12/08/1992 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e reduced the deficit from $6.3 million to $4.7 million. He noted that addi- tions to the core would not be budgeted until revenue is available. The only unfunded item included in the budget is the "Safer Schools" program. Mr. Gleason said that the funds for the program were in the Transition Reserve. He reminded the council that the City is required by State law to prepare a balanced budget document. Mr. Nicholson said that he had believed that the additions to the core were to be funded, and the council's priorities dictate what services be eliminated in order to do so. Mr. Gleason suggested that such an action would lead to considerable debate during the budget process when constituencies for various services questioned their elimination. That would lead to a debate that was not focused on strategy, but rather on a cut that might or might not happen. Mr. Boles said the council made a decision which should be reflected in the budget; such decisions would mean other services will not be funded in the FY94 budget, assuming no new revenues. Ms. Bascom objected, saying she believed that the decision had been to add to the core if revenues became available. Mr. Gleason said that the council's strategy was adopted with the under- standing that implementation of further reductions, based on council priori- ties, would occur if no new revenues were secured. He asked the council if it wished to direct him to develop a budget reflecting the additions to the core and service reductions based on the priorities in order to fund the additions. Mr. Miller said that the council had not decided its course of action if no e new revenues became available, and staff was required to prepare the budget document before that decision was made. Mr. Boles said that staff had council policies that would drive the service reductions. Mr. Robinette objected, saying he did not believe that the issue was so simple. Mr. Gleason said it was his recollection that the council had agreed to postpone a decision on a Strategy C (no revenue strategy) prior to going to the voters. Absent that decision, staff had no choice but to bring the council the budget document, based on the forecast. The council's choice of "zero" (a no new revenue strategy) could be implemented through a supplemental budget after the election. Mr. Robinette said that the Council Committee on Eugene Decisions had recom- mended that the council agree on Strategy C, because it did not feel that the council could place the decision on the City Manager through implementation of the council's priorities. Mr. Boles said that it was not easy to use the policies to create the budget, but it was the tool the council had placed in the City Manager's hands to do so. Mr. Robinette disagreed, saying that the priorities were not sufficiently defined to reach the level of detail reflect- ed in the budget. He reiterated that the council needed to agree as a body what "zero" means. He added that the council would not let the City Manager make those decisions if he wanted to. Mr. MacDonald agreed. Responding to a question from Ms. Bascom regarding the role of the Budget Committee, Mr. Robinette said that members present were receiving the same e MINUTES--City Council Work Session December 8, 1992 Page 4 4 p.m.