05/10/1978 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e~e~~body in the city. Mr. Porter noted a recent use of a toll system in Berkeley, California, made it very unattractive for people wanting to go ~ into the central area. He noted Eugene's Planning Commission wanted to make the plan positive rather than negative actions. Mr. Delay spoke to policy No. 49, noting he would like to delete the wording regarding users' fees for bikes. He felt people should be encouraged to use bikes, and noted the small amount of money put into bike systems ($75,000), compared to the amount of money invested in streets (millions). He felt it suggested that bike riders were not paying their way and he felt just the opposite was true. Mayor Keller noted the Bike Committee' had looked at such a fee for several years. He himself did not find it offensive, as a licensing policy might help in policing. Mr. Delay said it did not address the issue of licensing, but was a users I fee as a source of revenue for facil i ti es. He fel t there could be licensing fees, but did not think there was a need for a users' fee to support the meager investment made in the bike system. Mr. Bernhard agreed with Mr. Delay. Bike facilities should be financed with highway funds. He said much discussion had taken place and this policy was placed in the plan because it related to providing locked, lighted bike facilities in all public and community facilities. Therefore, the users' fee would be used for that reason, and not for pathways, etc. Mr. Haws left the meeting. Mr. Obie felt if better facilities were provided, it might increase the ~ bicycle ridership. Mr. Delay did not view the users' fee on bike riders as a practical source of major revenue. Mr. Lieuallen felt that the facilities could come from private resources and should be voluntary efforts. He thought it would be a fee that would be hard to collect, woul d not generate that much money, and woul d create ill will. Hewoul d rather see it not mandated by the local government, but left to voluntary efforts, which he felt would be forthcoming. Ms. Smith felt the policy was stating that new revenues could come from a users' fee and as such should be investigated. She wondered about the amount of time Council was spending considering this issue, as she had no problem in accepting the Commission's recommendation. Mayor Keller said if the City were consistent regarding users' fee, it could be constructive. It would be an equitable way of paying for services that the community is asking for. Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to delete in Policy Section No. 49, unedr "Di scussion", the words added by the Planning Commission relating to a bike user's fee as a source of revenue. Mr. Hamel spoke in favor of the motion. He said if the need for a fee for bike users should come up later, it could be dealt with at that time. e 5/10/78--10 3LfC/