My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2008
>
CC Agenda - 07/14/08 Meeting
>
Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 12:27:26 PM
Creation date
7/11/2008 10:26:59 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
7/14/2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
60
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
program was duplicating regulatory requirements; it was a mechanism for assuring they were implemented. <br />He said the proposed enhancements to housing standards represented basic health and safety issues. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman asked staff to review the public notice procedures for the ordinance. Marsha Miller, <br />Planning and Development Department, replied that staff had returned to the council with a review of the <br />public housing code as requested; two work sessions were held and the council provided clear direction on <br />what was to be included in the ordinance. She said the City’s standard public notice procedures were <br />followed as staff was not given directions to develop an advisory committee. She reminded the council that <br />there had been at least three advisory committees on housing codes over the past 15 years. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman observed that whenever there was an ordinance regulating an industry, the industry <br />wanted to help frame that ordinance. She did not feel an advisory committee was necessary every time the <br />council considered revising the code; the public hearing provided adequate opportunity for input. She <br />asserted that laws could not be predicated only on industry interests. She asked for a response from staff to <br />public testimony if the council held another work session. She said over half of the housing units in Eugene <br />were rental because the University of Oregon had externalized student housing needs to the community, <br />making it necessary for the City to assure housing was habitable. She did not favor a sunset provision <br />because the housing code was necessary to protect the health and safety of renters. <br /> <br />Councilor Solomon remarked that a sunset provision provided an opportunity for the council to review the <br />housing program and determine it was relevant and achieving the goals that were established for it and if it <br />was not, revise the program to better meet needs. She was disappointed that staff did not provide more <br />comprehensive notice of the proposed ordinance to the industry. She said no one was suggesting an advisory <br />committee composed only of the industry and noted that Councilor Ortiz had emphasized the importance of <br />including both landlords and tenants. She said the code was intended as a tool for both landlords and renters <br />and instead it appeared it was being used against landlords. <br /> <br />Councilor Solomon agreed with the need for an accounting of how program funds were spent and also asked <br />for a report on the number of calls, call types and responses to those calls since the program’s inception. <br />She did not find the program’s website helpful. She asked for clarification of how emergency provisions <br />were enforced. Rachelle Nicholas, Planning and Development Department, replied that a section of the code <br />addressed dangerous buildings and referred to the building code. She could not think of any instance where <br />a house had been posted for rental housing code standards. She said what typically happened was that an <br />inspection under the rental housing code identified safety concerns related to the State building code that <br />were serious enough to warrant posting a house as a dangerous building. She said there had been four <br />incidents of that nature. <br /> <br />Councilor Solomon asked if the rental housing code emergency clause had been used to enter a building <br />without notifying a landlord. She said that had been done under the State building code as the City’s staff <br />enforced both the rental housing and State building codes. She said the program received both types of calls <br />and if the problem was related to the State building code the tenant could authorize access; if the call related <br />to the rental housing program a 24-hour notice was given to the landlord. <br /> <br />Councilor Clark agreed with Councilor Ortiz and remarked that the large number of people attending the <br />hearing illustrated the importance of a periodic review of the housing program and the need for public <br />participation. He supported holding another work session on the ordinance and forming an advisory <br />committee similar to the one established in Portland. He suggested it include University of Oregon students. <br /> <br />Mr. Ruiz said he would poll the council on a work session and formation of an advisory committee. <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council May 19, 2008 Page 9 <br /> Public Hearing <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.