CC Minutes - 02/14/05 Mtg - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

David Monk, 3720 Emerald Street, referred to a packet of information that he had prepared and encouraged councilors to read the information. As one of the three right-to-know advocates and the current chair of the Toxics Board, he offered a revised proposal to the proposed ordinance and asked the council to affirm tonight the unanimous recommendation from the board to include other hazardous substance users. He said the revised language deleted painting, roofing, wall covering contractors, and crematoriums from the proposed ordinance. He also asked that the council recognize the limitations of the board to address the fee inequities in the program and to encourage those in the business community who sued the City and lobbied for the legislative cap, to go back to the legislature this session and advocate for quantity-based fees and support the City's position for elimination of the fee cap. Mr. Monk took issue with a February 13, 2005, article in The Register-Guard by Mr. Russo that misrepresented the language that defined hazardous substance users. Evan Arkin, 29136 Gimpl Hill Road, an eighth grader from Spencer Butte Middle School, said that youth breathe in more air than adults and he wanted to know what he was breathing in. He asked how youth could participate in the process. He encouraged the council to consider the youth of the community and asserted he spoke for the youth of the community. He wanted to know how he could take part in the future of the community and how he could participate in learning about the environment, how to control it and how to make it safe. He understood that some businesses may consider it unfair to pay fees, but compared to the overall health of the community, the ordinance would help people know what was going into the air. He encouraged the council to look through the packets, alarming facts, and alarming statistics to realize that youth and adults need to know what was going into the air. Planet Glassberg, 1154-½ Hodson Lane, said that several women friends had died of cancer in a five-year period. She asked what it was going to take to prevent any more harm to Eugene residents. She wanted to know what substances industries, corporations, and business were using that would cause harm, and why they could not use alternatives that would not harm the environment or individuals. She asserted that the environment and people must come before profits. All corporations, businesses, and industries needed to be accountable and honest. It was time for the City to adopt and implement the precautionary principle as San Francisco and other cities had. Ruth Duemler, 1745 Fircrest Drive, said there was a need for a fair way to pay for the program. She asserted that everyone should work together to accomplish that goal. She displayed a chart that illustrated the difference between what was reported to the City compared to what was reported to the State and federal governments, noting higher figures were reported to the City. She encouraged the council to approve the ordinance. Stephen Kujawa, 29495 Airport Road, ran a small, clean manufacturing business that employed six employees who supported families in Eugene. He said that the business used small amounts of chemicals that were already reported to the EPA, the Fire Marshal, and other regulatory authorities. He said the business could expand to ten employees within the next year, at which time the cost of doing business in Eugene would go up. He stated the proposed ordinance was inequitable in that it did not proportionally distribute the costs to users. He asserted that the proposal punished small, growing companies that provided family-wage jobs. He found it ludicrous that small companies using very little of the substances were charged proportionately huge fees compared to larger companies that used 99 percent of the substances. He asked if the City wanted small companies to spend time and money on redundant paperwork or on employee health insurance, or perhaps on expanding their businesses resulting in more family-wage jobs. He said if the ordinance could not be enforced equitably, the job should be left to other regulatory agencies, and MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 14, 2005 Page 17 Regular Session