02/10/1986 Meeting (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e e e Ms. Ehrman asked how firm the figures are and what kind of timeline is projec- ted. Mr. Shelby responded that the lottery funding will be announced Friday, February 14th; and that a firm answer from the FAA will be in place by June, or earlier if the lObbying firm is successful in their efforts to move that decision closer. He expects that a go-ahead decision can be made by June, which would be necessary in order to stay within the inflation factor of the proposal. The airline negotiations can also be completed by June 1. Ms. Ehrman questioned whether the County would say yes to the room tax pro- posal and suggested that other options be considered. Ms. Wooten believed that the financial case is good enough to present convincingly. Mr. Gleason pointed out that Ms. Wooten's scenario is only one option and that there are others. The question is not whether the project can be done, but how long it will take and how it will be packaged. Negotiations should remain open in order to change phasing and financing. It is not necessary to commit to only one kind of revenue source. Mr. Holmer asked about general obligation bonds and Mr. Wong provided interest rate figures. Mr. Rutan supported giving local contractors and suppliers every opportunity to be involved in the project, and that bid packages be designed to make this possible. Ms. Schue encouraged the council to go to the City of Springfield and Lane County with gestures of good will backed with positive action. If they say no, then the council can regroup. She did not think it wise to do a "what if" in approaching the other bodies. Mayor Obie reviewed the timeline for the committee, that a gO-day time frame for discussion of the 2% room tax with the City of Springfield and Lane County was agreed upon. Mr. Hansen questioned the wisdom of going to the joint com- mittee with the project intact, leaving little room for flexibility or input. Mr. Obie asked that the committee come back to the council if the suggestions drastically change the funding sources or the project scope. One of the advantages of the plan already in place is that it can be done. The council needs an opportunity to evaluate the possibility of success of another plan. Mr. Holmer suggested that the committee discuss with the other bodies the Passenger Facilities Charge as an ultimate source of revenue. Mr. Obie supported the cooperation with other governmental bodies because it starts a gradual move towards a regional concept of the airport facility and services both for planning and funding. Ms. Wooten summarized the discussion by listing the issues generally consented to by the council members: 1. That a 2% county-wide room tax be pursued; 2. That the airport expansion project be funded as designed with the possibility of cuts if revenue sources donlt materialize; 3. That the Airport Commission be expanded with representation outside the City of Eugene MINUTES--City Council Work Session February 10, 1986 Page 5