Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/17/1992 Meeting e M I NUT E S Eugene City Council Work Session McNutt Room--City Hall August 17, 1992 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Shawn Boles, Ruth Bascom, Roger Rutan, Debra Ehrman, Bobby Green, Randy MacDonald, Paul Nicholson, Kaye Robinette. The work session of the Eugene City Council was called to order by His Honor Mayor Jeff Miller. I. WORK SESSION: EUGENE DECISIONS John O'Connor of the City Manager's Office facilitated the meeting. Councilors shared their views of the process to date. Mr. Robinette said that in light of the feedback he had received since the previous meeting, he believed that the council had made several mistakes. He e said that the first mistake was not developing a funding strategy for the shortfall remaining after cost savings were identified. The council should reconsider that action. Mr. Robinette said that further, he did not believe the council sufficiently honored the portion of the process goal that the final strategy be community supported. He referred the council to the survey feedback, noting that the community indicated support for the restaurant tax, corporate tax, and room tax. He suggested that the Revenue Task Force examine the restaurant and corporate tax to see if the inequities that exist around the restaurant tax could be mitigated. Mr. Robinette said that the enhancements identified by the council were important to the community, but he pointed out that the enhancement with the most support was affordable housing. He was in favor of developing a strategy to fund affordable housing with a bond. Mr. Robinette suggested that the other enhancements should be considered in the future, while the council attempts to garner additional community support for each. Ms. Bascom said she had received several telephone calls regarding the draft strategy. The feedback she received indicated to her that the council had not brought the community along in the process sufficiently to the extent required for support of a final strategy. She endorsed Mr. Robinette's suggestion that the council address funding for core services. Ms. Bascom said she was inclined to postpone further consideration of other enhancements at this time, and attempt to link each with a specific revenue stream in future discussion. e MINUTES--City Council Work Session August 17, 1992 Page 1 5:30 p.m. ---~ e Mr. MacDonald said that, while he had received few telephone calls, the feedback received by the council reflected the unwillingness on the part of the community to be taxed. People want services, but they want to tax someone else for the cost of services. Mr. MacDonald said that he agreed the council needed to back off on the enhancements identified for inclusion in the strategy package due to the need to educate the community further about the importance of the enhancements. He recommended that the council examine its strategy in light of the community feedback and adjust the strategy according- ly before moving ahead. Mr. MacDonald said that the revenues identified for funding services required further analysis. Mr. Nicholson agreed with the remarks made by Mr. Robinette and Mr. MacDonald. He said that the council did not have to solve the City's entire budget problem at one time. He suggested that the council address funding for core services before moving on to enhancements. Mr. Nicholson said that the council can put the enhancements off without putting them aside. He noted that he had received litte community feedback, and what he had received was positive, courteous, and reasonable. Mr. Nicholson said people feel that the council has not given enough attention to the "doing things differently" aspect of the process. He suggested the council give more concrete form to the commitment it made to doing things differently. Mr. Nicholson cited as a specific example working on planned and structural savings in the current budget to fund such enhancements as communi- ty policing. e Ms. Ehrman stressed the tentative nature of the decisions made by the council. She suggested that the council was driven by a time line that might not have been reasonable, as it did not allow more time for final strategy development. Ms. Ehrman pointed out that the council went farther than the public in making cuts. However, she believed that the council needed to have more indepth discussion of revenues and the integration between revenues. She added that she believed the task was one for the council as a whole, rather than for a task force. The task force could refine the council's conclusions. Ms. Ehrman pointed out that the community did not support the enhancements to the degree that the council did, and suggested that the council examine the enhancements to determine what should be put off to the future. She pointed out that the process was an educational process, and she believed the feedback indicated education was occurring. Ms. Ehrman concluded that the council had more work to do. Mr. Rutan said he was pleased and proud to be part of the council and happy with the process. He said he had received a moderate amount of telephone contacts. Mr. Rutan said some of the callers were poorly informed or misin- formed in different ways. He attributed some of the misinformation to the media coverage of the council's deliberations. Mr. Rutan said that the council message that the process was iterative was ignored. Instead, the media reported decisions as though they were final. He said that the personal attacks launched on the council in newspaper columns were damaging to the goal e MINUTES--City Council Work Session August 17, 1992 Page 2 5:30 p.m. e of reaching a community-supported solution. He said he was offended and disappointed by such attacks. Mr. Rutan stressed the tentative nature of the decisions made in the process. The council was not finished with the process. He noted that he had been con- cerned about several of the enhancements and had anticipated further council discussion about those issues. Mr. Rutan said he was concerned about the characterization in the media that the council was not considering community input. He referred to the cost savings, noting that the savings reflected very closely the community direction. Further, he anticipated that the council would proceed with the community's first choice of revenue source in the form of the room tax. He pointed out that the corporate income tax was the third revenue source most favored by the community. Mr. Rutan agreed that the restaurant tax required further discussion at a council level as the community did not have the benefit of the reasons offered by councilors regarding the infeasibility of the tax. Mr. Rutan concluded that as a councilor, he had been elected to review all input and balance that input with his knowledge. He said survey results did not indicate a majority support for any single revenue. The council had considered the results of the survey and attempted to interpret the results accurately. Mr. Rutan expressed appreciation for the letter from the Chamber of Commerce regarding the draft strategy. e Mr. Green referred to the reporting of the process by The Reqister-Guard and said that anyone could take "cheap shots" at the process. He said it was easy to stand back and criticize the decisions made by the council. Mr. Green said the tentative nature of the decisions made by the council was not reported. Mr. Green indicated his willingness to re-examine the decisions made by the council and pointed out that the community had a fallback position in the form of Strategy C. However, the council had not heard support for that strategy from the community. Mr. Green recommended that the council re-examine the core services and discuss the timing of implementing enhancements in the future. He said the council should not attempt to solve the entire budgetary shortfall at one time or on the backs of a single industry. Mr. Green indicated his support for a corporate income tax, but suggested that a restaurant tax was not as equitable as many in the community believe. He encouraged the council to work together toward a unanimous decision. Mr. Boles said he was also pleased and proud to be a member of the council. He called the reporting of the process an egregious misrepresentation of where the council was in the process. He repeated the goal of the process: a comprehensive, sustainable, citizen-supported funding and service mix. Mr. Boles said that the issue was not one of "pet projects" as reported, but the best mix of services for the community sustainable into the next decade. e MINUTES--City Council Work Session August 17, 1992 Page 3 5:30 p.m. e Mr. Boles reminded the council that it had relied on a variety of information sources, including the Trends and Issues Report, which provided the council with a broad context for its deliberations, and many adopted plans. He said that there were three principles driving the process: 1) representative democracy; 2) the need to solve more than one problem at a time; and 3) crisis prevention, or the need to be proactive to community needs. Mr. Boles believed that the principles he cited were the reasons for the council support for a new library: the new library not only responds to the public, but reinforces the council's goal for downtown revitalization. In response to criticism that the council had not listened to community feedback, Mr. Boles pointed to the mix of cost savings and revenues. He said that the draft strategy brought the mix to a 29:71 ratio, which was very close to the public feedback. Additionally, Mr. Boles maintained that the council had been told by the community it did not want Strategy C. Mr. Boles said there was no way to provide for revenues that would not make someone angry. If the community responded to those individuals as though they represented the entire community, it would never have a quality discussion with the entire community about revenue issues. Mr. Boles said that while the council does not have to implement every enhancement now, it needed to be clear about its intent with each item. Mr. Miller expressed appreciation to the council for its time, commitment, and energy, as well as for its strong feeling for the community. He said every issue the council has discussed concerns human lives, and that message does e not come across to the public in reporting. Mr. Miller said the difficulty of making the reductions decisions was not described. Those reductions will affect many people. Mr. Miller said that the process is ongoing and not complete. He regretted what he termed the irresponsibility of the personal attacks launched on the council in the newspaper. Mr. Miller said that government in general is at a crucial period in history. He said that the focus of the process is on service delivery systems, asking the community, "what is it that you want your government to accomplish? How do you want to pay for it?" The council agreed to review the core services and cost savings identified thus far in the process. Mr. Boles pointed out that the major messages of the input process were that people supported 30 percent reductions in services and 70 percent new revenue. He said that if the council funded the core as it stood, it would have funded 5/8 of the problem with cost savings and 3/8 with new revenues, which did not reflect the community's desires. Ms. Bascom acknowledged the survey results, but suggested that the council consider the responses made by the community regarding revenues. She believed the message was imprecise, and said the council needed to work more on revenues and be sensitive to the community feedback. e MINUTES--City Council Work Session August 17, 1992 Page 4 5:30 p.m. e Ms. Bascom raised the issue of the citizen involvement program and said that a majority of citizens supported a cut in the program. The council had decided to deliver the services differently. Ms. Bascom suggested that the council reinforce that message by reducing the $75,000 cost to $50,000. Mr. Boles said that Ms. Bascom was arguing for a Strategy C approach to citizen involvement. He said the citizen involvement process results in higher quality decisions on the part of the City. Mr. Boles said he did not want to lose the opportunity to change the way the program is managed, but he continued to support the level of funding identified in the strategy. He added it would require resources to change the way the program is managed. Until those changes are made, he favored maintaining the current funding. Ms. Ehrman asked Ms. Bascom what she believed the effect of the cut would be. Ms. Bascom said she did not know for sure. She anticipated that the staff and council would spend less time on neighborhood issues as a result. Mr. Nicholson pointed out that the council had agreed to revisit the program and suggested it was "tokenism" to make such a cut. He said that the council should leave the program in place at the current time. Mr. MacDonald agreed. Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Mr. Robinette, to delete $25,000 from the citizen involvement/neighborhood groups program. Ms. Ehrman said she could not support the motion because she did not know what the cut would entail. She pointed out that one staff member is devoted to the e neighborhood program, and a large part of the budget is for the newsletters. She said that the program had been cut several times over the years. Mr. Green pointed out that as the council discussed doing things differently it had focused on volunteerism. He said that the program was a source of volunteers. Ms. Ehrman added that the council is not precluded from realizing more savings in the program. The motion failed, 7:1. Mr. Nicholson moved, seconded by Ms. Bascom, to add the afford- able housing enhancement to the core and eliminate the portion of the cost intended to support systems development charges (SDCs) for low-income exemptions for a total of $300,000. Responding to a question from Mr. Boles, Mr. Nicholson said that he believed that the SDC dollars had become "magic money." He said that the City had not collected such funds in the recent past. Mr. Nicholson said that no one seemed to be willing to recognize the impact of the SDCs on the capital budgets. He suggested that the proper motion was to support affordable housing at $500,000 and reduce the capital budget by $200,000. He offered his concept as an amendment to his motion. e MINUTES--City Council Work Session August 17, 1992 Page 5 5:30 p.m. e Ms. Bascom, who had seconded the motion, indicated she could not support the amendment. Responding to a question from Mr. Green, Mr. Boles said the figure identified for support of the SDCs assumed that the $300,000 for affordable housing would be used to leverage HOME program dollars of around $1 million. In response to Mr. Nicholson's remarks, Mr. Boles said that the impact is not on the General Fund capital budget, but on the SDC funds for the systems involved. He suggested that without dedicated revenues the council would be forced to go to the contingency fund to support low-income SDC exemptions. Mr. Rutan wondered about the links between the enhancements for affordable housing and human services. Ms. Ehrman and Ms. Bascom supported inclusion of the program in the core due to its high community ranking in surveys. Ms. Ehrman also noted that afford- able housing had been a council goal for three years. She indicated a desire for more information about how the money would be spent and suggested that the program could be phased in at a lower amount. Ms. Bascom said that Federal dollars for housing require a local match. Mr. Robinette spoke of his interest in supporting the program through bonding. The motion passed, 6:2. e Mr. Boles moved, seconded by Mr. Nicholson, to move the human services enhancement at a cost of $500,000 into the core. Responding to a question from Ms. Ehrman, Mr. Boles said that his proposal was an addition to the City's current contribution to human services. Mr. Gleason said that the City's contribution would be $1.1 million. Ms. Ehrman spoke in opposition to the motion as the City of Eugene is currently the largest contributor of General Fund dollars to the Joint Social Services Fund. She supported an increase of $200,000. Ms. Ehrman moved, seconded by Mr. Robinette, to amend the motion to add the human services enhancement to the core at a cost of $200,000. Mr. MacDonald supported the amendment due to the ranking of the component in surveys and to what he believed was a need to challenge the City's partners in the program to address unmet needs in the human service area. Mr. MacDonald added that he would like to have an increase of $500,000, but expressed agreement with Ms. Ehrman that the City's partners in the program, particular- ly Springfield, needed to make a larger program contribution. Mr. Boles said he opposed the amendment as he believed the amount was too small. He said that the demand for program dollars was four times the amount currently available. Mr. Green agreed with Mr. Boles' remarks. He did not e MINUTES--City Council Work Session August 17, 1992 Page 6 5:30 p.m. e believe that the City could count on a larger contribution from its partners in the program. Ms. Bascom said that the result of the citizen input process did not indicate support for the program. The motion as amended passed, 8:0. The meeting recessed briefly at 7 p.m and resumed at 7:10 p.m. Mr. Boles spoke in support of inclusion of community policing in the core. He said that while the community response was not strong, it was not clear to him that those responding on the issue had the benefit of information about the plan and the financial consequences of not implementing the program. Further, Mr. Boles said that the ratio of service reductions to revenues did not reflect the community's feedback. Mr. Boles moved, seconded by Mr. Green, to include community policing in the core at a cost $2.15 million. Mr. Robinette said he supported community policing but did not think the council had made a case for the service to the community. He did not want to offer the community the service without coming to community consensus regard- ing the need. Mr. Robinette supported putting off the enhancement until the new police chief was on board and an educational program was developed to elicit community acceptance. e Mr. Boles argued that the police chief was hired because of his understanding of preventive policing. He believed the chief needed the resources to make the program work. Regarding the level of community acceptance for the program, Mr. Boles said that the community had gone through an extensive community process in the development of the Public Safety Long-Range Plan. He said community policing was a component of any sustainable, comprehensive service delivery system. Ms. Bascom agreed with Mr. Robinette's remarks. She was in favor of starting a public education campaign in 1993 and developing a revenue source specifi- cally for the program. Ms. Bascom said that the council was in danger of "sinking" its core proposal with the addition of community policing. Mr. Rutan agreed. He said that the community did not seem to perceive the service as a basic service. Mr. Rutan said Mr. Boles' points were correct, but the question was one of how to garner community support for what he considered an important service. Mr. Miller said he was deeply supportive of the program. However, he suggest- ed the possibility of keeping the program out of the core while moving forward with a separate proposal for fire construction/operations and community policing that included a tie to a specific revenue. The motion failed, 6:2. e MINUTES--City Council Work Session August 17, 1992 Page 7 5:30 p.m. e Mr. Nicholson moved, seconded by Mr. MacDonald, to add communi- ty policing to the core at the cost of $500,000 the first year, with an additional $500,000 for each subsequent year until $2 million in FY97 is achieved, the dollars to be taken from operational efficiencies. Responding to a question from Ms. Ehrman, David Whitlow, Director of Public Safety, said that the long-range plan called for funding for human services agencies as a first priority. He anticipated that staff would recommend that $400,000 be directed toward contracts with those agencies to provide the types of services the CAHOOTS program provides at the present time. After that, he said staff would recommend that the council institutionalize such programs as Safer Schools and bicycle patrols, which occur now on an ad hoc basis. Mr. Robinette said he would like staff to respond to the realism of Mr. Nicholson's proposal before he supported the motion. Mr. Boles agreed. He pointed out that the total program costs were $4 million, not $2 million, noting that the $2 million was a compromise figure reached by the council in discussion of the community-oriented policing portion of the plan. Mr. Rutan indicated his agreement with the remarks made by Mr. Robinette and Mr. Boles. He said that the council should identify specific funding for the entire program rather than attempt to implement it on a piecemeal basis. Mr. MacDonald said that the issue was not one of funding alone, but the need to build community support for the program. He said for community policing to e work, the community must work with the police. Mr. MacDonald suggested that Mr. Nicholson's proposal would allow the City both to implement the program and educate the community about the program. Mr. Nicholson said he shared all the concerns that had been raised. He said there was a large majority of people who were not affected by community degradation to the degree that others were. Mr. Nicholson said that if the City did not implement the program and make progress in improving the day-to- day life of the community, it would have difficulty in "selling" an abstract concept like community policing. Further, Mr. Nicholson said he wished to illustrate the council's commitment to "doing things differently." He maintained that there were many areas the council could look to in order to realize $500,000 annually. He maintained that the council would have a more "sellable" package using such an approach. Mr. Boles said he would support the motion if it was the best the council could do. However, he disagreed that the issue was one of the "salability" of the final strategy, but rather about the council having the information to make the best decision for the community. Mr. Green indicated his opposition to the motion because he did not think the amount proposed would result in a high quality product. e MINUTES--City Council Work Session August 17, 1992 Page 8 5:30 p.m. e Ms. Bascom referred the council to what she considered a discontinuity between the expressed interest and need for community policing and the community's willingness to support that need. She maintained that the council needed to address the program by tying it to a specific revenue stream at some point in the future. The motion passed 5:4; Mr. Miller casting the tie-breaking vote. Mr. MacDonald suggested that the council request the City Manager to prepare an analysis of the identified cost savings. Mr. Rutan moved, seconded by Ms. Bascom, to reduce the amount of money identified for facilities maintenance from $3.7 million to $3 million. Mr. Rutan said that at a level of $3 million, the City would be substantially increasing its expenditures for maintenance. A commitment to the expenditure on an ongoing basis would result in major inroads on the problems that arose from a lack of funding in the past. Mr. Boles reminded the council that it had already dropped the amount for facilities maintenance by $800,000. Further reduction as proposed by Mr. Rutan would drop by one-third the original amount, which was calculated on the value of City assets and deferred maintenance needs. He pointed out that the proposal would reduce the core even further and not be consistent with the e community's desires as reflected in the surveys. Mr. Robinette asked Tony Mounts, Administrative Services Department, how much of the original $4.59 million identified for facilities maintenance was to "catch up" on past maintenance needs. Mr. Mounts said $730,000 was for deferred maintenance, and $300,000 was for Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. Those dollars were spread over a "catch-up" period of five years. Mr. Mounts confirmed that after five years the total figure dropped to $1 million. Responding to a question from Mr. Robinette, Mr. Rutan said that he believed that the Chamber of Commerce figure of $2.7 million was adequate to address capital maintenance needs. He said that the City had spent an average of $600,000 yearly and its facilities were still standing. Ms. Ehrman said she could not support the motion because over the years the council had cut capital to support operations. At some point, Ms. Ehrman believed that course had to halt. She pointed out that the figure was large because of the need to address deferred maintenance. Ms. Ehrman said that the chamber's figures did not take into account the demands of the ADA. Ms. Bascom suggested that the issue before the council was whether to set necessary and reasonable targets for the health and well-being of the communi- ty, or identify a target for which it can obtain public support. e MINUTES--City Council Work Session August 17, 1992 Page 9 5:30 p.m. e In response to Ms. Bascom's comments, Mr. Nicholson said it would be too bad if the council sacrificed important principles to make the strategy palatable for the public. The motion failed, 6:2. Responding to a question from Mr. Miller, City Manager Mike Gleason estimated that it would take staff 20 to 30 days to describe the service mix identified by the council. Mr. Boles moved, seconded by Mr. Green, to tentatively accept the core proposal as designed. The motion passed, 8:0. The council discussed funding strategies for the core package ($3.8 million). Mr. MacDonald proposed that the council retain the mix of corporate and personal income tax to support the core proposal. Mr. Rutan said he generally supported Mr. MacDonald's suggestion, but raised the possibility of refining the package by substituting a business and occupation tax (B & 0 tax). He said the tax would provide the broadest possible base as it encompassed partnerships, sub-s corporations, as well as C corporations and individuals. Mr. Mounts described the Multnomah County business tax and the Portland B & 0 tax. Mr. Boles asked how public sector employees would be addressed under the B & 0 e tax. Mr. Mounts said that those employees would be excluded from the collec- tion pool. Ms. Ehrman asked how much more would be realized from a B & 0 tax as opposed to a corporate income tax. Mr. Mounts estimated that an additional $900,000 would be collected at a rate of one percent. It would require 1.6 percent to realize $3.8 million. Mr. Boles asked if a B & 0 tax would affect professional corporations. Mr. Mounts said yes. Mr. Boles asked if there was a difference in the efficiency of collection, administration, and implementation between a B & 0 versus the mix of taxes the council has considered. Mr. Mounts said he had not analyzed the concept thoroughly, but pointed out that the administrative costs for business would be less than for a personal income tax due to the number of filers. In addition, the personal income tax requires monthly turnovers for withholding. He estimated that there were 5,000 entities affected by the B & o tax in Eugene as opposed to 75,000 persons affected by a personal income tax. The council briefly discussed with Mr. Mounts how a B & 0 tax would work and the rates necessary to support the core proposal. Mr. Rutan moved, seconded by Mr. Nicholson, to appoint council- ors to serve as a revenue task force for the purpose of analyz- e MINUTES--City Council Work Session August 17, 1992 Page 10 5:30 p.m. e ing and reporting to the council on the different drawbacks and benefits of different configurations and combinations of the personal income tax and business occupation tax. That analysis would include examination of equity and efficiency at various rates. Mr. Nicholson said that the motion was a sound proposal, and suggested that the council consider more community surveys. Mr. Boles said that he supported the proposal if a short time line was estab- lished for the revenue task team's work. Mr. Rutan suggested a three week time line. The motion passed, 6:2. Mr. Miller appointed Mr. Rutan, Mr. Nicholson, and Mr. Green to serve on the revenue task force. The meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m. e (Recorded by Kimberly Young) cc53017.082 e MINUTES--City Council Work Session August 17, 1992 Page 11 5:30 p.m.