Laserfiche WebLink
fective date of this ordinance shall continue to be allocated for those purposes at the <br />same percentage.” <br /> <br />Roll call vote, the motion to amend the main motion passed, 8:0. <br /> <br />Councilor Poling, seconded by Councilor Papé, moved to amend the main motion to <br />delete Section 7.750(2)(a) from the ordinance concerning a transportation system <br />maintenance fee. <br /> <br />Councilor Poling stated that his purpose was to prevent TSMF revenues from being used for anything other <br />than curb-to-curb repairs. He was agreeable to a suggestion at an earlier meeting by Councilor Kelly that <br />five percent be dedicated to off-street bike paths, but wanted to remove any possibility of TSMF revenues <br />being used for OMP and improvements; funds should be used strictly for road repairs. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman asked how revenue collected annually would be impacted. Mr. Corey responded that the <br />rate methodology would not be affected but it would create a problem that would not be addressed as part of <br />the strategy and that was the need to fill the $1.5 million gap in the operations and maintenance budget. He <br />said Councilor Poling’s amendment would address the backlog of deferred maintenance but leave unresolved <br />the funding gap in operations and maintenance. <br /> <br />Councilor Kelly said he would support an amendment that only deleted the words “and improve” instead of <br />the entire section. He wanted to restrict the TSMF to OMP but not improvement or new streets. He said <br />since the council chose not to address road operations funds with some other budgetary mechanism to <br />resolve the $1.5 million gap, he could not support the amendment. <br /> <br />Councilor Papé felt that people wanted the streets repaired and if there could be a sunset at the point when <br />repairs were completed he thought OMP could be funded from a source like the gas tax. He asked if any <br />gas tax revenue was currently used for OMP. Mr. Corey replied that the local option gas tax completely <br />dedicated to capital preservation and had been since its inception. He said the operation and maintenance <br />gap could be addressed through other means, such as an increase to the local gas tax. He said each cent of <br />tax generated about $700,000 annually, so a two-cent increase would close the gap. <br /> <br />Councilor Papé remarked that he wanted to see the City use TSMF revenues for repairs, be held account- <br />able, get the job done and then rely on other sources for OMP. He would support the amendment. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman pointed out that Section 7.760(1) stated the fee should not be used for capacity- <br />enhancing street improvements. She believed there was a conflict with the language and definition and one <br />of her amendments would resolve the issue. She would support Councilor Poling’s amendment if the words <br />“and improvements” were removed, but if the TSMF passed she did not want the $1.5 million to be shifted <br />from other General Fund services. <br /> <br />Roll call vote, the vote to amend the main motion by deleting Section 7l750(2)(a) <br />from the ordinance concerning a transportation system maintenance fee was a 4:4 <br />tie, with councilors Poling, Solomon, Pryor and Papé voting in favor and councilors <br />Bettman, Kelly, Taylor and Ortiz voting in opposition. Mayor Piercy voted in op- <br />position and the motion failed on a final vote of 5:4. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 27, 2006 Page 7 <br /> Regular Meeting <br /> <br />