Laserfiche WebLink
guaranteed profit. She said it felt somewhat like double taxation on haulers. She also wanted a Budget <br />Committee discussion of a gas tax as some people had indicated they would support a gas tax in lieu of the <br />surcharge. <br /> <br />Councilor Pryor indicated he wanted to have a more extensive discussion of the surcharge and the broader <br />issue of the City’s position with respect to transportation funding. He said there needed to be a consistent <br />set of values, direction and priorities upon which to build a budget. He said the deferred maintenance <br />backlog resulted from a systematic lack of consideration for transportation funding over many years. <br /> <br />Councilor Clark emphasized that there had to be a larger discussion of City priorities. He said fixing the <br />transportation system was one of the highest priorities, second only to public safety, but felt the surcharge <br />was an inappropriate way to fund it. <br /> <br />Councilor Ortiz expressed her disappointment that the ordinance did not pass. She asked if reducing the <br />budget by $900,000 would result in employees being laid off. Mr. Ruiz said the result was a $900,000 gap <br />in road operations and the maintenance budget, but was not certain if that would result in layoffs. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy summarized that councilors had not rejected the concept of a garbage hauler surcharge, but <br />wanted to have that discussion within the budget process. <br /> <br />Councilor Zelenka asked that Budget Committee members be provided with a copy of the Council <br />Committee on Transportation Funding Solutions report. He hoped the budget discussions would also <br />include a street utility fee, one of the funding recommendations that he had supported. He said that streets <br />had to be repaired and if no other revenue sources were available, that meant massive cuts to other services <br />the City provided and the community valued. <br /> <br />Councilor Clark stressed that public safety—fire, police and emergency medical services—was his highest <br />priority for the City; transportation and appropriate funding was his second highest priority. He said the <br />public expected the council to make hard decisions about priorities within the framework of available funds. <br /> <br />Councilor Poling reiterated his opposition to a garbage haulers tax. <br /> <br />Councilor Pryor remarked that it was a momentous decision that directly addressed community values and <br />priorities. He said councilors would approach the matter from their individual perspectives and it would be <br />a difficult discussion, but that was what they were elected to do. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy encouraged councilors to be respectful of each others’ values and priorities during the budget <br />process. <br /> <br />7. ACTION: <br /> An Ordinance Concerning Wastewater and Stormwater Service and Amending Sections 6.411 and <br />6.421 of the Eugene Code, 1971 <br /> <br />Councilor Zelenka, seconded by Councilor Clark, moved that the City Council <br />adopt Council Bill 5000, an ordinance concerning wastewater and stormwater ser- <br />vice. <br /> <br />Mr. Klein clarified that the ordinance Section 3 transferred funds and sections 1 and 2 were forward-looking <br />and put into place the ability to use the funds in the same way in the future. <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 27, 2009 Page 9 <br /> <br />