Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

in order to pay their rent. She said anything she could personully do that would hdp to hring jobs and increase the quality of hh~ tor he.r cQnstitut:nL.; WGuld be "greaL" She wished to nok ,yh~H the topic of '{';;lC~\tiOW; was raised that peopk in her neighborhood did not get vacation:~. Ri1th~~r, th:y '.;yeat to tb;'. pml or had a day of swhruning and "called. it good," ('onndJor Pap( thank.~<.l the Mayor and Councilor Ortiz for tl)(~ir \vork with the Lane Board of County Commissioner::; to reach a n::~lolution, He aiso thank.ed COlmnii;sionen; Green and Stewmi. In response to fhrther postl,llation from Councilor Hdtman, M"r. Braud explained that a hypothetical $2 billion investmcnt that resulted in 5DO new jobs 'Nould bring the one...third rule into play and Hynix would receive a 67 percent tax exemption, If the company created 1,000 n.ew jobs, HyniA l;:ould receive.;;\ 100 percent exemption. Couneilor Ekttrnan tmdemtood the exal.uple in the AIS to be n:H.:1'dy an exaropi.c and not the anticipated :"cenario. Shc wish~-0 to n::inforce what Cou:ndlor Ortiz said regHrding thefJeopk in the community who neededjot>s. However, she asserted the en.terprhe zone w"as a "massive gih~l.way," SIK: thought the magnitude of the "giveaway" would negatively prejudk;::: the ahility of peopk to hav<:. economic justice in the conrrmmity. She allege.d that one entity would receive a gift from t.he comn:mnity, the magnitude of \^l'hi,;::h so ["l.T outweighed t.he hcnefit that. it was not justifiahle, (\"}UlKilor Taylor also opposed the enterprl$e zone. She wa::; disappointed that this "deat was hrokered 'Ni.thout the City Council consent" She did not think that Hynix should have a voke in the zone. She did not believe Uynix was 'Nailing on. (l. tax break nor did she \vish to $uhgidhe that smi of job. She averred that w'orking for '''less than $30,000 a yea!'" wodd. mA allow a pe.rSOH tQ afford how.;ing in the community. She wanted to :mhsidize rc"il assets to the community, those hminesses that paid a hving wage and werc t;~n:vironmJ;~ntally friendly. COl.mci!or Kelly expre$sed di~.;appointment that the. iSi;ue had '"led to i;imp1e pohri7J..\tion" in which one was only pro.hmines::l or anti.husiness. He thought the eoundt had worked. ha:rd to get "into subtlety and I;;OnSen$!.4';" and that was ne'w '\mt the window." He reiterated thal the council had supported an enterprise zone in April by a 7:1 vote. He ::;till ~mpported this original ide"l. for an enterprise zone, fIe thought the council f;;houkl ask vlh<'t magnitude of tax break was enough. He observed that the City was being a~,hd. to give a $96,000 tax break per job over the cumse of three years.. Ik r~caUed that. he originally ha.d not wanted to apply for rm. cntt:1"prise zone but decided to support. it because the cormdl "propt:dy" tHrgded aHd capped it within the constraints. ofStak Inw. l-k Ophlcd that th.~ H)solution bdi)re the council abando11{~d "a reasm:whk maximrm1 amount of tax." given up pel" job agreed tn in good faith by the council. Councilor Kelly said H)/llix was an <.t~.;set t() the cmmimnity and he did not ,,"ish to .;;\ppear to be opposed specifkally to that (:ompany, Howev<;:r. ht~ k~lt a $3 million ta){ br(xtk was enough. COl..lHl.::.i1or Poiing observed that the coundlors had not achieved. unanimous agreement on the caps:, the rV1.ayor h;;td hroken the tic and the cap had been added in. He unden,cored that the 7: I vote wa.s in :mpport ofpunmance of an enterprise zone. He decbgd that the eouncE and Countl needed to get pa~~t t.he "quagrnire" they had falkn i.n.to, "3/hich h{~ attributed to a lack of communk;ation hetween the tW(} governlue:n!t.;. He said the resolution returned ;;;ontroI to local government hrx.lies and aHowed the City and Cm.mty to initiate tht;: hroader discussion. .MT.Nr.rrES--.J:i..ugene City Council August &. 2005 Page 8 Regular Ses~.;ion