Springfield City Council — June 30, 2025

0:39 May 19th, you received the final report from the FIS Springfield fiscal submitting task force and started a conversation on the recommendations. Tonight is a continuation of that conversation. staff employees and guidance on which recommendations you have pursuing to go with prioration or recommendations. Basing feedback tonight, uh staff's goal is to be in work on some of those items while in summer recess and bring that information back to you in work session or multiple uh in the fall. And then uh to help tonight's conversation, we created a potential implementation timeline for recommendations that have a positive impact on the city's general fund as well as a corresponding five-year forecast that shows an impact. And if you could bring up the timeline and I'll talk briefly.

1:49 Yeah. All right. Um, so recommendations up here, two of them, same recommendation, just two potential ways of approaching it. Levy, uh, that's already been in front of you and is in motion and will be on the, uh, ballot in November. Um, that one will take effect on July 1st, 2026, which is the beginning of fiscal year 27. Um, the second one is the, uh, library reduction scenario. uh one potential is and just u I should probably briefly say um this is based on assumptions and uh those assumptions are a realistic uh time frame but also because we're dealing with the deficit spend starting in fiscal year 27 uh impacts our five-year forecast or engages it as soon as possible and so uh

2:35 that's kind of what's driving this you know just kind of our best recommendation as uh caretakers of the city's uh fiscal health So, library reduction, we'd be in front of council uh in the fall uh with if you're wanting to move forward with that recommendation, we would incorporate into the fiscal year 27 uh budget process that also would take effect on July 1st, 2026. Uh and beginning in fiscal year 27, uh the next uh let's see, items three and four, it's the payroll tax option. Uh option one is in front of you in the fall where you just implement um um payroll tax. Uh you know from conversations we had with Eugene based on their experience we should allow ourselves about a year time frame

3:21 to uh implement that. That's educating uh the business community on administering that uh as well as as advanced notice for the payroll services such as ADP uh to um co to their program. um that then would take effect on um if I can read that halfway through fiscal year 27. So I think it should be January. Yep. Uh January of 207. Uh but we wouldn't see tax receipts uh until uh the second quarter of that year. So we would see them at the tail end of fiscal year 27, the last three months of 27. Uh the next option though is the same where we're in front of you uh in the fall talking about the payroll tax, but if

4:06 you decide to put it on the ballot, uh we uh took a May ballot for that, giving ourselves a year to implement that uh from July 1st, 26 uh to June 30th, 27. Um and then it would go live on July 1st, 27. Again, uh three months before we'd see those uh receipts coming in, so we'd see those coming in the second quarter of fiscal year 28. Uh and then the last item is the uh police uh levy. Similar to the fire levy, it's on its own time frame already. Um we're going to be uh in front of you uh in the spring of 2027 with that potentially going on the ballot in November of 27. And that would take uh effect on July 1st, 28 or the beginning of fiscal year 29. Uh and then if we call this

4:52 implementation scenario the five-year forecast will you know which which um payroll tax you for the forecasting. So for you forecast uh we took the uh option of where you would just implement the payroll tax without putting it on the ballot and just it impacts the general fund sooner. All right. So school years 27 through 31 um about mid down uh is the five-year forecast starting with the deficit spend of about 2.6 6 million in fiscal year 27

5:38 growing to 6.3 million uh in fiscal year 31. And then I've layered in based on those recommendations. So you have the library reduction um happening in fiscal year 27. Uh I believe it was the last quarter for the payroll tax uh in 27 and then the fire levy takes place in 27. Uh and then going out to fiscal year 29 is where the police levy would then uh take effect. And you can see how those four recommendations alone positively impact five-year forecast. Is it payroll tax done by the council or is it going to have to be avoked? There's two potentials. So you just implemented and that's what I actually used for this five-year forecast. The other ones if you were to um put it on a

6:24 ballot and you see the receipts coming in six months later. So that would just shift uh the paper. you wouldn't see anything in fiscal year 27 if it been asked if you and u and then a smaller amount in fiscal year 28 but then roughly those amounts for those years outward. So, one other thing we need this evening from you is after we've had a conversation on the recommendations also as an attachment is a public engagement packet. Uh, and Lee um has some questions for you regarding uh the plan for public engagement over the summer months. Um, and depending on uh the recommendations that you want to move forward with. Let's go to councelorly first. What I'm not seeing on here that came up in our initial conversation is a

7:11 library levy as a potential revenue. So the recommendations uh of the task force. So you model just specifically what was on the task force until we could give even better. Yes. Okay. All of this really at the end of the day is is up to you as a council to decide how you like to approach it. This scenario, does this budget include the transient lodging tax? I know there was we weren't getting um that from the Glenwood properties because it was the zip code.

7:57 Uh was that are those addressed and they're included in all of the numbers that we're looking at? Okay. So, things we got to figure out. One is the questions for you and then the questions, you know, more broadly for at least about what public engagement should look like. So, do you guys want to take this and you want to see all the material first and then dive into it or do you want to talk about uh the uh what uh Nathan needs to kind of get us through get us into the fall first? I think so, too. So, Nathan, you're looking for us to tell you, hey, we're going to see we're probably going to see this again in I

8:42 don't know if it was the 2nd of September or the 1st of September, whatever the first meeting back at September is. So, need some direction on what we should what we're interested in pursuing. We're going to add things so they can gather information, right? So like there's interested you know material on on on a li library levy and what you know what we're what we're supportive of going into in into that meeting. So who wants to dive in first or clarify questions right this could be a lively this could be a lively discussion not good. So as part of that conver conversation when we come back uh at the end of our break, one thing that would be helpful for me in regards to the conversation around the library is understanding what each

9:29 component of the library costs the city. So just events the book all of the different components like what is the core service and what have we you know kind of built upon as we've gone forward in all you know what are we buffering for the um list drift what are we lame are there play you know are there ways to build some some gap reduction in air it's kind of I just think it would be helpful to have that conversation around what we're actually spending to run the library in all of the different areas. Okay. So, I think how I'd approach that then is just the minimum staffing required to just

10:15 have open hours. Uh and then from there all the programming that the library does, how that you know what the demand is hours wise. Yeah, I think if we could delineate them, it'll help us to start having a maybe a more thoughtful conversation around, you know, the different cost components. Thank you. I appreciate you opening with that because I completely agree. I think it would be helpful to see what that looks like. Um I think that um because for me and and I have been thinking about this a lot in terms of how we've grown and we've put the library and the museum together. So, I would be really interested in sort of seeing what are the if we're talking about just library cuts, what is what are we talking about? I personally am

11:00 not supportive of cutting hours from the library. I think it's one of the the um the third spaces that we have in this town, one of the only ones that's available for people to access computers and to all of the thing all of the things that we have heard about from people. And additionally um you know in terms of the conversations that we've had so far I have had many many people come and talk to me or send things or want to talk about the library and supporting it. I've had no one come and say I can't wait to cut the library. So I think we need to look at that very carefully and think about that because I completely agree with councelor Weber. I would be more interested in looking at programming or how do we maintain the core services and the availability for

11:46 people and then how do we use that to um grow and stabilize which is why I am also interested in whether it's a library levy or what that looks like in terms of broadening our funding for the library because I do I I think we have heard from a lot of people how important that is and what they want that to be and I'm looking forward to to what those conversations ations look like over the summer from people and encourage people to come out and share that so that we can get serious about that. So that's how I I completely agree with you. Let's dig into that more and understand exactly what we're talking about, what we're looking at, and what are the creative things we do because I'm not going to be in favor of just let's cut the library and save $500,000 compared

12:31 to millions of dollars. I think it's it's worth it to us to figure out how to preserve that. and I'm interested in a levy looking at that or revenue. Um, so, so one of the things I know that the task force was not charged with was having the fire governance conversation. And I think that it, it's hard for me to be voting for a payroll tax unless it goes to stabilizing and establishing um the fire department's future within this context of Springfield. There's been a lot of difficulties certainly with you know it's it's been an unhappy marriage in some way some ways good but an unhappy marriage in some ways the mix between Eugene Springfield fire. Um that

13:18 said you know there's also you know I can I can see certain aspects of that. I I think it's really important and not with exhaustive detail but at least with um you know a a a reasonable level of projections. What are our options for fire governance as respect to this budget? What are our options for like what would this look like for us to have our own department? Because I know that conversation is going to come up in the fall. And the thing that really um I think the the underlying plea that I've heard from the department has been um let's you know when we are when we're required we're requiring these firefighters to have to ask for their jobs every five years and

14:05 whether they're not sure if they're going to have a future with you know in Springfield. They're raising their families. They're doing all their work here in Springfield. I think it's really important. my priority would be life safety certainly above um above really anything else. At the same time, I do recognize the very great value that the library does create for our community. And so um like councelor Rodley, I'm very much in favor of looking at what a library levy is, but I I think it's the it's that governance speech which was not talked about um which is of uh I think it's important to bring up. Um, I think my last comment is just that in voting for the the higher level of um, uh, fire levy, I didn't want to make

14:51 that vote except to balance the budget because I knew we needed to balance the budget in that way. It wasn't one to take because we had uh, we hadn't gotten a chance to talk about fire governance and I still think that's important. So that's that is okay. Anybody? Anybody else? I will, but I'm just gonna wait till ready for you. Um, I too have done a lot of thinking about this. Um, and I know that there's other communities around us who have councils who allow a motion and um, public test and signs to um, sort of get their

15:39 decisions. And that's not how I make my decisions. My decisions are based wholly on fiscal and um the the stability of our budget. Um and I think um even with no budget cuts to the library, it's clear that the the library isn't funded the way it could be and should be. Like there's not enough there. They'reing on a shoestring budget. We've had volunt people who are volunteers who come in and say, "I volunteer my time." which I I think is very admirable and is awesome, but it sucks that we have a library that has to be ran by volunteers. And so I think when I've looked at other communities and I looked at the hundred I don't know how many libraries we looked at the communities that put their libraries on a ley levy separated out from their

16:25 general fund so that every year they don't have to worry about the ever shrinking general funds that we have. um they have a stable method of funding that can then they can be responsible for that um is is a smarter way to go. I'm not in favor of a payroll tax and we're compelling people to pay a tax to support something that even though we haven't heard from them, we may they may or may not be supportive of that. We we're hearing from people that are actively involved in the library. I've spoken to lots of people who are like, I don't even think about the library because I've no I never go there. I don't have anything to do with it. But I'll tell you what, if we do a payroll tax, they're gonna they're going to know what that is. Um, so by putting that out there to the voters on a levy for the

17:11 library, it would truly show how valuable that is to our community. Um, I get concerned because there's a lot of the programs and events that happen there that I think are very narrowly focused and they focus on a certain area of our community that I don't think they reach out to everyone and I don't you know so they should be able to control that. I don't think I don't know that the government that we should be supporting and funding those particular kind of pet projects. Um, so I am not in favor of a um, payroll tax whether it be to the voters or not or compelling them and doing it immediately. And I really want us to look I think we're just like easing the band-aid off by taking

17:56 $500,000 and and eventually it's going to be another 75. You know, it's going to be this constant thing. And I just feel like they deserve to have stable funding and that's not going to be through the general fund. It's just not. Okay. So, let's dive into a couple different parts um parts of this because this I think this is the this is a helpful discussion. So, I think in the fall, right, like like understand bringing back information around what a library levy would would potentially look like. One of the questions that I have, and I'm gonna acknowledge that I hear kind of two separate themes, is really what is the headroom in our in our community between where we are right

18:41 now from a uh from a property tax rate and compression because when in the report you're like there's not that much headroom, right? So like getting that balancing act right would be it would be potentially really really important. Um the other question about the library and it's so hard because I know you guys are back there. I prefer looking right at you guys. So um understanding what the implications of what those so what those cuts would look like would be really would be really helpful I think to this conversation because I think we've got two two potential things happening. One of them is, you know, do do we concentrate on

19:26 hours and sort of get, you know, and get sort of more sharp around the hours or do we sort of balance that with with protecting programming? And I think there's a question out there which is, hey, are we duplicating anything with the other with the other jurisdictions between Walain, the school district, you know, other other focus, right? So I think councelor Rodley used the term sort of harden right like I hear that you know councelor Doyle I hear that kind of in your language too right which is hey like what is you know let's not make this a death by a thousand cuts let's be sort of strategic about whatever we're going to do um so I think that set of questions becomes becomes very like very important here

20:16 if you look at the numbers we have a$ two half million dollar deficit without the library and our general fund, that's $2.3 million instead of trying to figure out all these things. So, by eliminating that library from the general fund, it almost completely solves the problem instead of trying to do all these little things. Here's my concern. When I when I read the when when I read the whole thing, I can look at things completely differently. I hear what you're saying. I think it is a logical way to think about it. What I what I read what I what I see is the problem that we're going to run into is what is essentially where the is the cap on property taxes. There is not like even if we went out to the voters and said what are we going to do, you know, can we solve this all you know

21:02 through good campaigning and what people are voting for like state law is not going to allow folks to go that far as far as as far as property taxes go. That's what I'm hearing, right? And I know you both kind of go back and forth on payroll packs and again respect that is that um our what our constituents are telling us is they want us to protect seniors, right? That and that's what came up today with with protect retirees, find more people to pay, right? that you know pay in uh paying the uh pay to the system whether or not it be renters or workers or people out you know outside the area and being competitive for for businesses and I don't like I think that's why like when when the committee talked about

21:48 diversification of revenue that's where where the payroll packs ended up on the limit and I and I understand I think you have a really good point which is hey you guys have to be super like super strategic here we can't just take do one of everything, right? And we can't put ourselves in a cycle that every 5 minutes we're out in front of voters. But I just don't see a way that this is going to get fixed in the long term with us just 100% putting everything out to the, you know, on a on a five-year operating levy. My concern is Oh, I'm sorry. Can we go ahead and My biggest concern is that we just keep nickeling and diamond payroll tax. We've already seen it happen in Eugene. They've already increased it. It's like and now their thing is we saved the library but now we're we found another way to tax people and so we're going to keep I it's

22:36 like sales tax like we haven't ever voted in a sales tax which actually sales tax would probably help but you know it just you see it get put in and then it just slowly gets more and more and more because we can and I just don't want to see that happen. I I I don't think any of us want want to see that happen and let's go short on money. names at the end. Yeah. Here is to stabilize where our finances are and not to create this avenue where we just can turn the turn the dial every five minutes when it gets uncomfortable. Yeah. I'm to that to that point. I also am um very interested in looking at at a payroll tax and I'm not at all opposed to it. And when we had the initial conversation, it was like, how do we get it just right to start with, which I

23:21 think came out of that um fiscal task force as well as like consider starting here. I think and I appreciate councelor Doyle's perspective and revenue is a real issue and we are a growing city and we are we're not alone in having to tackle it, but we we can't keep doing more and not find a way to pay for it. So, I mean, that's just the reality of that of that diversifying in terms of revenue. And one of the things that I I do like about a payroll tax to the mayor's point is that it people the way say property taxes do or say a sales tax would or things like that. So, um looking at the different ways that people um that we can generate that

24:06 revenue in a fair way. You know, we're also being surrounded by municipalities that are also doing a payroll tax and the countyy's talking about doing a payroll tax. So, I guess there's this like, oh my gosh, they're going to tax us in a million ways. And we have these very real limitations that keep us from having the revenue that we need to do the work to make this the thriving, livable community that it needs to be. So, I'm still open to the payroll tax. I'm not against it. Um, and I hear what you say about the compression and the the library levy and would also like to just explore what that would look like. money. All the money we put you guys on both sides of that

24:53 broadly actually touched on part of that part of the uh payroll tax the stability um task force mentioned was you know starting at a certain point and putting some good parameters around that to kind of protect it. I know you can obviously down the road it could get raised raised like you're said and that's a concern of mine as well. I don't necessarily see us reaching our budget goals without it. So my question there when I look through all the numbers is how would we even do what we need to do without implementing it and I don't want to pay nobody wants to pay it just right absolutely I agree on the conversation around the payroll tax I don't see us getting to to solving our problem if we don't include it in some fashion so I'm supportive of continued

25:39 conversation for sure um as it relates to the levy I'm I'm open to seeing what that looks like, but I do get a little concerned when we have three things out there on levy like you know at some point voter appetite which like public safety I'm sorry to I mean I have to say public safety is the absolute most important thing that we do for our citizens. So in my mind contemplate those first. Uh so just putting that out there as yes, let's see what it looks like, but keep in mind that that is a is a key component. Anybody else? Um I do think putting these updated

26:25 round of fire governance questions in there, we are not going to settle this um like it's got to get like it has got to get back to the to the to the governance committee. I mean, we have councelor Mor and councelor Widley, the folks that sit on it. Um, this thing's got to get done and I think it it but like from our perspective when I look at the the finance piece of it, I think we're going to have to do more than one thing at the same time here. Did you want to jump in here? Yeah, I want to address that really briefly. So, I wanted to give you all an update. I wanted to put it in memo form, but life kind of gotten away a little bit from me recently. Um but when it comes to the fire governance discussion um there was you know there was a pause

27:10 because of some of the things that were happening in Eugene right because we are functionally consolidated so decisions that happen on one or or both sides kind of impact the other like it or you don't so you know there was some question about the the fee and whether or not that would be you know referred to the ballot and what was going on there so we're kind of waiting on that but I also I Eugene was looking at what is their fiscal impact in their budget. Um looking at all the different scenarios and we are also looking um in our side what is the implication of what what could potentially happen right? So like if if uh there was some you know some kind of split and we operated our own fire

27:55 department what would be the financial implication of that if we had some sort of in new kind of intergovernmental agreement what would look like about that so I just kind of want to talk a little bit if you let me um what expectation and hope would be if we went that route would be you know I want to a considerable improvement in the administrative costs of this of this department because why go through the pain of that exercise if you don't have some um illumination of redundancies and I am completely open to having that discussion with city of Eugene and I and I know that their city manager is really committed to this project and so um and

28:42 and we have a really excellent relationship. So I but it really comes down you know we have duplication in our HR we have duplication in IT we you know just systems wise and it just really doesn't make sense. So how can we take a model that's similar? I'll use MWMC as an example. You know there's administrative parts and there's facilities parts and maybe we can look to that is you know so it's just a matter of determining how we can have a more streamlined processes. There's still redundancies in MWNC you know it's just not as not as visible of a department right because it's it's water and it just does its thing and everybody just trusts that it will but you know fire is another thing alto together. So that's that's kind of thing one. Thing two, I will say, you know, kind of brace

29:27 yourselves a little bit because irrespective of all that, we know it's going to cost. We know it is going to cost more. It's just what is the scope and scale of that. The third thing that I wanted to sort of say is, you know, I haven't had a chance yet to really um talk to the union leadership um about some of the things that they've been talking about with with their desires for a fire district. That's not really my role. I'm not the policy maker here, but I want to be clear that, you know, philosophically when you're setting up a a new taxing entity, good public administration would say that you should be transparent about what the true cost of that entity be, regardless of the service it's providing. So, I would not be

30:12 supportive, nor would I recommend to this body that we use the city council, the city's permanent rate to kind of supplement another uh taxing entity. I think you have to stay, you know, if you're asking to vote, go to the voters on something, you should be transparent about what the costs are from the very beginning and you live or die on on that. That's why it's different set these up because you really have to hit the sweet spot just right. You don't want to ask for too much and you don't want to ask for too little. So that I I don't know how much the union has had even that conversation other than we need more money and I don't nobody's disputing that and you know it's the it's the mechanism and the how and I don't think we've had um real I haven't seen anyway real thoughtout numbers yet

30:59 from the union. Maybe they're doing that internally. Again, that's not my lane, but I'm happy to have a discussion about my philosophy and what I would recommend to this body if that if that was really heavily promoted. I just think that it's the devil would be in the details. So, just letting you know where I stand on that, but it's not my decision to make. That would be this body and obviously, you know, um Eugene City Council would have to weigh in on that as well. Any other questions for me? Okay. Oh, one final thing. Um, I did one other uh I did go to Doyy's uh observation about if we just wholesale removed a library as a service out of the general fund or from whatever mechanism be it a levy or or

31:44 just a complete cut. Um that was kind of some preliminary discussion within the task force. They saw that connection, right? And then they kind of backed off away from that in in later discussions. So I do want to say that you know your observation you are not alone in making that observation but there's a couple of issues. Uh one we're not solving the whole problem that the task force was very well aware that this is a intermediate step to try to address how do we get a structure in place that has more longitudinal stickiness on how to provide city services. And we're not talking like you know we're not trying to grow the city. We're not trying to get fancy. We like being Springfield. We like being, you know, just kind of

32:29 gritty and doing what needs to be done in in a no frills way. And I'm I'm completely on board with that. Um, but it doesn't get you there just on that decision alone. So that was something that the task force realized. Um and kind of the the conclusion that you have realized as well is it is going to take a number of levers that this this body would need to determine to try to get a meaningful trajectory on finding sustainable funding. Um the one comment about um the payroll tax that I think that that cities are observing is that it is a mechanism that's different than property tax and it has the ability to have some sort of increase over time that our property tax structure doesn't

33:15 have. So until the legislature is willing to have the courage to talk about Oregon's broken tax structure um you know we're really not going to make a whole lot of meaningful change. So, it's kind of left to cities to try to figure out how are we going to address providing services on the city level and you know I'm not feeling very optimistic about the legislature after what just happened. The only political thing I will say and I'm done. Well, I will say that I am I work in Eugene so I have the city payroll tax and honestly I mean I'm not the business but I don't even notice it. I mean it's like three bucks. It's it's really minimal in terms of what it the effect that it has on my on my financial. I'm

34:01 more concerned about the business. It has to match that for every single employee that they have. Um but as a taxpaying person, you know, and having to look at like what you're going to tax me on, it is a pretty small amount to to see coming out of my check to to know that I'm, you know, providing value to a program. But I think that's the other thing is that we need to be able to show people that we're using that because there are times when I look at that and I'm like, what am I paying for in Eugene? Like, am I really getting what they're telling me that it's supposed to be for for the safety or whatever? So, um, if we do go that direction, we need to make sure just like with the bond for the roads that we have clear, you know, things that we can come back to people and say, "This is what you're paying for and this is what you're getting for it."

34:47 And I think that's really going to be valuable to help people buy in on that because Springfield does want to support what, you know, they need. So, so I think that's an effective segue into this question about guard rails, which is kind of the thing we haven't uh dived into. Um, you know, and when we talk about coming back again, this could take a couple times in the fall, right? So, just thank you for being patient as we kind of develop this. One of the real things that I think we've got to have is like the road report, annual report has been super effective. Like I don't know what a version of that looks like here, but that was one of the things that that I definitely had. Um or you know, and I think we can open up some other ideas. The staff will brainstorm a list of ideas for us, but we've got to get a lot crisper on what we're proposing for

35:32 guard rails. We haven't really dove dived into that conversation um yet. But like the other one that I kind of had in my mind, it's a very very clear process that is in code that we would have to go through if somebody was going to change it. That makes it cumbersome at best, right? That you know that that we're not going to you know be out trying to adjust this thing every every 30 seconds, right? Because you know and I don't looks like but right that is a very clear piece of feedback. I've heard a couple of uh times I've shared it in the community is like getting crisp and transparent about what those guard rails are is going to be important. This ideas for things that again we're kind of brainstorming here, right? This is

36:17 not meant to kind of hem us in at this point. Other guard rails that they would be interested in if we if we went for further down this road. I I don't quite know how to do this, but I think the most unusual thing about the payroll tax was the strong support it received from some some of the folks, especially some of the major industries. That was a surprise to me. I did not expect that. And so to that end, I would almost be more interested in I again, I don't have this figured out, but I'm like, how can we make sure that there we go? How can we make sure that those voices are at the table? Yes. When it comes to adjusting that that uh payroll

37:04 tax up or down because if they're not at the table, those industries that are paying our jobs are not not represented, then I'm very concerned that we're that we become tone toned up. The business and climate of of the business, the industry climate as it is. I don't have an idea, but alternative is heard that a lot for the LPD tax. Yeah. a lot of businesses. That support wasn't there at the beginning of that task force process. It developed and it developed because we had this transparent process where they had an opportunity to ask any questions and look under the hood and really see how things were working. So it grew and then out of that process we got nine recommendations with a consensus support of we think you should consider these

37:50 nine recommendations and I think you know kind of a buyin in terms of recognizing that they could be ambassadors going out into the community and helping educate because really what influenced their decisions was the education they experienced on uh our local government over those nine weeks. You have enough direction on your Well, I know two direction on on the uh library reduction and a levy um scenario. And so that's something then we'll plan on a work session to bring back that information. Um I also interested in a payroll tax um guard rails and what those potentially uh look like. Um, I think also just some

38:37 brainstorming I've done is I I would think that you would also want to just um how that process is going to work in terms of the steps involved. I think it's going to probably be done through an ordinance. Um, but just kind of a clear sort of direction on what the process looks like for implementing a payroll tax. Um I think right now we're looking at uh you know the recommendation was a 0.1 employer 0.1 employee um considerably less than uh across the free feels small to you should feel even smaller but um you know that was not sort of sustaining what they really were trying to say is is to raise that target of 2.3 million and so we've got to kind of dial in what the exact amount is but I'm wondering if it'd be helpful to also just understand what small variations

39:23 uh and how they could impact that. So if it was 0.11, you're getting into the 110,000th, but that could have a significant impact. So does that sound like useful information? I I I I think I think also an understanding, right? Because I think we're all thinking through the business compensation like we have a bunch of different firms in town, right? Understanding who's kind of paying what at what level, right? and then you know kind of the like broader question of like how are we really impacting folks because now we're going to have to start turning this from a kind of conceptual conversation to get some more meat so that folks can weigh in on what direction they feel we should go. So I want to address that question really quickly. Um we are um still using Sarah with Eco Northwest

40:08 to um help us figure out like what the impact will be on some of our some of our employers especially some of our larger employers because that's been kind of a natural question of you as Paul policy making book um and so that's something that we're working on but it's it's not it's not as it's not a public kind of our stuff you know it's all public and we you know anybody can go and look at it and and splice and dice data however you want to. But you know with private industry it's a little bit more um it's a little bit more complicated because you have to look at the department of revenue and and get you know data that's not maybe not as refined. Um but it is something that we we think is important at least to get so it may not have the

40:53 level of precision that we would love but at least we can get sort of a order of magnitude idea. It's probably a silly question and feel free to make fun of me for asking it, but do government entities pay payroll tax? I know we'd have paid would Okay. So, it would affect school district. Okay. And that's a good actually thank you for bringing that up. That's a that's a that is a distinction because not just government, but other nonprofits that would be taxexempt on their property taxes would then if they had employees um be subjected to that. Yes. Yeah. Because I work for Eugene. I Well, actually this is this is a good clarifying question, right? I mean you like when we're going to use the councelor Joy and I apologize here. She works in the city of Eugene, right? She

41:39 lives in Springfield. Thank you. Did she would she pay it if she's leaving Eugene and driving to Springfield or leaving Springfield and working? No. And that's a good point as well. Um because how they've uh determined who pays in Eugene, it's based where the headquarters is as opposed as opposed to where the work is done. So the potential uh depending on how we implement that the way that most people would implement is where the work is done. Um so closely with them to make sure that there isn't a situation where there's a double taxation if you I think understanding the two things you super clear on. We have a lot of people that drive over the freeway to work, right? And we're we're

42:25 not interested in sort of double taxing them and then, you know, making sure that we're not putting somebody in a situation where they manage to get hit by both folks. Go ahead, Council Blackwell. So, just a followup to that too, has the 2.3 estimated has has the cost to the city and to our police budget like has that all been considered I guess in that revenue? Yes. Okay. And in fact in that model I built in rather than the 2.3 I did build in the the 0.1 from our initial estimates is pretty close. And so in the model I built in the 0.1. Go ahead. So then I understand that you're doing a smaller amount let's say than Eugene. Have you looked at it? If it it was equal to

43:11 that, would that like eliminate the need for a cut to the library or you know more on the, you know, the levy for the police or something like that? Is there is that is that considered as all task force did because you one of the things we also asked them is how they felt about the levies if the levies were a good way to support uh fire and police and we got a resounding yes. they've been renewed consistently since 2002 and people felt that they were working and why change something that's working. Um so so that idea of the possibility of you know doing a a rate uh comparable to uh Eugene and then retiring something and and there wasn't that interest but was important to them was a very small amount um and just kind of a diversity of of a tax base

44:02 something different but that that was considered as part of the task force's deliberations increased that payroll tax and reduce the amount you're taking from the library. That's what I'm trying to find out like how much is it is $500,000 come up with the degrees I could give you some really simple tools to where you could do fast math and figure that out. There was um some discussion in in the videos that um staying where they suggested kept us competitive too as far as business. Okay. Any other any other questions from a finance perspective? and then we'll switch to just to just get a little bit of clarification. So, I'm going to bring back the payroll tax and the library

44:47 reduction levy in the full um there were nine recommendations that touches on two of the nine. Uh the fire levies already happened. Uh that's the third one. Uh regard I think some of them were already working on those recommendations. Others would and there we go. Uh would require some additional work. But another recommendation uh from uh the uh task force uh was not to bite off too much all at once because this is you know kind of complicated things that are going to require a lot of of community engagement and education and to go slow. So, are we comfortable justing the paper in the um library reduction/levy uh and then potentially visiting at a

45:32 later date the other recommendations for uh working those into our planning? Go ahead. Uh I'm comfortable and um I think that some of those and I think we touched on this before some of them we really are already working on the development opportunities. um says in the gateway employment area, we got some infrastructure work to do over there first. But I think that some of these are s are are are already moving in some ways. Um the the lobbying and working to modernize Oregon's revenue system, developing and implementing a business retention and expansion strategy. I think some of the things we have the the foundation for it. So, um, as long as we don't lose them and they're happening in some ways, but I'm comfortable focusing on the ones

46:19 that we're talking about getting started on the revenue pieces. I I think I I think I agree. Um, I think um some of these just adding some commentary when we get back saying, "Oh, yeah, we are working on this one now because we know like the CEDA group's doing some of it." Um, and then the other question that I'm kind of thinking about just a little bit long term is right, this is really the the basis of a lot of the strategy that we're following as a city go like going forward and how we kind of finalize this becomes super important and but like you know the overtime question right that that's been something that has been talked about and you know and the city manager says it's under control. So, so just I think I think I think just going through and

47:05 going, hey, we've talked about three, four of them are actually in flight with CEDA, right? And here's the ones where you provided no guidel guidance on. I think that would be helpful. Anybody else want to jump in here? Okay, I agree. Sounds good. Cruising right along. All right. Good evening, mayor and counselors. at least at Silic City public information officer uh here. Uh thank you for the opportunity to walk through the summer public outreach plan. This strategy is designed to support your engagement with the community uh as we move forward with the fiscal stability and supports recommendations. U the materials that were provided in your packet are based on my experience as a communications professional and are intended to serve

47:51 as a starting point for your conversations with interested groups in the broader public. I welcome your feedback and u whether that's refining, expanding or adjusting any part of the toolkit to better support your needs. In developing this plan, I focused on three key goals. Building public understanding of the city's fiscal position, reinforcing our shared values like openness, fiscal responsibility, and community resilience, and laying the foundation for meaningful two-way com uh communication. Uh the plan proposes a phased approach um beginning with communications following tonight's meeting and continuing with broader public engagement throughout the summer. Um each of you received a copy of the toolkit um and it includes a sample postcard sized handout with a QR code

48:36 linking to a community feedback survey uh social media templates to help share consistent updates and a copy of the survey questions. Um, we're also coordinating listening sessions and group presentations and we'll be tracking community participation and feedback to help guide next steps. Uh, this is a key opportunity to meet residents where they are um, whether at parks or other community venues uh, and summer events um, and invite them into the process early um, before any decisions have been finalized. And I'm happy to walk through any of the tools or answer questions about the proposed strategy. Um, and I thank you again for your time and your leadership in helping moving this conversation forward.

49:23 Council Robert, I'll kick it off. Great. And I really appreciate you doing all of this work and creating the tools and the things. Um, in terms of my feedback, um, I'm interested in how do we get to the the people in the places that we don't normally get to. Like I really appreciate it on here that I saw union meetings and online platforms, but I think um, and this I'm just going to be sharing a little bit of a bias here. I think that when we talk about the business community, we often think of that as being um just entwined with the chamber, but there a lot of small businesses or um minority or womenowned businesses that aren't necessarily members of the chamber. So, I don't know

50:08 what that looks like because you're the pro, but there is probably some ways to sort of touch base with some of those businesses that don't ordinarily come to the chamber roundts or things like that. um you know, community meetings or things that we're able to attract. And then the other piece that's not in here, and I know that this puts a lot of work on you, but interested in maybe doing some specific outreach in my ward. Um that there might be people who would want to come and talk to me that might not necessarily come to a thing, you know. Um so that there might be some contacts that we have that we can be like, well, who's still being at the school or or something like that. So I think that those are the pieces that I'm seeing. One, the other thing is is there a way to specifically sort of target reaching um sort of age demographics,

50:54 older folks, like could we get go to some, you know, retirement communities or places where we get that feedback because a lot of those folks are voters and have really strong opinions around and we're we're trying to take those considerations in when we consider revenue. So, I'm just like, how do we diversify that without making too much work? Is it stuff that I can do to help? I'm not going to put my other counselors to work, but I would absolutely work by word in some ways if that's helpful. No, I really appreciate that. That's great. Um, with regards to specific individual groups that you would be interested in reaching out to, I'd be more than happy to help you in whatever way is most helpful. I can assist with setup, provide prevent printed materials. um I can help facilitate you know getting the word out and making sure that people are

51:40 coming to what particular venue is and um simply being present also to help support with messaging um and logistics. So um I'm here this is what I'm I'm happy to help and in whatever way I can. Um also with regards to uh reaching maybe individuals that um aren't part of the chamber or other underrepresented groups is definitely something that's been on my mind. And so one of the things that I would like to do is continue to coordinate with community partners um and to help share materials and extend our reach. Um one of the ways that we could do that is by also uh establishing listening sessions that we would host in really hightraic locations. Um so that we can either like at a park or a community center make uh that participation as easy as possible

52:26 and that uh people would be again we would communicate that that is happening and that such and such individuals would be present to answer questions and to get continue that conversation. I'm also open to other pop-up outreach uh opportunities as they come online. Um and if you hear about something can share it with me and we can work to make that happen. So, I love that because uh counselor Blackwell and I have been wanting to do a um a town hall together. the wards are side by side and we've talked about like volunteer park which is like right on 42nd which is sort of the split for our group or somewhere that's where we could bring in people not just the stability

53:11 but just hey I'm your you know it's I hate that when politicians only show up like once every four years and they want your vote right I want to be able to to communicate with those people and so we've been trying to figure out a way that we could say hey it's not even a voting you know we're two years off from voting but we want to talk to you. And so it's it's how do we get a hold of the people in ward four and five to let them know that an event and I I know I would be very much open to that. I think we've both been talking about doing it later in the summer and we could kind of get our schedules coordinated. So I would absolutely be love to do that because I'm sure there's other things people would like to talk about too and ask about. Wonderful. That's that's why I'm here. Yeah. I just have one more piece around the tools. A lot of the people talk about I

53:56 should probably say it before we end. Um my other suggestion and I'm g say it with gentleness and kindness is when I was looking at this um the the feedback survey to maybe go over it with this plain language lens because I think that even terms like fiscal challenges can be you know like that there could be ways that we can talk about this that um yeah that that would be really e easier for people to um sort of absorb it. Thank you. Well, if I could make a suggestion for councelor Blackwell and Door, maybe the Hillview Baptist Church because she wasn't actually elected. She was running and they weren't allowed to

54:42 do that because they can't like pick sides. But now that we're both elected officials, they said that they could do that. Daniel, so he could do that. I was going my brother. Um, and I think what would help also I'm interested in doing a specific library town hall meet with the library groups, you know, if we like we can do that during the summer. That way we can talk more like talk a couple of times about it, but just having a broader Q&A with the groups and listen about their concerns I think would be would be really helpful. Somebody that's done a lot of event planning in Oregon. We do have this thing called weather and you know in the summertime our people really don't like

55:29 to go to events unless it's you know their personal time. So I try to be cautious of the fact that there's this very narrow window. I would suggest we do it a little bit more later summer like you were saying mayor or closer to the fall because because I swear because you have like a little window of okay let's have this event even if it's not at city hall you're going somewhere asking people to come out outside of their work hours and then during the summer when we only have the like three months of nice weather in this state and then you get into hunting season which is a total other thing in Oregon. So you have to like you have to think about all all these weird parameters and and when I was in um it's funny when I was in California they don't have to think about that at all. the open bill. Um, the other thing that I think would

56:15 be helpful is um if you if we t if the council t tabled it because I'm sure we have a table at the block party, you know, councly is not going to sign everybody else up for things, but I'm but I'm sign folks up. Um, I think two other things and then we'll get wrapped up here. One of I would like to do, and this is not a public uh public uh uh information piece, but I think when we get to the end of this, we do need to actually have a public hearing about it and just, you know, right, we've gotten a lot of public input, but we need to have some way to sort of formally consider that and just get really clear with people about um you know, when we're actually

57:01 going to make the decision because we're about halfway through here and people are super engaged and I don't want to get to the fall and have them feel like they've lost this conversation. All right. Any other feedback that you guys offer? Yes. Thank you very much. Thanks. One quick thing. One other um opportunity is we are partnering with Milano Lane for National Night Out this week. So that will be at the Bog Keeper Center much larger location. So that'll be another good opportunity for I think that is going to be it. Um, last meeting for the summer. The next meeting is what? Sep. Do we decide

57:47 September 2nd? Okay. September 2nd. So, I know we've done it since spring break. We've done a ton of work and I know how far every one of you guys going to be your summit in the class. That way sooner than you think. All right.