CC Minutes - 04/09/08 Work Session

Home Browse Search

that the County was a cooperator with its fellow jurisdictions and did not propose them, cities came to them proposing the development tool. Ms. Taylor did not perceive the county payments as a gift, rather she considered it an entitlement. She noted that presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had voiced that same opinion. She asked how much of Lane County was federal land and generated no tax revenue. Mr. Stewart responded that 54 percent of Lane County was federally owned. Ms. Bettman accepted the fact that the County was facing a crisis. She wanted to find long-term solutions. She noted the failure of recent county revenue measures. She opined that she had seen a lot of expenditures on the part of the county that she questioned. She related that there had been over 900 appeals to property taxes and 300 of them had been granted, which was a net reduction in revenue. She felt the people collecting the appeals were getting “astronomical amount of interest” on the tax money. She averred that this was a waste of money. In terms of SDCs, she reiterated that SDCs did provide a funding source for when new capacity for transportation or parks was needed. She declared that utilizing SDCs meant the money for such projects was not coming out of other funds. She also questioned the resolution the County was considering that would take on permitting and code enforcement in the Urban Transition area as she felt it would be an additional service for the County to provide that would cost the County money. Regarding the latter, Mr. Stewart clarified for Ms. Bettman that the land management division was solely fee based and the citizens applying for zoning changes and building permits and other actions would pay the cost to do so. He acknowledged concerns expressed by citizens regarding a potential adjustment in that agreement, adding that he would not say the County was ready to move on the matter. Mr. Zelenka asked if alternative funding sources for human services had been looked into. Mr. Stewart replied that they had not considered this at the Board level but he had worked with Executive Director for the Department of Human Services, Steve Manela on the possibility of a levy to help pay for the human services portion of the budget. Mr. Zelenka commented that he would support such a levy. Mr. Stewart said when facing a crisis one does what one can. He stressed that the income tax measure that had been posed had been based on the critical need to provide essential services. He had wanted to fix the whole problem at one time. He stressed that if the cuts came the County would have to suffer because there would not be a “miracle fix” for it. He predicted that what would happen was that the County would assess whether there would be any help from the State and then how to move forward from there. He thought they would continue to work through the federal government with our congressional leaders to get the payment for the services provided on those lands. He said the other point that would have to be addressed was how they could incrementally go to the citizens to replace some of the losses ahead. Mr. Zelenka thought this was an appropriate way to look at the budget issue. He opined that it was “not an enviable place to be.” Mr. Stewart thanked the councilors for their thoughts and ideas. He said he would take them back to the Board of Commissioners. He was also thankful that the council grasped the level of concern as to what was going to happen and that they wanted to help. He understood that no one could stand up “with a bag full of money” but he thought there were ways to change processes and look for efficiencies that would lead to a solution. MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 9, 2008 Page 10 Work Session