Laserfiche WebLink
view, but other jurisdictions might have a different perspective and the purpose of meeting jointly was to <br />identify how to work together to address common concerns. <br /> <br />Mr. Poling agreed with Mayor Piercy. He said he understood the purpose of the work session was to <br />develop Eugene's list of priorities, not criticize the lists of other jurisdictions. He said his interest in public <br />safety was based on how jurisdictions could work together to improve the system and realize efficiencies, <br />not create special districts. He said characterizing the issue that way and claiming it was an end run was <br />unfair and missed the point of the work session. <br /> <br />Mr. Clark thanked Ms. Bettman for her efforts to point out pitfalls in the process, but he did not see <br />anything "cloak and dagger" about the County listing as a priority how to address the loss of $47 million in <br />Federal funding. He said much of the County's public safety system directly affected Eugene citizens and <br />many of the services the City relied upon, such as the jail, might be severely affected by the County's loss of <br />revenue. He said all of the jurisdictions should discuss how to make the system better for everyone. <br /> <br />Mr. Pryor asked if the law provided for the creation of a special purpose district that was governed by <br />County commissioners. City Attorney Jerome Lidz replied that there were some such districts but he was <br />not certain of the type. <br /> <br />Mr. Pryor said rather than categorizing all special service districts as "evil" there should be more in-depth <br />discussion of the types and functions of districts and whether it was worthwhile considering the concept. He <br />said no jurisdiction operated in isolation and the County's loss of $47 million would affect many services <br />regardless of where they were provided; Secure Rural Schools was not just the County's concern. <br /> <br />Ms. Solomon arrived at 12:25 p.m. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman reiterated that the County was interested in amendments to the Metro Plan to allow the creation <br />of special districts. She said previously the County had in mind a public safety service district governed by <br />the County commissioners and there were many downsides from the City taxpayers' point of view. She <br />asserted that the process was inadequate because it did not allow time to discuss many of the issues on the <br />list of suggested priorities. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman said she intended to move to include discussions of the MPC/MPO voting structure, creation <br />of an ACT, and tax “giveaways” on Eugene's list. She asked if information could be provided on the <br />amount of money the City of Eugene had not collected in taxes for all the different incentives like urban <br />renewal districts, enterprise zones and multi-unit property tax exemptions (MUPTE) over the past five or six <br />years. She wanted that information to include what the City was foregoing from schools for the $167 <br />million that was taken away at the State level, including funds that were not coming through the County <br />because of the incentives the County was participating in, and the total amount the County was foregoing <br />pro tem <br />due to tax giveaways. City Manager Jones replied that the information could be compiled but it <br />would require a motion from the council to direct that it be provided, as it would require extensive staff time <br />to research and compile. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Zelenka, moved to direct staff to provide the infor- <br />mation she had described to the council before the joint elected officials meeting oc- <br />curred. <br /> <br />pro tem <br />City Manager Jones said she was not certain the information could be available by February 12. <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 30, 2008 Page 3 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />