Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Brown observed some of the cost of the tax was presented as avoidance and evasion, and he <br />questioned whether those represented true costs. He believed the council, through adjustments to the <br />rates, had eliminated most of the evasion and avoidance potential in the tax. <br />Mr. Farr said at level of five percent, the cost of administering the tax through Multnomah County was <br />$1.2 million. He determined from Ms. Cutsogeorge that those administrative costs were included in the <br />estimate of gross revenues that would not go to the schools ($7 million) because of tax evasion, <br />avoidance, or exemption. The net amount that would go to schools was $16.8 million. <br />Ms. Taylor asked what difference the amendment made. Mr. Klein said the amendment guaranteed that <br />the City Manager could not authorize rules to require employers to withhold. Ms. Taylor asked who <br />benefited from the amendment. Mr. Klein suggested that both employers and City staff benefited. He <br />noted that the ordinance still allowed for voluntary withholding. <br />Mr. Clark suggested that because addresses could be located inside the Eugene city limits but the <br />residents living at them were not subject to the tax, it would be burdensome to require employers to <br />withhold. <br />Responding to a question from Mr. Zelenka, City Manager Ruiz confirmed that it was not his intent to <br />require employer withholding. <br />The amendment to the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. <br />Mr. Zelenka, seconded by Mr. Poling, moved to amend Section 3 by adding the following <br />sentence: "It is the intent of the City Council that the sunset shall not be extended or <br />repealed unless approved by the voters." <br />Mr. Zelenka believed the addition of the sentence created an additional political hurdle for a future City <br />Council when it contemplated the extension of the tax. Mayor Piercy supported Mr. Zelenka's intent. <br />Mr. Farr determined from City Attorney Glenn Klein that the added sentence would not legally bind <br />future councils. <br />Mr. Brown concurred with Mr. Zelenka. He said people were spreading false fears that a future council <br />would decide to extend the tax indefinitely without referring it to the ballot. He pointed out the council <br />could have done that already but had chosen not to do so. He had a difficult time believing that a future <br />council would extend the tax without referring it to the voters. Mr. Brown suggested that voters could ask <br />those campaigning for council office if they would extend the tax unilaterally or refer it to the ballot. He <br />speculated the answer would be that they would refer it to the ballot. <br />Mr. Clark supported the amendment as clarifying the intent of the council. He acknowledged future <br />councilors were not bound by the action. Speaking to Mr. Brown's remarks, Mr. Clark said he did not <br />think it was a false fear that a future council would not allow the sunset to expire. He pointed to the <br />example of the City's gas tax, which was intended to expire but which had been extended by a council <br />majority. <br />Mr. Zelenka recalled that the council had included a sunset clause in the gas tax in the event the State <br />fixed the transportation funding problem, and when the State did not do so the City was forced to make <br />the tax permanent. <br />MINUTES— Eugene City Council April 27, 2011 Page 2 <br />Work Session <br />