HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 03/13/06 Meeting
M I N U T E S
Eugene City Council
City Council Meeting
Council Chamber—Eugene City Hall
March 13, 2006
7:30 p.m.
COUNCILORS PRESENT: Jennifer Solomon, Andrea Ortiz, David Kelly, Gary Papé, George Poling,
Chris Pryor, Bonny Bettman.
COUNCILORS ABSENT: Betty Taylor.
Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. She announced that
due the number of people who wished to testify for the public hearings on Resolutions 4861, 1038, and
4862, the public hearing for Resolution 4863 approving the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Project and
Priority Plan would be postponed.
1. CEREMONIAL MATTERS
- Presentation of Sister City Gift
Tom Bickel, manager of the Kakegawa Education Center of Oregon – a Sister City-owned farm in Junction
City - explained that Kakegawa presented a painted manhole cover to the City of Eugene. He read into the
record the letter of presentation that accompanied the gift, written by the Mayor of Kakegawa.
Mayor Piercy introduced three visitors from Tokyo, Japan who were in the audience and welcomed them to
Eugene.
- Recognition of Eugene Airport Employee Mike Coontz
Bob Wells, City Manager for the City of Salem, thanked Eugene for lending Airport employee Mike Coontz
to the Salem Airport while its airport administrator fulfilled his military duty in Iraq. He reported that
Salem Airport Administrator Alan Alexander had returned safely. He introduced a delegation of four people
from Salem who had come to honor Mr. Coontz’s service and read a proclamation signed by the Salem
Mayor and City Council into the record.
Mayor Piercy said, on behalf of the council and staff, that all were honored to have the delegation from
Salem present. She thanked them for taking the time to present the proclamation and that it was an honor to
have Mr. Coontz as part of the City organization and the community.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council -- March 13, 2006 Page 1
City Council Meeting
2. PUBLIC FORUM
Mayor Piercy reviewed the rules of the Public Forum. She noted that 24 people signed up to speak and
requested a motion to extend the 30-minute timeframe usually allotted for testimony.
Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Papé, moved to allow two minutes per speaker.
Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0.
Jim Torrey
, 3593 River Pointe, asked that the bond measure for the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space
Project and Priority List be expanded to include synthetic surface fields for five different facilities around
the city of Eugene: Cal Young Middle School, Madison Middle School, the Willamette High School
football/soccer facility (the only high school that does not currently have a synthetic surface), Jefferson
Middle School, and Roosevelt or Spencer Butte Middle School. He suggested that the reason the 1998 bond
measure for $25 million passed without one negative letter to the editor of the local paper was because a
broad cross-section of the community worked together in support of it. He averred that open space and
places for kids to play made good sense. He felt a partnership between open space and playing facilities
would help to pass the measure in November. He touted the synthetic fields, calling them “one of the best
things the City had done.” He stressed that such facilities could be used year-round and more frequently on
a daily basis than the grass fields.
Rachelle HaxbyJennifer Lam
, 200 North Silver Lane, spoke in tandem with , 2455 Willakenzie Road, and
Tricia Buzzard
, 2455 Willakenzie Road. They explained that they were members of the Teen Advocacy
Council for School-Based Health Centers (TAC), a group of 12 students from School District 4J and Bethel
School District high schools who sought to raise awareness of the school-based health centers and what they
had to offer: “quality, affordable health care to children and teens.” They stated that the health centers were
located at North Eugene, South Eugene, Sheldon, Churchill, and Springfield high schools and provided a
wide variety of health services to children from birth to the age of 19. On behalf of TAC, they thanked the
City Council for its continued support. They noted that the school levy recently overturned by the courts
was vital to the continuation of the health center services. They invited all interested members and
supporters to an Open House on April 4 between 2 - 5 p.m. at any school-based health center. They
submitted their testimony in writing along with buttons and fliers that publicize the program.
Mark Rabinowitz
, no address given, alleged that the Osprey Group, the consultants hired to facilitate
discussions about the West Eugene Parkway (WEP), were biased as they had been part of a highway project
built in Kansas and had served to undermine pro-environment efforts there. He asserted that the Osprey
Group’s co-founder was from a company that had a former employee of the engineering firm, CH2M Hill,
on its board. He felt this contributed to the bias, as CH2M Hill staff had done some engineering work for
the WEP. He called it an inappropriate use of City money to hire the Osprey Group. He suggested that the
City kept spending money on “bogus” studies when it could be spent on real transportation projects, such as
th
fixing the problems on West 11 Avenue. He predicted people would vote against bond measures because
they did not perceive that the money was being spent well.
Charles Warren
, 86260 Lorane Highway, echoed the thoughts expressed by Mr. Torrey. He said he had
chaired the committee for the Parks and Open Space bond measure in 1998 and reminded those present that
some of the money from the bond measure was earmarked to build synthetic surface athletic fields in
collaboration with School District 4j. He averred that the commitment to build those fields proved to be one
of the best investments the City made in athletic fields. However, he added that the City was faced with two
looming problems: 1) the existing fields needed to be resurfaced between 2008 and 2010 at a cost of
MINUTES—Eugene City Council -- March 13, 2006 Page 2
City Council Meeting
approximately $2 million, with the City’s share at $1 million, and 2) the fields had almost reached usage
capacity. He stated that if the City was going to continue to offer all of the youth in the community an
opportunity to participate in athletic programs and meet its responsibility to its adult athletic programs, the
best investment it could make would be to build more all-weather fields. He thought it was imperative that
the City Council look at the immediate need the City had for athletic fields and this would improve the
chances of the bond measure passing.
Kathy Ging
, PO Box 11245, recited the Oregon State Motto, “She flies with her own wings.” She said
implementation of Oregon Constitution Article 11(d) required a non-partisan, three-member, statewide
elected commission to oversee energy production in Oregon. She averred that it would provide local jobs
and long-term permanent rate relief and would keep economic benefits at home. She asserted that currently
Oregon was “funneling money to out-of-state corporations.” She felt that Oregon could be tapped for solar,
wind, geo-thermal, bio-fuels, tidal, and hydroelectric power. She said the Oregon State Grange added
Article 11(d) to the constitution through the petition process in 1932 and voted in 2006 to sponsor its
implementation in the Oregon Renewable Energy and Fuel act of 2006. She opined that the State was at a
historical crossroads to correct a “leadership vacuum” where renewable energy, economic development, and
environmental advocates could unite. She supported creation of this commission through a petition to get it
on the ballot.
Dave Clark
, 869 Aldridge Place, spoke in support of building more synthetic playing fields. He under-
scored that the City currently had more than 600 soccer teams and over 200 football teams, as well as
th
lacrosse teams in the 8 grade and below. He said the best fields owned by the City could only support two
games per day, while the synthetic fields could support up to seven games per day. He stated that the fields
were greatly needed by the youth of the community.
David Hinkley
, 1350 Lawrence Street, #1, objected to merging three public hearings into one. He cited
Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) 294.480(4), which mandated a public hearing prior to taking action on a
supplemental budget, and subsections under ORS 279 that allegedly required a public hearing be held prior
to taking action to exempt a process from competitive selection. He called it “unforgivable” that the council
would choose to combine the hearings as it did not allow enough time for testimony. He felt it was
“regrettable” that the council had “left to the last minute” something as controversial as the East Broadway
garage project. He opined that lack of planning on the City’s part did not constitute an emergency and it
was no reason to combine the measures or to shorten the speaking time to two minutes.
Marsha Edwards
, 2350 Jefferson Street, advocated for inclusion of five additional fields for community
sports in the bond measure for the parks and open spaces. As a current member of the Kidsports board of
directors, she said the organization was “desperate” for additional playing fields. She noted that lacrosse
was the newest sports craze and the City fell short in meeting interest in that sport was because of facility
limitations. She asked the council to consider community youth sports programs in parks planning.
Jared Allison
, 1513 Mill Street, read the mission statement for Leadership Education Adventure Direction
(LEAD): “Our mission is to develop the leadership skills of low-income youth, empowering them to address
community problems and change the world.” He thanked the councilors for the interest in meeting with
LEAD members.
Mr. Allison stated that life assignments were long-term goals that LEAD members chose for themselves. He
said his life assignment was to be a positive role model for LEAD teens and show them the values of LEAD
such as devotion to staying out of the juvenile justice system and staying in school. He explained that the
MINUTES—Eugene City Council -- March 13, 2006 Page 3
City Council Meeting
reason he did so was that teens needed a positive peer role model. He described a good LEAD teen as
someone who would show common courtesy toward other people, who would stop an individual from
oppressing another. and who would stand in the way of oppression.
Terra Williams
, 1669 Oak Patch Road, #219, stated that she was a volunteer in training for LEAD since
turning 18 years old. She felt that being a volunteer was a way to give back to LEAD. She said that as a
teen, LEAD gave her support that she would not have received anywhere else and taught her leadership
skills, public speaking skills, and ways to build toward her “life assignment.” As a volunteer, she felt able
to help other teens improve their skills and accomplish their goals. She said she had to learn to connect with
the teens differently and to spread herself out among the participants, but that other volunteers were helping
her adjust to her new role. She underscored that LEAD did not lose its connection with the teens it helped,
but rather had teens remain in the program to help younger teens.
th
D. Cohen
, 2115 West 12 Avenue, #6, explained that he was a member of LEAD staff and was Teen
Center co-coordinator, group leader, and a homeless outreach coordinator. Additionally, he was finishing
his studies at the University of Oregon in the Family and Human Services program and the Substance Abuse
Prevention program. He said the group had been working on the teen center for a year. He listed some of
the partnerships to which LEAD was committed, such as Centro LatinoAmericano, which provided meeting
space, Juventud Faceta – a youth program for Amigos Centro de Servicios Multiculturales, Lane County
Positive Youth Development Initiative, University of Oregon Family and Human Services program, and the
University of Oregon Multicultural Center, as well as the Trauma Healing Project. He noted that Papa
John’s Pizza was a sponsor for LEAD.
Mr. Cohen related that LEAD held a forum in Spring 2005 at the Eugene Public Library to gather input on
whether Eugene needed a teen center and what teens and adults would want from such a center. Since then,
through bimonthly meetings, LEAD created a name, a mission, goals, programs, and subcommittees. He
said a master’s student at the University of Oregon was currently creating a needs assessment for a teen
center and LEAD raised $15,000 in private donations. He was confident in the work LEAD was doing and
asked that others who shared LEAD’s vision to join in the effort. He added that his passion for the work
came from his own experience of being an at- risk youth. He said if it had not been for the work of key
mentors, he was uncertain where he would be at present, as he had spent his first three years in Eugene as a
homeless youth.
th
Caleb Pruzanski
, 470 West 27 Avenue, also spoke on behalf of LEAD. He stated that he was a board
member and Teen Center co-coordinator. He said the name of the proposed teen center would be Nuestro
Lugar, or Our Place. He underscored that LEAD was a non-discriminatory, diverse group of youth and
adult mentors committed to a safe, supportive, fun environment that promoted personal growth, multicultur-
alism, leadership, and empowerment. He averred that LEAD’s goals were very straight-forward: to help
teens in all ways possible. He thanked the council for its help in setting up a meeting with LEAD. He added
that LEAD representatives would provide testimony at every City Council meeting until a teen center was
underway.
Zachary Vishanoff
, Patterson Street, asked if a state of emergency had been called and this was why the
three hearings were grouped together. He said he wanted to be specific in his testimony and questioned
whether this was possible given that the hearings had been combined.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council -- March 13, 2006 Page 4
City Council Meeting
Mr. Vishanoff opined that too much money had been spent on consultants in the City Hall planning process.
He suggested that the Eugene Water & Electric Board Steam Plant or the Eugene Hotel be used as a new
City Hall. He recommended holding a wider public discussion and firing the consultants.
Jen Evans
, 1591 High Street, #1, showed a drawing she made for her architecture class that demonstrated
her plan for seven blocks of park in the downtown area. She thought this was an example of what could be
done in downtown Eugene if “we opened our eyes and let people propose what they’re thinking.” She
thought the City would then truly become a great city for the arts and outdoors.
rd
Lora Byxbe
, 677 West 23 Avenue, said she had a chance to see the plan for downtown Eugene prepared
by Professor Gillem of the University of Oregon; his students and she thought it was a beautiful proposal.
She felt it was unfortunate that the Whole Foods project was in the middle of it. She thought Eugene needed
to formulate a master plan for the downtown area and follow it. She felt doing so would prevent the City
from making a big mistake.
John Etter
, 85444 Teague Loop, expressed concern that the planning process surrounding the federal
courthouse/Cannery Square area was insufficient. He thought there was no site specific planning that would
give further direction as to how the downtown objectives would be achieved. He opined that this caused
those with a focus on urban design focus distress as they saw those with a focus on urban development
“allowing development proposals to proceed without consideration of how all objectives of the downtown
plan would be met in a coordinated manner.” He opined that the current policy seemed “first come, first
serve.” He felt the opportunity to design and enhance the general architecture of the City was lost in this
process. He lauded the university students who examined this opportunity and produced a proposal for a
park blocks connector from the downtown to the river. He asked the City to “give the best design
visionaries” the chance to work on this development.
th
Virginia M. Lo
, 1855 East 28 Avenue, said she was a professor at the University of Oregon. She was
concerned about the direction and process of development in downtown Eugene. She urged the council and
staff to tap into the talent of the community for design ideas, such as the one presented by Ms. Evans. She
asked that a vision of downtown that was for everyone be sought, and not just a vision of high-rise
condominiums and “shopping for yuppies.” She suggested that the City pursue a slow, deliberate, and
fiscally responsible policy that was not driven by developers’ agendas.
Jozef Siekiel-Zdzienicki
, 1025 Taylor Street, recalled that the council passed the Special Chambers Zone
Area on December 15, 2005. He hoped the City could maintain those standards for other neighborhoods
with similar old houses in them and ensure that the Planning Commission remained within the guidelines the
council set. He also conveyed his gratitude for the Forest Legacy Program.
th
Paul Nicholson
, 1855 East 28 Avenue, concurred with Mr. Hinkley’s remarks. He asserted that changes
in the structure of the three hearings were “symptomatic” of the rushed character of the whole process. He
hoped that the council would step back and allow for more time. He commented that he participated in
many of the public parts of the downtown planning process over “many years.” He felt the kinds of visions
that were preferred by the public were not reflected in what was occurring. He expressed concern that the
downtown plan would push out middle- and lower-income people by making it unaffordable to live there.
Charles Biggs
, 540 Antelope Way, read a letter into the record requesting that his testimony to the
Community Development Block Grant Advisory Committee from the meeting held on March 8, 2006, be
included as part of the City Council’s packet. He asked the council to postpone its vote on Consent
MINUTES—Eugene City Council -- March 13, 2006 Page 5
City Council Meeting
Calendar Item C, which would authorize an application to the Department of Housing and Urban Develop-
ment for loan guarantee assistance and other related matters until councilors had a chance to review the
points he made in his testimony.
Jon Pincus
, PO Box 422, noted that he resided in Noti. He commented that the downtown was the cultural
and economic center of the area. He expressed concern about the Connor/ Woolley project. He remembered
the urban renewal efforts from 25 and 35 years earlier, which he felt had been an “unmitigated disaster.” He
recalled that historic buildings were torn down and local businesses driven out. He averred that doing this
had not worked then and would not work now. He suggested that what made downtowns attractive and
economically vibrant was that they were “fun,” with night clubs, arts venues, and cultural resources. He
said this was what was recognized as making downtowns work in modern planning. He felt the current
planning seemed to be suffering a crisis of confidence.
Moshe Immerman
, 1290 McLean Boulevard, opined that there should be an ordinance requiring the City
Attorney to determine where the money was coming from whenever a major expenditure of public funds was
planned. He wanted to know well in advance the true source of the money and the nature of that transaction.
He felt that the public meetings law was sometimes circumvented by local governmental bodies. He said
this was not the way to create sustainable government.
Mayor Piercy closed the Public Forum and asked for comments from the council.
Councilor Ortiz lauded the representatives of LEAD, calling them a “bright star” at council meetings. She
hoped they would come back and that the City would find a way to work with them. She also hoped they
were reaching out to other agencies and organizations.
Councilor Pryor thanked everyone for speaking. He supported the idea of adding funding for synthetic fields
to the bond measure and trying to make it as flexible and usable to all of the people in Eugene.
Councilor Solomon asked the City Manager to determine what would be needed to include the costs for the
extra five synthetic playing surfaces. City Manager Taylor replied that there was an opportunity on April
10 at which the council could provide further direction on the bond issue. Councilor Solomon supported the
inclusion of the all-weather fields. She said she would poll her colleagues regarding this issue and asked that
information about this item be included in the Agenda Item Summary (AIS) for that day.
3. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of City Council Minutes
- January 11, 2006, Work Session
- February 13, 2006, Work Session
B. Approval of Tentative Working Agenda
C. Adoption of Resolution 4860 Authorizing Submission of an Application to the United States
Department of Housing and Urban Development for Loan Guarantee Assistance and Related
Matters
Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to adopt the Consent Calendar.
Councilor Bettman pulled Items B and C.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council -- March 13, 2006 Page 6
City Council Meeting
Roll call vote; Item A, the council minutes, was approved by unanimous vote, 7:0.
Councilor Bettman related that she had not seen the item for the compensation fund for Measure 37 claims
on the Tentative Agenda. She hoped to see a work session in April or May.
City Manager Taylor said the work sessions in April or May could be rearranged to a certain extent in order
to make room for that item.
Councilor Bettman asked that she be notified if it seemed that the agenda item would be pushed farther out
than May.
Roll call vote; Item B, the Tentative Agenda, was approved by a unanimous vote, 7:0.
Councilor Bettman averred that what the council was doing with Item C was to authorize the City to proceed
to pursue a $7.9 million capacity for loans. She asserted that this would require waiving some of the City’s
debt policies. She asked which of the conduit financing policies would need to be waived.
Financial Analysis Manager for the Finance Division, Sue Cutsogeorge, explained that when an actual
proposal came up, the council would have to approve the borrowing and, at that time, Finance staff would
review how the debt policies would be affected and which ones might need to be waived in a specific
instance.
In response to a question from Councilor Bettman, Ms. Cutsogeorge clarified that policies would only be
waived if the City borrowed money to lend to a private developer.
Councilor Bettman asked if there was a level that the City could project borrowing that would not
necessitate waiving the debt policies. Ms. Cutsogeorge replied that it did not have to do with the amount,
but rather with the type of borrowing. She assured her that the council would have another chance to
consider the debt policy in conjunction with the project.
Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0.
4. PUBLIC HEARING and POSSIBLE ACTION:
An Ordinance Providing for Withdrawal of Territories from the River Road Water District and
River Road Park and Recreation District and the Santa Clara Water District
City Manager Taylor asked Principal Planner Kurt Yeiter, to explain the basics of this item. He noted that
there were some consequences should action not be taken on it.
Councilor Papé clarified that this had originally been Agenda Item 8.
Mr. Yeiter stated that a public hearing was required by State law. He said 25 properties had already been
annexed to the City and if they were not withdrawn from the special districts, the tax assessor would keep
charging for both the districts that were no longer providing services and the City’s services. Should action
not be taken, the 25 property owners could potentially be charged twice for services.
Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council -- March 13, 2006 Page 7
City Council Meeting
Rob Handy
, 455 ½ River Road, likened the annexation to auctioning off properties. He averred that some
of the issues River Road/Santa Clara residents had with the City had to do with trust, voice, equity, and
collaboration. He said people wanted to know why the streets were being annexed as well as property. He
alleged that the impression in the community was that the City was circling for the purpose of later
annexation. He asked if the City could be “up front” about what its annexation policy was.
Mr. Handy related that people were pleased to be receiving the neighborhood organization letters, regardless
of City residency. He called it a wonderful step that was taken. He suggested the City amend the
neighborhood organization recognition policy to make the change permanent.
Mr. Handy asserted that the neighborhood character was being eroded. He said the area was interested in
having design standards before implementing opportunity siting.
Mr. Handy declared the River Road Park and Recreation District to be the community center. He asserted
that slowly but surely the piecemeal annexation was undermining the district’s ability to maintain itself.
Mayor Piercy closed the public hearing and asked for questions and comments from the council.
Councilor Ortiz asked staff to provide her with a memorandum explaining why the City was annexing
County streets in that area.
Mayor Piercy ascertained that there was no objection to taking action at the present meeting.
Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Ortiz, moved that the City Council adopt
Council Bill 4921, an ordinance providing for withdrawal of territories from special
districts. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0.
5. PUBLIC HEARING and POSSIBLE ACTION:
An Ordinance Adopting Hazardous Substance User Fees for the Fiscal Year commencing July 1,
2006
City Manager Taylor stated that Management Analyst for the Fire and Emergency Medical Services
Department, Glen Potter, would present the item.
Mr. Potter explained that a public hearing on this item was required by State law. He said the ordinance
provided for a fee of $31.30 per full-time equivalent (FTE) up to the State-imposed fee cap of $2,000 per
facility. He indicated that this was in line with the fees and budget under which the Toxics Right-to-Know
program operated for the past two years. He added that it came before the council with unanimous support
from the Toxics Board. He asked for action at the present meeting or at the work session scheduled for
March 15 in order to meet the charter-mandated fee payment deadline of May 1.
Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing.
Kathy Ging
, PO Box 11245, urged the council not to do anything to dilute the Toxics Right-to-Know
initiative. She averred that Eugene was unique in the country for having this policy, which mandated that
corporations post information about their toxic emissions posted on a website for all to see. She alleged that
MINUTES—Eugene City Council -- March 13, 2006 Page 8
City Council Meeting
the City of Eugene had one of the twelve most polluted “airsheds” in the country. She said that a client of
hers had decided not to move here because of this. She listed some of her concerns regarding pollution, such
as Teflon in cooking ware and treated lumber. She asserted that the City should demand honesty from its
polluters. She further alleged that Hynix Semiconductor, Inc. had a permit to put 69 tons of pollutants into
the air.
Zachary Vishanoff
, Patterson Street, asked the council to consider expanding the program to include
nanotechnology. He was very concerned that there seemed to be a lack of regulation governing nanotech-
nology. He thought the University of Oregon was making “new designer materials” that could be used by
the military-industrial complex. He suggested the councilors conduct a Google search by typing in ‘ONAMI
and RFID commercializing Oregon’s future.’ He said ONAMI had hired a public relations firm. He felt
there was a lack of information on polluters and that the Toxics Right-to-Know law could be gutted.
David Monk
, 3720 Emerald Street, thanked the councilors for their service to the community. He thought it
was significant that the councilors understood and appreciated the democratic process and the importance of
having an informed public. He said the City’s Toxics Program was one of the finest in the country. He
acknowledged that it had been argued the program duplicated Federal and State programs. He disagreed
with this assessment. He said the Eugene program had a mass/balance accounting system whereby all of the
toxic substances coming into a facility have to be reported whether they go into the water, air, product, or
elsewhere. He averred that this prevented any discrepancies from occurring. He noted that a couple of
years earlier, the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) had been allowed to relax the reporting
requirements for its program. He related that the DEQ had done so because it asserted that the federal
government had adequate reporting programs. He pointed out that the federal government was now
proposing reductions in its program, which heightened the need for local vigilance. He noted that the Toxics
Right-to-Know program was now nine years old and it still cost the City of Eugene nothing.
Mayor Piercy closed the public hearing and asked for questions and comments from the City Council.
Councilor Ortiz commented that she would like to expand the number of businesses that were required to
report, but she felt it should be left to the discretion of the Toxics Board to let the council know when it was
time to do so.
Mayor Piercy ascertained that there were no objections to taking action at the present meeting.
Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Ortiz, moved that the City Council adopt
Council Bill 4920, an ordinance adopting Hazardous Substance User Fees. Roll call vote;
the motion passed unanimously, 7:0.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council -- March 13, 2006 Page 9
City Council Meeting
Mayor Piercy stressed to those in the audience that she took full responsibility for combining the three
hearings.
Mayor Piercy opened the meeting of the Eugene Urban Renewal Agency at 8:45 p.m. The City Council
meeting remained open.
The following items were combined into one hearing:
6. PUBLIC HEARING:
Resolution 4861 Adopting a Supplemental Budget; Making Appropriations for the City of Eugene
for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 2005, and Ending June 30 2006
7. PUBLIC HEARING:
Resolution 1038 Adopting a Supplemental Budget; Making Appropriations for the Urban Renewal
Agency of the City of Eugene for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 2005, and Ending June 30,
2006
8. PUBLIC HEARING:
Resolution 4862 Granting an Exemption from Competitive Selection Requirements for a Personal
Services Contract Relating to Developer Services and Developer’s Selection of General Contrac-
tor for Construction of a Public Parking Facility; and Approving Findings Relating Thereto
City Manager Taylor asked Associate Planner for PDD, Nan Laurence, to describe the scope of the East
Broadway development project and the nature of the hearings that were before the council at this meeting.
He noted that he had conferred with the Mayor regarding how to best facilitate the hearing so that everyone
would have the opportunity to speak, once it had come to light that many people wished to testify on the
item. He said he had also conferred with the City Attorney and determined that the procedure by which the
council had chosen to conduct the three hearings was, in fact, legal. He felt the hearing would be more user-
friendly.
Ms. Laurence described the two components of the East Broadway proposal: the Whole Foods Grocery,
which would occupy approximately 52,000 square feet on the southern half of the block; and the parking
th
garage, located on the northern half of the block and which would face 8 Avenue. She explained that the
three items that were subject to public hearing were: 1) the supplemental budget for the East Broadway
public parking garage and the City Hall Phase 2 development plan; 2) the supplemental budget for the
Urban Renewal Agency also related to the parking garage; and 3) exempting the public parking from the
competitive selection process. She wished to emphasize three points:
1. This project sought to implement the vision for downtown based on council direction in the Down-
town Plan.
2. This project would be pro-active as the proposed public parking garage would act as an incentive
for further redevelopment and satisfy the demand for parking in the east end of the downtown area.
She stressed that these spaces were separate from and in addition to the 240 parking spaces that
were planned to be built above the Whole Foods Grocery structure. The need for parking was
documented in the Parking Study and the data in that study was based on a physical inventory con-
ducted by staff.
3. The project would be strategic and would capitalize on a development opportunity.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council -- March 13, 2006 Page 10
City Council Meeting
In closing, Ms. Laurence stressed that staff compared garage costs and was confident that the public parking
garage, as proposed, would result in construction cost efficiencies and an attractive, high-quality design.
Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing.
Councilor Papé declared a conflict of interest and recused himself from the proceeding. He left the dais at
8:50 p.m.
Mayor Piercy stated that 97 people signed up to speak and imposed a limit of two minutes per person. She
noted that it would take a council motion to extend the meeting time beyond 10 p.m.
John Barofski
, 2010 Hubbard Lane, stated that he was co-chair for the Fairmount Neighborhood
Association (FNA) and a citizen member of the Budget Committee. He reported that the FNA passed a
resolution in opposition to the above-ground parking structure and also suggested that below-ground parking
be built with park space above it. He submitted a copy of the resolution into the record.
Mr. Barofski disagreed with the assertion that a no-bid contract would save money. He felt evidence in
support of that proposal was anecdotal at best. He suggested that the City and citizens determine the design
for a parking structure that would work best for the city as a whole and not what fits the design of one
particular group. He thought, given that the City spent one year and $1 million to study a potential new City
Hall, the City could spend a little more time to decide how it wanted the downtown to look. He expressed
concern because this option would use up urban renewal bonding capacity for one project and this could
jeopardize other valuable projects. He asked, as a citizen member of the Budget Committee, that the City do
more to involve the citizen members of the committee in the supplemental budget process so that those
members could be better informed in advising the council.
Thomas Peterson
, 1178 Charnelton Street, said he was chair of the Downtown Neighborhood Association
(DNA). He reported that the DNA passed a similar resolution opposing the project. He submitted the
resolution into the record. He stressed that the DNA was not opposed to development but thought that all of
the relevant information about alternatives should be presented publicly, such as the aforementioned
underground parking. He averred that the quality of life in “this city of the arts and the outdoors” depended
on informed citizens’ democratic participation. He related that DNA members would welcome the
opportunity to join with the rest of the community in exploring options regarding this project. In closing, he
underscored that an open process was the “wisest course of action.”
Larry Reed
, 4765 Village Plaza Loop, supported the program. He commended the council for realizing
that the downtown was in trouble and for working on a visionary downtown plan. He stressed that the block
on which the proposed parking structure was to be built was contained in the plan, as were great pedestrian
streets and the provision of places for people to live and shop downtown. He asserted that the Mayor, in her
election literature, seemed to understand that it would take a private developer doing a private project to
bring marketplace economics to the downtown area. He provided written materials for the council record
that included the aforementioned campaign literature.
Mr. Reed stated that Whole Foods Grocery did not need Eugene, but Eugene did need the Whole Foods
Grocery. He said should the City pass on this “rare opportunity” there might not be a second one. He
commented that this was “just the way business operates.” He pointed out that Whole Foods Grocery would
create jobs and that it planned to build its own parking garage without a subsidy. He added that it had been
MINUTES—Eugene City Council -- March 13, 2006 Page 11
City Council Meeting
identified that the federal courthouse needed downtown parking. He asked that the council not “slap away
this opportunity.” He submitted his testimony in writing.
th
Rick Wright
, 25 West 25 Avenue, chief executive officer for the PC Market of Choice stores, averred that
a parking garage in partnership with a commercial project was a subsidy. He thought the real debate should
focus on who would win and who would lose. He opined that the only winners would be Whole Foods
Grocery and landlords and the whole community stood to lose something. He stressed that the city of
Eugene had a unique blend of locally owned grocery stores supported by an infrastructure of farmers,
manufacturers and suppliers. He felt Eugene offered one of the most sustainable food industries in the
country. He predicted that Whole Foods Grocery would do as much business as the combined business of
nine existing businesses. He felt this would significantly affect the sales of local businesses and the sales of
local growers as well.
Ginevra Ralph
, 2187 University Street, spoke on behalf of the Shedd Institute for the Arts. She urged the
th
council to move forward with a parking structure at 8 Avenue and High Street, including foregoing an open
bid process in this case. She said the City identified the need for additional structured parking on East
Broadway for eight years. She asserted that current parking was already seriously inadequate for existing
civic and commercial activity. She noted that the Shedd Institute currently served 700 students and
approximately 200 ticket buyers, staff, and faculty each week during daytime hours. She said this was in
addition to several thousand each month who attended evening concerts and public events. She stated that
the business hour users were served with 36 parking spaces in their lot. She underscored that the Shedd
Institute did not support providing a subsidy to businesses and disagreed with the assertion that the proposed
parking garage was such a subsidy, as the Whole Foods Grocery would provide its own parking. She
believed it was within the City’s role to provide adequate infrastructure parking in the downtown core and
that this would support the revitalization of the area. She opined that the alternative was urban sprawl,
shopping malls with acres of surface parking.
Dwight Collins
, 1600 Orchard Street, thanked the council for giving the public the opportunity to share its
vision of the downtown area and how public monies should be spent on achieving that vision. He stated that
he had owned Newman’s Fish Market for over 27 years, a business that was started in Eugene more than
115 years earlier. He joined many other small grocery businesses in their opposition to the use of public
money for the public garage, which he considered to be a subsidy to a competitor. He thought there were
already enough grocery stores in the downtown area. He said the free enterprise system invited growth and
competition, but this growth should not be subsidized. He asserted that Whole Foods must not be meeting
its parking goal given that the business made the parking structure a deal-breaker. He remarked that all
businesses faced parking issues and no other business would ask the City to provide more spaces. He did
not believe this was an appropriate use of public money. He said the council should show there was a great
need for the parking structure and this was a good use of $8 million in public money.
Michael Roberts
, 1919 Myers Road, said he owned a business in the downtown area. He supported the
building of the parking garage because the community had long-planned to build it. He declared that the
community must support compact urban growth and not sprawl. He felt construction of the garage would
foster many more projects in the downtown area. He asserted that every condominium or apartment built
downtown meant one less home outside the urban growth boundary (UGB).
Mr. Roberts said the “team-based delivery system” that was proposed on this construction project was
currently the leading method of building projects throughout the world. He stated that his company
currently delivered 80 percent of its projects on a team-based approach as opposed to a low-bid process. He
MINUTES—Eugene City Council -- March 13, 2006 Page 12
City Council Meeting
averred that the low-bid process did not necessarily translate to a lower cost; it only ensured a low bid on bid
day. He felt with a team of designers, engineers, and contractors working together, it would be possible to
build a better and more efficient project. He alleged that a privately developed parking garage would save
the City approximately $2,000 per space.
Greg Brokaw
, 114 High Street, recommended deferring to the staff recommendation on whether the parking
garage should be publicly or privately bid out. He averred that staff had been the only people who spent
“enough time with the details of this particular case to have an informed opinion.” He stated that he and his
family lived in the downtown area and he also owned a downtown professional firm and a recently renovated
building. He felt he and his partners were true progressives when it came to their commitment to a
successful and sustainable future for Eugene. He said his business evaluated many things when considering
a long-term investment in the downtown area in 2004, the most important of which had been the Downtown
Plan and the wisdom and maturity of the elected City Councilors and the “sophistication” of City staff to
carry out the day-to-day hard work of supporting a downtown renaissance. He related that two years earlier
he had felt that a successful future of the downtown area was common ground for all sides of the political
spectrum. Now, though he and his colleagues were still optimistic, it seemed that political leaders were
wavering from the larger vision and this was disconcerting. He had expected unanimous support for a
project of this caliber, given that it had been long planned for. He found it alarming that not one councilor
was leading the charge for a downtown renaissance. He asked where the leadership was. He submitted his
testimony in writing.
rd
Ronald Goldfarb
, 466 West 23 Avenue, said he used to be the owner of Ronnie’s Stereo, but had moved
to New Orleans to help his parents. He said that Hurricane Katrina was both an act of nature and an act of
a government that had not properly taken care of its citizenry. He did not believe leaders there had done
what was necessary to protect the citizenry. He thought the rest of the country looked at New Orleans and
thought it “would never happen to us.” He said it could happen anywhere. He averred that a misuse of the
public money would result in failure. He opposed giving undue favors, regardless of how positively they
were presented, as it led to unfair competition. He also felt it was important to get competitive bids on
contracts.
Floyd Prozanski
, PO Box 11511, State Senator, said he was speaking on behalf of all of the small
businesses and constituents had had contacted him to convey their opposition. He thought it was premature
for the City to build a parking garage at this time, given that the current $1.2 million study on the City Hall
needs assessment had not been completed and there could be a better use for that land, current parking
structures met the current needs for parking, and the current proposal was limited by its vertical design. He
pointed to the Salem Capitol Mall with its underground parking and above-ground greenway as an example
of building a multi-use structure within a dense community. He asked the council what position the Oregon
Department of Transportation (ODOT) had taken on the ingress/egress on a State highway. He did not
th
believe that ODOT agreed to any access from the 6 Avenue area. Speaking on his own behalf, he averred
that bigger was not always better. He called the parking garage a “boondoggle” for a large business that
would give a “very large corporation an unfair advantage” over existing Eugene businesses.
Mark Rabinowitz
, PO Box 51222, wanted to know the value of the land swap that had been proposed. He
felt building a parking garage made it clear that the City would not “deal with peak oil and climate change.”
He opined that this meant the City clearly did not “give a damn about sustainability.” He asserted that
building a parking garage would be tantamount to subsidizing food shipments from Mexico and all over the
world. He equated Whole Foods Grocery with sprawl. He thought the fact that it needed the parking
MINUTES—Eugene City Council -- March 13, 2006 Page 13
City Council Meeting
showed that its customer base was regional and not just people in the downtown area. He suggested that a
farmers’ market would be a better alternative.
Mr. Rabinowitz opined that the site of the former Sears building indicated that City planning was incompe-
tent.
Doug Black
, 4645 West Hillside Drive, said he was part of the group from the Eugene Permaculture Guild
that organized the Richard Heinberg event. He related that Professor Heinberg predicted a phenomenally
constrained economy of necessary food supply and manufacturing within the decade. He asserted that
Whole Foods Grocery’s expensive, contracted interstate-reliant form of product transport would have to be
overtaken by local systems of food transport. He referred to a study by Robert Hirsch that suggested that
the United States needed 20 years to plan for upcoming impacts of an “energy-constrained economy.” He
averred that the country had less than five years to do so. He said his household shopped at Sundance
Natural Foods store and Growers Market Food Co-op and had no shortage of “specially ordered supplies.”
He alleged that these locally owned stores ordered from locally owned food growers and grocery suppliers as
a point of business ethics. He noted that the members of the Permaculture Guild gathered “several hundred
signatures” on petitions that asked the City of Eugene to address “peak oil.” He asked where the response
was and who was setting the agenda relative to that topic.
th
Gavin McComas
, 1350 East 25 Avenue, acknowledged that the Whole Foods Grocery was more
progressive than other “big box chain stores.” He saw the appeal the “corporation” had to the idealism of
natural foods customers. He asserted that the store’s good deeds did not erase the damage it did to local
businesses. He said if it were Walmart asking for help from the City, the City would not give it. He averred
that like Walmart, Whole Foods Grocery took money out of the local economy and put it into the pockets of
stockholders. It uses a centralized purchasing, distribution, and management to lower its cost of doing
business. He alleged that Whole Foods Grocery would dismantle “local food webs” by buying their produce
cheaply from factory farms and only supported local farmers as a last resort. He predicted that Whole
Foods would help erode the individual character of Eugene, and would make it less attractive to tourists and
potential job-producing businesses. He said like Wal-mart, Whole Foods would only be successful at the
expense of local businesses. He did not think Whole Foods needed financial help from the City.
Kaz Oveissi
, 361 Sunset Drive, advocated for downtown development and had done so for many years. He
stated that he owned and operated four businesses in the downtown area. He said for the first time in all of
the years he had lived in Eugene he saw great possibilities and opportunities to transform the downtown
because of both the East Broadway and West Broadway projects. He averred that the City deserved a
livable downtown with dense, high-quality housing, movie theaters, restaurants, and a mix of national and
local businesses. He wanted the downtown to be free of drugs, crime and vandalism. He felt the City had
done its homework and the opportunity had arrived to produce the necessary results. He urged the council
to take “effective action for a downtown that is real and works.”
John Rowell
, 1 East Broadway, spoke in support of the Whole Foods Grocery project as it was currently
proposed. He said it aligned with the City’s plan for the downtown which was a result of an open and
exhaustive public process. He felt that saying no to this project would send a message that Eugene was
incapable of following its own plan. He thought it would be a terrible message to anyone who was about to
invest in downtown Eugene. He asserted that the Whole Foods Grocery had a positive identity that fit the
goals of the Mayor’s Sustainable Business Initiative and that the project was an important contribution to
the city’s health. He predicted that the grocery anchor would make other development more attractive and
would help business and not hurt it. He said downtown dwellers would finally have a supermarket, and the
MINUTES—Eugene City Council -- March 13, 2006 Page 14
City Council Meeting
“wonderful smaller markets” would continue to fill a niche and would benefit from more activity. He
averred that developers would not build housing and people would not move to the downtown area in any
numbers unless there was a supermarket. He commented that for decades, large-scale food markets had
been unwilling to take the risk and Whole Foods was the pioneer. He stressed that the City of Eugene built
expensive public infrastructure like the well-used parking garages all of the time to support the development
of outlying sites. He believed that in the downtown core parking garages were essential parts of public
infrastructure as they were efficient, good investments that contribute to sustainable land use and promoted
density. He did not think they were evil, nor did he think it should be assumed that such a structure would
be ugly. He remarked that to paint the parking garage as a subsidy was to ignore that the parking would
serve the public in the whole eastern downtown area. He added that if it attracted Whole Foods Grocery,
then that was just good strategy.
th
George Brown
, 60 West 17 Avenue, owner of the Kiva Market, said he had sold groceries, books, and
wines for 35 years. He commented that thanks to his loyal customers, the store had survived economic bad
times, achieved a modest livelihood, and had grown to become somewhat of a Eugene local institution. He
surmised that everyone in the room cared very deeply about the city of Eugene and the health of downtown.
He wanted to correct assumptions that he felt those who supported the project had about the opponents. He
stressed that grocers and restaurateurs did not want Whole Foods Grocery to move in because it threatened
their economic self-interest. He also stressed that Dan Giustina had a right to build a grocery store on his
property because he had a right to further his own economic self-interest. He underscored that the small
market owners were not anti-business, but wanted Eugene to grow and prosper, with modest, regulated
growth fueled by sustainable, well-paid jobs. He commented that most people would love to see more well-
planned housing, park space, offices, and retail, and possibly some non-polluting light manufacturing in the
downtown area. He stated that the people were not opposed to spending $9 million if it was to be spent on
public benefits. He believed the City should not spend $9 million to “subsidize a truly huge corporation that
was in no need of any type of welfare or entitlements.”
Lisa Warnes
, 5020 Nectar Way, stated that it was the policy of the City Council to utilize public
contracting practice and methods to maximize the efficient use of public resources and purchasing power of
public funds. She opposed the no-bid contract process that had been proposed. She alleged that downtown
had six parking garages that operated at only 53 percent of capacity during peak hours. She felt that many
people remained unconvinced that another such garage was needed. She thought the process should have
been started sooner given the timeline of the contract, proposed to be signed on June 1. She asserted that the
money came from the tax dollars of the citizens of Eugene and they had a right to the process. She declared
that the council was considering diverting $250,000 from the Stormwater Fund, $400,000 from the Riparian
Fund, and $475,000 from the Library fund to help pay for the parking garage. She called it unethical to do
so. She opposed the project. She submitted her testimony in writing.
David Hinkley
, 1350 Lawrence Street, #1, asserted that the proceeding was an improper and illegal use of
the supplemental budget process. He averred that the State provided in ORS 294.480(1) five possible
reasons to go into a supplemental budget. He did not believe the proceeding met the criteria. He asserted
that the council and the Budget Committee had not put this item into the budget and called that “your
failing.” He alleged that it should have been given that it was in plans that had been approved by the council
in 2004. He did not see a pressing necessity for the parking garage. He opposed the no-bid contracting
process as he did not believe it to be legal.
Mark Gillem
, 1206 University of Oregon, stated that he was teaching the Urban Design Studio at the
University of Oregon, where his students were looking at alternatives to the parking garage. He thanked his
MINUTES—Eugene City Council -- March 13, 2006 Page 15
City Council Meeting
students, who spent “over 10,000 hours thinking about how to make downtown Eugene a more livable, more
vibrant, and more diverse place.” He reiterated that the Downtown Neighborhood Association (DNA)
unanimously opposed the parking garage. He said the essence of the DNA’s position was that they wished
to look at alternatives to the proposal. He noted that the Fairmount Neighborhood Association (FNA) also
voted unanimously to consider alternatives as well. He felt they recognized that in order to be the city of the
arts and outdoors, parks were needed at the perimeter as well as at the heart of the City. He suggested that
the City consider utilizing the $8 million to acquire most of the land for parks or to increase the parks bond
from $20 million to $28 million. He thought the Park Blocks could be extended from the existing location
all the way to the river. He said allowing the current developer to build parking above grade would block
this access to the river forever. He maintained that park blocks to the river would do more in the long run to
create a safe and livable downtown.
Molly Dobbs
, 1125 Jackson Street, a member of the Urban Design Studio class, offered some ideas for
alternatives to a parking structure. She stated that the class developed designs for the downtown area that
sought to feed into the Downtown Plan. She outlined the benefits that the open spaces were predicted to
provide, not only to the City but to the developers and Whole Foods Grocery. She postulated that open
spaces in downtown urban areas spurred development. She cited an example from downtown Chicago
which increased land values in the areas surrounding the parks development. She cited another example
from Vancouver, Washington. She invited everyone present to come to a review of the work of the Urban
Design Studio scheduled for March 14 at 278 Lawrence Hall.
nd
Eben Fodor
, 394 East 32 Avenue, thanked everyone for the “outstanding citizen participation.” He said
he had never seen the Council Chamber so full of people. He called the hearing the “Texas Chain Store
Massacre.” He asserted that the planned parking garage was 53 percent more expensive than the City’s own
estimates for a garage. He calculated it would cost $29,000 per parking space. He thought it would be a
$2.6 million subsidy. He opposed the no-bid contracting process. He alleged that the City had no plans for
a parking garage on this site prior to the submittal of the proposal from the developer. He submitted his
testimony in writing.
Krishna Singh Khalsa
, 4521 Wagner Street, thanked the smaller store owners for sharing the impact they
felt a large store would have on their respective businesses. He said he was a member of the newly formed
Lane Food Policy Council. He called food security an important issue to every citizen. He commented that
the average food item traveled 1,500 miles from the farm to the plate. He thought the local food supply
needed to be vastly expanded in order to provide true food security to the community. He asked that public
funds not be used to “damage the very goal we’re working to establish.”
th
Dustann Jones
, 650 West 12 Avenue, #108, a member of the Urban Design Studio, opined that mixed-use
was how the site should be developed. He brought a drawing of his project, which included the 52,000
square foot Whole Foods Grocery, two floors of parking above, and 52 units of walk-up housing. He
thought along with the density, a mixed-use area could provide semi-private green spaces. He called it
enhanced architecture. He reported that he had run a pro forma on his proposed alternative project and it
had come back with a seven-percent return. He noted that the residential units at the Broadway Place
apartments subsidized the commercial space.
Otto Poticha
, 1820 Kona Street, spoke in support of the Whole Foods project but he did not support the
parking structure at the “entrance to downtown.” He felt the site would be better used for a new City Hall.
He commented that he waited 30 years for someone to build the four floors of parking on the County’s
public service building parking lot. He stated that he designed that building and it had been set for four
MINUTES—Eugene City Council -- March 13, 2006 Page 16
City Council Meeting
more floors. He described the structure as having a three-foot slab for a foundation over the entire block
which had taken 48 continuous hours to pour. He said it was made as ballast so that it does not “pop out of
the ground like a swimming pool.” He did not know why the City and the County could not use that
building. He had heard rumors that it had been said the structure would not hold up. He maintained that it
would hold up and offered to put his engineering study up against any engineering study that asserted
otherwise.
Russ Brink
, 132 East Broadway, provided the names of 225 people who visited the Downtown Eugene, Inc.
website to show their support for the project. He acknowledged that Whole Foods Grocery could build a
store on any properly zoned land in the City. He predicted the store would come to this community at some
time and that parking would be key to its location at any site. He wondered how many parking spaces
th
Whole Foods Grocery would be required to build under current code on West 11 Avenue and Coburg
Road. He asked why people would want to encourage surface parking at a suburban location when a City
center location was more consistent with smart growth principles. He pointed out that the City built and
operated parking in the downtown area because it was a parking exempt zone, which meant that developers
were not required to provide parking. He stressed that the City provided parking as a public service and as a
means to implement city growth management policies. He thought the site could be documented by any
common sense analysis given the recent developments in that area such as the federal courthouse and the
Shedd Institute.
Bart Ricketts
, 921 Southwest Washington Street, Portland, President of Lease Crutcher Lewis, spoke as a
construction professional and contractor with a great deal of experience with the no-bid delivery method. He
said this was the type of project that fit the no-bid contract and was allowable according to ORS 279. He
averred that the crux of the process was the speed of delivery, coordination of trades on a complex site, the
provision of public benefit to the public agency involved, and having a contractor that had public contracting
experience and good rapport with the contracting community. He stressed that there was still “plenty of
public bidding opportunities” built into the process as over 90 percent of the hard costs of construction
would be competitively bid by local trades-people, vendors, and subcontractors in the community. He hoped
the council would support the process.
Kelly Saito
, 1120 Northwest Couch Street, Suite 600, Portland, stated that he worked for Gerding/Edlen
Development Company and his company partnered with the Broadway and High Associates to put forth the
proposal for this development. He asked for approval on the resolution to grant the sole source exemption.
He commented that it was unfair to paint Whole Foods Grocery as a corporate baron coming to town to put
local businesses out of business. He felt it was a good company that would provide good jobs. He pointed
out that Whole Foods had been consistently ranked as one of the 100 best companies to work for. He
predicted Whole Foods would be a steward to the community and to the environment. He also wished to
underscore that the parking garage project was not a subsidy to the Whole Foods Grocery. He stressed that
Whole Foods was paying a premium to be in this location and was paying for its parking. He asserted that
the store could purchase land with surface parking for far less in the outlying areas of the city.
Mike Schwartz
, 725 Olive Street, said he and his family had owned a business in downtown Eugene for 69
years. He had served on the Downtown Commission, the Downtown Development Board, and the Eugene
Renewal Agency. He stressed that Whole Foods Grocery was “everything” the Downtown Plan that had
been passed in 1984 wanted, both in scope and in the parking garage. He wondered why this debate was
being held at all. He stated that the city and its citizens had spent millions of dollars and thousands of hours
of volunteer time trying to set up a downtown just for the projects it was now beginning to see proposed. He
averred that any downtown in the country would love to have a Whole Foods Grocery interested in locating
MINUTES—Eugene City Council -- March 13, 2006 Page 17
City Council Meeting
there. He wondered why people were finding ways to oppose a project that was in perfect harmony with the
Downtown Plan. He found it ironic that most of the opponents to the project were in support of smart
growth principles and were anti-sprawl. He called the project a “poster child for smart growth.” He said
there was a documented need for parking in the proposed area and the City would never get another garage
in such a strategic location and at a better price. He felt this was an opportunity to say ‘yes’ to exactly the
kind of development that Eugene’s downtown vision and plan called for. He added that in the late 1960s
Eugene had said ‘no’ to Nordstrom’s and the store had gone to Salem.
Alex Brokaw
, 1123 Barber Drive, asked the council to trust Planning staff. She said they had studied and
researched the proposal. She felt that should this project fell apart as a result of the “actions of a vocal
minority” then it was very possible other plans for revitalizing downtown Eugene would go down the drain.
She urged the council to “stay the course” and vote for downtown Eugene’s future.
Ruth Duemler
, 1745 Fircrest Drive, opposed the parking garage project. She predicted that the cost of
gasoline would increase to $10 a gallon in ten years. She felt it was short-sighted to focus spending on a
parking garage and suggested that the money would be better spent on the library. She predicted a future
with small neighborhood grocery stores that supported small local farms. She supported the idea of
extending the park blocks to the river. She imagined that Eugene residents would adjust to a healthier
lifestyle that involved more walking and bicycling.
th
Michael Coughlin
, 860 West 38 Avenue, stated that he was a downtown building owner and co-owner of
the only privately held garage downtown. He indicated that the parking garage was over 100 percent full.
He had reviewed the Downtown Plan over the past few weeks and agreed there was a need for parking in the
downtown area. He urged the council to move ahead with the Whole Foods Grocery project as it was an
opportunity that should not be passed up. He thought if this got away from the City, the whole plan would
“crumble.” He acknowledged that there were a lot of different viewpoints and praised the council for
assimilating the information. He commented that the Giustina family had “done right” by Eugene and had
done a wonderful job of developing properties. He felt they deserved the City’s backing.
Roger Kaldahl
, 975 Lewis Avenue, #8, spoke on behalf of the Laborers Union Local 121, which
represented more than 200 construction craft laborers in the Eugene market. He said the Union supported
moving forward with the development and allowing Lease Crutcher Lewis to perform the construction of the
parking structure. He stated that the working relationship Lease Crutcher Lewis had with Local 121
allowed them to complete past projects safely, on time, and with the highest quality assurances. He thought
because of the working relationships between the developer and contractor, and the ways and means with
which Lease Crutcher Lewis conducted business, the cost savings to the City and taxpayers would be
considerable. He said they used a trained and qualified workforce as well as utilizing a State-approved
apprenticeship program to ensure that professional craftsmen continue to excel.
Kathy Ging
, PO Box 11245, said Eugene should take a cue from Cuba which had over 1,000 food kiosks
that sold food grown inside and around the urban areas. She predicted Whole Foods Grocery would erode
the profit margins of struggling local natural food markets. She asserted that Whole Foods made 12 flavors
of hummus under its brand name and this would take away from some of the local, independent companies
that make those products. She suggested that the City spend $45,000 to conduct a study of the feasibility of
a 100,000 to 150,000 square foot covered space for parking and year-round marketing of farmers’ goods.
She asserted that an indoor space would allow the farmers to build greenhouses and grow foods year-round.
She predicted that farmers could grow 20 percent of Eugene’s food under those circumstances. She alleged
MINUTES—Eugene City Council -- March 13, 2006 Page 18
City Council Meeting
that there were stories of Whole Foods Grocery stores in New Jersey firing and replacing staff for
attempting to organize. Based on this information, she did not believe Whole Foods to be a good employer.
John Keith Geiger
, 86289 Lorane Highway, said he worked for a co-op in Austin, Texas in 1980. He
related that the arrival of Whole Foods Grocery had caused a great deal of concern on the part of the co-op;
but, in fact, the co-op had kept its basic clientele. He had been able to work with the Whole Foods
distribution house and rather than hurting the co-op, it had helped. Both stores still existed in Austin. He
favored Whole Foods Grocery coming to Eugene as he had seen them encourage local farmers to turn away
from commercial production to local organic production.
The council discussed whether to move to extend the meeting. Councilor Ortiz predicted, based on the
number of people yet to testify, that the meeting could last until midnight. City Manager Taylor stated that
the council operating agreements allowed for completion of an item once it began.
Mayor Piercy called for a short break at 10 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 10:08 p.m.
Kevin Jones
, 4740 Wendover Street, encouraged all people to read ingredient lists and to avoid foods that
were either not grown with organic farming methods or were genetically modified. He did not support
having a Whole Foods Grocery in the city of Eugene. He believed there were other options that would better
serve the community. He related that he had shopped in a Whole Foods store when visiting his parents in
the east. He knew the store to be committed to organically grown foods. He enjoyed supporting local
stores, however. He asserted that corporate chain stores demanded huge community investments and were
fragile in today’s economy.
Tracy Olson
, 795 Willamette Street, stated that he resided downtown. In talking about projects that were
designed to bring people downtown, he wished to note that he was one of the “few people crazy enough” to
live downtown. He indicated he would shop at a Whole Foods Grocery. He said in order to go grocery
shopping at present he had to get in his car and drive somewhere. He averred that those who think the city
has plenty of parking downtown either do not live or work downtown. He underscored that there was a need
and encouraged the council to move forward with the project.
Leroy Marney
, 3460 Avalon Street, said he had lived in Eugene for 45 years and provided for his family by
working as a laborer in the construction industry. He supported the use of a no-bid contract. He stated that
all construction contracts should be awarded to the most responsible contractors providing a living wage and
benefits to its workers. He related that it had been his experience that Lease Crutcher Lewis paid its
construction craft workers the prevailing wage, contributed $45 an hour to the pension plan, $4.80 to the
health insurance premium. He said this kept working families from seeking public assistance and becoming
a burden on taxpayers. He felt that allowing this contract to go to a responsible contractor, such as Lease
Crutcher Lewis, would help the local community.
Jozef Siekiel-Zdzienicki
, 1025 Taylor Street, wondered why an above-ground parking garage was a priority
over every development project in the downtown area. He asked if this was the primary goal when building.
He commented that he had yet to find a parking garage that was full. He questioned the notion of the
parking structure meeting, in part, the needs of the federal courthouse, as it was not on the east side of
Franklin Boulevard. He opined that the no-bid contract sounded much like the contracting of Halliburton in
Iraq.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council -- March 13, 2006 Page 19
City Council Meeting
th
Phyllis Kesner
, 650 West 12 Avenue, Apt. 203, extolled the virtues of small markets. She said she had
become aware that allergists were now recommending that people not eat food from more than several
hundred miles away. She liked the idea of having more green spaces in the downtown area and recalled how
Central Park enhanced the livability of New York City. She opposed having a no-bid contract because she
thought it “spoke badly” of the City.
Artemio Paz
, 86950 Cedar Flat Road, Springfield, expressed concern with the urban planning process. He
thought as the City marshaled this vision of downtown design, the City would be doing the vision an
th
injustice by placing a parking structure at the east end of 8 Avenue as it had been designated a “Great
Street.” He said if one looked at subsidies, it seemed that the City was privatizing the public realm.
Keith Cooper
, 28475 Spencer Creek Road, a local food producer, averred that the money for a parking
garage appeared to be a subsidy and the City should not spend public funds on it. He said a council that
espoused sustainability should not support a store that brought food from a great distance. He stated that
the Lane County Farmers Market had existed for 30 years without any City support.
Ken Silverman
, 2744 Harris Street, sang a song opposing the parking garage. He likened it to “giving
away our town.” He opposed “big box stores” because he did not believe they supported sustainability.
Mike Bradbury
, 1214 ‘Q’ Street, #5, Springfield, stated that he had worked for 16 years in construction.
He said whether the City chose to build a parking structure or a bicycle lot or a high rise it should use a
responsible contractor in its publicly funded projects. He averred that Lease Crutcher Lewis was a
responsible contractor that paid the prevailing wage on both public and private sector projects and offered
health care and full retirement plans. He believed that Gerding and Edlen used some form of a competitive
evaluation process when selecting Lease Crutcher Lewis. He was certain they had evaluated the company’s
past performance, ability to complete projects within the deadline and under budget, and the resources that
would benefit the local communities. He opined that Lease Crutcher Lewis was qualified and had much
expertise in the Eugene market. He added that Lease Crutcher Lewis valued the safety and livelihood of
their workers and employed local citizens who perform the work on their projects at or above industry
standards. He felt the City stood to gain value through the working relationship of the two companies and
supported the no-bid contract process as it stood.
Jan Spencer
, 212 Benjamin Street, suggested that citizens should buy the property in question and form its
own design process to decide what to do with it. He felt such a group of citizens could think of a lot of
different uses for a downtown location that would be more creative than the proposed parking. He
suggested that the community had many skills and much creativity that could be tapped into. He said he
would leave his Web address and would convene a public meeting so that people could start this process.
Steve Stearns
, 32789 East Dixon Street, Coburg, stated that he was a local general contractor. He opposed
the no-bid contract. He did not think the City would know whether it was charting the best course for itself
without getting competitive bids. He related that Lease Crutcher Lewis said it would hire 90 percent local
people, but Lease Crutcher Lewis itself was not local. He likened the process to a used car sale. Regarding
Whole Foods Grocery, he said let them come because that was their business. However, he felt building a
parking structure was the City’s business.
th
Ben Martin-Horse
, 607 West 8 Avenue, thought Eugene was not a community “that was about
competition, especially not unfair competition.” He said Eugene was a city whose soul was community. He
did not think a downtown area would be made attractive by an “overabundance of parking.” He opined that
MINUTES—Eugene City Council -- March 13, 2006 Page 20
City Council Meeting
downtowns were attractive because parking was unnecessary. He stated that he worked at Sundance
Natural Foods and he wondered if he should fear for his job should Whole Foods Grocery open in Eugene.
He worried for the other smaller community stores. He likened the proposed parking garage to subsidizing
“our own loss of soul.” He felt Whole Foods should foot the bill if is wanted more parking.
Zachary Vishanoff
, Patterson Street, suspected that the reason a parking garage was being proposed for the
downtown area was that the area was the second choice for a University of Oregon basketball arena. He
opposed a Whole Foods Grocery moving into Eugene. He thought the no-bid contract tied into the
Government Service Administration.
th
Virginia M. Lo
, 1855 East 28 Avenue, brought a letter signed by seven faculty and staff from the
Department of Computer Science of the University of Oregon opposing the project. She called the
downtown an “important asset for all of us.” She opined that the need for a new parking garage was
dubious. She opposed the no-bid contract. She felt the parking garage was a public subsidy for a
corporation from Texas that could hurt the local food industry. She did not like that the proposed parking
garage used public money to close the opportunity for a greenway. She did not feel there had been enough
time to consider the issues given that the public hearing had been scheduled two days prior to the vote. She
asked the council to slow down.
th
Madeline Smith
, 594 West 11 Avenue, said it was difficult to “figure out what to do.” She wished to
make Eugene a place that was a showcase of alternative energy technology, “permatopia organic farming
practices,” and the rational rationing of all resources.
George T. Boehnke
, 2040 Willamette Street, likened urban renewal funds to manure: if you did not spread
it around, nothing grew. He said the City of Eugene used urban renewal funds to purchase a library. He
stated that the 90 businesses that had moved from downtown Eugene never came back. He thought that the
parking garage was for the federal courthouse. He exhorted the City Council and staff to “own up to it” and
ask the United States government for the funds to build the garage.
Gary Wildish
, 2424 Quince Street, hoped that the council understood that the no-bid contract was exactly
what the City of Eugene did routinely in the selection of an architect or an engineer. He said this process
had been used for many years and it had been found that a better project could be delivered at a lower cost
and timelier manner using this method. He averred that contractors understood costs. He stated that Lease
Crutcher Lewis used a number of subcontractors and every craft working on the project would be required
to submit a bid. He thought the team concept was very viable.
Terry Connolly
, 1401 Willamette Street, spoke on behalf of the Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce. He
reminded the council that a great deal of staff time, Planning Commission time, and council time had gone
into the adoption of the Downtown Plan. He said policies need to be more than documents on a shelf. He
called this project a chance to take another step forward in implementing the Downtown Plan. He read a
portion of the plan aloud which emphasized the importance of being flexible and committed to responding to
opportunities. He said the project was in line with the goals and policies of the plan.
Danelle Zeghbib
, 1618 Villard Street, stated that she was a student of architecture and a graduate teaching
fellow in the environmental studies department. She said it seemed like the Whole Foods Grocery might be a
step in the direction of having a more vibrant downtown but if the City could afford to finance a parking
structure then it should be able to support a sustainable economy and the promotion of environmental
sustainability. She felt that by funding a new parking structure, the City was sending a message that
MINUTES—Eugene City Council -- March 13, 2006 Page 21
City Council Meeting
everyone should drive to downtown. She averred that this ran counter to the purported goal in the plan, on
page 52, that the City would promote and support alternative modes of transport. She proposed that the
City balance its non-sustainable actions, such as building parking structures, with sustainable measures such
as covered bicycle parking, downtown parks, reduced fees for carpool parking, and awareness campaigns.
Julie Rogers
, 381 Huntington Avenue, felt that Eugene would lose at least as many jobs as it gained should
Whole Foods Grocery open an outlet here, as smaller stores would lose business. She asked what was
sustainable about bringing to town a “corporate mega-store” that could diminish the success of numerous
smaller stores that had already invested heavily in the community. She felt the money should be spent on the
development of an indoor/outdoor market for the Farmers Market.
th
David Woods
, 953 West 8 Avenue, did not believe enough time had been allowed to discuss this item. He
said it seemed the council was on a fast track and people did not have enough time to say what they needed
to say about the issue. He felt he was hearing from “people talking from their wallets and people talking
from their hearts” at the hearing. He did not wish to displace the existing natural foods industry with the
Whole Foods Grocery. He asked the council to “really think about it.”
Sam Hediger
, 3440 McKenna Drive, #9, said everyone wanted to rebuild downtown Eugene and to have it
be successful. He offered an alternative proposal which sought to subsidize the increase of public
sustainable transit. He averred that doing so would “achieve the benefits of a smooth flow of traffic” and
this would increase the livability of the new commercial and residential districts. He wished to create a
“laboratory for small business” and/or a permanent structure for the Farmers Market by renovating existing
businesses using green technologies. He thought such an endeavor could be managed by a citizen board that
included representatives from the business colleges and the City Manager among others.
th
Paul Nicholson
, 1855 East 28 Avenue, asked that the council extend this discussion to the next meeting,
given that some people had been unable to stay to give their testimony because of the time. He did not take
issue with the idea of Whole Foods Grocery coming to Eugene, but he felt the City was giving a subsidy to
the developer. He called this a “planning process out of control.” He noted that one of the reasons given for
the parking garage was to be prepared for future development as yet unidentified. He said the City would be
subsidizing “we don’t know what.” It was not clear to him that a public benefit would be achieved by the
proposal. He opined that he did not trust staff because the City had spent almost $100 million on the
downtown and staff was responsible for the result.
Planet Glassberg
, PO Box 11011, opposed using public money for a parking garage. She thought the
money should stay in the community and should not be used to subsidize a corporation. She called it
“crucial” to continue to support local businesses and farmers in order to build a resilient local economy to
conserve cultural and biological diversity in the community. She suggested that the downtown could be
revitalized and would flourish for local businesses, parks, and open space.
Chuck Hunt
, 130 Hansen Lane, asked the council and staff to think creatively of alternatives to the
proposal. He stated that he was beginning his 10th year as a vendor at the Farmers Market and suggested
that the council consider what it already had. He said the Farmers Market took in $1.5 to $2 million in
gross annual sales. He asserted that this revenue remained in the community. He related that the market
was struggling with space issues and had problems with weather. He thought the market would love to have
a covered area for a year-round farmers’ market-type venue. He asked that the council look to the Farmers
Market if it was looking for partnerships.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council -- March 13, 2006 Page 22
City Council Meeting
Carl Oslund
, 28285 Spencer Creek Road, spoke in support of the Whole Foods Grocery and proposed
parking structure. He said as a designer and consultant on a variety of projects, he had found the design-
built format very effective. He supported the no-bid contract. He disagreed that Whole Foods Grocery
would cause other businesses to fail. He underscored that Eugene would grow regardless of what happened
with this issue and the question was whether the growth would occur in the core or at the perimeter. He
thought one could “talk on and on” of the aesthetics of a parking structure, but personal transportation and
food were both hallmark underpinnings of a vibrant economy. He said people would live near food. He
predicted that the development would be a catalyst for the community. He thought instead that the presence
of Whole Foods Grocery could raise the standards for other larger stores such as Safeway and Albertson’s.
Charles Biggs
, 540 Antelope Way, thought the need for the parking structure had not been made clear. He
had not personally found any “sound evidence” to support the need. He opined that educational levies would
be hurt by the deferred tax revenue. He predicted the project would deplete stormwater funds and this would
require an increase in systems development charges (SDCs). He said urban renewal districts were formed to
redistribute the “up-front costs of development” over a 20-year timeframe and should not be used to
subsidize “as much development as possible” with taxpayers’ money. It was his understanding that the
Riverfront Urban Renewal District had depreciated in value since its formation and had “not performed even
to conservative expectations.” He submitted his testimony in writing and reiterated his earlier request, made
during the Public Forum.
th
Kim Buchanan
, 85 West 24 Place, spoke on behalf of Dan Lundberg. She read a statement from Mr.
Lundberg which related his experience studying traffic-calming and car-free centers. She said he found that
in Europe, traffic congestion had been reduced by increasing parking fees and reducing parking places. His
statement also asserted that Los Angeles traffic engineers found that reducing the freeway by one lane
reduced traffic congestion. Mr. Lundberg thought the earth’s climate was “spinning out of control.” She
said his main message was that projects such as a parking structure should not be built because peak oil
production had been reached and money should not be spent on building infrastructure for petroleum-using
vehicles.
Paul Moore
, 2586 Potter Street, said area transportation planning called for shorter automobile trips and
nodal development. He read Whole Foods Grocery siting requirements aloud. He said the store was not
intended to serve downtown Eugene residents. He averred that it was a 52,000-square-foot destination store,
designed to bring a large volume of automobile traffic to the downtown from a wide area. He thought the
store would work against all efforts to increase the use of public transportation because it would encourage
grocery shopping after work using single-occupant vehicles. He thought shopping should be within walking
distance and supported the idea of urban villages.
Mayor Piercy called for a five-minute break. She reconvened the meeting at 11:07 p.m.
Councilor Solomon left the meeting.
Hope Marston
, PO Box 51434, urged the council not to be afraid to pass up what appeared to be an
opportunity. She felt it was an opportunity that came with “too many red flags.” She opposed the no-bid
contract. She did not believe a parking structure qualified as something that was for the public good. She
called the proposal “a slap in the face” to local grocers and people who had built businesses and provided
services for many years. She also felt the proposal would jeopardize other public enterprises such as the
library. She preferred the types of projects that the students of architecture had brought forth. She thought
MINUTES—Eugene City Council -- March 13, 2006 Page 23
City Council Meeting
they did a better job of expressing “what Eugene was about.” She urged the council to oppose the no-bid
contract and the supplemental budget.
Walter Hunt
, 2745 Spring Boulevard, spoke in support of downtown development. He said the parking
structure had been talked about for approximately ten years. He hoped the City could “pull it together”
downtown. He expressed concern that the City did not have a “plan B” in the event that the Whole Foods
Grocery failed. He acknowledged that there was a lot of support in Eugene for the local merchants. He
noted the two holes that had been left undeveloped in the downtown area and did not want more holes. He
wished to move forward with the project but remained concerned.
Tom Slocum
, 1950 Graham Drive, expressed disappointment that some business owners expressed such
pessimism about another business moving in. He noted that Jerry’s Home Improvement maintained a
positive attitude when Home Depot moved into town. He thought the food industry in this community could
also step forward and make its way. He did not want others to limit his shopping options. He had been to
Whole Foods Groceries in two cities and had found them to be wonderful stores. He thought it would be a
welcome addition to the community. He felt the real issue was whether or not the City would get started on
revamping the downtown in Eugene. He opined that the community was in disrepair and “really needed
some help.” He said without a big increase in the assessed valuation in the community Eugene would not be
able to pay its bills. He looked at the project as the cornerstone to the downtown redevelopment.
Eric Gunderson
, 86840 Dukhobar Road, commented that he heard many people say this was a conversa-
tion about development versus livability. He had heard this debate for over 30 years in the community and
had found that the City often ended up choosing neither one. He thought sustainability should embrace both.
He opined that Whole Foods Grocery and a parking garage and the accompanying density would make the
downtown a sustainable place. He said he embraced the people who came to the downtown. He believed
parking to be a complement to mass transit. He embraced the developments of residential housing
downtown, both the low-income and otherwise. He favored both projects.
David Hoffman
, 2790 Madison Street, opposed transporting food over long distances. He felt it posed food
security risks as well as reduced the nutritional value of produce. He believed Whole Foods Grocery to be
akin to Wal-mart. He thought it would drive local markets out of business and would restrict the city’s food
supply. He opposed “wasting time and revenue” on this. He opined that the City should be talking about
giving the Farmers Market more space. He averred that the Whole Foods Grocery would take money from
the community and send it elsewhere, while local growers kept money in the community.
Joseph Young
, 3045 Harris Street, believed the project would do nothing but take money out of the
community and drive local businesses to failure. He felt it made no sense to give money to a large
corporation. He did not think money should be thrown around in a “haphazard” manner. He echoed
concerns that the hearing had been rushed through. He thought the process should slow down. He related
that he ate locally grown foods almost exclusively and he felt this had greatly reduced his allergies.
Athena Yemaya-Perkins
, 311 Merrill Court, recalled ten years earlier when a major magazine declared
Eugene to be one of the ten best places to live in the United States. She attributed this to having both a big
city and a small town feel. She felt that part of the small town feeling was due to the number of small
natural food stores scattered around the area and Eugene’s resistance to national corporations. She opined
that this supported the community and decreased its dependence on fossil fuels. She did not believe a
centrally located downtown grocery store was needed. She opposed the project. She opined that money and
MINUTES—Eugene City Council -- March 13, 2006 Page 24
City Council Meeting
the power should be kept in the city of Eugene. She suggested the citizens of the community decide how to
best use the space downtown. She supported building an indoor, year-round Farmers Market structure.
Moshe Immerman
, 1295 McLean Boulevard, called Whole Foods Grocery the opposite of sustainable
business. He alleged that $46 million would “leave the city” annually should Whole Foods Grocery be
located here. He opposed the use of City staff time and money to support the project.
Michelle Emmons
, 132 East Broadway, #103, said in six years of working downtown she felt there had
never been a more exciting time for the future of the downtown area. She averred that downtown was no
longer lingering at the tipping point but was now at a “critical juncture of critical mass.” She said Whole
Foods Grocery had a record of providing family-wage jobs, insurance, community reinvestment, and
supported both local and global sustainable business practices. She commented that she would not stop
shopping at her other favorite natural food markets. She stated that a new parking garage would serve
parking needs into the future as the courthouse neighborhood continued to develop. She reiterated that city
parking studies indicated the need to provide more parking in order to serve the mixed-use, dense urban
development described in Eugene’s Growth and Sustainability Principles. She stressed that the community
spent several years and “hundreds of thousands” of hours to accommodate the kind of development
described in the Downtown Plan. She averred it was a valid plan and it was now time to realize the vision
and move forward, stepping into the future of a safe, attractive, inviting, and economically vital downtown
that would be a source of pride for everyone.
Kevin Matthews
, PO Box 1588, called the turnout at the council meeting a “great showing that the people
of Eugene really care about their city.” He stated that the Friends of Eugene submitted written testimony.
He related that the Friends of Eugene met the previous evening and had spent six hours listing “the problems
and the points that need to be clarified.” He wondered why the City of Eugene was in this situation. He felt
that developers were “always” going to try to approach the City looking for “sweetheart deals.” He opined
that the City was not getting staff work that was “accurate and of the highest integrity.” He opined that the
“low quality of the facts and findings” would leave the City “without a legal leg to stand on.”
John Flanery
, 1641 Broadway, commented that a market that built its strategy around shipping foods for
thousands of miles was not a good future bet for the downtown area. He also wondered what the City would
do if the Whole Foods Grocery failed.
Candace Nelson
, 361 Lombard Lane, opposed the proposed East Broadway parking project. She asked
that Eugene citizens be allowed to determine the atmosphere of the downtown rather than business interests.
She related that Friends of Eugene held a rally on March 7 at which many people voiced their opposition to
the project. She wanted the City to be proactive rather than reactive when planning. She averred that the
people wanted the City to plan and develop a downtown that reflected their common values. She asserted
that the council was considering transferring money from other sources and that using taxes allocated for
other things to build a parking garage was “wrong.” She opined that using public funds to build a garage
and to pay for other infrastructure changes in order to entice a private business was unfair to other self-
supporting private businesses. She wished for mixed-use development in the downtown area with residential
development first.
Jenny Gosset
agreed that the downtown area could use improvement. She thought mixed-use development
would revitalize it, but she opposed the proposed parking garage and its connection to the Whole Foods
Grocery store. She thought the City should supply money “of the sort being discussed” to local businesses
and then Eugene would become “a sustainable model to the world.” She suggested that money should be
MINUTES—Eugene City Council -- March 13, 2006 Page 25
City Council Meeting
given to enhance public transportation. She predicted that the parking garage and the development of Whole
Foods Grocery would make the City of Eugene gentrify and become just like “Anywhere U.S.A.”
Mayor Piercy closed the public hearing. She called for council questions and comments.
Councilor Bettman asked how much parking the Government Services Administration had requested. She
also asked if ODOT had weighed in on the project and whether they had taken a stand on ingress and egress.
Continuing, Councilor Bettman asked staff to look into Mr. Poticha’s assertion regarding the County
structure and its ability to accommodate more levels of parking.
Councilor Bettman said some people had testified that there would still be competitive bidding. She asked
staff to determine if this would reduce the amount of money the City would give to Gerding/Edlen.
In response to another question from Councilor Bettman, City Manager Taylor indicated that the debt cap
would not have to be raised for this project.
Councilor Bettman asked where the money would come from if there were not enough agency funds to pay
back the City through the Urban Renewal District.
Councilor Ortiz thanked everyone for testifying, calling it a definite show of force. She said it was
interesting to see how powerful it can be when people get organized around an issue. She commented that
she would love to have people get behind other issues such as child abuse and domestic violence with such a
show of force. She reiterated her thanks to everyone for coming and to the councilors for staying to hear
everyone speak.
Mayor Piercy thanked everyone for staying and for their testimony.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:39 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dennis M. Taylor
City Manager
(Recorded by Ruth Atcherson)
MINUTES—Eugene City Council -- March 13, 2006 Page 26
City Council Meeting