CC Minutes - 01/14/08 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Councilor Ortiz commented that she did not look at the City of Eugene selling less gasoline as necessarily a bad thing. She would surmise that people were living within their footprint. She felt that spending money locally in one’s own community was a good thing. She had supported the gas tax in the past because she heard the frustration of staff regarding not being able to address deteriorating roads and she heard feedback from constituents regarding the roads. Councilor Pryor thought the vote in November was something the council should pay attention to. He was uncertain as to how he would vote on it at this point. He recalled that he had debated the last gas tax with Mr. Romain and he believed Mr. Romain was sincere when he said he would work to pass a statewide gas tax. He indicated his willingness to collaborate on such a tax. He shared his concern that a decision not to sunset the 2 cent tax would result in the tax being placed on the ballot and voted down, just as the proposed gas tax that had been placed on the November ballot failed. He also found it difficult to walk away from $1.4 million, which he believed was desperately needed. He wanted to have community support for the larger elements of the transportation package the committee had worked on. He was concerned that the gas tax could negatively impact a bond measure. He agreed that street repairs should not be a “sidebar issue” when talking about the budget. Councilor Bettman thanked everyone who testified. She said she did not “read” the election as the voters rescinding the existing gas tax. She acknowledged that some would disagree with an action to extend the gas tax and that those people would have a right to place it on the ballot. She appreciated hearing that people were willing to “step up to the plate” to help at the state level “if [the council] did what they wanted.” She commented that the bond would not provide enough money to fund the backlog of street repairs. She asked if it would be possible to modify the ordinance so that the sunset date could be postponed until it was triggered by a remedy implemented by the State or County that would satisfy the City’s funding need. City Attorney Jerry Lidz stated that the council could amend the ordinance but it could not make the sunset date contingent upon the action of another governmental body. He said the council could extend or repeal the sunset. He explained that it was a constitutional principle that a governmental body could not delegate its legislative authority to the legislature. Councilor Bettman requested ordinance language that would extend the tax by three years, indicating that this would be enough time to see if there were other remedies at the State and/or County level. Councilor Clark was pleased to hear Mr. Romain indicate he would be willing to work toward a statewide solution. He heard that the gas tax was not the right funding solution but that those in opposition to the tax were committed to finding the right one. He agreed that it was a larger issue than an individual revenue stream and that it was a larger core service issue. He believed that there was money in the City’s budget but it was not being spent as people expected it to be spent. He felt that people wanted the City to “deal with at least some of this problem” with the money that it had. He was somewhat concerned that repealing the sunset would cause there to be two political fights at the same time: one to keep the $1.4 million and the other to pass a bond which could potentially generate tens of millions of dollars. He was inclined to believe that it would be wiser for the City to seek short-term solutions with the money it already had. Councilor Zelenka stated that the gas tax could only be used on road maintenance by law. He felt that anyone who mistrusted the City government should “rest assured” that it would be illegal to spend it on other things. He acknowledged that the gas tax was tough for people on fixed and low incomes but this was not an increase, it was maintaining the status quo. In response to those who said the council should listen to the voters he wished to point out that the voters in Wards 1, 2, and 3 voted “overwhelmingly” in support of MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 14, 2008 Page 10 Regular Meeting