CC Minutes - 01/17/01 Work Session

Home Browse Search

C.Work Session: Endangered Species Act/Salmon Team Work Program Senior Planner Neil Bj0rklund of the Planning and Development Department joined the council for the item. He reported that none of the ordinances recently passed by the council amending the West Eugene Wetlands Plan had been appealed. Mr. Bj0rklund provided some context for the agenda item by noting that the protection rules issued by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for the upper Willamette spring chinook went into effect on January 8. There had been no lawsuits filed yet, and the courts were often the avenue the Endangered Species Act (ESA) was enforced and defined. Mr. Bj0rklund called attention to Attachment B, an overview of the ESA/Salmon Team Work Program, and reviewed the status of the work program items. Mr. Bj0rklund reminded the council of the resolution regarding the City's response to the ESA listing of the spring chinook, it passed in April, and included in the meeting packet as Attachment C. Mr. Bj0rklund said that staff would be seeking a supplemental budget request to underwrite an assessment of the City's regulations, administrative rules, and adopted policies. The assessment would identify those regulations through which the City requires some external party to do something that could harm salmon. That was a liability under the ESA and the City could be sued. Mr. Bj0rklund said that the assessment would also identify any areas under the City's regulatory authority it was not regulating where an activity could occur that could harm salmon. He said that the work would be done by a consultant because of staff resources issues, the need for expertise not found on staff, and the need for speed. Mr. Bj0rklund noted the proposed funding split and recommended allocations. Mr. Meisner expressed disappointment that the council resolution, which referred to the fact the activities of citizens and City government will affect the future of the salmon, was not reflected in the work program. He maintained that there was no community involvement or education called for. He said that the work program assumed the sole City response was regulatory but there was a need for a strong educational component. Mr. Bj0rklund pointed to item 4 in the work program, Public Information, "Includes developing and implementing City public information program on ESA, salmon, and the City's response, coordinating with the Metro ESA Coordinating Team (MECT) effort, and developing and maintaining web site." Mr. Meisner responded that the item referred to information rather than education. Mr. Bj0rklund said that the detailed work program included public forums, working with MECT on public service announcements, newspaper advertisements, etc. Mr. Meisner called for more focus on an aggressive educational program for all citizens. Mr. Bj0rklund assured Mr. Meisner that the program envisioned a multi-faceted approach, which included a focus on curriculum. Mr. Meisner said it did not "bode well" that education and outreach was "slighted" even in the description of the work program. City Manager Jim Johnson said that staff would return with more details about what was planned, and if other councilors agreed, it was clear direction for staff to "beef up" the public education. Ms. Nathanson asked what likelihood there was that the community's effort would influence what happened at the State and federal level. She was concerned about the expenditure and the timing of the effort, and asked if it could make Eugene a target if its approach was considered too MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 17, 2001 Page 4 Work Session