New Search
My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
New Search
Gas Tax Sunset
COE
>
PW
>
Admin
>
Execs
>
Executive non-confidential
>
Historical
>
Gas Tax Sunset
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/11/2010 9:58:12 AM
Creation date
10/10/2008 1:13:19 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PW_Exec
PW_Division_Exec
Administration
PWA_Project_Area
Road Repair
PW_Subject
Gas Tax Sunset
Document_Date
1/28/2008
External_View
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
58
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
~ <br />Councilor Beriman thanked everyone who testified. She said she did not "read" the election as <br />the voters rescinding the existing gas tax. She acknowledged that some would disagree with an <br />action to extend the gas tax and that those people would have a right to place it on the ballot. She <br />appreciated hearing that people were willing to "step up to the plate" to help at the state level "if <br />[the council] did what they wanted." She commented that the bond would not provide enough <br />money to fund the backlog of street repairs. She asked if it would be possible to modify the <br />ordinance so that the sunset date could be postponed until it was triggered by a remedy <br />implemented by the State or County that would satisfy the City's funding need. <br />City Attorney Jerry Lidz stated that the council could amend the ordinance but it could not make <br />the sunset date contingent upon the action of another government body. He said the council <br />could extend or repeal the sunset. He explained that it was a constitutional principle that a <br />governmental body could not delegate its legislative authority to the legislature. <br />Councilor Bettman requested ordinance language that would extend the tax by three years, <br />indicating that this would be enough time to see if there were other remedies at the State and/or <br />County level. <br />Councilor Clark was pleased to hear Mr. Romain indicate he would be willing to work toward a <br />statewide solution. He heard that the gas tax was not the right funding solution but that those in <br />opposition to the tax were committed to finding the right one. He agreed that it was a larger issue <br />than an individual revenue stream and that it was a larger core service issue. He believed that <br />there was money in the City's budget but it was not being spent as people expected it to be spent. <br />He felt that people wanted the City to "deal with at least some of this problem" with the money <br />that it had. He was somewhat concerned that repealing the sunset would cause there to be two <br />political fights at the same time: one to keep the $1.4 million and the other to pass a bond which <br />could potentially generate tens of millions of dollars. He was inclined to believe that it would be <br />wiser for the City to seek short-term solutions with the money it already had. <br />Councilor Zelenka stated that the gas tax could only be used on road maintenance by law. He felt <br />that anyone who mistrusted the city government should stand "rest assured" that it would be <br />illegal to spend it on other things. He aclrnowledged that the gas tax was tough for people on <br />fixed and low incomes but this was not an increase, it was maintaining the status quo. In <br />response to those who said the council should listen to the voters he wished to point out that the <br />voters in Wards l, 2, and 3 voted "overwhelmingly" in support of the gas tax increase. He <br />thought it likely they would do the same in a vote to maintain the existing tax. He questioned <br />whether the gas tax was truly the cause of all gas station owners' woes. He noted that he sat on <br />the Metropolitan Policy Committee and observed that Oregon Department of Transportation <br />funds to every part of the state were being cut because the revenues from the gas tax had been <br />declining. He attributed this to the increase in efficiency in cars. He stated that the 5 cent gas tax <br />had already paid for $16.5 million in road maintenance over the past few years. He disputed any <br />assertion that the backlog did not exist, adding that anyone who thought so should "just drive <br />around." He averred that the City had been "abandoned by the feds and abandoned by the State" <br />and this was why the City had pursued a funding solution on the local level. He was skeptical <br />that a"petroleum guy" would help promote a statewide increase in the gas tax. He asserted that <br />half of the people who used the roads in the City of Eugene did not help to pay for the roads in <br />property taxes. <br />Councilor Poling believed the City needed a concentrated effort to get all of the cities on board in <br />support of either a countywide gas tax or to submit something to the State. He believed that <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.