12/08/1992 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e Mr. Robinette reminded the council that it had agreed to defer several issues related to "doing things differently," and that "doing things differently" would make the system sustainable. He maintained the council had recognized at that time service impacts would occur. Mr. Wong reviewed three options developed by staff that would balance the General Fund for the purposes of preparing the FY94 budget. Responding to a question from Mr. Robinette, Mr. Wong said that it was possible to adopt Strategy C as the budget-balancing option. Mr. Gleason said staff would submit a budget to the Budget Committee in April, and it would be adopted by the council in June. If the timing did not work, Strategy C could be adopted through the supplemental budget process. Mr. Wong added that the implementation of Strategy C would also require transition funding. The meeting recessed at 6:47 p.m. and resumed at 6:57 p.m. Mr. Miller summarized the proposed options as authorization for the staff to prepare a budget with the realization that the next council will be examining implementation strategies with or without a new revenue that could supersede the selected option. Mr. Miller emphasized that selecting an option did not preclude further adjustments to the budget, which is essentially a planning document. Mr. Robinette moved, seconded by Mr. Nicholson, to adopt Option 2 as the budget-balancing mechanism for document preparation. e Mr. Boles maintained that the three options would produce a budget document that did not reflect any aspects of the Eugene Decisions process. He asked where the document would reflect the adjustments made through that process outside of increased user fees and proposed service changes. Mr. Robinette responded that the implementation of the process would occur incrementally. Only the new council can actually decide what cuts will be made if no new revenues are secured. Mr. Robinette said that staff cannot make those decisions, and the council cannot provide staff with direction until the new council goes through that process. He pointed out that the budget will include many of the changes resulting from Eugene Decisions. Mr. MacDonald said that the council was committed to Eugene Decisions rather than the budget represented by the proposed options. He said that the options represented a device to produce a planning document, and did not reflect the council's closure on the Eugene Decisions process. Mr. MacDonald said he would like continuing councilors to indicate that a vote for the motion did not represent rejection of that process. Mr. Boles said that the option is being presented as a "plug" to move the process on until the council can make firm decisions at a later time about how to balance the budget without new revenues. However, the option selected will drive preparation of a budget. Mr. Boles stated his objection to the direc- tion represented by the options. e MINUTES--City Council Work Session December 8, 1992 Page 8 4 p.m.