Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Mulligan pointed out that if the committee did not act, the costs would escalate and the streets would <br />continue to deteriorate. He said that the gas tax was a risky proposition given the current economic <br />climate, but it could be a start. Mr. Mulligan referred to one of the consultant’s recommendations that the <br />early treatments of the residential streets would provide a noted improvement to residents as to what was <br />being done with their dollars. <br />Mr. Bonnett suggested that a different set of graphs be prepared to track reconstruction and actual forecasts <br />and that narrative be included with the committee’s recommendation elaborating the details of the plan. <br />Mr. Carlson explained that a transportation utility, created to account for the new funding resources, would <br />be managed through the annual budget. Additionally, budgetary decisions would need to be made on an <br />annual basis to adjust the TUF rate, as needed, and to allocate the proceeds therefrom. <br />Mr. Wanichek stated that, in his opinion, it was a sound investment to recommend this funding package to <br />begin addressing the preservation program. He added that capturing Lane County residents and <br />businesses, as well as Lane Transit District (LTD) would be prudent and that the trips measurements <br />should be consistent with the standard measurements as listed in the Institute of Transportation Engineers <br />(ITE) Trip Generation Manual. Mr. Carlson remarked that no entity used every single trip rate from the <br />ITE Manual and that there would need to be some adjustment. <br />Mr. Wanichek suggested that an amendment be made to the motion to include a provision that the gas tax <br />MINUTES- Citizen Subcommittee of the Budget Committee September 19, 2001Page 12 <br />