Laserfiche WebLink
He said that the proposal was modeled on one developed and implemented by the City of <br />Ashland, which passed a serial levy to help the schools with funding. <br /> <br />Mr. Hunsaker expressed appreciation for the council's support for numerous programs already in <br />place, such as the Safer Schools Program and the after-school program levy. He said the City's <br />support in working with the district on facilities issues was also appreciated. He expressed <br />pleasure with the partnership that had been created. He said that City Planning staff had been <br />particularly helpful to the district. <br /> <br />Mr. Hunsaker encouraged the council to let the proposal move forward and see what happened. <br />He noted the lesser funding percentage that the Bethel district took in comparison to the 4J <br />district, but said there were many things that had been phased out he would like to see replaced <br />and for which he believed there was community support. <br /> <br />Ms. Jones requested direction from the council to proceed to develop a proposal. She reiterated <br />there was considerable community support, and emphasized the partnerships that would be <br />created. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner liked the idea and said he would support a motion directing more work. He termed <br />the proposal a stop-gap measure and said he had heard from a Santa Clara resident urging <br />support because that person did not have to pay for it. He said that people would question <br />annexation if the City paid for everything. He said the City needed equitable participation from <br />other agencies. He asked why the County was not involved. Ms. Jones said that staff continued <br />to work to get all jurisdictions to step up and get involved. She would continue to work with Lane <br />County. She said that she discussed the issue with selected commissioners, who have no desire <br />to put something on the ballot at this time. <br /> <br />Mr. Russell indicated that he had received an e-mail from County Administrator Bill Van Vactor <br />regarding his interest in the topic. Mr. Meisner encouraged staff to work with Lane County. <br /> <br />Mr. Farr endorsed Mr. Meisner's remarks and said the City needed to start with the State <br />legislature. He said that he had become a councilor to help schools. He said that the council had <br />the chance to do so tonight. He thought it should help both districts in whatever way possible. He <br />called for council support in putting something on the ballot. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly agreed the need was critical and the mission of the schools vital. He supported the <br />concept under discussion. He asked for an update from staff regarding the impact of such a <br />measure on the City's property tax cap. He said the measure would allow the districts to restore <br />or avoid cutting some of its recreation service, art, music, etc., which he fully supported. He said <br />that the Agenda Item Summary for the item hints the measure might be bundled with the renewal <br />of the City youth service levy, an action which he opposed. He believed that politically, the more <br />simple the message behind it, the more likely a measure would pass. From a philosophical <br />standpoint, he thought the council had, under some protest, put the initial youth levy on the ballot; <br />its wariness had been the continued reliance on the property tax. Staff had been directed at that <br />time to develop a permanent funding source. That had not happened. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor asked if the issue of combining districts had been discussed. She suggested it would <br />save dollars to combine the districts. She agreed a countywide approach was preferable. She <br />agreed with Mr. Kelly that the issues should be separate. She wanted the City to help the <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 10, 2002 Page 3 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />