My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC Minutes - 04/09/08 Work Session
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Minutes
>
2008
>
CC Minutes - 04/09/08 Work Session
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 10:27:35 AM
Creation date
5/22/2008 9:15:43 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Minutes
Meeting_Type
Work Session
CMO_Meeting_Date
4/9/2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Ms. Bettman expressed appreciation for Mr. Stewart’s lobbying efforts at the state and federal levels to <br />restore the funds. She observed that the federal revenue measure was for $47 million and asked if $7 million <br />of it was dedicated for schools. Mr. Stewart responded that this was approximately correct, noting that <br />there was a little more funding because of Title 2 and Title 3 money that paid for the jail, though the Forest <br />Work Camp was not included. He said in looking what Lane County benefited from, it amounted to <br />approximately $51 million and there would be approximately a $7 million loss to local schools. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman had heard that the FY 08-09 budget for the County would be cut by $83 million and asked <br />why this amount was different from the $47 million loss in federal money. Mr. Stewart explained that the <br />federal money was utilized to leverage matching funds in the DHHS. He stated that the County was only <br />cutting the General Fund portion of health and human services by approximately $3 million, but that money <br />leveraged approximately $26 million. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman asserted that there were areas of revenue available to the County that the County was not <br />receiving at the state level. She asked how the County felt about lobbying to remove the prohibition on <br />recovering Systems Development Charges (SDCs) on public safety. Mr. Stewart responded that he had not <br />personally engaged in a conversation about SDCs for public safety. He knew that the Association of <br />Oregon Counties (AOC) and specifically the 16 affected counties were working hard to address the funding <br />issues. He related that there was a task force convened by the Governor that was looking for revenue <br />opportunities. He said the assessors organization had looked at how the County could increase money <br />coming from the state through property tax interest rates and how more money could be leveraged to offset <br />the cost of property tax collection in Eugene and Lane County. He underscored that they were working <br />closely with the State to see how they could lobby in the future to make up the difference. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman averred that the County had the ability to charge SDCs for transportation and parks but was <br />not doing so. Mr. Stewart replied that the County was collecting SDCs for parks in rural Lane County. He <br />said staff was working on transportation SDCs. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman asked how much revenue the County annually deferred for urban renewal districts, Multiple <br />Unit Property Tax Exemptions (MUPTEs), and Enterprise Zones. Mr. Stewart responded that he did not <br />know what that amount would be. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman declared that when she “did the research” for the urban renewal measure she had concluded <br />that the County would lose $3 million per year. She noted that it had endorsed an Enterprise Zone that she <br />projected would defer approximately $475,000 per year in tax revenue. She wondered why the County had <br />not “gotten serious” about looking at collecting “the revenue that was due” to it. Mr. Stewart replied that if <br />Ms. Bettman was referring to the zone in Oakridge, it had been in place for 11 years, no revenue had been <br />generated, and therefore there had been no property tax reduction. <br /> <br />Ms. Ortiz thanked Mr. Stewart for his presentation. She remarked that it was difficult to consider the <br />impacts of the budget on our future. She averred that people did not realize that organizations like the <br />Buckley House had an impact on the community. She wondered if the Buckley House had any grant writing <br />opportunities. She underscored that Buckley House was the only place an uninsured person with an alcohol <br />or drug problem could go to. She predicted that citizens would notice its closure because the people it <br />treated would be out on the street. <br /> <br />Ms. Ortiz asked if the County had considered selling any excess properties. Mr. Stewart replied that such <br />sales had been discussed at a low level by the Board. He underscored that it would not be prudent to sell an <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 9, 2008 Page 8 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.