Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes ECC UGENE ITY OUNCIL AIS GENDA TEM UMMARY Approval of City Council Minutes Meeting Date: February 11, 2008 Agenda Item Number: 2A Department: City Manager’s Office Staff Contact: Beth Forrest www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-5882 ISSUE STATEMENT This is a routine item to approve City Council meeting minutes. SUGGESTED MOTION Move to approve the minutes of the September 18, 2007 Work Session, November 27, 2007, Workshop, December 18, 2007, Work Session, January 7, 2008, State of the City, and January 16, 2008, Joint Elected Officials Meeting. ATTACHMENTS A.September 18, 2007, Work Session B.November 27, 2007, Workshop C.December 18, 2007, Work Session D.January 7, 2008, State of the City E.January 16, 2008, Joint Elected Officials Meeting FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Beth Forrest Telephone: 682-5882 Staff E-Mail: beth.l.forrest@ci.eugene.or.us F:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080211\S0802112A.doc ATTACHMENT A M I N U T E S Eugene City Council Special Meeting Council Chamber—Eugene City Hall September 18, 2007 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Andrea Ortiz, Betty Taylor, Bonny Bettman, George Poling, Mike Clark, Alan Zelenka. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Jennifer Solomon, Chris Pryor. Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the special meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. 1. WORK SESSION: Meeting with Recruiter for City Manager Position Acting Assistant City Manager Scott Luell introduced the topic, indicating that consultant Bob Neher of Bennett Yarger was present to share the input from the public forum and citizen meetings. Recruitment and Selection Manager Alana Holmes and Director Lauren Chouinard of Human Resources and Risk Services were also present. Mr. Neher distributed copies of examples of the e-mail communications received in response to a public solicitation, the comment cards gathered at the recent Eugene Celebration, and copies of a statement authored by Parks and Open Space Director Johnny Medlin. Mr. Zelenka arrived. Mr. Neher highlighted the importance of communications, collaboration, relationship building, and conflict resolution to those he interviewed. The issues highlighted by respondents mirrored council goals and concerns, including a high level of community and citizen involvement. He indicated a draft candidate profile would be forthcoming and would be used in the recruitment process. Candidates would be referred to other City documents increasingly as the number was winnowed down. Ms. Ortiz arrived. Mr. Neher outlined the recruitment process to come and answered questions clarifying the details of the process. Councilors briefly discussed the dates in the process timeline. Mayor Piercy requested the timeframe in written form. Mr. Neher reviewed some of the comments collected earlier that day. MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 18, 2007 Page 1 Special Meeting The council reviewed the job description and offered some suggestions for changes, which were recorded by staff and the consultants. Ms. Bettman shared her list of qualities for a city manager, which she agreed to send to the consultant and council by Friday. Mr. Neher invited other lists from other councilors. Mr. Pryor left during the discussion. Mayor Piercy recognized Mr. Zelenka for a motion unrelated to the agenda topic. Mr. Zelenka, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to postpone selection of the new members of City boards and commissions until the members of the Sustainability Committee were selected. Ms. Ortiz asked that action be postponed until a meeting when Ms. Solomon and Mr. Pryor could be present. Mayor Piercy concurred. Mr. Poling suggested that there was no reason not to appoint the incumbent Budget Committee members who reapplied if they received sufficient votes. The council honored the request of Ms. Ortiz and did not take action on the motion. Mayor Piercy adjourned the meeting at 7:02 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Angel Jones City Manager pro tem (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 18, 2007 Page 2 Special Meeting ATTACHMENT B M I N U T E S Eugene Urban Renewal Agency Workshop McNutt Room – City Hall 777 Pearl Street—Eugene, Oregon November 27, 2007 6 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Andrea Ortiz, Bonny Bettman, George Poling, Jennifer Solomon, Betty Taylor, Mike Clark. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Chris Pryor, Alan Zelenka. Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy convened the Eugene Urban Renewal Agency Workshop at 6:10 p.m. A. WORKSHOP: West Broadway Project City Manager Pro Tem Angel Jones stated that the purpose of the meeting was to hear from the body of the council on how the City should move forward after the defeat of the ballot measure. She related that staff had outlined options that captured different approaches considered for the West Broadway area. She underscored that there were other ideas that could be put on the table and the council should not limit itself. She said some of the options included in the Agenda Item Summary (AIS) went beyond what staff would recommend, but were included to provide a broad range. Ms. Jones extended her appreciation to Brad Malsin, Pete Eggspuehler, and Thomas Kemper for taking the time to be present. Denny Braud, Senior Development Analyst for the Planning and Development Department (PDD), provided a power point presentation outlining the Options for West Broadway Redevelopment. He reiterated that the purpose of the meeting was to seek the possible next steps for the Broadway area redevelopment. He noted that both the presentation and the options would be available on the City’s Web site. Executive Director for PDD, Susan Muir, said Mr. Braud had prepared a suggested motion. She underscored the need for direction, either by utilizing the prepared motion or from councilors in the form of feedback. She related that they were very aware that the “clock was ticking” on the options the City had taken to purchase some of the properties. She stated staff’s intention to prepare an additional recommendation based on the feedback received. She asked Tom Kemper, KWG Development Partners, to comment on what had been presented and possible next steps. MINUTES—Eugene Urban Renewal Agency November 27, 2007 Page 1 Workshop Mr. Kemper expressed disappointment in the results of the election. He related that KWG Development Partners had been surprised by the vote as they had been led to believe by some studies that there was a fair amount of support for downtown redevelopment. He wondered if this was attributable to a lack of understand- ing of how urban renewal worked or to true opposition to spending any money on the downtown project. He underscored that urban renewal funds did not take money from schools. Mr. Kemper stated that the original proposal for the Sears site for residential and live/work units as mixed use development would have been difficult to pull off on that site. He related that when the Request for Qualifica- tions (RFQ) came up for the Broadway area it presented the opportunity to create a whole district. KWG thought it could change that area of the downtown significantly, but to do so would take a project of a scale that would create a synergy between the participating entities and was planned to include an upscale neighborhood with hotel, restaurants, and residential units with retail below them among other things. He indicated that KWG Partners was willing to explore options, but it was difficult to be “excited” about moving forward given the results from the election. He said at this point KWG was reluctant to proceed with the Sears site because of the current housing market. Mr. Malsin, of Beam Development, thanked those present for inviting him. He said to a great degree he would mirror Mr. Kemper’s comments. He believed that the downtown needed “a shot in the arm in a considerable way.” He stated that whether the City redeveloped in a piecemeal fashion or something else, the redevelopment needed the support of the community or it would not work. He attributed their confusion to not knowing the reason the ballot measure had not passed. He was uncertain whether it was too big or whether citizens just did not want it to happen. He averred that taking no action would be the wrong thing to do. He said if there were to be a vital downtown the City would have to make a commitment to it; the risk could not be mitigated by inaction. He indicated that Beam Development was still interested in discussions. He agreed with Mr. Kemper that the market had changed. Mayor Piercy thanked Mr. Kemper and Mr. Malsin for coming. Ms. Bettman attributed the failure of the ballot measure to “sticker shock.” She believed the actual financing mechanism was flawed. She felt the City was out of touch with the general population. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to direct the City Manager/Agency Director to bring back to the City Council/Urban Renewal Agency for consideration at the December 10, 2007 work session, a proposal(s) that would be consistent with provisions of Option 2 offered by staff/Eugene Redevelopment Advisory Committee at the April 25, 2007 council work ses- sion as follows: Option 2 engages Beam to proceed with “renovation of the Center Court building and the Washburne building and a yet-to-be-defined level of new construction on the adjacent vacant land;” and, includes that the City Council/Urban Renewal Agency “would also continue to th move forward with the TK Partners project as previously selected on the 10 and Charnelton Request for Proposals process” (consisting of 106 “homes” on the Sears pit site). This motion assumed a proposal(s) coming back to the council would define the use and inten- sity for the Aster Pit development; and maintain Beam and Kemper as separate entities. Ms. Bettman acknowledged Mr. Pryor’s and Mr. Zelenka’s opposition to taking action at the present workshop. She said the reason she wanted to move forward was that Mr. Pryor and Mr. Zelenka had not asked for a postponement of action until they had learned that she would be placing the motion on the table. She affirmed that it was the councilors’ prerogative to request that action be delayed, but she declared that in this case it was important to take the first step. MINUTES—Eugene Urban Renewal Agency November 27, 2007 Page 2 Workshop Mayor Piercy verified that Mr. Zelenka and Mr. Pryor had requested that no motions be made at the present meeting. Ms. Taylor averred that it was important that action be taken. She believed that people had not voted against the ballot measure because they did not wish to redevelop the downtown area. She felt the message was that the public did not want a large project and did not want to “destroy” what was there. Ms. Ortiz said she would honor her council peers’ request to not take action. She felt they could still have a good robust discussion about what the next steps should be. Mr. Poling, seconded by Mr. Clark, moved to table the motion. Mr. Clark expressed his feeling that his colleagues should respect Mr. Zelenka’s and Mr. Pryor’s request. He noted that Mr. Zelenka had participated in the advisory committee process. He said it was important that the community spoke together. The motion passed, 4:2; councilors Taylor and Bettman voting in opposition. Mayor Piercy stated that the motion would be deferred to December 10. Ms. Taylor said they needed to find out if Kemper was still willing to build housing at the Sears site. Ms. Ortiz welcomed Mr. Kemper and Mr. Malsin to the meeting. She remarked that she was not surprised by the vote but she had been disappointed. She asked if it would be possible to reconfigure the project and move forward with a different footprint. She wanted to know if KWG Partners would be willing to do a more scaled- back project. Mr. Kemper, who had driven from Portland to participate in the discussion, said if the City proceeded with a housing project, it could “blow” the opportunity to do something bigger that would be a more desirable project for the downtown. He stated that he was far less enthusiastic about the Sears proposal than he had been 15 months earlier. He would not be inclined to “step up to” the timeline they had agreed upon at the time. He recalled that they had discussed scaling back the density and the parking and whether that made sense, but one of the strongest desires was to create a district with some unique restaurants and retail spaces. He was not sure a scaled-back version of the original concept would work. Mayor Piercy asked for clarification on the original timeline. Mr. Kemper replied that under the original proposal for the Sears site they had intended to break ground in 12 months, but at present he would choose to slow that down. Mr. Poling thanked the developers for remaining interested. He averred that the third reason the ballot measure had not passed was that the citizens wanted the streets to be fixed, increased public safety, and economic redevelopment. He felt these were legitimate concerns. He favored the proposed motion in the AIS. He did not want to spend General Fund money on the redevelopment project. He also supported inclusion of the properties that were south of Broadway and the Roberts building and Scan Design properties. Additionally, he would support the inclusion of a park space in the redevelopment project only if it was developed along with redevelopment of the downtown area. MINUTES—Eugene Urban Renewal Agency November 27, 2007 Page 3 Workshop Mr. Clark echoed Mr. Poling’s comments. He thanked Mr. Kemper and Mr. Malsin for their time investment in the process. He shared their disappointment in the outcome of the election, but he was sensitive to what the voters said. He also did not favor spending General Fund money on the project until there was a clear way of addressing the needed transportation funding and the need to increase funding for public safety. Ms. Bettman was also not in favor of using General Fund money. She favored using the Facility Reserve fund as security on Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD) loan money. She averred that it was available for redevelopment and should be used for that. She said it should not be “wasted in three or four different ways.” In terms of acquisition of property, she was not interested in acquiring properties that lay north of Broadway. She felt that her motion should have been left on the table because she believed there needed to be some decision in place in order to know what next steps to take. Ms. Bettman noted that options laid out by staff included increasing the urban renewal district spending limit by a smaller amount. She underscored her opposition to doing so. She said she had “done some numbers” and would share them with anyone who was interested. She explained that she was thinking in terms of what she thought was available from existing funds. She averred that the City had to do what it could afford. She added that housing should still be a top priority for the downtown area. She also agreed that the property across from the library should not be redeveloped solely for a park. Mayor Piercy commented that both the people who supported and opposed the ballot measure supported reinvigoration of the downtown area. She pointed out that the closer people lived to the downtown area the more likely they were to support the ballot measure. Mayor Piercy did not think the City of Eugene had “saturated” its interest in condominiums in the downtown area. She believed there was housing potential in the area that might not be true in other areas. She also thought the park idea had been couched in the context of housing and was not something that would stand by itself. Ms. Bettman wanted to hear more from the developers about what they wanted to do next. In response to a question from Ms. Bettman, Financial Analysis Manager for the Central Services Department, Sue Cutsogeorge, affirmed that a special levy was considered tax increment financing and would count as part of the spending limit for the district. Mr. Malsin commented that one challenge was not just to look at how they perceived the housing market but how housing would be financed. He explained that at present, financial institutions were hesitant to finance condominium projects. Regarding the Washburne/Centre Court/Aster pit project, he said Beam Development was still interested and believed they could make it work. He wanted to see what KWG Development would be doing because he thought there could be synergy between the two. He believed there was some formulation that existed in downtown courts that involved a critical mass of activity that would make things viable. He believed it would take more cooperation from the City financially and otherwise to be able to take smaller steps as this approach would present challenges. Ms. Solomon observed that some of the options would expire on March 24, 2008. She asked if it would be reasonable to expect a commitment from the developers at this time. Mr. Kemper called this an appropriate question. He underscored that when the project was actually initiated the developer would spend between $500,000 and $700,000 in predevelopment costs out of pocket. He said it represented a bet that at the end of the process they would be able to secure a construction loan to build the MINUTES—Eugene Urban Renewal Agency November 27, 2007 Page 4 Workshop project. He stated that if they asked him at the present meeting if he was willing to “step up” and spend the money on purchase contracts the answer would be no. He added that they would continue to take the Sears site under serious consideration. In response to a question from Ms. Taylor, Mr. Malsin said he would consider moving forward with the Beam proposal alone. Ms. Taylor asked how soon they would let the City know of their intentions. Pete Eggspuehler, also represent- ing Beam Development, responded that the original proposal was a more phased project. He said they were talking with potential tenants in order to get a better sense of their intentions. He underscored that having a tenant prior to redevelopment reduced risk. Ms. Bettman said it was important to know where the developers wanted to move with the original proposals so that the City would know how to proceed. She remarked that the City had the ability to make investments in housing. She asserted that there was a set amount of money in terms of the HUD money, the Brownfield Economic Development Initiative (BEDI) grant, what was left under the urban renewal district cap, and there were “other monies as well.” She stated that there were state HOME funds, Multiple Unit Property Tax Exemption (MUPTE) incentives, and low income housing credits for affordable housing. She hoped that City staff could talk to the developers about what options for financing were available. Mayor Piercy asked Mr. Malsin if the Beam project would go forward with the Centre Court building if the Washburne building was not included in the project. Mr. Malsin responded that he would have to consider this at greater length given that at present it appeared that the tenants he was working with would require both buildings. Mayor Piercy remarked that she had heard in an earlier meeting that housing was in better shape in the northwest than in other areas of the country. Mr. Kemper replied that he thought it was an accurate assessment. He explained that the decline in prices had created difficulty for lenders but prices had not fallen significantly in the northwest. He said the other variable was the number of sales, which at this point were “way off.” Mr. Malsin concurred with Mr. Kemper. He said there were trends in development and big developers tended to look at trends rather than markets. He underscored that developers’ investments were long term investments. Mr. Clark observed that much of the conversation revolved around what the development would cost and what it would consist of. He acknowledged that developers would also look at who would move into the building and what the revenue stream would be. He asked for feedback regarding the differences between the larger project from before and what could be built at present. Mr. Kemper said KWG had proposed a mixed use concept with housing and retail, with the retail at a significant scale. He explained that the sort of retail they were looking for would want to know who the “players” would be in their neighborhood. He underscored that the scale of the project had been critical to its success. He added that the housing they had considered consisted predominantly of condominiums. He reiterated that at present getting financing for condos was “extraordinarily difficult.” Mr. Malsin said the Beam concept had been to restore buildings and to house smaller locally-owned businesses in them. He stressed that in the “real world” there had to be a lot of different uses in the downtown area. Ms. Bettman asked staff to talk about tools such as conduit loans that could be utilized for financing. She averred that the City could bypass “a reluctant banking industry.” MINUTES—Eugene Urban Renewal Agency November 27, 2007 Page 5 Workshop Ms. Cutsogeorge stated that non-profit housing projects had the ability to access tax increment financing through conduit loans. Community Development Division Manager, Mike Sullivan, explained that there was financing available for “for-profit” developers who were developing affordable housing. He stated that the Kemper group in some of its iterations had used tax credit financing and possibly state bond financing. He said the four percent tax credit could finance housing for people with 60 percent of the median family income in many communities. He noted that this was being used for the West Town project. Regarding HUD financing, he clarified that the block grant program was not available for the construction of housing under most circumstances. Ms. Bettman asked if that funding could be used to acquire property. Mr. Sullivan replied that this funding could only be used for acquisition of property if it was for the correction of slums and blights. Ms. Jones noted the time and asked Ms. Muir to summarize. Ms. Muir surmised that there was support for having the flexibility to work with the developers on their concepts, possibly including the purchase of some additional properties: the Scan Design building, the Roberts building, the Diva/ShawMed building, and the Diamond property. She said she had clearly heard that there should not be any further delay. She acknowledged the desire to continue the discussion of inclusion of open space in the larger project. Ms. Taylor reiterated her opposition to the inclusion of the Scan Design building and the Roberts building. Ms. Bettman said there was definitely not consensus to support acquisition of the properties north of Broadway. She added that purchasing additional properties was not part of her tabled motion. She averred that the Aster pit had not been defined in terms of the intensity and density of the intended use; therefore there was some flexibility in that location. She stated that the only other flexibility that she had mentioned was in regard to the potential purchase of the Diamond lot and how the “housing project” could be reconfigured to maximize community objectives. Mr. Poling asked staff to return with an amendment to include the acquisition of the Scan Design and Roberts buildings given that Ms. Bettman’s motion did not have consensus support. Mr. Clark noted that the City had been contacted by the people who owned Bradford’s about the cost to them of being vacated from that building. He asked staff to address how the City would ensure that the Bradford’s Home Entertainment business was kept whole through the process. Mayor Piercy reiterated her gratitude to Mr. Kemper, Mr. Malsin, and Mr. Eggspuehler for coming to the meeting and participating in the discussion. The meeting adjourned at 7:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Angel Jones City Manager Pro Tem MINUTES—Eugene Urban Renewal Agency November 27, 2007 Page 6 Workshop (Recorded by Ruth Atcherson) MINUTES—Eugene Urban Renewal Agency November 27, 2007 Page 7 Workshop ATTACHMENT C M I N U T E S Eugene City Council Executive Session McNutt Room—Eugene City Hall December 18, 2007 Noon COUNCILORS PRESENT: Andrea Ortiz, Chris Pryor, Betty Taylor, Bonny Bettman, Jennifer Solomon, George Poling, Mike Clark, Alan Zelenka. Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. A. EXECUTIVE SESSION Pursuant to Oregon Revised Statute 192.660(2)(a), the Eugene City Council met in executive session to consider the employment of a public officer. B. WORK SESSION: City Manager Compensation Due to a lack of time, this item was not addressed. The meeting adjourned at 1:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Angel Jones City Manager pro tem (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 18, 2007 Page 1 Executive Session ATTACHMENT D M I N U T E S Eugene City Council State of the City Hult Center for the Performing Arts January 7, 2008 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Andrea Ortiz, Chris Pryor, Betty Taylor, Bonny Bettman, Jennifer Solomon, George Poling, Mike Clark, Alan Zelenka. I. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS Council President Andrea Ortiz welcomed those present at the 2008 State of the City. She said that all those present made Eugene a great place to be. She recognized the public officials present at the event. She welcomed the students present from Eugene’s Sister City Chinju, Korea, who stood to be recognized. II. MUSICAL SELECTION Those present heard a musical selection entitled Dancing Bear by Tonn Nua Celtic Band, which included members Ansel Dow, Daphne Garcia, David Garcia, Zoe Garcia, and Alison Helser. III. CITY COUNCILOR REMARKS Ms. Bettman, Ward 1, welcomed those present and thanked the mayor for allowing the councilors to speak. She expressed appreciation to all those present for their participation. She noted that the mayor would soon celebrate the positive achievements of the past year, and she shared her pride in the City’s achievements. However, she perceived systematic problems that would continue to undermine progress and sustainable change and hoped they could be addressed in 2008. Ms. Bettman offered the following for facilitating progress. She proposed the creation of the office of independent auditor to provide data, research, and information to public officials; she noted the risk that such an office could be diluted in the initiative process, and suggested her fears were well-founded in the opposition of the administration to an independent police oversight process with authority or power. She suggested that the administration manipulated an outcome to minimize the power of the police auditor and civilian review board, although it was better than nothing and most people were satisfied with the outcome. She said the independent auditor could face the same fate of providing a façade of accountability superimposed over “business as usual,” delaying true reform for decades. She advocated for an external professional auditor’s office with a caveat that the public must be informed and vigilant to ensure true accountability. MINUTES—State of the City January 7, 2008 Page 1 Ms. Bettman called for the City Manager to create an in-house city attorney’s office. She said the City needed such a fully staffed office to save money and eliminate conflicts on the part of the existing firm, which represented many other clients who often had interests contradictory to the City’s. She said it was not an adverse judgment on the existing firm; it merely had too many bosses, and Eugene deserved attorneys dedicated to the community’s best interest. She said the council should direct the City Manager to establish such an office by motion. Ms. Bettman advocated for hiring a new city manager with extensive experience and leadership ability who had ideas and the skills to implement them. That individual should find where common ground existed among councilors and develop it for the benefit of all rather than exploiting differences and pitting factions against each other to barely pass initiatives divisive to the community. She called for leadership which confidently embraced reform and innovation and was not afraid of its citizens. Ms. Bettman advocated for abolishment of the existing urban renewal districts in favor of existing mechanisms that assisted in the development of housing. She thought urban renewal districts were a disincentive to sensitive development because property owners hold out in hopes of “cashing in” for huge public subsidies, and in the meantime the urban core was suffering from inattention. She pointed out it only required a council majority to spend the money. Once the districts were ended, the community could still suffer the impacts of urban renewal tax diversion because of the many districts in the state that used urban renewal and diverted money away from Eugene students and State services. She said Eugene still had work to do at the State legislature so that schools and other jurisdictions could “opt out” of other cities and counties’ urban renewal tax diversion programs for funding their “pet projects.” She believed her four initiatives would contribute positively to every issue citizens cared about. Ms. Bettman ended with a quote from Franklin Delano Roosevelt: “The only sure bulwark of continuing liberty is a government strong enough to protect the interests of the people, and a people strong enough and well-enough informed to maintain its sovereign control over its government.” Ms. Taylor, Ward 2, agreed with Ms. Bettman’s remarks about a performance auditor and in-house attorney. She expressed the wish that each councilor could give an award. The first she would give was to the citizens who worked to defeat the increase in the urban renewal debt and protect businesses downtown. She was glad that no downtown business had to move unless they wished to. Ms. Taylor believed it was a good year for citizen activity, citing the Amazon Headwaters supporters’ work to persuade the council to exercise eminent domain for property containing some of the headwaters. She also cited the work of the Crest neighbors in getting context-sensitive design for their streets, the work of the Madison Meadows neighbors who succeeded in saving a green space in their neighborhood as other examples to be commended. Ms. Taylor said she would like to see the Amazon Headwaters protected and in public ownership. She hoped the council hired a competent city manager and passed a living wage ordinance. She suggested the council could allow free parking downtown. In the long-range, Ms. Taylor wished success to the Beam project. She hoped to see work begin on a youth center and called for a philanthropist to support in that effort. MINUTES—State of the City January 7, 2008 Page 2 Ms. Taylor suggested the City modify its motto and be a “great city for the arts and outdoors.” Ms. Ortiz, Ward 7, observed that the State of the City event gave those without a lot of time to spare a snapshot of how the City was doing. She thanked her family for its support and said her husband Nino and sons Nino, Raoul, and Emilo were the most important people in her life. Her immediate family kept her humble, laughing, and crying. Ms. Ortiz said her work family at Peace Health was also important. Her job reminded her of how insignificant she was and that she was part of a bigger puzzle. Her job reminded her of how blessed she was with good health, a home, the ability to pay her bills, a car, and a loving family. Most people took that for granted. Ms. Ortiz believed her position on the council gave her the position to speak truth when others could not. Ms. Ortiz offered the following quote: “Believe that there is no limit but the sky.” IV. AWARDS AND RECOGNITION ? Community Service Awards Mayor Piercy acknowledged the contribution of co-chairs Greg McLauchlan and Harriett Cherry of the West Broadway Advisory Committee and spoke of the work done by the committee. She thanked Mr. McLauchlan and Ms. Cherry and presented them with the Community Service Award. She also thanked committee members present and asked them to stand to be recognized. Mayor Piercy acknowledged the contribution of co-chair Tina Rinaldi of the Cultural Policy Review Committee and spoke of the work of the committee. She thanked Ms. Rinaldi and presented her with the Community Service Award. She also noted the leadership of co-chair David Kelly, who was not present. Mayor Piercy asked other committee members to stand to be recognized. She also noted the contribution of Wolf Brown consultants in creating the committee’s final report and recommendations. Mayor Piercy acknowledged the contribution of Marilyn Milne and Sara Mazze of the Mayor’s Climate Challenge Committee and presented them with the Community Service Award. She encouraged those present to visit sustaineugene.com and commit to the challenge. Mayor Piercy also acknowledged the contributions of the University of Oregon’s Climate Leadership Initiative, led by Bob Doppelt. She also asked Dave Funk, Mary Van Noy, and Kelly Hale to stand to be recognized as part of the climate challenge. ? Employee Recognition Award Mayor Piercy recognized Michelle Mortenson, Public Service Specialist, and Isaac Markehe, Neighborhood Program Manager, for their contributions to the City in 2007. ? Mayor’s Sustainability Award Mayor Piercy presented the Mayor’s Sustainability Award to Mark Raney of Cumulus Broadcasting, noting the company’s contribution to the Sustainable Business Initiative, which resulted in free public service announcements about sustainability practices being broadcast on Cumulus stations. She thanked Michael MINUTES—State of the City January 7, 2008 Page 3 O’Shea of Cumulus and community members Dave Funk, Sheriza Gerry, Jennifer Bell, Roger Ebbage, Sara Mazze, and for their contributions to the effort. V. POETRY READING Those present heard a poem by Ari Lesser entitled Global Warming, performed by Iana Matthew-Harris, Ari Lesser, and Ishi Woods. VI. SPECIAL PRESENTATION Bill Drumheller, Oregon Department of Energy, provided a special presentation on the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives Greenhouse Gas Inventory. VII. MUSICAL SELECTION Those present heard another musical selection by Tonn Nua Celtic Band entitled The Gaelic Song. VIII. STATE OF THE CITY ADDRESS Mayor Piercy delivered the following remarks: Good evening everyone and thank you for joining us here in our beautiful Hult Center for the Performing Arts. Let me take this opportunity to thank our citizens, our council and our staff for all their efforts in 2007 to keep Eugene such a great place to call home. Like many of you, I start off most days by listening to the radio, reading the newspaper and checking the web. Like you, I am acutely aware of the ever-rising death toll in Iraq, the ever-rising temperature of the earth, the fretful American economy and the resulting financial challenges we face at home. And, I am more committed than ever to doing everything we can to work for peace and justice, to reduce our impact on global warming, to keep our economy strong, and to provide the services our community expects. I believe absolutely in the power we have individually and collectively to make change, influence policy and set the direction for the future. Cities are where it all happens; where people live, work, raise families, and establish roots. Eugene is our city and our home. It is a reflection of our values and how we want this world to be. A lot of our work occurs at the City Council table, through advocacy groups, on committees and commis- sions, and in our neighborhoods. Our energy and passion for civic engagement is a tremendous community asset, allowing us to address more issues in greater depth. MINUTES—State of the City January 7, 2008 Page 4 Essential to our civic engagement are our neighborhood associations. I am impressed with the ever more active and successful role they are taking to bring forward community perspectives and expertise, whether it’s on mixed-use development, infill and neighborhood livability, safer parks, railroad pollution, response to traffic fatalities, or protecting headwaters. Civic engagement almost always comes with differences of opinion and the issues we face are often thorny. To me, the important thing is to work together - to find points of common agreement so that we can move forward as a community. Some recent examples of successful community cooperation are the Mayor’s Sustainable Business Initiative and the West Eugene Collaborative. The Sustainable Business Initiative brought together a very broad-based group of people with economic, social and environmental expertise, to make recommendations on how the City of Eugene could support and encourage the growth of businesses that produce sustainable products such as alternative energy, alternative fuel, green building, recycling, alternative transportation and health care, natural foods and products. The task force was also charged with making recommendations that would support and encourage all businesses to use sustainable practices that reflect the triple bottom line of protecting our natural resources, building social equity and ensuring economic well-being. Their 22 recommendations, supported by the entire task force and adopted by our City Council, included establishing an Office of Sustainability and a Sustainability Commission. Both the office and commission are now firmly in place. Then, there was the decades-long, acrimonious debate over the West Eugene Parkway. It was clear that the funding for this project was simply not there and that federal approval was likely never to occur. I asked business owners, environmentalists, neighbors, agencies, and elected officials to join together to start afresh and come up with do-able solutions for the vexing West Eugene traffic and transportation problems. They responded by forming the West Eugene Collaborative. We are working together to make recommendations on how local governing bodies can solve the longstanding traffic and transportation challenges in West Eugene while protecting our biologically rich wetlands. Another one of our city’s current issues is the reinvigoration of downtown. We’ve had differences of opinion on how best to accomplish this and an election on one proposed course of action is now behind us. It is time to bridge our differences and form a plan that the whole community will support. I urge all those involved and interested in the future of our downtown to work for common ground. We can take the energy and continued commitment of the Citizens for Public Accountability, Chamber of Commerce, and hundreds of other community members and, together, bring life to our downtown, the heart of our city. The valuable work of West Broadway Advisory Committee can help inform the discussion. It is within our reach. One of the reasons I am so optimistic about our downtown is that much of it is already doing well. Fifth Street, East Broadway and most of Oak, Charnelton, Pearl, Willamette and Olive are busy and full. The Beam redevelopment of Center Court and the Washburn Building is on the table. We have new businesses on Broadway and Enterprise is moving into the refurbished “Bon Marche” building. KLCC is moving in th just a block away on 8 Avenue and Oregon Research Institute has a renewed interest in establishing a presence in downtown. Yes, we do have those two pits and empty storefronts - and lots of visitors coming to town. In the short run, we can focus public safety efforts on our problem blocks, address rundown storefronts, tweak codes, increase cultural and recreational activities in the area, and look at parking restrictions. I intend to walk MINUTES—State of the City January 7, 2008 Page 5 into each business in that two-block area to either thank them for looking good or to see how improvements can be made. This is something we must take on together. Those short-term fixes will help keep the momentum going and build a base for a wide-range of exciting possibilities. We need to put the two problem blocks in the context of our entire downtown: opportunities for a new city hall, expansion of The Shedd, the development of a new Courthouse area, Franklin Boulevard improvements and, with EWEB’s anticipated move, new connections to the river. Let’s roll up our sleeves and keep going. I am proud of the many services and amenities the City provides: our parks, open spaces and bike paths in every part of the community, and our stewardship of valuable natural resources. Most recently, we were the first city in Oregon to receive Forest Legacy funding in order to preserve 25 acres of Oak habitat at Wild Iris Ridge. That’s a great accomplishment! It is our wealth of arts and outdoors assets that makes this community so special and this year offers an exceptional opportunity to highlight both. th In September, we celebrated the 25 Anniversary of this beautiful facility and offered 5,443 free admissions to a variety of events. Our beloved library, which has quickly become a cornerstone of our downtown, just th celebrated its 5 birthday. Over 3,000 people participated in a Cultural Policy Review and the council has adopted strategies that will strengthen both our city’s and community’s cultural offerings and our commitment to the arts. Galleries are thriving - and not just on First Fridays – and local musicians and performers provide a diverse range of entertainment in unique local venues. We took pride in the achievements of the University of Oregon and the Ducks as they gained national attention and acclaim for Eugene (even that pugnacious mascot). The University logged permits for more than $43 million in building projects in Eugene this year. And a hard working coalition not only brought the 2008 Olympic Track & Field Trials back to Hayward Field, re-establishing our reputation as Track City USA, but Eugene has also been chosen to host the U.S. national track championships in 2009 and 2011 and the 2012 Olympic Track & Field Trials. The huge community engagement efforts in planning for the Olympic Trials, the events leading up to them, and the strategies to engage our young people were instrumental in ensuring that Eugene is Track City USA –forever. I want to give special thanks to our interim city manager Angel Jones for her key role in this success. I also want to thank all our partners in the coalition who are doing a wonderful job of working together to maximize this opportunity for our commu- nity: the University of Oregon, City of Springfield, CVALCO, Lane County, State of Oregon, and Lane Transit District, as well as numerous businesses and hundreds of volunteers. Thanks to their efforts, this event is shaping up to be one of the biggest, most exciting, and most fun events in Eugene’s recent history. I encourage you all to get involved, support it, or simply enjoy it. On another front, Eugene continues to address the critical need for affordable and low-income housing. The th most recent project is nearing completion in our downtown: WestTown on 8, with its new innovative work/live units. Eugene adopted a stronger manufactured home ordinance to protect owners of this important affordable housing stock. We provided funds for shelter and transportation for the homeless and the Mayor’s Blue Ribbon Committee on Homelessness has been working hard on how we can provide services and reduce the numbers of those who are homeless or face the threat of homelessness. A one-day Project Homeless Connect event in February provided services and connections for over a thousand of the MINUTES—State of the City January 7, 2008 Page 6 area’s homeless and a second one is scheduled for next month. Staff, social services, governing bodies, and hundreds of volunteers and donations make this event meaningful on every level. In July, our independent police auditor, Cris Beamud, officially opened her doors downtown and the Civilian Review Board is in place, working on complaints. Both have become an important part of ensuring justice in our community. Police staffing needs remain an issue before us and that problem is compounded by the inadequate funding of Lane County’s prevention, intervention and treatment services, jail beds, legal, and judicial processes. While Eugeneans are committed to community policing, the county public safety system itself is broken. We will have to be very strategic in our prioritizations in order to effectively address this critical issue. Loss of federal, state and county road repair dollars also continues to plague us and our pothole backlog grows. At my request, the council worked together to bring very diverse perspectives to the table and develop a funding package that included a gas tax increase. Although the tax increase did not survive the last election, we understand the growing need and will keep working on finding solutions that the community will support. No look at local issues is complete without some mention of the hospital saga. While neither the council nor I can legally comment on the location proposed by McKenzie-Willamette in north Eugene, I can reiterate my strong support for the presence of two full-service hospitals in our metropolitan area, which will ensure healthy competition and breadth of services. McKenzie-Willamette should be in Eugene where it can effectively provide health care for our community, support our tax base and where, if needed, we can have some influence on significant health care policies. I am proud of our continued efforts to guarantee the right and access to services for all our community members, regardless of race, age, gender, sexual orientation, abilities, beliefs, or income. We want this community to be a comfortable place for everyone to live, work and raise their families, where differences are respected and thought of as a valued part of the fabric of a strong community. It hurt last year when our city experienced repeated incidents of hate speech and the defacing of important religious objects. Our community will stand united against such behavior, and defend the rights of all its members. Same sex couples still pursue the same legal rights as married couples; clearly the day has come to end all forms of discrimination based on sexual orientation. As you are probably aware, an opportunity to take one more step in achieving this goal of equality was recently frustrated when a new domestic partnership law was postponed by the courts. Despite these setbacks, however, we must continue to be vigilant in pursuing equal rights for all. Differences of opinion about immigration issues can fuel bigotry and hatred; we need to remind ourselves that our community and our nation were built by indigenous peoples and immigrants, and that all human beings deserve respect. The social justice triumphs and defeats of this last year have increased my resolve to continue working on becoming an official Human Rights City, one that embraces human rights in every decision we make. If there’s any place in America that can do this, it is certainly here. MINUTES—State of the City January 7, 2008 Page 7 Eugene has a commitment to being the most sustainable community possible. We know that with finite resources and growing climate change challenges, we must scale up this commitment as a matter of both City policy and in the consciousness and actions of the larger community. This past year, we hired the City’s first sustainability manager and the members of the new Sustainability Commission have now been appointed. We will update our community greenhouse gas inventory in April. We know that over the last eight years, through the purchase of hybrids and bio diesel, City government has decreased its CO2 emissions by 10 %. The methane we capture at our wastewater plant provides half the power it needs. Through LED lighting, recycling, wind power purchase, bus passes, bike programs, e- communications, and a whole range of other strategies, Eugene has taken strides toward carbon neutrality and zero waste. We still have a long way to go. Large reductions in building and transportation emissions are the only way we can seriously impact climate change. I have enjoyed working hand in hand with mayors across this country (now over 800) in support of the U.S. Mayor’s Climate Protection Agreement, using our mutual power to push for changes at the Congressional level. While the situation we face as a planet is serious, I see major cities such as New York, Los Angeles and Chicago combining their purchasing powers for green solutions and to create green jobs at home - jobs that help put sustainable practices in place, are built on social equity, and pay well. In Oregon, Governor Kulongoski has embraced sustainable jobs and practices as the basis for Oregon’s economy, much as we have been doing here. He hopes that Oregon can offer leadership on a number of fronts and I want Eugene to be a significant part of this work. It is no coincidence that Sequential BioFuels is located here, and that the largest solar panel display in the state is on one of our industrial roofs. The governor has also required every state department including ODOT to do their part to reduce carbon emissions. As we approach all new regional planning efforts in transportation and land use, the state requirements give me hope. Necessity is the mother of invention and may help ODOT respond to climate change and finite resources, allowing it to be more creative and energy-conscious, rather than simply laying more roads. The challenges are great and so are the possibilities. I know 2008 will be a very challenging year at every level. We must continue to build on the momentum we have to address the major issues nationally and locally. We have the talent, the heart and the chutzpah. We are, after all, Eugene. Thus, my to-do list for 2008 includes the following goals: • Eugene leads in sustainable practices and supports the growth of sustainable businesses as a key to strengthening our economy; • Eugene continues to implement the Sustainable Business Initiative recommendations, moving toward carbon neutrality and zero waste; • Eugene develops a climate protection strategic plan; MINUTES—State of the City January 7, 2008 Page 8 • The West Eugene Collaborative (WEC )completes its recommendations for addressing traffic and transportation issues in west Eugene; • Eugene reviews the recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Committee on Homelessness and ef- fective goals and strategies are adopted; • We collaborate and successfully plan for downtown, increasing the pace of reinvigoration of West Broadway; • Eugene addresses its neighborhood pothole backlog; • Eugene advances the Cultural Policy Review’s strategies to increase support for arts and cul- ture; • Eugene and our partners host a hugely successful and green Olympic Track & Field Trials; • Eugene considers an independent auditor for the City of Eugene; • McKenzie-Willamette Hospital locates in Eugene; • Our new city manager is on the job and is exceptional; • Eugene adopts a youth advisory board respecting the voices, talents and needs of our young people; • Eugene and its partners collaborate on the protection and restoration of the Amazon Creek ba- sin and headwaters and build upon the success of the wetlands with the creation of the Envi- ronmental Education Center; and • Eugene moves toward becoming an official Human Rights City. My comments tonight and the goals I outlined have focused on the main issues of the day and on who we are as a community. I could go on for hours! I know we can successfully bring people together to work on our most difficult and challenging issues. We must keep the proverbial “pedal to the metal” so we can hold on to what is wonderful about this place we call home. Our future depends on it. IX. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, MINUTES—State of the City January 7, 2008 Page 9 Angel Jones City Manager pro tem (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES—State of the City January 7, 2008 Page 10 ATTACHMENT E JOINT BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS'/ CITY OF EUGENE HEARING January 16, 2008 6:00 p.m. Harris Hall Main Floor Commissioner Faye Stewart presided over the meeting for the Board of Commissioners with Bill Dwyer, Bobby Green, Sr., and Peter Sorenson present. Bill Fleenor was excused. Recording Secretary Melissa Zimmer was also present. Mayor Kitty Piercy presided over the meeting for the Eugene City Council with Bonny Bettman, Chris Pryor, Mike Clark, George Poling, Andrea Ortiz, Jennifer Solomon, and Betty Taylor. Alan Zelenka was excused. Stewart opened the Board of County Commissioners meeting. Mayor Piercy opened the meeting of the Eugene City Council. WORK SESSION 19. a. NINTH READING AND DELIBERATION Ordinance No. PA 1238/In the Matter of Amending the Lane County Rural Comprehensive Plan to Revise the “Significant Mineral and Aggregate Resources Inventory”; Metro Plan Redesignation from “Agriculture” to “Sand and Gravel”; Rezoning from “E30/Exclusive Farm Use Zone” to “SG/Sand, Gravel & Rock Products Zone”; to Allow Mining on 72.31 Acres of Land Pursuant to Lane Code 12.225 and 16.252 and the Goal 5 Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR 660-023); and Adopting Savings and Severability Clauses (file no. PA 05- 6151, Delta Property Co.) (NBA & PM 10/18/06, 11/1/06, 12/12/06, 2/14/07 & 3/14/07, 4/18/07, 5/1/07, 5/23/07). Stewart stated that the intent for the meeting was to provide the Eugene City Council with the Board’s actions and findings to date. He said the Board worked through the application and they wanted to share findings and the mitigating factors to deal with the potential problems that might occur. Kent Howe, Land Management, explained that there was a legitimate concern by the city council and in order to know whether or not minimization of potential impacts was occurring, he didn’t know if the city knew the conditions the County might set on the potential authorization and whether the impacts had been minimized to get to a conclusion. Howe recalled in August 2005 the County received this application and in November 2005 the Joint Planning Commission meetings took place. He noted on November 1, 2006 there was a joint elected officials meeting. He added on April 11, 2007 the city council deliberated and on May 23, 2007 the Board of Commissioners deliberated, and both bodies came up with different conclusions. He noted on September 19, 2007 the Board of Commissioners sent a letter to the City to offer the possibility of a further dialogue. 1 MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 16, 2008 Page Joint Elected Officials Meeting Howe explained since this meeting doesn’t constitute a hearing, the record is closed. He said there is no need for a request of disclosure of ex parte contacts. He said they shouldn’t review any letters or e-mails they receive since the record is closed and they should avoid any types of ex parte contacts. He indicated state and County staff received a letter concerning the process. He added because the record is closed, the letter is not being provided unless they vote to reopen the record for all participants to submit additional testimony on the issue. Howe explained in regard to the Goal 5 process and general steps, Step 1 deals with the adequacy of the post acknowledgement plan amendment application and the information provided. He indicated that both the city council and the Board determined that sufficient information was submitted by the applicant for the application to be considered adequate, allowing the determination of site significance and the minimization of potential conflicts under the Goal 5 Rule process to proceed. He explained that after they conclude there is adequate information to proceed, Step 1 asks if it is a significant site. He added after Step 1 it moves into steps that are potential impacts, and if those impacts could be minimized. He said if they can be minimized, then the site should be protected, justifying the plan amendment to protect the significant Goal 5 resource. Howe noted there are two characteristics considered when determining significance. He said one is quantity. He said an aggregate resource site shall be significant if there is 2 million tons of the resource at the site and if it is in an area where it is an expansion area and in agricultural soils Class 2 or better. He added if more than 35 percent of that mining proposed area is Class 2 soils, then it has to have an average thickness of aggregate layer within the mining area of 60 feet. He noted that both the council and the Board concluded from the record that over 8 million cubic tons of material is present at the site, an amount well in excess of the 2 million cubic tons requirement. He added that the findings support the conclusion that an adequate quantity of the gravel resource exists on the site to meet that step. He noted the average cumulative depth of the aggregate layer is 70.5 feet. With regard to quality, Howe explained that the quality of the resource has to meet ODOT standards. He noted those are standards that are specific for highway construction and the record shows that the methodology used to acquire and analyze the resource sample followed the industry standard and was conducted in a manner that supports the conclusion that the quality of the gravel resource meets the threshold designation as a significant gravel resource site under the Goal 5 Rule. He added that the analysis of the gravel at the site was peer reviewed by both ODOT and DOGAMI and the representative samples used in the analysis of quality are in the record. Howe stated the Board found there was a significant site, meaning both in quality and quantity. He said the council found the site was significant from the standpoint of quantity but not quality and through a straw vote, the city is at that step. Howe reported Step 3 is minimizing conflicts. He said there were seven potential conflicts that had been identified in the record. He reported that under the Goal 5 Rule, conflicts are considered to be minimized if they meet the local, state or federal standard. He added that most of the conflicts have a state standard. He indicated the conflicts were traffic, groundwater, wetlands, flooding, agricultural practices, dust and noise. He noted the next question in the process is whether any of the conflicts extend beyond the 1500 foot impact area that is required by the rule. He indicated the answer by the County was no, the 1500 foot impact area was measured from the boundary of the proposed mining expansion area and none of the potential conflicts were determined to extend beyond the 1500 foot impact area. He recalled that the Board determined that all of the conflicts could be minimized to acceptable levels and or minimum thresholds through the proposed conditions attached to the County ordinance. 2 MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 16, 2008 Page Joint Elected Officials Meeting With regard to traffic, Howe indicated the County engineer waived the requirement for a traffic impact analysis. He noted it is an existing site and the existing processing operation is not going to change. He said all that is happening is that it is expanding the area from which they are taking the gravel. He explained because of the scale and size of the proposed extraction rate in the expansion area, it didn’t warrant a detailed traffic analysis for road performance. He indicated that the County found that they did not require further analysis and traffic impacts had been minimized. With regard to groundwater, Howe reported that the construction of the aquaclude is proposed to minimize any loss of groundwater and any impact to neighboring wells. He said it is a low grade barrier that would eliminate flow on the groundwater into the pit. He said groundwater by the Board of Commissioners has been determined to be minimized with the aquaclude. Under wetlands, Howe noted the Division of State Lands is the regulatory body. He indicated there are two identified wetlands on the property and the completion of the aquaclude would function to retain groundwater that could also retain water in the lower reaches of the wetlands and it wouldn’t impact the wetlands. He indicated the Board of Commissioners has concluded that the impacts to wetlands have been minimized. With regard to flooding, Howe stated that FEMA is the agency standard. He added that gravel extraction doesn’t impede the water flow. He said the extraction of the aggregate proceeds in a downward manner and doesn’t create any barriers that impede flood flows. He indicated under this analysis, the Board concluded that the potential impact of flooding has been minimized by meeting the FEMA regulations. Under agricultural conflicts, Howe reported that there are two standards under the state rule, Agricultural Land Goal 3. He said the proposal won’t force a significant change in accepted farm or forest practices and won’t significantly increase the cost of accepted farm or forest practices on surrounding lands. He said the property is currently being farmed and the land being farmed is an appropriate interim use for future gravel resource. He said the agricultural uses that have been identified in the record are beyond the 1500 foot impact area. He stated no minimization conditions are proposed and the agricultural conflicts have been met. With regard to notice, Howe noted the category is addressed by the regulations of the DEQ. He said under Goal 5, only the expansion area is subject to the noise threshold requirement. He indicated that there is an existing operation. He added that the plant and processing faculties are currently operating under a permit. He added that the focus on noise conflicts with the final analysis, the minimization procedures and the conditions and findings provided were sufficient evidence for the Board to conclude that potential noise conflicts of mining the expansion area are minimized to the level required under the Goal 5 Rule by meeting the noise standards. Under dust, Howe stated the DEQ regulates the dust emission standards through LRAPA through an air contaminate discharge permit. He indicated that Delta’s processing operation directly east of the expansion site operates under the current LRAPA permit and if approved the future mining expansion area would be added to the existing permit that would be updated to include the expansion area and conduct operations in a manner with the applicable standards under the existing authorized permit. He indicated that the sources of dust include activities from overburden removal, aggregate extraction and truck traffic on the haul roads from the expansion area to the processing plant on the existing approved 3 MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 16, 2008 Page Joint Elected Officials Meeting operation. He said the Board found that the potential dust conflicts would be minimized to the operation’s limits that are in the conditions that include the watering of surfaces during dry periods. He said LRAPA monitors air quality in the metro area to meet DEQ emission standards applied to the air contaminate discharge permit. He said therefore, this criterion has been met and the potential impact minimized through that condition. He stated the Board concluded through their straw vote that the proposed conditions do adequately minimize all potential conflicts to a level that meets the required thresholds. Howe explained the next step is laying the ESEE analysis. He said that analysis is only triggered if one of the potential conflicts wasn’t minimized. He added since they were all minimized, they didn’t need to move into Step 4 for an ESEE analysis. Howe noted Step 5 was the determination of whether new uses surrounding the Goal 5 resource could impact it and would they need to be limited. He added that is done through an ESEE analysis. He indicated that the record showed there weren’t any potential new uses identified in the impact area, therefore the ESEE analysis of potential new uses was not required. Howe said the procedures for Step 6 where they develop the program to allow the mining is the final step of the process. He said because the expansion site is outside the urban growth boundary, Lane Code Chapter 16 applies and the Board of Commissioners is the one that makes the decision on the operation plan and the rezoning of the property. He said the Board found the record showed ample evidence that the site meets all of the above criteria for the rezoning requirements and would approve the rezoning of the property to sand and gravel and rock products. He said a variance was requested. He added that it would only be processed by the Board. He said the requirements were addressing setbacks and no flood hazards as a result of a variance. He said the request was for the aquaclude requiring the variance. He added the request for placement within the setback area is to ensure its separation from the excavated aggregate pit and to place the barrier’s outer edge as close as possible to the surrounding outside shallow aquifer. He said the applicant proposed to construct that aquaclude within the setback, proceeding ahead of the mining extraction to the west at a distance of 400 feet from any excavation activity. He said under the rule to allow mining, it takes any required measures to minimize conflicts including special conditions and procedures regulating mining need to be clear and objective. He said that Lane County will be coordinating with DOGAMI and the water resources regarding the existing operation and reclamation plan for the expansion into the area. He said the mining plan requires DOGAMI approval. Howe said if the City of Eugene should revisit this and get beyond Step 2, those would be the conditions and the reasoning behind the Board concluding that the potential impacts would be minimized with the conditions and how the Board concluded that this is a significant Goal 5 resource that needs protection and they would be developing the plan to allow the mining. Clark declared that he received an e-mail from a neighbor and gave it to staff. Solomon thought the County came up with a reasonable plan that addressed all the issues that Delta Sand and Gravel and the neighbors had. She commented that it is a heavily regulated industry and she was confident that the program the County has come up with is reasonable. She thought they were contributing to the economy and community. She believed that at a minimum the city council owes them a vote. 4 MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 16, 2008 Page Joint Elected Officials Meeting Ortiz believed this was an important decision but she still had a lot of concerns. Clark asked how the Board reached their vote. Dwyer stated his decision was based on the record. He said the record indicates that these things have worked in the past. He added that they will put in the specifications for the aquaclude and if anything happens, the application said they would mitigate the program caused by a problem. Bettman asked what the purpose of this meeting was. Dwyer said they have a process and people are entitled to a conclusion to a process. He said if they don’t like the conclusion, they have to be able to access the procedural rights that allow this to move forward. He added by the council not taking a position, they are denying the procedural rights of an applicant that deserves some finality or a way to move forward to get to a conclusion. He said it is not fair to allow a process to be thwarted. Dwyer thought the city council only took a straw vote. Bettman recalled that they were under the impression from their staff that they could spend time deliberating the other issues but since their definitive piece disagreed with the County’s finding, the only process is to take it to MPC. She said there is a process. She stated that the council did not thwart anyone’s rights. She said the council did what they needed to do in order to expedite the process. She commented that if there is no agreement on whether the resource is adequate. The rest is moot. Stewart stated they were told by staff that a straw poll was made and it wasn’t a final decision and a final decision hadn’t been made yet. He said they were also told by staff that some of the deliberations the County had might help move the city council to a final decision. He said the County hasn’t made its final decision but they are prepared to adopt the findings. He stated the county and city are at differences. He asked if they go to the MPC process if they could work out the differences. He added up to this point they were not lead to believe that the straw poll was a final decision. Emily Jerome, City of Eugene, responded that what the County has done has placed the County and city in the same position. She said both bodies have taken votes (straw polls) on particular criteria and the MPC does not begin until both jurisdictions have adopted ordinances with findings and conclusions. She said the city council at any time could make that decision. She said if the ordinances differ, that is when it would be referred to MPC. Kurt Yeiter, City of Eugene, explained that they are not asking for council deliberation on the findings tonight. He said their recommendation is to bring back several options at a subsequent meeting with findings for all of the criteria for denying on the overarching issue of resource. Bettman said they took a formal motion to ask staff to prepare a resolution that finds that there was not sufficient evidence that a significant resource exists on the subject site consistent with the attached draft findings. She said someone asked if this superseded a straw poll and staff said it does. She stated that they revised it and talked about using an ordinance instead of a resolution. She said they look at internal factors whether there are issues of production changes or the product changing. She asked if they had looked at external factors such as initial operations and transportation issues. She said the Eugene Code requires a transportation impact analysis which has to cover 20 years. She added there is a state transportation planning rule that says if they change the use, it becomes a sub-study of the metro plan. She said it was designated as part of the inventory for residential property. She asked if the change of 5 MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 16, 2008 Page Joint Elected Officials Meeting use triggers the state transportation rule. She asked if the County’s waiver supersedes the state requirement that there be a transportation study. She added that the Eugene Code says the transportation impact analysis has to cover 20 years. She said she reviewed the notes she took of the testimony and had a note that stated Mike Alltucker in his comments said that currently they are producing 4 million tons per year to be mined. She added that will increase to 8.5 million per year. She said they were making the point that they were making a large contribution to the community but it was inconsistent with what the application said. She asked about the inconsistency. She commented that over 20 years, if production varies and they excuse the TIA based on the claim on the record, there will be a stable production over 20 years. She saw an inconsistency with the Eugene Code requirements and with the State Transportation Planning rule and concerned about the conflicts that are occurring and the interchanges are in a failure mode. She said with all of the specific criteria they look at, that unless they do an ESEE analysis, there is no opportunity to look at the impact on the people who have built houses and moved into their neighborhood. She noted that with every hearing, there was never a representative of the company that showed up to say a housing development shouldn’t have been built because they had the land and they planned to expand the gravel pit. She stated families are now living there. She added that they are going to be impacting those families and their property values. Pryor recalled that after they had their joint meeting, the city just had one meeting to discuss this. He recalled they voted to have a resolution prepared but didn’t’ remember voting on the resolution. They told staff to prepare a resolution, but he didn’t think they had an official action. He recalled saying if they can’t get past Step 2, they shouldn’t spend any more time on the rest of the steps. He commented that if they focus at Step 2, it is a dead action. He didn’t think it was a productive use of time to process all of the other decisions knowing they are going to reject them.. Green read the council action after Step 2 as being done. He said under the Metro Plan Agreement, there is a provision to go to MPC. He didn’t advocate that process as it doesn’t lend itself to a resolution. He said they would spend too much time to go no where. He said the applicant deserves to know this so they could go onto the next level. Poling didn’t think they came to a conclusion on Step 2. He recalled the motion they passed was to direct staff to prepare an ordinance. He said they never voted on the ordinance. He didn’t think Step 2 was completed. Piercy asked what the next step would be. Howe said final action would be directed to the planning directors to draft the findings because there wasn’t agreement. He thought the County wanted it with the perspective that the County was able to get to yes, but the Eugene City Council couldn’t get past significance of a resource and the application denied. Dwyer commented that this process was not conducive to good government. He thought the quicker they could come to a conclusion, the better off it would be for everyone. Clark asked if this process is appealed to LUBA, if the City of Eugene would bear the sole costs for its defense. Jerome said that was a policy question for staff. 6 MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 16, 2008 Page Joint Elected Officials Meeting Clark asked if the County and city disagreed what the resolution would be. Dwyer said they would support their position at the Court of Appeals. Clark commented that the County could wind up on the side of the applicant and the city could end up as the defendant at LUBA. Bettman heard that there was enough gravel to last 10 or 15 years and it is not someone running out of gravel and going out of business. She didn’t recommend sending this to MPC. She said as a council they have to do the same due diligence as MPC because they have to give definitive direction to represent the Council’s policy direction. She added it would be the same steps they would need to go through to address an entire application. She thought it made sense to go through the entire application in case they have to end up defending it. Pryor said they know where the Board is: ready to approve the ordinance. He said because the record is closed, he didn’t anticipate any change in vote. He said they know if they bring an ordinance, it is going to be to deny. He said the city council needs to do the ordinance. He said a question is if it is going to court, do they need to go through the rest of the steps to have a position in a court case. He said if it were up to him, he would approve it, but it wasn’t up to him it is where the council is on the issue. He recommended getting the ordinance on their agenda signed so people have certainty what they need to do next. He said they need to go to a forum where they can get a legitimate legal and binding solution. Stewart indicated that each body will go back and take their action. He said the legal counsels can give direction as to the next step of the MPC process or a final determination by the planning director that gives the application the ability to move on. Piercy thought it was legitimate for both bodies to believe they have done a due process and acted on behalf of the public in a responsible way and come to different conclusions. Poling asked if they need to have a public hearing with the ordinance. Jerome responded that they had already had the public hearing and neither body needs to open the record or have another public hearing. She said the city council may choose to deliberate further. She said with the County’s complete findings, they are ready to adopt an ordinance but they need to take the final step and no hearing. MOTION: to approve a Ninth Reading and Deliberation and Setting a Tenth Reading and Deliberation on Ordinance No. PA 1238 on February 5, 2008. Green MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED VOTE: 4-0. There being no further business, Commissioner Stewart adjourned the meeting of the Board of Commission at 7:05 p.m. 7 MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 16, 2008 Page Joint Elected Officials Meeting Mayor Piercy closed the meeting of the Eugene City Council at 7:05 p.m. Melissa Zimmer Recording Secretary 8 MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 16, 2008 Page Joint Elected Officials Meeting