Item 2A - Minutes Approval - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Klein reported that several weeks ago, Governor Ted Kulongoski's legal counsel announced that waivers made under Ballot Measure 37 were not transferable in most cases. He had not yet seen the written opinion. Mr. Klein said that he and Ms. Muir reviewed the Planning Division work program and concluded that, with the possible exception of the City's Goal 5-related work, nothing needed adjustment. Ms. Muir reviewed the City's progress on meeting its State commitments with regard to periodic review of the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan, in particular its work on meeting the State mandates set out under Statewide Planning Goal 5, Natural Resources. The intent of the effort was to protect natural resources and conserve scenic and historic areas and open spaces. She briefly overviewed the history of that effort. She noted that the actions the City had taken in regard to that effort had already been appealed twice. Ms. Muir said the City was working to meet a July 1, 2005, deadline for its Goal 5 work. She said several months of work and public input-gathering remained. She anticipated a controversial and contentious process. Staff had been informed any decision would be appealed, no matter what it was. Ms. Muir noted that Eugene would be one of the first jurisdictions adopting Goal 5 work following the passage of Ballot Measure 37 and that the City's work would be watched closely. In conclusion, Mr. Klein said staff was not recommending the City shift directions in regard to its Goal 5 work. He believed that would be premature. He recommended the City go through the process and determine what protection measures it wished to adopt. In June, staff would identify the potential Ballot Measure 37 implications of the measures satisfying Goal 5. Assuming the protection measures were not exempt and there was a reduction in property value due to a local ordinance, a property owner probably would have a valid Ballot Measure 37 claim. He said that he and Ms. Muir met with staff of the Department of Land Conservation and Development the previous week, and he believed that if the City received many claims, the State would be willing to work with Eugene to develop something that satisfied Goal 5 while avoiding such claims. Staff had developed some options it was beginning to explore in regard to limiting the City's exposure to Ballot Measure 37 claims for the council's later consideration. Mayor Piercy called on the council for comments and questions. Mr. Kelly expressed appreciation for the background information provided to the council. He concurred with the staff recommendation that the City should continue its natural resource inventory work. The City Council would then be able to adopt any ordinance with "its eyes open" regarding the potential risk. Mr. Kelly asked about the recommendation of the Jobs and Land Use Roundtable that an uplands inventory be conducted. Ms. Muir said that staff requested additional information from the roundtable. At this time, the inventory was not on the work program. Mr. Kelly suggested further discussion in June. Mr. Poling asked if any claims had been filed directly with Circuit Court. Mr. Klein said no. Under the provisions of the measure, a property owner must first file a claim with the City, wait 180 days, and then go to court. Mr. Poling asked for more information about the appeals mentioned by Ms. Muir. Ms. Muir said the first appeal was made by property owners objecting to having their property included in the City's Goal 5 MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 19, 2005 Page 2 Work Session