The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutItem 3: Resolution on GO Bond for Streets ECC UGENE ITY OUNCIL AIS GENDA TEM UMMARY Action: Resolution 4953 Calling a City Election on November 4, 2008 for the Purpose of Referring to the Legal Electors of the City of Eugene a Measure Authorizing the Issuance of a Maximum of $81.1 or $35.9 Million of General Obligation Bonds to Fund Street Preservation Projects Meeting Date: July 28, 2008 Agenda Item Number: 3 Department: Central Services Staff Contact: Sue Cutsogeorge www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-5589 ISSUE STATEMENT The council will consider placing a General Obligation (GO) bond measure for street preservation projects on the November 2008 ballot. BACKGROUND Council Action History Over the past several years, the council has worked on ways to adequately fund a large and growing pavement preservation project backlog. Some highlights from the history of this effort are included in Attachment A. Most recently, on July 16, the council continued discussions about the GO bond measure. At that meeting, the council directed the City Manager to bring back two bond resolutions, one for $35.9 million for projects to be completed over five years and one for $81.1 million for projects to be completed over ten years. The council directed that the measure for a five-year period should not include any provision for future councils to remove projects from the list, but should allow bond funds to be used for additional projects, with a majority vote by council, for the next highest priority street preservation projects once all the other projects on the bond list are complete. The council directed that the 10-year measure should, in the final year of the measure, allow for removals from the project list upon an affirmative vote by at least six councilors, and additions to the list by a majority vote of the council, upon completion of all the projects on the list. The City Manager’s Street Maintenance Task Force met on Friday, July 18, and received results from a survey conducted in July. The Task Force discussed the survey results and made recommendations to the City Manager, which have been taken into account in developing the bond resolutions presented in this material. Bond Options Two options are presented for council consideration, in accordance with direction provided at the July 16 meeting. For each option, there are attachments that show the project list, a project map, and a bond resolution. A summary of the two options is included in the following chart. Z:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080728\S0807283andattA.doc Miles of Off- # of Street Street Bike & Average Tax Average Ped Path Total Cost to Preservation Rate Annual Cost Projects/# of Preservation (Per $1000 of to Average Average Bond Size Projects Taxpayer Miles AV) Taxpayer 32 projects / $495 over 5 $35.9 Million 3+ miles $0.59 $99 per year 70 miles years 86 projects / $1,070 over 10 $81.1 Million 7+ miles $0.59 $107 per year 150+ miles years It should be noted that both measures would have the same estimated tax rate. The lower cost for the five-year measure is due to the fact that assessed values for homes are expected to rise over the period of the bond measure, and the first five years will have lower assessed values than the last five years. Attachment H includes a map comparing the $35.9 million and $81.1 million project lists. In develop- ing the five-year project list, staff took into account geographic equity and the “visibility” of projects. Having a higher portion of the $35.9 million bond measure dedicated to the more visible, highly traveled streets means that the smaller measure has a greater share dedicated to reconstruction projects. Because reconstructions tend to be significantly more costly than overlay treatments, the five-year list represents less than half of the projects, both by number and lane miles, than the ten-year list. The bond resolutions for the two measures are otherwise the same, with the exception of the language that grants council the authority to add or delete projects from the bond list. ? As the council directed, the $35.9 million resolution does not allow for any projects to be removed from the bond list. It does, however, allow council to add projects, once all the other projects on the bond list are complete, upon a majority vote of council. Councilor Bettman asked for a footnote to be added to the resolution that provides for council approval to allocate the balance of bond proceeds to the next highest priority street preservation project in the event all the projects are completed and there is a remaining balance in the bond authorization. The resolution included in Attachment D contains language to accomplish this in Section 4, although it is not in the form of a footnote. ? The $81.1 million resolution allows the council to remove projects from the list, upon the approval th of at least six councilors, but only in 2018 (the 10 year of spending). It also allows additions to the project list, with a majority council vote, but again, only in 2018. In addition, based on successful measures in other areas, the City Manager is recommending a street repair review panel for the bond measure. This review panel would produce an annual report that evaluates how well the City has implemented the bond measure project list. This provision has been added to both resolutions in Recital I. In order to promote accountability in the use of bond proceeds, staff is continuing to recommend that an outside auditor be periodically engaged to review and prepare a publicly-issued report on the use of the bond monies for the purposes authorized by the bond measure and within the restrictions established by the council. There were questions at the July 16 meeting about ways to allow projects that are no longer feasible to come off the list “automatically.” The difficulty in automatic removal stems from the council’s desire to Z:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080728\S0807283andattA.doc limit bond spending to only those projects on the list. If the list were illustrative, but not binding, this would not be an issue. The only methods to take projects off the list are either to create a process or develop objective criteria. If objective criteria could be developed that were comprehensive enough to cover every potential future situation, then there could be an “automatic” deletion of projects from the list. Because the criteria would have to be developed to cover situations that are not known today, however, it is unlikely that any set of criteria developed today would be the specific criteria needed to cover an actual future situation. Therefore, it is much more practical to specify a process to allow for deletions from the project list under appropriate circumstances. That is what is proposed for the $81.1 million bond measure. This proposal is just one potential process that could be used, and the council could develop another process if desired. As was discussed at the July 16 council meeting, the choice between an $81.1 million and a $35.9 million bond measure is a difficult one and there are many factors to consider. Some of the factors mentioned at the meeting were: building trust with the voters; the current economic climate; the time and effort required to place a measure on the ballot and campaign for it; the effort to educate citizens about the issues and this specific measure; the results of recent surveys; and the need to solve the street preservation and maintenance funding issue as soon as possible. Weighing all those factors, as well as information from the Street Maintenance Task Force and from the recent survey, staff recommends that a $35.9 million bond measure for five years of projects be placed on the November 2008 ballot. Communications Plan Attachment I contains a revised communications plan, based on comments from the July 16 meeting and other edits. As mentioned earlier, this is a dynamic document that will be updated as circumstances change. Questions from July 16 Meeting A question was asked about survey results that might provide information to assist the council in determining the impact of bond measure size on voter approval of a measure. As part of the City Manager’s Street Maintenance Task Force work, a survey was conducted on various financing mechanisms to pay for street maintenance. The survey results will be presented at a work session on July 28. Three other surveys have been conducted by the City in the past two years. The street funding survey prepared in January 2008 asked two questions about a property tax measure for street repairs: ? Would you be willing to pay an additional $110 per year in property taxes to go toward repairing Eugene's streets? Yes – 56.33% Don’t Know – 4.47% No – 38.96% No Answer – 0.25% ? Question asked of only those people who said NO, DON’T KNOW, or NO ANSWER to the previous question: Would you be willing to pay an additional $90 per year in property taxes to go toward repairing Eugene's streets? (Percentages are of the entire survey population, not just the people that said NO, DON’T KNOW or NO ANSWER to the first question.) Yes – 5.96% Don’t Know – 2.48% No – 34.49% No Answer – 0.74% Adding the results of the two questions together, 62% of those surveyed said they would be willing to support a property tax measure for street repairs that cost the average taxpayer $90 per year. Z:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080728\S0807283andattA.doc Two surveys were completed during 2007 for the City Hall project. Excerpts from the presentations to the council on these surveys are included in Attachment J. Voters’ Pamphlet Immediately following this item on the council agenda is an item that requests funding for a voters’ pamphlet and assignment of councilors to serve on the proponent committee. Information Tabloid The City has prepared neutral information tabloids for some of the previous bond measures, such as the parks and open space bonds. Staff proposes preparing a tabloid for this measure that would include the project list and map, along with other neutral information that is approved by the City Attorney. The tabloid would be distributed by mail to all Eugene households, probably in early October 2008. The estimated cost of printing and mailing the tabloid is $25,000, and staff is requesting council General Fund contingency be used to provide the necessary budget appropriation to cover this cost. Timing The council’s last opportunity to pass a resolution placing the measure on the ballot is August 5. Once the council passes a resolution placing the measure on the ballot, the City Attorney will create a ballot title (caption, question and summary) within five business days, which will be published in the Register- Guard. Citizens will have an opportunity to challenge the ballot title language by filing a petition with the Lane County Circuit Court within seven business days of the date that the City Attorney files the ballot title with the City Recorder. RELATED CITY POLICIES The council’s goals for 2007 include “Transportation Initiative: Develop mechanisms to adequately fund our transportation system for cars, trucks, bikes and pedestrians including maintenance and preservation and capital reconstruction.” COUNCIL OPTIONS There are two decisions related to the bond measure before the council at this meeting. The first decision would determine the dollar amount and terms of the bond measure to go to the voters, with the following two options: ? $35.9 million bond measure to fund street and off-street bike and pedestrian preservation projects over five years. Attachments B, C and D include the project list, the project map and resolution for this measure. ? $81.1 million bond measure to fund street and off-street bike and pedestrian preservation projects over ten years. Attachments E, F and G include the project list, the project map and resolution for this measure. Additionally, staff requests authorization to prepare a neutral information tabloid for distribution to all households in the City. The council could decide to approve or not to approve this request. Z:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080728\S0807283andattA.doc CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION The City Manager recommends that the council approve a resolution placing a $35.9 million General Obligation bond measure on the November 2008 ballot for the purpose of funding street preservation projects, as set out in the resolution in Attachment D. Furthermore, the Manager recommends that staff be authorized to prepare a neutral information tabloid to explain the measure to voters, and that council allocate $25,000 from General Fund contingency to pay for the tabloid. SUGGESTED MOTIONS Move to adopt Resolution 4953 calling a City election on November 4, 2008, for the purpose of referring to the legal electors of the City of Eugene a measure authorizing the issuance of a maximum of $35.9 million of General Obligation Bonds to fund street preservation projects. Move to authorize the expenditure of $25,000 from the General Fund contingency account to produce a neutral information tabloid to be sent to all households in the City. ATTACHMENTS A.Pavement Preservation Funding Action History B.$35.9 Million Bond Measure Project List C.$35.9 Million Bond Measure Project Map D.$35.9 Million Bond Measure Resolution E.$81.1 Million Bond Measure Project List F.$81.1 Million Bond Measure Project Map G.$81.1 Million Bond Measure Resolution H.Map Comparing $81.1 Million and $35.9 Million Project Lists I.Updated Communications Plan J.Excerpt of Data from Prior Bond Measure Surveys K.July 24 Memo from Jon Ruiz on Task Force Recommendation FOR MORE INFORMATION Contact: Sue Cutsogeorge, Financial Analysis Manager Telephone: 682-5589 Staff E-Mail: Sue.L.Cutsogeorge@ci.eugene.or.us Z:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080728\S0807283andattA.doc ATTACHMENT A Pavement Preservation Funding Action History The City’s current 5-cent local gas tax, together with other dedicated pavement preservation funding, has allowed the City to complete nearly $18.6 million in street preservation project work since 2002, which has repaired 153 lane miles with slurry seals, overlays and reconstructions. Recent projects include overlay of portions of 18th Avenue, Chambers Street and Bailey Hill Road. Projects planned for th 2008 include portions of East 13 Avenue, Barger Drive, Chambers Street and Roosevelt Boulevard. In spite of these accomplishments, the backlog of needed repair work continues to grow in the face of rapidly rising construction costs and insufficient revenues. In late 2001, the City was facing an estimated $67 million backlog in pavement preservation work. By spring 2008, the estimated cost of that backlog had grown to $173 million and, with no new funding, was projected to grow to over $280 million within the next 10 years. In January 2007, council formed a Council Subcommittee on Transportation Funding Solutions (the “subcommittee”) to study transportation funding options and bring back creative solutions for ade- quately funding Eugene’s transportation system for cars, trucks, bicycles and pedestrians in ways that collect funds proportionately (or equally) from residents and non-residents who use the roads, are more consistent with sustainability goals, have direct connection to use of the roads, and give incentives to those who do not have a car or use one very little. This proposal for a bond measure for street repairs is an integral component in a package strategy recommended by the subcommittee, and approved by council, to adequately and equitably fund Eugene’s transportation system for a variety of users. The package of proposed solutions included a street user fee, a street and bike/pedestrian path lighting fee, and an increase in the local motor vehicle fuel tax. The council also took action to extend the local fuel tax sunset provision by three additional years, leaving the fuel tax at five cents per gallon until February 28, 2011. In the course of its work, the subcommittee learned that, to completely eliminate the pavement repair backlog within the next 10 years, an estimated $27 million in pavement preservation funding would be needed per year. The subcommittee deemed this revenue target to be too aggressive and, instead, recommended additional annual funding of $13 million to $14 million, bringing total pavement preservation funding up to $18 million per year. While this additional funding would not eliminate the backlog within 10 years, it was projected that it would stabilize the cost-effective annual overlay program and begin to reduce the reconstruction backlog. The subcommittee recommended that the transportation funding package include a capital local option levy generating approximately $6 million net revenues annually to fund pavement capital preservation projects. Council subsequently decided to allocate another $0.5 million to the capital local option levy instead of allocating this amount to a solid waste collection surcharge. In addition, the subcommittee recommended and the council agreed that $350,000 of that amount should be allocated each year for bike and pedestrian path capital preservation. On December 10, 2007, council discussed a property tax approach to funding pavement capital preser- vation. Staff presented an approach using a short-term General Obligation (GO) bond. Council directed Z:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080728\S0807283andattA.doc the City Manager to “bring a proposal to a future council work session for a GO Bond measure to fund $81 million of pavement capital preservation projects over 10 years within an appropriate timeframe to place the question on the May 2008 ballot. The proposal should include ballot measure language that provides for both a list of high priority pavement capital preservation projects and appropriate flexibility for planning activities and changing pavement capital preservation project priorities.” On January 28, council continued discussions of an approach to use General Obligation bonds for street preservation projects. Council directed the City Manager to “bring a resolution forward placing an $81 million General Obligation bond measure to be used for preservation only, no system capacity enhancements, on the November 2008 ballot.” A friendly amendment was added to provide a complete project list as part of the ballot measure. The $81 million bond measure will provide for $6.5 million of overlays and reconstruction activities each year, factoring in the cost of inflation over a 10-year period. On June 9, council continued discussions about using General Obligation bonds for street preservation projects. At that meeting, council directed the City Manager to bring back a resolution placing an $81.1 million GO bond measure on the November 2008 ballot, consistent with the initial project list and the draft resolution provided at that meeting. There remained, however, significant questions about how to provide assurance to voters as to which specific street repair projects would be accomplished as a result of approval of the bonds, what the appropriate timing of the bond measure should be, and how citizens will be informed about the need for the bond measure. On June 23, council discussed street assessment policies. At that meeting, several councilors requested information about including an element in this bond measure to fund the City’s share of assessment project costs. On July 16, council continued discussions about the GO bond measure. At that meeting, council directed the City Manager to bring back two bond resolutions, one for $35.9 million of projects over 5 years and one for $81.1 million of projects over 10 years. The measure for five years should not include any provision to remove projects from the list, but should allow bond funds to be used for additional projects, upon a council vote, for the next highest street preservation projects on the city’s list once all the other projects are complete. The ten year measure should allow for changes in the project list, upon th an affirmative vote by at least 6 councilors, in the 10 year of the measure. Z:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080728\S0807283andattA.doc ttachment B A Project List for $35.9 Million Bond Measure MAP#STREET NAMEFROMTO 18TH AVE510' EAST OF CHAMBERSCITY VIEW 1 218TH AVEHILYARDWASHINGTON 23RD AVEHILYARDPATTERSON 3 24TH AVEJEFFERSONCHAMBERS 4 ALDERBROADWAY18TH AVE 5 BAILEY HILL RD18TH AVEBERTELSEN 6 BLAIR BLVD2ND AVEMONROE 7 BREWERGILHAMNORKENZIE 8 COBURG RDCRESCENTSOUTH ONRAMP BELTLINE 9 COBURG RD850' NORTH OF CALYOUNG450' NORTH OF I-105 OFF RAMP 10 CONGER ST7TH AVE11TH AVE 11 CURTIS AVE550' EAST OF NORKENZIENORKENZIE 12 GILHAM RDHONEYWOOD STCRESCENT 13 GOODPASTURE IS RDNORKENZIE RDDELTA HWY BRIDGE 14 GOODPASTURE IS RDBRIDGE OVER SLOUGH1250' NORTH OF VALLEY RIVER DR 15 HARLOW RDI-5 COBURG 16 HILYARD STE 24TH AVE34TH AVE 17 PATTERSONE 13TH AVE23RD AVE 18 PEARL4TH AVE200' NORTH OF BROADWAY 19 RAILROAD BLVDVAN BURENCHAMBERS 20 RIVER RDHORN LNRAILROAD 21 RIVERVIEW STSYLVAN16TH AVE 22 RIVERVIEW STFRANKLIN OFF RAMP247' SOUTH OF FRANKLIN OFF RAMP 23 ROYAL AVEHWY 99100' EAST OF WAITE ST 24 SILVER LNRIVER RDGROVE 25 TERRY ST1100' NORTH OF AVALON STROYAL 26 27VAN BURENRR CROSSINGBLAIR BLVD WARREN STBAILEY HILLTIMBERLINE DR 28 WILLAMETTE ST306' NORTH OF 29TH AVE180' SOUTH OF SPENCERS CREST 29 WILSON STW 5TH AVEW 7TH AVE 30 AUGUSTA16TH AVE26TH AVE 31 TANEY STBARGERMARSHALL 32 7/22/2008 ß¬¬¿½¸³»²¬Ý Û«¹»²»Í¬®»»¬Ð®»»®ª¿¬·±²Ð®±¶»½¬ üíëòçÓ·´´·±²Þ±²¼Ó»¿«®»Ð®±¶»½¬Ó¿° ïí îë ç ïî è íî ïì ïë îê ïð îï îì ïê îð îé íð ïç é ïï îî ë îí ïè î ï í îè ê íï ì ïé îç Ô»¹»²¼ îç Í»»¿½½±³°¿²§·²¹·²¼»¨º±®°»½·º·½°®±¶»½¬·²º±®³¿¬·±² ÙÑÞ±²¼Ð®±¶»½¬ Ý·¬§Í¬®»»¬ Ý·¬§Ô·³·¬ Û«¹»²»ËÙÞ ððòîëðòëïÓ·´» Ð®±¼«½»¼¾§Ý·¬§±ºÛ«¹»²»ÐÉÛ²¹×²º±Ì»¿³ôÖ«´§ïèîððèøÎ»ºýðéðèóïëéê÷ Attachment D RESOLUTION NO. ________ A RESOLUTION CALLING A CITY ELECTION ON NOVEMBER 4, 2008, FOR THE PURPOSE OF REFERRING TO THE LEGAL ELECTORS OF THE CITY OF EUGENE A MEASURE AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF A MAXIMUM OF $35,900,000 OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS TO FUND STREET PRESERVATION PROJECTS. The City Council of the City of Eugene finds that: A. Using the City’s current 5-cent per gallon local gas tax and other dedicated pavement preservation funding, the City has completed nearly $18.6 million in street preservation work since 2002, including contracts in progress. Since 2002, the City has repaired 153 lane miles of streets through overlay, reconstruction and slurry seal treatments. Projects in progress for 2008 include portions of 27th Avenue, Barger Drive, Chambers Street and Roosevelt Boulevard. B. The amount of funding for street maintenance and reconstruction has been insufficient to keep up with deteriorating street conditions. The backlog of needed repair work continues to grow in the face of rapidly rising construction costs and is currently $173 million. Streets that have failed to the point of reconstruction create safety problems and cause vehicle repair problems, make walking, biking or driving on the streets uncomfortable, interfere with economic activity and diminish the quality of life. C. In order to address the funding shortfalls with the City’s street maintenance and preservation program, the City Council determined that a General Obligation Bond measure generating approximately $6.5 million in net revenues annually should be referred to voters. Of that amount, the Council determined that $350,000 should be allocated each year for off-street bike and pedestrian path preservation and repair. D. The bond proceeds will be used to overlay or reconstruct the driving surface of streets, as well as to preserve existing integral elements of the street such as curbs, gutters, sidewalks, on-street bike lanes, traffic signals, street lights, medians, traffic calming devices, and other integral parts of a street preservation project. These preservation efforts will be undertaken only to preserve existing elements, not to expand the capacity of the street system. In addition, the City will annually allocate not less than $350,000 of the bond proceeds to fund the overlay and reconstruction of existing off-street bicycle and pedestrian paths. E . A general obligation bond measure of $35.9 million would fund specific street preservation projects over a period of five years. This amount represents 32 different projects that would repair an estimated 70 lane miles of roads and approximately 3 miles of off-street bike and pedestrian paths. The $35.9 million figure accounts for $6.5 million per year for five years at an inflation factor of 4.8%. F. The measure is expected to cost an average of $0.59 per $1000 of assessed value each year for ten years. For an average homeowner in Eugene, this would be about $99 per year. G. The criteria for choosing bond projects included: a) citizen input with respect to prioritizing major streets in need of reconstruction; b) scientific information about needed street rehabilitation and reconstruction from the pavement management system; and c) geographic distribution throughout the community to ensure all areas of the City receive a benefit from the bond proceeds.Bond proceeds will only be used for street preservation projects included in the list of projects attached as Exhibit A to this Resolution. If all of the projects listed in Exhibit A are completed and there are bond proceeds remaining, the Council may add other street preservation projects to the list. H. In order to promote accountability in the use of bond proceeds, the City Manager will contract with an outside auditor to prepare a written report on the use of the bond proceeds on a regular basis. The auditor will ascertain and report on whether the bond proceeds were used for the authorized purposes and in compliance with the restrictions set forth above. The City Manager will provide the report to the Council and make the report publicly available. I. To further promote accountability and citizen involvement in street preservation projects, the City Manager has advised that he intends to create a street repair review panel. The street repair review panel will prepare a report, separate and distinct from the report prepared by the outside auditor, documenting the City’s use of the bond proceeds and noting whether the bond proceeds were used in compliance with the terms of this Resolution. The City Manager will provide the street repair review panel’s report to the Council and make the report publicly available. NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the above findings, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EUGENE, a Municipal Corporation of the State of Oregon, as follows: Section 1. A city election is called for the purpose of submitting to the qualified electors of the City a Measure authorizing the issuance of a maximum of $35,900,000 of General Obligation bonds to fund street preservation projects and off-street bicycle and pedestrian path preservation projects. Section 2. The City Council orders this City election to be held in the City of Eugene, th Oregon, concurrently with the general election on the 4 day of November, 2008, in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 254 of the Oregon Revised Statutes, and the ballots shall be counted and tabulated and the results certified as provided by law. Section 3. The City Recorder is directed to give not less than ten days’ notice of the City election by publication of one notice in the Register Guard, a newspaper published in the City and of general circulation within the City. Section 4. If approved by the electors, the proceeds from the sale of the bonds will be used only for costs related to street preservation projects, off-street bicycle and pedestrian path preservation projects and payment of bond issuance costs. The use of bond proceeds for street Resolution - 2 preservation projects will be limited to projects included in Exhibit A to this Resolution unless upon completion of all the projects listed in Exhibit A to this Resolution the Council adds other street preservation projects to the list in order to utilize unspent bond proceeds. Section 5. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption. The foregoing Resolution adopted the ____ day of ______________, 2008. _____________________________________ City Recorder 00202753.DOC;1 Resolution - 3 Exhibit A Project List for $35.9 Million Bond Measure MAP#STREET NAMEFROMTO 18TH AVE510' EAST OF CHAMBERSCITY VIEW 1 18TH AVEHILYARDWASHINGTON 2 323RD AVEHILYARDPATTERSON 24TH AVEJEFFERSONCHAMBERS 4 ALDERBROADWAY18TH AVE 5 BAILEY HILL RD18TH AVEBERTELSEN 6 BLAIR BLVD2ND AVEMONROE 7 BREWERGILHAMNORKENZIE 8 COBURG RDCRESCENTSOUTH ONRAMP BELTLINE 9 COBURG RD850' NORTH OF CALYOUNG450' NORTH OF I-105 OFF RAMP 10 CONGER ST7TH AVE11TH AVE 11 CURTIS AVE550' EAST OF NORKENZIENORKENZIE 12 GILHAM RDHONEYWOOD STCRESCENT 13 GOODPASTURE IS RDNORKENZIE RDDELTA HWY BRIDGE 14 GOODPASTURE IS RDBRIDGE OVER SLOUGH1250' NORTH OF VALLEY RIVER DR 15 HARLOW RDI-5 COBURG 16 HILYARD STE 24TH AVE34TH AVE 17 PATTERSONE 13TH AVE23RD AVE 18 PEARL4TH AVE200' NORTH OF BROADWAY 19 RAILROAD BLVDVAN BURENCHAMBERS 20 RIVER RDHORN LNRAILROAD 21 RIVERVIEW STSYLVAN16TH AVE 22 RIVERVIEW STFRANKLIN OFF RAMP247' SOUTH OF FRANKLIN OFF RAMP 23 ROYAL AVEHWY 99100' EAST OF WAITE ST 24 SILVER LNRIVER RDGROVE 25 TERRY ST1100' NORTH OF AVALON STROYAL 26 VAN BURENRR CROSSINGBLAIR BLVD 27 WARREN STBAILEY HILLTIMBERLINE DR 28 WILLAMETTE ST306' NORTH OF 29TH AVE180' SOUTH OF SPENCERS CREST 29 WILSON STW 5TH AVEW 7TH AVE 30 AUGUSTA16TH AVE26TH AVE 31 TANEY STBARGERMARSHALL 32 7/22/2008 Attachment E Eugene Street Preservation 10-YearProject List (To Be Funded by General Obligation Bonds) Map #Street nameFromTo 04TH AVECOBURGPEARL 1 05TH AVEHIGHTAYLOR 2 05TH AVEBERTELSEN250' WEST OF COMMERCIAL ST 3 07TH AVEBERTLESENOSCAR 4 07TH PLSENECABAILEY HILL 5 08TH AVEPEARLOAK 6 08TH AVECHAMBERSGARFIELD 7 10TH AVEOLIVEWASHINGTON 8 13TH AVEKINCAIDMONROE 9 13TH AVECHAMBERSGARFIELD 10 18TH AVE510' EAST OF CHAMBERSCITY VIEW 11 18TH AVEHILYARDWASHINGTON 12 18TH AVE102' EAST OF JOSH STBERTELSEN 13 23RD AVEHILYARDPATTERSON 14 24TH AVEJEFFERSONCHAMBERS 15 25TH AVEHAWKINS LNBRITTANY 16 28TH AVEWASHINGTONFRIENDLY 17 29TH AVEOAKWILLAMETTE 18 39TH AVEWILLAMETTE100' EAST OF DENSMORE RD 19 40TH AVEHILYARDDONALD 20 AGATE STFRANKLIN13TH AVE 21 ALDERBROADWAY18TH AVE 22 BAILEY HILL RD7TH AVE11TH AVE 23 BAILEY HILL RD18TH AVEBERTELSEN 24 BAILEY LNBOGART LNCOBURG RD 25 BARGER DRALTAMONTPRIMROSE 26 BLAIR BLVD2ND AVEMONROE 27 BRAE BURN ST39TH AVEWILLAMETTE 28 BREWERGILHAMNORKENZIE 29 BRITTANY STW 18TH AVEW 25TH AVE 30 CAPITAL DRSPRINGCRESTA DE RUTA ST 31 CHAMBERS ST11TH AVE24TH AVE 32 CHARNELTONW 4TH AVEW 11TH AVE 33 CITY VIEW STW 18TH AVEPANORAMA 34 COBURG RDCRESCENTSOUTH ONRAMP BELTLINE 35 COBURG RD850' NORTH OF CALYOUNG450' NORTH OF I-105 OFF RAMP 36 CONGER ST7TH AVE11TH AVE 37 CURTIS AVE550' EAST OF NORKENZIENORKENZIE 38 EAST AMAZON DRHILYARDDILLARD 39 FAIRFIELDHWY 99ROYAL 40 GILHAM RDHONEYWOOD STCRESCENT 41 GOODPASTURE IS RDNORKENZIE RDDELTA HWY BRIDGE 42 GOODPASTURE IS RDBRIDGE OVER SLOUGH1250' NORTH OF VALLEY RIVER DR 43 GOODPASTURE LPGOODPASTURE IS RD1100' NORTH OF GP IS RD 44 GREEN ACRES RDAPPLEWOODDELTA HWY 45 HARLOW RDI-5COBURG 46 HIGH ST3RD AVEE 17TH AVE 47 HILYARD STE 24TH AVE34TH AVE 48 HILYARD STE BROADWAYE 11TH AVE 49 LINCOLN STW 5TH AVEW 13TH AVE 50 LYNNBROOK DR250' EAST OF TORRINGTON AVELANCASTER 51 1Eugene Street Preservation Project List7/8/2008 MADISON STW 5TH AVEW 8TH AVE 52 ML KING JR BLVDI-5CENTENNIAL LOOP 53 NORTH SHASTA LPFIRLANDE 43RD AVE 54 OAKMONT WAYCOBURG RDOAKWAY RD 55 OLIVE STW 10TH AVEW 11TH AVE 56 PATTERSONE 13TH AVE23RD AVE 57 PEARL4TH AVE200' NORTH OF BROADWAY 58 POLK STW 6TH AVEW 7TH AVE 59 POLK STW 18TH AVEW 24TH AVE 60 RAILROAD BLVDVAN BURENCHAMBERS 61 RIVER RDHORN LNRAILROAD 62 RIVERVIEW STSYLVAN16TH AVE 63 RIVERVIEW STFRANKLIN OFF RAMP250' SOUTH OF FRANKLIN OFF RAMP 64 ROYAL AVEHWY 99100' EAST OF WAITE ST 65 SILVER LNRIVER RDGROVE 66 SPRING BLVDFAIRMOUNTWOODLAWN AVE 67 TERRY ST1100' NORTH OF AVALON STROYAL 68 TIMBERLINE DR200' NORTH OF TIMBERLINE DRWINTERCREEK 69 VAN BURENRR CROSSINGBLAIR BLVD 70 WARREN STBAILEY HILLTIMBERLINE DR 71 WASHINGTONW 1ST AVEW 6TH AVE 72 WEST AMAZON DRHILYARDFOX HOLLOW 73 WILLAMETTE STE 10TH AVEE 11TH AVE 74 WILLAMETTE STE 20TH AVE350' SOUTH OF E 24TH AVE 75 WILLAMETTE ST306' NORTH OF 29TH AVE180' SOUTH OF SPENCERS CREST 76 WILSON STW 5TH AVEW 7TH AVE 77 02ND AVEBLAIR BLVDGARFIELD 78 33RD AVEHILYARDWILLAMETTE 79 AUGUSTA16TH AVE26TH AVE 80 DONALD ST46TH AVEFOX HOLLOW 81 GARFIELDROOSEVELTW 11TH AVE 82 HARRIS18TH AVE28TH AVE 83 HAWKINS LNW 18TH AVE100' SOUTH OF VIDERA 84 MINDAGILHAMNORKENZIE 85 TANEY STBARGERMARSHALL 86 2Eugene Street Preservation Project List7/8/2008 ß¬¬¿½¸³»²¬ Ú Û«¹»²» Í¬®»»¬ Ð®»»®ª¿¬·±² Ð®±¶»½¬ Ì± Þ» Ú«²¼»¼ É·¬¸ ïðóÇ»¿®ÙÑ Þ±²¼ ëï ìï êê ìë íë íè ìì îê îç èê ìî èë ìí êèîë ìð íê êî êë ëë ìê êï éî éè í éð éé ï î ï ëí èî ë ëç ëî ëè îé íí ì é ê îí íé ëð éì ìç è îï ìé ëê ïð ç íî êí îî êì ëé ïî ïï ïí êð íð èí íì éë éï îì ïì èì êé èð ïë ïê íï ïé ïè êç ìè éê éç éí Í»» ¿½½±³°¿²§·²¹ ·²¼»¨ º±® °»½·º·½ °®±¶»½¬ ·²º±®³¿¬·±² ïç îð ëì îè íç ÙÑ Þ±²¼ Ð®±¶»½¬ éê Ý·¬§ Í¬®»»¬ Ý·¬§ Ô·³·¬ Û«¹»²» ËÙÞ èï ððòîëðòëïÓ·´» Ð®±¼«½»¼ ¾§ Ý·¬§ ±º Û«¹»²» ÐÉ Û²¹ ×²º± Ì»¿³ô Ö«´§ èô îððè øÎ»ºý ðéðèóïëéê÷ Attachment G RESOLUTION NO. _________ A RESOLUTION CALLING A CITY ELECTION ON NOVEMBER 4, 2008, FOR THE PURPOSE OF REFERRING TO THE LEGAL ELECTORS OF THE CITY OF EUGENE A MEASURE AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF A MAXIMUM OF $81,100,000 OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS TO FUND STREET PRESERVATION PROJECTS. The City Council of the City of Eugene finds that: A. Using the City’s current 5-cent per gallon local gas tax and other dedicated pavement preservation funding, the City has completed nearly $18.6 million in street preservation work since 2002, including contracts in progress. Since 2002, the City has repaired 153 lane miles of streets through overlay, reconstruction and slurry seal treatments. Projects in progress for 2008 include portions of 27th Avenue, Barger Drive, Chambers Street and Roosevelt Boulevard. B. The amount of funding for street maintenance and reconstruction has been insufficient to keep up with deteriorating street conditions. The backlog of needed repair work continues to grow in the face of rapidly rising construction costs and is currently $173 million. Streets that have failed to the point of reconstruction create safety problems and cause vehicle repair problems, make walking, biking or driving on the streets uncomfortable, interfere with economic activity and diminish the quality of life. C. In order to address the funding shortfalls with the City’s street maintenance and preservation program, the City Council determined that a General Obligation Bond measure generating approximately $6.5 million in net revenues annually should be referred to voters. Of that amount, the Council determined that $350,000 should be allocated each year for off-street bike and pedestrian path preservation and repair. D. The bond proceeds will be used to overlay or reconstruct the driving surface of streets, as well as to preserve existing integral elements of the street such as curbs, gutters, sidewalks, on-street bike lanes, traffic signals, street lights, medians, traffic calming devices, and other integral parts of a street preservation project. These preservation efforts will be undertaken only to preserve existing elements, not to expand the capacity of the street system. In addition, the City will annually allocate not less than $350,000 of the bond proceeds to fund the overlay and reconstruction of existing off-street bicycle and pedestrian paths. E. A general obligation bond measure of $81.1 million would fund specific street preservation projects over a period of 10 years. This amount represents 86 different projects that would repair an estimated 150 lane miles of roads and approximately 7 miles of off-street bike and pedestrian paths. The $81.1 million figure accounts for $6.5 million per year for ten years at an inflation factor of 4.8%. F. The measure is expected to cost an average of $0.59 per $1000 of assessed value each year for ten years. For an average homeowner in Eugene, this would be about $107 per year. G. The criteria for choosing these projects included: a) citizen input with respect to prioritizing major streets in need of reconstruction; b) scientific information about needed street rehabilitation and reconstruction from the pavement management system; and c) geographic distribution throughout the community to ensure all areas of the City receive a benefit from the bond proceeds. Bond proceeds will only be used for the street preservation projects included in the list attached as Exhibit A to this Resolution. However, if at least six city councilors determine that one or more of the projects listed in Exhibit A has become impractical to undertake, the project(s) may be removed from the list. If all the projects on the list are completed and there are bond proceeds remaining, the Council may add other street preservation projects to the list. The Council may only add projects to the list or delete projects from the list after January 1, 2018. H. In order to promote accountability in the use of bond proceeds, the City Manager will contract with an outside auditor to prepare a written report on the use of the bond proceeds on a regular basis. The auditor will ascertain and report on whether the bond proceeds were used for the authorized purposes and in compliance with the restrictions set forth above. The City Manager will provide the report to the Council and make the report publicly available. I. To further promote accountability and citizen involvement in street preservation projects, the City Manager has advised that he intends to create a street repair review panel. The street repair review panel will prepare a report, separate and distinct from the report prepared by the outside auditor, documenting the City’s use of the bond proceeds and noting whether the bond proceeds were used in compliance with the terms of this Resolution. The City Manager will provide the street repair review panel’s report to the Council and make the report publicly available. NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the above findings, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EUGENE, a Municipal Corporation of the State of Oregon, as follows: Section 1. A city election is called for the purpose of submitting to the qualified electors of the City a Measure authorizing the issuance of a maximum of $81,100,000 of General Obligation bonds to fund street preservation projects and off-street bicycle and pedestrian path preservation projects. Section 2. The City Council orders this City election to be held in the City of Eugene, th Oregon, concurrently with the general election on the 4 day of November, 2008, in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 254 of the Oregon Revised Statutes, and the ballots shall be counted and tabulated and the results certified as provided by law. Resolution - 2 Section 3. The City Recorder is directed to give not less than ten days’ notice of the City election by publication of one notice in the Register Guard, a newspaper published in the City and of general circulation within the City. Section 4. If approved by the electors, the proceeds from the sale of the bonds will be used only for costs related to street preservation projects, off-street bicycle and pedestrian path preservation projects and payment of bond issuance costs. The use of bond proceeds for street preservation projects will be limited to projects included in Exhibit A to this Resolution unless upon completion of all the projects listed in Exhibit A to this Resolution the Council adds other street preservation projects to the list in order to utilize unspent bond proceeds. If at least six city councilors determine that one or more of the projects listed in Exhibit A to this Resolution has become impractical to undertake, the project(s) may be removed from the list. The Council may not add projects to, or remove projects from, the list attached as Exhibit A to this Resolution except after January 1, 2018. Section 5. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption. The foregoing Resolution adopted the ____ day of ______________, 2008. _____________________________________ City Recorder 00202754.DOC;1 Resolution - 3 Exhibit A Eugene Street Preservation 10-YearProject List (To Be Funded by General Obligation Bonds) Map #Street nameFromTo 04TH AVECOBURGPEARL 1 05TH AVEHIGHTAYLOR 2 05TH AVEBERTELSEN250' WEST OF COMMERCIAL ST 3 07TH AVEBERTLESENOSCAR 4 07TH PLSENECABAILEY HILL 5 08TH AVEPEARLOAK 6 08TH AVECHAMBERSGARFIELD 7 10TH AVEOLIVEWASHINGTON 8 13TH AVEKINCAIDMONROE 9 13TH AVECHAMBERSGARFIELD 10 18TH AVE510' EAST OF CHAMBERSCITY VIEW 11 18TH AVEHILYARDWASHINGTON 12 18TH AVE102' EAST OF JOSH STBERTELSEN 13 23RD AVEHILYARDPATTERSON 14 24TH AVEJEFFERSONCHAMBERS 15 25TH AVEHAWKINS LNBRITTANY 16 28TH AVEWASHINGTONFRIENDLY 17 29TH AVEOAKWILLAMETTE 18 39TH AVEWILLAMETTE100' EAST OF DENSMORE RD 19 40TH AVEHILYARDDONALD 20 AGATE STFRANKLIN13TH AVE 21 ALDERBROADWAY18TH AVE 22 BAILEY HILL RD7TH AVE11TH AVE 23 BAILEY HILL RD18TH AVEBERTELSEN 24 BAILEY LNBOGART LNCOBURG RD 25 BARGER DRALTAMONTPRIMROSE 26 BLAIR BLVD2ND AVEMONROE 27 BRAE BURN ST39TH AVEWILLAMETTE 28 BREWERGILHAMNORKENZIE 29 BRITTANY STW 18TH AVEW 25TH AVE 30 CAPITAL DRSPRINGCRESTA DE RUTA ST 31 CHAMBERS ST11TH AVE24TH AVE 32 CHARNELTONW 4TH AVEW 11TH AVE 33 CITY VIEW STW 18TH AVEPANORAMA 34 COBURG RDCRESCENTSOUTH ONRAMP BELTLINE 35 COBURG RD850' NORTH OF CALYOUNG450' NORTH OF I-105 OFF RAMP 36 CONGER ST7TH AVE11TH AVE 37 CURTIS AVE550' EAST OF NORKENZIENORKENZIE 38 EAST AMAZON DRHILYARDDILLARD 39 FAIRFIELDHWY 99ROYAL 40 GILHAM RDHONEYWOOD STCRESCENT 41 GOODPASTURE IS RDNORKENZIE RDDELTA HWY BRIDGE 42 GOODPASTURE IS RDBRIDGE OVER SLOUGH1250' NORTH OF VALLEY RIVER DR 43 GOODPASTURE LPGOODPASTURE IS RD1100' NORTH OF GP IS RD 44 GREEN ACRES RDAPPLEWOODDELTA HWY 45 HARLOW RDI-5COBURG 46 HIGH ST3RD AVEE 17TH AVE 47 HILYARD STE 24TH AVE34TH AVE 48 HILYARD STE BROADWAYE 11TH AVE 49 LINCOLN STW 5TH AVEW 13TH AVE 50 LYNNBROOK DR250' EAST OF TORRINGTON AVELANCASTER 51 1Eugene Street Preservation Project List7/8/2008 MADISON STW 5TH AVEW 8TH AVE 52 ML KING JR BLVDI-5CENTENNIAL LOOP 53 NORTH SHASTA LPFIRLANDE 43RD AVE 54 OAKMONT WAYCOBURG RDOAKWAY RD 55 OLIVE STW 10TH AVEW 11TH AVE 56 PATTERSONE 13TH AVE23RD AVE 57 PEARL4TH AVE200' NORTH OF BROADWAY 58 POLK STW 6TH AVEW 7TH AVE 59 POLK STW 18TH AVEW 24TH AVE 60 RAILROAD BLVDVAN BURENCHAMBERS 61 RIVER RDHORN LNRAILROAD 62 RIVERVIEW STSYLVAN16TH AVE 63 RIVERVIEW STFRANKLIN OFF RAMP250' SOUTH OF FRANKLIN OFF RAMP 64 ROYAL AVEHWY 99100' EAST OF WAITE ST 65 SILVER LNRIVER RDGROVE 66 SPRING BLVDFAIRMOUNTWOODLAWN AVE 67 TERRY ST1100' NORTH OF AVALON STROYAL 68 TIMBERLINE DR200' NORTH OF TIMBERLINE DRWINTERCREEK 69 VAN BURENRR CROSSINGBLAIR BLVD 70 WARREN STBAILEY HILLTIMBERLINE DR 71 WASHINGTONW 1ST AVEW 6TH AVE 72 WEST AMAZON DRHILYARDFOX HOLLOW 73 WILLAMETTE STE 10TH AVEE 11TH AVE 74 WILLAMETTE STE 20TH AVE350' SOUTH OF E 24TH AVE 75 WILLAMETTE ST306' NORTH OF 29TH AVE180' SOUTH OF SPENCERS CREST 76 WILSON STW 5TH AVEW 7TH AVE 77 02ND AVEBLAIR BLVDGARFIELD 78 33RD AVEHILYARDWILLAMETTE 79 AUGUSTA16TH AVE26TH AVE 80 DONALD ST46TH AVEFOX HOLLOW 81 GARFIELDROOSEVELTW 11TH AVE 82 HARRIS18TH AVE28TH AVE 83 HAWKINS LNW 18TH AVE100' SOUTH OF VIDERA 84 MINDAGILHAMNORKENZIE 85 TANEY STBARGERMARSHALL 86 2Eugene Street Preservation Project List7/8/2008 ß¬¬¿½¸³»²¬Ø Û«¹»²»Í¬®»»¬Ð®»»®ª¿¬·±²Ð®±¶»½¬ Ó¿°Ý±³°¿®·²¹üèïòïÓ·´´·±²¿²¼üíëòçÓ·´´·±²Ð®±¶»½¬Ô·¬ ìï êê íë íè îç èê ìî ìí êè íê êî êë ìê êï éð éé ëè îé íé êí îî êì ëé ïî ïï ïì éï îì èð ïë ìè éê Ô»¹»²¼ éê Í»»ïðó§»¿®·²¼»¨º±®°»½·º·½°®±¶»½¬·²º±®³¿¬·±² Þ±²¼Ð®±¶»½¬±²ëó§»¿®´·¬ Þ±²¼Ð®±¶»½¬±²ïðó§»¿®´·¬ ø¬¸¿¬¿®»²±¬·²½´«¼»¼±²ëó§»¿®´·¬÷ Ý·¬§Í¬®»»¬ Ý·¬§Ô·³·¬ Û«¹»²»ËÙÞ ððòîëðòëïÓ·´» Ð®±¼«½»¼¾§Ý·¬§±ºÛ«¹»²»ÐÉÛ²¹×²º±Ì»¿³ôÖ«´§ïèîððèøÎ»ºýðéðèóïëéê÷ Attachment I TRANSPORTATION FUNDING COMMUNICATION PLAN (Updated July 22, 2008) Goals and Objectives: Effectively communicate the value of locally controlled, sustainable and equitable transportation funding solutions in ways that people see benefit for themselves and their neighborhoods Generate adequate support to implement the solutions, built on the fact that street maintenance is a core value for Eugene residents Citizens, staff and elected officials trust Public Works and the City of Eugene to make good decisions about local transportation services and how they are delivered and funded Key Audiences: City Council Eugene voters Taxpayers Business community (including Chamber of Commerce) Local opinion leaders (including key media, neighborhood group leaders) Public Works employees and all City employees Other public agencies Strategies: Find and use benefit statements for every constituency/key audience Build community support through constituent/opinion leaders (e.g., members of the Street Maintenance Task Force) Simplify benefit statement/messages (e.g., “street repairs” and “fixing the potholes” rather than “pavement preservation”) whenever possible Recognize the communication value of “official” documents (agenda item summaries, resolutions, ballot titles, etc.) Separate issues (e.g., property tax measure, gas tax sunset) to manage the amount of information key audiences need to have at any particular moment in time Find opportunities to talk about “big picture” in ways that clearly describe what each component of the package would do and how individual components work together as a balanced package Enlist mayor and councilors as spokespersons for the issue Look for groups invested in solutions as message partners Develop an implementation schedule early on to coordinate communications on various solution components Ensure communication tactics are consistent with and support election laws and other procedural requirements Build on successes of pavement preservation program, and tell the street maintenance “story” Use Final Report of the Transportation Subcommittee (2007), LOC “Investing in a Neglected Asset” report, and PMS report (2008) and other source documents to support communications Use a range of outreach tactics (e.g., meetings/presentations, internet, newsletter) to reach targeted audiences as well as the general public Address state and county relationships in a positive way; look for opportunities to liaison with and coordinate our interests with those of our regional partners (including Springfield, Lane County, ODOT and EWEB) Develop a strong internal communications to inform employees, using supervisors to communicate key messages and promote understanding through the City organization Use surveys (specifically, the January 2008 NSDS survey and the July 2008 SRI survey) and focus groups to test methodologies and key messages Make effective use of consultant resources (e.g., Barry Pack, Steve Johnson, Gary Manross) in developing plans and implementing strategies Communication Constraints (Specific to Bond Measure): As with any tax measure, the complexity of the issue and the need to couch language in terms that satisfy legal requirements don’t always allow for easy-to-understand explanations. Placing the bond measure in the context of a larger package, some elements of which haven’t yet been fully worked out, is a significant communications challenge. Voters will need to understand why the measure doesn’t focus solely on the worst streets (i.e., why preserving streets from further deterioration is a good investment). Including a number of reconstruction projects in the bond measure will help voters see obvious benefit. Voters have trouble distinguishing between improved and unimproved streets. The message needs to be clear why they’re not funded by the bond measure and what strategies the City has to address those streets (including increased funding for pothole repairs). The “list” of repair projects to be funded by the bond measure is a subset of a larger list of projects to be funded from multiple sources of road repair funding, including current existing sources of revenue. Voters may be confused if they don’t see beneficial projects that aren’t on the bond list because they are scheduled to receive some other type of funding. As with all election issues, the City must avoid advocacy and provide only neutral information. To the extent that it’s important to communicate benefits, the council and any citizen groups that come forward must carry those messages. Key Messages Bond Measure for Street Repairs Voters in November will be asked to approve a $35.9 million levy dedicated to local street repairs The levy is estimated to cost the average homeowner $99 per year for five years A five-year levy will deliver on a promise to work on improving a core service and allow the community to rebuild trust in solutions for a more robust street repair program in the future A list of high-priority projects has been developed to indicate exactly which streets would be repaired with bond funds. The list includes 32 projects covering 70 miles of city streets. The project list will include overlay projects (to preserve streets from further deterioration) and reconstruction projects (to fix streets that have fallen apart and need to be rebuilt) Accountability will be provided, bond expenditures will be monitored and annual reports will be given to the council and the community. The bond measure is not the complete and final answer, either for the full street repair backlog or the immediate need for additional funding for ongoing street operations and maintenance. Overall Package of Transportation Funding Solutions Eugene is faced with a $173 million backlog of street repair projects. The backlog could reach $280 million over the next decade if more funds are not invested in local street repairs. To bring the backlog under control, at least $18 million per year needs to be invested in local street repairs. Currently Eugene is investing about $5 million a year in major street repairs. To truly address the need, a package of revenue solutions is needed. Package elements could include some combination of a general obligation bond measure, local fuel tax, monthly street repair fee, street lighting fee, garbage fee surcharge, countywide vehicle registration fee and/or countywide fuel tax, and/or reallocation of existing general fund revenue. Any package, in total, needs to provide achievable, balanced and sustainable solutions to adequately fund Eugene’s transportation system for cars, trucks, bicycles and pedestrians A good package element is one that collects funds proportionately (or equally) from residents and non-residents who use our roads, is consistent with our sustainability goals, has direct connection to the use of the roads, and give incentives to those who do not have a car or use one very little. Since 2002 (including the 2008 construction season), the City has invested $18.6 million in pavement preservation projects. Since 2002 (including the 2008 construction season), the City has repaired 153 lane miles of streets through overlay, reconstruction and slurry seal treatments. Local Fuel Tax Eugene’s gas tax is 5 cents per gallon (it has been at 5 cents a gallon since January 2005) 2 cents of that is subject to a sunset provision; the sunset has been extended to 2011 to allow more time to see if alternate sources of revenue can be found (examples: increasing the state gas tax to replace the money that currently comes from the local gas tax, or a county vehicle registration fee) Each penny of the local fuel tax generates about $650,000 per year; therefore, the current 5-cent local fuel tax generates about $3.2 million per year for street repairs The local motor vehicle fuel tax is closely tied to the use of the transportation system: the more you drive, the more wear and tear you put on the streets, and the more you pay through a gas tax. Currently, Eugene's pavement preservation program is funded primarily by the local motor vehicle fuel tax. More information is available on the City’s web site (go to www.eugene-or.gov/pw and click on the street funding link. Reallocation of General Fund Revenue Council allocated $1.5 million for capital pavement repairs in FY07. These funds were used to overlay streets that otherwise would have deteriorated to the point of needing reconstruction (at a cost of five times the cost of an overlay) As part of a cooperative funding agreement with Lane County, Council made available $4.5 million from the general fund (facility reserve) for capital road repairs beginning July 1, 2008. Council approved $1 million from the general fund for “pothole patching” in FY09 and another $1 million in FY10. Work efforts to be funded include a dedicated “pothole patrol,” maintenance overlays primarily on unimproved streets, and repairs to a number of badly rutted and potholed intersections around town. All these allocations are in addition to the funds currently dedicated to street repairs in the City’s O&M road fund (which comes primarily from state gas taxes) and capital pavement preservation program fund (which comes primarily from local gas taxes). Street Fee Recommended as part of Council Subcommittee “package”; still in the conceptual stages The best fee is one that is easy to understand and inexpensive to bill and collect (so that more money goes to street repairs and less to fee administration) Intended to generate annual net revenue of approximately $6.5 million, with $150,000 per year dedicated to funding traffic calming measures Estimated to cost the average household about $5 per month Street Lighting Fee Recommended as part of Council Subcommittee “package”; still in the conceptual stages Intended to generate approximately $800,000 to operate and maintain and provide for reasonable expansion of Eugene’s street and bike/pedestrian path lighting system Estimated to cost the average household $1.50 per month Other Potential Sources of Funding Garbage surcharge (recommended as part of Council Subcommittee “package”) could raise $1 million to $2 million per year County vehicle registration fee (could raise up to $9 million per year countywide; revenue to Eugene not currently determined) Countywide gas tax (could raise $1.5 million per penny per year countywide; revenue to Eugene not currently determined) State solutions, including an increase in the state’s gas tax Attachment J Excerpt of Data from Prior Bond Measure Surveys June 2007 Survey Report - Support Drops Below A Majority When the Cost to a Household Exceeds $100 Per Year December 2007 Survey Report – A Bare Majority of Voters Favors A Property Tax Levy to Improve the Roads and Streets In Eugene ATTACHMENT K City Manager’s Office City of Eugene 777 Pearl Street Room 105 M Eugene, Oregon 97401-2793 EMORANDUM (541) 682-5010 (541) 682-5414 FAX www.eugene-or.gov Date: July 24, 2008 To: Mayor Piercy and City Council From: Jon R. Ruiz, City Manager 682-5510 Subject: City Manager’s Street Maintenance Task Force Recommendation for G.O. Bond Proposal On Friday, July 18, the Street Maintenance Task Force met with consultant Dr. Gary Manross to review the community polling data and to continue previous discussions on developing a long-term proposal for street maintenance. Based on this information, the task force came to consensus on recommending the following strategy: ? Place a 5-year, $35.9 million general obligation bond on the November 2008 ballot. ? Include a street repair review panel and an auditor as part of the bond resolution. The review panel will produce an annual “Promises Made, Promises Kept” report and the auditor will ascertain and report on whether the bond funds were used in compliance with the bond measure. ? Include a specific list of projects that cannot be altered except to add projects if funds remain after all other projects are completed. ? Do not move forward at this time with other local street funding mechanisms, but recognize that the property tax measure is not the complete and final answer either for the backlog of repair projects or the immediate need for additional funding for ongoing operations and maintenance of the transportation system. I fully and strongly support this recommendation and encourage the Council to unanimously support it as well. Discussion The above recommendation is not where I initially wanted to be. I preferred a more comprehensive approach that would completely resolve the backlog issues; however, the polling data overwhelmingly supports this recommendation as the best choice to move forward at this time. The basic issue that continuously comes out in the polling data is a need to strengthen the trust between the community and the City. Delivery on a smaller, shorter term bond measure is step to build that trust. Based on the data, the consultant’s initial recommendation was to not pursue a bond (the polling tested the $81 million version) in November but to wait until next year. After much discussion, he believes a $35.9 million bond is doable, but will take work to get passed, particularly with the uncertainty of the economy over the next many months. He emphasized that the expected large turnout of voters in November does not help our situation, but given the double majority requirement in off years, this November remains the best timing. Data from the polling: ? Street maintenance is very high on the community’s radar, is a very important core value, and is a top spending priority for City programs and services. ? 66% of voters support a potential tax increase for street maintenance. ? 22% support avoiding additional taxes by either making cutbacks in street maintenance or other City services. ? 50% are willing to pay up to $20 per month in additional taxes to maintain the streets. ? 47% are likely to support a 10-year G.O. bond. (Likely support is a more robust predictor of success than a simple combination of “definite” and “probable” intent to support, because it takes into account the fact that only a portion of respondents who say they will probably vote in favor of a measure actually do so). The consultant stated that with appropriate support it is possible to move this number to 50%—perhaps more so with a 5-year bond. ? Voters likely to support an increase in the stormwater fee to fund street maintenance, garbage fee, or vehicle registration fee are 37.5%, 43%, and 41.5% respectively. However, combining strategies does not appear to be popular; when any of these approaches are combined with a G.O. bond, the likely support decreases. ? Including an independent auditor significantly increases voter support. Trust is a significant issue impacting voters’ support for various street funding proposals. By starting with a smaller 5-year bond only, and delivering on the promise, the task force believes that trust can be rebuilt, which will allow the success of a more robust program in the future. It will also be important to continually tell the “street maintenance” story, including the eventual need for $15 to $18 million per year, to ensure the long-term maintenance of our street network. The July 28 work session will include a presentation by the polling consultant. Cc: Executive Team Manager’s Street Maintenance Task Force