Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Zelenka agreed that future councils could change urban renewal plans at will and the council's action <br />was only stating intent, but would not have certainty. He liked the idea of a community review panel. He <br />felt the major public safety issue in Eugene was property crime and wondered if that could be addressed <br />along with downtown safety. He felt that dedicating nine police officers to downtown was too much <br />without directing any of that effort to property crime. <br />Mr. Zelenka moved to amend Item 1.d as follows: "... (i) Broadway Place Garage <br />debt, thereby freeing up funds for additional police officers downtown and half <br />forproperty crime, and..." The motion died for lack of a second. <br />Ms. Solomon determined from staff that the urban renewal district was scheduled to sunset in 2024, but a <br />proposal to amend the plan could result in an earlier termination date. <br />Ms. Solomon, seconded by Mr. Brown, called for the question. The motion failed <br />for lack of a two- thirds majority, 5:3; Mr. Zelenka, Mr. Brown and Ms. Taylor <br />voting no. <br />Mr. Poling, seconded by Ms. Solomon, moved to postpone discussion and action <br />on items Ld through 5 until the February 22, 2010, council work session. The <br />motion passed, 6:2; Mr. Brown and Ms. Taylor voting no. <br />Mr. Poling left the meeting at 1:06 p.m. <br />Mr. Brown objected to postponing the discussion. He felt the deadline for placing something on the May <br />ballot would be missed and was concerned that the issue of urban renewal would result in an acrimonious <br />disagreement with Lane Community College caught in the middle. He felt there were other tools for <br />financing downtown revitalization and regretted that he was unable to discuss them until February 22. <br />Ms. Taylor concurred with Mr. Brown. <br />Ms. Ortiz observed that there was a lot of work yet to be done and cautioned against creating divisiveness <br />in the community with inflammatory remarks. <br />Mr. Pryor applauded staff's efforts to present a comprehensive package that included terminating the <br />urban renewal district within a reasonable timeframe. He could not worry about what a future council <br />might do and wanted discussions to focus on the issues at -hand without becoming acrimonious and <br />divisive. He agreed the urban renewal district should come to an end; the question was when and how to <br />do that. He looked forward to a productive discussion at the next work session. <br />Ms. Piercy said the question was whether the council wished to pursue projects that the community had <br />identified as important. She pointed out that the package of strategies reflected what the community <br />wanted and how those could be funded. She hoped to see a productive discussion of outcomes and the <br />tools to achieve them. She urged the council to seek ways to come to agreement on how to meet the <br />community's expectations. <br />Mr. Zelenka commended the proposed projects as good for the community and downtown. He hoped the <br />council would not pursue a funding mechanism that caused disagreements, which was why he had <br />proposed an analysis of other funding mechanisms that might be more widely supported on the council. <br />He suggested adding a motion to address a cap on the overall cost of the downtown safety initiative. He <br />MINUTES Eugene City Council February 10, 2010 Page 6 <br />Work Session <br />