CC Minutes - 05/13/08 Joint Elected Officials

Home Browse Search

jurisdiction. Regarding animal control, he said they wanted to ensure that in addition to taking a look at the current provision of services through the County, they worked with non-profit agencies to figure out the best way to provide animal control services in both the short- and long-term. Mayor Leiken remarked that over the last several years Commissioner Dwyer and he had compared budget notes. He said usually Commissioner Dwyer asked what he could do for the City of Springfield, but he predicted the tables would turn for the coming budget cycle. Mr. Grimaldi said Commissioner Sorenson’s suggestion was worth discussion. He stated that the Springfield budget issues paled in comparison with the County’s budget woes. He related that Springfield was not without its challenges as it had two fire stations that had to relocate and had to find the resources for this. Additionally, there was fire apparatus which needed to be replaced and a jail projected to open which would take resources that were not yet fully identified. He stated that one area to look at as the area moved forward was the entire public safety system to see if some economies of scale could be attained. Commissioner Stewart asked when Springfield’s budget process would be complete. Mr. Grimaldi replied that they projected it would be wrapped up that night. Mr. Ruiz stated that the Eugene Budget Committee would end its budget process on May 21 and the budget was on the docket for adoption on June 9. Eugene City Councilor Taylor approved of Commissioner Sorenson’s idea. She did not think the City of Eugene had a budget surplus in any fund, but if the City could help the County’s budget and still have its budget for city roads this could benefit both jurisdictions. Councilor Bettman called the co-deployment agreements between Springfield and Eugene public safety entities “problematic.” She averred that efforts to expand the Springfield Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) would increase the need for services. She did not believe the three-percent cap on the property tax increases would cover this. She did not want to see Eugene taxpayers and ratepayers “subsidizing the massive expansion” of Springfield’s UGB. She was also concerned when hearing people discuss economies of scale. She felt this meant merging public safety of the cities and this would cause Eugene to lose its jurisdictional authority over its police and fire departments. She opined that Eugene’s departments would no longer be able to have policies that reflected the community. Councilor Bettman related that the council had discussed reciprocity extensively in its meeting on the previous night. She asked if the $37 million in the County’s Public Works Reserve Fund included the $9 million from the State. Public Works Director for Lane County, Oliver Snowden, replied that it did not include the Senate Bill (SB) 994 money from the State. He said the County would not receive the $9.9 million from the bill until November 1, 2008. He related that the Road Fund money was subject to Article 9, Section 3(a) of the Constitution. There was an exception to this that had arisen from SB 808 that allowed Douglas and Lane Counties to use a portion of its timber receipts for sheriff’s patrol on county roads. He explained that a transfer of $1.5 million had been made from the County Road Fund to the Lane County Sheriff’s Office (LCSO) in the past year and in the next year’s budget for the traffic team. Councilor Bettman declared that the City of Eugene was in the county and its roads were county roads. She asserted that any road repair done on city roads was a benefit to the county. She ascertained from Mr. Snowden that there was no legal constraint on a potential swap between Lane County and the City of Eugene. MINUTES—Joint Elected Officials— May 13, 2008 Page 4 Lane Board of County Commissioners and Eugene and Springfield City Councils