Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Kelly suggested that the information provided by Mr. Heuser could be used to educate the <br />voters. He wanted a similar document focused on the impact of the reduction on City residents. <br />He thought the more the council could inform the voters, the more likely they were to support new <br />taxes or further budget reductions. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor said that the January measure may not be successful. He wanted his taxes to be used <br />for the correct purposes, but because it was being used for PERS he would find it difficult to vote <br />for it. He added that the Tier II employees were not the problem. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman was unclear of the reason for the work session, given uncertainties about the <br />projections. She pointed out that over the last two decades the tax burden in the state of Oregon <br />shifted from an equitable split between taxes on businesses and taxes on residents to the degree <br />residents now paid 60 percent or more of the cost of government. Establishing equity in that <br />allocation would be a step in the right direction. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor also was unclear as to the reason for the work session. She suggested, however, that <br />the council could make recommendations on which taxes to lobby for. She agreed that property <br />taxes were a burden on residents and people were tired of them. She asked if the council was to <br />discuss the types of taxes it wanted to get support for. Mr. Meisner said that the council would <br />review and approve the City's legislative policy document. <br /> <br />Mr. Carlson clarified that the State levied no property taxes, and its crisis was generally income-tax <br />related. Ms. Taylor said that all taxes were related. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap8 said that the legislature needed the courage to find a new and creative revenue. He <br />agreed with Mr. Meisner that the City needed to discuss its funding priorities and stick to them <br />throughout the budget process. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey suggested that the CCIGR develop a short, tight list of priorities. He said that the <br />"big elephant in the middle of the room" was education funding. If local governments did not force <br />resolution of the issue, everyone would be dealing with it. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey noted that other groups, such as the League of Oregon Cities, were also working on <br />the issue of funding. He thought local options would be under real pressure at the next <br />legislature. Many people were working to undermine local governments' option to fund their <br />programs. He noted that the Oregon Department of Transportation wanted the legislature to <br />consider a statewide systems development charge for transportation, which could compete with <br />local priorities. He suggested that the City should focus on what was "doable" in Salem. <br /> <br />Speaking to Mr. Rayor's comments regarding PERS, Mayor Torrey said that nothing the State did <br />regarding PERS was going to solve the budget problem. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor said that Oregon cities have to make the State legislature solve the problem. He <br />believed the City's school funding measure gave the legislature less incentive to handle the <br />funding issue, and in addition it did nothing to help the other school districts in Lane County. He <br />did not see the equity in that. <br /> <br />The meeting adjourned at 7:16 p.m. <br />Respectfully submitted, <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 23, 2002 Page 9 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />