CC Minutes - 06/27/01 Work Session

Home Browse Search

likened the area to nodal development, with mixed uses and different kinds of housing, close to transit, and walkable. She said that the rent in this area was more reasonable than other areas and that it was close enough to not require vehicles for transportation. Ms. Taylor said she would like to see PeaceHealth stay in the downtown area. She said that there were other alternatives that could be looked at. Mr. Pap8 said that Ms. Nathanson was right that the City was reacting, not planning. However, he said that the hospital had plans to expand and that it will proceed without the City. Mr. Pap8 said that while he would like to vote in support of the motion, he could not support stopping negotiations. He said that he supported keeping the hospital in the core. The motion passed, 7:1; Mr. Pap8 voting in opposition. Mr. Kelly spoke to the financing package. He believed that the major component should be put to the voters for a vote. Mr. Kelly said he would propose to direct staff to put together a finance package to be voted upon by the City Council on July 9. He said that a business registration tax was not a viable option, as it was too small and would have to go on for at least 50 years. He said that the November vote would also necessitate the need for a double majority. Mr. Kelly, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to direct the City Manager to prepare necessary motions and measures for a two-year income tax surcharge to be considered on July 9. Mr. Farr opposed the motion. He said that there have been efforts to finance an ongoing revenue stream for affordable housing and the income tax was considered for this purpose. He said that an income tax surcharge should be dedicated to something very important and to something that would generate results which more closely pertain to the council's goals. He said that if this measure goes to the ballot, he would not vote for it. Mr. Meisner also opposed the motion. He pointed out that measures 5, 47, and 50 have shifted the tax burden to the individual and away from business. He said that business registration fees may not raise all of the money that would be needed, but would be a good start. The income tax surcharge would be an additional tax on individuals and families and he could not support it. He said that if the intent was to add to the corporate income tax, the motion needs to state so. In addition, Mr. Meisner noted that the motion would preclude the use of an income tax surcharge in a quasi-bonding form rather than for the support of operations and services. He said that he felt this would confuse the citizens and that he was not in support of this approach. Ms. Bettman supported the motion. She said that if the motion were expanded to include corporate income tax, she hoped Mr. Meisner could support it. This provided an opportunity for the City to do something about the relocation of PeaceHealth. Regarding affordable housing, the negotiations suggested relocating housing to the park area, which has not been used for years, and to facilitate Iow-income housing. Ms. Bettman said that she would support either the income tax surcharge or the business registration tax. She said that the limitation to two years for the income tax surcharge did not preclude it from consideration for other City needs in the future. Ms. Taylor said that she would not support any ballot measure until she knew what the plan was, and that it would have to be a plan which did not destroy the neighborhood. She said that if it included expansion at the Eugene Clinic site, she would consider the motion and that she would probably favor a business registration tax. MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 27, 2001 Page 7 Work Session