CC Minutes - 09/25/02 Work Session

Home Browse Search

Ms. Nathanson also supported the motion. She said that it represented a reasonable approach based on existing policies. She said that an amendment to the motion was not necessary because the money would not be spent without City Council approval. She believed that building the City's reserves was the right thing to do because it meant that the City did not have to turn to the voters for such expenditures as equipment replacement, for example. Mr. Rayor also supported the motion. He did not want to over-fund the library simply because money was available, and wanted the City to begin to look at legal mechanisms to direct the excess money from the Urban Renewal Fund to the General Fund. He indicated he would support an amendment to place the money in reserves pending consideration of Supplemental Budget #1. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Rayor, moved to amend the motion by replacing (iii) with a new clause directing the City Manager to place the $365,000 into the General Fund Reserve for Revenue Shortfall for future action by the City Council. Mr. Meisner opposed the amendment, saying that it took the allocation of funding outside the budget process while the motion directed the manager to prepare a request for the council to discuss. If the council supported the amendment, there would be no further discussion. Mr. Carlson clarified that any budgetary action would be taken in conjunction with the supplemental budget process. Ms. Bettman and Mr. Rayor accepted a friendly amendment from Mr. Kelly to direct the manager to schedule a work session to discuss the disposition of the $365,000 shortly before council consideration of Supplemental Budget #1. Ms. Nathanson opposed the amendment, saying it meant the City Council would end up discussing the subject twice. Responding to a question from Mayor Torrey, Mr. Carlson indicated that it was his belief that the staff recommendation was appropriate and in keeping with council and Budget Committee policy. Ms. Bettman said that the council's time for discussion of the supplemental budget was generally constrained. She thought that postponing the discussion until that time would not give the council adequate time to discuss the disposition of the funding. The vote on the amendment to the motion was a 4:4 tie; Ms. Nathanson, Mr. Meisner, Mr. Farr, and Mr. Pap~ voting no, and Ms. Taylor, Mr. Kelly, Ms. Bettman, and Mr. Rayor voting yes. Mayor Torrey cast a vote in opposition to the amendment and it failed on a final vote of 5:4. Ms. Bettman said that although she supported the cost savings the proposal would realize, due to the failure of her amendment, she would be unable to support the motion. Mr. Rayor thanked the staff for the clear Agenda Item Summary. The motion passed, 6:2; Ms. Taylor and Ms. Bettman voting no. MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 25, 2002 Page 5 Work Session