CC Minutes - 07/14/03 Mtg - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Dave Hauser, 2168 Elkhorn Drive, also from the Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce, stated that the chamber had filed an initiative petition to place before the voters the transportation systems maintenance fee. He reported that the decision to pursue the initiative process was due to the chamber's belief that there was a better solution to address local street maintenance funding and that it would be difficult, if not impossible, for these solutions to "surface" until the fee was "off the table." He raised several concerns in regard to the fee, alleging that the repeal of this fee in Springfield created an "unlevel playing field" for Eugene businesses and that there were no specific requirements that the transportation maintenance fee would be spent exclusively to address the backlog in street maintenance issues. He added that the fee methodology placed a burden on certain categories of businesses and organizations, including the public school system. He predicted that this fee would cost the 4J School District $50,000 annually. He assured the council that the Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce had the organization and the resources to place the initiative on the ballot in May 2004, and that once the measure qualified for the ballot, the chamber had complete confidence that the fee would be repealed. He noted that a similar repeal voted on in Salem in May 2003, had passed with 80 percent of the vote. He urged the City Council to "follow the lead of the Springfield City Council" and voluntarily repeal the transportation systems maintenance fee, stating that this would accelerate the time frame to get to a real solution to local street maintenance funding and to "open the door" for organizations like the chamber and the Lane County Commissioners to work toward an acceptable solution to fund street maintenance challenges. Mary Blackburn, 3914 Shasta View, related that when she had moved to the community 20 years previously, she and her husband had been shocked to discover that there was no cattery. She said that the facility had since been built and that now was the time to fund it. She felt that the City had not stepped forward and "done the right thing," unfairly placing the burden of stray and abandoned cats on a non-profit agency. She advocated for the institution of aggressive dog licensing and the creation of a protective cat ordinance to offset costs. Melanie Foster, 2307 Churchill Street, reported that the Churchill neighborhood fully supported the continuation of the cat shelter. She said she had been in contact with many local residents and business owners and that the citizens of this community were appalled there was a huge budget allocated for the promotion of the airport but when the Lane County Board of Commissioners made funding available to the cattery contingent on the City's match, the City had not risen to the occasion. She related that, at times, 50 cats and kittens were brought into the shelter per day. Diana Huntington, 87426 Halderson Road, Eugene, spoke on behalf of the Animal Welfare Network.of Lane County. She requested that adequate funding be provided for the LCARA cattery. She read aloud the list of 27 local groups that were members of the network and provided services, including fund-raising, for animal welfare within the community. Jauetta Overholser, 30300 Lorane Road, Cottage Grove, stated that she was president of the Cottage Grove Humane Society. She explained that, because of the law, Greenhill Humane MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 14, 2003 Page 3 Regular Meeting