Laserfiche WebLink
generate as much as $3 million but that any portion of those funds would not be available until late in FY2011. Mr. <br />Corey proceeded to describe several other funding mechanisms associated with HB 2001 that might be used to <br />generate funds for local roadway improvements. <br />Mr. Brown suggested that the City might utilize funds from its facility reserves to cover the operations and <br />maintenance needs for local roadways until state gas tax funds generated by HB 2001 were available. <br />Mr. Corey responded that full implementation of HB 2001 would still not generate enough revenue to cover the <br />operations and maintenance funding gaps currently faced by the City. <br />Mr. Pryor thanked the staff for their information and the diligence of their research regarding the matter. He <br />disagreed that people might try to find ways to illegally dump their garbage or find other ways to circumvent local <br />garbage service practices as a result of the surcharge but felt that the cost of the surcharge was unfortunately still <br />going to be passed down to average consumers. He suggested that a City transportation utility might be a more <br />equitable way to generate revenue for the City. <br />Ms. Ortiz was frustrated that many of the same concerns from previous council and budget committee meetings were <br />being raised regarding the solid waste collection surcharge with little advancement. She hoped that a motion on the <br />matter might finally be put forth. <br />Mr. Zelenka noted that local garbage haulers had recently increased their fees in order to cover their own increased <br />costs by double the amount being suggested by the City and had seen absolutely no decrease in the amount of people <br />using the service. He also noted that a recent editorial in the Register-Guard had reflected that many funding sources <br />that used to go towards repairing and maintaining local roadways had been taken away and not replaced. He felt that <br />the solid waste collection surcharge represented a fair and equitable revenue source that would be easy to admini- <br />strate. <br />Mr. Zelenka commented that state funds from HB 2001 would not be seen locally for more than a year if in fact the <br />bill actually passed. <br />Ms. Piercy noted that the overwhelming indication from the public and the City’s budget committee had been that the <br />repair and maintenance of local roadways was of paramount importance. She further maintained that if citizens were <br />to use smaller garbage containers, or similarly reduce their level of garbage service, that would not necessarily be bad <br />for the community. <br />Ms. Piercy expressed that the City was currently prohibited from implementing a vehicle registration fee as Ms. <br />Taylor had previously suggested. <br />Ms. Piercy read the motion that had been recently passed by the Budget Committee: “Move that the Budget <br />Committee recommend that the City Council impose a 5% transportation surcharge on solid waste haulers to <br />generate an estimated $900,000 for road maintenance and operations. All monies collected are to be designated to <br />local streets for operations and maintenance. Should the City receive any extra road funding from state or other <br />sources in the 2010 budget cycle, that money should be used first to offset the fees as a priority in order to rescind the <br />surcharge.” <br />Mr. Pryor felt that the solid waste collection surcharge was not the right mechanism to address the operations and <br />maintenance funding gaps and maintained that the City should continue to explore the use of a transportation utility <br />fee. <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 10, 2009 Page 6 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />