Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 2A - Minutes ApprovalEUGENE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Approval of City Council Minutes Meeting Date: November 22, 2004 Agenda Item Number: 2A Department: City Manager's Office Staff Contact: Lynda Rose www. cl. eugene, or. us Contact Telephone Number: 682-5017 ISSUE STATEMENT This is a routine item to approve City Council meeting minutes. SUGGESTED MOTION Move to approve the minutes of the October 20, 2004, Work Session, October 25, 2004, City Council Meeting, and November 3, 2004, Work Session. ATTACHMENTS A. October 20, 2004, Work Session B. October 25, 2004, City Council Meeting C. November 3, 2004, Work Session FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Lynda Rose Telephone: 682-5017 Staff E-Mail: lynda.l.rose~ci.eugene.or.us L:\CMO\2004 Council Agendas\M041122\S0411222A. doc ATTACHMENT A MINUTES Eugene City Council Work Session McNutt Room--Eugene City Hall October 20, 2004 Noon COUNCILORS PRESENT: George Poling, Scott Meisner, David Kelly, Betty Taylor, Gary Pap6 Jennifer Solomon. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Nancy Nathanson, Bonny Bettman. Mayor James D. Torrey called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. He recognized Mr. Meisner. Mr. Meisner announced the death of Tom Wiper of the Eugene Library Foundation, who was instrumental in the construction of the new library. Mr. Wiper's funeral would be held on October 26 at 2 p.m. at the First Methodist Church, and with the council's concurrence, Mr. Meisner indicated he would work with Council Coordinator Lynda Rose to draft a letter of condolence to Mr. Wiper's family on the council's behalf. A. WORK SESSION: Annual Joint Meeting with Eugene Planning Commission The council was joined by Planning Commissioners Anne Made Levis, Adell McMillan, John Lawless, Charles Rusch, Jon Belcher, and Mitzi Colbath. Planning and Development Director Tom Coyle and Planning Director Susan Muir were also present for the item. In the absence of City Manager Dennis Taylor, Assistant City Manager Jim Carlson introduced the item, noting the council would consider the commission's work plan, including the work plan of the Historic Review Board, for adoption later in the meeting. Mayor Torrey presented Ms. McMillan with a plaque recognizing her 12 years of service on the Eugene Planning Commission. He expressed appreciation for her wisdom and common sense in regard to planning and City government. Mayor Torrey said she would be missed by the City. Ms. Muir noted the relationship of the commission's work plan to the Planning Division's work program priorities, adopted by the council in April 2004. Ms. Levis conducted the council through a PowerPoint presentation reviewing the past year's accom- plishments and detailing the emphasis to be placed on the tops of mixed-use neighborhood planning and development of the "alternate path" approach to development applications. Ms. Levis invited comment at this point in the discussion. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 20, 2004 Page 1 Work Session Mr. Kelly thanked the commissioners for their service to the City. He referred to the topic of building relationships, expressing some confusion because at the last joint meeting, the commission had presented several process ideas, which the council had accepted. However, none were cited in the packet and nothing seemed to have occurred. For example, regarding how the commission conveys its opinions to the council, the commission had discussed sending memorandums directly to the council on controversial topics and that had occurred only once. Mr. Kelly said he would like to see memoranda from the commission reflecting the issues discussed by the commission when reaching its recommendations, the pros and cons identified in discussion, and the final votes. Mr. Kelly recalled that the commission had also discussed sending commissioners to various council meetings and he was unsure that occurred. Ms. McMillan indicated that it had. Mr. Kelly said the commission also recommended establishing councilor/commissioner "buddies" but he had no contacts. Ms. Levis said that occurred at differing levels. Mayor Torrey expressed concem about the growing incidence of NIMBY (Not in My Back Yard) issues in the community, saying there were citywide implications to all issues but frequently, a small segment of the community that would be negatively impacted by an action or decision, drove an outcome that affected the entire community, which might have been positively impacted otherwise. He asked how that could be avoided, given that large segments of the community frequently did not see the value of contributing input. Mayor Torrey observed that the commission did not seem to have the same political pressure placed on it that the council received. He said the council needed a group such as the commission to weigh those community ramifications without pressure. Ms. Taylor believed all residents were impacted by political considerations, overt or not. She noted the termination of the Citizen Involvement Committee (CIC), some of whose tasks the commission had assumed, and asked commissioners to comment on whether they believed a separate CIC was needed. Mr. Lawless believed that in regard to large-scale issues, the commission felt an intermediate dialogue about the issues and political ramifications of recommendations was lacking. He said he would like to see occasional work sessions between the commission and council regarding the reasoning behind its recommendations. In regard to the subject of the CIC, Mr. Belcher noted that the commission only addressed the land use component of what the CIC had done. The commission had considered one or two projects to this point, and he thought it was too early to tell if the committee would be missed. Ms. Levis agreed. She said the commission understood the reasons for the committee's demise but in a way she found it sad given how critical citizen input was. Ms. Taylor hoped the CIC would be revived. Ms. Taylor said she wanted to know the reasons for the commission's decision, what the vote was, and why commissioners voted yes or no. Mr. Meisner expressed appreciation for the "buddy" approach employed by the commission. He suggested there were political, technical, and budgetary differences between the work of the council and commission. He said the council was always provided with some information about the budgetary MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 20, 2004 Page 2 Work Session consequences of its policy decisions, and he suggested the commission should be provided with similar information. Speaking to the issue of political pressure, Mr. Meisner pointed out that residents often know they will have an opportunity to testify before the council on an issue and may bypass the commission process. He believed the testimony the commission received still gave it sense of what the council could expect. Mr. Meisner recalled that two councilors had been assigned to work with the commission on the Growth Management Study, which had worked well and helped to bridge communication gaps. He suggested a similar approach be considered in the future for some projects. Mr. Pap~ said he would have liked to have had dialogue with the commission regarding its Crest Drive area street classifications recommendations. He thought it would be useful for the council and commis- sion to meet more often, such as twice annually. He apologized that the commission had not been involved in the reprioritization of the Planning Division's work program. He hoped the commission shared those priorities. Mr. Kelly liked the idea of a twice-a-year check-in and reiterated that a memorandum from the commis- sion on its recommendations would be useful. He also liked the idea of more dialogue between the council and commission. Ms. McMillan thought the commission could play a role in providing a more global review of issues, and she assured the mayor that the commission took that element of its job seriously. She said commissioners did not think of themselves as being part of any particular neighborhood or area of the city, but considered themselves representatives of the entire community and looked at the city as a whole. Mayor Torrey urged the commission to make sure its message was loud and clear to the public so the more global messages were not obscured. Mr. Belcher reviewed the commission's progress on mixed-use neighborhood planning. He invited comments at this point in the presentation. Mr. Kelly expressed appreciation for the new energy and ideas, but expressed frustration it was taking so long for the City to implement mixed-use development. There was no actual example of mixed-use development or redevelopment for the council to point to demonstrate the results of the approach. Mr. Kelly spoke to the issue of NIMBY, saying it was essential to get neighborhood buy-in for develop- ment, but the community had to accommodate growth. He suggested that the City establish growth targets for each neighborhood based on existing population. The City could work collaboratively with the neighborhood on how to accommodate that growth. Mr. Kelly said that articulating the goals of mixed- use development was important. He suggested one goal related to transportation, and noted the City was subject to State mandates related to transportation with which it was not in compliance. He suggested that the commission consider that issue, and what to do if the City was unable to meet the mandates. Mr. Kelly asked what happened to the money allocated for the site-specific node planning and code changes. Ms. Muir said it had been used in tandem with the State Transportation Growth Management (TGM) funds for the mixed-use development planning project. Mr. Kelly requested a rough accounting of those funds. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 20, 2004 Page 3 Work Session Ms. Taylor liked the mixed-use concept and the idea of more neighborhood consultation. She pointed out the City had a goal of protecting established neighborhoOds. She expressed concern about the three types of mixed-use areas being contemplated by the commission, as the council had previously decided against having three types and against commercial nodes. She said that Valley River Center was not a node. Mr. Belcher said the designations were not exclusive but were a focus for the commission. For example, the commission had discussed the potential that some of the parking at Valley River Center could be redeveloped as residential, and in that case the area could be a mixed-use node with a commercial focus. The commission was talking about the emphasis of the nodes, not exclusive uses. Mr. Lawless added it was the commission's intent to avoid taking a cookie cutter approach to the different neighborhoods. The commission was looking for ways to balance the desired goals for the mixed-use areas. He said that preserving some neighborhoods from growth because of their unique character meant it would be impossible to spread growth out evenly across the community. Some neighborhoods would be more affected. That was a difficult issue to deal with. Mr. Lawless said the commission was looking at new areas for m/xed-use that it had not considered before. Mr. Pap~ shared Mr. Kelly's frustration about the allocation of funds, saying he thought the money allocated by the council would cover the costs of the mixed-use planning process and the backlog of remands to the Land Use Code. Mr. Coyle said the money was programmed for a two-year period commencing in June 2004. He anticipated staff would request carryover of those funds in the next fiscal year. Ms. Muir reported that the council funding was being supplanted by some grant funding. With regard to the Land Use Code amendments, she said staff had commenced work on the minor amendments with the commission, and she anticipated work on the larger code revisions would start in January 2005. She believed that the work involved could be done within six months. Mr. Pap~ joined in Mr. Kelly's request for an accounting of the funds allocated to the division by the council, adding if the money was to be carried over, that was a budgetary decision to be made by the council. Mayor Torrey was happy to see the term "nodal development" had been abandoned because it was confusing and difficult to explain to residents. Mayor Torrey suggested the City missed an opportunity with regard to the Chase Gardens nodal development. He believed the council had wanted too much and had been willing to lose everything if it did not get what it wanted. He suggested the commission could institute a checkpoint during which an independent auditor aware of financial and land use issues was consulted about the implications of the City's requirements. He believed the community was the loser because the City had been unwilling to give in on some minor issues that would have benefited residents of the Chase Gardens area. Mr. Kelly disagreed that the council had not compromised in regard to the Chase Gardens development. Councilors had given up on several design features that both the commission and council thought important to mixed-use development. When final adoption occurred, all that was left was two-story development on the main commercial street and doors onto the street. Mr. Kelly said those elements spoke to the community's goals. Development of the land to the minimum density requirements for commercial and residential would not have resulted in a good use of the land. Mr. Kelly believed the council was aware there was a chance that the requirements could postpone development on the property. Mr. Kelly recalled that the council had directed staff to solicit ideas for additional code changes from the public and asked the status of that effort. Mr. Coyle indicated that those ideas would be sought through MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 20, 2004 Page 4 Work Session the public process associated with code changes related to policy issues, and the council would consider them in that context. Ms. Taylor suggested that if the mixed-use areas had no standards there was no purpose to them. Mr. Pap6 noted the council had not been unanimous about the standards to be applied to the Chase node, and expressed hope that the commission's examination included consideration of a set of underlying principles related to density and transportation rather than requirements. He believed the previous approach lacked the needed "give and take" between the City and developer. Mr. Lawless reviewed the commission's approach to the development of the alternative path. Mr. Lawless invited comments and questions. Mr. Meisner said Eugene had the habit of assuming it was so different and unique it had to invent a new solution. He said "this is not new stuff," and expressed hope that the commission was employing as much outside information as possible, particularly in light of diminishing Planning Division resources. He hoped the City was looking at what other communities had done. Ms. Muir assured him that was occurring. Mr. Meisner questioned how the commission could accomplish the work plan without more resources. He reiterated his request that the commission take advantage of the experience of others. Mr. Kelly shared in Mr. Meisner's remarks and suggested that staff examine what was done in Canada. Mr. Kelly thought the alternate path was an exciting way for the community to realize its goals while allowing developers to do creative things that matched those goals, even if it did not meet the "letter of the law." He encouraged the commission to think as broadly as it could. He recommended the commission review the work done by the "Gang of Four," the four community groups which had been charged by the mayor to review the Land Use Code Update prior to its adoption. Mr. Kelly envisioned two different paths through the code, one the proscriptive approach and one a more performance zoning based approach that allowed a developer to avoid the proscriptive approach. Mr. Pap6 concurred with Mr. Kelly's remarks. Mr. Kelly said Chambers node as a pilot was fine, but he wanted the commission to think in a broader context and could develop a work plan to complete the alternate path in the year. Mr. Kelly recalled that the Gang of Four had been hung up by who the approval body for the alternate path would be. He thought that the ultimate resolution to that question would be a key to the community's acceptance the alternate path, and he encouraged the commission to look at what other communities did. Mr. Pap6 noted the point system used by the City of Denver in its alternate path approach. Mr. Kelly said the City of Austin used a similar approach. Mayor Torrey asked the departing commissioners to comment on how the City could use the commis- sion's time better. Mr. Rusch thanked the council for the opportunity to serve on the commission. He had learned a great deal and hoped to continue to contribute. He thanked the commission for its high-level discussions and conviviality. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 20, 2004 Page 5 Work Session Mr. Rusch said he found the lack of long-range planning to be frustrating. He had expected to do more such planning. He would have been happy if the commission could have worked to address the issues of full employment in a "steady state" economy. No one knew how to do that. Instead, people were committed to growth as an economic driver, and he did not think that was sustainable. He believed that a group needed to investigate that topic. He was frustrated by the mayor's comments that the commission should engage topical issues as they arise as he had wanted to do that repeatedly. Issues would flare up but they never came before the commission, or he would attempt to raise them but was warned off because of the potential the commission could act as an appeals body at some point in time. Mr. Rusch suggested the commission's quasi judicial role be split off as a responsibility because it restricted the commission's ability to discuss topical issues. He indicated he was leaving the commission for personal health issues and had thoroughly enjoyed his time on the commission. Ms. McMillan said she was not as frustrated as Mr. Rusch because she had a different understanding of the commission's role. She liked the quasi judicial role of the commission. In regard to the Mayor's question, she said she was excited about the alternate path and thought the commission and council had the obligation to address the issue because of the promises made in the LUCU. She thought the commission's approach was the right one. She also concurred with Mr. Meisner that there were many examples to look at, and cautioned that the City would have to keep cost in mind as some approaches were very expensive. Ms. McMillan thanked the council for the opportunity to serve an additional term and said she would miss the commission. She also thanked the commission. Ms. Taylor thanked Ms. McMillan and Mr. Rusch and suggested the commission consider having the departing commissioners return in an advisory capacity from time to time to take advantage of their experience and points of view. Ms. Taylor agreed with Mr. Rusch that growth was not sustainable. She said both Mr. Rusch and Ms. McMillan would be missed. Mr. Kelly concurred with the comments of Ms. Taylor in regard to the service of Mr. Rusch and Ms. McMillan, and said he liked Ms. Taylor's suggestion that the commission call on retired commissioners for advice. Mr. Lawless said the commission hoped to foster more collaboration when controversial issues such as the East Campus planning process arose. He thought it would put the community miles ahead in reaching positive outcomes. Mr. Lawless believed the commission needed to examine its bylaws and procedures for possible changes. He said the commission was constantly challenged by the internal conflicts created by various planning documents, and advocated for integrating the longer term planning occurring through the Region 2050 process into the Land Use Code Update and commission processes. He also advocated for aggressive and mandated updates to neighborhood refinement plans. Mr. Poling, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to approve the Fiscal Year (FY) 2005 Plan- ning Commission work program contained in the attached FY04 Annual Report, including the Historic Review Board FY05 Work Program. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 20, 2004 Page 6 Work Session Mr. Kelly said the collaborative model was fabulous, as demonstrated by the East Campus planning model. He encouraged the commission to consider how that type of process could occur more routinely. He said that collaboration only works if all parties were asked to collaborate. Mr. Kelly suggested the Growth Management Study was a fundamental document for the commission to consider as it worked on the alternate path. Mr. Kelly said the work plan did not provide him with a way of judging whether the plan had been fulfilled in the future, and he did not know what it meant to adopt the motion. He preferred to have staff rework the Planning Division's work plan and turn it into a Planning Commission work plan. At this point, he was considering offering the body a substitute motion. Responding to a question from Mr. Pap6 regarding possible code amendments related to the siting of medical facilities, Ms. Muir indicated that was to be addressed in the Land Use Code amendments process. Referring to the identified emerging issues, Mr. Pap6 said that he preferred not to put the River Road/Santa Clara transition project on the top of the priority list without more discussion with the neighborhoods groups about other plans that also needed to be updated. Mr. Meisner shared Mr. Kelly's interest in measurable outcomes. Mr. Meisner suggested the possibility that the Coburg Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) corridor might not be the next BRT route given the complications facing that route, and the commission might need to be prepared to have some flexibility in that area. Mr. Meisner asked if the work plan could be accomplished with existing staff. Ms. Muir said the staff resources were forecast where possible; in some instances, it was very difficult to forecast resources without getting into more detailed work program planning. Mr. Meisner hoped the commission and staff would be willing to request additional resources if needed. Ms. Taylor wanted to know what happened to the Land Use Code remand items formerly on the top of the priority list. Ms. Muir indicated the Land Use Code Update remand items came up in April 2004 when the council discussed the Planning Division work program, and the work item was not identified as a high priority at that time. The work task in question was now item 43 on the priority list. Ms. Taylor said if the commission found the council-approved work plan was not working, it should return to the council and let it know. With regard to Mr. Pap6's comments regarding the code amendments associated with medical facilities siting, Mayor Torrey said that depending on where the hospitals located, doctors and clinics would be seeking to relocate as well, and he wanted to know how soon those people would have predictability from the City. Mayor Torrey noted the presence of residents from the River Road area at the meeting, and asked why the council would want to move forward and work on issues in that area before it found out whether there was any willingness on the part of County River Road residents to cooperate. He had never heard the council give any direction to City staff to attempt to annex River Road residents not already in the municipal MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 20, 2004 Page 7 Work Session boundaries, and he got frustrated when he got e-mails from residents insinuating the council had done so. He asked that those writing such e-mails stop doing so until they had information to the contrary. Assistant City Manager Carlson said the City staff had never been given any direction to pursue annexation in the area in question. Staff had the results of the work done by the River Road/Santa Clara Urban Services Committees, and it was working to implement those recommendations. The final report discussed a transition plan, and many translated that as an annexation plan; however, that was not the intent. Assistant City Manager Carlson pointed out that a transition to City services did not necessarily entail annexation as the transition of services happened all the time in many different ways. Annexation may be the ultimate transition but the City was not actively pursuing it. Mr. Lawless left the meeting. Mr. Kelly did not think that things had changed so fundamentally that staff could not forecast the needed staff resources. He acknowledged the work program was aspirational but he continued to be concerned about the lack of outcomes in the program. Mr. Kelly, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to approve the Historic Review Board Fiscal Year 2005 work program, and to direct staff to return with a Planning Commission work program organized similarly to last year's work program. Mr. Meisner said he would have been able to support the motion if it supported the two work plans and directed staff to return with a time line. Mr. Kelly withdrew his motion. Ms. Taylor withdrew her second. Mr. Kelly, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to amend the motion with the addition of a sentence that read "to direct staff to provide to the council, in a timely fashion, a timeline that differentiated between Planning Commission activities and Planning Division activi- ties.'' Assistant City Manager Carlson clarified with Mr. Kelly that he was proposing that staff provide the council with a time line at a later date, not that the work plan come back for adoption. The amended motion passed unanimously, 6:0. Ms. Taylor moved to amend the work plan by making work task item 43 a high priority. The motion died for lack of a second. The motion as amended passed unanimously, 6:0. The meeting adjourned at 1:28 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dennis M. Taylor City Manager MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 20, 2004 Page 8 Work Session ATTACHMENT B MINUTES Eugene City Council Regular Session Council Chamber--City Hall October 25, 2004 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Bonny Bettman, George Poling, David Kelly, Betty Taylor, Jennifer Solomon, Scott Meisner, Gary Pap6, Nancy Nathanson. Mayor James D. Torrey called the meeting of the City Council to order. 1. PUBLIC FORUM Mayor Torrey reviewed the rules of the Public Forum. Julie Van Amerongen, 5045 Nectar Way, spoke on behalf of the Nectar Way Neighborhood Association in support of purchasing the 38-acre parcel bordering Nectar Way and Dillard Road. She described the property, which included some old growth trees and seasonal wetlands. She said a developer had purchased the property for $325,000 and was willing to sell it to the City for $600,000. The property had been recently appraised at $430,000 and this had just been submitted to the property owner. She conveyed the neighborhood's interest, should the property owner not react favorably to the appraisal, in working with the City and possibly with other organizations to create a contingency plan for the acquisition of the property so that it could be added to the Ridgeline trail system and be protected into perpetuity for the citizens of Eugene. Benjamin McKechnie, 1462 Hilyard Street, representing the Eugene Citizens for Housing Standards (ECHS), recalled the group's push to adopt a rental housing program based on the successful system in the City of Corvallis. He noted that the program in Corvallis had been selected as a model, out of many, in part because it had not caused any noticeable increase in rents in that city. He stated that there was, in fact, much support for the program there by citizens, landlords, and elected officials. Based on research, he asserted that complaint-driven programs were not nearly as successful and advocated for the adoption of a program based on the Corvallis program. Adam Petkun, 221 East Broadway, Apartment 165, also a member of ECHS, noted that recently, opponents of rental housing standards had argued that it was unnecessary and offered no new protections. He reiterated that tenants currently only have two options: 1) file a lawsuit against landlords in Small Claims Court; and 2) withhold rent. He stated that due to cutbacks in the courts, the former now took up to four months and was not available to all people and the latter could lead to eviction. He explained that State law allowed renters to withhold up to $500 for affairs of violations of State law and $1,000 in cases that involve serious health risks. He related that many repairs exceed the limit and that such repairs force renters to find solutions to problems they often did not have experience with. He reiterated that the creation of a rental housing code in Eugene would provide renters the protection they deserve. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 25, 2004 Page 1 Regular Session Katie Shopp, 61464 Hamilton Road, also a member of ECHS, stated that Eugene had been without local protection of basic habitability standards for renters. She thanked the council for looking into changing that. She asserted that Eugene was currently the largest city in Oregon without such local protection. She related that throughout discussions with community business leaders, landlords, and the Rental Owners Association of Lane County, some had expressed concem that the current proposal did not address neighborhood blight. She countered that Eugene Code (EC) 6.005 through 6.010 covered all of these concerns. She encouraged the council to pass local rental housing standards. David G. Itoffman, 2790 Madison Street, wished to speak on the proposed Santa Clara Park. He stated that food was the top priority for people and, thus, so was the best food-growing soil. He asked why the City was wasting its time on urban growth boundary (UGB) issues when it should only be looking at soil analysis. He cited the case of the River Road farms versus the gravel pit, in which evidence had been provided by Professor Loudermilk, assistant chief soil conservationist, and though the soil was Class 2 the farms had prevailed. He related that Professor Loudermilk's study of 7,000 years of world agricultural history had shown that neglect of soil helped wipe out entire civilizations. He stated that homeland defense had become the govemment's priority, including protection of food sources. He opined that had a person with an Arabic-sounding name proposed to develop such prime farm land, it would be considered an act of terrorism. He asserted that the metro-area only contained a three-day supply of food. He said reduction in local food production forced an increase in food that was trucked in, causing damage to roadways, using fuel, and providing food that was less fresh. He asserted that local farms and growing its own food gave the United States a military, health, economic, and sustainable advantage. He expressed dismay that the City would consider a land swap that would turn 125 acres of Class 1 soil into a park. He felt history and nature show that people must protect the soil. Kevin Jones, 4740 Wendover Street, representing the Santa Clara Committee for Parks and Open Spaces, described the land swap. He reiterated that the land contained Class 1 soil. He stated that there was a great deal of opposition and encouraged the council to slow down and put the amendment of the Metro Park Plan on hold. He said there was no question that residents wanted a park, but wanted other sites to be considered. He conveyed the committee's recommendation that the City consider the Santa Clara Elementary School as a place to hold some of the facilities that would be part of a community park and that some other smaller parks be considered for further development. He commented that some areas of the country had worked to provide connections between parks and that some bicycle path expansion would benefit local residents. In closing, he stated that he and other committee members were gathering signatures in opposition of the land swap and had, to date, gathered approximately 350 signatures. Lee Rademacher, 4174 Lancaster Drive, also a member of the Santa Clara Committee for Parks and Open Spaces, echoed the comments of Mr. Jones. He shared that he lived on the edge of the UGB. He said his backyard featured seasonal water and had a direct view of the farmland that was proposed to be included in the UGB. He assumed the UGB had been designed to restrict growth in some areas and encourage it in others. He questioned the wisdom of swapping farmable land for developable land. While he recognized the need to eventually expand the UGB, he opined that at the rate the City was growing it would grow to include Junction City in the UGB. He felt the decision to swap prime farmland it would set a precedent for developers to "dangle a carrot" before the City and make such trades. Zach Vishanoff, Patterson Street, alleged that the engineering firm CH2M Hill was building the power plant in the City of Coburg. He also alleged that the City had hired CH2M Hill. He thought, given the opposition to the proposed power plant in Coburg, the City should "fire" CH2M Hill. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 25, 2004 Page 2 Regular Session Mr. Vishanoff listed several articles and submitted them into the record. He asserted that the former director of the American Planners Association had invited the mayor to China to discuss "mega-cities." He opined that the new courthouse was part of a "Smart Growth" plan. He hoped there would be a "Smart Growth" debate or else the courthouse would be "built on a foundation of lies." Mr. Vishanoff related his experience of being shot by non-lethal bullets. He recommended the City review its policies regarding non-lethal weapons. Ray Wolfe, 1473 Luella Street, wished to focus cm homelessness as addressed in the City of Eugene 2003 Legislative Policy Statement. He said it discussed homelessness primarily in terms of affordable housing. While he agreed that affordable housing was an important symptomatic aspect of homelessness, he felt the document overlooked fundamental causes of homelessness namely poverty, drug use, and mental health. He recommended that Eugene lobby unilaterally or with the help of the League of Oregon Cities to address these more fundamental causes of homelessness. He thought the 2004 document should be amended to deal with the regressive character of Oregon State income tax laws. He opined the existing laws were outrageously counter-productive. He said estimated tax withholding applied to very low incomes of people eligible for public assistance was unrealistic, short-sighted, and naive. Mr. Wolfe also recommended that the State of Oregon fund and reopen institutions to treat mental disease. He thought it obvious that treatment with tranquilizing medications had failed to successfully address the problems faced by the mentally ill when the State hospitals had been closed. He suggested that inclusion of low- income people in the deliberations of the council's legislative policy committee would help to provide sound policy on homelessness. He likened the current approach to curing small pox by treating the lesions and not the disease. LeAnn Walker, 2860 Federal Place, opposed the McDougal land swap for the proposed park in Santa Clara. She shared that she had helped collect signatures in opposition and had, to date, only met one person who supported the swap. She felt that in addition to impacting wetlands and the environment, it would also exacerbate traffic issues at the River Road/Beltline Road interchange, an interchange that was already failing. Charles Biggs, 540 Antelope Way, submitted his testimony in writing. He urged the audience to vote no on Measure 20-88. He asserted it would increase taxes so that the City could "spend $6 million to house non-tax paying social services" in the new public safety building. He asked why they could not be moved into the old police facility. He wondered if it was "asking too much to have children and victims go across the street." He theorized it could even be safer given what had happened to the Oklahoma City's co-located daycare facility. He thought the money would be better spent on a school levy. He questioned the wisdom of investing in buildings given the current fiscal situation, adding that "police fight crime, no buildings." He opined that a new building could be "rewarding bad behavior" recently reported in the news, such as the recent Magana trial and incidences of racial profiling. He called the new police building "lavish" and reiterated that voters should vote against it. Rob Handy, 455-½ River Road, said he was inspired by the discussion at the joint session of the Planning Commission and City Council. He was particularly interested in the "alternate path" for planning and development, specifically for the River Road/Santa Clara area. He wondered how an alternate path could be found around island annexation in that area. He thought there was sometimes a lack of good information about the pros and cons of urban service delivery challenges. He said residents wanted to know what the build-ont would look like and asked if residents would have a voice in this. He asked if the "alternate path" would embrace context sensitive design. He wondered if pursuing the "alternate path" MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 25, 2004 Page 3 Regular Session would cause the City to increase funding for neighborhood newsletters in order to involve citizens more. He wondered if such a path would cause a moratorium on annexations until there was a better plan to build trust and create a voice for area residents to that whatever plan was developed would be one that citizens could "get behind." He alleged that projects were largely staff-driven and suggested that the "alternate path" should do something other than staff-driven projects with timelines. Bruce Miller, PO Box 50968, complimented the Mayor on his interview on the radio station KPNW regarding his trip to Korea. He said he hoped the University of Oregon and Lane Connnunity College (LCC) would have him speak about his trip. Mr. Miller complained that the University of Oregon faculty was aged. Mr. Miller registered his opposition to State Ballot Measure 38. He noted that the former dean of the University of Oregon Business School had written an argument in favor of the measure in the voter's pamphlet. He reiterated his displeasure with the individual in question. Mayor Torrey closed the Public Forum and called on the council for responses and comments. Councilor Bettman thanked everyone for their testimony. She considered a council meeting a success when so many people were engaged in the business of the community. Councilor Taylor Councilor Taylor thanked everyone for testifying. She conveyed her hope that the City would not delay the purchase of the land Nectar Way neighbors were speaking about. She averred that the City needed land, both for environmental preservation and for farming reasons. She also registered her opposition to the McDougal land swap, as it would take farm land out of production. Mayor Torrey explained to the committee of Santa Clara representatives that he had asked the City Manager to come back to the council with a plan to do outreach to that entire area to determine whether or not they want the City to proceed with this major community-level park. He shared his perspective that he and the council were prepared to move away from that land swap, should the residents be roundly opposed. But, he said, should the opposition be great, residents should think of other possible sites. He noted that the City was losing soccer fields and needed to plan for more park and field facilities for the children and adults of the community. 2. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of City Council Minutes - September 15, 2004, Work Session - September 27, 2004, Work Session - September 27, 2004, City Council Meeting - September 29, 2004, Work Session B. Approval of Tentative Working Agenda Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved approval of the Consent Calendar. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 25, 2004 Page 4 Regular Session Councilor Kelly noted he had submitted corrections to the minutes electronically. Mayor Torrey deemed them, without objection, approved. Councilor Taylor said she submitted minutes' corrections. She pulled Item B. Mayor Torrey acknowledged the minutes' corrections and deemed them, without objection, approved. Councilor Pap6 called attention to errors in the heading of the work session held on September 15 at noon. It was incorrectly listed as being held on September 13 and at 5:30 p.m. Roll call vote; the Consent Calendar, with the exception of Item B, was unanimously approved, 8:0. Councilor Taylor noted that the Tentative Agenda indicated the council would discuss the smoking ordinance on November 8 and wondered why changes would be considered. Mayor Torrey responded that he had asked the same questions in a staff meeting and the changes seemed to be minor. He said staff would provide the information prior to the meeting. Roll call vote; Consent Calendar Item B was unanimously approved, 8:0. 3. PUBLIC HEARING: An Ordinance Amending the November 1999 Street Classification Map Adopted by Ordinance No. 20181 to Designate Collector Streets in the Crest Drive Neighborhood City Manager Taylor stated that staff would be available, but given that the council had received a lengthy presentation on issue during the work session, no presentation was planned prior to the hearing. Mayor Torrey outlined the procedure for testimony. He opened the public heating. Jon Belcher, 1240 West 15th Avenue, Apartment 4, noted he was not speaking for the Planning Commission. He supported the proposal as he felt it important for this area of town to have collector streets just as the rest of the City did. He said it was a fact that a significant number of people who drove through the neighborhood were from outside that part of town, so in that respect, it was not functioning as a collector. He suggested that the City make sure the context-sensitive design did not increase traffic. Kathy Saranpa, 3015 Friendly Street, commended the Mayor, City Manager, staff, and City Councilors for all of the hard work. She urged the council to adopt Option 2 and designate the streets in the area as local. She felt she had not heard one compelling reason to use the neighborhood collector designation for the streets. She opined the neighborhood had rare value in terms of natural beauty, history, and charm. Don Neet, 3436 Storey Boulevard, noted that Councilor Kelly had asked about traffic counts. He stated that the upper Crest Drive area received more traffic than the Storey Boulevard area. He suggested staff look at Ayres Road, which he did not think had been improved by being designated a collector. He said the area residents did not want their neighborhood "destroyed." He related that staff had talked about the collector designation, that it looked good. He thought it would end at 28th Avenue and people would take Jefferson Street from there. He asked if anyone on Jefferson Street had been warned about the possible increase in traffic. He conveyed the neighborhood's willingness to work with the City, should the City align itself with the wish of the neighborhood to maintain the local designation. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 25, 2004 Page 5 Regular Session George Kjaer, 814 Lorane Highway, likened the meetings with the Planning and Development Department (PDD) staff with being sold a roof. He said the salesperson knew he needed a roof, but would not tell him how much it would cost nor what color it would be. He advocated for having all the design elements in place and codified, including the designation of context-sensitive design as well as the local street designation to provide a real choice. Donna Hawley, 3484 Storey Boulevard, said she was speaking on behalf of her daughter, Sheri Hawley, who was unable to attend. She shared that the "long struggle" affected the families and friends of the residents of the neighborhood. She reiterated that the neighbors wanted the beauty of the neighborhood to be preserved. She related that she had worked in the City of Salem as a neighborhood counselor, helping neighbors understand how to work with the City to achieve their goals. She understood the frustration of people who were confronted with City plans that were supposed to be for their own good. She opined that eventually the City had to pay attention to what the neighbors want and need rather than what "looked good on a piece of paper." She urged the council to keep the street designation "local." Stanley D. Kluth, 2830 Friendly Street, shared that he worked for the Army and the Department of Defense. He commented that the people should drive the plan and not the other way around. He related that he had lived in several cities in Germany. He said they had started to mn traffic collectors through residential neighborhoods and had determined that it did not work. He stated that the cities had pulled the traffic back out of the neighborhoods by placing traffic calming devices and reducing the speed limit to 30 kilometers per hour. He stressed that residential neighborhoods were not for traffic. Virginia Starling, 3302 Storey Boulevard, asked how the neighborhood could give City staff "carte blanche" to design the area when they had not shown the neighbors any of the ideas that were being considered. She noted that staff had collected a variety of ideas from the neighbors, but there was no indication of the planning that City staff had undertaken. She asserted that senior transportation analyst for the Public Works Department, Gary McNeel, had contradicted himself regarding sidewalk requirements, which added to neighborhood mistrust. She said there were discrepancies in the information provided the neighborhood regarding tree removal as well. Clyde R. Nielson, 3441 Storey Boulevard, urged the City to cooperate with the neighborhood regarding designation and potential street improvements. He supported Option 2 and thought this was the solution the neighborhood would be willing to work with. He was troubled, however, by the meaning of "context- sensitive design." He thought sensitive to be a nebulous word, subject to individual interpretation. He commented that the word "context" in this case referred to the physical surroundings of the traffic. He opined that it should also include the people. He averred that neighborhood sentiments about what Was being planned should be an essential part of the equation. He thought that a determination of how design decisions should be made and who shared in the final say should be folded into the term "context sensitive design." He felt that citizen involvement would otherwise be a sham. In closing, Mr. Nielson thanked the City because the push for collector status for the neighborhood streets had given birth to solidarity. Paul Thompson, 2970 Charnelton Street, speaking as chair of the Crest Drive Neighborhood Association, conveyed the opposition of the association, as per the vote in the previous spring. He reminded the council that one year ago the neighborhood association had voted to formally and unanimously endorse the inclusion of context-sensitive design in the arterial/collector street plan. He observed that the work MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 25, 2004 Page 6 Regular Session session had indicated that the council would not move ahead with an option on November 8 that did not identify either arterial collectors or local streets and possibly entered into an approach that looked at design options before classification. He asked that, should this approach be chosen, members of the neighborhood be carefully selected to aid in the design. Diane Thurlow, 217 Crest Drive, called attention to the fact that nearly all of the people who resided in the neighborhood had signs in their yards indicating their opposition to having the street designated a collector. She asked why the issue was not resolved already, given the level of opposition. She commented that she had to back out onto Crest Drive and that she did not find it to be dangerous. She liked the area and the wildlife, adding that she believed property values would go down if the change was instituted. Kathryn Lorish, 897 West 36th Avenue, thanked everyone present for all of their hard work. She thanked Mayor Torrey and the council for postponing the action from the previous spring. She said she learned since the Crest Drive vote that people were vital. She commented that the cohesiveness of the neighborhood had grown out of the "crisis." She stated that nearly 100 percent of the neighbors had signed a petition in opposition to the change in street designation. Fred Lorish, 897 West 36t~ Avenue, jokingly suggested a toll booth be installed at either end of the road. He reiterated the neighborhood's willingness to work with City staff and that the neighbors wanted input into what the improvements would entail. He noted that it was the final neighborhood to be added to the Comprehensive Plan and that this was not enough reason to make the change. He hoped City staff and neighbors could work together toward a "win-win" solution. He conveyed the neighborhood's resolve to work with the City and preserve the neighborhood they lived in. He stressed that the neighborhood would not agree to a change that would increase traffic and the speed it travels at through the Crest Drive corridor. Matt Shuler, 890 West 36th Avenue, called Eugene a "distinctive" community. He related that he had enjoyed the passion for democracy and for the neighborhood. He thought City staff, as steward of the community process, was trying to see the issue through new eyes. He pointed out that the new overlay, context-sensitive design, provided the opportunity for Eugene to lead the way and make it a best practice. He suggested that the Crest Drive neighbors had the energy and passion to pursue context-sensitive design and the City should seize the opportunity to deploy that energy in a positive way. Michael Boutette, 2970 Friendly Street, thanked the City for conducting the hearing. He concurred with comments made by previous speakers. He asked the council to consider who wanted the plan, noting that less than three percent of the neighborhood did. He wondered why, if it was so roundly opposed, the City was continuing to pursue a plan to redesignate area streets. He asserted that the TransPlan was supposed to benefit neighborhoods. He suggested the City work on a neighborhood that did want SUch improvements. Marcella Moore, 2812 Friendly Street, stated that she had resided at her residence for 28 years. She opposed the designation of Friendly Street, Storey Boulevard, and Crest Drive as collectors. She loved the rural nature of the streets and had enjoyed raising two of her children in that.area. She urged the City to designate the streets as "local." Steve West, 3025 Friendly Street, thanked the council for all of the hard work. He also thanked the Save Our Streets Committee for all of its hard work as well. He commented that, should the City build larger MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 25, 2004 Page 7 Regular Session streets, the traffic would increase. He reiterated neighbors' opposition, and averred it was not fight to make neighborhood residents pay for the street improvements and it was not fight to ask the neighborhood to give up its amenities. Furthermore, he did not believe it would solve the traffic problem. Mr. West reiterated his invitation to the council to join him for the walk from his house to downtown Eugene. He suggested that they stand at a comer of 6th or 7th Avenue and watch all of the cars driving by with only one person in them. Mr. West related that the staff report had indicated a commonality in the opinions received. He advocated for supporting Option 2. James McDonald, 560 Crest Drive, thanked the council for its hard work and asked the councilors to support Option 2 and keep the street designations local. I-Iai Ituestis, 2856 Friendly Street, said he lived on Friendly Street for 23 years. He agreed that traffic had increased, but did not feel it had increased astronomically. He attributed the largest increase to the traffic light installation near the new post office and Willamette Street. Regarding street quality, he agreed it was terrible, but observed that it did not seem to be making people use other routes. Regarding sidewalks, Mr. Huestis asserted that some houses would lose ten feet of frontage. He did not want to live that close to the street, nor did he want to part with the mature vegetation in his front yard. He reiterated the neighbors' desire to be involved in the design. Marlene Varady, 420 Crest Drive, stated that she had mn a massage center at the Crest Drive location for 19 years. She wanted to keep the street designation as it was. She felt the late Wayne Morse would approve, as he had donated the land surrounding his ranch to the City because he recognized the value of keeping it rural and a natural habitat. Jo Warren, 2840 Friendly Street, was adamantly opposed to the collector designation. She related that she had strong feelings, due in part to being unable to afford to be assessed for the cost of changes the City was proposing. She asked that Friendly Street be lef~ as it is. Cathryn Treadway, 2820 Friendly Street, submitted her testimony in writing. She opposed the designation of the street as a neighborhood collector. She also thanked Mayor Torrey and the council for their leadership, stating that without them, they would not be there. Christine Donahue, 2988 Madison Street, said she had lived in the Crest Drive neighborhood for approximately 20 years. She stated that she attended many of the traffic study meetings and had volunteered and worked with staff several years back. She averred that many of the area streets were badly in need of repair and pedestrian safety was an issue. She opined that most of the traffic in the neighborhood was just from the neighborhood. She agreed that the neighborhood was unique and, as such, context-sensitive design standards would greatly benefit the process as citizens would participate. Kirk Jacobson, 3280 Whitten Drive, explained that, as a medical doctor, he was concerned about health care and the environment both locally and worldwide. He noted that he was about to complete a solar energy project for his practice that would generate approximately 40 percent of his power. He said this had been a collaboration of the Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB), the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), and himself. He shared this as an example of entities working together to build a MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 25, 2004 Page 8 Regular Session win-win situation. He thought more time was necessary for the City to build relationships with all of the people in the neighborhood so that they could be included in the process. He felt the design charrette held by the City was just the start. He suggested linking the street designation, either by ordinance or by council motion, to the design process. He also recommended adoption of the Crest Drive Neighborhood Association recommendation, encapsulated in Option 2. He was concerned that approval of the designation as arterial collectors would alienate all of the residents of the area. Susan Jason, 310 Crest Drive, related that her home had suffered a devastating house fire on September 16. She said no one was home at the time and quick-thinking neighbors had been able to let their dogs loose. She noted they ran into the street and were not hit by cars and attributed this to the street not being a collector, She stated that the damage was not as severe as it could have been because the Eugene Fire Department responded quickly, something she also conjectured could have been delayed had the road been redesignated a collector. She averred the potholes could be fixed without changing the road. Len Bailey, 2932 Friendly Street, called the neighborhood unique in its collection of winding roads, wildlife, and tall fir trees and "country lane feel." He thought this neighborhood caused City planners and traffic engineers to "virtually drool at the possibilities to make the neighborhood into some grand, 'eugeneric,' super-efficient, over-engineered system." He averred that building wider streets would bring more traffic. He reiterated the neighborhood's desire to calm the existing traffic and to avoid increasing it. He asked the council to cherish the neighborhood as those who resided there did. Donna Riddle, 1238 Crest Drive, said she lived on her five-acre parcel for 34 years. She related that the County had turned over maintenance of Crest Drive to the City approximately 15 years ago. She alleged that it had not been maintained since then. She noted she nearly fell in a pothole earlier in the day. She agreed with comments that suggested that the change in traffic lights at Willamette Street had increased traffic. James Reed, 990 Crest Drive, stated that the Public Works Department staff had assured the neighborhood that the same physical design would be implemented irrespective of the classification. With that in mind, he suggested a local designation would not interfere with the City's goals of connectivity. He felt that the risk with the collector designation was that the codified standards for neighborhood collectors were far in excess of what would be deemed acceptable. He noted that context-sensitive design had yet to be codified. He opined that the risks to livability far outweighed the benefits of connectivity that a collector would afford the neighborhood. Regarding current traffic, he agreed that more stop signs and traffic calming were needed. He likened using evidence that traffic existed on the roads already as justification for redesignation to deciding that, because people were throwing garbage in their yard that it would be a good place for a garbage dump. Robbin Howard, 3217 Whitten Drive, said she walked on the streets with her seven-year-old daughter and they loved their walks in the neighborhood. She commented that the City offered incentives to businesses to move to the City, but the other reason businesses located here was the livability the City had to offer. She asserted that designation as a collector could cause trees to be cut down, roads to be widened, and a reduction in the livability of the neighborhood. She thought everyone should think of themselves as public servants and should serve the public. She felt being attached to one wrong idea did not serve the public. She said she was honored by her neighbors' cooperation to work toward a common good. She supported Option 2. She noted that she had spoken to neighbors that, while opposed to redesignating the street, wanted the safety improved. She supported such improvements. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 25, 2004 Page 9 Regular Session Zachary Vishanoff, Patterson Street, expressed concern that video cameras would be included in the construction of roads. He alleged that Eugene was looking into a $50 million investment in new roads that included video cameras. He called it a huge problem for privacy advocates. He shared his observations about smart growth. Mayor Torrey called for comments from councilors. Councilor Kelly said in order to move forward collectively, the City needed to codify the design prior to discussing classification. Councilor Poling thanked everyone for their testimony. He thought that the council had good ideas that could solve the problem and the ultimate result would be a "win-win solution.'" Councilor Taylor lauded the abundance of intelligent and creative people in Eugene. She hoped the council would adopt Option 2. She related that she had heard from some of the residents on the side streets who expressed concern about the safety of the roads. She encouraged members of Save Our Streets to seek them out and talk with them. Councilor Bettman echoed council gratitude for the abundance of testimony. She hoped that, as the process moved forward, the group of neighbors would not lose momentum. She believed that the outcome would be calmer, safer streets and better mobility. She added that she had documentation that children were safer on calmer streets and offered to share it with anyone who was interested. Mayor Torrey declared that City Hall, the City Council, and the mayor did listen to the testimony. Mayor Torrey called for a five-minute recess at 9:20 p.m. 4. ACTION: Appointments to Boards, Commissions, and Committees Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to reappoint Terrance McDonald to Position 2 on the Budget Committee for a three- year term beginning November 1, 2004, and ending on October 31, 2007. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0 (Councilor Nathanson was gone momentarily from the dais.) Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to appoint Michael Clark to Position 7 on the Budget Committee for a three-year term beginning November 1, 2004, and ending on October 31, 2007. Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to substitute John Dembowski for Michael Clark in the motion. Councilor Kelly said both gentlemen gave good interviews, but he felt Mr. Dembowski would bring more diversity when looking at existing committee members' views. He also thought Mr. Clark was, perhaps, too expressive and it could be more challenging for him to fit into the committee structure. He suggested MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 25, 2004 Page 10 Regular Session that Mr. Dembowski's work in the social services arena would bring an important voice in the Budget Committee discussions. Councilor Nathanson returned to the dais. Councilor Bettman agreed that most of the Budget Committee applicants had interviewed well. She believed it essential to have a balance of viewpoints on the committee and, so, would be supporting the appointment of Mr. Dembowski. She opined that Mr. Clark replicated the experience that was already on the Budget Committee. She noted it was Mr. Dembowski's second year to apply and that he had been succinct and "on message." Roll call vote; the motion to substitute Mr. Dembrowski for Mr. Clark failed, 5:3; Councilors Taylor, Bettman, and Kelly voting in favor. Roll call vote; the main motion passed, 5:3; Councilors Taylor, Bettman, and Kelly voting in opposition. Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to appoint David Doll to Position 1, the unexpired term of Brian Allen, as an industry representative, on the Toxics Board for a three-year term beginning on November 1, 2003, and ending on October 31, 2006. Councilor Bettman said Mr. Doll had received eight votes in the balloting. Councilor Solomon called him an outstanding candidate who would be an excellent addition to the Toxics Board. She noted he was the only applicant from her ward, Ward 6. She asked that more people from her ward consider serving on a committee, board, or commission. Councilor Pap6 suggested that Mr. Doll be appointed to serve a whole term and not to finish Mr. Allen's term. Councilor Bettman withdrew her motion. Councilor Poling was amenable to this. Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to appoint Dean Bautz to Positionl, the unexpired term of Brian Allen, as an industry representative, on the Toxics Board for a three-year term beginning on November 1, 2003, and ending on October 31, 2006. Councilor Bettman advocated for his appointment. She stated that Mr. Bautz had experience doing the reporting for his company as well as having a background in chemistry. She also felt he would be able to work with people with opposing opinions. Councilor Poling, seconded by Councilor Solomon, moved to amend the motion to substitute Douglas Brooke for Dean Bautz in the motion. Councilor Poling pointed out that Mr. Brooke had the same level of experience as Mr. Doll and was currently working for the same company Mr. Allen had worked for. He felt Mr. Brook was aware of the MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 25, 2004 Page 11 Regular Session demands and needs the Toxics Board would place upon him. He added that the council had received a memo from the Toxics Board endorsing him. Councilor Pap6 was impressed by all three of the candidates and said he could support any of them. Councilor Solomon underscored that the Toxics Board had sent an endorsement. Councilor Kelly wished to clarify that the recommendation from the Toxics Board had not been from the full board, but had been only from the industry representatives. He added that the full board had only provided recommendations on neutral positions. He asserted that Mr. Bautz did the reporting for his company, while Mr. Brooke was only part of a team of people who conducted this sort of work. He also felt that Mr. Brooke did not answer the question regarding the purpose of the Toxics Board as well as Mr. Bautz did. Councilor Meisner commented that all three interviewees were qualified. He was willing to take the recommendation from the industry representatives. Councilor Bettman related that she had been surprised by a "lack of information" received from Mr. Brooke on important questions such as whether he could work with people on the board whose viewpoints differed dramatically from his. She thought his answers to be vague. She reiterated her reasons for supporting Mr. Bautz. She felt it was doing a "disfavor to the board" to not appoint Mr. Bautz. Councilor Taylor said she was impressed with how well informed Mr. Bautz was. Councilor Nathanson referred to statements from the supplemental questionnaire from Mr. Brooke. She noted that it mentioned attending many meetings during the development of the program and that he supported compromise. Roll call vote; the motion to substitute Mr. Brooke for Mr. Bautz passed 5:3; Councilors Taylor, Bettman, and Kelly voting in opposition. Roll call vote; the motion to approve the appointment of Mr. Brooke to fill the unexpired term of Brian Allen, Position 1, for a term beginning on appointment and ending on October 31, 2006, passed, 5:3; Councilors Taylor, Bettman, and Kelly voting in opposition. Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to appoint David Doll to Position 2, as an industry representative, on the Toxics Board for a three-year term beginning on November 1, 2004, and ending on October 31, 2007. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to reappoint Jennifer Gleason to Position 5, an advocacy representative on the Toxics Board for a three-year term beginning on November 1, 2004 and ending on October 31, 2007. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to reappoint Marylee Bowman to Position 7, the neutral position, on the Toxics Board MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 25, 2004 Page 12 Regular Session for a three-year term beginning on November 1, 2004, and ending on October 31, 2007. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to appoint Earl Koenig to Position 2, a Eugene at large position to the Lane Regional Air Pollution Authority Board of Directors, for a three-year term beginning November 1, 2004, and ending October 31, 2007. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to reappoint Karen Seidel to Position 1, on the Historic Review Board for a four-year term beginning November 1, 2004, and ending on October 31, 2008. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to reappoint Gunnar Schlieder to Position 2, on the Historic Review Board for a four- year term beginning November 1, 2004, and ending on October 31, 2008. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to reappoint Christine Thompson to Position 4, on the Historic Review Board for a four-year term beginning November 1, 2004, and ending on October 31, 2008. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to reappoint Richard Danemiller to Position 6, on the Historic Review Board for a four-year term beginning November 1, 2004, and ending on October 31, 2008. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to appoint John Ahlen to Position 4 on the Police Commission, the unexpired term of Kimberly Shore, for a four-year term beginning November 1, 2002, and expiring October 31, 2006. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. The meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dennis M. Taylor City Manager (Recorded by Ruth Atcherson) MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 25, 2004 Page 13 Regular Session ATTACHMENT C MINUTES Eugene City Council Executive Session McNutt Room--Eugene City Hall November 3, 2004 Noon COUNCILORS PRESENT: Bonny Bettman, George Poling, Nancy Nathanson, Scott Meisner, David Kelly, Betty Taylor, Gary Pap6, Jennifer Solomon. Mayor James D. Torrey called the executive session of the Eugene City Council to order. A. EXECUTIVE SESSION The City Council met in executive session in accordance with Oregon Revised Statute 192.660(1)(f). Mayor Torrey adjourned the executive session and called the council to order in a public meeting. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Poling, moved, pursuant to Section 28(4) of the Eugene Charter, to authorize a public hearing on November 8, 2004, on an ordinance related to implementation of Ballot Measure 37. The council shall leave the record open until No- vember 15 for the submission of written comments on the proposed ordinance. Mayor Torrey solicited council comments on the motion. Responding to a question from Mr. Kelly regarding the time provided for council and public review of the ordinance, City Manager Dennis Taylor indicated the council would also hold a work session on the ordinance and the time for comment was proposed to be extended. Ms. Nathanson indicated she might have to leave before the vote and said she was in favor of putting some sort of ordinance in place to establish a process. She thought the timing of the public process unfortunate but pointed out the ballot measure had been discussed extensively during the campaign. She did not think the public was fully aware of the ramifications of the measure, and the results would not be what people understood. She believed voters thought they were voting to compensate property owners, but many jurisdictions would not be able to do so and would be forced to waive regulations altogether. Ms. Nathanson hoped to see a minimal ordinance that addressed what the City had to do at this point. Other revisions or ordinances could follow. Ms. Taylor agreed with Ms. Nathanson's remarks. However, she thought the public hearing should occur later to give residents more time to be aware of what the council was contemplating and to become familiar with the issues involved. She preferred to have a special public meeting on the topic as well. Ms. Nathanson left the meeting. MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 3, 2004 Page 1 Executive Session Ms. Bettman said the City had been working to anticipate the measure's passage but she did not think the same was true of the public. She did not think the public understood all the ramifications of the measure or what the council was considering through the ordinance. That would take time. She preferred to hold a special meeting on November 22 followed by a public hearing. The council could then take action at a special meeting in early December. Mr. Meisner supported the motion. He thought it ironic the council was discussing the need for the public to become better informed and educated about the ordinance when the public was clearly neither informed nor educated during the campaign about the consequences of the action voters had so recently taken to undo Oregon's land use system. Mr. Meisner thought it incumbent on the council to do something now. He pointed out the ordinance could be amended in the future. He said the council needed to be prepared as quickly as possible, and educate those who will be attempting to make claims on December 3. City Attorney Glenn Klein noted that approval of the motion required unanimous approval, and suggested that it be withdrawn and a public heating scheduled on November 22. Mayor Torrey suggested the council hold two heatings. Ms. Bettman indicated willingness to support the motion given that the record would be held open. Responding to a question from Mr. Kelly about what he saw as the benefit of holding two heatings, Mayor Torrey suggested that education and increased public involvement were two benefits. Mr. Kelly questioned whether the motion needed to be amended to accommodate two hearings. Ms. Bettman pointed out the council could vote to continue the hearing of November 8 to November 22. City Manager Taylor recommended that approach. Mr. Pap6 suggested the possibility the council could take action on November 22. Ms. Taylor said she could not support the motion unless it specifically called for a second hearing. Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to amend the motion by stipulating the council would hold a second public hearing on the ordinance on November 22. The amendment to the motion passed, 5:2; Mr. Pap6 and Ms. Solomon voting no. The motion as amended passed unanimously, 7:0. The meeting adjourned at 1:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dennis M. Taylor City Manager (Recorded by Kimbefly Young) MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 3, 2004 Page 2 Executive Session