Laserfiche WebLink
<br />that the procedure for assessments be governed by general ordinance. I In this case the <br />Charge-Out Rates may not be used for assessment since they were set by Administrative <br />Orders of the City Manager, and not by the general ordinance of the City Council. See <br />Administrative Order Nos. 58-04-14-F and 58-05-07-F for Charge-Out Rates effective for <br />FY2004-2005 and FY 2005-2006, respectively. Exs. 2 and 3. <br /> <br />Second, the Orders indicate that the rates were set pursuant to Eugene Code 2.020. <br />However, Code 2.020 indicates that fees are to be set based, not solely upon "actual cost" <br />as required by the Oregon Constitution, but upon policies, enactments and directives of <br />City Council, the amount charged by the City in the past, the full costs of providing the <br />services, the amounts charged by comparable providers, the revenue needs of the City as <br />determined by the budget and the hourly rates of engineering employees. Code 2.020 (2). <br />The Orders expressly state that they were based upon these factors. Exs. 2 and 3. They <br />were thus not based solely upon "actual cost." <br /> <br />Third, the Orders setting the Charge-Out Rates indicate that they were for <br />purposes of complying with Code 7.130. which is specifically only for engineering costs <br />where the City does not provide the engineering for the proiect, unlike the alley projects, <br />where the City provided the engineering for the project. ("The city engineer shall charge <br />a fee set pursuant to section 2.020 of this code to cover the costs, including overhead, of <br />engineering, inspection and review services performed by the city on all private or public <br />improvements not engineered by the city. ") <br /> <br />d) City has not supported its claim for the Engineering Charge with evidence of <br />actual costs consisting of wages or wages plus benefits for City engineering staff <br />classifications, with the hours billed for each classification as part of the alley project. <br />Therefore, the entire Engineering Charge of $509,380.59 used as part of the overall <br />assessment should be deleted from the calculations. There is no evidence in the record of <br />actual costs of the time of city engineering staff, and the assessment therefore should not <br />include costs of such time. If this reduction is applied to the assessment at 566 E. 18th, <br />the new assessment would be reduced by roughly $4,545.41 to $11,403.40. <br /> <br />e) This writer has not been able to obtain timely adequate information as to hourly <br />wages and benefits of City engineering staff classifications and the hours billed for each <br />classification on this alley project, so as to allow calculation of the actual costs of wages <br />and benefits for the project. See discussion below. However, some information has been <br />provided to allow some rough estimation of the impact ofthe City's failure to base the <br />assessment on actual costs of wages. <br /> <br />For example, as of May, 2004, the average charge-out rate for all engineering <br />classifications was $74.38. Ex. 2 (Charge-out rates were increased as of July 1,2005, Ex <br /> <br />I The Eugene City Charter, section 38, provides that "[t]he procedure for levying, <br />collecting and enforcing the payment of special assessments for public improvements <br />shall be governed by general ordinance." Section 39 provides that amendments to such <br />ordinance requires 2/3's vote of the City council, and that "such amendment may not take <br />effect for six months after the council adopts it and may not apply to an improvement <br />authorized by the council before the effective date of the amendment." <br /> <br />-;)..-- <br />