CC Minutes - 08/12/02 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

In response to a question from Councilor Pap~ regarding whether the question would be covered in the yearly budget process, City Manager Carlson said it would, and added that the budget process would be another opportunity, each and every year, for the resources to appropriated. The amendment failed, 5:3; councilors Rayor, Nathanson, and Fart voting in support. Councilor Farr said he would oppose the main motion. He said it would create an uneven playing field for Eugene businesses. Councilor Bettman said she would oppose the main motion because it was an ordinance that could be amended at any time, which meant that a large pot of money was being created that could be redirected to anything a majority of the council decided to redirect it to. She added that a County gas tax should be considered first since, if the gas tax was not passed, the transportation maintenance fee would be even higher than what was initially proposed. She went on to note that there was no sunset date for the ordinance. She said that passage of the motion would facilitate the dysfunction of a system which continually built new roads when it could not maintain existing infrastructure. Councilor Kelly reiterated that the process had started 18 months ago and noted that if the motion failed it would be at least a year before a new proposal was constructed which would mean an addition $10 - $15 million added to the backlog. He said he had not seen an alternative that was both legal and practical to administer. City Manager Carlson said the issue was the key finance issue facing the City of Eugene. He stressed the fact that it was the most important finance issue that the city had before it, aside from PERS. He said it was the first opportunity for the City to have a locally funded transportation revenue source. He urged action on the issue. In response to a question from Councilor Bettman regarding the timeline for appealing the issue and putting it on the ballot, Mr. Klein said a person would have 30 days in which to gather the necessary signatures to refer the item to the ballot. If the necessary number of signatures were obtained, the ordinance would be presented to the council, which would have an opportunity to repeal it. If the council did not repeal the ordinance, it would go on the ballot and would not take effect until it was voted on. Councilor Bettman asked if the contract for collecting the fee was granted to the local public utility, could a person's water and electricity be shut off if the fee were not paid? City Manager Carlson said that was a possible outcome but noted that, in practice, there were other means of compelling collection. Councilor Fart reiterated his concern that the council was making it more difficult for businesses to operate inside the City of Eugene. Roll call vote; the vote on the motion was a 4:4 tie; councilors Pap~, Kelly, Meisner and Rayor voting in favor, and councilors Nathanson, Fart, Taylor, and Bettman voting in opposition. Mayor Torrey voted in opposition, and the motion failed on a final vote of 5:4. The meeting adjourned at 11:15 p.m. MINUTES--Eugene City Council August 12, 2002 Page 14 Regular Meeting