Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Acting City Manager Angel Jones spoke to the need for addressing the item at this time, saying the intent of the City was to use the resources as a tool for several projects. Staff brought several items forward to the council indicating that intent, including council approval of the 108 application, the Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations approval of the Brownfield Economic Development Initiative grant application, and the Request for Qualifications on the Broadway Project. Staff wanted to be strategic and proactive in securing valuable tools to achieve the common goal of a vibrant downtown. She recommended the council authorize the entire funding to move the downtown revitalization forward. Acting City Manager Jones said the issue was time-sensitive due to the number of projects with related time lines, including the options for the West Broadway project, which cost money to renew. Mayor Piercy and Ms. Bettman joined the meeting via speakerphone. Ms. Taylor was opposed to renewing the options for properties that currently house existing businesses that were thriving. She thought that constituted a threat to those businesses. She believed that urban renewal gave management too much freedom to act without council agreement. Ms. Bettman objected to having a public hearing before the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Advisory Committee rather than the council, although she acknowledged the final decision rested with the council. She thought it important for the council to hold the hearing because it would hear from the community regarding the value of the projects to be funded by the money. She said that the money in question was generally used to benefit low-income residents. She had requested a list of projects that benefited from the money in the past and there were economic development loans to Plaza Latina, accessibility projects, WomenSpace, Looking Glass, and Shelter Care. The money filled a gap where the City did not normally have money. Any project funded with the money should meet community needs. Ms. Bettman did not think people would refer the resolution to a public vote because there would be no projects to react to. Adopting the resolution circumvented the community’s ability to refer projects to the ballot. Mayor Piercy asked what was different about the process and if the City still had the same focus on trying to use the money to benefit low-income residents. Sue Cutsogeorge of Financial Services said that for the City to access the brownfield grant, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) required that it use the Section 108 borrowing through the agency and that it pledge as a revenue source the CDGB revenues as an “ultimate backstop.” The City would not use those CDBG revenues to pay the debt but rather would use project revenues and urban renewal revenues with the goal of avoiding the use of the CDBG revenues to pay the debt. If the City could find no other way to pay back the debt, HUD could hold back future CDBG revenues but that was not the City or HUD’s intention. Mr. Pryor did not think the approach being proposed was an attempt to circumvent the public process. He did not have a problem with the first amendment Ms. Bettman suggested and e-mailed to councilors prior to the meeting, which was to hold a public hearing. He said the City was trying to create a revenue mechanism that it could take advantage of swiftly. He did not envision that anything would occur the council would not be aware of or would not authorize. Mr. Zelenka did not think anything nefarious was occurring but he acknowledged the money was public money and the council should not take away the public’s ability to refer projects for a vote. He thought the MINUTES—Eugene City Council February 26, 2007 Page 6 Work Session