Laserfiche WebLink
next session of the State Legislature. He noted that last year's document had not lacked some <br />attention to the details and, as a result, there had been some additional work this year. He added <br />that 32 coordinators had worked on the document. <br /> <br />Mr. Heuser previewed the legislative landscape of 2003, stating that there was a significant <br />Republican majority in the State House and that the Senate was evenly divided and would be <br />devising a plan for power-sharing. He said another revenue shortfall was projected. He <br />commented that Ballot Measure 28, to be voted on at the end of January, held $315 million <br />"hanging in the air" and that $95 million of that was dedicated to the K-12 public school system. <br />He felt that this would add up to a lack of transactional politics and the ensuing gridlock. <br /> <br />Mr. Heuser predicted that there would be three primary issues, as follows: <br /> · How to bridge revenue deficits. Currently, polls indicate that Ballot Measure 28 may <br /> not be voted in. <br /> · How to fund K-12 public education. Voters want this problem to be resolved at the <br /> state level. This may involve some reform to the tax base, which could involve a <br /> dedicated sales tax. <br /> · How to reform PERS. The strain this has put on the State budget has made it a critical <br /> issue in the budget solution that would come from this session. There is now strong <br /> and critical data that indicates that the PERS system may not be self-correcting as had <br /> been previously predicted. There would have to be "miracle returns" on the stock <br /> market for the next 10 to 15 years for the PERS situation to regain financial health. <br /> <br />Mr. Heuser delineated the two core principles of the legislative document, that of preserving local <br />decision making and that of maintaining the stability of City finances. <br /> <br />Mr. Heuser noted that the first issue that would be have to be dealt with would be PERS. He said <br />that there were many emerging developments in the PERS issue, including a pending lawsuit, and <br />as such, it had been difficult to craft definitive language regarding PERS in the legislative <br />document. He circulated an attachment that delineated the most recently revised language <br />regarding PERS. Ms. Bettman pointed out that a motion to accept the language would need to be <br />made at the end of the presentation of the legislative policies document. <br /> <br />Mr. Heuser summarized the PERS issue, explaining the two significant developments. He stated <br />that one was a ruling in the lawsuit that determined that the PERS board had exceeded its statutory <br />authority over the past few years specifically in regard to how earnings were credited to <br />employees' accounts and that the other development was the determination that the PERS system <br />would not likely be self-correcting in the long run. He said that currently there was a negotiated <br />settlement between employers, employees, and the governor's office. He elaborated, stating that <br />these entities were trying to arrive at a negotiated settlement that would be put into a statute by the <br />legislature and would encompass some of the findings and remedies of the lawsuit as well as <br />prospective changes that would make PERS sustainable over the next 50 years and potentially into <br />perpetuity. <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 25, 2002 Page 5 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />