Laserfiche WebLink
<br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Mr. Luell agreed with Mr. Brink1s observation that more free parking will be <br />available if abuse is reduced. <br /> <br />Mr. Bennett referred to Ms. Miller's comments and asked whether replacement <br />of parking structures could be funded by bonding based on a normal debt <br />service ratio. <br /> <br />Mr. Gleason responded by saying there are many different ways of paying for <br />parking structures, one of which is through a fund in which parking spaces <br />are purchased and assessed across a district. That undercuts the ability to <br />lease parking spaces and to sell revenue bonds to build new structures. He <br />said that most parking structures are paid for out of revenue bonds and a <br />parking district with associated leases. <br /> <br />Mr. Bennett requested clarification and asked about a normal debt service <br />rate which provides a return on the capital invested in the structure. Mr. <br />Gleason replied that a lease structure designed around the costs of <br />operation, maintenance, and replacement would be considerably higher. <br /> <br />Ms. Aspinwall-Lambert said the Downtown Commission would discuss the issue at <br />its meeting May 9. <br /> <br />Mayor Miller encouraged members of the public to submit their additional <br />written comments to either the Downtown Commission or the City Council. <br /> <br />Eli Hayes, 1969 Harris Street, indicated his desire to speak after the close <br />of the public hearing. <br /> <br />The Downtown Commission meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. <br /> <br />Councilor Holmer left the meeting at 8:30 p.m. <br /> <br />III. CONSIDERATION OF STATE BALLOT MEASURE #1 <br /> <br />City Manager Mike Gleason introduced the item. <br />information in councilors' packets and said Ms. <br />interest in discussing whether the City Council <br />the ballot measure. <br /> <br />Ms. Schue referred to <br />Ehrman had also expressed an <br />wished to adopt a position on <br /> <br />Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Ms. Bascom, to support State <br />Ballot Measure #1 by resolution. <br /> <br />Mr. Bennett considered taking a position on this State measure inappropriate <br />because it addresses conditions in other local areas. He encouraged <br />individuals to vote according to their consciences on May 16. <br /> <br />Ms. Schue responded that a property tax issue is inevitably tied to City <br />finances and impacts the ability of all forms of local government to raise <br />revenue. She added that the measure is an economic development issue because <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council <br /> <br />May 8, 1989 <br /> <br />Page 4 <br />