HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/26/1984 Meeting
M I NUT E S
-
Eugene City Council Work Session
McNutt Room
e
April 26, 1984
5:30 p.m.
PRESENT: Mayor Gus Keller, Brian Obie, Emily Schue, John Ball, Richard
Hansen, Freeman Holmer, Cynthia Wooten, Betty Smith (5:55-7:40),
councilors; Mike Gleason, City Manager; Dave Whitlow, Assistant City
Manager; Gary Long, Director of Administrative Services Department;
Warren Wong, Finance Director; Pat Lynch, Council Administrator; Bob
Deis, Marilynne Musso, Carol Calkins, Finance Department; Susy
Wagner, Risk Management Manager.
Mr. Keller called the meeting to order.
I. STATUS OF SPRINGFIELD'S REVENUE TAX PROPOSALS
e
Mr. Long reported that the Springfield City Council was still considering the
possibility of putting a gas tax measure on the ballot in June. If the
measure was put on the ballot in Springfield, it would be contingent upon
passage of a similar measure in Eugene. The tax would be three cents a
gallon, and it would be levied against wholesalers. It would be a business
occupation tax. May 23 is the last day such a measure could be put on the
June ballot.
e
Councilors and staff discussed the gas tax for some time. It could be put on
the ballot so that the City councils of Eugene and Springfield could each
decide whether to levy the tax if it passed. More people would be voting in
November than in June; consequently, if the City wanted public involvement, it
might be better to have the measure on the November ballot. It was important
to indicate to the Springfield City Council where the Eugene City Council
stood on the matter. Eugene could indicate it would put a measure on the
ballot if the measure had previously won in Springfield, or Eugene could
indicate it will put the measure on the ballot when Springfield does, or
Eugene could indicate it is not at all interested in the matter. It is
important for Eugene to know what it would accomplish with a gasoline tax.
The Eugene tax should be similar to the Springfield tax if they are levied.
-
The current State Gas Tax generates $1.4 million annually, and current expenses
for road/street operations and maintenance are about $5 million annually.
Grants provide most of the money used for street development.
Councilors discussed how gas tax revenues might be used and their effect on
the general fund. For example, it could be used to finish the Chambers
overpass, do design work on the Ferry Street Bridge, or maintain the city
streets. Some councilors thought there had been an agreement to ask the
voters for additional sources of revenue if the Hult Center deficit affected
-
MINUTES--Council Revenue Work Session
April 26, 1984
Page 1
-
the General Fund; some councilors thought no commitment had been made to a tax
specifically for the Hult Center. /
Mr. Gleason emphasized the importance of educating the public about the City's
needs, particularly if a measure is put on the ballot. Mr. Hansen hoped some
way could be found to judge whether a gas tax measure would pass.
e
II. SERVICE RESTORATION SCHEDULE
e
Mr. Long reviewed the April 6 memo from Mr. Gleason to the Mayor and councilors
about a service restoration schedule. The schedule indicated service restora-
tion would be accomplished at $900,000 a year for three years. It would
restore about 50 percent of the cuts that had been made since 1981. When
services are restored, they are often done differently because new ways of
doing things are often better and more economical. Services would be restored
in the areas of public safety, public development, support services, and
cultural and leisure services. The program would add 69.5 full-time employees
to the City payroll. If the service assumptions were changed by the council,
the financial estimates would also have to be changed.
Councilors discussed asking the voters if they want the level of services
restored. Responding to comments, Mr. Gleason said the Fire Suppression
Division is increasingly at risk because the Fire Prevention Program has been
decreased. The City is short of Fire Department staff. The department
is trying to keep ISO from dropping the City's rating from 3 to 4 because the
City does not have enough staff for the pumpers. The rating would affect the
insurance rates on large buildings and businesses. The Police Department
equipment is deteriorating. The Patrol and Detective sections are lean. The
streets system is being damaged because of the lack of maintenance. The audit
section disappeared two years ago. City investments are not managed as well
as they could be with additional staff. The information program of the City
has to rely on the private media, which is usually interested only in contro-
versial matters.
e
III. SIX-YEAR FINANCIAL FORECAST--REVISED BY THE COUNCIL AND COUNCILOR HOLMER
--.__.__0
Mr. Wong reviewed his April 20, 1984, memo to the Mayor and City Council
concerning the three versions of the six-year financial forecast for the
General/Federal Revenue Sharing Fund. The councilors and staff compared the
staff version, the council version, and Councilor Holmer's version. Councilor
Holmer often ~plained his version. Regardless of service restoration, Mr.
Gleason did not believe the City would get by for the next three years within
the forecast because of things beyond the City's control. Mr. Holmer said
additional taxes placed the City at a disadvantage in its economic diversifi-
cation efforts and he had tried to find a way to operate the City for the next
three years without additional taxes. Mr. Ball pointed out that the quality
and level of City services was important in economic development. Levels of
services and City salaries, as well as salaries in the private sector, were
discussed.
-
-
MINUTES--Council Revenue Work Session
April 26, 1984
Page 2
e
e
e
Mr. Gleason described an ideal organization. It included rate-based utilities.
Expenses would be reduced, he said, if Eugene adopted the system which would
take several years to implement.
-
Councilors discussed possible alternatives if the six-year forecast was wrong
or if an emergency developed. Much of the discussion on the six-year forecast
involved salaries and fringe benefits for City employees. The effects of
possible annexations in the next few years and various types of taxes that
would raise needed funds were discussed.
The work session was adjourned at 7:40 p.m.
(Recorded by Betty Lou Rarick)
BLR:pv/CM7b23
e
e
MINUTES--Council Revenue Work Session
April 26, 1984
Page 3