Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

He said Mr. Clark's question arose from the annexation provisions and changes to State law that would make annexation more difficult for those properties. He said the council had authority to establish policy around expectations of development inside the City versus outside the City. Ms. Bettman expressed surprise that the County was considering taking over permitting in urban transition areas when the City already provided those services through an intergovernmental. She understood there were criteria and unique circumstances under which extra-territorial extensions occurred and it would be difficult to anticipate all of those, which is why her motion focused on the process. She wanted to assure that a public hearing before a decision-making body would occur when the boundary commission no longer existed. Ms. Ortiz asked if local jurisdictions had contributed funds to the boundary commission and whether cities would be compensated for taking over the responsibility for annexations. Mr. Nystrom said that the boundary commission was a State agency and jurisdictions supported it through their contributions to Lane Council of Governments, which staffed the commission. He said any compensation for the City would come through related fees. Mr. Clark agreed that the council should be accountable for decisions, including annexations and extra- territorial extensions. He said extra-territorial extensions were likely to be controversial and asked for the criteria to be restated in any related ordinance. He wanted each application for an extension to be assessed in accordance with those criteria to remove any arbitrary elements. Ms. Bettman remarked that the criteria were in the ordinance, but because they were in several different places she was concerned that a request that was controversial could slip through without the stop-gap of a public hearing. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to direct the City Manager to pre- pare an ordinance amending the code so that the process for considering extra- territorial extension applications: 1. Requires a public hearing before the City Council and makes the City Council the final local decision-making body; and 2. Requires that notice of the City Council's public hearing be posted on the prop- erty which is the subject of the application so that the notice is visible from ad- jacent streets and that the notice be mailed to the appropriate neighborhood as- sociations, and all property owners and residents within 750 feet of that prop- erty's perimeter. Ms. Bettman further moved to direct the City Manager to hold any applications submitted for extra-territorial extension of water or sewer until the City Council has acted on this proposed ordinance or 60 days after the City Council holds a pub- lic hearing on the ordinance, whichever is earlier. Mr. Poling asked for clarification of the noticing requirements. Ms. Bettman explained that there had been problems in the past with property that was on a corner and notices were only posted on one street. The motion passed unanimously, 7:0. MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 23, 2008 Page 2 Work Session