Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 10/15/07 Public Hearing M I N U T E S Eugene City Council Public Hearing Council Chamber 777 Pearl Street—Eugene, Oregon October 15, 2007 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Andrea Ortiz, Chris Pryor, Betty Taylor, Bonny Bettman, George Poling, Mike Clark. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Alan Zelenka, Jennifer Solomon. Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Resolution No. 4919, a Resolution Concerning Streets Widths in the Crest Drive Area, and Amending the City's Design Standards and Guidelines for the Eugene Streets Sidewalks, Bikeways and Accessways, the Eugene Arterial and Collector Street Plan, and the Eugene Local Street Plan Ms. Piercy opened the public hearing and reviewed the rules for providing testimony. Sue Wolling , 85219 South Willamette Street, Eugene, remarked that the width of the streets was less important than the breadth of the project's vision. She said the process was driven by context sensitive design, but had not been sufficiently broad in terms of encompassing transportation options, particularly non-motorized options. She said it was unconscionable to build a street without specific facilities for bicycles. She said the Eugene Bicycle Coalition had suggested a street design that would accommodate bicyclist safely with minimal impact on the surrounding landscape. She urged the City to build a road for the future that included bicycles. Julie Redner , 2899 Friendly Street, Eugene, voiced her strong support for maintaining the traffic lanes on Friendly Street at 18 feet. She said that narrower streets provided a measure of traffic calming that was necessary in the area. She was also concerned about the increased cost of a wider road because she owned a shallow, but wide lot and her assessment could be as high $25,000. She agreed that bicycle and pedestrian safety was important, but she was being asked to pay additional costs for people who did not live in the area. Chuck Craytor , 3217 Whitten Drive, Eugene, thanked the City staff involved in the Crest Drive area street design. He felt an 18-foot width would be a better deterrent to speed than a wider street with speed bumps. He encouraged the council to approve the 18-foot width to preserve the beauty and character of the neighborhood. Len Bailey , 2932 Friendly Street, Eugene, said he would be assessed for street improvements. He described the process involved in developing a context sensitive design and defining the core themes and values of the Crest Drive neighborhood. He said design decisions had to support those themes and values, including MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 15, 2007 Page 1 Public Hearing traffic calming, preservation of the neighborhood's rural character and safety. He said the proposed 18-foot street width spoke to those values. Cathryn Treadway , 2820 Friendly Street, Eugene, vice-chair of the Crest Drive Citizens' Association, read a statement from the chair regarding the association's support for nine-foot travel lanes. That width would maintain the unique rural character and aesthetics of the neighborhood. She said that her property would be assessed. John Rude , 1207 Courtney Place, Eugene, stated that his property would be assessed. He reiterated the citizen association's support for 18-foot street widths. He said City staff had dishonored the context sensitive design solution process by advocating for 20-foot widths. He emphasized the importance of 18- foot street widths to preserving the integrity of the Crest Drive neighborhood environment and urged the council's support. Sherie Hawley , 3484 Storey Boulevard, Eugene, said her property would be assessed. She explained the 18-foot street widths were vital because that had been the street width in that neighborhood for 100 years, that width would slow cars down, the new construction would add four to five feet of pavement in addition to the travel lane and could not be accommodated if the travel lanes were wider. She noted that other area in the community and other communities in the state had 18-foot street widths without jeopardizing safety. Christine Sullivan , 1207 Courtney Place, Eugene, said her property would be assessed. She said using a context sensitive design process in the Crest Drive neighborhood had been very challenging because of the complex issues involved. She said there were other more desirable routes for bicycles to take to rural areas and the steep incline in the neighborhood discouraged most bicycle traffic; that would not change if the roadways were wider. She urged support for 18-foot street widths as the best solution for all transportation modes, including bicycles. Christina Gryce , 895 Crest Drive, Eugene, said her property was at the corner of Crest Drive and Storey Boulevard and would be impacted by improvements on both streets. She said the cost of improvements would be high and the greatest percentage of that cost was construction. She said maintaining 18-foot travel lanes would help to contain cost and conserve resources. Barbara Donovan , 885 Crest Drive, Eugene, commented that maintaining the neighborhood environment was a strong value during the design process and it was challenging to balance the needs of all street users with preservation of neighborhood. She said widening travel lanes and adding sidewalks to a 100-year- old road would threaten trees, vegetation, stream corridors and wildlife habitat. She said the 18-foot width would also have a larger footprint than the current roads, but would afford better protection of the environment. Jo Warren , Friendly Street, Eugene, said the estimated street assessments were some of the highest ever seen and she would be unable to afford them. She implored the council to listen to the neighborhood and maintain the nine-foot travel lanes. She questioned why the City would consider widening roads and encouraging more cards. She thanked those who had worked on the context sensitive design process. Fred Long , 810 Crest Drive, Eugene, said he was an assessed property owner, a member of the design team and a bicyclist who commuted to work and rode recreationally. He said that bicycle accessibility and safety was an important consideration during the design process and the Eugene Bicycle Coalition was involved throughout; recent concerns were expressed primarily by one individual and not based on accurate MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 15, 2007 Page 2 Public Hearing information. He said designated bike lanes were not well suited to streets in the neighborhood and increased street widths would mean increased car speeds. He urged support for narrower, safer streets. Desiree Rogers , 3131 Storey Boulevard, Eugene, said she was an assessed property owner. She was opposed to designing Crest Drive area roads like West Broadway or Willamette Street. She said the proposal for 18-foot street widths would calm traffic, allow for shared driveways and be consistent with traffic volume. Virginia Starling , 3302 Storey Boulevard, Eugene, remarked that concerns had been raised about school buses, emergency vehicles and garbage trucks traveling on Crest Drive area streets. She pointed out that those vehicles had been traversing the neighborhood's 18-foot streets without incident since the streets were built. She urged the council to leave the neighborhood as its residents wished. Laura Bailey , 2932 Friendly Street, Eugene, said her property would be assessed. She asserted that safety for all residents, pedestrians, emergency vehicles, school buses, commercial vehicles and bicycles was a primary consideration during the design process, along with preservation of the neighborhood character and environment. She said national experts recommended narrow streets for traffic calming and better pedestrian and bicycle safety. She asked the mayor and council to visit the neighborhood and experience the tranquil, rural environment. Frank Calciano , Crest Drive, Eugene, expressed concern with the cost of the project and said narrower street widths would represent a cost savings to the City and residents. He recommended 18-foot street widths and noted that there were neighborhoods throughout the community with narrow streets and the current design standards would present problems for them as well. He said approval of the Crest Drive neighborhood's request for 18-foot street widths could be an example to other neighborhoods facing similar design challenges. Hal Huestis , Friendly Street, Eugene, said his property would be assessed for the project. He pointed out that the proposed street designs for the neighborhood were all different to accommodate each street's unique features and issues and preserve neighborhood character. He said that all designs included a sidewalk on one side, solved draining issues and provided traffic calming. He urged support for 18-foot widths and the unique street designs. Meg Stewart Smith , 346 Crest Drive, Eugene, said her property would be assessed. She spoke to the spiritual values of the design team and how they were expressed in the physical aspect of the road design, particularly the 18-foot width. She hoped the council would support the neighborhood's design proposal. James Reed , Eugene, said he had been a member of the design team and thanked all of those involved in the process. He said technically a 20-foot roadbed would fit, but the issue was not what fit but what was best for the neighborhood. He indicated that livability and neighborhood character were factors in the context sensitive design and 18-foot street widths would preserve the character while providing pedestrian and bicycle amenities and traffic calming. Don Neet , 3434 Storey Boulevard, Eugene, said he was on the design team and his property would be assessed. He said Storey Boulevard had the highest traffic speed and steepest grade of all roads in the neighborhood. He said there were limited options for traffic calming and one of them was an 18-foot street MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 15, 2007 Page 3 Public Hearing width. He said the design process examined problems related to school buses and garbage trucks and concluded there were no issues. Jill Sager , 2945 Friendly Street, Eugene, said she was an assessed property owner. She had lived in the neighborhood for 12 years and walked daily. She felt safe as a pedestrian and appreciated the rural character of the area. She said the wider roadway and sidewalks on the northern end of Friendly Street created an urban environment and that would be inconsistent with the Crest Drive neighborhood character. She urged support for narrower streets. Fred Lorish , Eugene, said his property would be assessed for the project. He reviewed the history of the context sensitive design solutions process and consensus model. He said the themes and values that emerged from that process would be enhanced by narrower roadways and asked for the council's support of 18-foot street widths. Robbin Howard , 3217 Whitten Drive, Eugene, said her property would not be assessed, but she would be affected by the changes. She agreed with previous speakers in support of 18-foot street widths, which would be safer and encouraged physical activity. She did not think that the design should cater to large vehicles when companies could use smaller ones. She preferred not to use scarce resources to promote more vehicle use. Michael Boutette , 2970 Friendly Street, Eugene, said his property would be assessed. He supported 18- foot street widths and had seen no evidence that the current streets presented problems for emergency vehicles. He said narrower streets would preserve the rural character of the neighborhood, which is what drew many residents to the area, and would also slow traffic. He did not want to see the neighborhood subjected to a "cookie cutter" design. Paul Moor , 2586 Potter Street, Eugene, stated he had previously lived on Mary Lane and had frequently biked the streets in the Crest Drive neighborhood. He distributed a drawing of the proposed street design and said that 9- and 10-foot travel lanes would not safely accommodate a car and bicycle at the same time. He also distributed a petition from neighborhood residents and non-residents opposing narrower streets. Eric Selker , 3765 University Street, Eugene, commented on the wide range of bicycle accommodations across Europe. He said that in those areas where people used bicycles extensively the primary factor was safety, not the weather. He did not believe that a nine-foot travel lane without a bicycle accommodation was a good idea and protection from cars would be provided at leave for those going uphill. Jeanne Selker , 2765 University Street, remarked that the steepness of the street was irrelevant; bicyclists needed and would use a delineated travel lane that was smooth, whether it was a bike lane or sidewalk. She said that bicycles should not have to be part of the vehicle traffic. Chris Stine , 350 Fulvue Drive, Eugene, stated he was a bicycle commuter and also drove the Crest Drive neighborhood roads. He said any design should incorporate a safe bicycle lane for rider safety and to promote the City sustainability initiative by promoting alternate modes of transportation. He said that the safety of children biking and walking to school should also be a major consideration. Robert Hutchings , 515 Fulvue Drive, Eugene, said he was not affected by the assessment, but was an avid bicyclist and from his perspective the neighborhood could be even better if the roads were improved. He felt MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 15, 2007 Page 4 Public Hearing that nine-foot travel lanes would be acceptable if a bike lane could be accommodated, at least for uphill travel. Charles Quinn , 375 Mary Lane, Eugene, stated he was a bike commuter and regularly rode on neighbor- hood streets. He said that navigating those streets on a bike was frightening and regardless of the lane width, there should be accommodations for bicycles. He was also concerned with the safety of those children riding bicycles to school. He felt the process had been biased toward the minority of residents living on the affected streets because of their vested financial interest, but the other residents who used the streets should also be considered. He said that any design should accommodate all uses. Amy Clarke , 3009 Friendly Street, Eugene, expressed concern with the dangerous nature of the streets currently, particularly for pedestrians and bicyclists. She said that safe accommodations for those users should be a part of any design. Ms. Piercy closed the hearing and thanked those who spoke. Ms. Taylor commended the persistence and hard work of Crest Drive neighborhood residents and urged the council's support for nine-foot travel lanes. She said that bicycles could use the sidewalks planned for pedestrians, especially for uphill travel. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: An Ordinance Amending the Willakenzie Area Plan Inset Map D and Text; Amending Section 9.9700 of the Eugene Code, 1971; Amending the Eugene Zoning Map; and Adopting a Severability Clause (Summer Oaks/Crescent Center) Ms. Piercy announced that the hearing was a quasi-judicial proceeding and polled the council for conflicts of interest or ex parté contacts. None were declared. She opened the public hearing. Alissa Hansen, Planning and Development Department, reviewed the applicant's requests for a refinement plan amendment, code amendment and zone change and described the subject property. She said that no development proposal had been submitted and the Planning Commission had held a public hearing on the requests. She said the commission was recommending approval of the requests with two conditions. Ms. Piercy reviewed the rules for providing testimony in a quasi-judicial proceeding. She called for testimony from those in support of the application. George Swift , 1105 Porter Way, Milton, Washington, stated he was the property owner and had been involved in hotel development for many years. His concept for the property was an extended-stay hotel, which would have first class accommodations for long-term stays. He said the hotel would have 115 units, contribute to the vibrancy of the area and provide needed lodging when the new hospital opened. He asked the council to support the application and requested amendments and zone change. Aaron Murray , 1105 Porter Way, Milton, Washington, said his role was to oversee permitting and construction for the anticipated development of a hotel on the site. He said an extended stay hotel, with a typical stay of 13 days, had less of an impact on the environment because linens were washed once a week instead of daily and no disposable dinnerware or utensils were used. He said hotel residents would have a positive impact as pedestrians on the built environment and generate a need for goods and services in the area. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 15, 2007 Page 5 Public Hearing Mike Edwards , 2580 Edgewater Drive, Eugene, explained that he was the owner of a business currently located on Greenacres Road and a new facility planned for the Suzanne Way property would accommodate multiple uses and was well situated for ease of transportation access. Teresa Bishow , 871 Country Club Road, Eugene, speaking for Arlie and Company, distributed a colored version of a map included in the agenda packet. She said that approval of the ordinance would implement the Metro Plan as the subject property was designated as commercial in the plan and included within the Crescent nodal development area and would implement council goals for nodal development areas; approval would not convert residential land or open space to commercial. She said the rezone allowing a hotel would increase evening activity in the area. She said the ordinance would result in minor changes to the Willa- kenzie plan and only two lots were affected; those lots would change from Neighborhood Commercial to Community Commercial. She said approval would also recognize that the City's approval of Crescent Village had shifted in that mixed use project the location of key neighborhood commercial services to the heart of the node within easier walking distance of the high density neighborhood. She urged the council's support for the application. Brian Genovese , 4765 Village Plaza Loop, Eugene, principal traffic engineer representing the applicant, said the traffic analysis conducted for the application included the entitled uses under the approved Summer Oaks planned unit development (PUD) compared to the proposed uses. He said the approved uses for the PUD were anticipated to generate approximately 1,900 daily trips, with 234 trips occurring in the PM peak hour; the proposed zone change would accommodate a mix of proposed uses that would generate less than 1,600 daily trips with 213 trips occurring in the PM peak hour. He emphasized that the proposed uses would generate fewer daily and PM peak hour trips than the currently approved uses, which equated to less impact on the transportation system. Greg Brokaw , 114 High Street, Eugene, architect, spoke to the Floor Area Ratio (FAR). He used conceptual drawings to illustrate and contrast the FAR for the current PUD and the proposed uses. He said 1.0 FAR exceeded the trip cap and left no room to develop the property. Ms. Hansen indicated she had no response to the testimony. Ms. Bettman expressed concern with considering a change to the FAR based on conjectural diagrams of a development proposal that was not tied to the change. She said if all of the applicant's requests were granted there was no requirement that a hotel or other specific use occur; once the zone change occurred the owners could make any use of the property that was permitted under the new zone. Ms. Hansen agreed, but noted there were some limitations on uses due to the nodal development overlay. Ms. Bettman asked for clearer copies of the trip generation chart and other agenda packet materials. She did not perceive a connection between modifying the FAR and increasing density in nodal areas. Ms. Piercy asked if Ms. Bettman wished to keep the record open. Ms. Bettman asked if the applicant would be able to provide additional testimony if clearer copies of the tables and graphs were provided to her. City Attorney Jerome Lidz replied that the materials were already in the record and providing more legible copies would not change the record. Ms. Piercy closed the record and the public hearing. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 15, 2007 Page 6 Public Hearing 3. PUBLIC HEARING: An Ordinance Providing for an Intergovernmental Agreement to Establish a Regional Fiber Consortium for the Ownership and Operation of a Fiber Optic Sys- tem; and Repealing Ordinance No. 20181 Pam Berrian, Telecom/Cable Program Manager, introduced Milo Mecham with the Lane Council of Governments, who was available to answer questions. She reviewed the proposed ordinance, which would merge two western Oregon public fiber consortia that had been working together for several years. She explained the Fiber South Consortium, composed of Oregon city and county governments, owned an intra- Oregon fiber optic backbone. She said the Regional Fiber Consortium existed nearby and both organiza- tions were established eight years ago when two fiber backbone providers gave several miles of dark fiber to cities and counties in exchange for a 20-year waiver of rights-of-way use fees; in Eugene's case that represented 66 feet of rights-of-way. She said merging the local government consortia under one organiza- tional government body was permitted under State law ORS 190. Ms. Berrian said the fiber was lit by a private provider chosen by a competitive process and the intention of the urban/rural partnership was to deliver high speed broadband and voice services to nearby, but less urban areas that did not have affordable access to such services. She emphasized that the merger would not create new obligations for the City and the City's actions would remain voluntary; any financial obligation would apply to Eugene only if Eugene agreed to the obligation beforehand. She said the partnership would serve the public interest and reflect the reality of the administration of both networks. She said nothing in the agreement reduced or adversely impacted Eugene's financial or program authority. Ms. Piercy opened the public hearing and called for testimony. Drix , Eugene, said his background was in communication and reviewed the changes in growth in the field over the past several decades. He said the Internet represented a vast river of knowledge and wonder that represented freedom and was accessible to a majority of the population, but it was important that everyone be connected. He said fiber optics was the future and urged the council to support the ordinance. Ms. Piercy closed the hearing. Ms. Bettman noted that the consortium membership was geographically determined, which meant Eugene was not represented based on its population. She was concerned that the decision-making process of regional bodies gave smaller cities the same voting power as Eugene. She said the proposed agreement indicated financial resources would be the responsibility of the governing body and Eugene would be participating in a process where it was not proportionately represented. She felt Eugene was often considered the "deep pockets" in those situations and she was reluctant to be involved in a regional decision- making body with budgeting authority without the weight of the City's population behind it. She asked how the agreement would assure that Eugene taxpayers did not bear a disportionate burden. Ms. Berrian said the agreement insured that no financial obligation would be undertaken without the council's specific authoriza- tion. Ms. Bettman asked if any consortium financial obligation would come before the council. Ms. Berrian said any obligation that affected Eugene would come to the council. She reviewed the relevant provisions of the bylaws. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 15, 2007 Page 7 Public Hearing Ms. Bettman pointed out that bylaws could be changed and asked if Eugene could propose proportional representation. Mr. Mecham said that Eugene could make that proposal. He clarified that the consortium had operating funds that were disposed of according to the decisions of the consortium; however, the City of Eugene was not obligated to provide those operating funds. He said operating funds were generated by the lease of fiber. Ms. Bettman commented that revenues went directly to the consortium even though Eugene likely generated more resources than the other members. Ms. Berrian explained that the fiber backbone used only 66 feet of Eugene's right-of-way, for which the City was provided nine miles of fiber through the city limits. Ms. Bettman asked how the City could pursue the issue that any expenditure or resource investment decision of the consortium would come back to the council. Mr. Lidz said a proposal for proportional representation involving weighted votes based on population could be submitted, although that would mean that Eugene would have greater weight than any other member of the consortium and the partnership could lose its attractiveness to other communities. Mr. Mecham said in a population-based proportional representation scenario Eugene would likely have close to 50 percent of the population and other jurisdictions would probably object. He understood the concern about proportional representation, but Eugene's original intent when entering into the consortium was to provide assistance to smaller cities that did not have access to telecommunications facilities. He said Eugene's involvement was not based on a particular benefit to the City, but rather aiding those other communities. He noted that the negotiations resulted in a large amount of fiber throughout Eugene that significantly increased its fiber infrastructure and from which the City had profited tremendously. He said Eugene had already received far greater value from the consortium than any of the other cities would ever receive. Mr. Pryor indicated he was pleased with the proposal and felt staff had negotiated a good agreement. He felt that any changes should be at the direction of the full council and subject to a vote. Ms. Bettman cited provisions of the agreement that authorized the consortium to enter into contracts for technical services, construction, facilities, purchase and ownership of real and personal property. She asked for language to amend the resolution so that any budget authority or resource allocation decisions were brought first to the council. Mr. Lidz explained that the intent of the consortium agreement was that the consortium derived revenue from the lease of dark fiber and that revenue was available to the consortium to expend; no funds from the City's coffers should be available for the consortium to spend. He asked if Ms. Bettman still wished to have consortium expenditures approved by the council. Ms. Bettman asked how much revenue was generated annually and what portion of that was generated by Eugene. Mr. Mecham said the operating budget for both consortia was under $100,000 and Eugene generated none of the revenue. Ms. Bettman asked if there were likely to be future expenditures that would exceed available revenue and require investments such as revenue bonds. Mr. Mecham said that was theoretically possible but he thought it was unlikely that the representatives of local governments would be interested in bonding. He said the intent was for the consortium to operate without the need for borrowing and the vision was to use private capital investments. He said the difficulty of submitting budget decisions to the City of Eugene for approval was that the consortium was established as a separate legal entity and allowing Eugene or any other city to have veto authority over budget decisions would blur the separation of financial obligations. He reiterated MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 15, 2007 Page 8 Public Hearing that the consortium had no ability to create a financial obligation for Eugene, but blurring the separation could pose greater financial risk for the City. Ms. Bettman asserted that she found the language related to the consortium's authority to enter into contracts and expend funds confusing. She said she had no context for the amount of money that might be involved in ten years. She asked how much revenue staff projected might be generated by the City of Eugene and go directly to the consortium in the future. Mr. Mecham said that the amount would be zero, as the consortium would not have access to any funds from the City of Eugene without the City of Eugene's prior approval. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: An Ordinance Granting Comcast of Oregon II, Inc., an Additional Term and Franchise Renewal for the Operation of a Cable Communications System; Amend- ing Ordinance 19775; Adopting a Severability Clause; and Providing an Effective Date Ms. Berrian related that the City's cable television franchise was a contract with Comcast granting permission to use the City's public rights-of-way for commercial television activities. She said City code, federal law and Federal Communication Commission (FCC) rules governed franchise agreements. She mentioned that complaints related to programming, channel changes and most rate increases were outside the purview of local governments and the responsibility of the FCC and Congress. She reviewed the history of the cable television franchise and said Eugene, Springfield and Lane County had worked together to develop separate but identical franchises and that regional approach had worked well for resolving issues. Ms. Berrian stated that the current franchise was 15-years-old and would sunset in July 2008. She was proposing a renewed agreement that contained provisions that in her opinion would likely have been validated and put in place by a formal process, but without the cost of that formal process. She said City Council adoption of an ordinance was necessary to enact that type of contract. While many of the desired current provisions would be retained she highlighted some components of the new agreement including $20,000 in matching funds from Comcast for a downtown build out, provision of several additional no-cost basic service television connections to publicly owned buildings, provision of a fourth access channel for Public Safety Training and an additional annual payment from Comcast of a $50,000 Capital Contribution for public education and government access channels. She reviewed a number of other provisions and said the new agreement served the public interest and did not provide Comcast exclusive rights to the Eugene market since other providers were welcome to obtain Franchise to market services in the community. She did not believe that further negotiations would result in significant gains. Ms. Piercy opened the public hearing. There being no one wishing to testify, she closed the hearing. Ms. Taylor asked if the City could find another provider. Ms. Berrian replied that rights-of-way had always been open to other providers but another provider had not come forward, likely due to the infrastructure expense. Ms. Taylor noted that basic cable services had been reduced again while rates were increased. She said if those things were outside the City's control, perhaps another provider could be sought. She asked about the consequences if the franchise agreement was not renewed. Ms. Berrian said if the proposal was not accepted a formal renewal process established under federal rules would have to be undertaken; if the council chose not to renew after that formal process, none of the provisions she highlighted in the agreement would exist. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 15, 2007 Page 9 Public Hearing Mr. Mecham said there were few providers seeking to expand into the Eugene market and the likely result of not renewing the current franchise agreement was that the City would have even less control over cable television services. He was not certain that Comcast would remain without a franchise agreement, which could leave the City with no cable television services. He thought the better approach to obtaining more choices for subscribers was to renew the franchise while encouraging competitors. Ms. Taylor said she had heard that low-income subscribers had very few channels currently. Ms. Berrian said she had received complaints about the most basic tier of service. She said those issues had to be addressed at the federal level, but local governments could advocate for better oversight. Ms. Bettman asked if the City was making the additional $50,000 payment for education and government access channels. Ms. Berrian replied that Comcast would make that payment to the City. Ms. Bettman asked for clarification of the income that would be excluded under the new agreement. Ms. Berrian said there were two types of disputed income: income from advertising commissions and subscriber territory and income received when new programs were launched within the subscriber territory. She said a dispute over commissions had resulted in a settlement and the agreement provided for a $200,000 payment to the three jurisdictions in lieu of that income. 5. PUBLIC HEARING: An Ordinance Concerning the Police Commission and Amending Sections 2.013 and 2.368 of the Eugene Code, 1971 Linda Phelps, Eugene Police Department, provided an overview of the amendments, which addressed issues that had been raised by the City Council. She said those issues included elimination of a position appointed by the police chief and changing the designation of a position from Citizen Review Board to Civilian Review Board (CRB) representative and clarifying the role of that position. Ms. Piercy opened the public hearing and called for testimony. Joe Alsup , 36 West 38th Avenue, Eugene, Police Commission vice chair urged the council to approve amendments modifying membership and clarifying the role of the CRB members. He said the commission unanimously supported the amendments. There being no further testimony, Ms. Piercy closed the hearing. In response to a question from Ms. Piercy, Mr. Lidz explained that an issue was raised regarding substitut- ing the word "civilian" for "citizen" throughout the ordinance, even where it referred to the community members of the commission as opposed to the CRB member. He said the term "citizen" was used throughout Chapter 2 in the description of other City commissions when it referred to a person who did not represent a specific entity to distinguish them from members who were designated representatives from other bodies or organizations. He said the definition of a citizen as someone who was a resident of a city or town, especially one who was permitted to vote, was the sense in which citizen was used in the current code. He said that could be changed but recommended it be done by separate ordinance for all board and commis- sions. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 15, 2007 Page 10 Public Hearing Ms. Ortiz said she would support an ordinance changing the definition, but there should be a conversation about what the term means to the community at large. She said the Police Commission's intent was to use a term that was as inclusive as possible and not discourage someone from applying for appointment to a board or commission. Ms. Bettman agreed with Ms. Ortiz that the City needed to be clear about who could apply for boards and commissions and would welcome a discussion of the term "civilian." She said an amendment could provide the definition of the term "citizen" in the code. She suggested that the matter be referred to the Human Rights Commission for feedback. Ms. Piercy determined there were no objections to referring the issue for discussion by the Human Rights Commission. Mr. Poling asked if action on the Willakenzie plan, currently scheduled for November 17, could be rescheduled, as several councilors would be absent on that date. City Manager Angel Jones said she would check on whether that could be done. Ms. Bettman said that the council's earlier discussion with City Attorney Emily Jerome had seemed to indicate that councilors could not have any discussions about alternative hospital sites. She said the issue was of critical interest to the community and asked if the council could have a formal discussion in open session. Mr. Lidz said he would need to confer with Ms. Jerome regarding her advice and the context in which it was given before responding. The meeting adjourned at 10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Angel Jones City Manager Pro Tem (Recorded by Lynn Taylor) MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 15, 2007 Page 11 Public Hearing