CC Minutes - 04/11/11 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

4. PUBLIC HEARING: An Ordinance Concerning a Four -Year Income Tax for Schools; Adding Sections 2.2000 to 2.2038 to the Eugene Code, 1971; and Providing a Sunset Date City Manager Ruiz introduced the item. He said action on the ordinance, which established an income tax for schools, was scheduled for April 25, 2011. He reminded the council that the ordinance would only become effective if the voters approved Ballot Measure 21 -82 in a May 2011 election. Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing. Roxie Cuellar, PO Box 668, Yachats, Campaign Manager for the organization Citizens for Jobs and Schools, expressed concern that the provisions laid out in Section 2.2006 of the ordinance would be complex to implement because there was no easy way for employers to know which employees were City residents subject to the tax. She referred to Section 2.2012 and suggested that it should be revised with the addition of criteria governing the basis on which City staff would determine a person was subject to the tax. She suggested the City consider requiring the mailing of tax form along with the instructions. She also found the sunset clause to be ambiguous. Mark Callahan, 3621 Mahlon Avenue, opposed the ordinance because it would require only a majority vote of the council, rather than voter approval, to modify the ordinance. He was concerned that by proposing the ordinance additions, the council was "putting the cart before the horse" given the vote on the proposed tax was a month away and was a highly contested issue. Mr. Callahan concluded by quoting Article 8, Section 8, Subsection 1 of the Oregon Constitution, which spoke to the requirement that the Oregon State Legislature, not the City of Eugene, provide adequate and equitable funding for the educational system. Larry Lewin, 2145 Lincoln Street, discussed the growth in class room size he had experienced throughout his teaching career in Eugene. He emphasized the importance of smaller class sizes to learning. He was concerned about the children in the city's districts, particularly his two grandchildren. One would soon enter kindergarten, and he was concerned about her class size as it affected her ability to learn. His grandson was in fifth grade and would soon experience another furlough day. He said such days were a concern that would be addressed by the proposed income tax. Sarah Case, 2525 Charnelton Street, thanked the council for referring Ballot Measure 21 -82 to the May ballot. She addressed the issue of constitutionality raised by Mr. Callahan, saying a local option levy funded 20 percent of school operations, so the community was already supplementing State funding. Ms. Case said many parents were concerned by the potential loss of valued programs, larger classes, and teacher layoffs. Such factors made it difficult for children to thrive. Ms. Case commended those who put forth the measure and said the number of people who supported the measure was growing. Ian McNeely, 2288 Potter Street, also thanked the council and voiced support for the ordinance. He provided some history of "how we got here," which he attributed to the "meltdown on Wall Street" and the State's tax structure, which did not produce sufficient funding and left the State disproportionately dependent on the income tax. The problem was not caused locally but no one from outside the community was going to help. He acknowledged that the measure was not perfect as class sizes would still be too large and the school year too short. However, passage of the measure would keep the schools going and demonstrate what the community was "all about." Carey Hancock, 2660 Spring Boulevard, spoke in support of Ballot Measure 21 -82. She said she had to hire math tutors for her children because of large class sizes they experienced in Eugene schools. She had MINUTES — Eugene City Council April 11, 2011 Page 4 Regular Meeting