04/22/1992 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e e e I. WORK SESSION: EUGENE DECISIONS--DEVElOPMENT OF DETAILED STRATEGIES Professor Ed Weeks, University of Oregon, discussed the data collection instruments that would be used in the next round of publiC input for the Eugene Decisions process. He discussed the principles guiding the development of the survey: to provide the public with the facts and the context within which budget decisions will be made, to construct the data collection instruments in a way that mirrors the actual decision-making process, and to provide an instrument that does not constrain response. Mr. Weeks said that he is in the process of pretesting the survey. Mr. Weeks reviewed the structure of the tabloid survey. Responding to a question from Mr. MacDonald about a chart, Mr. Weeks said that the bars next to the tax choices represented responses from the public in the second round of public input. The responses indicated that 76 percent of respondents balanced the budget with additional revenues. However, no single revenue received a majority of support. Mr. Weeks said the survey introduces that information and asks for feedback. Mr. MacDonald questioned the utility of providing the respondents with what other people have supported. He suggested that tax equity and amount to be collected were more relevant. Mr. MacDonald expressed concern that the information would influence those respondents who tend to vote with the majority in order to be on the prevailing side. Mr. Boles referred to the document entitled "Alternative Revenue Options" and suggested that inclusion of that document would provide the information to respondents that Mr. MacDonald desired. Responding to a concern raised by Ms. Ehrman, Ms. Bellamy said that the language in the survey was preliminary and would be extensively reviewed by the Council Committee on Eugene Decisions (CCED). Mr. Weeks discussed the results of pretesting, noting that several respondents had expressed dissatisfaction regarding the inclusion of lower dollar service reductions and indicated a desire to proceed with those reductions without further discussion. Additionally, respondents complained about an inability to balance the budget through service reductions alone. Mr. Boles pointed out that the strategy components developed by the council for staff analysis did not total $8 million. He said that the CCED had discussed the possibility of adding a third strategy, Strategy C, based on council policy, showing the service reductions that would occur if voters reject a strategy at the polls. Responding to a question from Ms. Ehrman, Mr. Boles said that the council had given the community a version of Strategy C in the second round of public input in reduction strategies 1 and 2. Mr. Miller pointed out that subsequently, the council had reviewed and changed its financial policies. MINUTES--Eugene City Council 11 :30 a.m. Apri 1 22, 1992 Page 2