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

Home Browse Search

The motion passed 7:6. Noting that the motion passed by a bare majority, Mr. Forbes said the enterprise zone recommendation would be a critical piece of the committee's report to the City Council. He asked for committee reaction. Ms. Edwards said she saw more conciliatory possibilities to get to three-quarters support. She said she did not know how to proceed, but thought the committee needed to look somewhere in between where it had just arrived by vote. Ms. Rygas moved, seconded by Mr. Re'Voal, to adopt the report as written by the Enterprize Zone subcommittee, with the following amendments (deletions in italics, additions in bold): 1) Potential Criterion a: Local company--on property or payroll tax rolls for past three years 2) Potential Criteria g and h: replace mean with median and with the understanding that all of the potential criteria reflected principles to be followed, not specific details. Mr. Rexius asked if a better description of the "smaller, chopped up tracts" in the boundary description was available and was told those were the tracts on Prairie Road. He asked for confirmation that the proposed zone does not include the infrastructure-ready business parks on West 11th, and received confirmation that it does not. Last, he said railroad and mill sites needed to be included. Mr. Kahle said some of the railroad properties were greenfields and some were brownfields; he would include brownfields. Mr. Proudfoot said he believed the EPA defined brownfields as anything that is perceived as brownfields. He agreed brownfields inside or outside the boundary should be included. He said his concern with excluding business parks was that it could lead to pushing the urban growth boundary. He said he would rather promote sites where the infrastructure is already present. Ms. Pierce said she thought it would be difficult for committee members to vote on the motion without a clear designation of boundaries. She said she would like to see a map developed before the next meeting that outlines exactly the small additional tracts and the brownfields to be included. She said the City Council will have to have such a map to adopt the proposal. Mr. Wanichek said he would not support the motion. He said Eugene has shovel-ready sites that the State and the Governor have said are shovel-ready sites, and development can still occur without a property tax exemption, but we are here to be an economic development committee that helps bring businesses in, and when we talk about the community we are making a significant value statement with the extra 33.3% criteria about Eugene's uniqueness, and that statement is enough. He said we should have the same enterprise zone we had before. Ms. Rygas used an analogy of a former meth house, a house needing renovation, and a new house to make the point that different reward systems are needed to encourage people to move into all three of them. She said Eugene also had three different kinds of properties that needed to be developed, that the heart of the proposal was substantially different incentives for the three kinds, and noted that greenfields often are developed with no incentive at all. MINUTES--Mayor's Committee on Economic Development June 14, 2004 Page 13