My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCAgenda-3/10/04WS
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2004
>
CCAgenda-03/10/04WS
>
CCAgenda-3/10/04WS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 12:13:01 PM
Creation date
3/5/2004 9:34:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda
CMO_Meeting_Date
3/10/2004
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
71
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
3 <br /> <br />2. The City could reduce the threshold number of employees or remove it <br /> completely; <br /> <br /> This would increase the number of businesses supporting the program and <br />reporting. Auto body paint shops and dry cleaners, for instance, would report. This <br />would likely reduce the fee on each small business to a minimal impact. <br /> <br /> Two additional steps, which would not involye passing an ordinance, would help <br />un-do what the businesses have done to themselves: <br /> <br />3. The City could actively lobby the state legislature to remove the $2,000 cap that is <br /> forcing the City to increase the financial burden on small businesses. <br /> <br /> The state should not be telling local governments how they can raise money to run <br /> local programs. <br /> <br />4. The City could actively lobby the state legislature to acknowledge that Eugene's <br /> Right to Know program is substantially different, not similar, to the State Fire <br /> Marshal's hazardous substance reporting program (see footnote 1, page 1) <br /> <br /> If the State were to acknowledge that Eugene's program is different than the State <br /> Fire Marshal's, only those Eugene businesses that produce or use 2,640 pounds of <br /> hazardous chemicals a year would pay the fee for the reporting program. <br /> <br />5. The City could charge a small business tax to companies within certain SIC <br /> codes and then use those funds to pay for the program or other costs the City <br /> wants to cover. <br /> <br /> SUMMARY: Only those people who are wanting to .see the reporting of toxics <br />eliminated are proposing that the City re-vote on its constitution's (charter's) law re: <br />toxics right-to-know. <br /> <br />How well has Eugene's Charter law on toxics right-to-know been <br />working apart from the fee-shifting shenanigans? <br /> <br /> Great. <br /> <br /> 1. Eugene has the best local toxics-right-to-know reporting system in the <br />nation and it has been upheld in state court and twice in the Oregon State Legislature. <br /> <br /> 2. All covered companies are reporting annually and paying their fees <br />annually. Almost no enforcement actions have had to be taken in its 6-year history. <br /> <br /> City Council Agenda page 651 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.