Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Zelenka agreed with Ms. Piercy that there were General Fund tradeoffs and he preferred to avoid cuts to <br />those services. Regarding the garbage surcharge, he said it was not singling out garbage haulers at random; <br />those vehicles used the system at a far greater level than other users and there was a direct nexus with <br />damage to streets. He said there was no practical way to assess other heavy vehicles, plus those vehicles <br />paid a fee to the State that was contributed to the City’s road funds. He felt the street utility fee was the <br />most equitable and captured government agencies, the University of Oregon, commercial and residential <br />users and non-residential commuters. He hoped that option would be further explored. He said the <br />connection between a stormwater/wastewater fee was not as clear. He urged involvement of the public in <br />any discussion of transportation funding. <br /> <br />Mr. Clark agreed the public needed to be involved in the conversation about a long-term permanent solution. <br />He said the City could not prioritize or tax its way out of the problem; the City could not afford to be all <br />things to all people, especially during difficult economic times. He thought that setting priorities was the <br />council’s job and the public expected it to make difficult choices with limited resources. <br /> <br />Ms. Piercy concurred that setting priorities was the council’s job and the services the City provided were <br />reflective of the community’s direction on how to spend revenue. She asked councilors to provide direction <br />to staff on the next steps to be taken. <br /> <br />Mr. Ruiz asked the council to consider ways to fill the FY10 O&M gap on a one-time basis instead of <br />reducing services, preliminary to the more comprehensive discussion of long-term solutions. <br /> <br />Mr. Clark said his best outcome would be to find creative solutions to filling the short-term gap, followed by <br />a longer term process that involved the public after the City had demonstrated its accountability for the bond <br />measure. <br /> <br />Ms. Ortiz did not want to reduce existing services. She agreed with the need to educate the public, but was <br />not certain how to provide information in a useful way. She said the community wanted to see a clear <br />direction for solving the problem and earning the public’s trust by completing projects funded by the ballot <br />measure was a step forward. <br /> <br />Mr. Pryor indicated he was interested in seeing what reductions might be used to fill the FY10 funding gap <br />if additional revenue was not available. He wanted to see a broader involvement from the community in <br />discussions of long-term solutions. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor said the council should be educated by the public about what services it was willing to give up. <br />She said it was never possible to engage the entire community. She urged the council to seek a County-wide <br />solution. <br /> <br />Ms. Solomon suggested using the stormwater fund to fill the short-term gap. She said the council had been <br />discussing for some time going back to the community for a reprioritization of budget issues; that had not <br />yet occurred and therefore it was not entirely accurate to say spending currently reflected the priorities of <br />citizens. She hoped hearing from citizens about what their budget priorities were would be a key element of <br />future discussions. She strongly supported providing some General Fund dollars for roads. <br /> <br />Mr. Poling joined Mr. Pryor’s request for information about what cuts might be necessary to fill the short- <br />term funding gap. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council February 18, 2009 Page 4 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />