Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 09/24/07 Meeting M I N U T E S Eugene City Council Regular Meeting Council Chamber—Eugene City Hall September 24, 2007 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Andrea Ortiz, Chris Pryor, Betty Taylor, Bonny Bettman, George Poling, Jennifer Solomon, Mike Clark, Alan Zelenka. Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the regular meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. 1. PUBLIC FORUM Mayor Piercy reviewed the rules of the Public Forum. Deborah Frisch spoke to the ordinance concerning the consumption of alcohol that the council would vote on later in the evening and anticipated the various actions she believed the council would take in regard to amending the ordinance, which she maintained would not correct the awkward text in the ordinance and would still allow people to drive drunk. She suggested that the time for drinking be reduced from nine hours to seven hours. She then proceeded to imitate Howard Cosell on December 8, 1980, confirming the death of John Lennon. Dan Williams , Assistant to the President of the University of Oregon (UO), suggested all would agree it would be better if there was no alcohol present on game day. He noted the fact the Athletic Department must be self-supporting and so must be sensitive to its audience, who want the tailgating experience. For many, that includes alcohol consumption. Mr. Williams discussed the steps used to control alcohol consumption at Autzen Stadium, noting the limits imposed on time in the parking lot and the number of people who arrive at the stadium via bus, which helps alleviate the problem. Some suggested that the University should prohibit fans from leaving and re-entering the stadium on the basis they are likely leaving to drink, but he questioned how the University could differentiate between the reasons that people left. Joe Collins , 2233 Hawkins Lane, addressed remarks that Councilor Clark had made to him in September 2007 asking him to refrain from calling Police Chief Robert Lehner’s integrity into question. He did not know the chief but had been told twice that the chief would contact him about problems at his condominium development but he had not. He saw no improvement in the police force since Chief Lehner was hired. People had been killed by the police and no one had been fired because of the Lara/Magana incidents. He speculated that the police could violate department policies without check or oversight. Mr. Collins maintained that Chief Lehner was part of a corrupt justice system overseen by Douglas Harcleroad, who he asserted was loved by the police but feared by attorneys and judges. He perceived the chief as a failure. Daniel Cooler, shared an anecdote about a recent encounter he had with the legal system. MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 24, 2007 Page 1 Regular Meeting Zachary Vishanoff , a resident living on Patterson Street, asked that he be allowed to see the materials he was submitting to the council to ensure they received them. He shared several documents with the council to illustrate his remarks about his concerns about the potential of no-bid contracts such as that he anticipated would be issued for the proposed basketball arena. He wanted Nike to have to abide by the existing laws as he considered the arena to be “a Nike annexation of Eugene by dint of eminent domain.” Mayor Piercy closed the Public Forum and called on the council for questions and remarks. Councilor Zelenka clarified that the City of Eugene had nothing to do with the University’s actions in regard to the University’s potential use of eminent domain. He acknowledged his own neighborhood’s concern about the impact of the arena but also noted the neighborhood organization’s tentative support for the arena if its concerns were respected by the University. 2. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of City Council Minutes - June 11, 2007, Work Session - July 9, 2007, Work Session - July 16, 2007, City Council Meeting - July 23, 2007, City Council Meeting B. Approval of Tentative Working Agenda C. Request for Contingency Funds for Cost and Expense Associated with Recruitment and Selection of a New City Manager Councilor Pryor, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to approve the items on the Consent Calendar with the exception of the minutes from the work session that was held on May 14, 2007. Councilor Bettman noted minutes corrections she had submitted earlier via e-mail, noting the deletion of the correction she had tentatively proposed to the July 23, 2007, work session minutes as that section had been clarified by minutes staff. Mayor Piercy deemed them approved as submitted. . Roll call vote; the motion to approve the Consent Calendar passed unanimously, 7:0. 3. ACTION: An Ordinance Concerning Consumption or Possession of Alcohol in Public Places and Amending Sections 4.190, 4.990, and 4.996 of the Eugene Code, 1971 Councilor Ortiz joined the council via speakerphone. Councilor Pryor, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved that the City Council adopt Council Bill 4053, an ordinance concerning consumption or possession of alcohol in public places. Councilor Bettman asked City Attorney Jerome Lidz how the ordinance could be interpreted as creating a special class, a violation of the Oregon Constitution. Mr. Lidz recalled the challenge to Ballot Measure 37 ultimately decided by the Oregon Supreme Court, which ruled there was no special privilege created by MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 24, 2007 Page 2 Regular Meeting Measure 37 that violated the constitution. In this case, he said, the question was what the classification was that constituted a special privilege for one group or lack of privilege for another. Councilor Bettman suggested that a student in the UO parking lot drinking a beer from an open container the day before the game could be cited by the police, but the next day, during a game during tailgating hours, the student would not be cited. The same was true of an individual across town in the park. Mr. Lidz said the constitutional standard was whether there was a reasonable basis for the classification under the law, or whether the law had a negative disparate impact on a protected class of persons. A UO student would not fall under the category of one receiving a special privilege. Mr. Lidz said unless the council was acting with a discriminatory motive, ordinances that distinguished among geographic areas did not violate the constitution. Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to amend the ordinance by delet- ing sections 1, 2, and 3 of the ordinance, and replacing them with a section that provides subsection 4 of Section 4.190 is hereby repealed. Councilor Bettman addressed the impact of her substitute motion, saying that the council rarely got to make life and death decisions but she considered the decision on the ordinance in question to be one. She viewed the motion offered by Councilor Pryor as the City creating opportunities for drinking and driving, which was a public health hazard. The code included an exemption for Autzen Stadium to a law that was in place the remainder of the year. She believed that the prohibition on public drinking was a justifiable law for Eugene. It had been enacted by a previous council to preserve the health and safety of the community and she thought it should apply to Duck fans as well as everyone else in the community. Councilor Bettman believed the City should maintain its law against public drinking. If the council did not think that justifiable, it should rescind the prohibition entirely. Responding to a question from Councilor Solomon, Mr. Lidz confirmed that the City could prohibit drinking at the Autzen Stadium lot. He acknowledged that the area of City and University relationships was complex and sometimes theoretical, but generally the two parties avoided bringing issues to a head by agreeing on common purposes and policies. He did not believe the City could regulate the University itself, but that was different from regulating an individual’s behavior on UO property. Responding to a request for clarification from Councilor Solomon, Councilor Bettman said her motion would remove the exemption that the UO currently received. She said if the UO had jurisdiction over its parking lot, it could exercise it, but she was attempting to remove the City-provided exemption from the code. Councilor Bettman said she had not heard that the UO had jurisdiction over its lot but if that was the case the UO could allow drinking on its lot and accept the ramifications of that. Roll call vote; the motion failed, 6;2; councilors Taylor and Bettman voting yes. Councilor Ortiz, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to amend Section 4.190(2) as fol- lows: “The exemption is provided for the consumption of alcoholic beverages on this prop- erty during the time period commencing four hours before the start of the scheduled colle- giate game at Autzen Stadium and ending at the end of game.” Councilor Ortiz said that those she had asked had supported the four-hour window prior to game start times concept as a compromise. Mayor Piercy said she thought that ceasing activity after the third quarter was acceptable. Councilor Ortiz agreed. MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 24, 2007 Page 3 Regular Meeting Councilor Bettman thought the amendment irrelevant to the issue of drinking and driving and the danger to public health. In addition, drinking at games created a huge enforcement issue for the Eugene Police Department, which the amendment that had been offered did not address. The revised ordinance would compound that problem. She did not want to set up an expectation among Duck fans that drinking and driving was condoned by the City because it was willing to make an exception to the existing law. Mayor Piercy reiterated her belief that drinking should be stopped after the third quarter thereby making the situation safer for the community. She invited the council to amend the motion thusly. Mr. Lidz said that Chief Lehner had pointed out that there was another reference to ending drinking two hours after the game was completed within the ordinance itself. He suggested the motion could be amended to amend section 1 of the ordinance by substituting the word “when” for the phrase “two hours after.” That would replace the phrase “two hours after game” in two places; one in the existing ordinance, and one in the proposed amendment. Councilors Ortiz and Poling accepted the amendment. Roll call vote; the motion passed, 6:2; councilors Taylor and Bettman voting no. Councilor Zelenka said the wife and children of a dear friend were killed by a drunk driver and he understood what happened to people and their families when people decided to drink and drive. It was a big societal issue that would take more than action by the Eugene City Council to eradicate. He had observed tailgating at Autzen Stadium and believed that most people behaved responsibly. Those that did not created a problem, but he did not want to penalize many people to punish a few people. Councilor Zelenka acknowledged the City’s lack of enforcement capacity in regard to the current law prohibiting such drinking, and suggested the next best thing the council could do was to regulate it. He believed the proposed ordinance was an appropriate regulation and wanted the area regulated to be as small as possible. Councilor Zelenka had asked staff to find out where people were tailgating and it appeared they were divided between Centennial Loop and the Autzen Stadium area. As that was the area where tailgating was happening, he supported the boundaries, despite his initial objection. Councilor Zelenka said he did not think the City’s actions would increase drinking, but rather would regulate it. Councilor Clark offered a friendly amendment to include the businesses immediately adjacent to Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard to the south, so the boundaries included those lots adjacent to the street not now included in the map. He said it seemed arbitrary to exclude them. Councilor Pryor determined from Sergeant Pete Kerns that there may be tailgating in the area identified by Councilor Clark but an assessment done by the department did not produce any pay for use parking lots, which was the focus of the ordinance. Councilors Pryor and Ortiz declined to accept the friendly amendment. Councilor Clark wanted to treat all businesses in the immediate area in the same manner and said it appeared the ordinance differentiated between those residents who paid and those who did not. He thought the council would face the same problem it faced now in regard to enforcement if it excluded that area. The City would have geographically isolated the issue. MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 24, 2007 Page 4 Regular Meeting Councilor Clark, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to amend the motion by including the area south of MLK bounded by the Millrace and Coburg Road (Map C amended). Mr. Lidz determined that Councilor Clark was essentially suggesting a closed loop. Councilor Ortiz indicated she did not support the inclusion of the additional properties. Roll call vote; the motion failed, 5:3; councilors Clark, Poling, and Solomon voting yes. Councilor Bettman said that no one was interested in banning all alcohol consumption on game days, but she was in favor of banning it in the parking lots around the stadium. She did not believe any drinking was allowed inside Autzen Stadium and suggested that was because the UO did not want to manage the problem, and it had been externalized outside the stadium for the EPD to manage. If the City considered it justifiable to prohibit public drinking in the community because it was hazardous, it was even more justifiable on game days when people wanted to get intoxicated. She opposed the motion strenuously and said it sent the wrong message to the public. People could watch sports without the expectation they would be able to drink and become intoxicated and then get into their cars and drive home. She said “we are making a big mistake.” Councilor Zelenka said that tailgating did not equal drinking and people could tailgate without drinking and still have a good time. The City was not supporting a no-holds barred approach to drinking, but instead acknowledging its limitations in regard to enforcement capacity and regulating the problem. If parking lot owners did not follow the regulations, their ability to operate would be taken away. Saturation patrols would continue to take place, but now parking lot owners would be responsible for enforcement. Councilor Taylor said the issue was a difficult one for her. However, she thought parking lots were the last places that drinking should be encouraged because people reached such lots in cars and had to drive away to leave them. She regretted that Councilor Bettman’s first motion had failed. She suggested that forcing people to stop drinking at the end of the game could result in people leaving all at once, thus compounding the problem. She opposed the motion. Councilor Poling endorsed the comments of Councilor Zelenka, saying the City was not creating new places where alcohol use was allowed because the use had been happening for some years. The City would continue to enforce its drinking laws. A prohibition was punishment for 99 percent of the people because of the one percent who could not control themselves. He noted the many people who occupied the area at one time and suggested that problems were similar to those that occurred in the city over a weekend in a more spread out area. He noted that many of the parking lot owners had already established rules and regulations similar to those in the ordinance and had done a good job in managing their lots. He supported the ordinance, pointing out staff indicated 40 more officers would be needed to enforce the prohibition rules on parking lots in and around the stadium in the absence of the exemption, which were officers the City did not have. Mr. Lidz clarified the motion on the floor to ensure the correct map was being discussed; he pointed out the suggested motion under council Option 2 accomplished what was desired, but the ordinance in the packet included the older version of the map. He suggested the council amend the motion to amend the map. Councilor Pryor and Councilor Taylor accepted the friendly amendment adding the phrase “As depicted on the map for 4.190(4)(b) appended to this chapter and amending this provision,” and language offered by Mr. MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 24, 2007 Page 5 Regular Meeting Lidz: “by Coburg Road on the west, the Willamette River on the south, interstate 5 on the east, and Interstate 105 on the north.” Councilor Bettman suggested the council majority was legalizing illegal drinking. She pointed out the administrative civil penalty, which allowed for up to two violations in one year in a three-month period before a third penalty caused the privilege to be rescinded. She suggested a parking lot manager would ask a troublesome person to leave, and they would leave in their vehicle. Councilor Bettman said that the City was not legalizing tailgating; people could still have picnics with juice and water. The City Council was legalizing drinking in parking lots. Councilor Zelenka said that revocation occurred on a third penalty and reinstatement was not automatic. In addition, the ordinance included a provision that allowed citizens to make complaints. Roll call vote; the motion as amended passed, 6:2; councilors Taylor and Bettman voting no. Councilor Zelenka, seconded by Councilor Pryor, moved to direct the city manager to schedule a work session on the ordinance in spring 2008 in time for modifications to take effect before the football season started. Councilor Poling determined from Mr. Lidz that the ordinance would take effect inside 30 days, and only two home games were scheduled after that. He asked if that would give time for evaluation of the ordinance. Chief Lehner did not believe it made much difference if it was one season or two games. Councilor Zelenka asked if the ordinance could be made effective immediately with an emergency clause. Mr. Lidz responded that two-thirds of the council must vote in the affirmative for the ordinance to be effective immediately. Roll call vote; the motion passed, 6:2; councilors Taylor and Bettman voting no. Councilor Poling thought that there would be sufficient information before spring given the City’s past experience. Councilor Zelenka moved to reconsider the passage of the ordinance. The motion died for lack of a second. Councilor Bettman clarified that drinking was still illegal in the parking lots adjacent to Autzen and asked if the City’s existing ordinance would be enforced. Chief Lehner said the ordinance had been essentially unenforceable because of resource constraints and he did not expect that to change in the next 30 days. Councilor Ortiz left the meeting. MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 24, 2007 Page 6 Regular Meeting 4. ACTION: An Ordinance Concerning Initiative and Referendum Procedures; and Amending Sections 2.972 and 2.981 of the Eugene Code, 1971 Mr. Lidz reminded the council that Section 1 of the ordinance would amend the provision of the Eugene Code defining the number of signatures required for a referendum petition to generate an election, and changed the standard from ten percent of the number of votes cast for all candidates for mayor to ten percent of the number of votes cast for mayor. Section 2 of the ordinance would give the council the option of scheduling an election on a referendum (not initiative measures) at a date different than the election at which it would otherwise be scheduled under current rules. That potentially avoided the cost of a special election. Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to amend Eugene Code Section 2.981(2)(b) to read as follows: An election on legislation referred to the electors by petition shall be held on the next available election date under State law that is not sooner than the th 90 day after certification and acceptance of the referendum petition under Section 2.979, unless the council refers the measures to a later election date at which there are other meas- ures or candidates on the ballot. Responding to a question from Mayor Piercy about the effect of the amendment, Mr. Lidz said the primary effect of the amendment to the motion would be to remove the option of holding an earlier election. It would also remove the option already contained in the code as it also affected the last sentence in subsection (2)(b), which stated special elections could not be held earlier than 66 days after certification and acceptance of the petition. . Councilor Bettman believed that the problem with giving the council the added discretion created by the ordinance was that if members of the community decided to challenge an ordinance and went through the rigor of securing the needed signatures, the clock started ticking when they handed in the signatures and they had yet to see the ballot title, which they might wish to challenge. Councilor Bettman perceived the ordinance as tightening the timeline to an unreasonable degree. She pointed out the council did not ask for the amendment and it came from staff. She said if the council wanted economy, this gave it the opportunity to place a measure on a ballot with other issues on it. If the council wanted to expedite a measure, the council could refer such a measure. She perceived the section as unfair and thought it made sense to attempt to amend the ordinance to achieve the economy without creating a grossly unfair situation for the commu- nity. City Recorder Mary Feldman, City Elections Officer, said the ballot title for a referendum petition was prepared within five days of the petitioners filing the initial petition, not when they turned in the signatures. She was required to file the prospective petition before the signature gathering occurred. Councilor Bettman said that made sense, but the residents still had to go through hoops because of the exacting restrictions. Responding to a question from Mayor Piercy, Ms. Feldman reviewed the process timelines. Mr. Lidz said neither the ordinance nor Councilor Bettman’s amendment affected the signature gathering process as it addressed the timing of a referendum. Councilor Bettman suggested the complexity of the issue justified a work session. The existing ordinance provided that a special election may not be held earlier than 66 days after certification. Councilor Bettman thought the referendum process sufficiently challenging and said the City should not make it harder. . MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 24, 2007 Page 7 Regular Meeting Councilor Zelenka agreed that the council should have had a work session on the issue. However, he was not convinced having more flexibility to vote earlier had much of an impact. He said the practice the City used to count the signatures for the gas tax was a long-held City practice changed by a judge, and only then did the petroleum operators have enough signatures to challenge the ordinance. He considered the council was fixing a technical error. Speaking to the economy issue, Councilor Zelenka said that the ordinance gave the council an opportunity to save money by avoiding a one-issue election. City Manager pro tem Jones reminded the council that she had recommended the council move forward without a work session because the ordinance reflected past practice and because of the economies of scale that were realized. She wanted the council to have the option to decide when something went on the ballot. Councilor Bettman said the council had the ability to schedule a later election, and her amendment did not compromise that. Mr. Lidz concurred. Councilor Bettman said that the economies were achievable with her amendment. Councilor Pryor recalled that the council had intended to fix the problem raised by the last referendum and he wanted to fix that problem without getting into discussions of the other issues without the benefit of a work session. Mayor Piercy asked if Councilor Pryor wished to separate the motion. Mr. Lidz clarified that would be Option B in the Agenda Item Summary. Councilor Bettman indicated willingness to withdraw her motion and defer the related issues to a work session. With the consent of her second, Councilor Taylor, Councilor Bettman withdrew her motion. Councilor Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to delete the reference to Section 2.981 in the caption, delete Section 2, and renumber Section 3 to Section 2. Councilor Zelenka suggested the economy issue cut both ways. The council might want to have an earlier election that saved more money rather than later. That was why staff included the text “earlier or later.” It made sense and that was why he supported it. He encouraged the council to oppose the amendment as the council could face an election in the near future. He supported Option A. He added that he did not like the process the council went through to get here. Councilor Taylor agreed the council should hold a work session. She suggested that the council take minimal action and then discuss the pros and cons of the issues involved. Roll call vote; the motion passed, 4:3; councilors Solomon, Pryor, Taylor, and Bettman vot- ing yes; councilors Poling, Clark, and Zelenka voting no. The meeting adjourned at 9 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Angel Jones MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 24, 2007 Page 8 Regular Meeting City Manager pro tem (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 24, 2007 Page 9 Regular Meeting