CC Minutes - 05/23/05 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

the Metro Plan amendment language be changed to clarify that even if the State statute was repealed, the City of Eugene could not be taken out of the process. City Manager Taylor clarified that the public safety district under discussion was countywide as a county service district so it would not be a single-purpose special district. He recommended that the language (1) allow for the formation of a district without the need to further amend the Metro Plan; (2) ensure the council could prevent the formation of such a district if the district included territory within the city limits and (3) ensure that the County cannot create a district until after the City and the County enter into an agreement that guarantees the County would hold the City harmless from any compression losses resulting from the district. Mayor Piercy stated she was reluctant to support the amendment without additional discussion with all parties involved. Mr. Kelly pointed out that the Springfield City Council passed the amendment by only a 3:2 vote. He reiterated that the need was there; however, he opined voters would be less likely to pass a special district due to its permanent nature, whereas a serial levy that expires or an income tax that can be overturned may prove to be more acceptable. Mr. Kelly put forth an alternative to the proposal, which was that the City enter into a partnership with the County to research a mechanism that does not change the fundamental structure of government. He opined that a conversation that only focuses on a special district would be counterproductive. Finally, Mr. Kelly pointed out that passage of the amendment cuts off the County as it limits it exclusively to a "special district" path. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to direct the City Manager to prepare an ordinance denying the Metro Plan amendment and to comprehensively explore with Springfield and Lane County mutually acceptable revenue-generating initiatives for restoring statutorily mandated public safety services. Ms. Bettman stated that if the amendment was adopted, it was the end of the discussion as the amendment was specific in nature and provides the County the ability to determine what services would prevail. She stressed that the amendment cannot be tweaked once it was passed. Ms. Bettman said that if one of the options the council wishes to pursue was to tweak an amendment of the Metro Plan to allow a specific service district, the motion she put forth allowed for such an action. However, she questioned if agreed upon language would in fact be included in the Metro Plan at the end of the process. Ms. Bettman reasoned that the Planning Commission did pass the amendment; however, it forwarded recommended language to the County that was not incorporated into the document that was now before the council. Further, she said the issue of compression was not considered by the County. Ms. Bettman pointed out that in the recent past, the Eugene City Council twice voted down a special district. She reiterated that the County focused the process to a Metro Plan amendment for the metropolitan area initially as it was the lucrative revenue generator. She further pointed out that other cities could "opt out" of such a process and the County would continue to be statutorily mandated to provide services to those cities, leaving the City with the burden of the special district. The cities of Eugene and Springfield would be subsidizing the level of services provided to such areas. In conclusion, Ms. Bettman opined that the City of Eugene would cede its taxing authority to the County if the amendment was passed. MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 23, 2005 Page 10 Work Session