02/22/1984 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e e - Mr. Obie questioned what direction is being given to staff. Ms. Wooten res- ponded that the motion tells staff that the council has policies which have been adopted and are accepting and recognizing concerns of the Budget Committee, forwarding that recognition to the Budget Committee for their deliberation on the Executive Budget. She said the motion is not adopting the policies, but is asking for recognition of the concerns in the budget. She stated that the adopted policies include the priorities of the council. Councilor Ball stated that he is willing to accept the document, but he felt that it points out the confusion in the budget process. He urged the council to study the dollar situation to determine the amount of funding for each of the priority items. In response to a question, Mr. Gleason stated he would interpret the motion to state that the guidelines used last year are in place but that staff should also give consideration to those concerns raised by the Budget Committee when evalu- ating the first step in the budget process. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 7:0. VIII. FLOW-DEPENDENT RATE FOR RESIDENTIAL SEWER SERVICE (memo distributed) City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced the agenda item as having been previously requested by the council. Referring to a conversation he had with Steve Burkett, the Springfield City Manager, Mr. Gleason stated that Mr. Burkett indicated the City of Eugene should continue along the path they are on of defining and approving the steps in the process. He said Mr. Burkett feels that this process will move the two city councils toward agreement. Mr. Gleason agreed with this suggestion. Mayor Keller, referring to a recent conversation he had with Mayor Lively of Springfield, concurred with Mr. Gleason's statements. Councilor Wooten stated that the council had passed a resolution calling for a flow-based rate system to be in place by February 1985. She asked if the City of Springfield had a similar time frame in mind. Mr. Gleason stated that the City of Springfield did not have, and therefore did not adopt, a time chart as was presented to the council. He said his conversations with the Springfield City Manager have indicated that the approach stated is reasonable. In response to a question, Mr. Gleason stated that he could not speak for the City of Springfield in stating whether they desired a flow-based rate system or not. He stated that there does not appear to be any objection by the City of Springfield to Eugene's desire to move toward a flow-based rate. He added that the City of Springfield has not been presented with the details as has the City Council. Mayor Keller stated that Mayor Lively has indicated that the City of Springfield is ready to study a work program which would bring them to a position with the City of Eugene on a given date and to develop a flow-based rate, unless some unforeseen factor develops. Councilor Smith, referring to conversations with members of the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission, stated that the commissioners did not have the benefit of the time chart for conversion to the flow-based rate as was presented to the council. She agreed that there does not appear to be any problem with the City of Eugene implementing flow-based rates. MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 22, 1984 Page 8