My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 2A: Approval of Minutes
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2005
>
CC Agenda - 08/08/05 Mtg
>
Item 2A: Approval of Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 12:30:28 PM
Creation date
8/3/2005 3:50:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
8/8/2005
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Mr. Kelly said the council worked hard to find a collaborative solution that resulted in a 7 to 1 vote in <br />favor of an application for an enterprise zone, which he felt was a factor in the State's approval. He said <br />part of the solution was a per-j ob cap of $30,000 maximum tax exemption for each j ob created, which was <br />generous and in line with benefits provided under the previous enterprise zone. He said the commission- <br />ers' discussion did not include the per-job cap; rather, timing was the topic. He said if Mr. Poling's <br />motion passed, months of consensus and commitments among the councilors would be "thrown out the <br />window" and he would not support the motion. He said if the motion was defeated he would introduce a <br />motion to withdraw or terminate the City's application and designate a representative to work with County <br />commissioners over the next year on an application that could receive consensus at the onset. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman said she felt there were some circumstances under which an enterprise zone could be a <br />benefit to the community and she was willing to support it under those circumstances. She hoped that the <br />council was willing to honor the collaboration involved in the application. In terms of the cap in the <br />resolution, she felt there were legal implications to adopting standards or granting an application for <br />benefit to the enterprise zone that did not include the cap as it would be inconsistent with the resolution. <br />She said without the cap, the enterprise zone benefit was based on property value and investment, not on <br />jobs, and the whole justification for the zone was job creation. She said the cap the council put in place <br />provided almost all small and medium business under the cap with generous room to succeed and there <br />were perhaps one or two very large entities that would benefit from the enterprise zone without the cap. <br />She questioned the County's willingness to so generously transfer tax dollars that could be used to pay for <br />public safety patrols and jails when it was claiming it did not have enough money for public safety. <br /> <br />Ms. Solomon acknowledged the compromises made during development of the application, noting that she <br />had compromised on the exclusion of the railroad yards in the zone when she preferred to have them <br />included. She was agreeable to continuing to compromise in order to have a zone. She said the council <br />had not had a significant discussion of the job caps, yet she compromised on including them in the <br />resolution because she was willing to have a discussion at a later date. She said the understanding at the <br />council's June 27, 2005, meeting was that all of the standards and the j ob cap were temporary but she <br />continued to hear councilors state that only under those circumstances would there be an enterprise zone <br />in Eugene. She questioned whether the council really wanted public input to determine community <br />standards. She expressed concern that the City was "cutting off its nose to spite its face." Ms. Solomon <br />emphasized that the standards were temporary and in the interests of retaining an enterprise zone and <br />maintaining a relationship with partners she was willing to compromise. She indicated she would support <br />the motion. <br /> <br />Mr. Pryor pointed out that the City was 90 percent of the way to an enterprise zone. He said the previous <br />months had seen an enormous amount of effort, collaboration and compromise. He said that withdrawing <br />from the application would be like traveling from Oregon to New York and turning around and leaving <br />when the arrival date was Friday instead of Thursday as originally expected. He said that agreement had <br />been reached on standards, size and scope, a joint application had been submitted and approved and there <br />was one piece left to negotiate. His impression was that the piece was still negotiable; yet the council was <br />ready to walk away from the application and that was a waste. Mr. Pryor expressed concern that the <br />council would look foolish to the State if the application was withdrawn after it was approved because one <br />final piece could not be agreed upon. He urged the council to work on the issue of caps and his sense was <br />that the County commissioners were willing to discuss job caps. He said so much had been accomplished <br />on the enterprise zone that the effort should not be abandoned. <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 29, 2005 Page 3 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.