Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Broadway project. He asked how the $10 million for administration would be used. Ms. Cutsogeorge said the funds would be used for all of the administrative functions necessary to support the district over the life of the plan. Mr. Zelenka asked what type of activities would cause the City’s financial role in the project to increase. Mr. Klein replied that one thing might be the need for the urban renewal agency to acquire the property for resale to the developers. Mr. Zelenka asked for an analysis of activities that could increase the City’s financial involvement. He asked how much was currently available in the Downtown Revitalization Loan Program. Ms. Cutsogeorge indicated the current balance of unexpended loan funds was approximately $2.1 million. Mr. Zelenka asked for clarification of the reference on page 19 of the agenda packet to the urban renewal agency taking on a higher level of debt to be guaranteed by the City’s full faith and credit. Ms. Cutsogeorge explained that it involved capturing a future tax increment for properties not actually on the tax roll at the time the project was implemented and backing that with the General Fund. She said that had occurred with the library project. She said that the finance plan would evolve over time as the project moved forward. Mr. Clark thought the City was either growing or dying and he realized that the term “growing” made many people uncomfortable. He wanted the project to move forward in a manner that engaged as many members of the community as possible. He was reluctant to expand the boundary as a part of the plan amendment and preferred to focus on creating the necessary tools for redeveloping West Broadway. He asked if eliminating the boundary expansion would in any way imperil the West Broadway project. Ms. Cutsogeorge said it would not. Ms. Taylor expressed concern with extending the termination date for the plan and wondered when the tax revenues would be available for other purposes. She felt the project was being presented as a “done deal” and questioned the purpose of the committee if a decision had already been made. She liked KWG Development Partners’ work and supported their project at the Sears site, but was not willing to turn over to them the fate of existing businesses on West Broadway, the future of downtown and huge amounts of taxpayer money from current and future taxpayers. Mayor Piercy reiterated that whatever decisions the council made regarding amending the urban renew plan did not commit the City to a particular course of action; it would simply provide tools and options in a timely manner. Ms. Ortiz, seconded by Mr. Pryor, moved to forward to the Planning Commission and over- lapping taxing districts the proposed amendments to the Downtown Urban Renewal Plan, consistent with the draft plan and report included in attachments D and E, except that the amendments shall include an increased maximum indebtedness of $40 million, for a total of $73 million and an extension of the termination date from June 30, 2024, to June 30, 2030. Ms. Bettman asked why a hearing on the specific West Broadway projects would be held in July before the advisory committee had presented its work. Ms. Cutsogeorge commented that similar to the urban renewal plan amendment process, significant lead time was required in order to use the HUD Section 108 loan. She said in order to preserve that option, some information about the project for which the loan might be used would need to be presented in July. She said that did not mean the entire project; it could simply mean property acquisition. MINUTES—Eugene City Council May 29, 2007 Page 6 Work Session