Item 3A - Minutes Approval - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Manager Taylor underscored that almost every project in the CIP included extensive public planning processes; ideas for projects were never weighed for the first time in the CIP. Councilor Pap6 alleged that there were several projects that the council had not seen before. He asked that a work session be held on how the council would want to work through the draft CIP in the future. Regarding Councilor Bettman's amendment, Councilor Pap6 said he assumed she referred to transportation-related capital improvements. He asked if it was necessary to pass the CIP at the present meeting. City Manager Taylor responded that, while it was not urgent that the council pass the CIP on this night, he hoped it would pass. He felt the amendment as proposed was worthy of further discussion, but that it was related to the City's financial goals and policies and not the CIP. He stressed that this was the last meeting until April 11 and the draft budget was slated to be proposed on April 25. He said it would be difficult to make recommendations without an adopted CIP and council direction on some of the projects for FY06. Councilor Bettman indicated she would not support the CIP because it was a "moving target" and she did not know what was really in it and how it was to be funded. She did not see her amendment as an obstacle because the City Manager already had a projection of what would be included in the capital budget. She suggested he put the projection into the proposed budget and then the council could make changes as necessary. Councilor Bettman affirmed that Councilor Pap6 was correct in assuming that she intended to refer to transportation infrastructure in proposed Policy 8. Continuing, Councilor Bettman said her original approach was a project-specific approach. She had been prepared to propose that STP-U money be removed from the Chad Drive extension and the Monroe/Friendly Bikeway be authorized but realized her real concern was that there was a lack of council policy direction in the document. She asserted that while the City Manager said projects in the CIP were based on other plans and policies, when she had worked with other staff they indicated that the projects were drawn from the CIP. She felt she was unable to "get in there" and have an influence on the decisions. She was amenable to postponement of the discussion. Councilor Kelly offered a friendly amendment to insert the word 'transportation' before the word 'infrastructure' in Policy 8. The maker of the motion accepted the friendly amendment. Councilor Kelly supported the amendment. He felt the amendment informed the CIP and would provide the council with the opportunity to weigh in on changes in funding for the projects. He said if he perceived that the amendment sought to change the financial goals and policies he would not support it. City Manager Taylor read the following from the bottom of the proposed amendment: "In the event that the council adopts the above motion, the City Manager and finance staff will bring to the Budget Committee in the normal course amendments to the City's Financial Management Goals and Policies to incorporate the above." MINUTES--Eugene City Council March 7, 2005 Page 10 Regular Session