Laserfiche WebLink
Regarding Item C, Councilor Bettman said she pulled the item because she objected to the way <br />the funding package was put together. She noted that the assessments left over $867,000 for <br />the County Road fund to pick up. She said this was a demonstrative example of why she had <br />voted against the Transportation System Maintenance Fee. She said, if the project was being <br />done by the City of Eugene, the remainder of the project would be financed by SDCs and noted <br />that the current financing was coming out of the County Road Fund which could be used for <br />maintenance and preservation instead of increasing capacity. She said she would vote against <br />the resolution. <br /> <br /> Roll call vote; Item C passed, 6:2; councilors Bettman and Taylor voting in <br /> opposition. <br /> <br />Regarding Item B, Councilor Nathanson said the work session on a living wage was to be held a <br />day before the vote on Measure 28, the State tax measure. She noted that, even if the measure <br />passed there would be huge budget problems for the fiscal year. She said a discussion of a <br />living wage ordinance would involve a potential budget impact to the City and commented that <br />the discussion needed to wait until the results of the funding measure were known. <br /> <br /> Councilor Nathanson, seconded by Councilor Meisner, moved to change the <br /> tentative working agenda by switching the work session on Endangered <br /> Species Act salmon strategies for the work session on a living wage <br /> standard. <br /> <br />Councilor Kelly noted that the council had passed a motion to work through the living wage issue <br />in time for the beginning of the budget process. He further noted that the item had already been <br />postponed twice. He said he could not support postponing the matter again. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman said it was merely a work session and any action taken was subject to the full <br />Budget Committee. She said it would not make sense to postpone the matter since the work <br />needed to be done in a timely way to forward on to the Budget Committee. She remarked that <br />any budget action was contingent on what happened with the state funding measure and other <br />alternative funding options. <br /> <br />Councilor Taylor said she would oppose the motion because the discussion had been postponed <br />too many times. <br /> <br /> Councilor Kelly offered a friendly amendment, which was accepted, to have <br /> the discussion on January 29. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey said he would vote in favor of the initial motion but would vote against the amended <br />motion. He said, while the council would know the outcome of the vote on January 29, the <br />council would not know what the legislature intended to do about any proposed budget cuts. <br /> <br /> Roll call vote; the motion, as amended, passed, 5:3; councilors Poling, <br /> Meisner, and Solomon voting in opposition. <br /> <br /> Roll call vote; Item B, as amended, passed unanimously. <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 13, 2003 Page 6 <br /> Regular Meeting <br /> <br /> <br />