Laserfiche WebLink
being requested in order to adhere to the schedule established for the West Broadway project, as it took <br />approximately 100 days to process them. She said that under the preliminary approach, the City would <br />provide about $24 million of the $186 million project cost by assisting with land acquisition, purchasing a <br />turn-key garage and providing a low interest housing loan. She noted that urban renewal was the most <br />significant tool the City anticipated using for the project, for a total of $13.5 million or 60 percent of the <br />public participation in the project. <br /> <br />Ms. Cutsogeorge reviewed the downtown urban renewal plan’s history and the regulatory requirements for <br />urban renewal plans. She described the process required for a substantial amendment, which was <br />anticipated to take about four months to complete. She said staff was proposing three amendments: <br />increase maximum indebtedness, extend termination date and expand boundaries. She said that increasing <br />maximum indebtedness was actually increasing the spending limit; the current cap was $33 million, of which <br />$4.6 million remained, and that would need to be increased to accommodate the West Broadway project. <br />She reviewed the options for increasing maximum indebtedness, ranging from $40 million to $115 million. <br /> <br />Continuing, Ms. Cutsogeorge said the recommendation was to change the termination date from June 30, <br />2024, to June 30, 2030, in order to allow for a 20-year debt repayment and maximize the financial capacity <br />of the district to pay for the redevelopment effort. She said not extending the termination date could require <br />looking for funding elsewhere in the City to compensate for a smaller financial capacity in the district. She <br />reviewed potential boundary expansion options, but noted that it was not necessary to expand the boundary <br />in order to increase maximum indebtedness; however, since the same process was required for such an <br />amendment it was an opportunity for the council to consider what areas might benefit from tax increment <br />financing in the future. She said that potential expansions included a north expansion, south expansion and <br />a combined expansion that included both areas; staff recommended the combined expansion option. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy questioned why the council would move forward with a plan amendment before there had been <br />a community debate on West Broadway redevelopment. City Manager Taylor replied that the staff <br />proposals were consistent with the council’s earlier discussion regarding a timeline and would allow the City <br />to move forward with the required actions to put in place a financial plan. Ms. Cutsogeorge pointed out that <br />the council was not being asked to amend the plan, but rather to forward the plan with proposed amend- <br />ments to the Planning Commission and overlapping taxing districts for consideration. She said feedback <br />from those bodies would be provided to the council to inform its discussion and decision sometime in <br />August. She said that staff would also schedule a public hearing on the plan before the council in July 2007. <br /> <br />Mr. Poling was pleased to see the recommendations from staff to move the process forward and obtain the <br />information the council needed to make a decision. He felt the timing was opportune and favored forward- <br />ing the proposal to the Planning Commission. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman said she did not believe that anyone outside of the isolated groups of the Eugene Area Chamber <br />of Commerce and City Hall would regard the proposed increased spending limit of $128 million as a <br />justifiable expenditure or support the transfer of funding from the General Fund, community colleges, and <br />schools to private developers. She perceived it as an admission that the redevelopment proposal would not <br />be a cure-all and more development would be necessary at astronomical costs to the community. She <br />questioned why the amendments were not proposed when the urban renewal plan was modified in 2004. <br /> <br />Mr. Zelenka said he understood the efficiency of including a boundary expansion, but felt the expansion <br />issue would muddy the waters and make the process more confusing. He felt that amending the urban <br />renewal plan and developing a financing plan were complicated enough without including a boundary <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council May 29, 2007 Page 5 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />