Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~ Mr. Gleason considered the current development proposal before the council to <br />be consistent with discussions held with the community and to represent good <br />faith action. He said the council needs a comprehensive report on the <br />project. <br /> <br />Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Rutan, to approve $60,000 in <br />Community Development Block Grant funding to rehabilitate the <br />Riley House, moved to the Lincoln School site to serve as a <br />neighborhood center. Roll call vote; the motion carried <br />unanimously, 6:0. <br /> <br />XI. APPROVAL OF 1990-91 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FINAL STATEMENT <br />OF OBJECTIVES <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Ms. Ehrman asked whether $30,000 listed for a ramp at the Shelton-McMurphey <br />House was restricted to a ramp and whether alternative methods of providing <br />access had been considered. Ms. Dawson responded that the allocation was <br />contingent on a ramp being the method of access. <br /> <br />Ms. Ehrman expressed concern about such a sensitive issue as the method of <br />access to the house being decided by an advisory committee. While she did <br />not necessarily disagree with the decision, she maintained that controversial <br />policy decisions should be made by the council. <br /> <br />Mr. Gleason suggested that the council adopt the statement of objectives with <br />the understanding that the $30,000 in question would not be expended without <br />council approval. <br /> <br />Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Rutan, to approve the 1990-91 <br />Community Development Block Grant final statement of <br />objectives, with the understanding that no money will be <br />spent on a ramp at the Shelton-McMurphey House until further <br />consideration by the council. Roll call vote; the motion <br />carried unanimously, 6:0. <br /> <br />XII. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING LONGER-TERM INVESTMENTS <br /> <br />City Manager Mike Gleason introduced the item. Kathy Rodeman, Financial <br />Operations Service Division, reported that the return from the proposed <br />longer-term investments would be set aside for future debt service payments. <br />The maturities on the proposed investments would match those of the debt <br />service, equalizing the cash flow. <br /> <br />Responding to a question from Ms. Bascom, Ms. Rodeman explained that the <br />investments would be essentially risk-free instruments, guaranteed by the <br />Federal government and maturing in 1994 and 1995 for the proposed Parkland <br />bond defeasance. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council <br /> <br />May 14, 1990 <br /> <br />Page 11 <br />