CC Minutes - 10/10/05 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Kelly suggested that the council was confused as to the difference between the existing and proposed process. He said it would be helpful if the council received a table comparing the two ordinances in regard to the timelines and approval processes. Mr. Kelly pointed out that, with regard to the Planning Commission coming between the council and public, the manager did the same in the existing process. He underscored the effort the council made to improve the existing Ballot Measure 37 ordinance and said he would be examining the new ordinance carefully. He also suggested that staff produce a side-by-side comparison of the administrative rules for the existing ordinance and the proposed ordinance. Ms. Bettman was not confused as to the difference between the two processes, but did not see any benefit to changing the existing process; in fact, she saw downsides to changing the process. Speaking to comments that the council was merely directing staff to return with a revised process, Ms. Bettman pointed out the motion directed staff to do some very expensive resource-intensive work. She said that if councilors did not intend to support the ultimate outcome, they should vote against the motion. The motion passed, 5:2; Ms. Taylor and Ms. Bettman voting no. C. WORK SESSION: Stormwater Permit and Program Developments City Manager Taylor reported that staff would highlight stormwater permit and program developments for the council. He recalled that the last comprehensive review of the Stormwater Program occurred in 2003, when staff raised some budget and fee issues facing the program. He said staff would discuss some of the developments in the existing service as well as in the permit renewal project and seek guidance as it prepared the fiscal year (FY) 2007 budget. The council was also joined by Peter Ruffier and Therese Walch of the Public Works Department. Ms. Walch provided a PowerPoint presentation, entitled Stormwater Permit and Program Developments. The presentation highlighted the impacts from the new National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit issued in March 2004, developments in the program that had future impacts, and options and recommendations for the future. Ms. Walch briefly noted the regulatory and policy basis for the City’s stormwater program. She recalled the council’s 2003 program review, impelled by a projected budget shortfall, and reminded the council that at that time it had reduced the program budget by $1.8 million to bring it line with revenues. The reduced program met the 1994 NPDES program conditions but there were uncertainties about whether it would satisfy the renewed permit. The reduced program also extended the timelines for meeting the goals of the City’s Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan. Ms. Walch said that staff had evaluated the program in light of the new permit conditions. The evaluation validated core program elements, identified program gaps, and proposed program adjustments. Among the identified gaps with a fiscal impact were stormwater development standards; staff further recommended completion of a bacteria pilot study, expansion of the monitoring program, and the purchase of new monitoring equipment. The total cost was estimated to be approximately $307,000. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 10, 2005 Page 8 Work Session