Laserfiche WebLink
Mayor Piercy solicited comments from members of the panel. Mr. Bonnett, Mr. Barofsky, and Ms. <br />Calvert commended the work of staff and the panel. Mr. Barofsky said the panel members were all <br />advocates for better roads and he recommended the council keep the panel in place to identify projects for <br />a future bond. He said the backlog of projects was down this year for the first time in ten years but would <br />go back up next year. That needed to be addressed, and Mr. Barofsky thought it important to keep in <br />mind that there was still work to be done. He said the panel was also open to other charges. <br />Ms. Calvert thought the emphasis on alternative modes in the measure was also important and hoped that <br />focus and modal split was maintained in future bonds. <br />Mayor Piercy expressed appreciation for the work of the panel. She asked that a letter of appreciation be <br />sent to the panel on behalf of the council. She said it was heartening to hear about the jobs that resulted <br />from the bond measure and the fact projects were reducing the community's environmental impact while <br />saving money. She heard continual positive feedback about the projects from the public. Mayor Piercy <br />acknowledged there was still work to be done. <br />Mr. Clark congratulated Mr. Corey and thanked him and his staff for a job well -done. He also thanked <br />the panel members. He thought the council should consider other ways the panel could serve as the <br />council contemplated future bond measures. <br />Mr. Clark asked Mr. Corey when he believed another bond would be needed. Mr. Corey suggested the <br />City first needed to consider the status of the budget after the first 32 projects were completed. He did not <br />know what other competing needs might exist following expiration of the bond in 2013. He said the <br />council would need to discuss the ramifications of another bond and the potential of other funding <br />sources, such as a transportation maintenance system fee and fees assessed to garbage haulers. <br />Mr. Clark asked about the department's capacity to address the condition of unimproved roads. He noted <br />the department's use of thin overlays, which many in his ward were satisfied with and others wanted. Mr. <br />Corey acknowledged the City received many inquiries about the overlays. A considerable amount of such <br />work had occurred through transfers from the General Fund. He said through full implementation of <br />House Bill 2001, the City anticipated a continuation of such work through the Road Fund over the six - <br />year forecast period at a cost of $200,000 annually. <br />Mr. Clark wanted the City to have a long -term plan of action to deal with its unimproved streets, which <br />were not included in the maintenance backlog. He asked if that required a council work session. Mr. <br />Corey thought the City was heading in that direction as a result of previous council discussions. He <br />anticipated that staff would return with ideas about how to address those streets. <br />Mr. Pryor expressed appreciation for all the work that had been done by everyone. He had joined the <br />council because of the poor condition of City streets, and at that time there seemed to be no resolution in <br />sight. There had been considerable need but little money. He said the bond moved the community <br />forward and helped stabilize the situation, but he agreed with Mr. Corey that more work was needed. He <br />believed that the projects that had been accomplished represented a significant victory for the community. <br />He was pleased the council kept the promises it made to voters. <br />Mr. Poling agreed with the remarks of Mr. Clark and Mr. Pryor. He reported that he had also received <br />inquiries about the overlays mentioned by Mr. Clark and hoped to see more such overlays done. <br />MINUTES— Eugene City Council January 19, 2010 Page 2 <br />Work Session <br />