Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Roll call vote; the vote on whether to support the recommendation of the Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations to take a position of Priority 2 Oppose was a tie, 4:4; councilors Zelenka, Ortiz, Taylor and Bettman voting in favor and councilors Solomon, Poling, Clark and Pryor voting in opposition. Mayor Piercy voted in favor of the recommendation and it passed. SB 293 Councilor Pryor stated that a number of bills that related to the use of mobile communication while driving had been generated this session, of which this bill was one. He pulled the bill because staff expressed concerns that the bill did not exempt the use of two-way radios by police, emergency personnel, and public works staff. He said the CCIGR voted to support the bill with the amendment to provide that exemption. He suggested that the council pull the bill for later approval when a more current version came out. Ms. Wilson interjected that she believed SB 293 was now a “dead” bill. She predicted that the Legislature would focus on distracted driving as a whole issue rather than “nitpicking” each activity. Mayor Piercy ascertained that there was no objection to dropping the motion. HB 2140 Councilor Pryor explained that the bill made technical changes to public contracting code. He said major revisions of public contracting had been undertaken one year earlier. He stated that the bill would add language for contracting with government agencies, changing bid thresholds and limiting certain kinds of contracts. He related that staff felt that the bill was primarily a clean-up of wording and that it added clarifications to the revisions. He said both Mr. Perry of the Finance Division and Mr. Klope of Public Works had recommended that the City support the bill. The CCIGR voted 2:1 to oppose it. Councilor Bettman affirmed that the bill made “alleged housekeeping changes” but she felt the changes were very significant in terms of public policy. She said one would change the quote limit for transportation projects from $50,000 to $100,000. She thought this would make so that anything that was under $100,000 would not need to go out for a competitive bid. She also took issue with language regarding pilot projects. She asserted that it circumvented public accountability, as any project could be called a pilot project. Councilor Solomon asked staff to verify if the bill would change the language so that a project for $100,000 or less could not be subjected to the bid process. Mr. Klein replied that if it worked like the rest of the code, it referred to the minimum and not the maximum; in other words, the bid process would be optional for a project at that level. Councilor Solomon surmised that the City of Eugene could still require contracts to be bid out. She supported the idea. She felt pilot projects were ways of exploring a different way of doing business. She believed it to be a way to try something new without having to “cement it into an ordinance.” She averred that it was worth a try. She supported having more tools at the table that would help to save money. Councilor Clark said he wanted to support inventive ways of doing things in order to find cost savings in the process. Councilor Pryor said if one looked at Public Works law it was apparent that projects that cost $100,000 or less were already exempted from the bid requirements, with the exception of transportation projects. He explained that the bill sought to bring transportation projects in line with the rest of the public works MINUTES—Eugene City Council March 12, 2007 Page 11 Regular Meeting