City staff presented a concept for a transportation user fee to create a segregated revenue source for street repair and larger reconstruction projects. The staff member described two implementation approaches: use the fee to pay debt service for a debt issue that would fund aggressive, multi-year reconstruction, or apply fee revenue to smaller projects year by year. “I think we would always want to reserve a certain amount of that for major repair rehabilitation,” a staff member said, and added that initial debt-backed financing could allow faster, larger-scale reconstruction.

Council members asked whether the fee could be collected on utility bills and whether the revenue could cover drainage and sidewalks. Staff answered that the fee could be a line item on the utility bill and that it would likely cover drainage and sidewalks as part of street projects, but large sewer or other major utility replacements would typically be funded elsewhere. The staff member said the fee could be set up as a segregated account to ensure it was used only for transportation infrastructure.

The discussion included operational considerations: staff said that if major street projects proceed, the city should coordinate underground utility planning to minimize cutting newly reconstructed streets. Staff described examples of planning to “sleeve” for future growth so additional lines can be installed without repeatedly opening a road.

No formal ordinance or fee was adopted at the session; council discussion focused on policy options and next steps for modeling revenue and project lists. Staff indicated further study would be required to determine fee level, formal account structure and the possible use of debt financing.