Laserfiche WebLink
Regarding the potential of a sales tax, Mr. Meisner said he was interested in such a tax if it could <br />be adjusted. He said that the restaurant tax was a subset of the sales tax, and asked if there were <br />other specialized subsets of the sales tax that other Oregon jurisdictions were using. Mr. Carlson <br />cited the amusement tax as one example. Mr. Meisner asked for an example not listed in the <br />materials given the council. Mr. Carlson indicated he would follow-up with a memorandum. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly said his goal was to establish a taxing system that spread the burden most broadly. He <br />said a taxing mechanism that made the City's revenues less sensitive to the ebbs and flows of the <br />economy would be helpful. He said as part of any new measure, he would like to see the property <br />tax burden on single-family residences reduced, and echoed Mr. Meisner's request for more <br />research on the topic of residential property tax relief. He was interested more in restructuring the <br />current system than in a major revenue increase. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly indicated appreciation for the information provided by staff regarding small, niche taxes, <br />although his interest was in the more broad, general purpose taxes listed. <br /> <br />Responding to a question from Mr. Kelly regarding how much of the property tax was paid by <br />businesses and how much by homeowners, Mr. Carlson estimated that of the total (including <br />commercial and industrial), owner-occupied, single-family and mobile home property taxes totaled <br />approximately 41 percent of the assessed value. He said that staff did not have information about <br />assessed value of personal property or centrally assessed utilities. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap6 agreed with Mr. Kelly regarding the need for a broad taxing mechanism. The most fair <br />taxes were those that touch all citizens. He did not favor niche taxes and recalled that the County <br />had levied a tax on rental cars. Mr. Johnson suggested that such a tax reflected the cost to the <br />infrastructure system of people from outside the area coming to the area and renting cars. Mr. <br />Pap6 expressed skepticism about the reasoning behind the tax, and noted his support for a personal <br />income tax and a gross receipts tax, as proposed by the Eugene City Club. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor acknowledged the need for more revenues, particularly for street preservation and <br />maintenance. He proposed that the council consider as a criterion for further action what other <br />Oregon cities have done, suggesting that the taxes used by other cities be listed in a matrix that <br />included each tax's yield. He thought it would be useful to know which taxes could be levied <br />administratively versus through a vote. Mr. Carlson replied that as a home rule city, Eugene could <br />implement any of the nonproperty tax revenues by ordinance, but ordinances could be referred by <br />the voters. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor supported the utility surcharge method as a proven taxing tool, particularly for funding <br />street maintenance needs. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman said she would use as general criteria the workability of the tax, its equitability, and <br />the distribution of the tax among the people using the services. For example, those who worked in <br />Eugene and lived outside the city would not be affected by a personal income tax. Such a tax <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 8, 2001 Page 4 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />