06/13/1983 Meeting (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Gleason noted that staff had already held a neighborhood hearing on the e proposed improvements in the Roosevelt area and had scheduled the initiation of the project for a future council hearing. He said that if the council decides to change the assessment structure, he would recommend that another staff hearing be held and that the initiation be delayed. He noted that the project construction schedule was tight and that a delay in the project, which could occur if there were a remonstrance, could make it impossible to do the construc- tion this year, thus rendering it ineligible under the Jobs Bill. Councilor Wooten agreed that improving Roosevelt Boulevard was an important part of industrial revitalization for the City, but she was uncomfortable with using Jobs Bill funds in such a limited manner. She noted that the council had agreed in the past to use 25 percent of the standard COBG funds over a three-year period for economic diversification and suggested that 25 percent of these funds be treated in the same way. Councilor Schue felt that there was no reason to subsidize these particular assessments. She noted that a large portion of the property involved was owned by the State of Oregon and asked whether the State would pay an assessment for its properties. Mr. Teitzel responded about 30 to 40 percent of the property involved was owned by the State. He said that if the State determined that the property was excess, the assessments would probably be paid when the property was sold. Responding to questions from Councilor Hansen, Mr. Gleason said it might be possible for the council to adopt the proposal in such a way that the assessment subsidies were made only for low- and moderate-income property owners. He e stressed, however, that the council should only take this step if the council was willing to override any potential remonstrance. Responding to a question from Councilor Obie, Mr. Porter said that reduced assessments had been made in the past for improvements on Coburg Road and on States streets. He said the States streets reductions were made on the basis of the low income level of the area. He noted that in that assessment owner-occupants and investor-owners had been assessed equally. Responding to a question from Mr. Obie, Mr. Teitzel said that the streets leading into Skinner Butte park had been assessed at the full assessment. Councilor Obie said he favored the staff proposal, since he believed that Eugene's real need was for long-term economic diversification and that making the Four Corners area accessible for industrial growth would help meet this long-term need. He felt this economic diversification effort would help compensate for the decline in the timber industry. Councilor Ball said the issue was long- versus short-term economic solutions. He felt that the council was addressing the long-term issues in other ways and that the intent of the administration and Congress was to use the Jobs Bill funds for short-term solutions. He agreed that the Roosevelt Boulevard project was very important but felt it should be addressed in the normal capital budgeting process of the City. Mr. Ball recognized that the City was placed in a difficult position by being asked to provide employment through the Jobs Bill funds, but he felt that a creative solution could be found. He therefore opposed the staff e recommendation and urged that alternative proposals be developed quickly. MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 13, 1983 Page 9