Laserfiche WebLink
thought the proposal inconsistent with the council’s goal related to financial resources, which called for fair <br />and equitable system revenues, and inconsistent with the goal related to sustainable development as it did not <br />meet environment needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs. Mr. <br />Bonnett said that when someone wanted to use the transportation system, they should pay a fee. He said <br />that his written testimony included some suggestions for proceeding, and he encouraged the council to form <br />an advisory body to discuss the issue. <br /> <br />There being no other requests to speak, Mayor Piercy closed the public hearing. <br /> <br />Councilor Ortiz thanked those who attended the hearing and spoke. She asked if the manager could provide <br />the council with information on how much the gas tax would need to be increased to meet the needs <br />identified by staff. Mr. Corey indicated that it would require about fourteen to fifteen cents per gallon to <br />meet the need and generate $9 million annually. <br /> <br />Councilor Poling said all who spoke agreed the streets needed to be maintained. He recalled that he had <br />voted to rescind the fee previously on the basis that Lane County would assist in the road funding solution; <br />that had not occurred, and Lane County was now contemplating ending its contribution to the City’s Road <br />Fund. <br /> <br />Councilor Poling wanted a fee that addressed maintenance needs on a curb-to-curb basis and said Section <br />7.750(2)(a) must be removed if he was to support the ordinance. He did not support paying for off-street <br />maintenance with the fee. <br /> <br />Councilor Poling said that increasing the local gas tax would be unfair to local gas station owners because it <br />would be easy for motorists to drive to Springfield or other areas of the county and pay less. <br /> <br />Councilor Poling indicated he would not support an ordinance unless the public voted to support it. <br /> <br />Councilor Poling said that he had repeatedly tried without success to make street maintenance a council <br />priority and he would raise the issue again. <br /> <br />Regarding the suggestion for a local vehicle registration fees, Councilor Poling said that only the County or <br />State could establish such a fee. <br /> <br />Councilor Papé believed that progress had been made in that all now seemed to be aware of the street <br />preservation problem. The issue now was how to fix the problem. The gas tax solved part of the problem <br />but the City was still behind in its preservation backlog. He had not favored rescinding the fee and said that <br />if that had not occurred, the City would not be in the situation it was facing today. <br /> <br />Councilor Papé noted that Salem had bonded for road improvements for years and asked where the chamber <br />had been three or four years ago when the City faced down the County without success. <br /> <br />Councilor Papé agreed with Councilor Poling that the fee should be dedicated to curb-to-curb maintenance. <br /> <br />Councilor Papé said that the City needed a reliable transportation system for emergency vehicles. He <br />pointed out that streets were needed by all, even those without a vehicle. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 16, 2006 Page 11 <br /> Public Hearing <br /> <br />