Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Ms. Solomon hoped that a street utility fee based on a parking model would not conflict with any part of the City Code with respect to any development strategies designed to reduce the number of parking spaces in the City. Mr. Corey, responding to a question from Ms. Solomon, noted that on-street parking would not be included as part of the street utility fee as such spaces were generally not the exclusive purview of the property owner. Ms. Solomon worried that increasing the number of City staff necessary to successfully implement a street utility fee would constitute an unnecessary increase in the size of the City’s overall organizational structure. Ms. Piercy recognized that there was a general consensus from the council to move forward with the discussion of the street utility fee, if not the full implementation of the fee itself. Ms. Piercy agreed with comments that maintained that a collaborative approach with the City’s business and community leaders would be the best way in which to proceed with discussions of the street utility fee and encouraged the council members to feel free to become more engaged in such collaborations as the matter moved forward. Ms. Piercy felt that it would be very important to include those community members who did not drive, in the various conversations surrounding the street utility fee. Mr. Zelenka noted his support of a vehicle registration fee and requested that staff gather more information on how such fees were applied in other areas of the country. Mr. Zelenka, seconded by Mr. Clark, moved to direct the City Manager to contin- ue work on development of a street utility fee, including returning with a proposed budget for additional staffing and program needs for this effort and a plan to in- volve the public. Mr. Clark noted that while he was in favor of public involvement in the matter of the street utility fee he would be voting against the motion. Ms. Piercy called for a vote on Mr. Zelenka’s previously stated motion. The mo- tion passed, 6:2 (Mr. Clark and Ms. Taylor voting in opposition). Mr. Zelenka, seconded by Mr. Clark, moved to direct the City Manager to develop the street utility fee using parking spaces as the metric for measuring relative use of the system and allocating the costs between user categories. Mr. Poling confirmed that the stated motion was only directing the City Manager to return with further information on the manner in which a street utility fee would be implemented, rather than direction for the City Manager to implement the fee itself. Ms. Piercy agreed with Mr. Poling’s statement and felt it was important that the public understood that the council discussions represented only the “beginning of a journey” with respect to the street utility fee. Ms. Piercy called for a vote on the previously stated motion. The motion passed 6:2 (Mr. Clark and Ms. Taylor voting in opposition). MINUTES—Eugene City Council July 15, 2009 Page 6 Work Session