HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 2D - 2005 Leg.Policies DocEUGENE CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Adoption of 2005 Legislative Policies Document
Meeting Date: December 6, 2004 Agenda Item Number: 2D
Department: City Manager's Office Staff Contact: Jason Heuser
www. ci. eugette, or. us Contact TelephoneNumber: (541) 682-8441
ISSUE STATEMENT
This is a consent calendar item to adopt the City of Eugene 2005 Legislative Policies Document that
guides the Intergovernmental Relations Program in Salem in the pursuit of legislative outcomes consistent
with the principles of the document. The document has been reviewed and forwarded for approval by the
Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations with a recommendation to adopt.
BACKGROUND
The City Council has biennially approved iterations of a legislative policies document that is inclusive of
emerging legislative issues and possessing general principles that can be applied to unforeseen events in a
legislative session. The 2005 session will most likely be difficult. The State is again in a significant
budget crisis and facing additional revenue deficits. It will be a challenge to ensure that the legislature
avoids shifting any portion of this crisis to local governments, either by reducing shared revenues or
restricting local revenue options.
RELATED CITY POLICIES
The Legislative Policies Document will apprise legislators and intergovernmental partners of the policy
outcomes favorable or unfavorable to City interests and goals and highlight recommendations that
achieve these outcomes. When appropriate and possible, the document references and uses adopted City
Council and city policy as guiding principles. The document is iterative and is based in past practice and
policies.
CITY COUNCIL OPTIONS
The City Council may adopt the 2005 Legislative Policies Document and forward the document to the
printing process for distribution within the Oregon State Legislature and with intergovernmental partners.
The 2005 session of the Oregon State Legislature will convene January 10, 2005. Ideally, the council
would approve the document in order for the document to be reproduced and distributed to state
legislators and their staff by the opening of the legislative session.
L:\CMO\2004 Council Agendas\M041206\S0412062D.doc
CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
The City Manager recommends that the council act upon the IGR Committee's recommendation and
approve the document.
SUGGESTED MOTION
Move to approve the City of Eugene 2005 Legislative Policies Document.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Draft of the 2005 Legislative Policies Document
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Staff Contact: Jason Heuser
Telephone: 682-8441
Staff E-Mail: jason.p.heuser~ci.eugene.or.us
L:\CMO\2004 Council Agendas\M041206\S0412062D.doc
CITY OF EUGENE
LEGISLATIVE POLICIES
FOR 200~ LEGISLATIVE
SESSION
JANUARY 2005
For more information contact:
City of Eugene
Jason Heuser, Legislative Director
541-682-8441 Eugene Office
541-682-5414 Eugene Fax
503-378-1505 Salem Office
503-378-1323 Salem Fax
E-mail: j ason.p.heuser~ci.eugene.or.us
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session i
CITY OF EUGENE
LEGISLATIVE POLICIES FOR 2005 LEGISLATIVE SESSION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 1
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2
II. HOME RULE AND THE REGION 4
A. EUGENE, A CHARTER CITY 4
B. REGIONAL PARTNERSHIPS: EUGENE'S INTERGOVERNMENTAL PARTNERS 4
III. FINANCING STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT 7
A. TAX POLICY 7
B. PROPERTY TAXES 9
C. OTHERLOCAL BUDGET CONCERNS 13
D. STATE BUDGET 16
IV. TRANSPORTATION 18
A. FUNDING FOR STREETS, HIGHWAYS AND TRANSIT 18
B. RAIL SERVICE 20
C. COMMUNITY LIVABILITY- OREGON LIVABILITY INITIATIVE 21
D. CONGESTION PRICING 22
E. FEDERAL FUNDS 22
F. LOCAL FUNDING MECHANISMS 22
A. BUILDING CODES 24
C. LAND USE PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT 28
VI. PUBLIC SAFETY 33
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session ii
A. COURT 33
B. EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS AND 9-1-1 SERVICES 34
C. POLICE AND ENFORCEMENT 35
D. FIREAND EMERGENCY RESPONSE 37
VII. YOUTH 39
A. EDUCATION FUNDING 39
B. FUNDING FOR PREVENTION SERVICES FOR YOUTH 39
D. AFTER SCHOOL PILOT PROGRAMS 39
E. HOMELESS YOUTH 40
VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES 41
A. POLLUTION, SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLING 41
B. WATER AND ENDANGERED SPECIES 44
IX. GENERAL GOVERNMENT 49
A. BUSINESS LICENSING 49
B. CONTRACTING 49
C. LABOR 49
D. LIQUOR LICENSING 50
E. LIBRARY 51
F. PUBLIC RECORDS 51
G. SMOKING BAN AND TOBACCO REGULATION 52
H. USE OF THE INITIATIVE PROCESS, ELECTION REFORM 54
X. TELECOMMUNICATIONS 55
INDEX 58
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session iii
Introduction
As the State's second most populous metropolitan area, Eugene-Springfield serves as the economic,
recreational and cultural center for the southern Willamette Valley and much of southwestern Oregon.
The metropolitan area population is now more than 200,000. The regional economy is diversified, with
emphasis on technology, timber, education and service industries.
The City of Eugene operates under a home rule charter providing for a council/manager form of
government. The offices of the mayor and city councilors are nonpartisan, with the mayor elected at large
and one councilor elected from each of eight city wards.
In the past decade as a result of property tax limitation measures, specifically Measure 5 in 1990 and
Measures 47/50 in 1996/1997, the City has gone through a number of budget reduction processes. In the
early 1990's as a result of Measure 5, Eugene went through an extensive 18-month process to evaluate
City services and potential budget cuts. The City identified and made $5.3 million in budget cuts through
eliminating services and personnel reductions. As a result of Measure 50, which did not pass in Eugene
or Lane County, the City cut an additional $8.7 million in services in fiscal years 1998 and 1999.
The City's revenue has not kept pace with the service needs of the community since then. In fiscal year
2002 and again in 2003 service levels were again reduced and General Fund reserves have been tapped to
forestall deficits that were projected to occur in five of the next six years.
Despite the fiscal challenges faced by the City, Eugene has to date maintained an ~AA" bond rating from
Moody's Investor's Service. That rating is a positive reflection of the management and performance
history of the City. It is supported by the fact that a large percentage of the City's citizens rate City
services positively, and demonstrates that the City is attempting to strategically address the fiscal and
service issues facing the community in this decade.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 1
I. Executive Summary
To assist lawmakers in understanding the broad array of issue areas which can directly affect the City of
Eugene, this legislative policy overview provides an issue-by-issue resource. In 2005, the City of Eugene
has highlighted three broad themes in evaluating legislation:
Ensuring REVENUE for Needed Services
The City of Eugene urges the State Legislature to responsibly address state revenue shortfalls to
fund K-12 public education and critical state services and to preserve revenue sharing with
cities and counties.
The City of Eugene strongly supports the ongoing work of transportation funding packages that
establish local system maintenance, preservation and operation as a priority and the City
strongly opposes any attempt to limit local option street funding alternatives including local fuel
taxes and transportation system maintenance fees.
The City of Eugene strongly supports equitable distribution of a reauthorized 9-1-1 telephone
excise tax. This important user fee provides revenue for emergency call taking for 39 police, fire
and emergency medical services in Central Lane County.
The City opposes attempts to exempt "intangibles"from taxes or other reductions to the fixed
property tax revenues which the City relies upon under Measure 5.
Public rights-of-way are a valuable public asset. The City strongly supports protection of local
governments' authority to manage these public assets in behalf of their taxpayers and receive
adequate compensation for their use.
The City supports efforts to uphold PEPS reforms and mitigate volatile rate increases to public
employers, in a fashion that upholds a fair and adequate retirement for public employees.
Preserving HOME RULE and Local Flexibility
The City will strongly oppose attempts to repeal smoking bans, such as that adopted by the
Eugene City Council in November, 2000.
The City will oppose attempts to repeal Eugene's Toxics Right-to-Know program and oppose
toxic statutes unfair to small businesses.
The City strongly supports protecting the home rule authority of local government to charge
franchise fees for use of its rights-of-way used by telecommunication companies.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 2
The City supports after school youth programs and identification of long-term funding for these
programs.
Preserving LIVABILITY in Transportation and the Environment
The City supports greater State Highway Trust Fund funding for local street and road
maintenance and repair, and seeks additional flexibility to use funds for nodal development,
pedestrian and bicycle access.
The City opposes any preemption or limitation on local revenue options, including local fuel
taxes and transportation system maintenance fees that may be used to fund the City's
transportation system.
The City supports continued funding for passenger rail, as well as bus connections to eastern
and southern Oregon. Eugene's recently renovated historic depot is the southern terminus of the
Northwest Rail Corridor.
The City supports strategies that help urban communities respond proactively to salmon
protection, and respond to the listing by the National Marine Fisheries Service.
The City supports strategies that help local communities respond to a changing economic
climate, and funding strategies to preserve community livability and economic health.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 3
II. Home Rule and The Region
A. EUGENE, A CHARTER CITY
The City urges the Legislature to respect the rights of local governments to exercise local control
over local responsibilities provided by the Oregon Constitution. This includes protecting the
rights of city residents to determine the contents of city charters and protecting the rights of local
governing bodies to enact ordinances and procedures relating to all aspects of local government,
including municipal adjudication of ordinance violations.
A key factor that affects the power of the City to exercise local control over local responsibilities
is the ability to rely on stable and adequate funding for desired local programs and services. The
City urges the Legislature to consider the impact of state-level policy decisions on local
government revenue sources. The City will support State programs designed to enhance the
ability of local governments to fund services that the citizens desire or programs to assist local
governments in weathering economic downturns.
In the past, the Oregon Legislature has attempted to preempt Eugene's home rule authority
regarding two issues exclusively specific to Eugene--the voter-approved charter amendment
establishing the Toxics Right-to-Know program and the City's proposed construction of a bike
path along the Willamette River.
Recommendations:
1. Oppose any State action to reduce local revenues or to restrict the ability of local
governments to raise additional revenues.
2. Oppose intervention in local decisions which are clearly the authority of the City
under its constitutional home rule authority.
B. REGIONAL PARTNERSHIPS: EUGENE'S INTERGOVERNMENTAL PARTNERS
The City of Eugene believes that public services and public programs are delivered in partnership
with all levels of government. This partnership is based on cooperation and communication
among all local governments, whether individually or through councils of governments, as well
as with the State and Federal governments. To that end, the City maintains a staff presence in
Salem during legislative sessions and also retains assistance in Washington, D.C.
Our metropolitan area has a long tradition of inter-jurisdictional cooperation on service delivery.
There are hundreds of intergovernmental agreements that control cooperative provision of
services including ambulance, fire protection, emergency call-taking and dispatch, storm and
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 4
sanitary sewers, street repair, solid waste disposal, public safety records information systems,
planning, affordable housing, business recruitment, human services, cable television, mainframe
computer, geographic data systems, air quality regulation and transportation.
1. UNIVERSITY OF OREGON
The University of Oregon and the City of Eugene are partners in many efforts. The UO
is Lane County's largest employer, investing millions of dollars each year into our local
economy. The City of Eugene will support the UO in its efforts to obtain stable, adequate
funding to support affordable and accessible public higher education for the citizens of
Oregon.
The University of Oregon has served Oregonians for more than 120 years. It is a
comprehensive teaching and research university that serves its students and the people of
Oregon, the nation and the world through the creation and transfer of knowledge in the
liberal arts, the natural and social sciences and the professions. The UO is committed to
transforming lives through knowledge. UO teaching and research affects people in all
walks of life, and UO business internship programs have provided help to 702 Oregon
businesses in 59 cities throughout the state.
Enrollment at the UO was 16,725 full-time students in fall 1990, dipped in the early
1990's, and was back up to 17,843 in fall 2000. State funding support for the UO during
the same period went from $63.3 million to $49.3 million, a cut of 22 percent -- 40
percent factoring in inflation. Funding actually dropped below $45 million for two years,
making the negative impact more severe. As a consequence, tuition has increased and
access has been restricted for many Oregon citizens.
2. EUGENE WATER & ELECTRIC BOARD
The City's partner in providing municipal services is the Eugene Water & Electric Board
(EWEB), which historically provides electric, water and steam services to residents and
businesses in Eugene. EWEB recently received authorization to provide
telecommunications services as the result of an amendment to the City Charter approved
by Eugene voters in May 2000. Providing safe drinking water and reliable electric and
steam services at low cost to customers has been the trademark of the utility and remains
a high priority of the City and EWEB.
3. LEAGUE OF OREGON CITIES
The City of Eugene is a member of the League of Oregon Cities. City staff works
cooperatively with League staff during the legislative session. The City is generally
supportive of the Oregon Municipal Policy and the League's legislative policies and
positions.
4. CITY OF SPRINGFIELD AND LANE COUNTY
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 5
The City of Springfield, with approximately 52,000 residents, is Lane County's second
largest city and the eighth largest city in Oregon. Separated only by the Willamette
River, the City works cooperatively with and supports its sister city. The City of Eugene
also supports our partners in county government.
5. LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT
The City of Eugene works in partnership with Lane Transit District (LTD) to support a
complete transportation system, including meeting the transportation needs of people
who cannot drive their own vehicles. The City is committed to achieving the regional
goal of reducing vehicle miles traveled in the Eugene-Springfield area by supporting a
transit alternative to a single occupancy vehicle.
The City of Eugene supports LTD and its efforts to increase transit funding. The City
supports increased funding for transportation services to the elderly and disabled who can
not use a fixed route transit system.
6. 4J AND BETHEL SCHOOL DISTRICTS
The City has a policy of establishing partnerships with other jurisdictions to provide
school-related services and other community youth services. The Council has
specifically broadened its partnership with local school districts in response to the decline
of state school funding and the constraints on school revenue as a result from Measures 5
and 50. In November 2002, voters in the City of Eugene approved a four year local
option levy that would provide $24.5 million to District 4J and $4.6 million to Bethel for
such services as music, physical education, school nurses, counselors and librarians, and
student activities and athletics.
Strong schools are necessary for a strong community. The City strongly supports actions
to address critical school funding needs.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 6
iii. Financing State and Local Government
A. TAX POLICY
The adoption and subsequent implementation of Ballot Measure 50 has substantially changed
cities' approach to certain financial issues. With control of property taxes slipping further from
local governments, it is imperative for cities to retain and expand both the revenue-raising
authority and the revenue sources that they presently have. State tax policy has direct and
indirect effects on the financial welfare of Oregon's cities.
1. RAINY-DAY FUND
Oregon is one of only five states in the
U.S. without an adequately funded
General Precepts ;;rainy-day fund" to provide revenue
stability in the event of economic
downturn. The State's primary general-
· The State should not take action that (1) reduces revenue, fund revenue source is the income tax,
(2) increases costs to cities, or (3) preempts local authority which fluctuates with the economy.
to raise revenue. If the State takes any of these actions, These income tax revenues were positive
cities should be reimbursed for lost revenues or increased during the years of a strong economy in
costs, most of Oregon, but as of late proven
inadequate to support continuing levels
· Decisions about local services should continue to be of state services while the economy is in
made at the local level, a slow period.
· Support actions to sustain the stability and adequacy of
local revenue sources through positive and negative While stability of the state revenue
economic cycles, system does not have a dollar-for-dollar
impact on cities, in the current economic
· Support actions to maintain or improve the stability of downturn it is possible that state
State revenue sources, programs of importance to cities could
faker. Cities as well as other local
· The State should help cities to keep pace with the costs governments will likely suffer reductions
of growth, particularly infrastructure needs associated in state shared revenue as well as
with growth, increased demands for services due to
reductions in state programs.
· Support the use of System Development Charges (SDCs)
to fund capital improvements for police, fire, schools and
other local government services affected by new An adequate "rainy-day fund" has been
development, identified as a critical way for the State to
offset sudden reduction in revenues. It
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 7
would not provide complete revenue replacement to the state during economic difficulties, but would
provide some cushion for existing general fund programs if funding were to drop precipitously.
State-shared revenues could also be protected during an economic downturn if such a fund was in
place. The State's current financial difficulties would clearly have been lessened if, in more
prosperous times, the legislature had set aside surplus revenues in such a fund.
Recommendation:
1. Support the adequate Local Government Revenue
funding of a state ~rainy-
day fund" to provide
revenue stability in the · Support the adequate funding of a state ~Rainy
event of economic Day Fund" to provide revenue stability in the
downturn. However, in event of economic downturn. However, in
stabilizing state revenue, the State should avoid
stabilizing state revenue,
the State should avoid destabilizing local revenue.
destabilizing local
revenue. ·Any new exemptions, deferrals or forgiveness
of property taxes should be granted by local
governments rather than through Legislative
2. STATE TAX STRUCTURE action because of the direct impact that such
exemptions have on local government revenue.
Proposals to restructure or change
the State's tax system must allow ·If the State grants an exemption that results in a
local governments to finance the revenue loss to local governments, they should be
level of services demanded by reimbursed for the revenue loss.
their citizens. Cities must
maintain local flexibility to initiate ·The Legislature should revisit all property tax
revenue sources with local voter exemptions in light of the new revenue
approval, and to retain local environment for local government.
apportionment of revenue from
State gas, liquor, beer and wine ·Oppose any exemption from taxation for the
taxes, and other revenues, intangible personal property of centrally assessed
companies. If such an exemption is granted, the
Recommendation: state should reimburse cities for lost revenue.
1. Oppose any efforts to
erode local flexibility in
initiating revenue sources.
3. LOCAL AUTHORITY
Local governments and the State are partners in serving the needs of Oregon's citizens.
Local and state governments recognize the distinct role each plays, and that certain
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 8
services are best provided at the state level, while other services must be responsive to the
unique needs of each community.
This partnership becomes dysfunctional when the Legislature preempts certain revenue-
raising authority enjoyed by local government. This occurred in 1997 when local
governments were prohibited from implementing a local real estate transfer tax and in
1995 when the Legislature preempted Eugene's ability to collect a voter- passed video
poker tax. In both cases, the impact was to divest local government of one more tool -- a
necessary tool given property tax limitations -- to meet the costs of services demanded
by residents. It remains crucial for city residents, through their officials, to be able to
determine the types and levels of services needed.
The City of Eugene will oppose
legislation that restricts cities' ability to Local Government Funding
diversify their income base. With the
passage of Measure 50 in 1997 and
Measure 5 in 1990, our options for .Any local government authority to raise
funding services needed and/or desired revenue should not be preempted by the
by our citizens are constrained. Cities' Legislature.
authority to impose local option sales,
use, business, income and premium .Terminate State preemption of local taxes.
taxes must be maintained, as well as
their ability to impose vehicle, license .Oppose any effort to restrict cities' ability
and regulatory fees, fines and penalties, to diversify their income base.
Recommendations:
1. Oppose any efforts by the
Legislature to preempt local government authority to raise revenue.
2. Support termination of state preemption of local taxes.
3. Oppose any effort to restrict cities' ability to diversify their income base.
B. PROPERTY TAXES
1. EXEMPTIONS
In Oregon, a total of 107 different types of property tax exemptions resulted in more than
$19 billion in tax revenue foregone in the 2004-2005 biennium. As outlined in the
Oregon Department of Revenue's ;;2004-2005 Tax Expenditure Report," many of these
exemptions date back to the State's territorial days. Most, then, were intended to further a
public policy goal.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 9
Property Taxes
Before the passage of Ballot Measure
50 and the resulting introduction of a
rate-based tax system, there was little .Oppose any modifications or ~corrections"
competition between the public-policy to Measure 50 that reduce revenue to cities
goals associated with exemptions and without full reimbursement from the State.
the public-service activities carried
out under a local government's .Oppose any modification to urban renewal
budget. Even if a property was that affects maximum revenue collection
exempted from taxation, the city's authority granted to urban renewal agencies
under Measure 50 that would reduce urban
levy remained intact, and the revenue
was replaced by shifting the renewal revenues, cause compression where
obligation to the remaining taxable compression does not exist under current
properties, law, or that requires any retroactive
reimbursement of tax revenue already
This is no longer the case. Now, collected.
property tax exemptions reduce
revenue to cities. If the amount of
assessed value is reduced because a
property is exempted, then the amount
of tax revenue collected is reduced. Without another form of revenue to replace the
property tax loss, the result is fewer city services or reduced service levels. In fact, state-
granted property tax exemptions are simply state expenditures of scarce local government
revenue without consideration of the local government's priorities or needs.
The realities of the new property tax environment faced by local government raise serious
concerns about a) granting exemptions or other property tax reductions; and b)
exemptions of intangible property.
a. Granting Exemptions or Other Property Tax Reductions
There is a concern that the State can grant property tax exemptions without
regard to the impact such exemptions will have on local property-tax-dependent
jurisdictions. It is recognized, however, that regardless of the revenue impact,
there may be occasions when property tax exemptions or deferrals are the best
method of serving a city's long-term interests. In those cases, the decision to
grant an exemption should be made at the local level, rather than by the State.
If, however, the State grants property tax exemptions or other property tax
reductions without the approval of the taxing jurisdiction, the State should
reimburse cities for the resulting revenue loss.
The Tax Expenditure Report highlights a number of property tax exemptions that
may no longer serve their public policy objective. Local governments would be
well served by a thorough review of all of these expenditures.
Recommendations:
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 10
1. Oppose any granting of new exemptions, deferrals or forgiveness of
property taxes by the Legislature.
2. Support reimbursement of revenue loss if the state grants an exemption
that results in a revenue loss to cities.
3. Support the Legislature revisiting all property tax exemptions granted in
the past in light of the new revenue impact on local government.
b. Exemption of Intangible Property
The coalition of centrally assessed businesses, including telecommunications
companies, power utilities, railroads and airlines, attempted to exempt intangible
personal property from property taxation in the 1997, 1999 and 2001 legislative
sessions. Despite strong opposition by local government, industry successfully
passed HB 2050 in 1999, which was vetoed by the Governor. A similar bill, HB
2062, was also vetoed by the Governor following the 1997 session. A veto threat
in 2001 kept the same proposal bottled up in committee in 2001.
Any exemption of intangible personal property will reduce local government
revenue. A study completed in 1998 by a Department of Revenue work group
showed that more than $2 billion in assessed value, some $30 million in tax
dollars, could potentially be removed from the tax rolls. Exempting intangible
property will substantially reduce local revenue and will foster perpetual tax
appeals and litigation, an approach which appears not to be backed by economic
logic. These issues could easily return in 2005.
Recommendation:
1. Oppose the granting of any exemption from taxation for the intangible
personal property of centrally assessed companies. If such an exemption
is granted, the State should reimburse cities for lost revenue.
2. URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICTS AND THE SHILO 1NN DECISION
As a result of Measure 50, the City undertook a full review of its urban renewal programs
during the spring of 1998. For the Downtown District, the City determined that it would
grandfather the district and redirect all revenues toward an important public project in the
downtown area (construction of a new library). With the new library complete, the City
Council amended the Downtown District plan in 2004 to allow projects besides the
library. Also, the City recently enlarged and renewed the Riverfront urban renewal
district to stimulate development in the vicinity of the soon-to-be constructed Federal
Courthouse. Any action by the Legislature to reduce urban renewal revenues, or that
would result in compression where compression does not exist under current law, would
result in a reduced ability by the City to fund highly desired projects.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 11
On December 20, 2001, the Oregon Supreme Court ruled on a tax appeal filed by Shilo
Inns against Multnomah County, the City of Portland, the Portland Development
Commission, and State Department of Revenue. The court decided that all urban renewal
division of tax revenues, including those revenues generated by school levies and GO
bond levies, are subject to the Measure 5 limit of $10 per thousand of real market value
for general government taxes. This increases the possibility that cities will experience tax
compression resulting in loss of revenue.
The City opposes any proposed legislation that would result in a further potential loss of
revenue to local taxing jurisdictions, unless the State fully reimburses the local
government.
Recommendations:
1. Oppose any legislation that reduces revenue to cities without full reimbursement
from the State.
2. Oppose any legislation regarding urban renewal that affects maximum revenue
collection authority granted to urban renewal agencies under Measure 50 that
would cause compression where compression does not exist under current law, or
that requires any retroactive reimbursement of tax revenue already collected.
4. ASSESSMENT AND TAXATION APPEALS, FUNDING AND STANDARDS
Although the assessment and taxation (A&T) function is carried out at the county level,
the results are important to cities, particularly in a post-Measure 50 environment. Cities
have always relied on county tax collections for city property taxes; now they must rely
on the completeness and accuracy of the assessment process to ensure that they receive
the full amount of property taxes due. If, for example, the county assessor does not add
new properties to the rolls, does not adjust assessments for major improvements or if the
market value of properties are not kept up-to-date, additional revenue loss could occur.
The counties have taken the
position that they need help Assessment and Taxation Funding
with funding of the A&T
function. Assessors say that
declining county revenues .Support statewide standards for assessment and
have resulted in fewer staff, taxation services to ensure that assessment records
particularly appraisers, are correct and up-to-date, and thus can be used to
They have sought a stable provide accurate calculations of property tax
funding source for A&T revenue.
activities, and in particular,
have proposed that cities, · Support stable and dedicated sources of statewide
schools and special districts funding for assessment and taxation activities.
· Oppose a shift to the cities for funding of county
assessment and taxation activities unless an
additional source of revenue is identified.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session
· Support a requirement that cities be notified of
appeals of non-residential assessed value.
share in the cost of property tax administration.
In addition, appeals of assessed property value may result in loss of taxable value within
the city and subsequent loss of tax revenue. This is of particular concern for the City of
Eugene and other cities which have a substantial portion of their taxable valuation
provided by high-technology facilities which may be subject to extreme swings in
assessed value. Unexpected reductions of assessed values in such cases can have
damaging effect on local services. In order to anticipate changes in taxable valuation,
cities should be notified of appeals of assessed value for non-residential property.
Recommendations:
1. Support statewide standards for assessment and taxation services to ensure that
assessment records are correct and up-to-date, and thus can be used to provide
accurate calculations of property tax revenue.
2. Support stable and dedicated sources of statewide funding for assessment and
taxation activities.
3. Oppose any shift to cities for funding of county assessment and taxation activities
unless an additional source of revenue is identified.
4. Support a requirement that cities be notified of appeals of assessed value for non-
residential property. Cities should be given a formal opportunity to comment on
the record.
C. OTHERLOCALBUDGETCONCERNS
1. STATE-SHARED REVENUE
The provision of police, fire, planning, zoning and other services make the City eligible
to receive these funds from the State. The City receives approximately $2.5 million each
fiscal year in state shared revenue. This money is placed in the City's General Fund and
is used to provide essential services, such as police and fire.
Recommendation:
1. Support any effort to increase the amount of state shared revenues sent to local
governments and oppose any action that would reduce current funding levels.
2. ABILITY TO CHARGE FOR STATE-MANDATED SERVICES
Cities should be allowed to recover the full cost of providing a service when performing
mandated activities on behalf of the State. The State may have an interest in setting
guidelines for the fees charged by local government, but cities should be able to request
fee increases when their documented costs exceed State recommendations.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 13
3. DISBURSEMENT OF STATE FINES AND FEES
The burden of uncollected fines/fees should be shared equally between the state and the
city.
Recommendation:
1. The City supports any effort to allow cities and the State to equally divide any
monies collected, so that the burden of uncollected monies is shared by both.
4. ABILITY TO RECOUP COSTS OF STATE COLLECTIONS
When the City acts as a collection agent for the State, it should be allowed to retain its
legitimate overhead costs before forwarding funds to the State.
5. FEE FOR SERVICES TO TAX-EXEMPT ORGANIZATIONS
Cities should be allowed to collect payments in lieu of property taxes for municipal
services provided to tax-exempt organizations.
6. PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES FOR POLICE, FIRE AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL
SERVICES PROVIDED TO STATE-OWNED PROPERTY
The League of Oregon Cities is supporting legislation to require State agencies with
property within a city's boundaries to make Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILOTS)
equivalent to the portion of the city's taxes that goes to support police, fire and
emergency medical services.
As an example, state-owned properties with an estimated assessed value of about $400
million receive police, fire and emergency medical services provided by the City of
Eugene yet are exempt from payment of property taxes to help support those services.
Other Oregon cities, like Salem, with many state-owned properties face similar demands
for services.
Recommendation:
1. The City supports proposals to require State-owned property within city
boundaries to contribute to police, fire and emergency services, using
payment-in-lieu-of-taxes (PILOT) funding mechanisms.
7. PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM (PERS)
The City's employer rates for the Public Employees Retirement System grew at a volatile
and alarming pace in the last 10 years. The 2003 Legislative Session produced HB 2003,
the PERS Reform and Stabilization Act. This reform package was spurred on at the
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 14
longtime urging of local governments, joined later on by the state's business community
and eventually the leadership of Governor Ted Kulongoski. The bill provided corrections
for employee/employer crediting practices of the PERS board found erroneous in a
previous lawsuit, slowed the growth of employee accounts in an effort to reduce the
unfunded liability of PERS and employers. It has been estimated that these reforms
shaved nearly five percent off employer rates in the first valuations adopted by the PERS
board subsequently.
The PERS reforms, if upheld in pending legal challenges, improve the stability of the
PERS system, but stabilization does not fully reverse the spiral of PERS costs brought on
in the last 10 years by incorrect crediting practices and the fiscally unsound structure of
PERS.
Recommendation:
1. Support efforts to uphold PERS reforms and mitigate volatile rate increases to
public employers, in a fashion that upholds a fair and adequate retirement for
public employees.
8. REPEAL OF LOCAL REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX PREEMPTION
Under current law, local governments are prohibited from enacting local real estate
transfer taxes or fees. Real Estate Transfer Taxes have been used successfully in other
states as a way of funding and promoting affordable housing. Additionally, a local real
estate transfer tax would be a logical tool for local governments to use to process claims
and pay just compensation on occasion, in a post-Measure 37 environment.
Recommendation:
1. Support efforts to repeal the prohibition of local real estate transfer taxes.
9. LOCAL FLEXIBILITY FOR ENTERPRISE ZONE CRITERIA
Enterprise Zones have been useful tools available to local governments to attract
employers. However, more flexibility is needed to afford local governments the
opportunities to tailor enterprise zone proposals in a way consistent with important and
specific city goals and values.
Recommendation:
1. Support efforts to allow additional local flexibility to enterprise zone criteria for
qualifying businesses.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 15
D. STATE BUDGET
Measure 50 impaired the City's ability to provide necessary services to its citizens. The City
understands the constraints on the State's General Fund budget, but will oppose cuts in State
agencies that would impose substantial burdens on local government or require them to assume
services cut by the State. In Eugene-Springfield -- where a State institution, the University of
Oregon -- is the largest employer, the community's dependence on the State's financial structure
and viability is profound. Local governments are more intricately associated with the State
taxation and budgeting structure than is commonly realized. For example, the State's inability to
provide adequate funding for human services has had a direct impact on cities, because the
demand for services did not disappear.
1. DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION
The City deeply appreciates the investments the citizens of Oregon have made, through
the Legislature, in facilities and programs at the University of Oregon. These
investments have allowed the University to return numerous dividends to the State
through education, research and public service. The City encourages increased
investment in higher education.
2. DEPARTMENT OF LAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT
The City supports the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD)
budget for the coming biennium, with special emphasis on providing continued funding
of the DLCD-ODOT Transportation and Growth Management Grant Program, full
funding of local planning grants and an increased level of technical assistance and
data/research capacity within the agency.
3. STATE LIBRARY
The City will support legislation to continue funding for the Library Link program. This
frees up Federal funds for local library development and meets the purposes of Federal
law. The City supports State reimbursement of local libraries that lend to other libraries
more materials than they borrow, and continuation of a formula distribution of State aid
to public libraries. The amount allocated is very small ($1.00 per child through age 14),
but assists in providing some library services targeted to children.
4. DIVISION OF STATE LANDS
The City of Eugene participated in the creation of the West Eugene Wetlands Plan which
has become a national model for addressing Federal requirements to preserve wetland
habitats. Programs administered by the Division of State Lands that support the
successful administration of this plan include the Wetland Conservation Planning
Program, technical assistance on wetlands regulatory issues, the wetland mitigation
banking program, coordination with and representation in Federal wetlands policy
processes and wetlands determinations for nonprofit development proposals.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 16
5. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
There are many examples where sufficient funding for Department of Environmental
Quality (DEQ) programs significantly benefits local governments. These include
groundwater protection, toxic use and hazardous waste reduction, solid waste reduction,
spill-response programs, the state superfund program to clean up sites contaminated by
commercial or industrial use of hazardous materials, household hazardous waste
collection, market development for recycled products, other toxic site cleanup and the
sewer safety net. Adequate funding for DEQ to CalTy out its water quality programs is
extremely important for local governments.
6. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
Further reductions in services to at-risk youth, families, the homeless, unemployed
persons and persons with mental disabilities can create situations requiring police
response. Cuts in these areas also would reduce referral opportunities, resulting in
reduced ability to resolve problems outside the criminal justice system.
The City of Eugene is opposed to State service reductions that will remove key survival
services to persons unable to obtain those services elsewhere. Such reductions not only
are a direct threat to the health and welfare of thousands of Oregonians, but also present
the potential for additional burdens to local social service programs.
7. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY SERVICES
The City strongly supports continued State funding for low-income housing programs,
including the Oregon Housing Fund, grants to community development corporations and
funding for emergency housing services. The Emergency Housing Account has
supported programs such as the shelter at Centro LatinoAmericano and the Interfaith
Emergency Shelter Program. The account is mostly depleted and needs to be
replenished.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 17
IV. TRANSPORTATION
A. FUNDING FOR STREETS, HIGHWAYS AND TRANSIT
Funding needs for maintenance and preservation of the City's existing transportation system
remain in a critical stage. Inflation is eroding the buying power of current funding, yet the City's
population and transportation system usage continues to grow. Present funds do not allow the
City of Eugene to preserve its current investment in maintaining existing transportation
infrastructure or address the increased safety, seismic, public transit and growth needs of the
people and businesses in our community. Without additional funding, the existing system will
continue to deteriorate.
Presently there exists an unfunded backlog of capital preservation projects for the City's streets
(street overlays and reconstructions) of over $70 million. This backlog could grow to more than
$232 million by 2011 unless additional capital funding is located. The City is also facing a
shortfall in funding for transportation system operation as well.
In the fall of 2000, the City Council requested that the Citizen Subcommittee of the Eugene
Budget Committee review local funding options to address these needs. The subcommittee
concluded that the most critical capital funding need currently facing the City is in addressing the
backlog of preservation work for both streets and off-street bike paths. In order to meet this goal
of preserving Eugene's transportation infrastructure, adequate funds are also required for
operating and maintaining the system. The subcommittee recommended that the council
implement a transportation funding package consisting of a combination local motor vehicle fuel
tax and transportation utility fee for the purpose of generating an additional $9 million each year
to address the City's transportation funding needs. In 2003, the City of Eugene adopted a $0.03
gas tax. As of November 2004, the Council is considering further proposals consistent with the
findings of the subcommittee to address transportation funding needs.
The 2003 Legislature passed HB 2041, increasing vehicle titling and registration fees to fund a
transportation finance package generating $1.6 billion for state and local bridges repair and
replacement. Intersate-5 Bridges locally, over the McKenzie and Willamette Rivers, are two
highlighted examples of the state's investment in replacing and strengthening bridges essential to
the statewide transportation system for both commercial and general use transit. HB 2041
additionally provides welcomed new revenue to cities that can be applied to maintenance of
existing local transportation systems. Further resources are needed locally though to fully address
local system maintenance.
Recommendation:
1. Support a supplemental iteration of a 2005 OTIA transportation funding package that:
a. bolsters a more equitable share of funding for cities and counties
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 18
b. establishes system maintenance, preservation and operation as a priority for
funding;
c. ensures the greatest possible flexibility for the use of funds to meet local needs;
d. supports the development of funding mechanisms to fund transit, including
access to transit and elderly and disabled funding;
e. encourages transportation cost analysis to consider tolls, congestion pricing and
access management alternatives; and the indexing of transportation revenue to
counteract the effects of inflation and improvements in vehicle mileage;
f. encourages the coordination of land use and transportation planning and
implementation;
g. supports livable communities and innovative strategies, like nodal development,
to improve transportation efficiency; and
h. preserves all local option transportation system funding alternatives including
local option fuel taxes and local transportation system maintenance fees.
1. HIGHWAY TRUST FUND
The City will continue to work for funding that meets the needs of the community.
Expenditures from the Highway Trust Fund should continue to be dedicated to a
comprehensive, integrated system of streets, highways and other transportation systems.
Long-term preservation of the existing public investment in the transportation system
should be the first funding priority for Trust Fund revenues.
Distribution of the Highway Trust Fund should be equitable and should be made
cooperatively with local jurisdictions. Priority funding for projects should be considered
when a local match is available, either in direct project financing or in right-of-way
acquisition, design and engineering.
Recommendations:
1. Support Trust Fund use for:
a. bike path right-of-way acquisition, construction and maintenance;
b. public transit; and
c. alternative transportation modes, including, but not limited to, light rail,
electric trolley and shuttle bus systems.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 19
2. Support distribution of Highway Trust Funds that are equitable and made
cooperatively with local jurisdictions.
3. Support priority funding for projects when a local match is available.
2. OREGON TRANSPORTATION PLAN
The City has strongly supported the Oregon Transportation Plan, ODOT's long-term,
intermodal transportation planning effort. The City urges the Legislature to adopt
measures to incrementally implement the plan's strategies for providing Oregon with a
comprehensive, adequate transportation system.
Recommendations:
1. Support all efforts to implement the Oregon Transportation Plan which are
consistent with adopted City policies.
2. Support the State's partnership, including funding, in efforts to implement
projects on state highways in Eugene that address the goals of the Oregon
Transportation Plan and the City's Growth Management Policies.
B. RAIL SERVICE
The City strongly supports ODOT efforts to promote improved, high-speed, customer-
friendly passenger rail service in Oregon and to obtain the matching federal and state funds
needed to make track improvements to support faster service.
In 1999, the Oregon Legislature approved funds for a second round trip train and for a network of
connecting motorcoaches. In October 2000, Amtrak began a mid-morning departure from
Eugene with an early evening return from Portland to Eugene. Ridership has shown encouraging
gains in the past 5 years. The presence of connecting motorcoaches allows passengers from rural
areas of Oregon to connect to trains in Eugene and Portland.
The City of Eugene supports the high speed rail corridor track improvements which have now
begun to reduce travel times and increase grade crossing safety in urban areas. Over the past five
years, the entire Eugene-Springfield area has mobilized as a region to support the creation of this
high-speed rail corridor. Not only will this bring closer cultural and economic ties throughout the
Pacific Northwest, but will also mean fewer cars on Interstate 5. This reduction in vehicle miles
traveled will in turn postpone the need for expensive road expansions, allow passengers and
freight to move more quickly, and improve air quality.
Public acquisition, restoration and improvement of the Eugene Amtrak terminal, which has
garnered funding from the recent TEA-21 legislation, are also essential components of the overall
passenger rail program.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 20
Recommendations:
1. Support a service budget level of $9+ million in state funding for intercity rail service.
2. Support federal investment in passenger rail and ensure that funds are provided to match
Oregon's investments in track improvements and capital projects undertaken by local
governments.
3. Continue to advocate for additional funds and technologies to reduce interference and
delays between freight trains and passenger trains sharing the same tracks.
4. Support additional planning and construction funds for local communities to improve
safety at grade crossings, upgrade rail beds and acquire rights-of-way to facilitate
"passing" areas for passenger trains and freight trains.
5. Support matching funding for the State for federal rail and station projects in the corridor.
C. COMMUNITY LIVABILITY - OREGON LIVABILITY INITIATIVE
Livable, healthy cities form the foundation of a healthy, vibrant state. State agencies through the
Community Solutions Team and other efforts, including the Governor's "Oregon Livability
Initiative," are focusing attention on community-based solutions and investments. The initiative
seeks to revitalize downtowns and main streets, reduce sprawl and traffic congestion, reward
development of affordable housing and rebuild rural and distressed economies.
Oregon's population has grown by 500,000 since 1990. In the next 20 years, our population is
expected to grow by another 700,000. Governor Kitzhaber's Oregon Livability Initiative
leverages existing revenues to invest in affordable housing, transportation, water, sewer and main
streets. The Community Incentive Fund, created by the Oregon Legislature in 1999 in HB 2088,
provides $5 million in gap financing and technical assistance to local communities and state
agencies working to improve their communities. The City of Eugene is pursuing funding under
these initiatives to revitalize its downtown and to help its community partners with affordable
housing strategies.
Recommendations:
1. Continue to support the Governor's Oregon Livability Initiative, and encourage
additional funding for the Community Incentive Fund.
2. Support the continuation and expansion of the joint Oregon Department of Transportation
and Department of Land Conservation and Development Transportation and Growth
Management program, and urge that its approach to providing funding and assistance to
local communities be incorporated throughout ODOT.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 21
3. Support ODOT pilot projects conducted in conjunction with localgovernments to explore
lower cost remedies to traffic and congestion problems faced by cities and counties
across the state.
4. Support the use of State Highway Funds allocated to ODOT spent "off system" when it
provides a more cost effective and livable alternative to spending funds on the State
system, and support legislation to enhance flexible uses of these dollars.
5. Support changes in ODOT access management policies that enhance community
livability, and oppose attempts to shift costs related to highway capacity to local
government.
D. CONGESTION PRICING
Traffic congestion can affect the economy and the environment. One strategy to reduce
congestion in growing urban areas may be congestion pricing, in order to shift vehicle travel
times through pricing mechanisms.
Recommendations:
1. Support efforts to implement road pricing methods that significantly reduce congestion.
Support local jurisdictions seeking to implement demonstration pricing projects.
E. FEDERAL FUNDS
Led by a concerted bipartisan effort of Oregon's congressional delegation, Oregon has
substantially benefited from the Transportation Equity Act for the 21 Century (TEA-21). TEA-21
maintained provisions that ensure metropolitan areas have direct access to federal funds, and
allows for local accountability in selecting and programming projects.
Recommendation:
1. Work closely with city, county and transit transportation planners to prepare for the
reauthorization of TEA-21, already delayed from 2004.
F. LOCAL FUNDING MECHANISMS
Revenue tools for transportation have been under attack, as have many other local government
funding tools. During past sessions the gas dealers have worked to eliminate local governments'
ability to levy a gas tax. Now, more than ever, there is a need to preserve local revenue raising
capacity in an environment of increasing maintenance costs and backlog.
Recommendation:
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 22
1. Oppose any effort to preempt local governments' ability to raise transportation revenue.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 23
V. PLANNING AND COMMUNITY SERVICES
A. BUILDING CODES
1. COST ACCOUNTABILITY
When legislative action results in code changes that require local administration, there
should be State accountability for the additional financial resources that will be required.
Funding should be identified before enactment to compensate for such items as personnel
training, information and training for the public, and added review.
2. STREAMLINING
Building codes have become a complex burden for jurisdictions administering the codes
and for those in the building industry. Certain actions would simplify the codes for all
parties, making their administration more cost-effective and maintaining the integrity of
their intent to promote public health, welfare and safety. Those simplification actions
include:
a. Eliminate or severely curtail the number of amendments that the State of Oregon
adds to the model codes.
b. Work with the Oregon Building Officials Association (OBOA) and the
International Code Council Inc. (ICC) on code changes rather than
interpretations. ICC, a new organization of model code writing agencies, will be
the writer of Oregon's model codes. Focusing on code interpretations rather than
code changes makes proactive building codes administration more difficult.
3. STATEWIDE UNIFORMITY
Ensuring uniform application of Oregon building codes should be recognized as a priority
and should be funded to levels allowing effective monitoring and enforcement. Building
codes currently are administered and enforced in an inconsistent manner throughout the
state. This has caused an atmosphere of uncertainty and unpredictability and has created
competition between jurisdictions with regard to development activity.
4. USE OF SURCHARGE DOLLARS FOR TRAINING AND EDUCATION
Under current law, a one percent (1%) surcharge is levied on building permit fees to fund
training and education administered by the Building Codes Division (BCD). OBOA
continues to work with BCD to ensure that the funds are used for their intended purpose
and that there is adequate training provided for local building department staff.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 24
Recommendations:
1. Support efforts of OBOA to work with BCD to clearly dedicate revenue from the
current one percent surcharge on building permit fees to fund education and
training programs, particularly for local building department staff.
2. Since the State Building Codes Division has established a new layer of
administration in the Portland-Metro area, monitor to ensure that no
disproportionate amount is directed to the tri-county area.
5. MINIMUM REVIEW TIME LINES
In 1999, mandatory time lines were imposed for simple, new residential construction.
The manner in which the administrative rules were written and the complexity of the
building code system will minimize any measurable results of these regulations. As a
result, there may be additional legislation introduced attempting to force reduced permit
issuance time.
Legislated time lines have not successfully reduced permitting times in Oregon or other
states. Attitudes, plan quality, and work volume cannot be legislated and that is where
much of the challenge exists. The legislation does however, add process, time and
administrative cost which is ultimately counter productive. Eugene has met or exceeded
target processing timelines and anticipates continuing to meet this standard.
6. BUILDING CODES DIVISION OVERSIGHT
In 1995, legislation required an operating plan for each jurisdiction and expanded state
oversight of local programs. Additional rules continue to increase the State's oversight
and the complexity of the operating plan requirements. Legislation may be introduced
which would restrict local programs or affect local authority. There is concern that the
administration and oversight of the codes is becoming encumbered by regulations to
support special interests and trade groups. Additional reforms are needed to reduce the
"bureaucratic" nature of the system.
7. SHELTER FOR HOMELESS PERSONS
Building codes can create barriers to providing temporary shelter to homeless people in
our community. The City supports legislation to give communities increased flexibility
in administering and enforcing building codes to establish local standards that protect the
health and safety of homeless persons while meeting their needs for shelter.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 25
B. HOUSING (Figures in this section are based on 2000 census data.)
Despite the construction of more than
3,000 new rental units since 1990 in
the Eugene- Springfield metropolitan Housing Crisis
area, there remains a growing
housing crisis for those who need .25.7 percent of Eugene's 58,000 households are very
low-cost housing or emergency low-income. When combined with Springfield, over
shelter. The need for emergency 20,000 households have incomes at or below 50% of
shelter is documented in the adopted the area median.
Eugene-Springfield Consolidated
Plan, the United Way's State of .Fewer than 3,500 of the 20,000 eligible households
Caring study and Community receive housing subsidies, due to a shortage of
Solutions Plan, and the one-night resources.
homeless counts conducted every six
months. Despite a variety of shelter .Local counts of homeless people indicate that at
and homeless assistance programs least 1,600 and perhaps as many as 3,500 homeless
(including Family Shelter House, people can be found in Eugene on any given night.
Interfaith Emergency Shelter One third are children.
Program, Station 7 Youth Shelter,
Lindholm Service Station, and New
Roads) and an ordinance that allows
churches, businesses, government entities and residents to invite homeless people to camp on
their property, people are still turned away from overcrowded emergency shelters.
This area's most pressing need remains the creation of new low-cost housing for very-low-income
households. Evidence of this housing crisis includes:
· Out of nearly 37,500 renter households in Eugene and Springfield, 15600 (42%) have
incomes below 50% of median income.
· Over seventy percent of very-low-income families pay more than 30 percent of their
income for housing. Thirty-seven percent pay more than half of their income for housing.
· A majority of very-low-income families are headed by single women. Eighty percent of
these families pay more than 40 percent of their income for housing expenses.
· The Lane County Housing Authority reports a waiting list of more than 6,300 in The
Section 8 program alone. While nearly 3,500 households receive subsidized housing,
approximately 20,000 households in Eugene and Springfield are now financially eligible for
housing if it was available.
The Consolidated Plan lists three top priority activities: a) increasing the rental supply of
permanent affordable housing; b) enhancing shelter support services for homeless households;
and c) increasing the supply of transitional and permanent housing for specialized populations.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 26
The cities of Eugene and Springfield and Lane County address low-income housing needs
through an intergovernmental Housing Policy Board whose primary focus is to develop additional
housing for very-low-income families. The City also supports broadening the eligibility
requirements for housing assistance so that families between 40 and 80 percent of the area's
median income will be able to qualify for some assistance. In Lane County, the median income
for a family of three is $48,900; 80 percent of the median income is $39,100 (low-income); and
50 percent of median is $24,450 (very-low-income).
1. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AND SUPORT PROGRAMS
The Housing Trust Fund, created by statute in 1991, was one of Oregon's more successful
programs to increase the supply of affordable housing. The trust fund supported
programs ranging from the development of affordable housing to home ownership
assistance and an Emergency Housing Account. Oregon Housing & Community
Services (OHCS), along with affordable housing advocates, needs additional funding for
affordable housing development through the trust fund, and for emergency housing and
rental assistance. This would allow the Department to both increase the level of its
current services, as well as make additional investments in social service programs to
support those who cannot afford unsubsidized housing. The City supports the continued
funding of the Housing Trust Fund (HTF). Particular sub-goals include:
a) Support a funding goal of $50 million per biennium
b) Expansion of the Elderly Rental Assistance (ERA) program to include more
low-income households
c) Renew the Oregon Affordable Housing Tax Credit for lenders
2. REMOVAL OF REGULATORY BARRIERS TO LOW-INCOME HOUSING
The City of Eugene supports local efforts to make the siting, financing or development of
low-income and affordable housing easier by streamlining systems, rules, codes and laws
that present regulatory barriers to that housing. The City will support State legislation
that encourages the development of low-income and affordable housing while
considering the interests of cities and their citizens. The City will support repeal of ORS
197.309 which prohibits local jurisdictions from requiring affordable housing as a
condition of development approval ¢~inclusionary zoning"). The city also supports
efforts to prohibit insurance companies from either denying insurance coverage to
housing because it has public financing or increasing its premiums for such coverage.
3. HOUSING IMPACT STATEMENT
The City of Eugene will oppose legislation to impose a requirement that local
governments prepare a housing impact statement for municipal land use ordinances. The
land use laws require that all statewide goals be addressed when developing rules and
ordinances. Requiring impact statements creates unnecessary bureaucratic delay and
gives priority to housing over other land use goals.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 27
Eugene is committed to investigating barriers to affordable housing and to recommending
ways to mitigate or remove City ordinances or policies that add to the cost of housing.
The City has taken steps to remove many of these barriers, including expanding the
supply of vacant land zoned for medium-density housing, expanding the use of
manufactured homes and reducing parking requirements for low-income and senior
housing.
4. EXTEND MUPTE AND TRANSIT SUPPORTED TAX EXEMPTIONS
Extend legislative authorization for the New Multiple Unit Property Tax
Exemption program and the Transit Supportive Residential and Mixed Use tax exemption
program.
More than 25 percent of Eugene's 58,000 households are very low-income. When combined with
Springfield, over 20,000 households have incomes at or below 50 percent of the area median.
C. LAND USE PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT
1. BALLOT MEASURE 37 / JUST COMPENSATION
On November 2, 2004, Measure 37 was passed by the Oregon voters, requiring
governments to "pay owners, or forego enforcement when certain land restrictions reduce
property value."
The City of Eugene has had a legislative policy on just compensation for over a decade.
The City has always supported -- and continues to support -- the constitutional
requirement that property owners who have been deprived of all reasonable economic use
of their property by government action should be compensated. The City has opposed
legislation and ballot measures that would require compensation if a land use decision
deprives a property owner of only some, but not all or nearly all, reasonable economic
use of the property. The City's opposition has been based on the importance of
regulations in implementing comprehensive planning and other policy decisions of the
council and on the innumerable benefits of these regulations in providing certainty and
protection for property owners, developers and neighbors. While some argue that the
most basic land use regulations are "takings," others argue that they are "givings" and
that the emphasis on reduction in value is both one-sided and short-sighted.
The City of Eugene strongly supports that the legislature clarify important elements of
implementing Measure 37 that were not put before the voters.
Recommendation:
1. Authorize minimum requirements for filing M37 claim with governmental entity.
2. Define "accrual.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 28
3. Establish how to value "reduction in value."
4. Judicial Review of other government's action on a claim.
5. Resolve State vs. Local claims.
6. For new regulations, provide Goal 5 type classification process.
7. Establish how to handle new annexations and past annexations.
8. Ensure jurisdiction can waive even after M37 claim filed in court.
9. Ensure government can litigate validity of claim when first filed if beneficial to
do so.
10. Allow fees for local governments to recover actual processing costs.
2. LAND USE APPLICATION REVIEW PROCESS
Bills introduced in previous legislative sessions have attempted to limit local government
authority to process land use applications. One of these bills, which passed, instituted the
"120-day rule"; a bill to prohibit local government use of a hearings official failed.
The 120-day rule, established by legislation in 1993, requires local permit issuers to reach
a "final decision" within 120 days of the time a land use application is submitted and
deemed complete. Failure to meet the deadline allows the applicant to seek a writ of
mandamus from the circuit court, ordering the local government to issue the permit. The
120-day rule applies equally to a two-lot partition and a 200-unit planned unit
development. The planning concerns related to planned unit developments are far greater
than those applied to partitions, yet the same deadline applies to both.
Prior to 2003, an applicant could request a time extension for an application decision in
order to provide time for submission of pertinent information. The City of Eugene
supported SB 94 in the 2003 Session, which modified the criteria for determining when
an application to a city is deemed complete for the purposes of time limit for action by
the city. The bill also limits the total of all extensions to 245 days.
Two other proposals have been supported by the City of Eugene that were also intended
to address problems with current statutory requirements for land use application
processing. One proposal would have eliminated the requirement that comprehensive
plan provisions, including refinement plan policies, be added to the zoning code in order
to be used in evaluating limited land use decisions. Reprinting the full text of the plan
policies added 41 pages of text to the Land Use Code. Another proposal would have
provided some discretion in meeting the requirements of ORS 197.307 for "clear and
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 29
objective standards" for needed housing. None of these proposals have moved forward in
the 2001 or 2003 Legislative Sessions.
Recommendation:
1. Support legislative changes which clarify the requirements for determining a land
use application to be complete and increase the time line for city processing of
land use applications, especially when the applicant's proposal is changed
substantially during the review process.
2. Support legislative changes which would allow adopted plan policies to be
incorporated by reference in the Land Use Code rather than reprinted in the code
and which would allow some discretion in standards for ;;needed housing."
3. Oppose legislation that would prohibit or restrict the ability of local governments
to delegate land use decision-making authority to a hearings official or planning
commission.
3. 20-YEAR LAND SUPPLY
HB 2709, which passed in the 1995 Legislative Session and is codified as ORS 197.296,
requires cities to include enough residential land within their urban growth boundaries
(UGBs) to meet residential needs for the next 20 years. Intended to reduce land prices by
increasing the amount of land available for housing, the bill required that projections of
the 20-year need for residential land be based on the development that occurred since the
last periodic review or during the last five years, whichever is greater. This ignores
changes in policy and land use code provisions to facilitate more compact development.
The City supports the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC)
requirement for a 20-year buildable lands inventory, but continues to oppose the
requirement that the housing needs analysis be based only on actual past development.
Since the passage of liB 2709, commercial realtors have argued for comparable
legislation for commercial and industrial land. HB 3557, which passed in the 2001
Legislative Session, called for establishment of a working group to address issues related
to the need for commercial and industrial land.
Recommendation:
1. Support legislation to amend ORS 197.296 to allow policy and land use code
amendments to be considered in the determination of housing capacity and
need.
2. Oppose legislation that would establish a comparable requirement that the
determination of commercial and industrial capacity and need must be based
only on actual past development.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 30
4. URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY "SWAPS"
Requirements for establishment and change of urban growth boundaries are detailed in
Statewide Planning Goal 14, Urbanization, Statewide Planning Goal 2, Land Use
Planning, and ORS 197.298, Priority of land to be included within urban growth
boundary. These requirements assume that the change to the UGB is an expansion; there
is nothing in the goals or the statutes that would streamline the process for an urban
growth boundary change based on a "no-net-gain swap," brings some land into the urban
growth boundary while removing other land from the boundary. The Goal 14 Working
Group, convened by DLCD in 1999, expressed interest in streamlining the process for a
UGB swap, but the work of this group was put on hold following the results of the
election on Ballot Measure 7. A streamlined process for UGB "swaps" would allow a
city to fine-tune its urban growth boundary to reflect new information and opportunities
since the urban growth boundary was established.
Recommendation:
1. Support legislation that would allow modification of requirements and a
streamlined process for urban growth boundary amendments that would result
in a "no-net-gain swap."
5. ANNEXATION
The Eugene-Springfield Metro Plan establishes an urban growth boundary and envisions
that all land within the urban growth boundary ultimately will be annexed to a city and
provided with the required urban services. Annexations to Eugene are processed by the
Lane County Boundary Commission. In past legislative sessions, legislation has been
introduced to eliminate the Lane County boundary commissions and to eliminate or
weaken existing methods of annexation.
State law currently requires that withdrawals of annexed territory from special service
districts be processed by a city separately from Boundary Commission action on the
annexation request, necessitating a separate city hearing and action following Boundary
Commission approval of an annexation.
Recommendations:
1. Oppose legislation that eliminates the Lane County Boundary Commission or
eliminates or weakens existing methods of annexation.
2. Support legislation to allow withdrawal of territory from special service districts
to be processed by the Boundary Commission concurrent with its action on
annexation requests.
6. OREGON LAND USE PLANNING PROGRAM AND LAND CONSERVATION AND
DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 31
Senate Bill 100, enacted in 1973, established a statewide land use planning program to
address concerns that rapid and uncoordinated development was threatening Oregon's
livability. It required cities and counties to adopt and maintain comprehensive plans,
focusing urban development within UGBs and limiting rural development outside UGBs
to preserve Oregon's farm and forest land. During the 1993 Legislative Session, the
legislature adopted HB 3661, which revised and weakened the requirements for
development on rural lands. Two of the bills vetoed by Governor Kitzhaber following
the 1999 Legislative Session would have further expanded the uses allowed in rural areas
and one of the bills vetoed by the Governor following the 2001 Legislative Session would
have required LCDC to review its rules on developments in rural residential areas near
cities. The City will continue to oppose proposals for intensification of use outside in
rural areas near city urban growth boundaries.
Bills also have been introduced over the past decade to restructure the LCDC. Proposed
changes included the shift from an appointed to an elected commission and the
establishment of several regional commissions to replace the existing single commission.
The number of commissioners was increased from seven to eight by the 1993 Legislature,
but the Commission structure was not changed.
Recommendation:
1. Oppose legislation that would weaken the statewide land use planning program
or the role or structure of the Land Conservation and Development Commission.
7. PREEMPTIVE ZONING AND SUPERSITING
During the past several legislative sessions, legislation has been introduced that would
preempt local zoning regulations and substitute statewide zoning regulation, or that
would establish State supersiting authority. While it is the responsibility of the
Legislature to identify land use issues of statewide concern, local governments should
have the flexibility to implement State land use policy within the context of their
acknowledged comprehensive plans. State agency plans and decisions should be
consistent with local acknowledged comprehensive plans and local planning processes.
Recommendation:
1. Oppose legislation that establishes statutory preemptive zoning or State
supersiting authority.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 32
VI. PUBLIC SAFETY
A. COURT
Municipal Court has a focus on collection of fines as a means of ensuring that sanctions are
enforced. The court is also concerned with ensuring other sanctions are available such as work
crews, community service and jail.
1. FUNDING FOR COUNTY JAIL SPACE AND PROGRAMS
The City will oppose efforts to reduce local funding for jail facilities. The City supports
increases for jail programs, including road and work crews. The Municipal Court
depends on the availability of jail space for municipal offenders who are given mandatory
jail sentences and uses road and work crews for non-violent offenders in an effort to give
these offenders an opportunity to make a contribution to their community.
2. LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND COMMUNITY STANDARDS
Local government should have the right to set community standards and be able to
maintain those standards through public safety and justice activities. While recognizing
the limited jurisdiction of municipal courts, the City will oppose legislation which would
mandate the types of cases which may or may not be heard in municipal courts.
Municipal courts provide a speedy and cost effective way to deal with lesser violations of
the law, many of which would not be heard in Circuit Court.
3. COURT OF RECORD
Municipal courts are currently prohibited from recording court proceedings, which allows
defendants a second trial by appealing to Circuit Court. Allowing municipal courts to be
courts of record would speed up the justice process and reduce costs, and promote public
trust in decisions rendered in municipal courts.
4. UNPAID FEES, FINES AND PARKING CITATIONS
The City supports legislation to allow recovery of unpaid fees and fines by withholding
vehicle registration renewals, by attaching income tax refunds through the State
Department of Revenue or through the use of a collection agency. The City supports
legislation to allow local authority in application of gamishments as a collections tool.
The City also supports legislation to balance the burden of uncollected fines and fees
between the City and the State.
5. INCREASES IN BAlL SCHEDULE, FINES AND FEES
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 33
The City will oppose unilateral increases in fines or assessments as means of increased
support to State-sponsored programs or activities. The City will support legislation to
allow flexibility in the amount of assessments imposed, as well as legislation to
reimburse the City for the cost of collecting the mandated State and County assessments.
B. EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS AND 9-1-1 SERVICES
1. 9-1-1 TELEPHONE EXCISE TAX - ADEQUACY AND DISTRIBUTION
Revenue from the 9-1-1 telephone excise tax needs to be closely monitored to ensure that
it adequately covers the full local cost of providing this mandated service. Where this is
not the case, the City of Eugene supports legislation to increase revenue to local
jurisdictions to operate the system and/or to reevaluate the 1% guaranteed distribution
floor to counties that is inequitable.
2. RESTORATION AND PROTECTION OF 9-1-1 TAX REVENUES
In the 3rd Special Session of 2002, $7 million was diverted from the PSAP Consolidation
Incentive Fund and $2 million from the Enhanced 9-1-1 Sub-Account (to pay for Phase II
wireless location implementation) to credit the State's General Fund. Aside from being a
poor precedent of diverting 9-1-1 funds from the intended purpose for which they were
collected from the public, this diversion set back the implementation of life-saving
Enhanced 9-1-1 technology which would enable 9-1-1 operators to locate wireless callers
and dispatch necessary information to emergency responders.
3. FLEXIBILITY FOR PSAP ALIGNMENT
The City recognizes that some consolidation of Public Safety Answering Points (PSAPs)
should occur statewide. However, a one-size-fits-all approach of consolidating to a
single PSAP per county could prove costly and reduce levels of service in Lane County
and other regions. Lane County includes 4 PSAPs geographically spread out across the
Oregon Coast, Willamette Valley, and Cascades, providing high standards of emergency
response that a single PSAP alignment would be hard pressed to meet. Additionally,
consolidation to a single PSAP might necessitate costs for new facilities.
Recommendation:
1. The City supports legislation authorizing merit based flexibility for multiple
PSAP configuration in a county, using levels of services and realized cost
savings as criteria.
4. TRAINING 9-1-1 CALL TAKERS
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 34
The City of Eugene provides training and meets State standards for certification of 9-1-1
call takers. The City supports compensation from the State for providing this mandated
service.
5. NON-EMERGENCY NUMBER
The City opposes any legislation to establish a single statewide non-emergency number.
Instead, the City supports local control in listing non-emergency police agency numbers
in the front section of the telephone book.
C. POLICE AND ENFORCEMENT
1. LAW ENFORCEMENT MANDATES
Crime-related laws should be designed to limit administrative burdens. The City opposes
State requirements for additional paperwork, information collection and forms. Local
law enforcement resources should continue to be directed at crime suppression and
prevention.
The City opposes any attempt to impose user fees on agencies and local governments
using the state-run Law Enforcement Data System (LEDS).
2. REIMBURSEMENT FOR NEGLIGENT OR RECKLESS BEHAVIOR
In some instances, there are high public costs for public safety responses to incidents
caused by the negligence or reckless behavior of individuals. For example, a citizen may
swim or boat in a river, find himself stranded, and require an expensive rescue operation
with costs that are not recouped by the City. A drunk driver can cause a major accident
and down utility lines which require extensive and uncompensated public expense. The
City supports legislation that allows responding entities to recoup their costs for handling
these sorts of negligent and reckless events.
3. CRIMINAL HISTORY CHECKS FOR CHILD-CARE WORKERS
The City supports legislation to allow law enforcement agencies to conduct nationwide
criminal history checks on prospective child-care workers. The City of Eugene provides
a before and after school program called Kid City Adventures. Currently, the State
Children's Services Division provides Oregon criminal history checks. The City supports
expanding its ability to protect children in its care by obtaining nationwide criminal
history checks on prospective employees.
4. STREAMLINE ABATEMENT PROCESS
The City supports changes to streamline the process of abatement proceedings on drug
houses and other properties on which illegal activities are occurring. Loopholes in the
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 35
current abatement process have led to extended abatement proceedings, taking months,
and in some cases more than a year, to complete. The current loopholes allow violators
to lengthen the process by faking compliance, making perfunctory efforts to clean up a
property and taking advantage of generous deadlines.
5. TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT TOOLS: PHOTO RADAR, PHOTO RED LIGHT
The City supports giving communities the authority to use photo radar and photo red light
technologies as traffic enforcement tools. The City supports efforts to extend both
technologies to cities on a wider basis.
6. FIREARMS REGULATION
The City supports laws which strengthen reasonable requirements for purchase of
handguns. The City will work to protect its regulatory authority with respect to firearms.
Infringement on these powers reduces the City's ability to protect its citizens from
criminal acts involving firearms and ignores the diversity among communities within this
state.
7. LOCAL ABILITY TO DEAL WITH UNSUPERVISED YOUTH
The City supports local ability to detain runaways and other juveniles who are beyond
parental control and facilitate their referral to appropriate agencies. The City supports
strengthening the ability of the juvenile system to intervene and provide services to these
juveniles. Some services currently are not available to them because they have not
committed "criminal" offenses. This reduces the ability of agencies to provide services,
and provides no incentive for the juvenile to change his or her behavior.
8. TRAFFIC SAFETY
The City supports passage of laws which are practical in their application and will
enhance the safety of the motoring public.
9. ENFORCEMENT OF IMMIGRATION LAWS AND COLLECTION OF
INFORMATION
The City opposes legislation that would broaden the authority and responsibilities of local
law enforcement to conduct interviews to collect information on certain individuals not
suspected of a crime and/or detect and apprehend persons whose only offense is violation
of federal immigration law. The City supports that no changes be made to ORS 181.575
and 181.850.
10. REGIONAL TRAINING ACADEMY
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 36
The City supports continued authority for Eugene to conduct its own Department of
Public Safety Standards and Training (DPSST) accredited regional police basic training
academy.
11. POLICE SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CHARGES (SDCs)
New Growth places additional demands on city services. The City supports expanding
the existing definition of capital facilities for which SDCs can be imposed to include
police protection, to help offset the costs of new police/public safety facilities.
D. FIRE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
1. FIRE SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGES (SDCs)
The city supports expanding SDCs to include fire and emergency response infrastructure
and capital facilities costs related to new growth.
2. FIREFIGHTER CERTIFICATION
The DPSST may seek to expand its authority to certify firefighters. The City opposes
DPSST certification for firefighters.
3. MUTUAL AID: WILDFIRES
In those instances where the State Fire Marshal assumes command of a wildfire
emergency in the State, the City supports the current mechanisms for responding. The
City opposes mandates requiring that local governments maintain specific fire equipment
or staffing levels to respond to these events or any legislation that mandates response.
4. WILD LAND FIRE: PREVENTION AND RECOVERY
The City currently operates educational programs to reduce the risk of wildfires in the
urban/rural interface zone. The City supports maintaining or enhancing the ability of
municipalities and districts to recover wild land fire response costs from responsible
parties.
6. SKINNY STREETS
The City would oppose legislation that mandates %kinny streets" unless appropriate local
design flexibility is allowed to accommodate fire and emergency vehicles and equipment.
7. TOXICS RIGHT TO KNOW
The City urges the Legislature to eliminate provisions of ORS 453.402 in order to allow
local jurisdictions to impose hazardous substance fees equitably to Eugene employers
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 37
enrolled in the program. Currently, an arbitrary cap spreads an uneven burden to smaller
employers.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 38
VII. YOUTH
A. EDUCATION FUNDING
A quality public education system is a universal benefit to the civic well-being of the entire state,
and is linked to the economic vitality of cities of well-trained and well-educated work forces.
Recommendation:
1. The City supports a bipartisan, adequate and sustainable funding policy for Oregon's
public education system.
B. FUNDING FOR PREVENTION SERVICES FOR YOUTH
One mechanism being considered in Eugene for the ongoing funding of prevention services for
youth is an "admissions" surcharge or local excise tax on tickets for entertainment and sports
events.
Recommendation:
1. Support legislation that strengthens the ability of local governments to assess an
"admissions tax," or suitable alternative for use in funding prevention services.
D. AFTER SCHOOL PILOT PROGRAMS
Reliable data indicates that students are safer at school than away from school and that the
majority of juvenile crime occurs in the afternoon hours immediately after the close of school
when many youth are unsupervised. Juveniles who are engaged in positive activities such as
sports, arts, clubs, and homework, especially when those activities involve contact with caring
adults, are less likely to go astray. There is conclusive evidence that young people in Oregon
who participate in after school programs generally make healthier choices for themselves ( less
tobacco, alcohol, and other drug use), have higher school performance (fewer suspensions,
absences, higher grade point averages) and have lower incidence of juvenile crime or violent
tendencies. Local resources available for after school programs have been severely reduced due
to recent local property tax reductions, but the need has increased.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 39
Recommendation:
1. Support legislation that provides for quality after school and school-break programs,
mentoring, community schools and other coordinated prevention programs for youth,
children and families. Specifically, support funding for a pilot program to provide grants
to smaller Oregon communities to initiate or expand such programs.
E. HOMELESS YOUTH
The number of homeless youth has increased in our community and throughout the State. These
youth are often the victims of adult criminal behavior. It is widely recognized that this is a
growing problem, especially in the cities of Eugene and Portland. Other than affordable housing
proposals, however, there have been no specific proposals to address the homeless youth issue.
Recommendation:
1. Encourage legislative proposals that attempt to resolve the homeless youth issue.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 40
VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
A. POLLUTION, SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLING
1. AIR QUALITY
The City will support legislation to enhance Lane Regional Air Pollution
Authority's ability to adopt and implement Clean Air Act requirements.
2. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
a. Household Hazardous Waste
There is little regulation in Oregon of household hazardous wastes, such as paints
and pesticides. Consumers often improperly dispose of these substances and
other materials which are not classified as hazardous waste (e.g., used motor oil
and antifreeze) by dumping them onto the ground or into storm sewers.
Adopting an advance disposal fee would help provide inexpensive disposal
alternatives, such as recycling and periodic household waste "roundups," that
have been quite successful.
b. Hazardous Wastes from Small Businesses
The City supports legislative or administrative efforts to develop a system under
which small businesses would be able to pool their hazardous wastes for
collection, transport and disposal. These costs can be prohibitive, especially to
businesses that generate only very small quantities. Any such proposal would
have to comply with Federal law requirements imposing liability on the
individual generator of the hazardous waste.
c. Certification of Environmental Laboratories
The City supports a State certification program for environmental laboratories.
3. SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLING
a. Market Development of Recovered Materials
Meeting statewide waste recovery goals under the 1991 Oregon Recycling Act
will require improved markets for recycled materials. The City of Eugene urges
the State to continue addressing material recovery and market development plans
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 41
as contained in the Integrated Resource and Solid Waste Management Plan, with
emphasis on the following items:
Recommendations:
1. The City will oppose mandates that local governments conduct education
programs or other activities unless the mandates are funded.
2. The City supports public agency procurement of recycled materials and
advocates removal of policies and legislation constraining that
procurement.
3. The City supports product stewardship containing ~take back" programs
encouraging products designed for recycling.
4. The City supports unredeemed bottle deposits to be returned from the
manufacturer and earmarked for recovery programs.
5. The City supports continued funding of the Oregon Recycling Markets
Development Corporation's efforts to improve, stabilize and expand
markets for recyclable and compostable materials.
If markets make it economically infeasible for collectors and intermediate
processors to recycle paper, glass, plastic and other materials, the Legislature
should take specific actions, including:
Recommendations:
1. Imposing charges at the point of sale on packaging that is not recyclable
or is not manufactured from recycled materials, and dedicating revenues
from such charges to programs for developing markets for recycled
materials and/or local waste reduction programs.
2. Providing for statewide recognition of retailers and producers who
voluntarily implement and report packaging reduction.
3. Adopting procurement guidelines for State and public agencies that
encourage purchase of construction materials with recycled content.
b. Waste Reduction Goals
Measurement of waste recovery must recognize local efforts that reduce waste
and reuse items.
Recommendations:
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 42
1. The City supports supplementing current methods for measuring
recovery by emphasizing multiple waste reduction measures.
2. The City supports reuse and recycling of construction and demolition
debris. Where possible, State law should count recovered construction
materials toward the waste recovery rate each watershed is required to
achieve.
3. The City supports regular composition studies by the Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ) to better understand waste disposal
patterns within local discard streams and improve targeting of waste
reduction, recycling and composting efforts.
4. The City supports promotion of waste prevention/resource efficiency
through Extended Product Responsibility.
c. Toxic and Hazardous Wastes
Waste reduction efforts must focus on reducing the toxicity of waste, as well as
the amount. The City supports an advance disposal fee (ADF) on the first
possessor of all hazardous materials sold or used in Oregon and/or license fees on
wholesale or retail sellers of such materials, and the reinstatement of the ADF on
automobile tires. Revenues earned would be statutorily dedicated to funding
programs, including waste exchanges, for proper collection and disposal of toxic
wastes.
The City will support a statutory requirement for sharing revenues between the
State and local governments participating in providing household and exempt
small-quantity generator hazardous waste collection services.
The City also supports deposit or exchange programs, managed by wholesalers
and retailers, for household batteries and other toxic consumer goods.
Businesses should not be required to take back more items than they sell, but
should provide a convenient collection service for the toxic items they sell to
their customers.
d. Rate Review
The City opposes Public Utility Commission involvement in evaluating local
solid waste collection rate requests. Independent or collaborative efforts among
organizations such as the League of Oregon Cities, Department of Environmental
Quality, Association of Oregon Counties, Association of Oregon Recyclers and
Oregon Refuse and Recycling Association instead could assist counties and cities
with rate review and provide other technical assistance.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 43
e. Recycling User Fees
The City supports exploration of user fees as one possible option to fund
recycling and resource recovery programs.
f. Responsible Materials Processing
The City encourages the State to provide greater support to businesses and
nonprofit agencies that process materials for reuse and recycling. Further, the
City supports incentives and/or requirements for manufactured products to be
assembled in such a manner that they can be disassembled for reuse and
recycling.
B. WATER AND ENDANGERED SPECIES
1. WATER QUALITY
a. DEQ Permit Fees/Water Quality Program Funding
The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality issues National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and Water Pollution Control Facility
permits. Permit fees include an application fee and an annual permit
maintenance fee.
The City opposes any effort to increase reliance on fees from local government to
support statewide programs, believing that statewide water quality programs
should be funded from the State General Fund. Permit and other fees should be
based only upon the actual cost of issuing and administering the permits for the
different permittees. The distribution of the costs should not result in one class
of permittees subsidizing another class (large vs. small permittees or municipal
vs. industrial permittees). The State should provide a clear accounting of the
basis for any permit fees and of the allocation of fee revenue to permit program
activities. The City also believes more attention and resources should be focused
on the current backlog of expired NPDES permits. The City further encourages
the State to define the responsibility of non-point sources in the funding strategy
for water quality program support.
Local governments are required to establish fair and equitable user charges to
sewerage system customers; a similar level of accountability should be
incorporated into the DEQ's permit fee structure.
b. Storm Water
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 44
The City is committed to addressing storm water pollution. The City has
developed a comprehensive storm water management plan, and has applied for
and received an NPDES permit for municipal storm water discharges. The City
believes that additional requirements for storm water control should only be
implemented following evaluation and documentation of the effectiveness of the
management practices in the existing plan, and of the continuing need for water
quality improvements. The City supports the use of resources to coordinate
municipal urban storm water permitting activities between the regions of the
state, including establishing procedures for storage and analysis of statewide
storm water monitoring data.
The City has established a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the DEQ
to administer portions of the Department's obligations under the industrial storm
water program within the City limits. Included in the MOU is a cost-sharing
formula for the permit fees associated with the program. The City is interested in
exploring additional innovative partnership agreements with the state and local
agencies for the effective implementation of the storm water regulations.
c. Non-Point Sources
National and state water quality monitoring data indicates that non-point sources
contribute most of the remaining pollution to surface waters. The City
contributed to and supports the Willamette River Basin Water Quality Study
which identifies non-point source pollution in the Willamette Basin. The City
believes that non-point sources must be considered and included when water
quality management plans are developed in the Willamette Basin. The City
supports the continued use of State resources to fund comprehensive basin
studies of water quality, such as the Willamette River Basin Water Quality Study,
and will continue to support related efforts such as the McKenzie River
Watershed Council and the Long Tom Watershed Council.
d. Innovative Approaches to Water Quality Management
Significant future progress in solving the State's remaining water quality
problems will require innovative solutions that go beyond the traditional
"command and control" permit approaches. Solutions such as watershed
management, pollution prevention, and pollution trading will require developing
partnerships and incentives to achieve effective improvements to water quality.
Strict liability and regulatory requirements currently do not allow the
implementation of these flexible approaches. The City supports legislative and
regulatory initiatives to facilitate development of new approaches to water
quality management, such as effluent trading and ~green" permits.
e. Water Quality Standards
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 45
The City opposes any efforts to change State water quality standards through the
legislative process. The DEQ has established a comprehensive process for
evaluating current water quality standards and proposing new or changed
standards which involves all stakeholders as well as recognized technical experts.
This process, followed by opportunities for the public to comment, has led to the
Environmental Quality Commission adopting changes to several water quality
standards. Future changes to water quality standards, including beneficial use
designations, should be obtained through a similar collaborative process, and not
achieved through legislative action.
2. POLLUTION SOURCE EQUITY
Since Congressional passage of the Clean Water Act (CWA) in 1972, cities and
industries which discharge effluent from a ;;point source" have been under EPA
jurisdiction. Authority to discharge from a point source (for example, a sewage treatment
plant) requires a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit.
Although this focus on point sources has significantly improved the nation's water
quality, substantial water pollution continues to result from unregulated ~non-point"
sources (i.e., water pollutants with diffuse origins). In its re-authorization of the CWA in
1987, Congress addressed part of this problem by requiring cities and certain industries to
treat storm water run-off through a series of ;;best practices." The 1987 language called
for implementation in two phases based on city population. Phase I called for cities with
a population of 100,000 or more to obtain NPDES Storm water permits. By 1995, all
Phase I communities in Oregon had received their NPDES permit. The EPA is now
moving into Phase II, which requires all cities with a population exceeding 50,000 to
obtain a stormwater permits. The agency has also authorized Oregon's DEQ to extend
the requirement to any city it deems appropriate.
Officials from Oregon cities have acknowledged their responsibility for maintaining and
improving water quality and have developed measures to reduce discharges from city
facilities.
Over the next 10 years, for example, Oregon's Phase I cities and Corvallis will spend
more than $10 billion on measures to reduce storm water pollutants. While urban areas
are a significant source of storm water pollutants, it is estimated that non-point sources
are responsible for more than half of the pollutants in water systems. However,
regulatory requirements focus almost exclusively on discharges from point source and
urban runoff.
If the objective is to remove pollutants from Oregon's waterways, then all sources of
non-point source discharges need to assume an equitable share of responsibility. Local
taxpayers should not be expected to continue funding water clean up while rural non-
point sources are exempt from responsibility.
Recommendations:
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 46
1. Support an increase in industrial wastewater fees and require DEQ to be
accountable as to how the fees are being used by the agency.
2. Support the use of state revolving funds for non-point sources and advocate for
increased funds for the State Revolving Loans Fund program.
3. SALMON RECOVERY AND WATERSHED HEALTH
In March 1999, NOAA Fisheries listed the Upper Willamette Spring Chinook as a
threatened species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The Upper Willamette
Spring Chinook spends part of its life in the Willamette River, including areas within the
City of Eugene. The protective rules for this species, known as Section 4(d) rules,
became effective on January 8, 2001, and prohibit any activity that harms the listed fish
or their habitat. Following legal challenges to ESA listing of various salmon populations
around the Northwest, NOAA Fisheries reviewed salmon listings throughout the region,
including the Upper Willamette Spring Chinook. NOAA Fisheries has recently proposed
to maintain the listing of the Upper Willamette Spring Chinook as threatened.
On April 10, 2000 the Eugene City Council adopted a resolution directing the City to
support recovery of upper Willamette Spring Chinook through an integrated, City-wide
effort. The resolution directs the City to work in partnership with local, state and federal
agencies to develop regional recovery plans.
Recommendations:
1. The City supports efforts to preserve the ability of local governments to pursue
recovery of salmon populations through a mix of regulatory compliance,
restoration projects, community outreach and involvement.
2. State and federal salmon recovery efforts should be responsive to and
coordinated with locally adopted and developed recovery plans.
3. The City supports the restoration and full implementation of the Pesticide
Tracking Bill passed by the 1999 legislature. The City encourages the State of
Oregon to work closely with local governments to identify and share pesticide
data, and to better assist with salmon recovery and water quality planning efforts
at the local level.
4. The City supports legislative proposals and recommendations that address
salmon protection and recovery in a holistic manner. Support efforts to develop
endangered species recovery plans within the context of a comprehensive
watershed health plan, and specifically address salmon recovery needs in urban
areas.
4. NOTICE FOR SPRAYING PESTICIDES/INSECTICIDES
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 47
The City of Eugene supports changes to ORS 634.057 to allow localities to use Home
Rule authority to require advance notice of spraying of pesticides or insecticides.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 48
IX. GENERAL GOVERNMENT
A. BUSINESS LICENSING
Cities should be able to license business activities which are not already regulated by the State in
order to promote public health and safety. Cities also must be able to charge sufficient fees to
recover regulatory costs. Cities should retain the right to regulate activities when State
regulations are insufficient to address local community concerns. For example, the City of
Eugene regulates a limited number of business activities such as taxi service and sidewalk
vending in order to safeguard the public's health, safety and welfare.
B. CONTRACTING
1. The City supports fair and open procedures in awarding contracts with the flexibility to
respond to local conditions and resources, including costs of monitoring the contracts, the
availability of competent suppliers to ensure competitive bidding.
2. The City supports modifying Qualified Rehabilitation Facilities (QRFs) statutes to
exempt security employment from the areas QRF are awarded selection preference.
C. LABOR
1. LOCAL CONTROL OF WAGES, BENEFITS AND EMPLOYMENT
PRACTICES
The City will oppose legislation that restricts or diminishes the rights of local
governments to exercise local control over benefits, wages and employment practices,
whether those restrictions come through policy or the collective bargaining process. The
City will oppose adding any more groups or categories of employees to those already
eligible to receive police and fire fighter benefits.
2. ADEQUATE BENEFIT LEVELS
The City supports the provision of public employee benefits that are consistent with
formal needs assessments and/or actuarial studies establishing standards of adequacy.
Benefits exceeding such standards should be provided at the discretion of individual
employers, and should not be mandated.
3. DEFERENCE TO VOLUNTARY NEGOTIATIONS
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 49
Resolution of employment disputes through voluntary agreement between the parties is
preferred to procedures which impose settlements by a third party.
4. INSTALLATION OF ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT
The City supports expanding the existing exemption afforded to cable television
companies from electrical permit and licensing requirements to include all forms of
communications cable (e.g., coaxial and fiber optic). These types of installations do not
require the knowledge, skills and abilities represented by a commercial electrician's
license. Cities should not be required to pay the associated fees and expenses of using
licensed electricians to install telephone and computer cable and equipment. These
requirements do not result in improved personnel or building safety.
D. LIQUOR LICENSING
To sustain safe, livable neighborhoods, local government recommendations regarding the
issuance of liquor licenses should have greater weight when the Oregon Liquor Control
Commission acts on license applications. Adverse recommendations by local governments
should have ;;presumptive" effect, meaning that a liquor license applicant would have to show
good cause to overcome an adverse recommendation from a city.
Prior to 1988, adverse local government recommendations regarding issuance of liquor licenses
did have a presumptive effect. The Oregon Liquor Control Commission (OLCC) defined
presumptive effect as meaning that once an applicant received an adverse recommendation based
on OLCC approval criteria, the OLCC would not issue a license unless the applicant was able to
show good cause that outweighed the local recommendation.
In 1988, the Attorney General issued an opinion stating that OLCC licensing criterion concerning
a local governing body endorsement was invalid, that by giving presumptive effect to adverse
local government recommendations, the Commission was delegating its licensing authority to
local governments unlawfully. The OLCC deleted the language and current language now states:
;;Local government, other government agencies, organizations, facilities or individuals may give
the Commission reliable factual information concerning whether there is a basis to grant or deny
a license or to impose license restrictions .... "
Creating (or re-establishing) a presumption against a license when an unfavorable
recommendation is forwarded by a local jurisdiction should be pursed. Such a change in the
statutes would allow local governing bodies a greater role in the licensing process. Local
recommendations would carry greater weight, while OLCC would play more of a reviewing role
and would maintain statewide criterion, thus maintaining consistency in licensing matters across
the state.
By applying a local government recommendation as a presumption, more of a burden would be
placed on the licensee to show good cause to overcome the recommendation. The local
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 50
government recommendation would be based on a set of conclusions applying the criterion
developed by the OLCC, to the facts, as determined by the local government.
Recommendation:
1. Support legislation providing local governments with presumptive effect regarding the
issuance of liquor licenses.
E. LIBRARY
1. SENATE INTERIM TASK FORCE ON LIBRARY COOPERATION
The City has an interest in partial funding to provide library resources to all Eugene
residents through a variety of State programs including Oregon LINK and the Net Lender
Reimbursement program. The City will closely monitor legislative proposals to modify
or create new systems of library cooperation at the State level.
2. FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION/FREE ACCESS TO IDEAS
The City will closely monitor legislative proposals that may have the effect of restricting
freedom of expression or access to ideas presented in literature and art, with a view
toward ensuring that both State and U.S. Constitutional guarantees of these freedoms are
not eroded.
3. BASIC PUBLIC LIBRARY SERVICE
Basic library service must remain available to all citizens and taxpayers free of additional
charge. Basic public library service is defined as access to the building and collections,
checking out materials available for circulation and reference, or readers' advisory
assistance.
F. PUBLIC RECORDS
1. COPYRIGHT AUTHORITY
State law permits some agencies to copyright and market data, text compilations, and
indexes of public information. The City will seek copyright authority for software
systems and other electronic and data services and products that have a commercial value
and were developed using public funds.
2. EMPLOYEE, JUDGE AND CONTRACTOR RECORDS
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 51
The City supports legislation which protects privacy of employees, judges and
contractors, including personnel records and personal information such as home
addresses and phone numbers.
3. VICTIM/WITNESS/JUROR PRIVACY
The City will support amendments to State public records law to protect the privacy of
reporting parties, crime victims, witnesses, and jurors.
4. PAYMENT FOR PUBLIC SAFETY RECORDS
The City supports legislation to require the State or criminal defendants to pay for records
requested through discovery or by subpoena. The City charges fees authorized by the
Public Records Law for records requested by criminal defendants or their attorneys.
Requesters have learned that the same records are available at no charge if the request is
made through discovery or by subpoena. Frequently, these requests are voluminous and
seek records not directly related to the case at hand. While it is less expensive to honor
the request than to use expensive attorney time to narrow the discovery request or quash
the subpoena, the City should not be required to provide this service free of charge.
5. EXPUNGEMENTS
The City is frequently ordered by the State District and Circuit Courts to expunge
individual adult or juvenile criminal records which meet certain criteria. The State
charges and collects a fee to cover the processing costs for adult expungements, but local
government also bears a workload burden in this process. Expungements are a complex
and staff-intensive process. While the expungement process allows individuals to clear
their records after certain periods of time, they also impede investigations of criminal
activity that has formed a pattern over the course of several years. The City will support
legislation to stiffen expungement criteria, allow juvenile criminal records to be sealed
rather than destroyed, and allow the City to recover its actual costs in complying with
expungement court orders.
6. ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES AND ELECTRONIC ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS
The City supports legislation permitting electronic signatures and electronic original
documents, such as warrants, to help information processing throughout local
government, and to include certain public safety records exempt from public records law.
Electronic original documents is a new concept that should be considered. The State of
Utah currently has electronic original document legislation which serves as an acceptable
model.
G. SMOKING BAN AND TOBACCO REGULATION
Overwhelming scientific evidence exists documenting the harmful health effects of smoking and
of exposure to secondhand smoke. The Eugene City Council has adopted ordinances to restrict
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 52
access of youth to tobacco products and to protect workers and the public from secondhand
smoke in all places of employment and other public places. The major provisions of those
ordinances are as follows:
1. YOUTH ACCESS RESTRICTIONS
a. Prohibits the sales of tobacco products to minors (persons under 18 years of age).
b. Requires retailers of tobacco products to obtain a license to sell tobacco.
c. Prohibits self-service tobacco sales, and require all sales of tobacco products to
be vendor-assisted, that is, have tobacco products behind the counter or in a
locked case, so that a sales clerk must assist the transaction and determine the age
of the customer.
2. CLEAN AIR IN PUBLIC PLACES AND PLACES OF EMPLOYMENT
a. Prohibits smoking in any enclosed place of employment and public place,
including, but not limited to, restaurants, bars, taverns, lobbies, elevators,
meeting rooms, banks, education facilities, public transportation, retail
businesses, movie or theater facilities, sports facilities, meeting rooms, health
care facilities.
b. Requires posting of a no smoking sign in a conspicuous location in every
affected building and at the primary entrance.
c. Prohibits smoking within a reasonable distance, of not less than 10 feet, of any
entrance to any enclosed area where smoking is prohibited.
Eugene's ordinances prohibiting smoking were nearly preempted in 2001 legislative
session. HB 2828 preempted local authority to enact such ordinances, substituting a
statewide workplace smoking ban (with exceptions, such as bars or taverns for example)
prohibitive of stricter local ordinances. However, the City of Eugene's ordinances were
grandfathered in along with the ordinances of nearly a dozen other communities enacted
prior to July 1,2001. The original bill would have preempted all local bans, or some,
including Eugene's. The governor's veto threat for any bill which did not exempt
Eugene led to an agreement preserving Eugene's ban.
Recommendations:
1. Oppose any legislation to repeal provisions of the statewide policy which
preserve more prohibitive locally enacted ordinances regulating smoking in
public places and places of employment.
2. Support any legislation to enact restrictions similar to Eugene's on a statewide
basis.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 53
H. USE OF THE INITIATIVE PROCESS, ELECTION REFORM
Oregon has two systems of lawmaking: one by the people themselves (the initiative process) and
one by their elected representatives (the State Legislature and local government bodies). This
dual system serves the public interest best when the strengths of each system offset the
weaknesses of the other.
The number of statewide initiatives measures has steadily increased in recent elections. As a
result, some problems have arisen that affect both state and local government in Oregon. While
state and legislative bodies are required to balance budgets, initiative lawmaking is under no such
constraints. Some initiative measures have imposed heavy financial burdens on state and local
governments, and yet made no provision to paying the cost of those burdens. Several initiatives
have enacted new programs or policies directly into the state constitution rather than by statute,
creating difficulties of interpretation, implementation and financing. The ability of the State
Legislature to respond is also limited.
Initiative campaigns are increasingly placed on the ballot by private sponsors, without public or
legal review, and are promoted by professional high-tech campaigns. Voters are faced with a
dizzying array of complex measures on their ballots. Reforms are needed to ensure that the
initiative process is no longer distorted and balance is returned to the system.
Recommendations:
1. Support proposals to increase the number of signatures required for an initiated
constitutional amendment.
2. Support proposals to limit the extent to which an initiated constitutional amendment can
require the state and/or local governments to make appropriations or incur expenditures
in excess of a certain amount to be fixed by law.
3. Support legislation requiring that prospective petitions be submitted to an appropriate
state agency (Legislative Counsel or Attorney General) for advisory technical review
prior to approval for circulation.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 54
X. TELECOMMUNICATIONS
Laws such as city charters, state statutes and federal code
authorize cities to manage the public rights of way Principles of Telecommunications Use of
(ROW) and collect fair compensation for use by private the Public Rights of Way (ROW)
providers. As cities develop, the public ROW represents
a substantial public investment and resource.
· Congress, Oregon courts, and the State
Legislature have clearly recognized that the
Congress passed the Telecommunications Act in 1996, at
rights of way are a valuable public asset.
the initiation of industry. Congress intended the Act to
remove federal regulation as a method to encourage -Cities have a duty and obligation to manage
competition wherever possible and expand universal the public rights of way for their citizens.
service. By doing so, Congress anticipated that increased
competition would result in better, broader service and -Preservation of city franchise fee authority
lower telecommunications costs to more Americans. must be assured.
Rent for Private Use of Public ROW: Procedurally, the -City authority to manage the public rights of
Act continues the federal government's role as primary way must be preserved.
regulator, but cities and states retain critical management -A franchise fee is not a tax. It is a business
authority under the Act. The Act specifically continues
operating cost incurred by providers when
municipal authority to manage the public ROW and to they use the public rights of way for their
receive compensation for its use, considered as rent. commercial endeavors.
Recent court decisions have reaffirmed cities' rights to
receive reasonable compensation - not be limited simply -Cities have legal authority for land use
to 'costs' in maintaining ROW as a result of any specific decisions relating to siting of
use. Reaffirmation of cities' rights was realized in a telecommunications facilities such as cell
series of Oregon State Supreme Court and Federal 9th towers.
Circuit legal decisions. · Existing authorities to form and operate
Construction Permits for Private Use of Public ROW: municipal electric utilities must be retained.
Along with the Act's ROW compensation affirmation, · Support efforts to institutionalize adequate
cities are realizing that technological advancement and levels of customer service.
growth contribute to the busy and crowded nature of our
public ROW today. An increasing amount of activity
occurs above, on and below the ROW. Residents and
businesses make ordinary use of the public ROW by
walking or driving on it. Others access the public ROW
for extraordinary uses such as cable, natural gas,
telecommunications, electricity, water and sewer lines.
As users compete for access, local management of the
public ROW becomes increasingly critical. Cities must
be able to respond to competing needs and provide users equitable access to the public ROW. Cities
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 55
manage these competing needs through their permitting procedures, which outline location, construction,
and traffic control standards. Increased interest in use of public ROW thus increases municipal
monitoring and managing the increased disruption to the ROW. Despite the increased workload, industry
accusations regarding permitting delays by Oregon cities have not been substantiated, despite municipal
requests for specific permitting problem areas. Thus, legislation aimed at curtailing cities' existing
permitting procedures is not appropriate and could erode municipal activities that sustain the useful life of
city streets and roads as surfaces are repeatedly cut and patched.
Cities manage the public ROW as a service to their citizens. Cities receive compensation from
telecommunications providers when providers use the public ROW as a part of their doing business.
Since the passage of the Act in 1996, carriers are increasingly insistent that local regulation and
management procedures not impede their ability to bring ~state-of-the-art' telecommunications services to
Oregonians, and argue that the wide variety of fees and charges they are faced with by multiple
jurisdictions has that effect. In light of recent, clearly written court opinions, this argument is simply not
credible. Providers offer a wide variety of services at a wide variety of fee structures to thousands of
customers without missing a billing; a relative handful of individual city agreements cannot be a barrier to
their operations. The same computer chip that can calculate an individual citizen's bill, out of thousands
of bills, can calculate one city's fee. The policy is long-standing; complying with the policy is not
structurally difficult.
In conclusion, adequate compensation for use of the public ROW should continue to be collected from
service providers. Management authority should also remain localized to allow cities to meet existing and
future federal requirements for nondiscriminatory access. Increasing use of ROW also increases the need
for adequate construction and safety criteria. Cities, consulting with appropriate engineering resources,
should be responsible for creating and enforcing standards that ensure effective ROW management and
accessibility.
Throughout 2000, cities and industry met (via House Bill 3345, 1999) as a task force aimed at finding
common ground across a number of administrative and compensation areas related to industry's use of
the public ROW. This task force discussed new ways of protecting vital municipal assets while at the
same time simplifying the local management scheme and providing for increased consistency and
minimizing the potential for creating competitive disadvantages across the industry. The report of the
task force's findings is available for review.
Related Issues:
Provider Fee Pass-Through to Customers: Currently, some providers directly pass all or part of their cost
for this use of the public right-of-way onto their customers by calling it a tax on their customers'
telephone bills. Such a cost is not a tax. It is a business operating cost incurred by providers when they
use the public ROW. When the cost is directly passed through to the customer, the citizen is, in effect,
paying the telecommunications provider for the providers' privilege to use that citizen's publicly
managed ROW. Such a practice is a misrepresentation of billing to telecommunications customers.
With few exceptions, providers are not required to pass on these particular expenses to customers; they
choose to do so.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 56
Wireless Facility Zoning and Siting: Along with cities' authority to manage the public ROW for their
citizens, the Act also affirmed cities' have legal authority over land use decisions relating to the
placement of telecommunications facilities such as cell towers. This authority allows cities to protect the
livability of their communities. The cities' authority in this area should not be curtailed.
Municipal Provision of Telecommunications Services: In keeping with Congressional efforts to increase
competition through the Act, cities and municipal utilities should continue to have direct authority to
provide telecommunications services for themselves and on a for-hire basis as desired. Recent federal
appellate decisions have reaffirmed cities rights under the Act.
Telecommunications policy remains a critical issue for cities in the 2005. Legislative decisions in the
telecommunications arena could have an enormous impact on city authority and revenues. In addition to
new attacks on long-standing municipal policies and standards, advancing technology and changes in the
industry create a challenge to cities' long standing inherent authority over certain telecommunications
issues.
Recommendations:
1. Support existing city responsibility to manage the public ROW, including opposing the
preemption of any portion of Eugene's Telecommunications ordinances, recently upheld by the
Oregon Supreme Court.
2. Support existing city right and duty to negotiate and collect fair compensation from
telecommunications and cable providers for use of public infrastructure and ROW.
3. Support clear and forthright billing practices between telecommunication providers who use the
public ROW and their customers. Providers should treat any costs they incur from using the
public ROW as a business operating cost, not as a tax.
4. Support current city zoning authority regarding the siting of telecommunications towers and other
facilities.
5. Support existing ability of cities and municipal utilities (i.e., Eugene Water and Electric Board) to
own, operate, construct and provide telecommunications services on a level playing field with
private providers. Oppose any attempt to pre-empt this activity.
6. Support existing local authority to make decisions regarding acceptable in-kind services in lieu of
franchise fees for use of the public ROW. Oppose any attempt to preempt local use of in-kind
agreements as a method of valid compensation.
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 57
INDEX
9 I
9-1-1 Services. iii, 2, 34, 35 Interfaith Emergency Shelter Program. 17, 26
A L
Amtrak · 20 Lane County · 1, 2, 5, 6, 26, 27, 31, 34
Lane Transit District · 6
League of Oregon Cities. 5, 14, 43
B Library. 16
Library Link program. 16
Building codes. 24, 25
M
C
Measure 37.15, 28
Courts. 52 Measure 5 · 1,2,7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 16
Measure 50 · 1, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 16
Measure 7 · 31
D
O
Department of Environmental Quality. 17, 43, 44
Department of Revenue · 11, 12, 33 Oregon Department of Revenue · 9
Division of State Lands · 16 Oregon Department of Transportation · 21
Oregon Housing Fund. 17
E Oregon Transportation Plan. 20
Eugene Water & Electric Board. 5 p
F Pollution' 41, 44
Federal funds. 16 g
Fire. 37
Recycling · 41, 42, 43, 44
H
S
Highway Trust Fund. 3, 19, 20
Home Rule authority. 48 Springfield, City of. 1, 6, 16, 20, 26, 27, 28, 31
Housing · 17, 26, 27 State-shared revenue · 8
Streets, highways, and transit · 28
Systems Development Charges (SDCs) · 37
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 58
T W
Tax Expenditure Report · 9, 10 West Eugene Wetlands Plan. 16
TEA-21 (federal txa~sportation funding bill) · 20, 22 Wetland Conservation Plmming Program. 16
Telecommunications · iii, 55, 57
U
University of Oregon. 5, 16
City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2005 Session 59