Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Poling was not prepared to support the resolution. He agreed with the comments of Ms. <br />Solomon and disagreed with Mr. Kelly about the value of the program. He believed it was <br />duplicative of other programs. Mr. Poling questioned funding the program at a time when the City <br />was asking the community to accept reduced service levels and was increasing its fees. He <br />agreed with Ms. Solomon about asking the voters to reconsider the program. He said that the <br />only difference between the local program and State and federal programs was the amount of <br />toxics materials being reported. Mr. Poling said that when a business pays more in fees, its <br />employee benefits were affected and ultimately, the consumer paid. <br /> <br />Ms. Nathanson said that it was easy to support a popular program at its current funding level but if <br />the council made a practice of that it would never be able to reduce the budget. She was not <br />surprised the Toxics Board supported the budget at its current level. She said that the discussion <br />highlighted the difficulty of attempting to institute administrative structure and detail in a charter. <br />She agreed with Mr. Meisners analysis and supported his proposal. She thought the City would <br />= <br />be able to maintain the program at a level commensurate with what was prescribed by charter at <br />the level proposed. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman said that the council was discussing toxic chemicals that were carcinogenic, <br />mutogenic, and neurotoxic. She said citizens had the right to know what toxins they were <br />consuming in their air, water, and soil. She favored the resolution as presented and suggested <br />the council could direct the board to determine what it needed in terms of program support next <br />year. Ms. Bettman said that the cap approved by the State legislature would result in small <br />businesses subsidizing large businesses because fees could not be assessed on quantity. She <br />did not believe the cost of reporting should be shifted to the citizens. <br /> <br />é <br />Mr. Pap, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to extend time for the item for <br />seven minutes. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. <br /> <br />Mr. Carlson said that it was true Mr. Potter did not spend all his time on the program, but the <br />program also required other staff support. Chief Tom Tallon had proposed the budget because in <br />totality, it was a one FTE program. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey indicated that if called on to vote, he would vote against the resolution on the floor <br />for the reasons cited by Ms. Nathanson. He said that it was clear the community wanted a toxics <br />right-to-know program, but the program should not be in the charter. He said that it was argued <br />by the adherents of that approach that the council would play games with the program if it was in <br />an ordinance form; instead, the State and the courts had altered the program and now the council <br />could not fix it. If it was an ordinance, it could have been adjusted. He agreed with Ms. Solomon <br />that the program was now seriously flawed and that the voters should be asked to consider the <br />issue. Mayor Torrey did not want to send the issue back to the board because the outcome would <br />merely be a 4:3 or 3:4 vote given the boards composition. <br />= <br /> <br />é <br />Mr. Pap moved to substitute a motion to send the budget back to the Toxics <br />Board with direction to prepare a budget that did not include more than a 20 <br />percent per FTE fee increase. <br /> <br />The motion died for lack of a second. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTESEugene City Council March 12, 2003 Page 4 <br />C <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />