CC Minutes - 05/19/08 Public Hearning

Home Browse Search

and if the problem was related to the State building code the tenant could authorize access; if the call related to the rental housing program a 24-hour notice was given to the landlord. Councilor Clark agreed with Councilor Ortiz and remarked that the large number of people attending the hearing illustrated the importance of a periodic review of the housing program and the need for public participation. He supported holding another work session on the ordinance and forming an advisory committee similar to the one established in Portland. He suggested it include University of Oregon students. Mr. Ruiz said he would poll the council on a work session and formation of an advisory committee. Councilor Pryor agreed with the need to take additional time to consider revision of the ordinance in a more thoughtful manner and find the right balance. He regretted the lack of notification to some interested parties and stressed the importance of more public input from both landlords and tenants. He believed there were legitimate concerns about mold, but felt there was a lack of expertise at this point to identify a clear course and wanted more information before making a decision. Councilor Taylor stated she would not support another work session as the council had already heard everyone’s opinions. She said the purpose of the code was to protect renters and she had not heard any renters object to the proposed ordinance changes. She was opposed to a sunset provision and an advisory committee. Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to remove the mold pro- vision from the ordinance and take it for consideration to a work session and bring the remainder of the ordinance back to the council for action on the scheduled date. She clarified that her motion did not adopt the ordinance and was intended to move forward with the other ordinance provisions without delay while the mold provision was discussed further. She was opposed to the creation of an advisory committee as it would be dominated by the industry because students and low- income renters did not have the resources to participate. Councilor Clark deplored the “us versus them” approach to problem-solving. He said there was disagree- ment among those who testified and the council about how to proceed and it was appropriate to involve more people in making a wiser decision. Councilor Zelenka agreed with Councilor Bettman’s intent and was in favor of moving forward with just the provisions related to security and smoke detectors and addressing mold concerns in a work session. He would support a scaled-down version of an advisory committee to obtain more public input. Councilor Pryor said he would support proceeding with the security and smoke detector provisions of the ordinance and removing the mold provision for further study. He did not feel the council had heard all of the opinions on mold and the rental housing program and an advisory committee could be very helpful. Councilor Ortiz supported the motion and asked staff to provide information on creating a smoke detector voucher program with the surplus program funds. Councilor Bettman asked that a work session on the mold provision be scheduled before the council’s break. MINUTES—Eugene City Council May 19, 2008 Page 9 Public Hearing