10/25/1989 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e Mr. Luell, presented an analysis of the estimated income and expenditures with the Urban Renewal Plan update and expansion option for the next 20 years. Referring to a point in Mr. Luell's presentation, Mr. Holmer noted that the analysis is peculiar in its arrangement, having the money for awnings, facades, and tools spent before street design is complete. Mr. Rutan pointed out that one reason not to have a project-specific plan is because a plan, which by design fosters growth, expansion, and improvement, cannot prophecy what will happen in the future. Responding to a question from Mr. Bennett, Mr. Luell said that the $14,000 test in year ten was initiated to examine the possible bonding capacity. Mr. Bennett noted that the library was singled out as a possible recipient of this bond-generated money. Given the council's strong commitment to a public library in the recent future, it gives the wrong impression to name this in year ten. He added that the council should identify some parameters for the library project, and decide what role the Urban Renewal Agency or Tax Increment funds should play in regard to a library. Mr. Boles said that $14 million test for bonding capacity in year ten represents the additional debt the City could take on that could be paid off at the end of 20 years as a result of the proposed strings of income. If this was not added to year ten, the duration of the current debt service could be shortened. Mr. Boles requested Mr. Luell to conduct a test every e three years to test the potential bonding capacity at that time. Mr. Boles requested the Council to redefine the $11 million that is specified in years 16-20 for parking structures to include areas of transportation as well. Mr. Holmer requested a list of those activities that can be performed under the new plan that were not performable under the existing plan. Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Mr. Rutan, to hold a public hearing on the Urban Renewal Plan update on November 6, 1989. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. III. CONSIDERATION OF ACTION ON INITIATIVE PETITION CONCERNING CHARTER AMENDMENTS At the October 11, 1989, meeting the Council decided to appoint Councilors Holmer and Ehrman to work with the representatives of the Coalition for Fair Allocation of City Taxes (COFACT) and the City Attorney to develop alternatives to the proposed initiative petition. Ms. Ehrman said she received a letter from COFACT representatives stating that they would be willing to accept this compromised form of the measure, if e MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 25, 1989 Page 5