05/12/1986 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. e e Mr. Luell said the industry standard for parking garage replacement reserves was two percent annually. He said the City goal had been one percent, but $4.80 was the highest amount that currently could be set aside without severely depleting working capital. He said a total of about 1,400 free spaces existed. Mr. Gleason said those free spaces were subsidized, but the subsidy was not breaking even. Mr. Luell said the replacement reserve for the entire parking program was listed as $212,000, which was one-quarter of the industry standard. Mr. Miller asked whether rental spaces were collecting adequate replacement costs. Mr. Farkas said they were not because rates charged were lower than the market and because many people used spaces for free. Mr. Gleason added that free spaces created a depression in the market. Mr. Hansen asked for a projection if all parking were paid. Mr. Luell said an alternative program, with two free hours followed by paid parking, was described on the last page. Mr. Holmer said that including both the replacement reserve and the debt ser- vice on a 20-year bond with a 50-year life seemed to be a double accounting error that increased apparent annual cost to more than it should be. Responding to Ms. Ehrman's question, Mr. Luell said designated spaces would be marked with signs and outlined in leases, of which short-term were preferred. Ms. Bascom said she found it confusing to use the word "free" in describing the subsidized program. Mr. Miller noted that replacement costs did not include new parking struc- tures, and he asked how those would be paid for. Mr. Luell said replacement reserves would be used for major improvements and could be used to help build- ing parking structures. Ms. Ehrman said she thought including the Downtown Manager salary in the park- ing fund skewed the deficit inappropriately. Mr. Farkas said the salary was charged to the ODD and not to the parking portion of the fund, which constitu- ted about 60 percent of DDD. II. JAILS/LAW ENFORCEMENT Mr. Gleason said that annual negotiations with representatives of Lane County were occurring for use of jail facilities. He said a proposal would be pre- sented to the County Commissioners, and the jail issue would be part of the urban transition discussions to be resolved in about August or September. He said an immediate need existed, architects had been contacted, and the City could purchase structures to be attached to existing buildings. He said about 40 beds would be provided, and he proposed using the $400,000 already budgeted in 1986-87 for jail services to purchase those structures. Mr. Gleason said the County would attach the structures to the building, staff the jail, and provide space for administration, laundr~l and food handling, in addition to providing access to alternative programs llKe work release. MINUTES--Eugene City Council Dinner/Work Session May 12, 1986 Page 4