01/10/1979 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e Ms. Miller felt it reasonable to exempt the City of Eugene agencies. However, she said it seemed most of the SOT is an attempt to shift expenses of development to those who created the need for that develop- ment. In the instance of LCC and other agencies, including EWEB, who are causing the costs of devlopment, she said the taxpayers would still pay the costs of that development. However, it would be reflected in a different column. She said as far as the people in Eugene paying their percentage share of any given cost, she felt it would come back to them perhaps in a reduction in city taxes. She was sympathetic to the parti- cular problems of the MWMC. In the other cases, she felt it seemed to be more rational to provide the City with a mechanism for making exceptions, such as for the Metro Wastewater Management Commission. She did not support a blanket exemption. Flexibility could be provided for other governmental agencies and publicly-supported projects in the downtown area to be considered on a case-by-case basis. Ms. Schue was in favor of the motion. She felt it to be a more simple approach to the problem, and more equitable to the taxpayer. Mr. Haws urged the Council to vote against the motion because he felt it would tax the citizens of Eugene more. He felt it more important to get taxes from those who use the City's resources but who live outside the city. He said this policy would not help Eugene citizens. However, he did feel there might be cases for some exemptions, such as MWMC. He said a third alternative to the two outlined in the memorandum would be not to exempt anyone at all, except on various limited cases. e Mr. Delay was not convinced the City of Eugene would get less taxes because it is not yet known what consequences might result from exemptions or reduced exemptions. Other jurisdictions may set up percentage alloca- tions to obtain money from within the City. As far as adding to the demands for services, he felt governmental agencies were responding to real needs of people, i.e., schools, or a new jail. Third, in dealing with intergovernmental relations and tax equity, he said the City has been trying very hard to simplify that process by focusing on the major high- dollar items. He felt it would behoove the City to use a less complex approach to enhance governmental relations. Mr. Obie supported the exemption of Eugene agencies, but not a blanket exemption of local governmental agencies. Mayor Keller cautioned Council before it voted on any amendment that it thoroughly understand the issues. He felt the Council should look very closely at schools, MWMC, and weigh heavily what it is doing. He said excellent points had been made in the discussion. He questioned if total exemption were granted to the agencies as outlined, what dollar portion is represented by those deletions. Mr. Gilman responded building permits for public agencies is very erratic, with perhaps one year seeing much construction and another year very little. It was estimated a total resource revenue of $800,000 a year would be received through the SOT. Mr. Gilman said that in 1977, there were $78 million worth of construction costs, with $2.5 million of that being public agencies. e 1/10/79--11 21