Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/18/1979 Meeting h M I NUT E S EUGENE CITY COUNCIL e July 18, 1979 Adjourned meeting from July 11, 1979, of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was called to order by His Honor Mayor Gus Keller at 11:45 a.m., in the Council Chambers, July 18, 1979, with the following Councilors present: Jack Delay, Betty Smith, D. W. Hamel, Eric Haws, Scott Lieuallen, Gretchen Miller. Councilors Brian Obie and Emily Schue were absent. 1- I. Items From Mayor and Council A. Shakespeare On-The-Mall Production Mr. Lieuallen commended Shakespeare On-The-Mall Production by the Oregon Repertory Theater. He congratulated the Room Tax Committee and the Council on. seeing their way clear to create a mechanism by \'ihich such things can be funded. He hoped that it could be repeated next year. B. Revenue Task Force Appointments Manager told Council it was important to have the first Revenue Task e Force meeting the first week of August. He asked that Keller and Lieuallen make their appointments to the Revenue Task Force. C. Goal-Setting Meeting Set For Council Don Murray is available September 21 for the Council Goal-Setting Session, Manager said. The meeting will be held Thursday afternoon, September 20, 1979, to Friday afternoon, September 21, 1979. D. Eugene Renewal Agency Appointments Manager, noting the expiration of terms of Wally Swanson and Frank Shearer, said nine applications listing the Renewal Agency as first choice and one as third choice were on file. Mr. Shearer no longer wishes to serve. Next week the Council will vote on the applications to determine those to be interviewed, and set a date for interviews. E. Committee Appointments to be Advertised 1- Room Tax Committee Ms. Smith questioned whether current committee makeup included a representative of the hotel/motel industry. 2. Employment Training Advisory Committee--two positions with resig- nation of Elizabeth Heath and George Russell. e 7/18/79--1 382. 3. Commission on the Rights of the Aging--one position. Manager - stated that designated alternate could take position. e F. Kakegawa, Japan, Sister City Representative Dr. Robert Clark introduced Mr. Mototeru Kamo, who brought 97 dif- ferent varieties of iris to Eugene from Kakegawa, Japan. Dr. Clark told of the airport reception and the planting ceremony. Mr. Kamo is a member of the Board of Directors of the Japanese Iris Society and a member of the American Iris Society. Mr. Buford, from Eugene, will work with Mr. Kamo in the exchange of plant materials between Eugene and its sister city, Kakegawa. G. Seed Burning Litigation Mr. Long said that Tuesday afternoon the City applied to the Marion County Circuit Court for a writ of mandamus to order the members of the Environmental Quality Commission to comply with the present State Implementation Plan, the current federal law (50,000 acres). Members of the EQC have been ordered by the Court to comply with those federal limitations. The City took that action because the State had issued permits for 198,000 acres to be burned. The City asked them not to go into their fifth year of violation. The EQC response was to continue the pattern of violations, and the City went to Court yesterday afternoon. Mr. Long indicated there will be one more proceeding in August, before the Marion County Circuit Court, at which time the Court will decided whether to impose a fine on the members of the EQC for the past violations. The writs of mandamus are being served. Mr. e Long said indications in the press have alluded to the action in Seattle, indicating that the rules on the Federal level might change for this burning season. He said they do not think that will happen. There is not enough time for final action from Seattle to make any significant difference this year. To Mr. Lieuallen's question about the permits already issued, Mr. Long said they have asked the Environmental Quality Commission to revoke those permits or lay them aside. II. Routine Items for Council Approval A. Improvement Petitions Res. No. 3192--Authorizing street paving, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and pedestrian way construction within Deertrail Subdivision (1526) Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote. Motion carried unanimously. e 3~3 7/18/79--2 , Res. No. 3193--Authorizing street paving~ sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and pedestrian way construction within and adjacent to . Treehouse PUD; sanitary sewer construction on Frederick Court from 35th Place to 450 feet west; street paving on Dellwood Drive from 450 feet northwest of 38th Avenue to 650 feet northwest of 38th Avenue (1538) Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote. Motion carried unanimously. Res. No. 3194--Authorizing storm sewer construction approximately 120 feet north of Vernon Way from Calvin Street to approxi- mately 120 feet west of President Street (1526) , Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote. Motion carried unanimously. B. Council Minutes--June 25, 1979 and June 27, 1979 Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to approve the Council minutes of June 25, 1979, and June 27, 1979. Motion passed unanimously. C. CETA Discretionary Grants (Memo Distributed) Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the City Council approve the Program Agency Advisory Council recommendation to fund e the discretionary grants and request that the City Manager modify existing subcontracts to include the new positions. Motion carried unanimously. III. Manager said he would tell the Council about the property tax relief, HARRP and income tax relief, and election impact (dates). Bill Baines, Lane County Tax Assessor, will talk on assessment problems, and the impact of the new legislation on the Eugene taxpayers. In the property tax area, there will be a 30-percent reduction for homeowner-occupied single-family residences on the part of the City and other jurisdictional levies which pertain to operations and exclude debt service and serial levies. If homeowners are to receive reductions, they must file their applications with the assessor by August 1, 1979. The bill the homeowner will receive will have the reduction subtracted from the total. The amount of the reduction will apply to 75-85 percent of the City tax bill, as the balance is in debt service (not the same in all districts, i.e., different in 4-J and Bethel-Oanebo). . 7/18/79--3 38~ For the City portion only, on the $65,000 house, if the Eugene budget ., levy passes on August 14, the net reduction will be $37 below last year's levy on the same house that, last year, was worth $50,000. The homeowner . of the hypothetical $50,000 house last year paid $1,215 if he lived in the 4-J District. The total reduction as a result of the reductions in each of the jurisdictions (4-J and Lane Community College) might be around $250. The individual tax bills are mailed in October. It is assumed that the lending institutions will pass the savings on, but that is unclear. Renters must fill out a form by August 1, 1979, to receive their share of the 30-percent reductions. The limit of their refund will be between $300 and $400 (4.7 percent of contract rent). In the income tax area, the taxpayer does nothing. They will receive a refund of approximately nine percent on their 1978 income tax liability. That will be done starting in October. On the election date and budget process, the ballot measures, for an operating levy for cities that have voted a ballot over six percent, will have two sections--A and B. Ballot A will be a vote on last year's approved levy (or the average of the last three years, whichever is higher), adjusted with the consumer's price index and the population growth index. Ballot B (they could both be on the same ballot), will be the amount in addition to Ballot A, or new expenditures. Items on Ballot B would not be subject to the State 30-percent reduction. In addition, Eugene voters will have to vote on a new tax base for the year 1980-81. Manager said the income tax rebate mayor may not continue the following years, depending on the surplus in the State Treasury. The property tax relief will be considered part of the succeeding year's State budget. Manager introduced Bill Baines, Lane County Tax Assessor, who served on e the Oregon Assessor's Legislative Committee. He said the legislative package consists of five bills, one of which paid for the other four. One other bill refers the whole thing to the voters in the May 1980 primary. The citizens, after experiencing the bills, will be able to vote on them. The remaining three tax bills consist of: 1) income tax refund bill; 2) income tax personal exemption indexing bill, and a limit on State spending; and 3) HB 2540, which is a property tax bill. HB 2540 consists of: a) tax relief to the homeowner and renter; b) controls on State and local spending; c) control on the increase in assessments. It creates "OOPR" (Owner-Occupied Principal Residents). The County expects 15,000-17,000 problem OOPR cases (defining duplex property, farms, and "mom and pOp" businesses) out of 60,000 homestead applications in Lane County. HB 2540 increased the HARRP--Homeowner And Renter Refund Program--to incomes up to $17,500 limit. Mr. Baines stressed that every homeowner qualifies for tax relief, if they owned and occupied the property as their . - 7/18/79--4 385 , principal residence as of the 30th of June, but they must file to receive it. There are three categories of renters: 1) Those who have earned - $15,000 or less. They have already filed their HARRP form. They do not have to do anything. They will receive their HARRP and 4.7 percent additional refund also. 2) Those that earn $16,000 to $17,500. They need to file and get their refund along with the 4.7-percent renter re 1 i ef. 3) Those that earned over $17,500. They need to file a special renter relief form. Mr. Baines said that he would talk about the 30 percent that isn't 30 percent, and the five percent that isn't five percent. The 30 percent that isn't 30 percent: By calculations, only 12 percent of the present City budget is not covered by the 30-percent tax relief. That is to say, there is 12 percent bonded indebtedness and the interest not covered by the State 30 percent. Existing serial levies are not excluded. Future serial levies for capital construction are excluded from the 30-percent State-paid tax relief. The taxing district will get the same number of dollars, but the taxpayer pays 30 percent less on those items which are not present bonded indebtedness and future bonded indebtedness, and serial levies for capital construction (the Legislature did not want to pay for locally-voted monuments), so the person in the 4-J District will get about 27 percent (30 percent of 12 percent not covered is three percent, and subtracting that from the 30 percent of the total tax bill) tax paid by the State of Oregon. It will be on their tax bill when it comes in October. People who do not file for property tax relief until after August 1, 1979, will receive a check from the State of Oregon after - January 1, 1980. The five percent that is not five percent: In growth counties, the five percent will not be five percent. The Legislature was concerned that the tax burden had shifted from commercial to residential. They cited the phasing out of the inventory tax in the last few years, the change of Western Oregon to a severence tax (timber is taxed when it is cut and not when it is standing), and the rise in the value of residential property, and the new residential construction. The Legislature separated the OOPRS and the non-OOPRS. They asked the counties to report how much property they had separately and what the indicated ratio is, market value as a ratio of the previous assessed value of the property. The counties sill send these rat i os to the State wh i ch wi 11, in turn, determi ne the state- wide ratio (assessed value over market or true cash value). Mr. Baines said to suppose that the statewide average is an increase of 20 percent over the previous year's assessed value and to suppose the homestead (OOPR) accounts in some growth counties is 30 percent. The State would return to the counties a correction factor (.875). The counties would take the correction factor and multiply it by the .130, and the result would be the increase that the counties would use to change the property value. The actual increase to change the property value would be 1.1375, or 14 percent, and that is the five percent that is not five percent. This program will start a year from this coming October, when the 1980-81 values show on the tax statements. - 7/18/79--5 38~ I Mr. Baines said the property value increase and the tax bill will come on , the same piece of paper in the Lane County October billing. Thi swill cause a need for two boards of equalization because the property owner has - until February 15 to file his value and that means the refund account will have to be bigger. To the question by Mr. Hamel about the homeowners that lived in their home until June 30, and moved to a new home on July 20, Mr. Baines said that the owner would not get a tax deduction because the new house was not registered as an owner-occupied principal residence on June 30. To Mr. Haws' question on property tax, that some people believe they might get cash or a check refund next year that could be applied to next year's tax, Mr. Baines said that if people do not file by August 1, 1979, it will not be on this year's tax bill. They will get a check after January 1, 1979. Lending institutions are going to handle this rebate differently, he said. Some people who have loans with the Department of Veteran1s Affairs will not file before August 1 in order to get a check back because the Department of Veteran's Affairs has decided to add the tax back to the principal balance each year. Some institutions will send Christmas presents of the rebate. To the question from the Mayor on the A and B ballots, Mr. Baines said the City staff was well versed in the A and B ballots, but that he would run through it. IIAII ballot must only contain the prior year's operating levy or the average of the last three years, plus the factor for growth in the Portland Consumer Price Index. The IIBII ballot is any new programs or additional dollars. If you have a program that exceeds the population and - the Consumer Price Index, you will have to put it on IIB.II IIBII can't pass unless IIAII does. The disclosure must be made on the ballot itself. The safety net provision says that if the City has been out of the six-percent limitation in three out of the last four years, the City has to bring to the voters a new tax base election and the voters may vote on that new tax base only in three elections. Manager said there was a bill that established election dates from the previous eight to six. The six are the third Tuesday in February, last Tuesday in March, third Tuesday in May, last Tuesday in June, third Tuesday in September, and the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. He said having August or July elections is not allowed. The voters must approve the IIAII ballot first, or the IIBII ballot does not pa s s . IV. Jetboats on Willamette River: Report from City Attorney on Possible Options Mr. Long outlined three possible courses of action that the City could take. The first would be to appear before the Army Corps of Engineers on the July 26 and present a City position. The City could join with other groups and may have some impact. Second, the City could become involved e .38'7 7/18/79--6 . with other State agencies, such as the Marine Board, Department of e Environmental Quality, and the fish & Wildlife Commission, and encourage such groups to act. This effort by the City would be similar to the one they make during the legislative year. The third possible course of action would take more time. It woul d be direct regulation itself. There is authority for the Council to impose some form of regulation if it decides to act, Mr. Long said. There are land-use and environmental considerations because of the Greenway. If the City chooses to regulate due to those considerations, the Council could undertake the long process of developing City codes and enforcing them. Mr. Haws and Ms. Smith did not favor regulation at this time. Mr. Li eua 11 en asked if limits could be set on the operation as to the level of activity and speed. Mr. Long replied yes, however, the simplest position was often the most effective. He said now agencies are doing nothing but the City could take action if it chooses to do so. Mr. Del~ moved, seconded by Mr. Liueallen, that the City take a position that it opposes use of motorized vehicular traffic on those portions of the Willamette River inside the city limits. Ms. Smith asked if Mr. Delay meant all motorized traffic, and he said he did. His intent of the motion was Option A in the memorandum. Mr. Lieuallen envisioned the use of a snowmobile-like vehicle and was e concerned for bathers under those circumstances. Ms. Miller noted that the motion, as she understands it, refers to all motorized recreational and commercial recreational activities on the river. She noted this was the only quiet place in an urban environment and the Council would be making a mistake to let it become other than it is. Mr. Lieuallen asked that the staff be directed to have the City Manager deliver that message to the two regulatory bodies, the Army Corps of Engineers and the DEQ, that are holding hearings in the near future. Motion carried 5:1, with Mr. Hamel voting no. v. Ordinances for Second Reading CB 1935--A measure submitting to the voters an ordinance amending the Eugene Code, 1971, which imposes tax on transfers of interest in real property. CB 1936--A measure submitting to the voters an ordinance amending the Eugene Code, 1971, which imposes tax on gross receipts of businesses. - 38i 7/18/79--7 . Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Miller, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. Manager noted these bills have been referred from the previous Council - meeting because of a split vote. 'Mr. Delay recognized the spirit of compromise in the Council and the Budget Committee that brought these measures before the Council. When these were originally vetoed, the reasons that were given were that there was not enough time for the electorate to become informed about these issues and there could be possible confusion if they were placed on the ballot with the budget request. This is why these issues are now being considered for the November ballot. The Revenue Task Force should not be saddled with this political issue, Mr. Delay said. He felt they should deal with long-range solutions, not the immediate revenue measures, for next year. Ms. Miller was concerned that the Council was stalemated. Mr. Delay's comments giving the reasons for the veto, that they were ill-conceived and too hasty, did not seem to get to the answer, she said. The City needs the revenue. Ms. Miller called for suggestions to resolve the present dilemma. She said she would be willing to have the Revenue Task Force look at these bills and give the Committee a deadline to bring recommendations to the Council with adequate time for the Council con- sider these bills for the November ballot. If the Council could reach a compromise consensus, she felt that she could go along with that. Ms. Smith agreed that these bills should go to the Revenue Task Force, but e had reservations about requiring them to make a recommendation in time for the November ballot. Ms. Miller replied that it was critical to her that there be something on the November ballot. Manager noted the Task Force would have to return the measures to the Council about the 10th of September. This would allow them six weeks for deliberation. Mayor felt he could support a compromise of having the Task Force look at the measures and make an early decision. He said he shared the con- cern to pass this year's budget, and that it was best to let the Task Force deal with these measures, making sure to keep the issue clear and separate. Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to postpone action on CB 1935 and CB 1936, and to refer them to the Revenue Task Force Committee until the Council gets the recommendation from the Revenue Task Force Committee after they have looked at these bills. If the Task Force recommends these measures, the Council would take action and place the bills on the November ballot. e 389 7/18/79--8 ~ " Ms. Miller wondered if, after looking at the recommendation, it would be possible that the recommendation of the Revenue Task Force be vetoed and, - if so, would that action not result in wasting the time of the Committee. Mayor concurred that a veto could result in wasting the Committee's time. Mr. Haws said that he would not compromise. Motion carried 5:1, with Mr. Haws voting no. Upon motion duly made, seconded, and passed, the meeting was adjourned to July 23, 1979. ~)~ Charles T. Henry City Manager CTH:so/CM8a1 (Recorded by Beth Conant) BC: so/CM8a1 e - 7/18/79--9 3'1rJ