Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Ms. Cutsogeorge sought direction from the council on the proposed tax measure, referring the council to the policy questions identified by staff in Attachment A of the Agenda Item Summary. At the request of Mayor Piercy, Ms. Cutsogeorge shared costs from past elections, which ranged between $20,000 and $77,000. The cost could be as high as $290,000 for a November ballot on which the measure was the only item. Councilor Ortiz, seconded by Councilor Zelenka, moved to direct the City Manager to bring back for council consideration on February 14 a proposed ballot measure for the May ballot that: 1. Approves a local income tax on Eugene residents that would sunset after six years; 2. Is designed to raise revenue sufficient to (a) allow the two school districts to reduce or eliminate furlough days and keep average class size from increasing to the extent possible; and (b) to cover the costs of implementing the measure; 3. Divides the tax revenues (after deducting the costs of implementation) between the two school districts based on the number of students in each district who reside within the city limits; 4. Would reduce or suspend the local income tax if the State either (a) increases state funding of the districts to the point that additional local revenues are no longer needed to restore furlough days or prevent average class size from increasing, or (b) requires that the local income tax revenues decrease the amount of state funding for the districts; 5. Requires the school districts to provide an annual report to the City Council describing how the income tax revenues were spent; and 6. Requires the school districts to establish a review panel, similar to the Citizen Street Repair Review Panel, comprised of four members appointed by the Bethel school district, four members appointed by the Eugene school district, and four members appointed by the Mayor, two of whom should be business representatives and two who opposed the measure. In addition, I move to direct the City Manager to ask each school district how much revenue the district would like to receive from the measure to achieve the outcomes. Mayor Piercy solicited comments on the motion. Councilor Taylor agreed with Mr. Hale that the schools were not the City’s responsibility and with Mr. Barofsky about the City’s own needs, but she considered the school funding situation to be an emergency and supported putting a measure on the May 2011 ballot. She advocated for a progressive, temporary tax that was related to the State tax and targeted at those with incomes over $50,000. She believed that the State tax was already regressive, and some residents were barely covering their living expenses now and would be less likely to support the tax if they had to pay it. Councilor Clark shared the values of those who advocated for the measure. The districts’ revenue shortfalls affected his family as well, but based on the revenue projections put forward by the subcommittee he would not have to pay the tax. Councilor Clark did not object to referring a measure to the voters, but he was concerned about the economic impacts of such a tax and did not want to make conditions worse. MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 24, 2010 Page 8 Regular Meeting