Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/13/1992 Meeting (2) e e e M I NUT E S Eugene City Council O'Neill Room--Eugene Conference Center January 13, 1992 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Shawn Boles, Bobby Green, Ruth Bascom, Debra Ehrman, Randy MacDonald, Paul Nicholson, Kaye Robinette, Roger Rutan. The adjourned meeting of January 8, 1992, of the Eugene City Council was called to order by His Honor Mayor Jeff Miller. I. WORK SESSION: EUGENE DECISIONS Mr. Gleason noted the change of venue from the McNutt Room--City Hall in order to accommodate interested members of the public. Barb Bellamy, City Manager's Office, introduced the topic by saying that the major portion of the meeting would be a presentation by University of Oregon professors Ed Weeks and Bill Simonsen. Through an intergovernmental agree- ment, they developed three survey instruments, compiled and analyzed the data, and prepared the report titled "Eugene Decisions: Results of Citizen Input Winter 1991." Ms. Bellamy explained subsequent activity, saying the information presented would help the City Council develop strategies to take to the community for one more round of public input before making the final decision about services and how to pay for them. She said the council would begin this process at its meeting on January 22. After staff analysis, the City Council is expected to refine from one to three strategies by the end of April for presentation to the community in late May/June for more input be- fore arriving at a final decision. Ed Weeks, Department of Planning, Public Policy, and Management, University of Oregon, thanked all who have contributed to the project. Mr. Weeks said his team was asked to gather information to address the fol- lowing questions: 1. Do citizens prefer to solve the budget deficit by reducing servic- es, increasing revenues, or by using a combination of these ap- proaches? 2. What services do citizens want to maintain? What services do citizens want to reduce? MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 13, 1992 Page 1 e 3. Do citizens favor additional expenditures for affordable housing construction, community policing, improved fire department re- sponse time, a new library, and/or enhanced tourism and arts pro- grams? 4. Is there support for new revenues to balance the budget or pay for services? What revenues are considered most desirable? Least desirable? Is there support to decrease taxes but increase user fees for a service? Mr. Weeks described the three instruments used to gather public information. He said there are two categories of data collection instruments: those that are administered in a manner intended to produce a statistically representa- tive sample and those which are not administered in that fashion. The first instrument is called "Ivory." It is a basic questionnaire that tends to produce an exaggerated picture of public support for programs. It would likewise produce information about user fees and other subjects in this man- ner. The advantage, he said, is that it is easy to administer and has a high response rate. The second instrument used, "Blue," included information about service costs. It also asked questions about the level of user fees one wishes to pay. With this additional information, the instrument provided results that were more realistic. e II BOB" (build your own budget), the third instrument, presented the $8 million projected deficit and then provided respondents an opportunity to select any or all service enhancements. In addition, respondents could reduce any of 40 services; or they could choose revenues. Mr. Weeks said three instruments were used because the information requested was voluminous. Also, using BOB was risky; if BOB failed to draw an adequate response rate, there would still be enough information from the other two instruments to draw conclusions. Mr. Weeks said that the instruments each provided a separate piece of information. Together they provided a larger, more textured picture. He noted the response rates (73, 70, and 53 percent, respectively) were unusually high. The margin errors were as follows: 5 percent for Ivory, 6 percent for Blue, and 7 percent for BOB. Mr. Weeks noted that the tabloid and workshops were not administered with the expectation that a statistically representative sample would be obtained. Instead, it was an important means by which the City could engage in a con- versation with as many citizens as wanted to participate. He said 1,052 people responded with the tabloid. The workshop process involved 78 groups, generally with six to nine people in a group. Mr. Weeks reviewed responses to the first question from all three instru- ments. Seventy-five percent of BOB respondents favored a combination of approaches to solve the budget deficit. Only 10 percent chose service reduc- tions only, and 13.4 percent balanced the budget exclusively through the use of additional revenue. Both the tabloid and the workshop process yielded e MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 13, 1992 Page 2 e e e similar results. Mr. Weeks discussed the extent to which respondents relied on additional revenue and on service reductions, saying most favored a combi- nation of approaches emphasizing revenue raising as opposed to service reduc- tions. This process is exaggerated in the workshops. Turning to the findings on service reduction, Mr. Weeks noted the extremely high degree of consistency, with a correlation coefficient of .92. A rank- ordered list of programs along with the average amount of reduction showed services such as public safety and library at the top, with cultural services at the bottom. Mr. Weeks said there was an important distinction in the average amount of reduction for programs. Displaying a list of the 15 pro- grams most often cut, he said only 10 percent of the respondents eliminated any program. Mr. Weeks said the problem is that the costly programs are the popular programs, and the programs that are reduced result in much less money saved. Though there seems to be general agreement to produce significant savings through reduction of services, there is no consensus on reductions that produce that amount of money. He noted that eliminating all the pro- grams chosen by the respondents would still produce a budget shortfall of 25 percent. Mr. Weeks revealed a similar dilemma on service enhancements. There is great consistency throughout the instruments. Mr. Weeks introduced the topic of revenues with a discussion of general tax- es. He noted that a recurring theme is broad support for balancing the budg- et through raising a general revenue. But there is no general support for any single revenue source. He said the most popular revenue sources tend to produce the least amount of revenue (with the exception of a restaurant tax), while the least popular sources yield more revenue. Mr. Weeks summarized his discussion saying that respondents seem to balance the budget by a combination of approaches, placing greater weight on addi- tional revenue. There is recognition that significant revenue will have to be generated through service reductions, but there is not full support for reducing services that will yield the amount needed to reach that budget target. There is wide support for using additional revenue to balance the budget, but not agreement on what revenue sources to use. The rank-ordered list of programs reveals broad public support for Public Safety, Library services, and programs that serve special populations for which there is not broad support for the use of user fees. There is also broad public support for services that respond to important community social issues. Mr. Weeks said the information in the report should be used with caution. He said the report is a "snapshot" of public opinion about services. There are other important reasons to make a decision about expansion, maintenance, or reduc- tion of a program beyond simply public opinion. Other considerations include public health and safety, contractual agreements, State mandates, and inter- nal management and operational considerations. Mr. Weeks said the information was useful to identify programs with such broad support that reduction is unlikely. The information also gives an indication of the kinds of policies the City might pursue in developing solu- MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 13, 1992 Page 3 e tions to the budget deficit. Mr. Weeks said the report suggests glvlng more intensive consideration to alternative means of service delivery. Mr. Simonsen gave more detailed information on revenue raising, saying three out of four respondents chose one of the general taxes, but there is no ma- jority support for anyone tax. He noted there was most support for corpo- rate, restaurant, room, and entertainment taxes and least support for utili- ty, personal income, and payroll taxes. Mr. Simonsen said this pattern was consistent among the three instruments. He said there was most support for combining two or more taxes to yield $8 million, but there was no agreement on which taxes to combine. Combining gross receipts and corporate taxes received the highest vote; 20.5 percent of the respondents chose this combi- nation. Mr. Simonsen said that there was considerable support for a combination of establishing and increasing user fees. Most often suggested were establish- ing fees for the Concerts In The Park program and increasing fees for recrea- tion programs in community centers. There was a reluctance to increase user fees for specialized services (services to seniors and people with disabili- ties). Mr. Simonsen said that taxes for construction bonds (property taxes) for capital improvement projects were divided as follows: 40 percent--affordable housing 42 percent--fire redeployment enhancement e Mr. We'ks summarized the presentation, saying the City Council has engaged the public in a serious discussion about the problems that the community is facing. He said the process had shown that involving the public in these discussions can be done. Mr. Weeks concluded that the process ought to be continued, if at all possible, leading to movement from the general to the particular. Responding to questions from the council, Mr. Weeks said his conclusion about the process being a success and wanting to carry it forward, is not based simply on the high rate of response. He noted that the data is "S0 sensible" it cannot be ignored, saying great thoughtfulness was demonstrated by the public. Mr. Weeks emphasized that the workshop experience was valuable for data collection as well as involving large numbers of community members in serious discussion. He said that anecdotal comments made by respondents have been transcribed into a 250-page document that is available on request. Responding to a question from Councilor Green, Mr. Simonsen said many people expressed disappointment that there was no entry regarding administrative costs for them to check. Councilor Boles was struck by the dichotomy between personal and business taxes. He asked for a brief one-page summary outlining the professors' con- clusions. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 13, 1992 Page 4 e e e Mr. Weeks agreed to do so, saying the team looks forward to every opportunity to provide further analysis. Mayor Miller thanked everyone involved in making the presentation. The coun- cil agreed to discuss how best to proceed at its next work session. The council meeting adjourned at 7:05 p.m. (Recorded by Yolanda Paule) MNCC 011392 MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 13, 1992 Page 5