05/10/1982 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e Ms. Wooten said neighborhood associations recognized that issue and are pleased the Downtown Commission is happening. Neighborhood associations had been concerned about the process. The timing has been a problem, as has been the disenfranchisement of people living in the area. When asked if representatives of the three downtown boards and commissions had been in contact with their parent groups, Mr. Kupper replied that two weeks ago he briefed the nine members and they formally voted to approve the draft ordi- nance and the boundaries. Representatives of that committee reported to the Eugene Renewal Agency and that agency moved to approve their work and recommended the ordinance and boundaries be approved by City Council. DDS made the same motion. The Eugene Downtown Association will be hearing the proposal May 12. Mr. Kupper highlighted the draft ordinance creating the Downtown Commission. Mr. Lindberg asked if four, rather than five, members would be a better number to have on the commission membership. Mr. Kupper said that had been discussed and some on the committee of nine said four would be better than five. Mr. Lindberg asked if a rationale for four had been presented. Mr. Kupper replied that those who had favored four had said the entire community should be tapped. Those who had favored five had said the people involved should be those whose interests are in the downtown area. Ms. Smith asked how many of the present members of the DDS and ERA would be eligible for the new Downtown Commission. Mr. Kupper replied that two members don't need to meet qualifications. Nine of the eleven current members of DDS and ERA meet the qualifications. e Mr. Lindberg said a strong Eugene Renewal Agency now exists in terms of exper- tise. Two recent applicants have had banking and development experience, but neither have interests in the downtown area. Ms. Wooten replied that eligibility requirements are flexible enough to incorporate many needs. Owning a business or working downtown qualifies as having an interest in the downtown. Mr. Lindberg said a major interest of DDB is the parking project. The financing of that program is under duress and he asked that it be explained. Mr. Kupper said, regarding the Downtown Development District, City Council has taken no new responsibility that they did not formerly have. The duress of the free parking program results from the decline of revenue. Total revenue in the district has gone down from $1 million annually three years ago to $700,000 this year. Most of the $700,000 is from fees rather than from parking revenues. The program still supports itself. The $1 million budget of a few years ago included money for capital improvement programs. When asked what the relationship between the downtown refinement plan and the proposed urban renewal plan were, Mr. Kupper said he did not know the answer. Ms. Wooten added that the Central Eugene Renewal Agency District can expand two blocks in any direction in terms of tax increment financing. In order to implement changes within the larger planning boundary the doughnut district overlay is needed to create the financing mechanism to do improvement. Logically e MINUTES--City Council Work Session May 10, 1982 Page 2