Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

nexus between road use and the tax. Such an increase captured the impact of those who did not live in Eugene and did not pay property taxes but used City streets. He had no objection to both increases going to the ballot and was also fine if people did not support them; but he was not going to cut recreation programs or afterschool programs for kids to make the roads better. He noted a recent survey related to the new city hall in which residents were asked their top five concerns, and the top concern voiced by all but one ward was the condition of the streets and roads. Mr. Poling said that the City was not getting much help from Lane County, and Junction City, for example, was also considering a gas tax increase. While he supported a gas tax and agreed as to the nexus, he thought those who signed the petition referring the increase thought they were voting to refer the entire amount. He supported placing the entire amount on the ballot. Mr. Pryor acknowledged the values that were driving both points of view in regard to the issue. He said he did not stand to profit from the issue and so had to act as he thought best for the community, which was to fix the potholes. He was also supportive of placing both increases on the ballot as it was likely the two-cent increase would be successfully referred as well. He trusted the voters to do the right thing. Mr. Pryor suggested that if the City was having this much trouble with three or five cents, he questioned what would happen when larger amounts were discussed. He was concerned that those who were professing to be the City’s partners would no longer be its partners in the future. He continued to support the funding package and emphasized the importance of moving forward. He wanted to do what was best for the community. Mr. Clark thought all the councilors were trying to do what was best for the community, but there were values at odds. He agreed many cities were contemplating similar taxes, and suggested a countywide gas tax was the best answer to the existing problem. He concurred with the recommendation offered by Mr. Connelly. Ms. Ortiz, seconded by Mr. Pryor, moved with the unanimous consent of the council to consider enactment of the ordinance at this time. Mr. Zelenka suggested a gas tax was most environmentally responsible of all the taxing instruments that the council had considered given its resemblance to the carbon tax. Regarding the idea of a countywide gas tax increase, Mr. Zelenka maintained that the petroleum distributors and gas station operators rejected that proposal as well and would refer it as well. He said that they did not want to have a gas tax increase and their objections had nothing to do with fairness. Mr. Zelenka pointed out that the councilors would be subject to the tax. He acknowledged that poor residents would have a hard time paying for the increase, but the council needed to be fair and have a way to get money from people who drove in Eugene but did not live there. Speaking to Mr. Zelenka’s remarks, Mr. Poling said that he repeatedly heard representatives of the industry speak in support of a fair, equitable tax increase that was applied statewide. Mr. Clark concurred with Mr. Poling, saying many industry representatives had spoken of the need for a statewide fix to what was a statewide problem. He thought that would be wise, but pointed out that would require waiting for action by the 2009 legislature, which would take too long. He favored a countywide solution at this point. MINUTES—Eugene City Council August 15, 2007 Page 3 Work Session