Laserfiche WebLink
<br />On September 26, 2005, the council reviewed and discussed the financial status and fund forecast for <br />Eugene’s Road Fund. Based on that discussion, the council directed the City Manager to develop an <br />FY07 Road Fund budget at the current service level and to bring back a proposal for a new revenue <br />funding package which would not only address the projected ongoing operating deficit in street <br />operations and maintenance but would also generate additional revenue to be dedicated to the backlog of <br />unfunded projects in the pavement preservation program. In the course of its FY07 budget <br />deliberations, the Budget Committee added a one-time funding allocation of $1.5 million to the <br />pavement preservation capital budget for FY07 to be focused on overlay projects for streets that would <br />otherwise fall into the reconstruct category in a subsequent year. <br /> <br />On February 27, 2006, the council reviewed and discussed a number of potential revenue strategies to <br />address unmet transportation system funding needs. At that session, the council directed the City <br />Manager to bring back a proposal for reestablishing the previously repealed TSMF to address not only <br />the projected ongoing operating deficits in road fund street operations and maintenance, but also to <br />generate additional revenue to address the remaining annual funding gaps in the pavement and off-street <br />bike path preservation programs. <br /> <br /> <br />Summary of Proposed Ordinance <br />The proposed TSMF ordinance (Attachment C) is identical to the ordinance that was the subject of the <br />public hearing before council on October 16. In essence, the ordinance establishes a TSMF to be paid <br />by all customers having possession or control of premises in the city. The proposed rate methodology <br />includes three components: 1) a variable trip-rate component which uses estimated trip generation to <br />measure a customer’s impact on the transportation system; 2) a flat base rate component; and 3) a flat <br />administrative fee component. The methodology includes five residential and four non-residential <br />customer property use categories. To provide a frame of reference for public and council discussion, <br />staff in July prepared preliminary examples of monthly rates: $5.22 for a single family home; $19.95 <br />for a 12,000-square-foot general office building; and $824.75 for a 40,000-square-foot grocery store. <br />The examples are based on a number of assumptions, detailed in the July 24, 2006, agenda item <br />summary for the council work session on the TSMF. Actual rates for each customer category would be <br />established through an administrative ratemaking process, following the requirements set forth in <br />Section 7.765 of the proposed ordinance. <br /> <br />The fee would be used to fund operation, maintenance and preservation of the existing transportation <br />system, including funding to reduce the backlog of needed street repairs. The ordinance would restrict <br />the use of revenues to the purposes stated in the ordinance and would prohibit the use of revenues for <br />capacity-enhancing street improvements. The ordinance would exclude TSMF funding for projects that <br />are routinely funded by assessments or work that would otherwise be eligible for the improvement fee <br />component of transportation system development charges. To facilitate discussion at the July 24, 2006, <br />City Council work session, staff projected TSMF revenue for FY08 at $6.72 million, based on a number <br />of assumptions. Actual annual revenue targets would be established by the City Manager based on an <br />investigation of the prescribed revenue needs and administrative costs, in accordance with the <br />procedures described in the TSMF ordinance. <br /> <br />Attachment A offers issue analyses and potential motions, should the council wish to amend portions of <br />the proposed TSMF ordinance. Attachment A also discusses how offsetting revenues from the local <br />motor vehicle fuel tax and other alternate sources of transportation system funding would be considered <br />in determining the annual need for TSMF revenue. <br /> L:\CMO\2006 Council Agendas\M061127\S0611273.doc <br />