Legislative Policies for the 2007 Oregon Legislative Session

New Search

City of Eugene Legislative Policies for 2007 Oregon Legislative Session City of Eugene Legislative Policies for 2007 Oregon Legislative Session D6. Department of Human Resources IV. TRANSPORTATION Further reductions in services to at-risk youth, families, the homeless, unemployed persons and persons with mental disabilities can create situations requiring police response. Cuts in these areas also would reduce referral opportunities, resulting in A. FUNDING FOR STREETS, HIGHWAYS AND TRANSIT reduced ability to resolve problems outside the criminal justice system. Funding needs for maintenance and preservation of the City's existing transportation t system remain in a critical stage. Inflation is eroding the buying power of current funding, The City of Eugene is opposed to State service reductions that will remove key survival yet the City's population and transportation system usage. continues to grow. Present ~I services to persons unable to obtain those services elsewhere. Such reductions not only funds do not allow the City of Eugene to preserve its current investment in maintainin are a direct threat to the health and welfare of thousands of Ore onions, but also resent g 9 p existing transportation infrastructure or address the increased safety and seismic needs of the potential for additional burdens to local social service programs as well as the local the people and business in the community. Without additional funding, the existing system criminal justice system. will continue to deteriorate. D7. Department of Housing and Community Services Presently there exists an unfunded backlog of capital preservation projects for the City's The City strongly supports continued State funding for low-income housing programs, streets (street overlays and reconstructions) of over $100 million. This backlog could grow including the Oregon Housing Fund, grants to community development corporations and to more than $232 million by 2011 unless additional capital funding is located. The City is funding for emergency housing services. The Emergency Housing Account has supported facing a shortfall in funding for transportation system operation as well. programs such as the. shelter at Centro LatinoAmericanoond the Interfaith Emergency Shelter Program. The account is mostly depleted and needs to be replenished. In the fall of 2000, the City Council requested that the Citizen Subcommittee of the Eugene Budget Committee review local funding options to address these needs. The subcommittee concluded that the most critical capital funding need currently facing the City is in addressing the backlog of preservation work for both streets and off-street bike paths. In order to meet this goal of preserving Eugene's transportation infrastructure, adequate funds are also required for operating and maintaining the system. The 2003 Legislature passed HB 2041, increasing vehicle titling and registration fees to' ` fund .a transportation finance package generating $1.6 billion for state and local bridges; repair and replacement. Interstate 5 bridges locally, over the McKenzie and Willamette _ Rivers, are two highlighted examples of the state's investment in replacing and strengthening bridges essential to the statewide transportation system for both commercial and general use transit. HB 2041 additionally provides helpful revenue to cities that can be applied to maintenance of existing local transportation systems. Further resources are needed locally, however, to fully address local system maintenance. t Recommendation ~ Support supplemental transportationfunding that.• o bolsters a more equitable share offunding forcities and counties; o establishes system maintenance, preservation and operation as a priority for funding; o ensures thegreatest possible flexibilityforthe use offunds to meetlocal needs; o supports the development of mechanisms to fund transit, including access forelderlyand disabled people; o supports the coordination of land use and transportation planning and implementation; o supports livable communities and innovative strategies, like nodal development, to improve transportation efficiency; and o preserves alllocal option transportation system funding alternatives including local option fuel taxes and local transportation system maintenance fees. 16 17 l