Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Mr. Zelenka said the Charter amendment on the ballot changed the ability of the City Council to use its discretion about whether or not there was a Police Auditor and Civilian Review Board oversight function; it made that function mandatory. He said there were no changes required in the ordinance to fulfill that Charter amendment, as the current language was consistent with that. He said the 12 changes proposed by Ms. Bettman did not address that issue; they were issues that the council had discussed and he supported, but they had not been presented to the voters. He preferred to stay with the current process. Mr. Ruiz clarified that he was not arguing for or against obtaining a second legal opinion. He felt it was his responsibility to identify issues that he felt the council should be made aware of, such as contract language, and that could present potential problems. Mr. Clark agreed with Mr. Zelenka about what the voters had approved and the 12 changes proposed by Ms. Bettman. He there were there varying opinions about the constraints imposed on the council by the Charter and suggested that the issue be clarified at some point in the future. Ms. Bettman cited Section 16 of the Charter that the City Manager shall make all purchases. She said the council could direct that a particular contract be entered into; it was not prohibited. She disagreed with Mr. Zelenka’s comment that the voters changed the police oversight function from discretionary to mandatory. She said the council chose to change all of the language from “may” to “shall,” including mandating authorities as they were listed in the Charter. She asserted that the current ordinance language was inconsistent with the Charter as amended and an independent legal analysis of how to proceed was needed. Ms. Piercy reminded the council that the motion to form a committee authorized it to review the issues raised by Ms. Bettman on November 10 and 17, 2008, and report back to the council on March 11, 2009, with recommendations on amendments to the Police Auditor ordinance. The motion failed 5:2; Ms. Bettman and Ms. Taylor voting yes. B. WORK SESSION: Opportunity Siting Update Mr. Ruiz introduced Patricia Thomas and Teri Harding, of the Planning Division, to present the update on opportunity siting. Ms. Thomas used a slide presentation to provide background on the project, activities to-date and next steps. She said council direction to staff included incorporating opportunity siting as a primary strategy for achieving density targets in mixed use centers. She said formation of a Planning Committee subcommittee, neighborhood tours, online surveys and sounding boards, eventually resulted in the formation of an Opportunity Siting (OS) Task Team of a dozen members. She described the composition of the team and said it was charged with studying the issues, developing a neighborhood process, identifying hypothetical test sites, studying market demand and feasibility and implementation. Ms. Thomas reviewed the issues considered during the task team’s study of market demand, compatibility and feasibility. She said the task team developed a methodology for working with neighborhoods and the Jefferson Westside Neighbors volunteered to test the methodology in neighborhood workshops. As a result of the test exercise, she said it was apparent that there were three important elements to identifying sites: neighborhood character, development impacts and matching development type to the site. She explained how hypothetical sites in the neighborhood were used for economic study of market demand and feasibility. She said the task team anticipated forwarding recommendations to the Planning Commission in mid-2009 and the next steps in the process were: MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 8, 2008 Page 4 Work Session