Laserfiche WebLink
Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing. <br /> <br />Stephen Kramer <br />, 42113 Deerhorn Road, Springfield, maintained most of the revenue collected by the <br />program was being used to collect the tax. There had been few legitimate complaints filed with the <br />program and an analysis of those complaints indicated almost all could have been addressed under <br />existing law, suggesting the program was redundant. The program was collecting a large surplus, which <br />also suggested the program was unnecessary. He believed the revenue supported a bunch of bureaucrats <br />who wished to extend and expand their bureaucratic base. <br /> <br />Jonathan Clay <br />, 4529 SW Vermont Street, #6, Portland, represented the Metro Multi-Family Housing <br />Association. He urged the council to sunset the ordinance. His organization supported quality housing <br />and believed complaints of substandard housing should be investigated and addressed where problems <br />existed; however, the level of substandard housing complaints received by the City suggested they could <br />be addressed within existing City resources. At a minimum, he suggested the City limit the amount <br />collected for the Rental Housing Program to ensure there was only a prudent reserve at year’s end. He <br />recommended a fee be reduced to be no more than $5 per unit, which would provide adequate program <br />funding and allow for the reserve. He believed it was unwise for the City to over-collect from its <br />taxpayer base in such difficult economic times. <br /> <br />Richard Thorin <br />, Ward 7, owned 87 rental units in Eugene and had been paying the fee since its <br />inception. He termed the fee ridiculous. Mr. Thorin believed that existing State law was sufficient and <br />worked well. He had not realized any benefit from the Eugene program. He asked that his money be <br />refunded and that the ordinance be sunsetted immediately. <br /> <br />Brett Rowlett <br />, 4970 Nectar Way, lead organizer for Eugene Citizens for Housing Standards, said he had <br />advocated for adoption of the code as a university student because he believed something needed to be <br />done about rental housing conditions in Eugene. His organization’s research found that similarly sized <br />communities had rental housing programs. Mr. Rowlett maintained that the current program was <br />necessary because renters could not afford to go to Small Claims Court. He did not think the program <br />cost much, it was not proactive in seeking out complaints, and it encouraged landlords and tenants to <br />work out their disagreements. Mr. Rowlett asserted the program was supported by landlords, who <br />considered it a resource. Renters did not mind paying the fee and homeowners supported the program <br />because it protected their property values. <br /> <br />Paul Cauthorne <br />, Ward 1, asked the council to end the Rental Housing Program. He suggested that the <br />program sounded great in theory when described by a past university student who advocated for it. He <br />reported he had attended the November 2010 meeting of the department advisory committee that advised <br />the City on the program, and members had requested information from staff to better quantify the value of <br />the program. Staff indicated that the committee was in place to support City staff objectives and <br />“essentially told to sit down and shut up.” He did not think that was appropriate or what was intended. <br /> <br />Scott Smith <br />, Ward 5, opposed the Rental Housing Code. He said advocates maintained there was an <br />overriding need for the program but he found that City staff was actively promoting the program to <br />tenants. He believed the record would demonstrate that the “groundswell of problems” the program was <br />created to solve did not exist. He believed the program represented “government for government” and <br />suggested staff would naturally recommend its continuance because staff benefited and could not be <br />objective. Mr. Smith termed the program a “cash cow” for the Planning and Development Department <br />and said it was difficult for citizens to monitor expenditures in the program because of the way it was <br />managed. The program was administration heavy. Because people were constantly buying and selling <br />property, staff spent time “cruising” Craigslist hoping to find new landlords to tax. The program was also <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 21, 2011 Page 4 <br /> Public Hearing <br /> <br />