CC Minutes - 10/17/01 Work Session

Home Browse Search

In conclusion, Ms. Mulder urged that the council act on this issue expeditiously as there would be a need for a formidable educational process before action could be taken, during which time the backlog would continue to increase. Mr. Meisner thanked the subcommittee for its efforts in reviewing this issue. He concurred that a locally controlled source of revenue was pivotal to addressing the issue and hoped that a regional approach could be achieved. Mr. Meisner voiced concern around the equitability issue if a TUF was implemented, but said he could support this approach if it were based upon use, rather than a flat fee. In response to a question from Mr. Meisner, City Manager Jim Johnson replied that on April 26, 2001, a letter was sent to the Lane County Board of Commissioners suggesting that it increase the amount of federal timber receipts that it shared with cities, noting that the urban transition process was permanent and that there had been significant changes over time. Additionally, it was noted in the letter that the level of service had increased and therefore the amount of dollars should increase; also that there had not been an inflation adjustment. Mr. Johnson explained that timber receipts were not related to population, miles driven, registered vehicles, or drivers' licenses. He said there were only two ways to increase road fund dollars distributed by the County; either by agreement among County officials or by the cities asking voters to require the County to increase funding. Mr. Meisner requested that the County's percentage of distribution of urban versus rural be provided to the council and the public. In response to a question from Mr. Meisner as to collaboration with the City of Springfield, Mr. Johnson said that discussions were ongoing with regard to road funding; however, he said there was not an active proposal in progress. Ms. Nathanson pointed out that if a new road was built at the same quality in the City as in the County, the City roads would deteriorate more quickly due to differences in volume and weight of traffic. With regard to the gas tax, she opined that a metropolitan approach would be the most reasonable and practical and questioned if the budget committees of both Eugene and Springfield could meet jointly to address the issue. Ms. Nathanson spoke to the education and outreach program and questioned who the stakeholder groups would include. In conclusion, Ms. Nathanson opined that cable television was not utilized to its potential and hoped that it could be considered to explain the issue to the public. Ms. Bettman voiced her appreciation to the subcommittee for its efforts in this study, and especially in its pursuit of independent studies to confirm the various components of the issue. She spoke about the gas tax and noted that as it was a flexible use of funding, that it trickled down from the State, through the County, to the City, and was not prioritized to protect the existing transportation system. Ms. Bettman pointed out that if the voters were asked to pay for the upkeep of the system, there would be no incentive for the County and State to change the manner in which they distributed this funding. She also opined that the TUF had inequities and Eugene residents were paying for infrastructure that served a larger area. She said she would support the suggested motion but would offer an amendment to the resolution to put the TUF measure on the ballot so the citizens could make an educated decision to either agree to fund the road maintenance or demand that the County and State prioritize their spending. Mr. Kelly voiced his appreciation to the subcommittee for its efforts in reviewing this issue and particularly its decision to obtain independent consultant opinions. He stressed that the roadways were deteriorating MINUTES- Eugene City Council Work Session October 17, 2001 Page 3