Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Bill Kievith , 3277 Onyx Place, stated that the American Public Works Association defined potholes as any divot in the road that affected cars or driving. He was interested to learn that $1 million was intended to be spent on filling potholes. He related that the City had spent $39,000 on potholes in 2004, $45,000 in 2005, $89,000 in 2006, and $67,000 in 2007. He wanted to know how the “magic figure” of $1 million had been arrived at as it had not been placed in the budget by the Public Works Director or the City Manager. He said 75 percent of the current potholes were being fixed on unimproved streets. He wondered if they really meant to spend $750,000 on filling potholes on unimproved streets as it did not make sense to him. He thought the money would be better spent on filling the cracks that precede the potholes. He averred that filling the cracks was a better investment in preserving roads. Michael Cresko , 952 Polk Street, member of the Jefferson/Westside Neighbors, supported funding for the police bicycle patrols as they made the parks and neighborhoods safer for families and residents. He felt it was a very effective program as it deterred crime and reduced the costs to police vehicle maintenance as well as the larger picture implications of contributions to global warming. He thought it would also be a “good plus” for police/citizen relations. He said if there was more person-to-person contact between police and citizens it would build positively on the image of the police department. He asked the council to consider expanding the program and making it a permanent part of the budget. Mayor Piercy closed the public hearing. Councilor Clark assured the people who testified in support of the bicycle program that it had been made a part of the ongoing budget and in this budget the program would become year-round. In response to a question from Councilor Ortiz, Budget Manager for the Finance Division, Kitty Murdoch, explained that the council was approving the resolutions that were the appropriations approved by the Budget Committee. She stated that the Budget Committee had made other motions that did not have appropriation changes attached to them, therefore the council was not necessarily approving all of the motions that the Budget Committee recommended. Mr. Ruiz asked Ms. Murdoch to give an example of which resolution did not have a budget impact. Ms. Murdoch responded that there had been a motion that had said there would be a certain amount of money tied up in the Facility Reserve but there was no money appropriated to do this. Councilor Ortiz ascertained that it would not be appropriate to pull a motion from the budget development motions at this time. She had been concerned with budget development motion No. 9, which sought to allocate up to $25 million of the Facility Reserve to upgrade, rehabilitate, and maintain City Hall for the purpose of extending its useful life at least 15 years. Mr. Ruiz responded that the amount for that motion had not been appropriated. Councilor Ortiz asked when the appropriate time would be to bring it forward. Mr. Murdoch replied that the City Council would be discussing City Hall in July and would then consider the advice of the Budget Committee. Councilor Zelenka agreed that potholes had become a big issue. He believed it was a customer service issue and that the City needed to have safer streets. th Councilor Clark understood that the maker of the 9 motion had intended it to be an appropriation. He asked what would qualify something as an appropriation. Ms. Murdoch responded that an appropriation MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 9, 2008 Page 10 Regular Meeting