CC Minutes - 10/16/06 Public Hearing

Home Browse Search

quarries were being built next to residences whose occupants did not want to live next to a rock quarry. Mr. Zako averred that people who voted for Ballot Measure 37 did not know what they were voting for and then wondered why a development was happening next to them. He suggested the reason the ballot measure was in litigation was because it was poorly written, and thought it unfortunate the measure did not provide for a compensation fund and the legislature had been able to resolve the problems with the measure. He acknowledged Ballot Measure 37 as the law and maintained that if Oregon residents supported Ballot Measure 37 and the payment of compensation to property owners from a government action that reduced a property’s value, “it was inescapable logic” that they supported paying the government for increases in their property value from a result of government actions. Mr. Zako asserted that the measure’s ballot title contained information stating that the measure would cost the State billions, and people voted for it knowing that the government would have to pay those costs. Mr. Zako believed the ordinance was a reasonable approach given the existence of Ballot Measure 37, and 1000 Friends of Oregon commended City staff for coming up with a carefully written and workable proposal. Lisa Warnes , 5020 Nectar Way, said the ordinance seemed fair and reasonable to her as a solution to the serious problem brought on the state by the passage of Ballot Measure 37. It seemed fair that property owners who sought actions that benefited the value of their property should pay more. She agreed with the request to keep the record open. Zachary Vishanoff , Patterson Street, provided the council with a packet of materials and asked the council to consider the information. He believed that the council was enhancing the tools for zoning enforcement by the government and he did not think that citizens had a grip on the tools the City already had at its disposal to change their neighborhoods without their consent. He said that streamlining the City’s ability to go full speed ahead with “smart growth” was not in the public’s interest. He thought that smart growth in Eugene was already out-of-control. Mr. Vishanoff said that the idea that density was good for the community was a false premise given the increase in air pollution levels that would occur. He said that density also promoted flooding and was used as a premise for the redevelopment of riverfronts in ways communities could not afford. Those riverfronts were often “hijacked” by the research industry for “weird” research that did not benefit the public. Mr. Vishanoff suggested that the council supported density because it perceived the government “pork” for such projects as a sustainable prop for the economy, which he considered a mistake. Charles Biggs , 540 Antelope Way, favored the ordinance because when the Planning Commission had a member with a Ballot Measure 37 claim it was “time to level the playing field.” He asked that the ordinance be amended to disqualify those with a value-added charge from seeking other City subsidies. William Sellers , 6071 Mondavi Lane, said that he was working with a group of attorneys to block any taxes the City of Eugene attempted to put forth. He said that he was working to arrange a full, seven-year audit of the City to identify waste and fraud. He was amazed by the City’s wasteful spending. Road taxes had increased and it appeared the council wanted to be everything to everybody and that required more taxes. He said that excessive taxation needed to come to an end. The council should not be working to spend money so it could tax people the fastest way. Majeska Seese Green , PO Box 1214, Eugene, clarified that she was not speaking on behalf of the Whiteaker Community Council (WCC), but favored the ordinance as an individual and hoped the council would proceed with its adoption. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 16, 2006 Page 3 Public Hearing