CC Minutes - 02/23/98 Work Session

Home Browse Search

3. Is completing those projects a higher priority than alternative use of General Fund dollars if the districts were terminated? Mr. Bowers explained that Measure 50 required that elected officials of jurisdictions with urban renewal districts decide whether they should be continued at their base increment, or continued at a "grandfathered" (enhanced) increment. He said that if a decision about a district was not made by June 30, 1998, it would be required to be continued at its base increment and that no other opportunity would be available to choose an enhanced increment. He said that Measure 50 did not require that a public vote be taken on the status of districts. Mr. Bowers referred to wall charts listing major accomplishments and plan objectives of the urban renewal districts, noting their correlation to the council's adopted growth management policies. He identified those projects that had not been completed, pointing out that creation of a new library was an objective of the Downtown Urban Renewal Plan which had not been accomplished. Sue Cutsogeorge, Administrative Services, reviewed information on wall charts which explained urban renewal collection options under Measure 50: 1) "Traditional Method" used prior to the passage of Measure 5 in 1990; and 2) "Urban Renewal Special Levy," which is available to existing districts provided certain steps are taken to "grandfather" them. She noted that the special levy did not require voter approval. Ms. Cutsogeorge indicated that Measure 50 allowed for different combinations of the two methods, but communities must decide on a method no later than June 1, 1998, otherwise they would be forced to collect the lower level of revenues. Ms. Cutsogeorge said the main differences among the three options were the total revenue that could be collected for urban renewal; whether additional funds would accrue to the General Fund; and, what the effect would be on the taxpayer. The comparisons are listed below: · After repayment of its debt, termination of the district could result in a one-time increase to the General Fund of approximately $650,000, or $4-6 million could be available for district capital projects. The owner of a home with the average assessed value of $115,520 would receive an annual property tax bill reduction of $26. · If the base option was chosen (or was imposed by default from lack of action), $1.55 million would continue to be collected by the Traditional Method, $0 would be provided annually to the General Fund, and $11-13 million could be available for district capital projects during the life of the district. The owner of a home with the average assessed value of $115,520 would receive an annual property tax bill reduction of $26. · If the grandfathered option #2 was chosen, $2.91 million could be collected by a citywide Urban Renewal Special Levy, approximately $650,000 would be provided annually to the General Fund, and $23-25 million could be available for district capital projects during the life of the district. The owner of a home with the average assessed value of $115,520 would receive an annual property tax bill increase of $33. Ms. Cutsogeorge said that if the enhanced option #1 were chosen, the traditional method would collect about $1.55 million and the special levy about $1.36 million, $0 would be provided to the Minutes--Eugene City Council February 23, 1998 Page 2 5:30 p.m.