Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout250514 WSMINUTES Eugene City Council Work Session Eugene, Oregon 97401 May 14, 2025 12:00 p.m. Councilors Present: Eliza Kashinsky, Matt Keating, Alan Zelenka, Jennifer Yeh, Mike Clark, Greg Evans, Lyndsie Leech, and Randy Groves Mayor Knudson opened the May 14, 2025, Eugene City Council Work Session in a virtual format. 1. WORK SESSION: Council Discussion of Revenue Options City Manager, Sarah Medary, presented information regarding revenue options. Councilor Discussion: • Mayor Knudson -noted this is challenging work on a challenging timeline; stated the community has a desire for stable services; noted the community's desire for Council to have meaningful conversations that will move the budget issue forward. • Councilor Clark -stated support for making necessary cuts; would have preferred to send the fire service fee decision to the voters; open to compromise to preserve some services; interested in lower-dollar revenue options if a fee is the interim solution; noted preference for time-limited fees; requested more details on adapting storm water fees; expressed concern about business impacts and use of storm water fees for community services. • Councilor Evans -asked if administrative costs would be included in any new fee; inquired about the implementation cost of using the stormwater fee; noted a time- limited fee is the most viable short-term budget solution and believes the community would support it. • Councilor Kashinsky -stated the importance of preserving community services; noted the fire service fee was developed as a long-term solution per Council direction; expressed concern that a sunset date would undermine effectiveness and defer the budget issue; does not support any solution that doesn't fully restore proposed cuts; requested information on service impacts if a lower fee is adopted; stated a minimum 10-year sunset would be necessary if one is included. • Councilor Groves -is interested in a compromise solution; noted the recent public comments received focused on service cuts, not opposition to a fee; believes many still expect to vote on the fire service fee; supports prioritization work; stated the State tax structure won't solve the issue and a fee alone won't fully address it; stated a need to define essential services; is likely to support the fire service fee at the ballot; asked about legal use and restrictions of storm water fees. • Councilor Zelenka -noted the fire service fee was intended to address current budget issues; referenced $60 million in cuts in previous years; stated some services will be cut regardless of an implementation of a fire service fee; asked what would be permanently cut with a reduced fee; supports letting the fire service fee go to the ballot in November; noted a stormwater fee alone would still require major cuts. • Councilor Yeh -believes some public opinions have not been heard; supports a compromise solution; urged for timely action; asked about bridge funding and the $8 million new revenue option; stated she is opposed to a new fee limited to two years; noted the fire service fee was meant as a permanent solution. • Councilor Leech -supported the fire service fee as a good option; noted she is opposed to a two-year fee as it is costly and slow to implement; supports an alternative fee option with a minimum sunset of four years; is open to a reduced fee; wants to restore and analyze alternative response services due to safety risks; supports fees that maintain core services and holding vacancies instead of cuts; favors moving a new fee option to a public hearing promptly. • Councilor Keating -would support a compromise on an alternative revenue fee to preserve services; wants to explore one-time funds to close gaps; opposes any options with an insufficient sunset time to explore permanent solutions; is opposed to a two-year fee solution; favors a four or six year sunset for any new fee; requested staffs next presentation include information on cuts and possible restorations with proposed revenue options. • Councilor Kashinsky-asked staff to confirm that a fee structure for less than six years could have a negative impact on the City's credit rating or require additional cuts in the outyear to balance; noted that public comment is coming from people who have heard about potential impacts. • Councilor Zelenka -stated that a two-year option is not tenable; questioned what a two-year revenue would bridge to; asked staff to show the list of services that will be cut without a new revenue source. • Councilor Clark-stated support for another work session on May 21, 2025 for this topic; does not believe fees are a long-term solution, and voters will likely reject a long-term fee; believes economic growth and new housing will expand the tax base to fund desired services. • Councilor Yeh -noted many important services are on the proposed cut list; would support an $8-million-dollar fee with a four-year sunset and Consumer Price Index (CPI) increases; said cuts would be needed annually without CPI adjustments; asked whether the citizen fiscal stability advisory group would report to Council or staff. • Councilor Leech -supportive of a solution that prevents service cuts to alternative response, community engagement and other critical services; does not feel that $250,000 is enough to sufficiently fund alternative response services. • Councilor Keating -asked what services could be saved with only the stormwater fee. • Councilor Groves -asked if the revenue generating services that may be cut have been calculated into the proposed budget information provided. • Councilor Evans -supports a compromise on a fee with a four-year sunset with $4.7 million in stormwater fees and $1.1 million in one-time money, to provide time for developing long-term solutions. • Councilor Zelenka -believes the focus of Council's conversation should be on services lost rather than saved; noted the proposed cuts are likely permanent; requested a clearer outline of proposed cuts in future discussions; believes a four- year sunset limits time for long-term planning; asked staff to provide a fee implementation timeline. • Councilor Clark -asked if it is appropriate to put forth a motion at this time; asked staff if there will be a work session on May 21, 2025; is in support of the fee terms stated by Councilor Evans. • Councilor Leech -stated that using the storm water fee is a workable compromise without extra administrative fees; asked staff about potential negative impacts; requested a motion to draft an ordinance for the next work session aiming for a June public hearing; inquired if the May 21, 2025 discussions will meet hearing deadlines; would like a draft ordinance with $8 million in revenue and four-year sunset prepared for the May 21 work session; requested more information on using stormwater fees for revenue. • Councilor Kashinsky -stated a desire for motions to be made to ensure that the majority vote is accurately counted; would prefer separate motions for each potential option. • Councilor Zelenka -requested a list of proposed cuts be prepared for the May 21 work session; asked about the stormwater fee duration and if the administrative costs for the $8 million dollar option come from reserves; believes motion should wait until the proposed cuts are fully understood; prefers for potential options to be presented at the May 21 work session. • Councilor Evans -stated intent to make a motion to direct staff to prepare materials for May the 21 work session, including a draft comparing $6 million and $8 million dollar options with a four-year sunset, plus a $4.7 million dollar stormwater fee and $1.1 million in reserve funding option with workforce reductions through vacancies; noted Lane County's proposed workforce cuts as a reference model. • Mayor Knudson -noted the options discussed should be presented separately by staff; summarized the options that councilors requested more information on during this session. • Councilor Keating -asked if the motions discussed are too prescriptive; asked if motions are necessary to move forward with the information requested. • Mayor Knudson -asked staff if a motion to draft a proposed ordinance is required. MOTION: Councilor Clark, seconded by Councilor Leech, moved to direct the City Manager to bring back information to the Council's May 21 work session regarding a stormwater fee increase that would generate $4. 7 million revenue, with $1.1 million one time, with a 4-year sunset. Councilor Discussion: • Councilor Keating-asked for clarification regarding wording of the motion; is in support of the motion. • Councilor Zelenka -asked if there will be a second motion; noted a second motion may affect support for the first; inquired if the proposed motion can be simplified. • Councilor Leech -stated preference of including Attachment A in the motion due to its many undiscussed parts; supported motion one as outlined in the agenda summary. • Councilor Kashinsky -noted prolonged discussion has cost impacts; stated the motion doesn't fully restore service cuts; will not support the motion. • Councilor Zelenka -asked to clarify the total revenue of the motion on the table; confirmed that the motion on the table would include service cuts; asked for the motion to be restated. VOTE: 7:1 PASSED IN FAVOR: Keating, Zelenka, Yeh, Clark, Evans, Leech, and Groves OPPOSED: Kashinsky MOTION: Councilor Evans, seconded by Councilor Leech, moved to direct the City Manager to prepare an ordinance consistent with the outline set forth in Attachment A of this AIS with alternatives of either an $8 million dollar or $6 million dollar revenue generation and have a sunset date of four years. Councilor Discussion: • Councilor Zelenka -asked to clarify that both a $6 and $8 million-dollar option as well as a potential cuts list will be available at the May 21 work session. • Councilor Kashinsky -stated that a four-year sunset is too short; noted concern for a $6 million dollar option and the impacts of potential cuts; will not support the motion for these reasons; is in favor of further discussions overall. • Councilor Keating -believes that a four-year sunset date is too short; supports the motion to bring back information. VOTE: 7:1 PASSED IN FAVOR: Keating, Zelenka, Yeh, Clark, Evans, Leech, and Groves OPPOSED: Kashinsky Councilor Mayor Knudson adjourned the meeting at 1:32 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Katie LaSala City Recorder (Recorded by Sara McKinney) Link to the we beast of this City Council meeting here.