Laserfiche WebLink
Mayor Piercy said she was struggling with the concept of using tax incentives to get certain <br />outcomes, but not offering these incentives when the council felt they might not be needed. She <br />thought payback over time was beneficial and thought the benefit could be realized now with the <br />use of MUPTE. She was willing to reduce the area and see if it continued to move forward, move <br />it into a different area, and keep the downtown area. If unintended or unanticipated results <br />occurred, they could be addressed in the future. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman said MUPTE was not just a tax giveaway from the City’s General Fund, but also <br />impacted Lane County and the school districts. When properties came back on the tax rolls, the <br />lost revenues were not made up. <br /> <br />Mr. Clark asked how difficult it would be to reinstate MUPTE boundaries if they were reduced. <br /> <br />Mr. Weinman responded that a City Council ordinance would be required to reinstate MUPTE <br />boundaries. <br /> <br />Mr. Poling had three questions that staff could respond to in memorandum form prior to the <br />public hearing. Referring to the 70 percent of developments built without MUPTE cited by Mr. <br />Zelenka, Mr. Poling asked how many projects had been applied for and denied, but built anyway? <br />Of the 30 percent that were built with MUPTE, how many would not have been built without <br />MUPTE? How many applications were submitted, turned down and nothing was built? <br /> <br />Mr. Clark asked of those that were turned down, how were the plans substantively altered in <br />terms of what was actually built before being built without MUPTE? <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman asked for clarification in memorandum form prior to the public hearing on whether <br />construction of five units during rehabilitation was above and beyond existing units, or the units <br />most recently torn down. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor said she would vote for the amendment but would not vote for any expansion beyond <br />the pre-2004 boundary. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy called for a vote on the amendment. <br /> <br />The vote on the amendment passed 5:4, Councilors Bettman, Taylor, Ze- <br />lenka, and Ortiz and Mayor Piercy voting in favor; Councilors Clark, <br />Poling, Pryor and Solomon voting in opposition. <br /> <br />Ms. Ortiz left at 1:15 p.m. <br /> <br />Responding to a question from Ms. Bettman, Mr. Weinman said the City did not monitor MUPTE <br />documentation after the fact. She asked that the information be provided prior to the public <br />hearing. <br /> <br />The amended motion passed 6:1, with Councilors Pryor, Clark, Poling, <br />Taylor, Bettman, and Zelenka voting in favor, and Councilor Solomon <br />voting in opposition. <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council May 27, 2008 Page 10 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />