CCMinutes - 10/27/04 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Corey distributed a TSMF fact sheet and called attention to the example rates. He noted changes from the rates previously considered by the council and reminded the council the rates were set by administrative rule. Mr. Corey noted the City Manager's recommendation that the council pursue a two-cent gas tax increase and establish a TSMF, and that it decline to pursue bonding alternatives at this time. He indicated that if the council decided to proceed, a public hearing would be scheduled for November 22, 2004, and action would be scheduled for December 6. Mr. Corey acknowledged the contributions of City staff members Sue Cutsogeorge, Larry Hill, Patty Boyle, Fred McVey, Eric Jones, and Becky Koble in preparing the materials before the council. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Poling, moved to direct the City Manager to pursue options 3 and 4 as outlined in the Agenda Item Summary. Mayor Torrey solicited council comments and questions regarding the motion. Mr. Poling asked staff to discuss administrative costs. Mr. Corey said that the primary administrative costs would include the costs of billing and internal service costs. He anticipated that those costs would be approximately $650,000 if done through the Eugene Water & Electric Board. Mr. Poling determined from Mr. Corey that the ordinance would encompass off-street bicycle paths. Mr. Poling asked what it meant to exempt 80 percent of the diesel fuel from the tax, as Springfield had done, and if Eugene could do the same thing. Mr. Corey noted that Springfield's gas tax collects approximately three times more from diesel fuel users than Eugene's did. He said that he would not recommend taking that approach because several councilors had wanted to ensure that the impact of trucks on the street was addressed in some manner. Mr. Poling asked if there could be a revenue cap set for the TSMF. Mr. Corey said the City could cap the revenue and anticipated that could occur through the budget process. However, he pointed out that it was likely that the revenue would fluctuate from year to year in response to higher or lower than estimated receipts from other components, such as the gas tax. Mr. Poling indicated he would not oppose removing the provision of the TSMF ordinance related to funding for the bicycle system. He believed revenues should be restricted to the on-street bicycle system only. Mr. Corey said the concept behind the TSMF was not that it was generated by the curb-to-curb network uses; the concept was that all in the community benefited from the network and that all paid, even if they were not direct users. He thought the language in the section was developed by the council during an earlier work session. Ms. Taylor stated that someone with five cars would pay the same TSMF as someone without a car. She said she had asked staff why the council was considering the TSMF again and what had changed since its repeal, and learned that nothing had changed other than that the Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce dropped its opposition. She would have preferred to hear more about support from other community organizations, such as the neighborhood associations and the City Club. Ms. Taylor found it extremely disturbing the chamber had so much influence on City actions, although she acknowledged she had not been bothered by the chamber's influence when the council repealed the ordinance because she did not support the MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 27, 2004 Page 9 Work Session