CC Minutes - 06/30/99 JEO - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

broken into three groups (City of Eugene, City of Springfield and the non-Eugene and Springfield Lane County that included rural areas, small cities and unincorporated portions of the metro area). He said detailed responses are available. He stated they looked at the survey to test people's willingness to look at either a property tax or income tax surcharge as a means of funding public safety programs in Lane County. He noted people were not enthusiastic about any of the revenue measures but the personal-corporate income tax was slightly favored. He reported the top reason given for the levy was the need or necessity and it showed only 16% in favor. He added that number would have to increase through public information efforts. He stated other items were more prevention, sharing the tax burden with business and corporations and stopping crime. He noted the primary reason people would be opposed to it is additional taxation. He said they specifically asked questions comparing prevention to enforcement and it was clear that prevention was thought to be more important than enforcement. He said with regard to specifics, the alternatives to jail (including the forest work camp) was the top ranked priority. He said with regard to the personal-corporate income tax proposal, the tax rate could not be increased without a vote of the people, it would be deductible from federal income tax and would establish a permanent funding for community safety and justice programs in Lane County. He noted more information would help people approve this type of measure and the corporate income tax was the preferred option among the survey group. S2 INTELLIGENCE REPORT Steve Schriver, S2 Intelligence, reported the focus groups were initiated to provide the qualitative side of the research puzzle. He said the focus groups' purpose was to provide substance in the form of tone and texture to fill in the blank spots that involved two groups of Eugene citizens, one group of Springfield citizens and one from citizens of outlying areas. He said there were approximately 12 on each focus group. He said they produced nine agreeable findings, where a large number of people from all of the focus groups agreed. The first finding asked what participants thought their chances of being victimized were: increasing; or staying about the same. He said few people indicated they thought their chances of being victimized was less. He noted the Eugene group was evenly split but Springfield and the outlying areas believed their chances of being victimized were on the increase. He noted with the second finding, the participants could not agree with what the words "community safety and justice services" meant. He said on the third finding, the participants thought prevention was the best long-term cost effective solution to crime. He noted in all focus groups, when talking about prevention, it dealt with youth. He said the fourth finding found that participants would be willing to pay more taxes to improve community safety. He added it was true among all the groups that they wanted to know how the dollars would be spent and if the expenditure produced significant results. He added they did not ask that question, it was volunteered. He said the next finding was property tax in comparison with income tax. He said the income tax was a preferred option, and it was unanimous. He said the next finding showed that participants would support a measure that shared revenue with the rural areas because it was fair and equitable. Page 5 -- Lane County Joint Elected Officials Meeting -- June 30, 1999 WP bclm1990751M