CC Minutes - 07/28/03 Mtg - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Attorney Glenn Klein stated, at the request of Councilor Kelly, that legal counsel had determined that the geographic adjustment was legal. Councilor Kelly recognized the intent of Councilor Poling's amendment, but questioned whether, as phrased, it was adoptable. He felt that, should the amendment be passed, the item should be tabled pending revision of the methodology pages. Mr. Klein agreed that, should it pass, the language would need to be revised and that the item would be brought before the council at the meeting scheduled for August 11. Councilor Kelly noted that the council had specifically directed staff to bring this proposal back with a geographic component and that now it appeared that staff would be directed to bring the proposal back a third time. He stressed that the geographic adjustment was intended to implement the growth management policies, including incentives for those things that put less burden on the infrastructure. He stated that the council had also asked for cost neutrality and that discounting the center would not further this as more costs would be borne by the broad public. Councilor Kelly asked, should the geographic component be removed from this item, what would have changed from the existing transportation SDCs. Mr. McVey replied that there were some modifications to the nodal development adjustment to exclude certain development types. Councilor Bettman opined that this proposal was very reasonable. She stressed that the downtown core would receive a 20-percent decrease and it would only increase the transportation SDCs in the outlying area by four percent. She called the increase "negligible." She asserted that there was a clear relationship between longer trips and an increased need for more capacity. Councilor Bettman felt that the Rates Advisory Committee vote was due to bias, asserting that the committee was overly influenced by the Home Builders Association. Councilor Meisner opposed the amendment, for the reasons listed by Councilor Kelly. He said that providing the center of town a discount was a different point. He stressed that it had been the revenue neutrality requirement that mandated the outcome before the council at the present meeting. Councilor Pap~ moved, seconded by Councilor Nathanson, to extend the time for the meeting by five minutes. Roll call vote; the motion carried, 6:2; councilors Bettman and Kelly voting in opposition. In response to a question from Councilor Pap~, Mr. Klein stated that the difference between voting down the amendment and voting down both the amendment and the main motion was that there were still some components that were specific to nodal development. MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 28, 2003 Page 18 Regular Meeting