City needs stable source of road funds.

Byline: Chris Pryor, Alan Zelenka and Jennifer Solomon

There has been much discussion in recent months about the condition of Eugene's streets. Local voters on Nov. 4 took a big step in the right direction by approving a $35.9 million measure to repair 70 miles of streets in the city over the next five years and begin reducing a $173 million backlog of major road repairs. We appreciate the support of the voters, and we will make good on our promise.

But Eugene faces another related, but separate, challenge - the ongoing operation and maintenance of street and traffic infrastructure. It's about $10 million a year, and it needs to come from a stable, ongoing source of money. Until now, that has been mostly state highway funds and some city general funds. Traditional sources of revenue, such as the state gas tax and county payments, have either been reduced or eliminated altogether. That leaves a gap of about $4 million a year.

In the meantime, expenditures have gone up 23 percent over the past five years due to increased labor and materials costs. Without new revenue, the O&M fund will be unable to pay for roughly a third of our street services in the fiscal year that begins July 1, 2009.

The options for keeping the road fund solvent are straightforward - reduce street maintenance to live within the available resources, or look for new ways to fund the services we want to keep. Using voter-approved bond funds for street operations is not possible. By law, the bond money is dedicated to the 32 major street repair projects specified in the measure.

Financing our transportation system is a complex challenge with no simple answer. The Eugene City Council and city staff have been working for years to find solutions for both parts of our street financing problem - the capital projects needed to reduce the backlog of major street repairs, and the street services that address day-to-day operational needs.

In 2007, a council committee worked for several months to come up with a recommendation to address both ongoing operations and the capital project backlog. The committee proposed a five-part strategy, including a bond measure similar to the one approved by voters to address the backlog. Strategies to address our ongoing operational needs included a 3-cent gas tax increase (defeated at the polls in November 2007), a $1 increase in monthly garbage fees (to compensate for the damage garbage trucks do to streets), a small street lighting fee and a Transportation Utility Fee to make up the rest. The TUF is a basic fee for using city streets, just like a utility charges for using electricity or water. The committee was attracted to the fee idea over other options because it ensures that everyone, including governments, pays their fair share.

The council committee always viewed this as a multi-part problem requiring a multi-part solution. It is not realistic to think that a $36 million bond measure is going to solve a $173 million backlog problem. Similarly, when the council last month agreed to consider a variety of locally controlled revenue options in the coming year - including small increases to stormwater and wastewater rates and a small surcharge on garbage fees - it was intended as a way to maintain current street operation services until longer-term solutions can be set.

It is possible that Gov. Ted Kulongoski's proposed transportation package will create a windfall for Eugene, and if so, the council can reduce or eliminate local measures accordingly. But there is a real concern that state solutions won't come through in a way that benefits our community. As The Register-Guard observed in a recent editorial, "The state's inaction is one reason Eugene and other cities have resorted to self-financed street repair programs."

Work on next year's budget is starting now. The public expects and deserves opportunities to review and comment on budget assumptions, which means we have to talk about our needs and our options in order to have a city budget ready in the spring - before the legislative outcome in Salem is even known.

We believe the public wants potholes patched, cracks sealed and streetlights, traffic signals, pavement markings and medians maintained. The reality is that it will take additional money to provide those services in the coming year at a time when outside sources are shrinking. If we cannot find those resources, then the city will need to reduce street maintenance services. It is appropriate for the city to look within its own budget for some of the money, but we can't absorb it all.

We've dug ourselves into this hole over many years. Unfortunately, it's going to take a number of years and a lot of money to get out. Determining just how to do that is the debate.

Councilors Chris Pryor, Jennifer Solomon and Alan Zelenka served on the Eugene City Council Committee for Transportation Funding Solutions. For more information on the transportation funding issues, go to www.eugene-or.gov/streets.