12/19/1988 Meeting (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e taxes in the form of a tax base increase or a serial tax levy; and 4) relying on a dedicated revenue source such as the utility tax under consideration. Mr. Mounts said the utility tax would be based on the consumption of electric, steam, water, telephone (excluding out-of-state long-distance), sewer, natural gas, and cable television utilities. The tax would be paid by all the consumers of those utilities within the city limits. It was estimated that a one-percent utility tax would raise $800,000 annually. The committee recommended that revenue in excess of that needed for library operations should be dedicated to branch libraries in the future. The average home owner would see an approximate $13.00 per year increase through this tax. For property tax to produce the same amount of revenue, the average impact on home owners would be approximately $19.00 per year on a $60,000 home. Carol Hildebrand, Library staff, responded to the often-asked question, "Why not remodel and expand the present library facility?" The Future of Our Library Committee (Future Committee) commissioned an architectural study of the present building which revealed that structural engineering of the present top floor is such that book weight cannot be supported, nor is an additional floor possible. Asbestos in the building should be removed and there are plumbing and wiring deficiencies. Were an expanded library to be located at the present site, additional land would have to be purchased for parking. Consequently, the Future Committee recommended a new library and its first choice location would be at Broadway and Charnel ton streets. In e its discussion of a possible mixed-use project, the committee developed several criteria for the library space: it should have a separate entrance and identity, be designed with the input of users and library staff, have control of its own interior, be constructed so the buildingls other uses do not disrupt the operation of the library (noises, smells), not inhibit free speech activities, and have ground floor access. Ms. Hildebrand concluded that the proposal being considered offers the necessary space and functions. Mayor Obie opened the public hearing. Because of the large number of requests to speak, he asked that members of the public limit their testimony to two minutes each. Jean Reeder, 500 East 4th Avenue, spoke as the general manager of EWEB regarding the proposed utility consumption tax. She reported that customer comments on EWEB bills indicated that 11 percent favor the library, 85 percent oppose the utility tax, and 4 percent made other comments. She presented these comments to the council for its review. Ms. Reeder said EWEBls in-lieu-of-tax payment to the City of Eugene currently is $6.2 million. She anticipated further growth of those payments and suggested that the ongoing costs of the library could be paid out of these additional payments. Ms. Reeder listed three legal concerns with the proposed utility tax. First, she questioned whether EWEB has the authority to impose and collect the tax. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 19, 1988 Page 3