Laserfiche WebLink
dollars to do it on a basis through the tax process instead of having to pay a levy bond interest over <br />20 years. He added they could show that they could save dollars for their constituents by doing it <br />that way and it would be cheaper to do in the long run with a cohesive package. He asked that they <br />consider it together. <br /> <br />Brooker stated since one of the elements that had yet to be decided was the revenue sharing issue <br />and how it will be instituted, they need to take another look at the support they have once the details <br />are taken care of. He said he could give conditional support to go forward at this point and wants to <br />make sure that his issues are being considered. He asked how they were going to get consensus in <br />the short time frame they are talking about in order to get the County Commissioners to move on it. <br /> <br />Maine said the only way is to go forward to continue to flush out the issues, and not recommend that <br />the County Commissioners decide and put it on the ballot. She said they are looking for consensus to <br />go forward with conditional support given they still have decision points to make and will involve <br />interested parties to make those decisions. <br /> <br />Jim Johnson, City Manager, City of Eugene stated in terms of next steps, they learned that from the <br />marketing research that people are interested in the details of how the money will be spent. He said <br />that he heard revenue sharing was supported by all of the communities. He said they owe it as cities <br />to come up with a package that is to be financed by the revenue sharing and do it quickly to present <br />the comprehensive package to the voters. He said the next step should be the cities working on the <br />components for the revenue sharing package. <br />Christine Lundberg, City of Springfield, stated that one of the bigger issues is education and they have <br />to look at the timing. She said she knows there are other considerations, but if they are serious about <br />passing this issue, that they have to convince the voters. <br /> <br />Mike Kelly, City Manager, City of Springfield noted the PSCC is made up of 28 individuals and they <br />do have a policy committee made up of the elected officials. He noted the elected officials that serve <br />on the PSCC form a policy committee and he suggested that that policy committee get together as <br />soon as possible, digest what was heard, consider recommissioning the finance committee with new <br />charges based on the discussion tonight and have that committee wrestle with the issues, and report <br />back to PSCC policy committee on where they go from here. <br /> <br />Leonard stated with regard to timing, last time they crafted the levy, they had the levy put together <br />earlier in June, they didn't get it going until September, and found that they were a month late. He <br />said voters need to understand what an income tax surcharge would be. He said if it is going to <br />happen, the decisions have to be made so the campaign can take shape and happen quicker and in a <br />more concentrated way than last year. <br /> <br />Anne Bellew stated this issue splits into prevention and present public safety. She said if they are <br />confident that they will do this, they have to put it down on paper, promise it and stand by it. <br /> <br />Page 15 -- Lane County Joint Elected Officials Meeting -- June 30, 1999 <br />WP bclm1990751M <br /> <br /> <br />