City counselors are scheduled to vote on November 27 on the proposed assessment fee, which would cost homeowners an estimated $5.22 per month, or about $63 a year.
The purpose is to raise $6.9 million a year filling a $100 million pot hole [pardon the pun] that gas taxes don't cover for repairing, rebuilding and maintaining Eugene's aging streets.
" "I regret that we are in the position of having to look at other ways to get enough funding to take care of the preservation and maintenance of our streets," said Councilor Gary Papé. "But the fact is that we are in that situation. So the question is, how do we dig our way out. "
I can think of a billion-dollar bus project that might help
The city council did approve a local gas tax (five cents per gallon) that generates about $3.6 million annually.
Business fees would depend on the size of the business and the amount vehicle traffic to that business. For example, 2,500 square-foot restaurant with a drive-through would pay $54.11 monthly [$649.32 annually], where a 4000 square-foot restaurant furniture store, which attracts fewer cars would pay $8.48 per month [$101.76 annually].
8 comments:
If Eugene does actually get this tax assessment approved by the people, they, the people, need to keep an eye on the City Council to insure they don't resort to the Portland way and use the money for some dumb feel good project rather than street repairs.
In the words of Ronald Reagan, "Trust but verify".
Gee, wasn't that gas tax they added suppose to go toward road repairs?
This is totally wrong. One obvious reason is not all property owners own the same number of vehicles.
I run, and my route is usually the local streets. I see houses with no cars, and I see houses with many cars. I see commercial vehicles always parked in front of the same houses. I see big heavy mobile homes parked on the streets.
Then there are the many that live in apartments. Will they pay their fair share? Nope.
I would like to see a full audit where the money goes now. In the budget there is a line item for such things - but the money is going elsewhere. My guess is social services - all that increased handout to illegals they eagerly want us to take in.
all that money could buy a lot of bicycles, thus reducing the need for roads.
beware this train (er, high speed bus?) of thought when Ms. Kitty gets the money in her paws.
in my opinion, the high-speed bus system is a joke. I would still like to see their figures and how they estimate that it will actually pay for itself, and if there is a breakeven point. Maybe in 50 years?
Of course, these are probably the same people who think that shoving four lanes of traffic into a "traffic circle" during rush hour,is a safe thing to do.
Robin
Public transportation is not about paying for itself but instead about social engineering.
Sid Leiken
Def. social engineering=convincing others that they are obligated to change their life style to accommodate your theories while maintaining your own identity.
Examples: Convincing the public that they need to live in crowded multi-family high density cubicles while you live on your acreage in the country.
Convincing the public that in order to save the environment they must ride bikes and take mass transportation while you go from speaking engagement to vacation home on your private jet.
Bobkatt
You definition of social engineering is well stated. Just like our SB100 and the Oregon land use planning system. Springfield is getting ready to undertake a residential land study to see how much land we have available for the next 20 years to abide by state law. If people want to live in condos or on small lots that is their choice, but choice should also include those that want to live on a larger lot with a larger yard as well.
Until the legislature begins taking a hard look at where we are today, Springfield and every other city has to abide laws that have been dealt to us, whether land use planning or any other issue.
Sid Leiken
Social engineering also has to have fiscal responsibility. Even though the EmX is receiving matching funds from the feds, it is still taxpayer money no matter how you look at it.
In a city the size of Eugene/Springfield, a bus system such as the EmX, especially one that cost as much as this one does is not very feasible in my opinion, especially when there are more economical alternatives.
Personally, I think the public should take a closer look at the EmX system, and really reconsider whether the project to move forward or whether we should focus our attention on the infrastructure of our road system.
Post a Comment