My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 3A: Approval of City Council Minutes
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2006
>
CC Agenda - 11/13/06 Meeting
>
Item 3A: Approval of City Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 1:07:43 PM
Creation date
11/9/2006 10:24:01 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
11/13/2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
46
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
amendment said, under (2), that through 2012 Lane County would focus increased revenue on significantly <br />reducing illegal drug production, dealing, and use, especially methamphetamine; reducing family violence, <br />enhancing drug and alcohol treatment programs for addicted adult and youth, and providing prevention <br />programs to reduce future crime. He said the board had to do so for at least five years. There was a <br />detailed list of all of the programs put together by the task force on which the Mayor and Councilor Kelly <br />had sat. <br /> <br />Regarding a question from Councilor Bettman that asked whether a $30 refund due to a renter who paid <br />income tax could potentially be given to his or her landlord, Mr. Harcleroad stressed that it was not a <br />refund; rather it was a credit that went to the individual that applied for the tax return. <br /> <br />Mr. Harlcleroad stated, in response to another question from Councilor Bettman, that the cost to administer <br />the program was estimated to be three percent, or $800,000. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman agreed that there was a deficit in funding the public safety services that the City did not <br />address. She also agreed that the task force had done a good job of identifying the problems and the <br />solutions. However, she opposed the funding mechanism. She believed it would lose at the ballot. She <br />said she would have supported the tax if it had been configured differently. She said if it the measure <br />failed, she would be happy to serve on the next tax force. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman said she had a problem with the measure as it was written because she felt it was a <br />simple process for commissioners to add or take away services. She interpreted the language as allowing <br />capital infrastructure to be built with this money. She asserted that the measure was not constrained <br />enough to the “valuable services” people would endorse when voting. She called the charter amendment “a <br />Machiavellian mechanism” that said the income tax would be limited. She thought the charter amendment <br />should have “strictly called out” the percentages that would be allocated to prevention, treatment, parole, <br />and the capacity at the jail. <br /> <br />Councilor Papé said the need was well-documented and he trusted the commissioners to do the right thing. <br />He also respected the process, though he would have done it differently. He supported the resolution. He <br />was concerned by the greatness of the need. <br /> <br />Councilor Poling thanked Mayor Piercy and Councilor Kelly for their comments. He stated that the matrix <br />system for early release from the county jail had been put into use in 1986. At that time, he worked with a <br />deputy and the worst crime for which arrestees were “matrixed out” had been a “Theft 3” or a Driving <br />Under the Influence of Intoxicants (DUII). He said over the years, the cutoff point for the matrix system <br />kept growing and the number of inmates kept growing and the caliber of inmate being released became <br />more serious. He averred that the system had been crumbling since 1978. He declared that the measure <br />was one of the best proposals he had seen over the years to try and help fund the law enforcement <br />community in Lane County. He supported the measure and hoped that his colleagues would support it as <br />well. He did not believe that a commissioner would come in 2013 and circumvent the charter amendment. <br /> <br />Regarding the property tax credit, Councilor Taylor ascertained from Mr. Harcleroad that it was a credit <br />for a portion of the taxes that went to the County. She said supposing a homeowner in Eugene paid $3,000 <br />per year in property taxes, what portion of it would go to the County? Mr. Harcleroad replied that no <br />property tax paid to the City of Eugene would be reduced. He stressed that the only property tax that <br />would be reduced would be the portion paid to Lane County. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 25, 2006 Page 11 <br /> Regular Meeting <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.