Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCMinutes - 11/08/04 Mtg MINUTES Eugene City Council Regular Meeting Council Chamber--Eugene City Hall November 8, 2004 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Bonny Bettman, George Poling, Nancy Nathanson, Scott Meisner, David Kelly, Betty Taylor, Gary Papd, Jennifer Solomon. Mayor James D. Torrey called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. Councilor Nancy Nathanson was present via speakerphone. 1. CEREMONIAL MATTERS Mayor Torrey introduced members of the Irkutsk Sister City Delegation, and asked them to rise for recognition. Mark Schoening, City Engineer, introduced Sue Wolling of the Eugene Bicycle Coalition, who presented Mayor Torrey with Eugene's award for Bicycle Friendly Communities. Ms. Wolling provided an extensive description of the award and encouraged the City to do more to build on its bicycle system. 2. PUBLIC FORUM Mayor Torrey reviewed the rules of the Public Forum. Jim Hale, 1719 Linnea Street, opposed the construction of a new police headquarters as being a project for the wrong time and place. The project as reconfigured did not accommodate for expansion needs or victims' assistance. He supported consideration of co-location with the Sheriff's Office. He opposed locating the facility on 8th Avenue because the use would create ~dead space" after business hours. He called for the facility to be located near the County jail. Zachary Vishanoff, Patterson Street, provided the council with information about the United Nations (UN) and its projects around the country. He suggested further community conversation about the UN's plans and "sustainability" was needed. He also called for community discussion on the impact of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) on Franklin Boulevard. Mr. Vishanoff opposed further development in the area of the Riverfront Research Park, particularly development that was related to field of nanotechnology, and said he had heard nothing in response to his request that a citizen committee be formed to oversee nanotechnology activities at the University of Oregon. MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 8, 2004 Page 1 Regular Meeting Lisa Warnes, 5020 Nectar Way, said she spoke on behalf of her neighborhood, which bordered on a development owned by Joe Green of Portland. She supported efforts on the part of the City to purchase a portion of the property. She thought the development proposal being considered was too intense for the area in question and would negatively affect the natural resources on the property. She maintained that the presence of natural resources on the property argued against dense residential development, even at a total of seven lots. She quoted from a letter from Engineer Tom Pogue to Appraiser Richard Duncan, who indicated the best use of the site was development of seven lots with no connection to Nectar Way, and access to be taken from Dillard Road. Ray Wolfe, 1473 Louella Street, said he did not oppose taxation in general but noted that records indicated property owners were in arrears with their taxes and many residents were at poverty levels. He attributed bond measure losses to that state of affairs. He suggested that the City consider progressive income taxes rather than regressive property taxes. He thought that would help to pass bond measures in the future. He suggested that well-paid City employees who design bond measures were detached from the realities facing their fellow residents. Kate Pearle, 4740 Wendover Street, spoke in opposition to the land change proposal intended to facilitate the development of a regional park in Santa Clara, saying that those in opposition to the proposal were opposed to shifting the urban growth boundary on a case-by-case basis because of the potential it would lead to sprawl. She suggested that existing facilities be remodeled as a community center and aquatic facility. She thought it irresponsible to encourage development on Class 1 farmland. Kevin Matthews, 120 West Broadway, Friends of Eugene, agreed with the concerns of the previous speaker. He opposed the appointment of Randy Hledik to the Planning Commission as Mr. Hledik was the general manager of Wildish Sand and Gravel. He opined that Mr. Hledik would have to recuse himself frequently from commission business due to his employment. He also averred that there was a "growing community perception" that the commission was "dominated" by business interests. Mayor Torrey called on the council for comments and questions in response to the Public Forum. Councilor Taylor hoped the opponents to the proposed Santa Clara regional park continued their opposition. Councilor Taylor hoped the City was working to purchase Mr. Green's property before the cost of the property went up. Councilor Taylor thought Mr. Matthews made some very good points. Because of the number of public hearings and the number of people wishing to offer testimony, Mayor Torrey called on Council President Bettman for a motion regarding Item 7. 7. ACTION: Appointments to Boards, Commissions, and Committees Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to reappoint Surendra Subramani to Position 2 on the Human Rights Commission for a MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 8, 2004 Page 2 Regular Meeting three-year term beginning November 1, 2004, and ending on October 31, 2007; to reappoint Dwight Souers to Position 6 on the Human Rights Commission for a three-year term beginning November 1, 2004, and end- ing on October 31, 2007; to appoint Ibrahim Hamide to Position 1 on the Human Rights Commission for a three-year term beginning November 1, 2004, and ending on October 31, 2007; to appoint Judith Castro to Position 3 on the Human Rights Commission for a three-year term beginning No- vember 1, 2004, and ending on October 31, 2007; to appoint Elizabeth Ayedelott to Position 12 on the Human Rights Commission, the unexpired term of Sheila Coats, for a term beginning upon appointment and ending on October 31, 2006; to appoint Juan Monjaras to Position 5 on the Human Rights Commission, the unexpired term of Mary Martinez-Wentzel, for a term beginning upon appointment and ending on October 31, 2005; to ap- point Misa Joo to Position 11 on the Human Rights Commission, the unex- pired term of Mo Young, for a term beginning upon appointment and end- ing on October 31, 2005; to appoint Andrea Smith to Position 8 on the Human Rights Commission, the unexpired term of Andrea Ortiz, for a term beginning upon appointment and ending on October 31, 2005. Councilor Bettman thanked all the applicants for the position, saying all were qualified, excellent candidates. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of City Council Minutes October 11, 2004, Work Session October 11, 2004, City Council October 12, 2004, Boards, Commissions, and Committees Interviews October 13, 2004, Work Session October 13, 2004, Boards, Commissions, and Committees Interviews October 26, 2004, Boards, Commissions, and Committees Interviews B. Approval of Tentative Working Agenda C. Adoption of Resolution 4814 Approving the Eugene-Springfield Metro Area Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to approve the Consent Calendar. Councilor Pap6 raised a point of order, asking that the council take action on the other pending appoint- ments. Councilor Pap~, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to appoint Randall Hledik to Position 2 on the Planning Commission for a four-year term beginning November 1, 2004, and ending on October 31, 2008. MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 8, 2004 Page 3 Regular Meeting Councilor Kelly noted that the council took action on the Human Rights Commission positions unanimously, and given the number of people waiting to testify, he asked Councilor Pap6 to withdraw the motion. Mayor Torrey determined from City Attorney Glenn Klein that Councilor Bettman's motion had precedence over Councilor Pap6's motion. At the request of Mayor Torrey, Councilor Pap6 withdrew his motion. Councilor Poling withdrew his second. Councilor Bettman and Councilor Meisner noted their submission of corrections to the minutes via e-mail. Mayor Torrey deemed them accepted as submitted. Roll call vote; the motion to adopt the Consent Calendar passed unanimously, 8:0. 4. PUBLIC HEARNG: An Ordinance Concerning Rental Housing; Adding Sections 8.400 Through 8.440, And Sections 8.995 To The Eugene Code, 1971; And Providing For A Delayed Enforcement Data City Manager Taylor called on Building and Permit Services Manager Marsha Miller to review the changes made since the council last considered the ordinance in August 2004 as a result of council input, staff analysis, and recommendations from the Housing Policy Board (HPB). Ms. Miller reported that most of the changes were simplifications but some were slightly more substantive. Staff added a provision for an oral agreement to be included in the definition of a rental agreement; added a requirement for all non-exempt rental housing to register with the City, even if exempt from the fees; and changed the requirement that repairs must be completed within tens days to ;;within a reasonable time" to accommodate the possible need for a building permit. Ms. Miller noted the council's receipt of a memorandum from the HPB proposing recommendations for fee exemptions for low-income housing, which staff supported. She noted that Councilor Poling had requested three amendments to the ordinance, a provision including a sunset clause, a provision providing more specificity about timelines for landlords to do repairs, and a provision providing property owner notice prior to inspection. She noted that staff had envisioned including the last provision in the administrative rules but would prepare motions to allow for its inclusion in the ordinance. Ms. Miller anticipated that over time, the program was anticipated to become self-sufficient, and staff would track all program revenues and expenditures and report back to the council on a regular basis. Mayor Torrey opened the public hearing. Bruce Miller, PO Box 50968, Eugene, supported a housing program based on the Corvallis model. He asked that copies of the ordinance be made widely available, and recommended that the Corvallis City Council and Corvallis landlords be consulted about how that ordinance worked. Paul Cauthorn, 2739 University Street, asked the council to consider all options before moving forward. MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 8, 2004 Page 4 Regular Meeting He opposed the ordinance because his tenants would have to pay the yearly fee. He maintained his property and his tenants would not benefit from the tax. The program would take money out of the pocket of tenants and he questioned what they would receive in exchange. He suggested a landlord-tenant education campaign administered by a local nonprofit be considered instead. If tenants did not know their rights, they had none. Courtney Anglin, 915 West 20th Avenue, chair of the Oregon Student Public Interest Research Group (OSPIRG), noted her organization's long-time interest in the topic. She said OSPIRG published a renter's handbook but it did not replace local protections she believed the City should provide. She maintained there was a problem with landlords in the community, and her organization did not have the resources to protect all renters. She asked the council to support a local rental housing code and local enforcement. Christa Hansen, 2738 Kismet Way, spoke in support of enforceable local housing standards such as there were in Lawrence, Kansas. She said that program benefited everyone. Violations were easily addressed because all understood the rules. The remainder of the community benefited because adjacent property values were maintained. She spoke of the experience of a friend, who was told by her landlord to go to court when she experienced a mouse infestation. Allison Rajak, 825 West 2nd Avenue, supported the creation of housing standards. She said she had first- hand experience with negligent landlords but her complaints were largely unaddressed by her out-of-town landlord. She was now a landlord herself and thought a housing standards program would be very useful, noting that the Corvallis program received many calls for information from landlords as well as tenants. Corey Harmon, 2141 Hilyard Street, acknowledged the State standards but said they forced tenants to file lawsuits, costing them time and money. He also acknowledged that tenants could withhold their rent in certain circumstances. However, many times the cost of repairs exceeded the withholding limits, and a lawsuit created the threat of eviction. She said the cost of the fee should not stress landlords as it was only $1 more monthly for renters and that was often divided among many people. She thought tenants would be willing to pay those costs for a local enforcement option. Taylour Johnson, 725 East 14th Avenue, a member of the Eugene Citizens for Housing Standards, said her organization met with landlords and property managers over the past years to discuss their concerns. She said one concern was that a local program would create loopholes for tenants to damage their properties to avoid eviction. Tenants would have to cause major damage for that to be a concern, such as damage to a property's structural integrity, broken windows, or a broken furnace. They would then have to wait ten days after contacting their landlord before filing a complaint with the City. In addition, State law already protected landlords in the case of tenant-caused property damage. She asserted that Oregon's eviction process was among the quickest in the country. There were alternatives available to landlords if damages exceeded the security deposit. Scott Lu, 746 East 19th Avenue, #7, a member of the Eugene Citizens for Housing Standards, noted the many members of the coalition present as well as those who endorse its efforts. He thanked the council for holding the hearing and asked it to adopt the standards. Bob Suess Jr., PO Box 456, Springfield, said he owned and operated apartment complexes in Eugene and Springfield. He had been trying to figure out why Eugene needed such standards given the State laws governing landlord-tenant relations. He anticipated that if the proposed standards were adopted, rents in MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 8, 2004 Page 5 Regular Meeting Eugene would be increased. Mr. Suess said that all the stories he heard from the renters' coalition regarded student housing or students' private homes. He said someone had mentioned broken windows as an example of neglect, but he did not understand how a landlord could be responsible for broken windows. That sounded like a tenant problem. He said that landlords' representatives met with the representatives of the coalition and asked to be made aware of worst habitability problems, but no one followed up. Now he was confused as to whether there was a problem in Eugene or the scope of the problem. Mr. Suess questioned whether another government program was needed to oversee rental housing, pointing out that many agencies existed to address the issues that had been brought up in testimony. Building Code violations could be addressed by the Building Official, and Fire Code violations by the Fire Marshal. He had surveyed some of his Eugene tenants, who also questioned what the problem was. Mr. Suess wanted to ensure that if an ordinance was adopted, all rental properties, including apartment complexes and single- family homes, were covered. Ron Kruetz, 5447 Wales Drive, said he was a landlord and opposed standards set only for rental housing. As a contractor, he had to abide by all building codes and standards. He believed the standards under consideration were duplicative of other standards in existing law. Noting that the City's Permit and Information Center was open for only four hours a day because it had to be fee-supported and could collect no money from the General Fund, he asked how the program would be funded. He noted that Eugene had one citation for an unsafe rental unit in 2004 and two fines for habitability issues in Corvallis; he questioned whether that level of activity justified a new program. He suggested that more education about what actually was in place was needed. He was strongly opposed to the program. Paula Roberts, PO Box 1022, Eugene, said she was a long-time renter, rendered homeless once for a short period of time during a dispute with a landlord. She was opposed to the City's standards because the State standards had protected her adequately. The City standards did not supplement the State program but did supplement the City's General Fund. Its limited standards in comparison to State law would not protect tenants or provide recovery for tenants in the event of harassment from landlords, wrongful evictions, vermin infestations, appliance failures, etc. In regard to the issue of avoiding high court fees, under Oregon Revised Statute 190, when a tenant has made good faith request for repairs, that tenant may withhold rent until mediation occurred. She believed that if a tenant could pay rent, that tenant could pay a small court filing fee, and pointed out all filing fees were reimbursed from the loser of claim. She asked the council to compare existing law and Eugene's proposal before making a decision. Sonny Taylor, PO Box 1022, Eugene, said as a renter he had both good and bad experiences and resolved his rental disputes using State law. He believed the proposed housing standards would not serve those they were intended to protect. The proposed ordinance did not supplement State law, failed to offer new protections, and duplicated enforcement of a narrow set of laws already in place. Rather than make restitution to tenants, landlords would make restitution to the City. The ordinance would establish a rental tax to be paid by property owners, who would pass it on to renters in the form of excessive fees. Mr. Taylor believed that renters who attempted to use the code without aggressively pursuing action could put themselves at risk of eviction because they did not file appropriate paperwork. Those who complain about serious habitability issues without taking advantage of State law may find themselves homeless if the City declares their residence uninhabitable. Mr. Taylor criticized the lack of a defined appeals process, the fact the ordinance was largely defined by administrative rules, and the fact on-campus housing was exempt. He said that much excellent information was available to renters. He suggested the City instead inform renters MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 8, 2004 Page 6 Regular Meeting of their remedies under State law, with the OSPIRG booklet on renters' rights used as guidelines. He said the City should serve tenants by being a teacher rather than a commissar. Dennis Casady, PO Box 5028, Eugene, was opposed to creating new City bureaucracies as would occur if the housing standards were adopted. He said the proposed code left many questions unanswered, such as the expertise of City inspectors in various areas like plumbing, building, and electric codes. He thought landlords should be notified of inspections so they could be present to answer questions and view the inspection. Mr. Casady called for education to eliminate the problems cited by those in support of housing standards, suggesting that landlords be required to give tenants a brochure explaining Oregon's landlord- tenant act and remedies, eliminating the need for local housing standards. Devin Gates, 447 Maxwell Road, had many misgivings about the proposed housing standards. He was concerned about the absence of a sunset clause in the ordinance and thought it was crucial there be a deadline for review of the ordinance's effectiveness. He was also concerned about the fiscal accountability of the program as landlords would be being taxed against their wills if it was adopted. He wanted to ensure the funds went to a dedicated fund, not the City's General Fund. Mr. Gates urged the council to reconsider a fine-based system, suggesting that general taxation of landlords who maintain their properties was unfair. He suggested an offender-based system would be more appropriate and just. Donna Turfing, 2305 Snelling Drive, expressed concern that the coalition was disseminating incorrect information about the need for recourse to small claims court when its own materials laid out different information. She challenged the coalition to be more accurate. She was concerned about the proposed ordinance, which was altered from the Corvallis model by deleting the maximum fine amounts; Eugene's were unlimited. The Corvallis program sent notice that fees were due, and Eugene's was voluntary, but there were fines for those who failed to register. Corvallis included a mayor-appointed appeals board; Eugene had an appeal to the manager. She also supported a sunset if an ordinance was to be adopted. Ms. Turring noted that she had been on the Joint Housing Commission in the 1980s when the City Code was in place, and the City staff responsible for the program recommended it be disbanded because the program was receiving nuisance complaints rather than habitability complaints; she understood the same thing was occurring in Corvallis. Patrick Costello, 474 Brookside Drive, said he owned and managed an apartment complex in Eugene. He said he rented units to many low-income people. He was not necessarily opposed to housing standards but he was opposed to the cost of the program. While the amount was not a lot for many people, for people living on very low incomes, such as his tenants living on $500 from Social Security or disability payments, it was a real cost. He was concerned because his tenants had difficulty paying their rents already. Mr. Costello asked the council if the program was necessary. He believed there were other alternatives for the council to consider. Bob Suess, Sr., 260 East 38th Avenue, said he began to provide affordable housing for Eugene residents 40 years ago. He and his tenants respected each other's needs. He believed it was a mistake to spend time on the housing standards when a committee of knowledgeable people could make recommendations for an approach that was fair to all. Mr. Suess commended the audience for its civility. Barry Blanton, 580 West 35th Place, a partner with Lorig Associates, noted his company's familiarity with the Corvallis ordinance, the model on which the proposal was based. He reviewed data provided by the MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 8, 2004 Page 7 Regular Meeting Corvallis program manager for the time period July 2003 - June 2004. That data indicated fewer than two contacts per business day; 267 were from tenants, 100 were from landlords, and 67 were from people from other than tenants or landlords. Of 434 total contacts, none resulted in administrative sanctions from Corvallis or got to the point of a legal notice. The cost of that program was about $90,000 annually. Mr. Blanton asked what the proposed Eugene ordinance would do that the State law did not. He asked the council to review the State landlord-tenant act before it adopted the ordinance. He submitted a copy into the record. He said the State law was strong, and damages were awarded to the tenant, not to government. John Tronrud, 1388 Willamette Street, Rental Association, said the association was not opposed to housing standards but was opposed to the duplication of process. He did not think the proposed code provided anything not found in State law. He discussed the history of the landlord-tenant law, and said those who said the only recourse was small claims court were not correct. Withholding rent was an option, and that got a landlord's attention. He said the local courts were very fair; they were more apt to give the tenant the benefit of the doubt, particularly with regard to habitability issues. He said the housing coalition did not address those issues. The association had offered the coalition the opportunity to give it the worst case scenario and it heard nothing. The coalition did not want to be in the court system; if a landlord had a claim made against them, they would be in the court system. Jami Sterling-Counard, 825 Mosh Drive, Sterling Management Group, said she was very involved in the Corvallis market and was familiar with that community's program. She said that in three years, Corvallis had experienced three code issues annually and those had regarded plumbing and weather stripping. The few problems that do exist would be subsidized by the landlords who really care about and take care of their properties. She did not think that was fair. Ms. Sterling-Counard asked if the council decided to go forward with housing standards, it include a two-year sunset provision for a meaningful review. Ms. Sterling-Counard emphasized the importance of having knowledgeable inspectors. Corvallis had done well in that regard. She said the program cost should be minimal. She suggested that the council consider discounting the fee for good behavior. She also supported directing revenues into a dedicated fund. Kelly Pearson, 375 Marche Chase Drive, representing Chase Village Apartments, opposed the adoption of local housing standards. She said that the fee being contemplated would realize considerable money from the 536 units she managed alone at a cost of $10 annually. She contrasted that with the cost to a single- family house, where more of the problems discussed by those supporting the housing standards seemed to occur. She said her complexes had permanent maintenance teams and addressed all tenant complaints as they were received. She had heard stories from tenants about bad rental situations and used them as suggestions for improvements. Brooke Hardy, 992-½ West 4th Avenue, represented a landlord unable to appear before the council. He was opposed to the housing standards as they were not needed. He said in his experience, often the problem with a rental was caused by tenants doing damage. He it was very difficult to evict a tenant and it took a court process. Mr. Hardy said he had just inspected one of his properties and was surprised by the damage that had been done. He pointed out that local landlords frequently owned only one or two properties or units. He objected to the fee associated with the housing standards program, which he characterized as a hidden tax and which he did not think was needed. Clark Winston Cox Jr., 1085 Patterson Street, said that his complex had experienced problems until a new MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 8, 2004 Page 8 Regular Meeting management company had assumed responsibility. In the past, management companies had worked slowly to fix things. He was a member of the West University neighborhood association board and did not recall that the organization had signed on in support of the housing standards. While he would not personally benefit from the standards, Mr. Cox supported the housing standards to address landlords who did not do what they should do. He also supported a sunset clause. Brett Roulett, 600 Howard Avenue, staff of the Eugene Citizens for Housing Standards, spoke of his work in support of housing standards and the research he had done in regard to the topic. He termed housing standards a human rights issue. He urged their adoption as being in the best interest of both landlords and tenants. He disagreed that rents would increase to any great degree as a result, particularly when compared with the rental savings that he anticipated tenants would experience from houses that were properly plumbed, weatherproofed, and heated. He maintained that Corvallis has experienced no great increase in rents. Adam Pitkin, 251 West Broadway, President of the Associated Students of the University of Oregon, asked that the council adopt an ordinance so that Eugene was not the last large community in Oregon lacking housing standards. Mr. Pitkin suggested that Corvallis renters had not had many problems because the program acted as a deterrent. Mr. Pitkin asked that a dedicated fund be created for the program and revenues used solely on the program. He also asked that the annual fee be as low as possible, noting that Corvallis had built up sufficient revenues to create a reserve for the program. Scott Smith, 728 Pond Lane, a board member of the Rental Owners Association of Lane County, said most people rented at one time or another and many times tenants and landlords disagreed. However, he questioned how many of the issues raised during testimony were actually in regard to habitability issues. He said cracks in the walls or poorly painted bathrooms were not habitability issues. Mr. Smith said many of those issues were not going to be addressed by the proposed code. He said that the association had sought information about the habitability problems being experienced by coalition members but had received nothing. He believed the information about the Corvallis code was revealing as the majority of calls were not in regard to habitability issues but instead the program acted as a tenant help line. He thought the proposed code a poor value for the residents of the City of Eugene. John Morrison, 803 Armstrong Avenue, agreed with those who spoke in opposition to the housing standards. He questioned the need for the ordinance, saying he had sought specifics about that need from the coalition but had received no information. He did not see the need for a duplicative bureaucracy and pointed out the City had code enforcement capacity now. Mr. Morrison opposed the fact that landlords who behaved well would pay for the program, as opposed to landlords who egregiously violated the law. Bob Cassidy, 1401 East 27th Avenue, said since he had last spoken in favor of the housing standards he had heard complaints about the program and now believed more time was needed to help reconcile the differences between parties. He did not think those in opposition wanted the program at all. He welcomed paying another $10 annually on his property to help his neighborhood from falling into degradation. He asked how those in opposition would improve the measure. He did not think small claims court was the answer because of the time it took to get on the docket. MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 8, 2004 Page 9 Regular Meeting Zach Vishanoff, Patterson Street, suggested that the housing standards were an outgrowth of "smart growth" policies that the City would employ to remove needed housing. He complained in general about the fact the University of Oregon was planning for its own property in a way that he did not support. Mr. Vishanoff's remaining comments regarded his general dissatisfaction with the City's planning processes. John Van Landingham, 335 North Grand Street, thanked the council for its service to the community. He spoke in his capacity as Chair of the Housing Policy Board (HPB), a body which recommended the City apply the ordinance to the City's affordable housing units but not charge a fee for those units. He said the Corvallis City Council made the same policy choice. He said the HPB believed the text used by the Corvallis ordinance was inadequate, and had recommended alternative text. Mr. Van Landingham thanked Councilor Pap~ and Councilor Kelly for their service on the HPB. Speaking as a lawyer for Legal Aid, Mr. Van Landingham said the State law did not provide a safe or affordable option for some tenants to force some landlords to make repairs. He maintained that the ordinance ~filled that gap." He indicated he had provided written testimony on that issue. He concluding by saying that he wished the State law was as effective as some maintained. David Hinkley, 1350 Lawrence Street, # 1, co-chair of the Jefferson-Westside Neighbors, said the neighborhood association had voted unanimously to support the ordinance at its last meeting. He noted that 48.2 percent of Eugene residents live in rental housing, and that number was growing. He regretted that a small proportion of landlords had created the need for the ordinance, and suggested that it was just a beginning as he believed there were other laws about landlord-tenant relationships that should be considered. David Hansen, 2738 Kismet Way, believed the rental association was sending a mixed message when it argued for education but then suggested the Corvallis program was essentially providing education. He asked what those individuals wanted. In regard to calls for slowing the process, Mr. Hansen said the council had taken its time, given that the issue had been under consideration since 1996. He said Corvallis researched the need for such a program for two years before passing the program. He said the coalition wished to avoid a similarly long adoption process. Kevin Matthews, 120 West Broadway, representing the Friends of Eugene, expressed his organization's support for the ordinance. However, given his organization's interest in adequate public processes, Mr. Matthews was concerned about the lack of public testimony from bad landlords. He pointed out that nobody had offered the council testimony to the effect that they were a bad landlord, and questioned whether the council should await that testimony, or whether it would have to represent their needs. Norton Cabell, 1456 West 10th Avenue, a property owner and manager, endorsed the inclusion of a sunset clause in the ordinance. He asked that the council amend the ordinance to recognize that not all damage to a property that is a code violation was caused by a landlord's action or inaction. Sometimes damage was caused by a tenant's action. He indicated he had submitted written text that allowed inspection staff to determine the source of the damage when deciding whether to penalize a landlord. Mr. Cabell said he was sure the manager would hire staff that would help protect tenants from those unscrupulous, uncaring, irresponsible landlords absent from the hearing, as well as landlords from the unscrupulous, uncaring, irresponsible tenants attempting to take advantage of a new system, who also had failed to offer testimony. MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 8, 2004 Page 10 Regular Meeting Roxie Cuellar, 2053 Laura Street, a member of the HPB and staff to the Lane County Homebuilders Association, indicated she supported the ordinance as a member of the HPB. The ordinance appeared to work in Corvallis and landlords appeared to benefit from it. She proposed an amendment similar to that proposed by Mr. Cabell, that Section 8.410 be modified to indicate the standards would not apply to any housing damages or defects caused by tenants or by tenants' guests. She asked that the any costs and paperwork associated with the program be kept to a minimum, and advocated for a sunset clause. Alicia Fernandez, 3950 Goodpasture Loop, representing Forest Hills Apartments, said that her complex was fairly new and had three on-site maintenance staff available 24 hours. Her company responded immediately to all service requests. She said if implemented, the ordinance would cost her company $2,480 above the costs it currently spent to maintain the complex. She said people in support of the ordinance do not seem to understand that rents would go up if the ordinance was adopted. She asked that, if adopted, the money collected is directed to a dedicated fund for the purposes of education and that a sunset clause be included. There being no further requests to speak, Mayor Torrey closed the public hearing. Mayor Torrey announced that, due to the lateness of the hour, the council would not be conducting the other two public hearings that had been scheduled for that evening. Mayor Torrey called on the council for questions and comments. Councilor Bettman thanked all those who testified. She asked City Manager Taylor to develop text to amend the ordinance to reflect the recommendations of the HPB. She asked how it could be determined that a tenant caused damage, which was a crime of vandalism. Ms. Miller said staff was concerned about that issue but was not sure how the inspector would determine who caused damage. No matter who caused the damage, the landlord would ultimately have to make repairs and she assumed that they had legal recourse to pursue damages from the tenant. She said staff could do more research on what other communities had done in regard to the issue. Councilor Kelly also thanked those who testified and expressed interest in the topic raised by Councilor Bettman. He invited written input from Mr. Cabell and others offering testimony about that issue. Councilor Kelly expressed appreciation for the suggestion that the City employ limited contract employees to administer the program to minimize costs in its initial phases. Councilor Kelly supported the HPB's recommended changes. Councilor Kelly referred to the staff-recommended change from ten days to a "reasonable time" and asked if it was possible to place some upper boundary on what that constituted. Councilor Kelly indicated he would support a sunset provision, suggesting that three years would be appropriate. Councilor Pap~ suggested that mention of housing standards was unfortunate because no new standards were being considered. Rather, the council was talking about enforcement. If the two existing methods of MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 8, 2004 Page 11 Regular Meeting enforcement were working, he did not think the council would be talking about an ordinance. Councilor Pap~ agreed that some consideration for tenant-caused damage was needed in the ordinance. He thought there were ways for the City to sort that issue and not place a burden on the landlord if the damage was found to be caused by a tenant. Councilor Pap~ asked if a tenant could use both State and City law at the same time in a rental dispute. Mr. Klein said nothing in the ordinance or State law would prevent that. The City program was in addition to the other remedies the tenant had. Councilor Pap~ was also interested in a sunset clause, saying his support for the ordinance might depend on the inclusion of such a provision. Councilor Pap~ indicated support for placing all program revenues in a dedicated fund. Councilor Poling requested that text be prepared to amend the ordinance in a way that allowed the property owner to be present during an inspection. Responding to a question from Councilor Poling about the qualifications the City's inspectors would have, City Manager Taylor said he was unsure at this point of the qualifications, but he anticipated staff could develop an outline of the position's responsibilities prior to implementation of the ordinance. Councilor Poling also supported establishing a dedicated fund for program revenues. He suggested the potential that the fee could be reduced if the program costs were not as high as anticipated. Councilor Poling noted the support expressed by the Harlow Neighbors neighborhood association for the ordinance. Councilor Meisner indicated support for the ordinance. He also supported a sunset or mandated review to ensure the program did not become a ~runaway bureaucracy." Councilor Meisner asked legal counsel to prepare a written response related to the issue of retaliation as raised in testimony. Would initiation of a tenant's complaint pursuant to the local ordinance trigger the anti- retaliation provisions in State law? Mr. Klein indicated he would follow-up. Councilor Nathanson expressed concern about the proposed administrative structure and cost. She said she had requested statistical information from the proponents of the program about the scope of the problem and regretted that information was not available. Speaking to the mandated review or sunset issue, Councilor Nathanson hoped that good information was available for an adequate and meaningful review. Mayor Torrey asked staff to incorporate the recommendations of Mr. Cabell and Ms. Cuellar into the ordinance. Mayor Torrey wanted a comparison of what the State program and proposed City program would do. Mayor Torrey supported a sunset clause. He suggested two years of operation would be sufficient for an MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 8, 2004 Page 12 Regular Meeting evaluation. Mayor Torrey called for a second round of council comments and questions. Councilor Bettman said her concern about Mr. Cabell's suggestion was how to determine the source of the damage. She wanted to ensure that the inspectors were qualified. She also supported the creation of a dedicated fund. Speaking to concerns raised by those in opposition to the ordinance that no evidence of the living conditions giving rise to the need for the ordinance had been provided, Councilor Bettman maintained that the council had heard very moving testimony in the past from people who had shared their experiences living in substandard housing, the difficulty they had accessing the court system, how much easier a City program would be for them to use, and how much safer they would feel. Councilor Nathanson indicated she supported the ordinance to ensure that residents living in habitable conditions, but she continued to have concerns about the administrative cost of the program. 5. PUBLIC HEARING: An Ordinance Amending the Laurel Hill Plan Land Use Diagram to Redesignate Property Identified as Tax Lots 199, 200, 300, Assessor's Map 18-03-03-2 3 from Low-Density Residential to Commercial and to Rezone the Property from R-1 Low-Density Resi- dential to C-2 Community Commercial; Adopting a Severability Clause; and Providing an Effec- tive Date Due to a lack of time, this item was not addressed. 6. PUBLIC HEARING: An Ordinance Concerning Real Property Compensation; Adding Sections 2.070, 2.075, 2.080, 2.085, 2.090, and 2.095 to the Eugene Code; 1971; Declaring an Emergency; and Providing an Immediate Effective Date Due to a lack of time, this item was not addressed. 7. ACTION: Appointments to Boards, Commissions, and Committees Due to a lack of time, this item was not completed. The meeting adjourned at 9:58 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dennis M. Taylor City Manager MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 8, 2004 Page 13 Regular Meeting (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 8, 2004 Page 14 Regular Meeting