04/27/1987 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e Mr. Holmer said he appreciated Mr. Rutan's willingness to work on the plan. He added that he thought the second phase, identification of target projects, was particularly significant and ought to be the focus of the council's consideration about where the projects fit into the total City agenda. Mr. Holmer said he thought the City needed to keep economic development in balance with the rest of its responsibilities. Ms. Bascom agreed. Ms. Ehrman noted that Issue 5 on page 3 of the staff notes suggested focusing international recruitment efforts on Pacific Rim countries. She said information from the Metro Partnership was that the Pacific Rim area now was passel and that current efforts should be directed toward Europe. She said those issues appeared to be in flux, and she did not know whether that policy should be "written in stone." Mr. Farkas said that was one element that could be expanded. Mayor Obie asked whether the council preferred to participate in the prioritization process in May and June, rather than delegating that to CCED. Ms. Schue said she agreed with addressing priorities once rather than twice, unless CCED members objected. Ms. Ehrman and Mr. Rutan said either process was acceptable. Mr. Rutan added that CCED could help to narrow the issues for focus. Ms. Wooten said she preferred to have CCED "filter" some issues. Mr. Holmer agreed and suggested making the CCED minutes available to the council. II. PROPOSAL ON ROLE OF COUNCIL AS EUGENE RENEWAL AGENCY e Mr. Farkas said the council in 1982 had assumed responsibility as the Eugene Urban Renewal Agency and had created the Downtown Commission. He said it seemed that more time had been spent in setting up the structure of the Downtown Commission, and perhaps not enough time had been spent trying to deal with how the council should or could act as a public development agency. Mr. Farkas reviewed the April 23, 1987, memo attached to agendas. He said policy suggestions included trying to model the relationship of the council as renewal agency and of an advisory group like the Downtown Commission after the re 1 at i onshi p between the council and the Community Deve 1 opment Committee (CDC). Mr. Farkas noted that the council provided broad guidance to CDC in developing the Community Development Block Grant work program, budget, and projects. He said projects were reviewed in detail by the CDC before coming back to the council for final approval. Mr. Farkas also suggested that the council first might consider holding a session as the renewal agency, at which it could establish goals and policies for the downtown and riverfront areas of the community. He said that could be done in June and would help with other decisions scheduled throughout the summer. Mr. Farkas said the council also might consider placing a councilor on the Downtown Commission in order to continue constant policy interaction. Ms. Stewart reviewed ways in which the Downtown Commission might implement the renewal agency policies and report to the counci1. She said the Downtown Commission would develop a work program, which would be submitted to and adopted by the counci 1. She said the counci 1 then could meet with the Downtown Commission quarterly or by project as necessary, to review the e MINUTES--City Council Dinner/Work Session Apri 1 27, 1987 Page 3