Laserfiche WebLink
<br />M I N U T E S <br /> <br /> <br />Eugene City Council <br />Work Session <br />McNutt Room – City Hall <br />777 Pearl Street—Eugene, Oregon <br /> <br /> March 10, 2008 <br /> 5:30 p.m. <br /> <br />COUNCILORS PRESENT: Andrea Ortiz, Chris Pryor, Bonny Bettman, George Poling, Mike Clark, <br />Jennifer Solomon, Alan Zelenka, Betty Taylor (by telephone). <br /> <br /> <br />Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. She announced that <br />Ms. Taylor would be participating by telephone from Washington, DC. <br /> <br />A. ACTION: Resolution 4932 Calling a City Election on May 20, 2008, for the Purpose of <br />Referring to the Electors of the City of Eugene Ordinance No. 20401 Amending Section 3 of <br />Ordinance No. 20337, to Extend the Sunset of $0.02 Per Gallon of the Motor Vehicle Fuel <br />Dealer’s Business License Tax until February 28, 2011 <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy said the County had conducted its first round of validation on the petition and the signatures <br />had not been acceptable; a second validation was underway and she expected results in three or four days. <br /> <br />City Attorney Jerome Lidz outlined the council’s choices with regard to the ordinance it adopted in January <br />2008, extending the sunset provision of a portion of the gas tax. He said signatures had been gathered to <br />refer that ordinance to an election and the County was in the process of validating the petition. He reviewed <br />the options set forth in the agenda item summary, which included repealing the ordinance, sending the <br />measure to the May ballot, taking no action and allowing the measure to go to a September election if there <br />were sufficient signatures, and referring a competing measure to the September ballot. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman said she was inclined to take no action and wait until there was a final determination on <br />petition signatures before taking action. She understood that if the council took no action the ordinance was <br />not enforceable if there were enough signatures to refer it to the ballot and the $0.02 would not be collected <br />through September. If there was no other competing measure, the council had the option to move the <br />election to November. Mr. Lidz said the council did not currently have the option to move the election; it <br />was one of the election code amendments that would be considered later on the agenda. <br /> <br />Mr. Poling said he was inclined to accept the City Manager’s recommendation to adopt a resolution and <br />place it on the May ballot. He pointed out that the $0.02 tax was enacted until other funding sources were <br />sought and that had not yet happened; it was not a new tax. He preferred the less expensive option of <br />placing the measure on the May ballot to that of a special election. <br /> <br />Mr. Clark agreed with Mr. Poling about avoiding the expense of a special election. He felt the people had a <br />right to vote on the matter and asked what the threshold was for valid signatures. City Recorder Mary <br />Feldman said the County was required to use a statistical sampling methodology, which varied from one <br />petition to another. <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council March 10, 2008 Page 1 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />