Item B - Econ.Dev.Comm. Recomm. - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ms. Edwards said she felt stakeholders would bring community interests to the surface, and so the broad definition was already covered without the addition. Ms. Pierce said she agreed with Ms. Edwards, and said adding "community" broadened the statement to virtually no meaning. Ms. Rygas said it was important that future readers of the statement understand what is meant by it, and she felt including both stakeholders and community in the language made it clear that both interests applied. The motion passed 8:5. Ms. Pierce noted that the motion had not passed by 75% of the members, and asked if all committee votes needed to pass by 75%, or just final recommendations. Mr. Goldsmith said final recommendations needed to pass by 75%, but the point he had raised previously was that if underlying motions do not pass by 75%, that would affect the outcome of the final recommendations, and he thought all motions should need 75% approval. Mr. Forbes said the challenge to the committee was that three-quarters of the members needed to be in agreement on final recommendations, and how the committee got there was important, as Mr. Goldsmith had said, but Mr. Forbes did not feel 75% was critical on all votes along the way. VII. BUSINESS FACILITATOR PROPOSAL Mr. Coyle referred members to the written proposal contained as Item 4 under Summary of Proposed Policies in Ms. Fiefeld's June 7, 2004, e-mail to committee members. Mr. Coyle said the intent of the proposal is to put the issue before the Budget Committee and the City Council in terms of resources for the next fiscal year. Ms. Pierce said, assuming the business facilitator was a new position, she thought it would take a considerable resource out of a very tight budget. She said committee members have not talked much about exactly what they thought the facilitator would do, and she wondered if there was some other way those things could be accomplished without adding resources. She asked Mr. Coyle how he envisioned the role, and why it was not getting done now. Mr. Coyle said he saw two roles and tried to incorporate both in the proposal. One role, he said, is interdepartmental and interagency coordination. The system is complex and many people touch permits as the permits go through the system and as regulations get more complex. He said he saw that as an administrative function and one the staff could do better internally, particularly as Eugene simplifies its code. The second role has to do with expansion opportunities, he said, for people who currently never get into the system because they see the hurdles involved as so awful. Mr. Coyle said that is a different level of advocacy, now sometimes done by the Chamber of Commerce or by staff, but there is no dedicated resource to do it. He said adding a service to provide facilitator assistance to businesses considering expansion seemed appropriate. Ms. Pierce said she believed a few years ago that kind of assistance was part of the function of the Lane Metro Partnership. Mr. Coyle agreed there was some assistance coming from the Metro Partnership, from the Chamber, and to a certain degree, from within the City. MINUTES--Mayor's Committee on Economic Development June 14, 2004 Page 5