Laserfiche WebLink
off the table in early in the process. He said the mood of the community had changed to the degree that <br />the council was now proposing an income tax for schools. He interpreted that to mean that some of the <br />other discarded options should be re- examined. <br />Mr. Hauser acknowledged the Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce was generally not supportive of <br />industry - specific taxes. He believed that political feasibility was a consideration for new revenues, and <br />that could conflict with another value, that of fairness. <br />Ms. Taylor liked the idea of taxing nonresidents who used City services. She asked if the task force had <br />considered an employment tax. She indicated her opposition to a restaurant tax. She did not think <br />Eugene was like Ashland. She said that Ashland had a stronger entertainment focus and was a smaller <br />city. People who went to Ashland were there on vacation and costs were less significant to people on <br />vacation. Most of Eugene's restaurants served Eugene residents, and a restaurant tax might deter them <br />from going out to eat. <br />Ms. Taylor said the task force did not recommend a business license tax but it worked in Portland and <br />was a major source of income. She asked why such a tax would not work in Eugene. Mr. Barofsky said <br />staff indicated the business license tax would not yield the desired amount. He believed, however, that <br />such small taxes could add up and have an impact. He noted his own suggestion to double the annual $10 <br />rental unit fee to raise revenue. Mr. Funk added that different businesses worked at different profit <br />margins and it was challenging to achieve parity in such a tax. He did not know how Portland <br />implemented its business tax. <br />Ms. Ortiz appreciated the work of the task force and said everything was taxed in California, the state she <br />came from. She expressed support for a restaurant tax because she did not think it would have much of <br />an impact on individuals but would capture revenue from nonresidents. <br />Mr. Farr asked how much discussion the committee had about the potential of creating an unlevel playing <br />field between restaurants inside and outside the community. Mr. Barofsky recalled it was a concern <br />raised during discussion of the gas tax and he anticipated it would be raised if the council proposed a <br />restaurant tax. He believed any funding source came with tradeoffs, however. He added the committee <br />agreed it was important to identify what the City would pay for with the money, and that it would be <br />useful if there was a nexus between the source of funding and the expenditures it paid for. <br />Mr. Farr recalled that in 1997 the council proposed a one percent utility tax for low- income housing and it <br />failed by a wide margin. <br />City Manager Ruiz said the council would not see any of the task force recommendations reflected in the <br />budget and staff was not asking the council to take action now or in the near term. He said he convened <br />the task force because the City had a responsibility to consider all its fiscal options. <br />City Manager Ruiz asked the group to discuss what sustainability in the budget meant to it from a policy <br />perspective. <br />Participants offered the following: <br />• A stable budget balanced revenue with expenditures but did not take into consideration all <br />unfunded or unmet needs, such as backlog of roads maintenance, ambulance fund, parking fund, <br />parks maintenance, building maintenance, planning and development issues those costs would <br />MINUTES— Eugene City Council April 18, 2010 Page 3 <br />Work Session <br />