Item 6: Ordinance Concerning Solid Waste Powers

Home Browse Search

ATTACHMENT A Public Works Administration City of Eugene 101 East Broadway, Suite 400 M Eugene, Oregon 97401 EMORANDUM (541) 682-8421 (541) 682-6826 FAX www.eugene-or.gov Date: April 24, 2009 To: Mayor Piercy and City Council From: Kurt Corey, Public Works Director, 682-8421 Subject: Response to Public Input and Questions on Solid Waste Hauler Surcharge A Public Hearing was held on April 20 to solicit public comment on a proposed ordinance amending sections of the City Code and establishing a transportation surcharge on solid waste (garbage) haulers and permitting that the surcharge be used for the repair, maintenance, operation and preservation of city- owned streets. This community input and subsequent council discussion raised several concerns. This memorandum provides staff responses to those issues, which are presented in two categories: those directly relating to the proposed ordinance before council; and those relating to issues of administration, timing of the new surcharge and potential impacts on hauler revenue and school district budgets. ISSUES RELATING DIRECTLY TO SOLID WASTE SURCHARGE ORDINANCE Four primary issues have been raised that pertain directly to the proposed solid waste hauler surcharge ordinance. Each issue discussion includes a summary of the issue and, where appropriate, a discussion of potential options to mitigate that concern, as well as a potential motion to incorporate those options. Application of the Surcharge to a Single Category of Heavy Vehicles The concern has been raised about the fairness of the proposed transportation surcharge in that it singles out a specific category of heavy vehicle operators for the surcharge, while revenue generated from the operation of other heavy vehicles, such as those operated by EWEB, LTD, the school district and local construction companies, would not be subject to the surcharge. Most cities in Oregon levy fees or taxes on garbage haulers and use the money for a variety of general government purposes, including road repair. The idea was recommended by a committee of the City Council which spent several months in 2007 on the difficult task of identifying viable funding for street maintenance and preservation. The suggestion that all heavy trucks should be included is a common one that was, in fact, considered as part of the council committee's review by looking at the potential for charging road fees to a broader group of heavy commercial vehicles operating in the city. The conclusion at that time was that the broader fee structure would be problematic for several reasons. The first concern is with regard to legal defensibility, in that if a fee were to be imposed as a requirement for operation of a heavy vehicle within Eugene, there is a high probability that it would be seen as a vehicle registration fee. Under state statutes, only counties may impose a local vehicle registration fee. Furthermore, charging the fee to the broader group of heavy truck haulers was also viewed as neither efficient nor cost effective as there is currently no practical way for the city to identify, track and assess the fee. Finally, there would likely be a disproportionate administrative cost associated with assessing a broad range of heavy trucks since there are no practical sources to obtain the needed data and bill for the fee. These are the primary reasons the Council committee determined that the broader heavy vehicle fee would not be feasible.