06/16/1986 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Byrne summarized that someone else is paying the debt service on the e Parcade; that the commercial space actually subsidizes the parking function; and that the Parcade is the healthiest of the enterprise funds. He concluded that the Parcade is a good facility which is easy to maintain. Mr. Rutan asked if the tax on general improvements would go into the General Fund if there were no tax allocation budget. Mr. Gleason said that the tax in the state of Oregon is a rate-based tax, and any increase in value of the increment districts would decrease the rate. Mr. Rutan asked, then, if tax allocation moneys could be used for other things, and Mr. Byrne said no, it would be lost revenue. Mr. Hansen asked what management personnel was funded under the Eugene Devel- opment Department for the parking program. Mr. Byrne replied that it pays for Mr. Luell, part of Jerry Gill, the clerks, property manager, and PIC people involved. Mr. Miller asked if there were any way of looking at all the personnel involved in the parking program, and if there were other ways of doing what we do now. Mr. Byrne displayed a chart of full-time employees for parking programs. The chart indicated the FTE amounts for each department: EDD, 2.1 FTE; Public Works, 4.38 FTE; and Parks, 2.0 FTE. This does not include central manage- ment personnel. Mr. Gleason pointed out that the parking program involves 250,000 square feet of structure, including enforcement, maintenance, and leasing arrangements. Analyses have been done and there is no substantial gain in radically changing the management model of the parking structures. e Mr. Obie disagreed that the numbers were reasonable; he believed $120,000 Central Services expenditures from a $829,000 budget was high. Mr. Gleason explained that most of the structure is being given away free and the pro- posal suggests that the parking spaces be leased at a reasonable amount. Mr. Hansen asked if a bidding process was used to make sure the department is competitive. Mr. Byrne said that yes, the bid contract is cost-effective. Ms. Ehrman asked if the City could get out of the management of the parking structures altogether. Mr. Gleason said this was possible, but would not rid the City of all the responsibilities. Mr. Rutan suggested that the council ask two questions: 1 . To what degree does the City have responsibility for providing public parking, free or not? 2. To what degree does the City need to be aggressively seeking and subsidizing (through parking) commercial tenants in the downtown area? Ms. Wooten agreed that the questions were needed, but also believed that within three to five years the circumstances would change; that the city was in a growing-up period and that the subsidy would need to continue until the city grows up. Mr. Byrne added that the code in the downtown zoning district does not require businesses to provide on-site parking; the code assumes the e parking will be provided publicly. Mr. Rutan suggested that the council MINUTES--City Council Work Session June 16~ 1986 Page 4