CC Minutes - 08/11/03 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

be addressed. He supported Ms. Nathanson's suggestion for a moratorium as a way to defuse the issue for a period of time so discussions could occur. Mayor Torrey recalled that he and Mayor Leiken had both suggested in their state of the city addresses that the fee could be repealed if the County was prepared to work with the two cities in melding the revenues available from all sources for road maintenance. He said that citizens do not care about how the services were delivered, and he suggested the jurisdictions get together to make the best use of the limited resources that they had. Mayor Torrey called for a second round of comments. Ms. Nathanson said that the challenge was for the three jurisdictions to work cooperatively, which they did last year and could do again. She indicated she was looking for the County to work with the City to develop and implement a permanent solution, which she anticipated would include a package of revenue sources. She said the preconditions for such a solution for her was that it must provide a level playing field between the two communities, the fee formula must be equitable, and the solution must have a cap. Mr. Kelly did not share Mr. Poling or the mayor's optimism about the elected officials working together. He asked what was changed from previous discussions. Speaking to Mr. Meisner's comments that if the council did not repeal the fee it would be referred, Mr. Kelly said that he did not disagree, but expressed concern that someone could hold a press conference and state they were taking something to the ballot, and the council would begin to shy away from such decisions. He said that the council was trying to run a representative government. Mr. Kelly quoted from an editorial published in a December 2002 edition of The Register-Guard, which stated that no one would be happy paying the fee, but that people would be even more unhappy paying the long-term cost of letting city streets deteriorate further. Mr. Poling said that he did not consider the County's demand that the City repeal the fee to be the main issue. He did not find the "threat very threatening to me." Mr. Poling said that the council needed to level the playing field between Eugene and Springfield by repealing the fee. If the commissioners could not help develop a solution, they would not look good to the voters. He thought the three jurisdictions could work together on an equitable solution. Ms. Bettman said that business argued that the fee was too burdensome to business. She reiterated that she was not interested in modifying the tax so that a greater burden was placed on homeowners. Statewide, the tax burden had been shifted away from businesses to residents so that residents were paying 60 percent of all taxes. Mr. Pap8 suggested that the "playing field could be leveled" if Springfield reinstated the fee. He believed that there was plenty of motivation for the three bodies to have worked together over the last two years but that had not happened. Mr. Pap8 agreed that there were elements of the fee that could be changed to make it more fair. Mayor Torrey said he had suggested to the Board of County Commissioners that if the board would place a countywide measure to equitably distribute road funds throughout the county, he would ask the City Council to refer the TSMF to the voters of Eugene. However, he did not think the City should automatically repeal the fee without action from the County. The meeting adjourned at 7:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, MINUTES-Eugene City Council August 11, 2003 Page 11 Work Session