Laserfiche WebLink
Councilor Solomon, responding to comments about a lack of discipline on the part of elected officials, stated <br />that there had not been an increase in the State gasoline tax for more than a decade and during this period <br />wherein revenues had remained the same, fuel efficiency and the cost of construction had increased. She <br />underscored that there had been a "myriad" of reasons that brought the City to its current crisis. She called <br />it unfair to place blame entirely on staff and the elected officials. <br /> <br />Councilor Ortiz felt compelled to support the tax. She acknowledged that it would not fix the problem for <br />good, but emphasized that the roads needed fixing, nonetheless. <br /> <br />Councilor Pryor expressed his distaste for taxing people. He felt he had walked into the middle of an <br />enormous problem with an immediate need for a remedy. He remarked that such a tax was easier to enact <br />with a known sunset date attached to it, adding that during the next three years the elected officials should <br />"turn over every rock" looking for modes of permanent funding for the City's road repairs. He supported <br />the motion, as amended. <br /> <br />Councilor Poling indicated his support for the motion. He noted the two-cent increase was in the total <br />originally recommended by the Budget Citizen Subcommittee. He expressed a willingness to sit down with <br />the County officials and whoever else was deemed necessary to determine other solutions to the road <br />problems. He said once permanent funding was found, he would support the elimination of the entire five <br />cent gasoline tax. He recognized that many people opposed the tax. He commented that people who <br />registered their opposition did not have an alternative solution to the funding issue to tender. He added, as a <br />point of information, that a person who drove 20,000 miles per year and whose vehicle got 20 miles to the <br />gallon would only experience a $20 increase in their annual expenses. <br /> <br />Councilor Ortiz appreciated the council's support for the amendment. She recalled paying 36 cents per <br />gallon for gasoline and recalled thinking that if it rose to 39 cents per gallon she would quit driving. She <br />noted that she now paid more than $1.50 per gallon and that this money went out of state. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy indicated that she would support the motion in the event of a tie. <br /> <br /> Roll call vote; the main motion passed, as amended, 5:3; councilors <br /> Bettman, Taylor, and Kelly voting in opposition. <br /> <br /> Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Bettman, moved that the <br /> ordinance be put on the ballot in order to allow the people to vote for it. <br /> <br />City Attorney Klein explained that the council could not simply do so and suggested that the council move to <br />direct the City Manager to bring back an ordinance that would refer the gas tax to the ballot. <br /> <br /> Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Bettman, changed her motion in <br /> accordance with the advice of legal counsel. The motion failed, 6:2; <br /> councilors Taylor and Bettman voting in favor. <br /> <br />The meeting adjourned at 10:01 p.m. <br /> <br />Respectfully submitted, <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 24, 2005 Page 16 <br /> Regular Session <br /> <br /> <br />