Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> M I NUT E S <br /> EUGENE CITY COUNCIL <br /> October 29,1974 <br /> e <br /> Regular meeting of the Common Council of the city of Eugene, Oregon - carried over from <br /> October 14, 1974 because of lack of quorum - was called to order by Council President Tom R. <br /> Williams in the absence of Mayor 7:30 p.m. on October 29, 1974 in the Council <br /> Chamber with other Council members present: James Hershner, H. C. McDonald, Wickes Beal, <br /> Beth Campbell, Gus Keller, Neil Murray, and Robert Wood. <br /> Side I <br /> (0001) Council President Williams recognized the presence of Boy Scout Troop 316 and their leader, <br /> Ken Higgins, and welcomed them in their observance of the Council meeting as part of their <br /> activities. <br /> I - Public Hearings <br /> A. Garbage Rate Increase <br /> Proposed Garbage Rate Increase - Copies of memo from the City Manager were previously <br /> distributed to Council members explaining the difficulty in making an analysis of <br /> equitability of the proposed garbage rate schedule. Comparison of costs and income <br /> between the 1971 rates (date of last increase) and the present rates was not meaning- <br /> ful because it was impossible to evaluate the 1971 rates. Quality of reoords and <br /> e changes in ownerships in the industry would not permit the analysis staff preferred. <br /> However, because of increase in costs, members of the garbage industry convinced the <br /> Garbage Board that it was an emergency situation and the Board recommended approval <br /> of the proposed increase with the understanding that it would be reconsidered as soon <br /> as staff was able to make an in-depth financial analysis of firms in the business. <br /> Councilman Williams asked if the analysis would covez' comparison between costs of com- <br /> mercial and homeowners rates and whether needed co-of>eration from the industry was i <br /> anticipated if the six-month increase was granted. Manager answered that staff hoped <br /> for a thorough analysis of investment rate, cost of operations, investment in equipment, <br /> manpower costs, etc., in.order to be able to make a knowledgeable recomm.endation. He <br /> added that with 40 different licensed collectors spanning a whole scale of efficiency <br /> in operations the suggested analysis would be necessary if it were to apply equitably <br /> across the industry. With regard to co-operation in gaining the necessary information <br /> on which to base comparison, Manager noted that the Council had the authori~y to with- <br /> draw any increase granted and that would provide leverage. He said co-operation had <br /> been assured by some people in the 'industry so long a's the information given was <br /> treat~d confidentially. I <br /> Councilman Murray asked for clarification of staff position - whether they felt the pro- <br /> posed increase and perhaps more was justified, or whether-they questioned that it was <br /> -, justified. Manager stated his understanding that thE' Garbage Board felt the increase <br /> was justified but that staff when asked by the Council to review the situation felt <br /> there. was not sufficient information to be able to say it was justified, particularly <br /> with regard to the commercial rate increase. Manager said, in response to Councilman <br /> Murray, that there was the possibility, if proper analysis indicated the increase was <br /> not justified, the Council could be faced with making a change after the six-month <br /> period. Sherm F10gstad, finance director, added that staff found the 10<: increase on <br /> the residential pickup reasonable. However, it was not known whether the 1971 rates <br /> were reasonable at that time, so it would be difficult to determine whether increase <br /> based on those rates was justified. <br /> Councilman Keller noted that when the original proposal was brought to the Council he <br /> questioned the suggested commercial rates - more than 30% increase across the board. <br /> He said he didn't like the ,idea of correcting action six months from now and thought <br /> it would be more beneficial to make the analysis before making a decision so that if <br /> an increased was granted it could be justified to the community. <br /> Councilman McDonald noted his opposition to the increase when it was first proposed <br /> on the basis that recycling would lower the cost of garbage pickup to the individual. <br /> If people did not make the effort to recycle and demanded garbage service, he said, <br /> then they would have to pay for it. He wondered why the commercial haulers were pro- <br /> - posing a 30% increase. <br /> Neil Brown, attorney representing Sani-pac, recited his recollection of previous action <br /> on the proposed increase - to delay until after the County election in which it would be <br /> determined whether a free disposal site would be.available or a user fee would be charged. <br /> At the same time staff was to follow an auditing procedure to determine whether the in- <br /> crease was justified. He said everything requested l,y ci ty . staff had been provided, <br /> but staff suggested the proposed rates might be too high and that they couldn't really <br /> _IT1f!ke ~ ~ c!_ete.rI11jnati_~~~i!.hout judgm~~t ~(J~] whe_t!3e.r. _ th~_!:.97 !_Eates_wi3:re reasonable. -~ -- --- -.--- <br /> 359 10/29/74 - 1 <br />