05/23/1984 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e e - so that public opinion could be obtained during September and October before the election. She agreed with the idea that any cuts take place over an 18-month period. Mr. Ball asked if the council was going to cut services or increase revenues. He said he felt that the process questions were an evasion of that primary question. Mr. Obie stressed that unity among the councilors was necessary for any action to be successful. Mr. Holmer questioned Mr. Ball's statement, stating that no one wanted to curtail the current level of services. He said that no cuts were necessary within the revenues presently available if the six- percent annual increase in the property tax was used and fees were adjusted. In response to a question, he stated that he would be against increasing the revenues. Mr. Ball said it must be determined which councilors were against increasing revenues. Mr. Obie said a question of degree existed whether to increase revenues by $500,000 or $3 million. He commented that the council should determine whether to adopt the three-year restoration plan. Ms. Nichols temporarily left the meeting at this time. Referring to the list of service restorations as listed in the April 6 letter from the City Manager to the City Council, Mr. Obie asked if the council wished to support those restorations and whether the public should be given the opportunity to provide input on the restorations. Addressing the issue of Public Safety, Ms. Schue stated that the general public was not concerned with the closure of fire stations as long as a truck responded to a fire. She said the actual situation and the effect of such closures have not been explained to the public. Mr. Obie said he was in favor of putting that decision to the public. Ms. Smith asked if the public should be allowed to identify which services should be restored. Mr. Obie responded that the public should be informed of what the funds would provide. Mr. Holmer commented that the council had already decided that restoring the fire stations was a low pri- ority, stating that it was taking a calculated risk while attempting to improve the City's capability to handle fire protection. He added that planning for a successor station was included in the 1985 CIP as part of a long-range plan. Ms. Schue said the City was not implementing its long-range plan; she said that such cuts were counter-productive. Mr. Ball said the voters were not-being given a choice; he felt that the public would fund the fire stations above some items chosen by the council. He said that the council asking the public for additional funding for fire protection after it had already decjded on the budget would give the public a false picture of the present situation. Ms. Nichols returned to the meeting at this time. Ms. Schue stated that the City was funding the most critical services on a year-to-year basis and not implementing long-range plans. She said she did not agree with putting the critical items out to the voters. Mr. Holmer stated that every effort must be made to provide services without adding new taxes, stating that the City cannot base its decisions on possible resources that might not materialize. He said he recognized the difficulties of making assumptions for the future. MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 23, 1984 Page 3