Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Lee said that he did not believe many persons would testify at a public hearing regarding <br />councilor interests in contracts. He said the proposals under consideration were a good attempt <br />to address the issues involved, but that he was unsure if their provisions were enforceable <br />because it was impossible to know what was gained in a contract with the City. He said he felt <br />sympathy for councilors-elect who would need to deal with issues related to the ordinance. <br /> <br />Mr. Klein stated that the Office of the City Attorney would seek to draft alternate language for the <br />proposed ordinance to address concerns raised by the council. <br /> <br />Ms. Swanson Gribskov said she would vote for the motion to avoid having newly elected <br />councilors deal with the issues involved. <br /> <br /> The motion was adopted, 5:3, with Mr. Meisner, Ms. Nathanson, and Ms. <br /> Taylor voting opposed. <br /> <br /> III. WORK SESSION: SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CHARGES AND GROWTH <br /> MANAGEMENT POLICIES <br /> <br />Mr. Laue suggested that it might be more appropriate for the newly elected members of the City <br />Council to deal with issues related to Systems Development Charges (SDCs) and Growth <br />Management Policies. Ms. Andersen replied that this work session was important for input to be <br />provided for the ongoing work of the Public Works Rates Advisory Committee (PWRAC). <br /> <br />City Engineer Les Lyle described the membership of the PWRAC and commended it for its work. <br />He explained that, by State law, SDCs could be developed for park, storm water, transportation, <br />water, and wastewater treatment systems. He said the council was being asked to provide <br />direction on how it wished to engage the PWRAC with the implementation of Growth <br />Management Study (GMS) policies as they relate to the SDC review currently underway. <br /> <br />Mr. Lyle referred to a document entitled "Land Use and Urban Form--Adopted Policies and <br />Example Actions" distributed with the agenda of the meeting and discussed SDC issues related <br />to GMS policies, as follows: <br /> <br /> · Policy 14 Should SDCs subsidize in-fill, mixed use, and nodal development? <br /> <br /> · Policy 18 Should commercial and industrial development share in the cost of <br /> parks through SDCs? Should more than neighborhood park <br /> development be included in the calculation of SDCs? <br /> <br /> · Policy 15 Should the relationship of SDCs to publicly financed infrastructure <br /> extensions to support development for higher densities be <br /> considered in relationship to the Capital Improvement Program <br /> (CIP)? <br /> <br /> · Policy 8 Should the City encourage affordable housing through waivers of <br /> property tax and SDCs? <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner stated that he believed the ClP was an important way to implement GMS policy 15. <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 23, 1998 Page 6 <br />5:30 p.m. <br /> <br /> <br />