06/13/1983 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

the principal paid; she said the properties paying regularly are allowed credit e for both the principal and interest paid. Mr. Whitlow stated that the questions put forth by the Downtown Commission on the fund balance would probably be answered in a report by the Bond Council to be distributed in July or early August. In response to a question, Ms. Stewart stated that the balance of $900,000 due on the Overpark bonds cannot be prepaid until next Spring. Ms. Stewart stated that the balance is a complicated legal issue because the rebate was defined when the bonds were sold. She added that it had been assumed at that time that the Overpark was to be a paid facility and the operation would include revenue to pay back the assessments. She stated that the staff does not have the expertise to deal with the issue, but the Bond Council is presently studyi ng the issue. She stated that r'ecommendat;ans wi 11 be presented to the Downtown Commission and will be sent to the City Council around September or October. Mr. Hansen asked what will happen if the Overpark is converted to paid parking. Mr. Porter responded that the properties will go back to the original Bancroft call s pl us the factor of the time between 1970 and when the free parking system would be taken out. Ms. James stated that the code under the DDD assessment states that for the amount of the credit allowed to the Overpark payees each year, a contingent liability is being established within the Over- park Fund. This amount, which is contingently liable now, is to be returned to the DDD fund and allocated to the IIDII properties if the council declares any rebates. Ms. Stewart stated that the Downtown Commission is waiting for a report on the Overpark assessment, rebate and the prepayment of that bond. She sai d that the commission is currently looking at the Access, Circulation, and Parking element e of the Downtown Plan as well as several related issues: 1) the operation of the parking program and whether the assessments impede the downtown development; 2) the possible return to the paid parking system; and 3) the position of the 'downtown in attracting new tenants. Ms. Stewart stated that the__~c9r.!miss-ion is investigating the possibility of hiring a Downtown Manager who would identify specific vacant properties and work with those property owners to bring tenants into the downtown. Ms. Stewart said that the commission is investigating funding the manager position through the DDD assessment, the General Fund, expanding the district, and by properties outside the district that could be served by the manager. She stated that the DDD tax is presently assuming the entire responsibility. Ms. Stewart said that the commission currently contracts with the EDA for a mall manager, but that the position does not include property management or addressing vacancies in the downtown area. Mr. Obie stated that the EDA has the old boundaries and Mr. Gleason added that the commission has broader boundaries than the EDA. Mr. Ball asked if any agency has spoken of developing a delegation to motivate the property owners in the downtown. Mr. Holmer stated that the Chamber has not taken the lead in this issue. Mr. Gleason commented that this responsibility must be an ongoing program to develop and maintain a good tenant mix. He stated that the downtown manager position must be a consultant and an advocate for developing interest among the brokers and organizing the concern for the down- town properties. Mr. Ball questioned whether the downtown manager could organize a program to develop another area in which the plasma centers could operate. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 13, 1983 Page 4