|
<br />Mr. Williams said in seconding the, motion that although he favors the principle
<br />of the concept he would reserve support until he has had an opportunity to re-
<br />view the written ,proposal.
<br />
<br />A vote was taken on the motion as stated, and motion carried unanimously.
<br />
<br />Comm
<br />4/12/72
<br />Approve
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />Neil Murray, 653 West Broadway, reminded the Council that the proposal would provide a
<br />vehi de for bet.ter co-ordination for existing 'and future community /s chool uses ~ In answer
<br />to Mr. Teague, he said there will be ways of controlling care and safeguarding of school
<br />buildings and properties. He said they are asking for app~oval of the concept at this time;
<br />later on ,recommendations will be made on details of the operation,. '
<br />
<br />Michael Sprague said ,he agreed with the concept and felt it is really necessary to organize
<br />the community to work toward opening schpol buildings on a 24-hour basis. He :said Lane
<br />'County pre-schools- should have 'ac'cess to the school' b'uildin-gs in- their local areas. "
<br />
<br />~ . - ~ -- ~...,.....,- -- -, --- ,-~.~ ~.-=.,--- .->-" -:: -. ~.,;,--:-= - ~
<br />
<br />E. Taxation Program (Primary Ballot Measures, May 1972) - Copies of a memo were dis-
<br />tributed to Council members setting, forth suggestions of th~ Council subcommi ttee
<br />with regard to the prqposed l~% County income tax and increased motor vehicle li-
<br />cense fee to be voted upon at the May primary. It is suggested revenues from the
<br />auto fee increase (estimated at $460,'000) be equally divided between Park and
<br />Street improvements. Park improvement, acquisition and develppment, to be in line
<br />with the 1970 10~y~ar capital program; and street improvements to emphasize ar-
<br />terials, but to also include traffic safety with more lighting, signals, and bi-
<br />cycle facilities. Revenues from ~he l~% income tax would be pledged to support
<br />of the operating budget, thereby offsetting property tax revenues with which the
<br />operating budget is now funded. Manager said the revenue projections from the tax
<br />are very conservative an,d expenditures probably overstated, this in order not to
<br />create too promi-sing a picture of what may develop.
<br />
<br />Since the tax i~ propo~e4 fO~,a, fo~r-yearper~od and there is ,the possibility the
<br />measure will not be resubmitted at the, end of that, time, or it may not be approved
<br />by the voters if resubmitted, it would not, appear pract.ical to pledge 'one-half of
<br />those ~evenues to ~etirem~nt of bonded, indeb,tedness for capi tal, projects. It is
<br />also evident_~hat the property tax will not support the needed capital improvements
<br />which it is felt can be p,rov:ided, ($10 to $15 mLllion). It ,was sugges.ted that the
<br />1970 10-year capi.tal, improvem~nt progra[U be updated before the November geI)eral
<br />election, including the, au.ditorium, ,giving time ,to giye the_public factual informa-
<br />tion on capital needs then bond issues could be submitted at that time.
<br />
<br />Mrs. Campbell asked if'a statement could be made that a portion of the income tax
<br />revenue will be used to reduce the property tax, which she feels would sell the,
<br />measure to the voters. Mr. Mohr. said, the correct statement w,ould be; as suggested
<br />by the Council subcommittee, that the entire income from the tax ,will be devoted
<br />to property tax relief through its application to the operating budget.
<br />
<br />Mayor Anderson said the Ci ty has two concerns, one is property tax. relief ,the,
<br />other is that the City has fallen behind in capital improvements and a program
<br />must be provided for the voters to decide whether they want to continue with
<br />capital projects. To p~pvide as much input as possible ,from the public, he said,
<br />publj.cllearings will be hel,d during the summe_r to help _in ,forI?ulating ,a .plan
<br />which will fall within the financial capabilities of the City.
<br />
<br />Manager said it should be stressed that voter approval of the income tax and the
<br />auto fee increase or one or the other does not imply that the capital improvement
<br />program will be approved, only that it will be submitted to give the voters a
<br />choi ce of what is wanted.
<br />
<br />Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mr. Williams to endorse the ,ballot measures, pledgi[lg
<br />revenues from the auto license fee increase equally to park$ and street improve-'
<br />ments, and all of the revenues from the l~% County income tax for the four-yea;r
<br />period to cffset the operating budget of the Ci ty.
<br />
<br />Councilman Williams asked if the motion should als.o incJ..ude the Council's intent,
<br />to submit a Jis~ of capital needs, to the ,voters before the November general elec-
<br />tion. ,Mr. Mohr, replied that he doesn',t feEl,l in supporting the ballot measures
<br />there is need to document the capital ,needs of the City in terms of bond issue
<br />or serial levy.
<br />
<br />A vote was taken on the motion as stat,ed, and motion carried unanimously.
<br />
<br />F. Portland Avenue Traffic - Copies of a mem.o were previously dist;ributed to Council
<br />members recommending permanent installation of the experimental barricade on
<br />Portland Avenue north of Crest Drive and that no other measures betaken at this
<br />time. ~t also recommended ,some signing at Portland at 30th and asked authoriza-
<br />
<br />tion for ~perimental traffic controls in other neighborhoods with simiiar problems.
<br />
<br />107
<br />
<br />4/24/7? - R
<br />
<br />.-
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />Comm
<br />4/19/72
<br />Approve
<br />
<br />-
<br />
<br />'~
<br />
|