Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Councilor Zelenka concurred with the methodology and the rationale for including the kindergarten through grade 12 educational institutions in the residential class of Systems Development Charges (SDCs). It had struck him as odd that it would not include all educational institutions in that class. Councilor Zelenka moved to amend the note underneath Table 19 in the Methodology, per- taining to Non-Residential Systems Development Charge classes for the Parks Systems De- velopment Charges, to read as follows: “Note that, on the basis of the park user survey results educational institutions are not included in non-residential classes , as users associated with educational institution are gen- erally attributable to residential land uses, and related demand is accounted for in residential development categories.” The motion died for lack of a second. Councilor Clark shared his concern that this would add a burden to those who would begin a sustainable business in the city of Eugene. He felt the resolution would put people in a position wherein it would be more advantageous to do business in Springfield. Councilor Bettman did not consider the addition of Systems Development Charges (SDCs) to be adding yet another burden to development. She averred that the costs to add new development were there regardless of who paid for them. She said the SDC methodology just determined who paid for it instead of shifting the burden of that new development onto taxpayers and residents. She asserted that people often paid for growth with diminished services and a diminished ability to pay for infrastructure. Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to amend the resolution to delete non-residential Systems Development Charge formulas. Councilor Solomon was not able to see a nexus for the formulas. She noted that the reasons people were for or against the non-residential charge listed in the agenda packet suggested that the additional population of employees, customers, and visitors and the associated increase in the population of park users increased the demands for park capacity. She disagreed with this assertion. She said when she went to Cottage Grove or Springfield it was not to go to the park. She thought a person might come to Eugene to attend a specific festival at one of the parks, but this did not correlate to an increase in park usage by people who were in Eugene for other reasons. Councilor Clark agreed with Councilor Solomon. He observed that the City asked people to come and enjoy the parks. He did not see it as an issue of business. Councilor Zelenka opposed the amendment. He believed there was a nexus between non-residential employees and customers and park usage. He averred that the increase in park usage had been documented in a survey which had indicated that 16 percent of the park users were non-residents. Councilor Pryor supported the amendment. He thought the original intent of SDCs was to provide parks in order to accommodate new residential growth and not to bring businesses into that mix. Councilor Bettman expressed her opposition. She felt staff had adequately documented the nexus of park usage and non-residents. She said the costs of providing capacity to new development was constant and everyone should pay a fair share. MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 9, 2007 Page 8 Regular Meeting