CC Minutes - 05/10/10 Work Session

Home Browse Search

comments spoke to the blighted conditions people perceived downtown. Many people suggested that downtown was not worth working on until the City had solved other problems downtown. However, Mayor Piercy believed the City would be remiss not to do its utmost to move forward to address downtown conditions, including the downtown "pits" and downtown public safety issues addressed, and said those were the purview of the City to solve. She agreed with Ms. Taylor that the money was not free but had been carefully accumulated in the district for such purposes. Mr. Brown spoke to ORS 457.170, which described a URA's powers, and suggested the City would violate the provision by paying off the debt for the parking garages and then using the money freed up to hire more police officers downtown. There was nothing in the statute that suggested that tax increment funds could be converted to general fund dollars. He described the purposes of a URA as contained in the statute and said the statute did not address the subject of paying debt on a pre - existing urban renewal project. Mr. Brown maintained that the statute was clear as to what was allowed and what was not allowed. He said the City had other ways to increase public safety without employing the district. He said that $500,000 could be used to hire police officers and rent jail beds with money left over to address homelessness and hunger. Mr. Zelenka recalled that the council received public comment that was overwhelmingly in support of the plan. I Ie said the proposal included four great projects that could produce jobs downtown and that could be accomplished without the need to raise taxes or harm the schools. He said the tax increment financing mechanism was the cheapest of those the council looked at. The next least expensive option, the existing resources option, would require the council to cut $500,000 from the General Fund. He considered that a bad choice that did not make sense. He questioned why the council should spend more money and increase taxes because some people did not like the funding mechanism. Mr. Zelenka thought the council needed to be clear that it did not have unlimited "do- avers" for downtown. He thought failure would mean that it would take years to achieve anything downtown. Ms. Taylor thought downtown had suffered from 40 years of urban renewal and asked why urban renewal had not worked to this point. She reiterated that the public should be asked to vote on the proposal being contemplated. She suggested the open pit associated with the project could be filled with existing resources. She determined from staff there was $22 million in the Facilities Reserve and suggested that those fund could be employed if the council chose, and it would not cost the City anything to use that funding. Ms. Taylor acknowledged there was some urgency about LCC's plans that could be hampered by a public vote, but she suggested that the Facility Reserve could be used for that project and the voters could decide on the use of urban renewal for the other three projects. Ms. Taylor asked how much it cost to survey the buildings downtown to determine if they were blighted. City Manager Ruiz said the work was done by staff, and the cost was paid for by urban renewal funds. Mr. Clark said he was not a big fan of how Eugene used tax increment financing in the past. However, he believed the- proposed plan, while not perfect for everyone, had elements that accomplished things that he thought made it worth accepting. He specifically cited the proposals related to downtown public safety as an example. Mr. Pryor spoke to the fact not a lot had happened downtown, and suggested it was because there had not been an idea that people could all get behind. He did not think the City had been in a position to find consensus in the past, but he believed that at this time the City was in a unique position to move forward. He agreed that urban renewal was not a perfect tool but he thought it could be good if not gTeat. He was MINUTES--City Council May 10, 2010 Page 7 Work Session