Item 2D: Ratification of IGR Action

Home Browse Search

4. Grant Ms. Wilson stated that this item sought to notify the CCIGR that staff was applying for a grant from the 2008-2009 Alliance for Community Traffic Safety in Oregon (ACTS Oregon) through its Building Safer Communities Mini-Grant Program. She said no local match was required. Ms. Wilson reported that copies of a letter from the Sustainability Commission to the Oregon Transporta- tion Commission (OTC) had been included in member packets that asked the OTC to proceed with the roadside vegetation pilot program in Lane County. The County already had implemented a program to use pesticide free vegetation controls and the pilot program was for state highways. 5. Discuss Legislative Policies Document Ms. Taylor began the review of the City of Eugene Legislative Policies document for the 2009 Oregon Legislative Session. She offered the following corrections: ? Page 6, second bullet point: Eugene opposes restrictions on a city’s ability to raise revenue, diver- sity income base, or erode local flexibility in initiating revenue sources. ? Page 6, third bullet point: Eugene opposes actions that would reduce revenue to cities or increase costs to cities… Ms. Taylor thought the last portion of the third bullet point, which opposed preemption of local authority to raise revenue without reimbursement, was redundant. Mr. Poling countered that restrictions on local flexibility to initiate revenue sources and preemption of local authority were two different things. Ms. Wilson observed that the City had a long-standing opposition to any preemption. She said even if the revenue was replaced it could always be taken away. Ms. Taylor suggested that the segment addressing preemption be moved to the second bullet point and that the portion about reimbursement be stricken. Ms. Wilson surmised that the second bullet point should address preemption and the ability to raise revenue and the third bullet point would be in regard to the reduction of revenue and the increase in costs. Ms. Taylor recommended that the paragraphs under C8 and C9 on page 10 be deleted as the legislators already understood current laws. The committee was amenable to the change. Ms. Taylor made the following change to page 11: ? First bullet point: Bolsters Provides a more equitable share of funding for cities and counties; Ms. Taylor remarked that the second bullet point under A1 Highway Trust Fund did not make sense to her. Mr. Poling understood it to mean that the Highway Trust Funds would be divided through cooperative methods. Ms. Wilson affirmed that it was cooperatively determined distribution. She suggested that she split the first portion of the sentence away so that there were two different bullet points, one addressing the equitable distribution of the funds and the other addressing the cooperative decision-making process involved in allocating them. Ms. Taylor suggested that the first two paragraphs on page 12, regarding Highway Trust Fund expenditures and distribution, be deleted as she considered them to be redundant. Ms. Wilson concurred. MINUTES—Council Committee on September 10, 2008 Page 2 Intergovernmental Relations