09/14/1977 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

John Porter, Planning Director, said the City Council had economic develop- ment agencies such as the Eugene Renewal Agency to meet the goals the Council has set forth. He said this would not be a new process and e Council had previously adjusted its procedures as it saw needs that should be addressed. Mr. Delay expressed appreciation for Mr. Whitelaw's comments and concurred there were many tools available. He wondered if the staff should respond with an integration of the comments that had been made by the three presen- tors before Council making a decision. He noted one of the Hartford documents addresses this economic issue. Mr. Hamel thought the three presentations could be worked together with Mr. Whitelaw setting forth problems and solutions, and Mr. Wood and Mr. Amundson furnishing the wherewithal to solve those problems. Mr. Lieuallen and Ms. Smith expressed concern about needing more time to study the issue before making a decision. Mr. Obie noted a deadline of September 22 for the LCOG meeting, at which time Mr. Haws would have to vote for or against the Lane County Economic Improvement Commission. Mr. Wood said he would be available to meet with Councilor staff to , supply more infonnation. As an individual he told Council it was an extremely important concern to him and felt the creation of this Commis- sion could address many economic problems in the area. Mayor Keller expressed appreciation for the presentations by all three persons. Mr. Obie cautioned Council not to let individual concerns override the . County's responsibility, saying he felt Council should not be a road- block to the County's needs. In pursuant discussion, it was detennined that Council would continue its discussion regarding the request by Lane County at September 21, Wednesday meeting, with the discussion confined to that one point, so Mr. Haws would have some direction by Council as to how to vote at the LCOG meeting on S~ptember 22. Mr. Wynia told Council the timing was critical, as well as City endorsement being critical. He sai d if the City did not endor,se the action, it would be difficult to get designations and receive endorsements from a number of other areas. The issue has to pass LCOG before the group may go to Seattle to negotiate, and nego- tiations would be more difficult if the City were not in agreement. I I V. Airport Bond Issue Election and Improvement Program Discussion-- Memo Distributed to Council. Manager referred to memo from Airport Commission, saying it outlined the need for funds and conditions regarding use of government funds for development of the airport to meet future needs. The conclusion was that the Commission would like to place on the November 1977 ballot a $900,000 bond issue which would be a general obligation bond issue to be repaid by airline charges, enabling the use low-interest rates on the bonds. He noted one possible complication was the stated intention by the County to place a bond issue for development and rehabilitation of the Fairgounds on the same ballot. . 9/14177--7 109