Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ATTACHMENT B <br /> <br />MINUTES <br /> <br />Eugene City Council <br />Work Session <br />McNutt Room-Eugene City Hall <br /> <br />September 28, 2005 <br />Noon <br /> <br />COUNCILORS PRESENT: <br /> <br />George Poling, Jennifer Solomon, Bonny Bettman, David Kelly, Betty <br />Taylor, Gary Pape, Andrea Ortiz, Chris Pryor. <br /> <br />Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order and welcomed those present. <br /> <br />A. ACTION: An Ordinance Concerning Smoking Areas; Amending Sections 6.225, 6.230, 6.235, <br />and 6.240 ofthe Eugene Code, 1971; Repealing Section 6.232 ofthat Code; and Adding Section <br />6.245 to that Code <br /> <br />Mr. Poling, seconded by Ms. Solomon, moved to request the City Manager to revise Ad- <br />ministrative Rule 6.230 to implement new standards for outdoor smoking areas and to <br />prepare ordinance revisions as appropriate, within a timeframe that allows new standards <br />to be in place before December 31, 2005. <br /> <br />Mr. Pape asked about Corvallis' experience in implementing a similar ordinance. Permit Review Manager <br />Keli Osborn replied that the clean air ordinance for Corvallis was countywide and primarily handled by <br />Benton County Public Health, but also administered within the City of Corvallis. She said that for <br />Corvallis, according to staff there, three to five citations had been issued over the past three years and <br />while citations with fines were issued when violations persisted, the usual experience was that businesses <br />that were approached regarding a violation immediately corrected the problem. She said that outdoor <br />smoking areas were not defined in the Benton County ordinance and staff s focus was to keep smokers ten <br />feet or more away from building entrances and exits. She said some businesses might have a sheltered <br />area but smoking areas were not considered enclosed. <br /> <br />Mr. Pape asked about Eugene's experience with complaints under its ordinance. Ms. Osborn said that <br />there had been 16 complaints related to the smoking ordinance since the first of the year; 11 related to <br />outdoor smoking areas and 5 related to smoking indoors. She said that since July 2001, the City issued <br />30 correction orders, levied 12 fmes and gone to appeal hearings 9 times. <br /> <br />Mr. Pape requested details abut the nature of the complaints related to outdoor smoking areas. Ms. <br />Osborn said the focus of complaints was whether standards had been met and whether the area was too <br />enclosed, given the 25 percent/75 percent rule now in place. She said the tracking system identified a <br />complaint as related to not meeting standards but did not provide specific details; 15 of the 16 complaints <br />received in 2005 were confidential. <br /> <br />Mr. Pape questioned whether there was actually a problem with the outdoor smoking areas. He realized <br />there could be problems related to compliance but was not certain that the existing ordinance failed to <br />meet the need to protect workers and patrons in bars, taverns and restaurants. <br /> <br />MINUTES-Eugene City Council <br />Work Session <br /> <br />September 28, 2005 <br /> <br />Page 1 <br />