CC Minutes - 10/31/07 Work Session

Home Browse Search

such measures included surveys which she considered to be intangibles. She felt the budget alignment process had no community input and was not justifiable at this time. She recalled that the council had voted to not dispose of the Kaufman Senior Center and had voted to take money from selling the annex and put it into a trust to provide the Kaufman Senior Center with funding into perpetuity. She noted that this was against the staff’s wishes, but the council supported doing so. She also recalled that the motion to fund bicycle and foot patrol public safety in perpetuity for urban core parks and downtown had been put into place by the council and budget committee despite opposition from staff. She asked what would happen to those services if staff decided that in order to “reach some obscure benchmark” the budget would not include these. Ms. Jones assured her that those decisions would be made like they were made every year; services funded in the previous year had to be evaluated the following year and the council and Budget Committee would still have the option to bring back something and make a change if they did not agree with a staff recom- mendation. She stressed that nothing was changing with that process. She stated that staff went through an annual evaluation of every service and tried to determine whether the City could continue to provide the service with the available resources or whether there was a better mechanism to deliver that service. Mr. Zelenka asked how the ten council goals would specifically be incorporated into the process. Ms. Jones responded that part of the budget instructions would state that there were ten council goals and that the staff teams needed to submit service offers at high, medium, and low levels to address those goals. Mr. Zelenka suggested that a web-based explanation be provided with a way for people to be involved and provide feedback. He preferred a budget based on values and a recognition of the diverse needs in the community, rather than just funding what was deemed most important and working the Budget Committee’s way down the budget. Ms. Taylor joined the meeting by telephone at 1:27 p.m. Ms. Bettman predicted that the issues that had “percolated up” from the community and upon which the council had made determinations, would be up for argument every year. She asserted that if those things were not supported by staff they would be the first things to fall out of the budget. She was not ready to make a change she considered to be so drastic. She felt this process was being “railroaded through” in a short amount of time. The motion passed, 6:2; Ms. Taylor and Ms. Bettman voting in opposition. The meeting adjourned at 1:29 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Angel Jones City Manager Pro Tem MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 31, 2007 Page 8 Work Session