11/14/1990 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e should be ample time to receive community consensus on the means of funding for library operation. Mr. Robinette expressed concern with proceeding to library construction in light of the financial uncertainty of Ballot Measure 5. He noted that the City can expect to have difficulty generating revenue for all City services and said that the council should not attempt to separate the question of library service from other services. Mr. Robinette cautioned the council that the State might not only refuse to make up the City revenues lost as a result of Measure 5, but might also may withdraw additional revenues. Responding to a question from Mr. Robinette, Mr. Gleason estimated that the cost of the March election would be approximately $20,000. Responding to a question from Mr. Rutan, Mr. Wong said that the implementa- tion rules for Ballot Measure 5 being drafted by the legislature now will determine largely what further impacts Measure 5 will have. The City has identified property taxes, State-shared revenues, and, most recently, Users' fees and charges as possible sources of lost revenues. Mr. Nicholson said that the library-siting decision carries with it the ne- cessity to purchase the property. He felt that the siting decision should be separated from the discussion of library operation. Mr. Green said that it would not be prudent to agree to library construction without having identified sources for its operation. He expressed support e for proceeding with a decision on the site alone. Ms. Schue pointed out that Ballot Measure 5 did not pass within the city limits of Eugene and noted that voter approval of a new tax base for for lane Community College serves as evidence that voters are willing to pay for projects they really want. The library may be one of those projects. Ms. Ehrman said that the council should proceed with an analysis of financing options. If solutions do not avail themselves, the council could still fall back on the site-only question. Mr. Rutan said that if site approval means site acquisition as well, it must be made clear up front. He concurred with Ms. Ehrman that the council should proceed with a financial analysis with the understanding that it does not have to make a decision. Responding to a question from Mr. Nicholson, Mr. Rutan said that it is not clear property tax support of library operation would be explicitly prohibit- ed. He indicated that some sessions at the recent Oregon league of Cities conference have indicated that as long as the tax is not a function of prop- erty ownership, it would not be illegal. However, he also cautioned that this may be a form of financial maneuvering that the council may not want to become involved in. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 14, 1990 Page 7