New Search
PROPOSAL 6: The City of Eugene could examine the ramifications of <br />providing an internal subsidy for the Weed Mowing Program either <br />in part or entirely. <br />There are some issues that must be considered: if the program is <br />to be completely funded, would this encourage those who usually <br />privately abate their obnoxious vegetation to become lax knowing <br />that a public agency will provide this service for no charge? If <br />the program is to be partially funded, what would be a fair rate to <br />charge those individuals who will pay their fees? <br />Here are some statistics based on the table on page 3 establishing <br />the Weed Mowing Program's net loss. <br />% Expenses % Expenses <br />Fiscal Total Net Net Covered By Not Covered <br />Year Expense Receipts Loss Receipting <br />83 -84 $18,690.40 S12,756.37 <$5,934.03> 68.30 31.7;0 <br />all <br />84 -85 26,343.60 19,430.63 < 6,912.97> 73.8% 26.2 °0 <br />From this table we note that a partial subsidy of 31.7% and 26.2% of <br />the total Weed Mowing Program expenses for the last two fiscal years, <br />respectively, would have made the program solvent. To be more pre- <br />cise in determining the actual dollar amounts the City lost on the <br />program, it should be noted that the $7.60 cost per bill to the <br />Finance Department includes both salaries, which are elsewhere funded, <br />and then materials, which are entirely dedicated to the Weed Mowing <br />Program. The breakdown is $4.48 in Finance Department salaries per <br />bill to the net loss: <br />Year Billings x 4.48 = Salary Costs minus Net Loss = Amended Loss <br />83 -84 279 x 4.48 = $1,249.92 - $5,934.03 <$4,684.11> <br />84 -85 466 x 4.48 = 2,087.68 - 6,912.97 < 4,825.29> <br />These two similar figures ($4,687.11 and $4,825.29) are the dollar <br />amounts that the City has had to bear for the last two fiscal <br />years because of the existence of the weed mowing program. Thus, <br />budgeting in the neighborhood of a $5,000.00 subsidy per year <br />(and allowing for staff time for the Public Works Department and <br />Finance Department employees that are involved in this program's <br />operation but not paid from its revenue) would have provided for <br />its solvent operation. <br />We can, in the same fashion, determine what additional funds would <br />have been necessary to fund the entire weed mowing program in 84 -85. <br />We will use this year as it has the largest net billing (which trans - <br />lastes to the largest cash flow) or the last five years (from table <br />page 3). The cost of the program above salaries already funded <br />would be: <br />Finance Dept. Net Additional <br />Year Total Expense Salaries Included Cost to City <br />84 =85 $26,343.60 minus 52,087.68 = $24,255.92 <br />a <br />—10 <br />