Laserfiche WebLink
5. ACTION: <br />An Ordinance Concerning Rental Housing Standards; Amending Section 8.425 of the Eugene <br />Code, 1971 <br /> <br />Councilor Zelenka, seconded by Councilor Clark, moved that the City Council <br />adopt Council Bill 4997, an ordinance concerning rental housing standards. <br /> <br />Councilor Clark thanked those who testified on the matter and those who served on the committee. He felt <br />the ordinance represented a good compromise and protection for all parties. He was particularly pleased <br />that it would not be necessary to add staff and potential fee reductions would be considered if excess revenue <br />was collected. <br /> <br />Councilor Poling stated he would support the ordinance because it addressed the specific type of mold <br />related to faulty plumbing or problems with the building and not just bad housekeeping. <br /> <br />Councilor Zelenka also thanked the committee for its work on a well-crafted, thoughtful recommendation. <br /> <br />The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. <br /> <br />6. ACTION: <br /> An Ordinance Concerning Solid Waste Administrative Powers and Amending Section 3.250 of the <br />Eugene Code, 1971 <br /> <br />Councilor Zelenka, seconded by Councilor Clark, moved that the City Council <br />adopt Council Bill 4999, an ordinance concerning solid waste administrative pow- <br />ers. <br /> <br />Councilor Clark stated that it was a bad idea to increase taxes at this time and the action was arbitrary and <br />would place an undue burden on many residents. He urged a no vote on the motion. <br /> <br />Becky Carlson, Public Works Department, reviewed the responses to public input and questions contained in <br />Attachment A of the agenda item summary. She reminded the council that it was a surcharge on garbage <br />haulers, not customers, and there was no requirement that the surcharge be passed on to customers. She <br />said the surcharge would only apply to customers within the City limits and those properties were already <br />identified by haulers. She also reviewed responses related to administration and collection of the surcharge, <br />the impact on haulers revenue and impact on school districts. She noted that the council could consider a <br />waiver or exemption for school districts, but that could create legal problems in defending the surcharge. <br />She said a more appropriate mechanism for mitigating school district impact would be to develop options in <br />the budget process to offset or reduce the increased fees using other City funding sources. She said a 100 <br />percent offset to the schools would require about $19,000 annually and the City Attorney had been asked to <br />prepare an amendment for the council’s consideration if they were interested in those options. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy asked if using garbage hauler fees to fund road repair and maintenance was an unusual <br />practice. Ms. Carlson replied that many jurisdictions in Oregon levied fees on garbage haulers and used the <br />revenue for a number of general government purposes, including road repair. <br /> <br />Councilor Pryor remarked that the Council Committee on Transportation Funding Solutions had discussed <br />the surcharge extensively and he was comfortable with the concept, but the timing of an additional fee was a <br />concern because of the economy. He was also concerned with enacting a fee before it had been discussed as <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 27, 2009 Page 7 <br /> <br />