HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 2A - Minutes ApprovalEUGENE CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Approval of City Council Minutes
Meeting Date: February 14, 2005 Agenda Item Number: 2A
Department: City Manager's Office Staff Contact: Lynda Rose
www. cl. eugene, or. us Contact Telephone Number: 682-5017
ISSUE STATEMENT
This is a routine item to approve City Council meeting minutes.
SUGGESTED MOTION
Move to approve the minutes of the January 3, 2005, State of the City Address, January 10, 2005, Work
Session, January 10, 2005, City Council Meeting, and January 24, 2005, City Council Meeting.
ATTACHMENTS
A. January 3, 2005, State of the City Address
B. January 10, 2005, Work Session
C. January 10, 2005, City Council Meeting
D. January 24, 2005, City Council Meeting
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Staff Contact: Lynda Rose
Telephone: 682-5017
Staff E-Mail: lynda.l.rose~ci.eugene.or.us
L:\CMO\2005 Council Agendas\M050214\S0502142A. doc
ATTACHMENT A
MINUTES
Eugene City Council
State of the City
Hult Center Lobby
January 3, 2005
5:30 p.m.
COUNCILORS PRESENT: Bonny Bettman, Betty Taylor, David Kelly, Gary Pap6, George Poling,
Jennifer Solomon, Andrea Ortiz, Chris Pryor.
I. Welcome and Introductions
Council President Bonny Bettman welcomed those present, and introduced other members of the council
and outgoing Mayor Jim Torrey and outgoing councilors Nancy Nathanson and Scott Meisner.
II. Musical Selection
Those present heard a musical selection by violinists James and Joshua Harmon.
III. Convening Council Meeting
Mayor James D. Torrey called the City Council meeting to order.
IV. Recognition of Outgoing Councilors
Mayor Torrey recognized the long-time contributions of outgoing councilors Nancy Nathanson and Scott
Meisner.
V. Administration of the Oath of Office
City Recorder Mary Feldman administered the oath of office to incoming councilors Andrea Ortiz and
Chris Pyror. She administered the oath of office to incoming Mayor Kitty Piercy.
VI. Musical Selection
Those present heard a musical selection by Jim Garcia and Bonnie Duran-Leaming.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 3, 2005 Page 1
State of the City
VII. Special Presentation
Mayor Piercy recognized outgoing Mayor Torrey for his many contributions to the community.
VIII. State of the City Address
The following is Mayor Kitty Piercy's State of the City Address:
I am honored and enormously pleased to be here with you today, full of pride in our community and
optimism for the future. On behalf of each of us who take office today, thank you 'for giving us this
opportunity. Thank you for voting and participating in our civic process. For our outgoing officials, I
want to add my thanks for your contributions to Eugene and wish you the very best in the future. For
those of you who are city employees, I want to thank you for your service and tell you how much I look
forward to working with you in the months ahead to achieve the goals of this community.
Since the election, all over town people have come up to me, even those who did not vote for me, to
express their great hopes for Eugene. If one place in this country is going to do it right, they hope it will
be here. I can tell you that I am excited and hopeful as well.
This State of the City speech is an opportunity for me to talk with the community about the current status
of our city and to make proposals for future direction. My proposals today will be focused in large part on
moving my six-point economic plan forward. These proposals are intended to recognize the work that has
been done and to build on our city's strengths and assets. These proposals are premised on a strong belief
that we are a remarkable community capable of meeting challenges and carving out an exciting and
responsible future for generations to come. These proposals indicate my emphasis on supporting our
families, strengthening our economy, and protecting our natural resources as the core elements of a
sustainable community.
As David Gottfried, founder of the U.S. World Green Building Council, has asked, 'How can we
afford not to understand and embody standard practices that provide good air quality, energy and
water efficiency, and health and comfort for all?'
Adoption of these natural principles," he suggests, "will improve your firm's bottom line, ensure
the survival of the planet, and contribute toward your own personal contentment.'
Before I go into economic proposals, I would like to spend a few moments talking about both the strengths
we have as a community and our public process. Understanding our strengths and using our public
processes well are key to the success of any proposal.
Our Community Strengths
I know we have great strength as a community. We have families that have lived here for generations, and
who have invested in our development and employed our people; newer residents who bring fresh
commitment and ideas to this city and stay here because they love it. We have hundreds of neighbors who
volunteer, serve on committees and join organizations to work on behalf of our community. We have the
good fortune of being the home of many innovative and successful businesses that provide products and
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 3, 2005 Page 2
State of the City
services that are the underpinnings of our local economy. We have remarkable social service providers
whose great heart and innovative, successful programs are noted across this country. We have high-
quality educational opportunities from pre-K through higher education. Our schools, our community
college and our universities are noted for their excellence. We have artists and artisans of great depth and
variety, giving us a huge array of cultural wealth. We live here nestled next to great rivers, rich farmland,
unique wetlands, green ridges and buttes. This trove of outdoor beauty and recreational opportunity is a
much-valued feature of our healthy community. We live in a great place and we need to say so! I feel so
fortunate to be able to serve as its Mayor.
The Public Process
So, is this a perfect place? Perhaps not quite. Eugene is a community of many neighborhoods, many
lifestyles and many opinions. Because we have so much we care about and because we are a knowledge-
able, vested community, we take on all major (and some minor) issues with a certain amount of zeal.
Thus, many folks have approached me to express concern about the fractious tone of our civic discussion.
Some think we talk too much and process things to death. Others feel underrepresented in our public
decision-making and want more meaningful discussions and participation. All would like to move
forward but have different ideas about what that might look like. The vast majority express a strong belief
that this is a great city to live in and they want to keep it that way. It's just that sometimes we disagree
loudly about how to do so.
We have much in common. Since April 2003, I have been participating in a Growth and Development
Roundtable convened by 1000 Friends of Oregon and the Lane Metro Partnership. The 16 community
members are educators, environmentalists, transportation specialists, developers, builders, housing
advocates, business owners and planners. Before we began potentially divisive discussions about our
Urban Growth Boundary or the West Eugene Parkway, we elected to spend several meetings sharing our
hopes for our community. I learned how much we all have in common, perhaps more than we differ. We
share a respect for diversity and the rights and beliefs of all. We want high quality education. We want
arts and culture and recreational and open space. We need clean air and water and public safety - just to
name a few. Learning about each other allowed us to listen better, to like each other, to appreciate our
common values and to better understand our differences. In many ways, this group represents the diverse
points of view in Eugene and the real potential for better community conversations around public policy
decisions that affect our lives.
As former Governors John Kitzhaber and James Geringer of Wyoming have suggested in a recent
Oregonian newspaper opinion piece, 'We must draw fellow citizens to the kitchen table where
America has traditionally found its most durable solutions, and begin to make progress together.'
(Oregonian, December 27, 2004)
There is nothing inherently wrong with difference of opinion. In fact, quite the opposite is true. Different
opinions based on facts, experiences and expertise enable us to initiate and consider policy proposals from
a broad range of perspectives. In the best of worlds this results in sound decisions. We can improve how
those opinions are expressed. I believe we can improve the quality of our civic discussions and that does
not necessarily call for greater quantity. We, both leaders and community members, simply can aim
together to do it better, to respect the views of all, to engage our residents in new ways and to carefully
use the expertise we have. And, we can aim for the win-win whenever possible.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 3, 2005 Page 3
State of the City
Proposals: I am making several proposals for 2005 that are aimed at improving our public process and
public communication.
1. Mayor's one-on-one. I intend to move these meetings out to the neighborhoods to create more
opportunity to hear from residents across Eugene, and I hope to be joined by the city councilor repre-
senting that neighborhood.
2. Develop better communication tools. I will ask City staff and my colleagues to help improve the ways
the City communicates with and hears from its citizens through strengthening neighborhood organiza-
tions and newsletters, better web tools, and improved hearings and council meetings.
3. Create a River Road/Santa Clara advisory committee. I support the City's current efforts to
strengthen positive relationships with these areas and to provide opportunity to hear from them regard-
ing City proposals that affect their lives. I suppo.rt the Santa Clara/River Road residents' request for
putting in place an on-going advisory committee.
4. Independent auditing of City services. I will work with the city manager and council to propose a
process for independent auditing of City services that is consistent with our city manager type of
government, but that also addresses concerns for transparency in how an auditor is selected, how goals
for audits are determined, and how the results of audits are shared and used. The dual intention here
is to identify where we can do better within our city governance and to measure our improvements
over time, and at the same time to respect the fine work of our City administration and staff.
Social Service Infrastructure
Is everyone doing well in our community? While many are, a recent United Way status report finds that
more and more of our families are struggling to be housed, fed, receive health care and to have good jobs
with incomes that can cover basic needs. We have learned from recent discussions about our stellar
school systems that some of our children still are not able to achieve success and that is often aligned with
insufficient incomes and basic needs struggles. Although the City is not a major social services provider, I
know that all things are linked. Thus, we must do what we can in collaboration with our regional partners
to ensure there are good job opportunities for those who need them. We must support the provision of a
sound social service infrastructure. We must do what we can in partnership and advocacy to support our
schools so that our youngsters have the opportunities for success they deserve. I know this community
will continue to step up to these challenges.
Proposals: In 2005 I am proposing that we:
1. Work with schools, social service agencies, higher education, business and regional partners to
determine how we can meet the challenges facing our social service infrastructure and schools. This
would include a particular focus on the holes in our social service systems that exacerbate student
achievement gaps and the role the City can play in addressing them.
2. Explore ways to connect wage and benefit standards to economic incentives. Within our legal
capacity, our City should use the tools available such as enterprise zones and urban renewal districts
to encourage jobs that provide wages and benefits that enable workers to feed clothe and house their
families and provide them with healthcare.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 3, 2005 Page 4
State of the City
Social Equity
Does everyone feel welcome and treated fairly in our community? I do believe that we would like that to
be the case, but recent discussions regarding school achievement gaps, availability of mental healthcare
services, and racial profiling are examples of inequities felt and lived in Eugene. I watched my son, a
Pacific Islander by birth, struggle with each of these. I strongly believe we must find better ways to hear
where we are failing and commit ourselves to improvement. We must take action where action has been
lacking and measure our success in moving forward.
I want to focus for a moment on the hate literature that has shown up in our community and across this
state. We will not put up with it and we will stand as a community strongly against it. Racial and ethnic
incidents and attitudes of intolerance are simply not acceptable if we wish to be a community where all
people in Eugene feel safe and valued. Incidents of intolerance hurt all of us, whether or not we are part
of a targeted group. Our progress in improving the climate for diversity and tolerance can ultimately
improve Eugene's regional and national reputation, our ability to recruit and retain quality companies and
employees, and the health of our community and strength of our local economy. It will just make us a
nicer community for people to live in.
Proposals: In 2005, I will be focusing on the following two issues:
1. External Review Board. I support establishing a Police External Review Board that will help us meet
our city's goal of ensuring that everyone is treated fairly and appropriately by our police officers.
2. Meeting regularly with communities that feel discrimination. It is important that we talk together in
our Human Rights Commission and in small meetings about what is working and what is not. Atten-
tion only at times of crisis is inadequate. I am not going to prescribe who should participate and what
those meetings should cover. That is what I need to hear from these communities.
And now, my thoughts and proposals regarding strengthening our economy:
Putting Real Commitment into Sustainable Economic Practices
Our city does many things well despite our economic challenges. I have spoken of our schools, social
services, public engagement, arts and culture. We have a number of excellent City services and I have
noted our great natural assets.
Yet, often in recent years I have seen Eugene characterized as a divided and divisive community
especially when it comes to business and the environment. I have heard Eugene labeled as a difficult
place to do business because of our concern for our environment.
I would like to change that message. We have excellent schools and a beautiful environment and these are
key attractions for business investors. Oregon ranks among the top seven states in three broad economic
development indicators, earning a spot on the "honor role" from the Corporation for Enterprise Develop-
ment, based in Washington DC. They say Oregon's economic development picture presents a "strong mix
of resource efficiency and quality of life."
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 3, 2005 Page 5
State of the City
Furthermore, in my conversations with people throughout our community, I have learned that, across all
sectors and political affiliations, our residents believe Eugene can and should have a strong economy and
protect this beautiful natural environment. People choose to live here because they love the rivers, ridges
and trees, the greenness of our valley, the clean water and air. They also want good employment
opportunities and a strong economy so that they can raise their families. By encouraging businesses that
are sustainable, we can meet the goals of environmental regeneration, social equity and profitability.
I notice that the word sustainability is commonly used in many different ways and when I mention it, there
is frequently some question or confusion as to my meaning. Sustainable economic development refers to
actions of government entities to protect natural capital (like water, plants, and energy) and human capital
(such as labor, education, and health) while supporting personal and business prosperity in the present.
As the level of governance closest to the community, local governments play a vital role in educating,
mobilizing, and responding to the public to promote sustainable economic development. State government
is showing enormous interest in sustainable business practices and many communities will take advantage
of new opportunities. We need to move quickly, making the case that we have the interest and expertise
and can demonstrate leadership.
Proposals: I am proposing that in 2005 we:
1. Form a Sustainability Advisory Board or Commission. This would be composed of stakeholders who
would propose process-oriented next steps the City and its partners can take to propel themselves
toward a comprehensive sustainable development initiative, one that goes beyond where the city is
today. We can build our base of environmental services and technology industries and other busi-
nesses pushing the envelope of social and environmental sustainability.
2. Form an Internal City Sustainability Steering Committee. This committee would include department
heads and elected officials to guide internal City sustainability efforts.
3. Recognize local businesses that are good examples of using sustainable practices or making
sustainable products. From green building to bio-diesel fuel use, Eugene is full of good practices and
products that should be recognized.
4. Work with the Chamber of Commerce on a local purchasing initiative. Supporting local business as a
city or in collaboration with other entities and buying locally is good for us all.
5. And fundamentally I want us to promote Eugene as a great place to live and work.
The Downtown Economy
There is work unfinished in this community, from resolving traffic issues in west and north Eugene to
locating a hospital and opening our new Federal Courthouse, and the downtown continues to need special
consideration. Eugene is a community that deserves a vital and active downtown, the hub of our
community life. We are working on it. We have built a worthy library, invested in streets, created
housing opportunities and now turn our eyes to future civic development. We need a more in-depth
conversation about what that should be like. The arts is one area that could help grow our downtown,
connect us to the university, encourage economic development and build on our assets. We are a
community blessed with a large number of artists and artisans who bring culture and joy into our
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 3, 2005 Page 6
State of the City
downtown and add value to our lives through crafts and the visual and performing arts. Many organiza-
tions and individuals are ready to push this effort forward.
Proposals: I will be proposing that in 2005 we:
1. Identify downtown Eugene as the cultural epicenter of our region. ThroUgh growing a year round
calendar of events we can bring more business and people downtown.
2. Support the designation of Eugene as the "WorM's Greatest City for the Arts and Outdoors." I want
to thank Robb Hankins of the Hult Center for this designation. I think it's a winner.
3. Explore the development of a Local Cultural Trust with Downtown Eugene, Inc. (DEI) to promote arts
and culture and to benefit locally from the Oregon Cultural Trust.
4. Consolidate all City arts efforts under Cultural Services. This will help in the development of the
other ongoing and new efforts.
We're a vibrant community that's an attractive home for businesses. With the actions I have proposed, I
plan to help us capitalize on our assets and our people, and grow a healthy economy thoughtfully, for the
long-term.
Now, I want to close this State of City conversation with some promises about what you can expect from
me in my role as Mayor. I am proud of this community and honored to serve. I will continue to reach out
to people to hear their concerns and perspectives and to find ways for us to work together. I will be
forthright and honest and do the people's work with transparency and respect for all. I will take the hard
stand when necessary but look for the win/win. You will always know where I am coming from. I will
maintain a good sense of humor, humility and a strong passion for justice. I will work with our regional,
state and national partners on behalf of this great community. I will be easy to reach and easy to talk to. I
hope to hear from you.
Again, my deep gratitude to you all.
IX. Musical Selection
Those present heard a musical selection from the Soromundi, Lesbian Chorus of Eugene, under the
direction of Lisa Hellemn and Karm Hagedorn.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 3, 2005 Page 7
State of the City
X. Closing Remarks and Adjournment
Mayor Piercy adjourned the meeting at 7 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dennis M. Taylor
City Manager
(Recorded by Kimberly Young)
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 3, 2005 Page 8
State of the City
ATTACHMENT B
MINUTES
Eugene City Council
Work Session
McNutt Room-Eugene City Hall
January 10, 2005
5:30 p.m.
COUNCILORS PRESENT: George Poling, David Kelly, Andrea Ortiz, Chris Pryor, Jennifer
Solomon, Betty Taylor.
COUNCILORS ABSENT: Bonny Bettman, Gary Papa.
Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order.
A. ITEMS FROM MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER
City Manager Dennis Taylor welcomed Mayor Kitty Piercy and the newly elected councilors. He referred
to his memo dated January 10, 2005, entitled Trespass, Solicitation and Homeless Articles and reported
that the Eugene Police Department is addressing this issue to ensure that solicitation and/or panhandling
is a constitutionally protected activity. City Manager Taylor announced that appropriate trainings are
underway to ensure this right for all community members and stressed that no enforcement action related
to the trespass markings will occur until the Eugene Police Department (EPD), the City Attorney, the City
Prosecutor, and Public Works Department meet to (1) review what is lawful, and (2) create a standardized
information package for distribution to patrol officers. Mayor Piercy thanked the City Manager for his
report.
Mr. Poling welcomed Mayor Piercy and newly elected councilors Ortiz and Pryor.
Mr. Poling reported that the Interstate 105 Resurfacing Project will begin in the spring and the Oregon
Department of Transportation (ODOT) hopes to limit the impact to the traffic flow. However, the
community must be made aware of this project as traffic will be directed to Harlow Road, Martin Luther
King Jr. Boulevard, Beltline and Franklin Boulevard; additionally, the overpass at Coburg Road will be
shut down for a brief period.
Mr. Poling said the Willakenzie School has been completely demolished, with the exception of the
playground and its equipment and the Parks and Recreation Division plan to work with the surrounding
neighborhoods to assist in the design of a replacement park.
Mr. Poling noted pending resolution of the possible litigation regarding the installed pipes and
approximately 30 percent of lost trees at the biocycle farm was underway.
Ms. Solomon also welcomed the Mayor and newly-elected council members.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 10, 2005 Page 1
Work Session
Ms. Ortiz stated she was looking forward to working with the council. She voiced her appreciation to the
City staff that provided excellent orientation on its practices.
Mr. Kelly welcomed the Mayor and newly elected councilors. He disclosed that he had received a
number of inquiries regarding the recent increase in local cable television rates (standard cable - $44.00
per month), which he noted is not in line with inflation. Mr. Kelly pointed out that the City is the
franchise authority for the local cable company and requested that staff determine if the council can bear
influence around the issue of rising cable rates. He also mentioned the recent loss to the City and the
community-at-large of Diversity Coordinator, Marilyn Mays. Mr. Kelly reminded the council of the
valuable contributions Ms. Mays has made to the community and sadly noted that her resignation was due
to the ongoing intolerance within the community around racial and ethnic differences. He voiced his
hope that as a result of this loss, the City will rededicate itself to improving the current climate. Mr. Kelly
announced that a new campaign, "We Are All In This Together," had been launched and a meeting was
scheduled for Thursday, January 13, to determine "next steps." In conclusion, he voiced his appreciation
to the City Manager and the Police Chief for their rapid response to the panhandling issue as EPD officers
intentionally misleading the community regarding constitutional protection cannot continue.
Ms. Taylor welcomed the Mayor and the newly elected councilors.
Mr. Pryor voiced his appreciation for the opportunity to serve the community.
Mayor Piercy announced that Ms. Bettman was ill and Mr. Pap~ was currently out of the state. She
wished Ms. Taylor a speedy recovery from recent surgery.
City Manager Taylor reminded the council that the International City Managers Association (ICMA)
team was currently in Eugene and would conduct individual interviews and focus groups/meetings
regarding comprehensive external police inquiry. As part of this process, he announced that an
advertisement was placed in The Register-Guard advising citizens who are not able to participate in the
process that there is a toll-free confidential recorded telephone line, 1-866-292-4860 (available through
January 31), which can be utilized to provide (1) advice on ways to improve the EPD, and (2) input on
community values and expectations for law enforcement.
B. WORK SESSION: Toxics Right to Know Program Fees
Glen Potter, Fire and Emergency Medical Services Department, presented an overview of the staff report.
He explained that the previous council had requested that the Toxics Board make recommendations
regarding the perceived inequity of program fees. Mr. Potter provided an historical overview of the
program and noted the following:
· The State of Oregon imposed a fee cap of $2,000 per business effective in 2004;
· Fees hovered around $10 to $15 per full-time equivalent (FTE) through 2003; however,
due to the cap, the 2004 fees were $31.65 per FTE up to the cap;
· The Toxics Board developed two proposals to address this inequity: 1) an ordinance
which would add certain types of businesses to the program to reduce the individual fees;
and 2) a surcharge on commercial solid-waste hauling fees of perhaps 50 cents per
account per month and $1 per dumpster removal;
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 10, 2005 Page 2
Work Session
· City Manager Taylor recommended that the council pursue a legislative solution (a repeal
of the cap).
Mr. Potter stated that if the council wished to proceed with wither Toxics Board proposal, a public
hearing would be set for February 14. He welcomed questions by the council.
In response to a question from Mr. Poling, Mr. Potter replied that this type of program does not exist in
other localities. He further explained that if the current fee structure continues, the City's obligation will
be fulfilled. Mr. Potter noted that 50 percent of his time is spent on the program, which is funded through
the fee structure.
Mr. Kelly voiced his agreement with the City Manager's recommendation to pursue the legislative avenue
to repeal the cap. Intergovernmental Relations Manager Jason Heuser stated that sponsors in both the
State House and Senate of legislation to remove the cap have been identified by Intergovernmental
Relations staff. He said he would work diligently to obtain the required number of votes to pass such
legislation and noted that the chances for passage in the Senate were excellent but the House was
currently believed to be split on this issue.
Mr. Kelly surmised that the inequity to small businesses may sway House members. In terms of the two
proposals noted by Mr. Potter, Mr. Kelly noted that a waste hauling surcharge may not be perceived as
"true to the intent" of the charter amendment. He stated that broadening the program to include other
businesses was appealing if it helped to resolve the inequity issue.
Ms. Taylor voiced her support of a legislative approach; however, she questioned if such action was
adequate. She wondered if it would be wise to also include other businesses in the program. Mr. Potter
responded that the initial authors of the charter amendment aimed the program to manufacturers solely.
Mr. Poling moved, seconded by Ms. Solomon, to table the Toxic Board's
recommendations as noted above and pursue legislative repeal of the fee
cap.
Ms. Taylor moved, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, to amend the motion to set a
public hearing for February 14, 2005, to discuss a proposed ordinance -
Ordinance adding businesses to the program--as noted in the council
packet.
Ms. Ortiz voiced her confidence in the State's legislative body; however, she advised caution in
considering expansion of the program to include other businesses, as inequity would continue to be
perceived within the community.
In response to Mr. Kelly's inquiry, Mr. Potter noted that a threshold of 2,640 pounds of toxic substances
must be reached before a business is required to submit a report. He explained that if a business had more
than two employees and did not reach the threshold, only a fee would be required. Mr. Kelly requested
that staff estimate how many newly added businesses will likely reach the 2,640 threshold at the proposed
public heating, should the motion pass.
Mr. Poling commented that by adding painting contractors, dry cleaners, spas, swimming pools, etc., the
City is moving away from the original intent of the charter amendment. He urged that the intent be
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 10, 2005 Page 3
Work Session
preserved as approved by the voters.
Mayor Piercy voiced her support for the program and believed broadening the program to include other
businesses would be a reasonable option at this time or at some time in the future. She also stated her
hope that the Toxics Board will address a simplification of the reporting procedures and how the data is
used by the community.
Ms. Ortiz reiterated that small businesses that do not meet the requirements to pay a fee or submit a report
should still be held accountable for any polluting of the air they may be responsible for.
Mr. Potter reminded the council that the ordinance under consideration would reduce the FTE threshold
from ten to two, and therefore, businesses in the previous manufacturing classifications that are smaller
would be included as participants in the program.
Mr. Pryor voiced his support for the legislative avenue; additionally, he reasoned that as the amendment
only moved the ordinance to a public hearing for further consideration he was willing to support it as
well.
The amendment to the motion passed 4-2, with Mr. Poling and Ms. Solomon in
opposition.
Mr. Kelly disclosed he had received an e~mail from Lane Regional Air Pollution Authority (LRAPA)
noting support for revisions to the program that will provide for registration of other businesses. He
asked that staff reach out to LRAPA to learn how these revisions will benefit not only Eugene residents
but additionally, how they will move forward with the information.
Mr. Potter clarified for Ms. Solomon that the program was self-supporting, and the changes that were
before the council for consideration were developed to address the inequity issue.
The motion passed unanimously.
City Manager Taylor reiterated that the public hearing would be set for February 14.
C. WORK SESSION: Downtown City Space Master Planning
Mike Penwell of Facilities Management provided an overview of the staff report and referred to
Attachment A which outlined the historical points of this issue. He stressed that public input to-date had
been limited in scope. Mr. Penwell noted that the bond measure put before the voters in November 2004
was defeated by 21 percent which indicated a lack of understanding around the issues related to the
consolidation of City services and construction of a new city hall and police station.
Mr. Penwell outlined the following:
(1) A collaborative public process is costly and time-consuming; however, the end result should
be a finer work product and at the very least result in 'consent' by the community to move
forward.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 10, 2005 Page 4
Work Session
(2) A collaborative process will require a greater commitment of time by City staff and the
council, as many of the decisions made by the previous council will need to be reopened for
discussion.
Mr. Penwell suggested that Option 2 in the staff report include a sub-category whereby staff and an
outside consultant design the public outreach process for review and approval by the council.
Assistant City Jim Carlson stated that his first task as the assistant city manager was to staff the
Police/Fire Building Task Force, and he believed that much progress had been made over the past five
years. Mr. Carlson noted that the previous council decided not to move forward with the construction of a
public safety building; rather, it directed staff to refine the master planning around that building and
return such a plan to the council for review and approval, followed by a public process to move the
project forward.
City Manager Taylor announced Ms. Bettman requested that, due to her absence, a vote on this issue not
be taken at this meeting; however, he stressed it would be most helpful to staff to receive input from the
council on the information provided in the council packet.
Ms. Taylor urged that staff ascertain from the public if, in fact, it wanted to replace City Hall, prior to a
public process on how to move forward with a design plan. She stressed that input from local architects
to remodel City Hall had never been considered, nor had costs to retrofit the City Hall researched. Ms.
Taylor suggested that staff bring this issue to neighborhood groups for input, followed by advertisements
in local newspapers and public hearings.
Mr. Pryor stated he was supportive of community outreach rather than "selling a product." He believed
that effective outreach was costly; however, a cap of such costs should be determined.
Mr. Kelly requested that staff ascertain if a majority or minority of those attending the City Hall design
charette believe the City Hall should be retained and remodeled. He noted that a broad segment of the
community would not participate in a public outreach campaign on this subject, as a need for replacement
is primarily recognized by individuals who are engaged with City Hall on a regular basis. Mr. Kelly
concurred with Ms. Taylor that the public must initially weigh in on the need for a new city hall.
Ms. Ortiz stated her belief that the City Hall must be separated from the Police Department as the current
model is intimidating to some members of the public.
In response to a question from Ms. Solomon, Mr. Carlson replied that the $75,000 cost would cover only
the plan; however, he emphasized that public participation would be included in implementation of the
plan. Ms. Solomon voiced frustration at the length of time that this project had been under consideration.
City Manager Taylor emphasized that outside consultant assistance would be most beneficial in advising
the City on best practices to involve the public in this process, especially around facility planning.
Mr. Poling stressed that the costs associated with this project needed to be itemized so that the council
and the public were well aware of each expense. He also requested that for the convenience of the
citizenry, a city government center with all services in one area be the focus of staff. Mr. Poling
concurred that a decision with regard to City Hall must be made quickly.
Mayor Piercy urged the council to provide input for a sound process to staff over the next few weeks.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 10, 2005 Page 5
Work Session
She stressed that staff needed direction from the council to move forward effectively.
Mr. Kelly voiced his concern that the design of the process was estimated to cost $75,000. He elaborated
that in order for the design to be effective a draft should be created, provided to at least five appropriate
stakeholders, posted on the City's Web site, and followed by input by the council at a work session. He
surmised that if this suggestion was followed, the design should only cost $20,000 to $30,000, rather than
$75,000.
In terms of issues, Mr. Kelly concluded that the focus should be on 1) a city-government complex; 2)
potential collaboration with other public/non-profit agencies; and 3) the question of location should be
open for discussion.
Mr. Pryor voiced his support for a public outreach campaign; however, he asked that staff control the
costs and stressed his hope that the process would take 12 to 18 months, rather than develop into years.
Ms. Taylor concurred that consolidation of services to be located in one location is necessary, with a
police station constructed possibly a few blocks from the city center. She reiterated that an expanded
remodel of City Hall should be assessed by local architects. In conclusion, Ms. Taylor suggested that
the ATM building could be replaced by a youth center.
Ms. Solomon noted that the charette process was attended by an impressive number of citizens. She
questioned how staff planned to define a successful public participation when the design was created.
Ms. Solomon stressed that at some point a decision must be made and the process moved forward. City
Manager Taylor stated that based on best practices, a conversation with stakeholders should address this
concern.
Mike Penwell concurred that the charette was very successful; however, he noted that only 75 citizens
participated. He explained that due to the timeline, staff could not previously do a proper public outreach
on this issue. Mr. Penwell reiterated that the unrepresented constituencies need to be drawn out to
ascertain their points of view and referred to the recent election defeat, which revealed the community did
not receive a clear message about the project.
In response to a question from Ms. Ortiz, Mr. Carlson replied that a bond measure was one of the
possibilities under consideration. He said adequate funds had been accumulated to build a basic police
facility; further, the city center consolidation could be realized by additional council action of other
monies the City currently has available.
In response to a question from Mr. Poling, City Manager Taylor replied that a meeting to readdress this
issue had not yet been set but the council would be provided that information in its next council packet.
City Manager Taylor requested that the council address the project as a "city govermnent complex."
Additionally, he asked that a refinement of the plan, along with a control of the costs, be included in the
revised recommendations.
Mr. Kelly stated that broad participation was critical for the ultimate success of this project. He
recommended that a citizen jury, chosen at random, be included in the process as the issue was quite
complex. Mr. Kelly also suggested it would be prudent to have staff and consultants provide five possible
scenarios for the public's review.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 10, 2005 Page 6
Work Session
Mr. Penwell referred to Attachment C, Page 33 - IAP~ Public Participation Spectrum. He said it would
be important to comply with the "Promises to the Public." Additionally, Mr. Penwell stressed that a
decision to replace or remodel the current City Hall had not been made at this point and that it was an
important issue to explore. He said that costs associated with a remodel can be considerable and must be
conveyed honestly. Mayor Piercy commented that the current City Hall would need a major retrofit to be
considered a viable building for staff and the community. Mr. Carlson noted that major repairs have not
been made to the current structure due to the previous council's decision not to invest in the facility,
rather, to plan for a replacement. He reiterated that space is sorely needed for police personnel and office
workers now and in the future.
Ms. Ortiz asked that staff consider what benefits the common person will realize with a replacement of
City Hall and that such benefits be explained clearly to the public.
Mr. Kelly asked for a clarification of the facility staff time and how that translates to this project. Mr.
Carlson explained that the facility development staff is funded through the professional services fund
which is paid through Capital Projects; if there are no capital projects, staff is reduced. He clarified that
none of the facility development staff is funded through the general fund
Mayor Piercy requested that council members probe staff as it pondered the information provided and
questions raised at the work session.
The meeting adjourned at 6:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dennis M. Taylor
City Manager
(Recorded by Joyce Ogden)
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 10, 2005 Page 7
Work Session
ATTACHMENT C
MINUTES
Eugene City Council
Regular Session
Council Chamber--City Hall
January 10, 2005
7:30 p.m.
COUNCILORS PRESENT: George Poling, David Kelly, Betty Taylor, Jennifer Solomon, Chris
Pryor, Andrea Ortiz.
COUNCILORS ABSENT: Bonny Bettman, Gary Pap6.
Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the City Council to order. She welcomed councilors Ortiz and
Pryor to the dais.
1. ACTION:
Election of City Council Officers for 2005
Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Pryor, moved to elect
Councilor George Poling as President of the City Council for 2005. Roll
call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 6:0.
Councilor Poling, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to elect
Councilor Jennifer Solomon as Vice President of the City Council for
2005.
Councilor Kelly noted, for the record, the long-standing rule that all councilors rotate through the offices
of Council President and Council Vice President.
Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 6:0.
2. PUBLIC FORUM
Mayor Piercy reviewed the rules of the Public Forum.
Councilor Poling, seconded by Councilor Solomon, moved to add 30
minutes to the time allotted for the Public Forum. Roll call vote; the
motion passed unanimously, 6:0.
Bruce Miller, PO Box 50968, Eugene, wished the council a prosperous year. He noted there was a
vacancy on the 4J School board.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 10, 2005 Page 1
Regular Session
Mr. Miller expressed his support for the Lane Transit District (LTD) bus drivers. He opined that they
needed to be able to come to work with good benefits.
Mr. Miller felt that the Nike Corporation should donate more money to the tsunami relief effort in
Southeast Asia. In particular, he thought Nike spokesperson and professional golfer, Tiger Woods, should
donate money. He suggested that Nike Corporation build up a small business loan bank to enable small
businesses to grow.
Cheryl Hunter, 5320 Nectar Way, spoke about the 38-acre parcel between Nectar Way and Dillard Road.
She circulated a memorandum that described in detail the actions taken regarding this piece of land. She
stated that developer Joe Green had purchased the land and then doubled the price and offered it for sale.
She related that the neighborhood was tracking what was happening with the property and had elected
Lisa Warnes as its representative in the process. She reiterated neighborhood concerns that the City was
not fully aware of the value of the land, noting that it was included in neither the Parks, Recreation, and
Open Space draft plan, nor in the Goal 5 inventory, with two small exceptions. She reported that the
neighborhood had hired a wetlands consultant and it was his opinion that many sensitive and endangered
plant and animal species lived on this acreage.
Anita Glantz, 5055 Nectar Way, opined the land near her was priceless. She felt the City had missed the
opportunity to buy the land prior to its purchase by Joe Green and now seemed like it would give up on
the purchase. She said she was part of a large and active group of neighbors that was advocating for
preservation of the property. She predicted that, should the City purchase the property, its ownership
would be in the long-term interest of the City's residents and that the property would not require much in
the way of ongoing maintenance costs. She averred that it would not be in the City's best interest to be
engaged in a prolonged battle over the use of this property. She believed the property likely was home to
endangered species. She submitted her testimony in writing.
Jason L. Owens, 339 West 22nd Avenue, said he was new to the area, having moved to Eugene six months
ago. He stated that he dedicated his service to the residents of Eugene and of the State of Oregon through
his position as a district aide for the State Representative Of District 8. He wished to speak about the
racial profiling issue. He moved from a large metropolitan area to Eugene to find a more wholesome life
and found it appalling that he had to fear being stopped by the same people that he served on a daily basis.
He noted that there were 38,000 people in his district that he watched over and cared for as a legislative
aide in terms of constituency issues. He felt it was a shame that he could not move freely in the district
that he served. He called it a "slap in the face" that the City Manager and Police Chief Lehner would not
to address this issue. He felt the service of African-American citizens, as well as members of other
minorities, to the City and the State was discounted.
Mr. Owens supported the implementation of an external review board. He said his hope and his dream
was, as a citizen, to walk freely without being judged based on the color of his skin. He hoped he would
not be stopped because his "watch fit loosely around [his] wrist." He believed that, if the approach to
stopping people was truly as transparent as it should be, then the Police Chief and the City Manager
should have absolutely no problem with engaging a citizens' external review board to review the
complaints. He stressed that the complaints were real and that racial profiling was happening.
Pauline Itutson, 1025 Taylor Street, spoke regarding the proposed gasoline tax. She opposed diverting
taxes into funding for road construction which benefited "global and mega-rich corporations." She
thought the proposal that Eugene taxpayers "pick up the tab" for $11.9 million for road work to enable
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 10, 2005 Page 2
Regular Session
McKenzie-Willamette/Triad Medical Center to build a hospital on the Eugene Water & Electric Board
(EWEB) site and the infrastructure, paid for by taxpayers, provided on West 11 th Avenue for the Wal-Mart
store and others were examples of strong reasons to oppose further taxation dedicated to road repairs. She
cited an article in The New York Times that reported that 12 percent of exports from China were for Wal-
Mart and Wal-Mart accounted for one percent of China's gross domestic product. She opined that, given
those facts, Wal-Mart should have paid for this infrastructure, with help from the Target store. She
asserted it was time to stop financing road construction for big business while existing streets were in such
a state of disrepair. She asked how, in all fairness, the City could increase the burden on consumers and
businesses through the consequences of its questionable fiscal policies. She indicated that, should the gas
tax be implemented, she would purchase gas in another town. She wished to remind the City Manager he
was a public servant, an employee of the taxpayers, whose primary obligation was to serve the interests of
the taxpayers and not the needs of special interests.
Marilyn Mays, 1081 North Pond Road, president of the local chapter of the Eugene/Springfield branch of
the National Association for Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), related that the local chapter had
received dozens of calls from community members of color who were voicing concerns regarding racial
profiling. She cited incidents of being followed by police cars for miles, of being stopped and questioned
seemingly for no reason, and more. She had reported this information to City Manager Dennis Taylor
several weeks earlier and had requested that the department and the community take a stand against any
unlawful or intimidating behavior by some police officers. She underscored that she recognized that it
was only some police officers who behaved unlawfully. However, she emphasized this was a significant
problem for community members of color as they were feeling intimidated and fearful of police officers.
Ms. Mays felt some officers were taking the results of the recent complaint made by Cortez Jordan for
granted and were exhibiting boastful and disrespectful behavior toward community members and, in some
cases, even employees of color within the organization. She thought a message had been sent to officers
that there was little or no accountability for the acts of officers who use racially biased tactics in policing.
She was gravely disappointed in the leadership of Chief Lehner on this issue.
Ms. Mays advised the City Manager and the Police Chief to listen more to the community and take these
issues seriously. She added that the NAACP had enjoyed a good relationship with the Police Department
over the last few years, but now it was at an all-time low. She asked, on behalf of the local chapter of the
NAACP, that the City consider endorsing an external review board for police complaints and having more
police officer accountability on these issues. She also requested a public statement from the City Manager
and the Police Chief against the practice of racial profiling. She said she and other members of
Communities United for Better Policing (CUBP) would be contacting the councilors individually in the
coming weeks for further dialogue on this issue.
Zachary Vishanoff, Patterson Street, thanked Mayor Piercy for serving as mayor. He wished to speak on
less-than-lethal warfare. He related that he was "needlessly attacked by the SWAT team" two years
earlier. He felt the article in the paper that spoke favorably about tasers was inaccurate as people
sometimes died as a result of being "tasered." He suggested a venue be formed to discuss less-than-lethal
warfare with the public at which such weapons were demonstrated. He said, since being hit, he spent
hours thinking about the reform of less-than-lethal warfare, as it had been proven to be used recklessly.
David Thor Johnson, 4986 Hunters Glen Drive, wished to be counted for the effort to preserve the
acreage near his house, the 38-acre parcel that was the subject of earlier testimony. He also wished to
commend all those present for participating in democracy and speaking their views.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 10, 2005 Page 3
Regular Session
Mr. Johnson noted that the area had deep ravines from which water flowed to the headwaters of Amazon
Creek. He thought development of this property could cause flood plain hazards for the people who
resided below the land. He opined the land was not worth building on, but was definitely worth saving.
He invited everyone to visit the property, which he felt demonstrated "nature as God intended it." He
asked why anyone would want to build houses there and suggested that they build in Springfield.
Peggy Soomil, 5185 Nectar Way, said her house and property bordered the edge of the property that was
currently being considered for development. She testified that on a nice day there were always
pedestrians walking through the woods on the property, in addition to a variety of animals and insects.
She called the property "exquisite," adding that it was only a 15-minute drive from the downtown area.
She advocated for preserving the property rather than developing it. She pointed out that traffic
congestion would be compounded by any dramatic increase in residents in the area.
Hope Marston, PO 51434, Eugene, welcomed the new mayor and new councilors. She felt glad that
Eugene was a community that recognized hate literature when it came into the City. She thought the City
of Eugene had done a good job when white supremacists distributed hate literature. However, she
suggested that Eugene had a long way to go in recognizing racial profiling and other more subtle forms of
racism. She averred that the dominant culture was never faced with subtle racism because it was never
faced with being followed in a store or potentially being denied the opportunity to rent an apartment or
house based on skin color. She asserted that the police felt vindicated because the racial profiling
allegation brought by Cortez Johnson had been deemed unsubstantiated. She asserted that Eugene had a
"real problem," and in the Police Department it was a problem of abuse of power. She cited, as an
example of such abuse, the recent actions of one officer taken to prevent homeless people from
panhandling.
Ms. Marston urged the council to have some sort of impact on the City Manager so he would take the
issue of racial profiling seriously and make a public statement about it. Additionally, she recommended
he imbue the Police Department with the fact that the City had a real problem. She underscored that just
because the allegations were found to be unsubstantiated by an internal investigation did not mean they
truly were unsubstantiated. She believed Mr. Jordan was racially profiled and she believed a lot of other
people in the community were subject to this sort of abuse as well. She advocated for the formation of an
external review board. She underscored the necessity of diversity in the community and asked that steps
be taken not to "drive out good people."
Elizabeth Twombly, 5015 Nectar Way, submitted pictures of the property neighbors were advocating for
the City to purchase and preserve. She recalled hearing years earlier that the property would be very
difficult to develop. She noted that the City's appraisal had suggested that the property could only be
divided into seven lots. She echoed the neighborhood's concerns regarding the City's "handling of the
property" and regarding potential erosion. She said it would be a shame to lose the resource.
Henry Luvert, 2036 South Shasta Loop, welcomed Mayor Piercy. He expressed hope that the City
Council would support Mayor Piercy in her endeavor to form an external review process. He noted that
profiling was difficult to prove because one had to prove intent. He said unless the officer indicated his or
her intent, it was virtually impossible to substantiate. He suggested that all an officer had to say was that
he or she perceived a "shoelace to be a weapon" or that a car had a flat tire with "explosives in it." He
averred that whatever the police officer said would become the truth. He stated that the City had a lot of
issues to look at. Mr. Luvert asserted that the City Manager and the Police Chief had let the officers know
how the City was going to proceed, but had not let the citizens who were paying the bill know. He
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 10, 2005 Page 4
Regular Session
recommended the Mayor and City Council give instructions to the City Manager and let him tell the
Police Chief what should happen and find a solution that would work for the entire community and not
one that "would fail from the beginning."
Lisa Warnes, 5020 Nectar Way, welcomed the mayor and new councilors. She expressed her concerns
regarding what she termed the "Nectar-Dillard Forest." She asserted the property J~n question contained
wetlands, seasonal creeks, and wildlife habitat, of which several acres of wetlands were not mapped in the
Goal 5 process. She pointed to a study of this property by wetlands consultant, Ethan Perkins, which
indicated wetlands on the property were overlooked. She commented that, as a building contractor, many
homes in this area were failing because the land they were built on presented the same issues as the
property that Mr. Green now owned. Ms. Wames acknowledged that building standards were better than
they were in the 1960s and 1970s. She predicted that allowing development risked damage to the Amazon
headwaters and asked that the City not "sacrifice our natural resources for one Portland developer and his
family business."
Carol Pearce, 5005 Nectar Way, stated that the main reason she moved to her current residence had been
the beautiful woods that extended from her yard to Dillard Road. She expressed concern for the animals
that lived in the woods and for the stream that bordered her backyard. She was "amazed" that the property
had ended up in a developer's hands. She said she would work with her neighbors for the preservation of
the property.
Betty Snowden, PO Box 5166, Eugene, said she was very busy, but could not leave the matter of racial
profiling unaddressed. She wished to direct the City Manager to take a public stance on racial profiling.
She underscored, as a black woman, that racial profiling did exist in Eugene. She related an incident from
her own life when she had been followed in her car and ultimately questioned. She said she owned a nice
car and the police officer questioned how she could come to own such a vehicle. Ms. Snowden talked of
another incident in which a racial epithet had been painted on the door of a business she owned. The
police officer who responded to the call suggested she move her business. She said it was up to the
council to do something about racial profiling. She feared the only way the council and mayor would "get
it" would be if an unarmed person of color was shot.
Charles Gray, 260 North Grand Street, called the Public Forum a wonderful tradition and thanked the
council for the time to speak. He conveyed his best wishes to the City Council and City Manager for the
work ahead of them.
Mr. Gray commented that he hoped the season of kindness and compassion was not over. He hoped that
people, including police officers, would not attempt to restrict the liberties of poor and homeless persons.
He said this was beginning to happen, with the 'no trespassing' and 'no solicitations' being painted on
some curbs. He observed that it was cold and wet outside, adding that it was colder and wetter for the
homeless. He shared that his wife and he often gave a dollar to homeless people on street comers and that
attached to the bill was a post-it note with a list of human service agencies on it. He doubted that they
ever held traffic up for more than five seconds. He urged the City Council, the City Manager, and police
to stop practices that limit the human rights and constitutional rights of the poor. He declared that a
society is measured by how it treats its poorest members.
Kathleen Leonard, 5020 Nectar Way, supported the preservation of the acreage abutting her property.
She opined that the City should preserve "what little forest land we have left within the City limits." She
asked if there was a way to "not sprawl out" into every square inch of soil. She thought the property in
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 10, 2005 Page 5
Regular Session
question was one of the last pieces of undomesticated woodland available within the City limits. She
advised the City not to let it slip away.
Joseph D. Bradford, 1459 City View Drive, concurred with previous speakers on racial profiling. He
commented that racial profiling was nothing new. He shared that it had been called DWB, driving while
black, and WWB, walking while black, when he was growing up. He understood, from personal
experience, what Mr. Johnson had gone through. He acknowledged that some people felt intimidated by
it, but averred that he did not because he was a commander in the United States Army. He supported the
formation of an external review board. He stated that harassment of people of color had to stop and
recommended that City Manager Taylor and Police Chief Lehner give public statements in opposition to
such harassment. He believed that if the system was truly just, these things would happen.
Mr. Bradford remarked that some people alleged that African-Americans were "playing the race card."
He underscored that the Emancipation Proclamation had been signed in 1865 and, though he had been
born in 1964, his family was still suffering from the repercussions of slavery.
Majeska Seese-Green, 549 Van Buren Street, welcomed the new councilors and the mayor. She recalled
the position taken by the Whiteaker Community Council nearly one year ago in support of the strongest
possible police review. She commented that at that time it seemed the Whiteaker neighborhood had been
the only voice speaking in support of this, but now due to several unfortunate incidents, more voices had
joined the call for this type of review. She reiterated the neighborhood's support for a review and
expressed appreciation to the NAACP, CUBP, and the Police Commission for joining in the work to
support it as well. She urged the City Council, Mayor, and City Manager to take the steps necessary to
move the process forward.
David Hinkley, 1350 Lawrence Street, Apartment #1, said in most cases a Consent Calendar was
intended to quickly process routine, non-controversial housekeeping matters. However, he did not feel
Item C, the resolution to repeal the Housing Dispersal Policy, was routine in the least. He thought the
policy had served the community very well. He opined that if it was to be revoked, it needed to be done
properly with public notice and a public hearing. He remarked that a lack of a social service dispersal
policy had turned several of the central city neighborhoods into "social service ghettos." He predicted that
revoking the housing dispersal policy would turn those areas into "outright ghettos." He preferred to
"tweak" the existing language rather than to revoke the entire policy.
Kevin Matthews, 1192 Lawrence Street, president of the Friends of Eugene, remarked that it was
"unspeakably sad" that one could be singled out because of one's physical characteristics in Eugene.
Mr. Matthews averred, regarding the property on Nectar Way, that had the City been able to move forward
with an evidence-based Goal 5 natural resource evaluation and protection process, this habitat would
already be protected. He noted that the Jobs and Land Use Round Table had asked for the council to
move forward with an upland habitat study that would seek to conduct "fact-based natural resource
analysis." He said this process had been suspended.
Mr. Matthews presented a transcript of the Citizens State of the City address to the Mayor and City
Council, a document written collaboratively by half a dozen different local non-profit entities.
Jean A. Stacey, 5150 Nectar Way, said she and her partner had traveled for four years looking for a new
place to live prior to moving to Eugene. She related that they enjoyed living here very much. She
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 10, 2005 Page 6
Regular Session
commented, however, that upon moving here they had observed a lack of African-American people living
here.
Ms. Stacey stated that she wished to testify in support of preserving the wooded property that abutted
Nectar Way. She and her dog walked there every day and appreciated its natural beauty. She felt the City
had erred when it had not purchased the property. She opined the property was an integral part of "who
we are."
Nadia Sindi, 3950 Good Pasture Loop #J-111, wished to speak on behalf of the Muslim and Arab
community. She said the brutality toward Muslims and Arabs was not a new thing in the city of Eugene.
She shared an incident from her past in which she was assaulted by a police officer. She was saddened
that the judge who presided over the recent police case involving two Arab men had called police actions
"appropriate." She felt that under most categories Arab and Muslim people were considered to be white,
but they were the first to be singled out for abuse, even prior to the events of September 11, 2001. She
asked for more vigilance in monitoring police abuse. She related that she had been followed and harassed
numerous times.
Gordie Albi, 1669 Adkins Street, thanked the elected officials for serving. She commented that her
mother used to say "beautiful is as beautiful does." While she felt everything should be done to save the
beauty of the City, the beauty of the people who lived there should also be honored. She stated that racial
profiling was little more than another brand of racial prejudice. She attended all of the meetings regarding
the police review. She said she had much experience, both as a professional auditor and working with
ethnic communities in Seattle, Washington, and Denver, Colorado. She related that she had witnessed
prejudicial handling by the police of an African-American person and also had witnessed this behavior
toward Latino people numerous times when she volunteered at Centro LatinoAmericano. She felt such
treatment arose from ignorance. She said she had materials to share and that she was happy to share what
she had learned with City staff.
Mayor Piercy closed the Public Forum and called on the council for responses and comments.
Councilor Kelly thanked everyone who spoke at the Public Forum. He wished to particularly thank the
people who spoke out about racial profiling. He reiterated his support for a police external review board.
He thought it would take a charter change to form such a board. He commented that the Human Rights
Commission (HRC) had launched a campaign called "We're All in This Together" in December that
sought to increase education and outreach and awareness around racial and ethnic issues. He had yet to
hear anything from other elected officials on how to move this forward. While he recognized the needs of
the City Manager and the Police Chief to carefully parse the words spoken in order to represent a wide
variety of people, he declared the time to be delicate on this issue had passed. He felt the time had come
to make statements powerfully and promptly on this situation. He said the community climate was in need
of improvement.
Regarding Mr. Gray's testimony, Councilor Kelly said some of the spray-painted signs forbidding
panhandling had already been erased and the policy questions that had been raised by this action were
being addressed.
Councilor Kelly requested an update on the Nectar Way property.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 10, 2005 Page 7
Regular Session
Councilor Poling said City Manager Taylor and Police Chief Lehner were taking the issue of racial
profiling very seriously and taking steps to address it. City Manager Taylor affirmed, in response to
Councilor Poling, that the police audit interviews were being conducted.
Councilor Poling recommended that people who were unable to interview personally with the
International City Managers Association (ICMA) auditors contact them by telephone. City Manager
Taylor listed the number to call: 1-866-292-4860. Councilor Poling said he took the accusations very
seriously and would take measures to ensure an appropriate response was made.
City Manager Taylor stated that the team would be taking comments through January 31 and expressed
hope that anyone with concerns would take the time to call. He said the ideas and issues represented at
the present meeting around alleged racial profiling were incredibly disturbing. He condemned acts of
racial profiling and indicated that he and the Police Chief were working aggressively to take steps to
ensure that racial profiling and bias-based policing would no longer happen in the community. He looked
forward to working with the Police Commission, with the council, mayor, and communities united to
understand better how the review process could be improved from beginning to end. He commented that
two years of analysis of data on racial profiling had been completed; the Police Commission was studying
the in-car video use and also was working to improve the timeliness and transparency of the complaint
process. City Manager Taylor acknowledged that further steps were necessary, but reiterated that the role
of the police auditor was being expanded to include inquiries as well as complaints and that he was
working closely with the HRC. He understood the issue of racial profiling to be complex, as it was both a
legal and moral issue. He looked forward to learning from the community what could be done to maintain
the type of community, City, and police department that everyone wanted.
Councilor Taylor thanked everyone who spoke and especially those who came from the Nectar Way area.
She felt it urgent to purchase the property. She thought the property should be purchased by the City,
adding that it was an "obvious place to use condemnation."
Regarding the external review board, Councilor Taylor reiterated her support for it. She did not feel that a
public entity could review itself very well.
Councilor Ortiz thanked everyone for the welcoming the new councilors warmly. She expressed
appreciation for City Manager Taylor's words. She wished the media had been present to capture them.
Mayor Piercy wished to join the council and City Manager in the City's commitment to addressing the
racial profiling issue. She stated that they would not let go of it until it was "made better."
3. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of City Council Minutes
November 8, 2004, Work Session
November 8, 2004, City Council Meeting
November 10, 2004, Work Session
November 15, 2004, City Council Meeting
November 22, 2004, Work Session
November 22, 2004, City Council Meeting
November 24, 2004, Work Session
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 10, 2005 Page 8
Regular Session
B. Approval of Tentative Working Agenda
C. Adoption of Resolution 4820 Repealing Resolution No. 4477 that Adopted the 1996
Housing Dispersal policy, and Providing an Effective Date
Councilor Poling, seconded by Councilor Solomon, moved approval of
the Consent Calendar.
Councilor Kelly pulled Item C. He stated that he had previously submitted minutes corrections via email.
He also noted, on behalf of Councilor Bettman, that she had submitted corrections to the minutes
electronically.
Mayor Piercy deemed the corrections, without objections, approved.
Roll call vote; the motion to approve the Consent Calendar with the
exceptions of Item C passed unanimously, 6:0.
Mayor Piercy called for discussion on Item C.
Councilor Kelly agreed with Mr. Hinkley's public testimony that this was not an item for the Consent
Calendar. Noting that the resolution was already on the table, he said it would either need to be approved,
denied, or tabled at this point. Having spent four years on the Housing Policy Board (HPB), he thought
the acceptance of subsidized housing in the community was due in part to the Housing Dispersal Policy.
He felt the goals of the policy were still valid. He did not find the reasons staff provided in the Agenda
Item Summary (AIS) to be sufficient to eliminate it. He believed the policies could need revision in some
places, such as finding a more relevant number for a maximum number of units.
Councilor Poling commented that his understanding was that the policy, when repealed, would be folded
into the Consolidated Plan. He asked if there were advantages for construction of low-income housing
that the City stood to lose by repealing the policy. Richie Weinman, Urban Services Manager for the
Planning and Development Division (PDD), responded that the City stood to gain something by repealing
the policy. He explained that this was the reason that both the HPB and the Planning Commission had
supported the repeal. He said the dispersal policy identified certain census tracks that were not eligible
for family housing because of population and, because of changes in federal funding, those census tracks
happened to be located in places where 30 percent more money could be gained for projects. He stated
that lower income census tracks had this bonus associated with them.
Continuing, Mr. Weinman conveyed the HPB's position that the projects that had been built were assets to
the neighborhoods in which they were constructed and would be assets to low-income census tracks as
well. He said award-winning housing was constructed that enhanced neighborhoods. He related that
current projects had been contrived to have fewer units in order to avoid the Housing Dispersal Policy
because it created a level of uncertainty at the time the projects were conceived.
Councilor Poling questioned whether sending the dispersal policy to be rewritten would duplicate what
the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Consolidated Plan set forth. Mr. Weinman
responded that the suggestion was that the council jettison the free-standing Housing Dispersal Policy and
fold its concepts into the Consolidated Plan, which is also adopted by the council. He reiterated that the
repeal of the Housing Dispersal Policy would not go into effect until the Consolidated Plan language was
adopted.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 10, 2005 Page 9
Regular Session
In response to another question from Councilor Poling, City Attorney Glenn Klein stated that no public
hearing was required for most resolutions, though certain resolutions such as budget adoption required
them.
Councilor Poling supported repealing the policy as he felt that its repeal would place the City in a better
position to provide low-income housing for people.
Councilor Taylor agreed the item did not belong on the Consent Calendar. She said the item should be
tabled to allow further council discussion. She noted that two members of the HPB had dissented and had
requested the opportunity to write a minority report. She did not see such a report in the packet and
wondered where it was. Mr. Weinman replied that the two members had ultimately decided not to provide
such a report. He noted that HPB member, Bob Doppelt, had been more concerned with the second part
of the policy. He stated that this information was in the agenda packet.
Councilor Ortiz said she had not read the Consolidated Plan. She had concerns about repealing the policy
because she lived in a neighborhood that was not "suitable for low-income housing." She opined that
placement of low-income housing in neighborhoods that had infrastructures to help enhance the lifestyles
of the people that it served would make a better environment for everyone. She commented that she had
known people who lived in public housing in the south hills area whose children were then able to go to
better schools with increased parental involvement. She felt that placement of public housing in her
neighborhood would result in the placement of people who were already somewhat marginalized and had
to depend on the government to help them live into a community that was transient and already was at the
lowest socio-economic stratum. She predicted the repeal of the policy would create an unstable
environment.
Councilor Pryor noted there seemed to be some fear that the repeal wOUld cause the City to concentrate
low-income housing. He asked staff to speak to the notion that if the policy was repealed there would be a
rush to create ghettoes. Mr. Weinman replied that it would be great if the City could build that many
housing units as there were approximately 20,000 households eligible for subsidized housing, based on the
last census, and altogether in the county, 3,500 households were being served. He emphasized that need
exceeded capacity. He said, given all of the best efforts in the last dozen years, the City and its partners in
development of low-income housing had only developed around 1,000 units to add to the low-income
housing stock in a variety of locations. He indicated on a large map where the low-income housing
developments were sited and where the land bank sites, the places that would be developed into future
low-income housing projects, were situated. He underscored that the land bank sites were well-dispersed
throughout the City. He did not think the current land bank sites presented a threat of any sort of
concentration of low-income housing in one area.
Councilor Solomon opined that this seemed to be more of a housekeeping issue as the repeal was tied to
incorporating the language into the Consolidated Plan. She indicated she would support the resolution.
Councilor Kelly questioned the necessity of getting rid of the Housing Dispersal Policy given that the low-
income census tracks were not likely to get much new housing. Mr. Weinman asked HPB chair, John
VanLandingham to respond. Mr. VanLandingham stated that a policy could be a bar. He recalled that the
Housing Dispersal Policy was originally, as conceived of in the 1970s, meant to encourage dispersal.
Now, he said, it was being used to block housing because of the way the numbers work in a particular
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 10, 2005 Page 10
Regular Session
neighborhood and the way the policy counted families. He cited two recent examples of this, both in
middle- to high-income neighborhoods.
Councilor Kelly interjected that if the policy was being used as a bar, it should be fixed and not thrown
out. He felt if there was insufficient flexibility or not enough opportunity for the City Council to weigh in
on a Request for Proposal (RFP), then this should be addressed. Mr. Weinman pointed out that this was
staff's suggestion. Councilor Kelly called the resolution "premature," as the language in the Consolidated
Plan was as yet unknown. He opined there was a big difference between a limit of 60 units and no limit at
all.
Roll call vote; the vote on Consent Calendar Item C was a tie, 3:3;
councilors Poling, Pryor, and Solomon voting in favor and councilors
Taylor, Kelly, and Ortiz voting in opposition. Mayor Piercy voted in
opposition and the resolution failed on a final vote of 4:3.
Mayor Piercy said the resolution could wait and could be done in a way that would be right for everyone.
She expressed concern regarding how housing dispersal affected the achievement gaps in schools.
City Manager Taylor underscored that this was not a time-critical issue. He said staff would make the
next review of the item coincide with the specific language in the Consolidated Plan.
3. PUBLIC HEARING:
An Ordinance Establishing the S-HJM Historic Johansen-Moody House Special Area Zone and
Amending the Eugene Zoning Map
City Manager Taylor asked PDD Associate Planner Kent Kullby to speak about this item.
Mr. Kullby explained that the council had been asked to consider the adoption of a Special Area Historic
Zone for a City landmark located at 370 River Road. He noted this was the second public hearing on this
item, the first having been heard by the Planning Commission. There were no objections to the change in
zoning to date, and the Planning Commission had recommended approval. He said the approval criteria
were in the City Council agenda packet.
Mayor Piercy outlined the procedure for testimony. She opened the public hearing.
Terri Harding, 132 East Broadway Street, Suite 536, planning manager for Satre Associates, noted that
the owner, Kathleen Hall, was present to answer questions if necessary. She thanked Mr. Kullby for his
presentation on the item to the Planning Commission, which unanimously supported the recommendation,
and before the City Council. She explained that the house was built in 1901 in the Vernacular Gothic
style. She said the present owner operated a business called Amelia's Antiques and intended to pay
tribute to the house's history through the operation of the business. She conveyed her client's request that
the council consider taking action on the ordinance earlier than January 24.
Seeing no others wishing to testify, Mayor Piercy closed the public hearing.
In response to a question from Councilor Kelly, Mr. Klein explained that with unanimous consent the
council could choose to take action. City Manager Taylor stated that the bill number was 4888.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 10, 2005 Page 11
Regular Session
Councilor Taylor indicated she favored the item, but was uncertain the council should proceed given that
two council members were not present. She asked if it was urgent. Ms. Harding responded that enacting
it sooner would allow the owner to submit applications for permits earlier.
City Manager Taylor observed that, with one objection to taking action, the item would be acted upon on
January 24, 2005.
4. PUBLIC HEARING and POSSIBLE ACTION:
An Ordinance Concerning City Expenditures; Amending Sections 2.515 and 2.525 of the Eugene
Code, 1971; and Repealing Section 2.555 of that Code
City Manager Taylor explained that this item sought to make the Eugene Code conform to current
practices.
Financial Analysis Manager for the Central Services Department, Sue Cutsogeorge, stated that the code
was currently written as though someone physically sat down and wrote out checks and signed them. She
said this did not happen very often and the City had the technology to make payments through electronic
transfers, which was not addressed in the code. She explained that the proposed ordinance would update
the code, allow more formats for making payments of City expenditures and permit the City Manager to
delegate signature authority on the City's checking accounts. She asked the council to consider taking
action at the present meeting and indicated that, should the council take action, there was a subsequent
related resolution on the agenda that would place a council action on the record to provide to banks as
proof of authorization.
Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing. Seeing no one who wished to speak, Mayor Piercy closed the
public hearing.
Councilor Poling asked if the safeguards and safety checks would be removed from the system, should this
go into effect. Ms. Cutsogeorge replied that, while not exactly the same, there would be safeguards on the
system. She added that the City Manager would instruct staff, in his delegation of payment authority, to
follow the payment procedures that had been set up.
Councilor Poling ascertained that this would save staff time. He stated that the City needed to stay on top
of advancements in technologies and use them to the organization's advantage.
Councilor Ortiz said she was glad to see staff continuing to improve City services.
Councilor Kelly conveyed his appreciation for staff's response to his question, similar to Councilor
Poling's question. He recalled that paper checks were facsimile signed by the City Manager and Mayor.
He asked if the signatories were being changed to the City Manager only. City Manager Taylor responded
that it would still require the signatures of the City Manager and the Finance Officer.
Mr. Klein stated that the code originally dictated that checks should be signed by the Mayor or City
Manager and the Finance Officer. He surmised this code provision dated back in history to an earlier
form of City government.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 10, 2005 Page 12
Regular Session
Mayor Piercy determined there were no objections to taking action at the present meeting.
Councilor Poling, seconded by Councilor Solomon, moved that the City
Council adopt Council Bill 4889, an ordinance concerning City
expenditures. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 6:0.
5. ACTION:
Resolution 4821 Designating Those Authorized to Sign Checks on Behalf of the City; Make
Electronic or other Transfers from City Accounts; Sign Grant Applications, Contracts on
Behalf of the City; and Repealing Resolution No. 4364
Councilor Poling, seconded by Councilor Solomon, moved to approve
Resolution 4821 designating those authorized to sign checks on behalf of
the City; make electronic or other transfers from City accounts; sign grant
applications, contracts on behalf of the City; and repealing resolution No.
4364. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 6:0.
The meeting adjourned at 9:24 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dennis M. Taylor
City Manager
(Recorded by Ruth Atcherson)
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 10, 2005 Page 13
Regular Session
ATTACHMENT D
MINUTES
Eugene City Council
Regular Session
Council Chamber--City Hall
January 24, 2005
7:30 p.m.
COUNCILORS PRESENT: George Poling, David Kelly, Betty Taylor, Jennifer Solomon, Chris
Pryor, Andrea Ortiz, Bonny Bettman, Gary Pap6.
Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order.
1. PUBLIC FORUM
Mayor Piercy reviewed the rules of the Public Forum.
Councilor Poling, seconded by Councilor Solomon, moved to allow all 13
people who had submitted request to speak forms the time to speak. Roll
call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0.
Roxie Cuellar, 2053 Laura Street, spoke on behalf of the Lane County Home Builders Association
(LCHBA). She thanked both the City Manager and the City Council for agreeing to hold a work session
on the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) Intergovernmental Agreement
(IGA). She related that the LCHBA took issue with two elements of the IGA: 1) that wastewater systems
development charges (SDCs) would be set by the MWMC instead of by the elected officials; and 2) the
facilities plan which the HBA was appealing to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) based on its
contention that this was a land use action. She stated that the LCHBA's concern was that the MWMC
could just make project changes on the facilities plan without consulting the elected officials.
Ellen Ityman, 3863 Dorchester Lane, welcomed the new councilors and mayor. She said the members of
the Santa Clara Committee for Sensible Parks and Open Spaces (SCCSPOS) had put together their own
questionnaire that went out to homes in the 97404 zip code area. She related that the committee decided
to take this on because they had heard that the City was going to conduct a telephone survey of 400
households in Eugene. The committee did not know how well-informed those to be called would be and
also what questions would be asked. She acknowledged that the City's survey might be more statistically
scientific, but asserted it would not come close to addressing the heart of the issue, which was the land
exchange. She said the issue for the neighborhood was whether or not the Santa Clara residents were
willing to accept a deal that allegedly only benefited a private developer and the City coffers. Ms. Hyman
felt moving the urban growth boundary (UGB) to benefit one land owner set a dangerous precedent. She
opined that nothing about this deal was in the best interest of Santa Clara citizens and predicted the
committee's questionnaire would give the residents a real voice in this process.
Ms. Hyman announced that the Santa Clara Community Organization was holding an informational
meeting scheduled for February 3, 2005, at the Santa Clara Grange, to which everyone was invited. Based
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 24, 2005 Page 1
Regular Session
on input from the meeting, both pro and con, the organization planned to formulate and vote on a
recommendation. In closing, she stated that the process had served as a catalyst to unify the community
and for that she was grateful.
Kathy Saranpa, 3015 Friendly Street, chair of the Crest Drive Citizens Association, applauded the
council's work on behalf of the neighborhood. She was gratified that the council had taken the time to
listen to comments and concerns and that the council made thoughtful and valuable suggestions to staff.
She commented that trust was an issue for the neighborhood and, upon seeing on the agenda that financing
options for the neighborhood were being discussed, concerned Crest Drive neighbors had no idea context-
sensitive design would also be discussed. Neighbors felt the postcard received during the previous
weekend was not adequate notice. She said the proposal to form a land improvement district (LID) before
context-sensitive design (CSD) standards had been developed caused her uneasiness. She related that
neighbors present at the work session were happy that no action had been taken at this time and hoped
they would be adequately informed prior to the next development.
Ms. Saranpa also expressed neighborhood opposition to the recent decision by the Lane Transit District
(LTD) to cut one more trip from Route 22. She urged the City Council to pass a resolution to support
Senator Bill Morrisette's bill in the State Legislature to make the LTD Board an elected board.
Gary E. Rayor, 2373 Washington Street, speaking on behalf of the Lane Regional Air Pollution
Authority (LRAPA) board, announced that the director had recently resigned. He explained that his
departure had to do with employee relations and annual reviews and not with the Toxics Right-to-Know
program. He said there was a transition plan in place to find a new director and, at present, the senior
management was not comfortable taking the director's place due to the turmoil in the agency.
Continuing, Mr. Rayor discussed the LH Baxter Company, a source of hundreds of air quality complaints,
most of which were substantiated. He said the Center for Disease Control and the State Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ) had come together to try to analyze the air emissions from Baxter to see the
effect on the neighborhood. He related that the two agencies had not found conclusive evidence without
further testing to determine what was getting into the neighborhood and where. He stated that the LRAPA
Board had passed a motion to add air monitoring testing to Baxter's agreement with LRAPA and results
from those tests would be turned over to the Center for Disease Control. While this did not alleviate the
nuisance odor, he felt it would assess the health impacts of living in proximity to JH Baxter Company. He
added that he appreciated being an LRAPA board member.
Tom Watson, 1963-7th Street, Springfield, wished to address the council in response to the news of the
external police review. He pointed out that the violations committed by the two officers, now in prison,
had been occurring for some years prior to their convictions for being sexual predators. He thought
everyone involved had been very light-handed in their regard. He related that he had become acquainted
with one of Roger Magana's victims, adding that her life had become "hell" because of being victimized.
He asserted that after turning in evidence, this woman had been discarded. He said the City had neither
apologized to her, nor helped her bring her life back together. He noted that $108,000 was being spent on
the review of the Eugene Police Department (EPD), but millions would have to be paid to the victims of
the crimes. He was concerned about how the other officers would be held accountable for their behavior.
He alleged there were other predatory officers who had not been sanctioned. He asked the City to
consider paying more money and taking a deeper look into the EPD and encouraged the council not to be
"hindered by politics."
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 24, 2005 Page 2
Regular Session
Lisa Dunn, no address given, said that the City declared it felt badly for the victims of former police
officers Lara and Magana but no one apologized to them. She averred the City had "enough money to
build fire stations" but did not help the victims to get their lives back on track. She stated that She had
filed a complaint with Senator Ron Wyden's office which referred her to the commissioners' office
regarding several other policeman's conduct issues, but "the case was closed the same day." She alleged
there was no accountability nor was there justice and there were still "crooked cops" on the street. She
felt the system portrayed her as a mentally ill drug addict who could not take care of herself or her
daughter. She asserted that before the police officers took advantage of her she had been a normal person.
Now, she said, she had lost her daughter, her soul, and her mind. She reiterated that she had not been
treated fairly or with respect.
Drew Ericson, 630 South 9th Street, Creswell, announced a community event scheduled for January 28 to
benefit Direct Relief International for aid to the tsunami victims of Southeast Asia. He listed the
restaurants that were donating their food and services to the buffet dinner scheduled to start at 5 p.m. and
thanked them publicly for their donations. He said the music would be world beat music and it would be a
family event. He underscored that Direct Relief International gave donated money directly to the people
who needed it the most. He added that it was always great to see the community come together and raise
money for local causes and this was a chance to come together and raise money for international causes.
Lonny Whelchel, PO Box 101 F, Florence, congratulated the new councilors and especially Mayor Kitty
Piercy. He wished to discuss the tsunami relief effort. He asserted that many people were donating
money without really having a sense of where it was going. He said donations to Direct Relief
International were a way that one could be assured that the money spent was going for direct relief to
tsunami victims. He stated that the benefit would include familiar faces from the local entertainment
community. He stressed that it was a family event with all kinds of music. He hoped there would be a big
turnout and that the benefit would raise lots of money. He said fliers were available in the back of the
Council Chamber.
Paul T. Biondi, PO Box 609, Veneta, said the tsunami benefit would bring Lane County together to do
something on a world level. He was honored to be part of this event. He repeated that, while previous
benefits had been for adults only, this one was oriented toward families. He said schools were getting
involved and there would, perhaps, be a pen pals program set up between children hit by the tsunami and
local children. He asked everyone to put the word out on the benefit. He noted that the Lane County
Fairgrounds had donated the space.
Terry Connolly, 1401 Willamette Street, representing the Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce, wished to
bring to the council's attention the chamber's concern over the scope and purpose of the public hearing
scheduled for February 14 pertaining to an ordinance regarding the Toxics Right-to-Know. He said the
ordinance was being "portrayed" as one method to address the fee equity in the current Toxics Right-to-
Know program. He alleged that a closer look at the ordinance indicated no clear connection with the
Toxics Right-to-Know program. He said the charter was clear with respect to which categories of
businesses were subject to these regulations and the charter could not be amended through an ordinance to
include new and different businesses. Mr. Connelly shared the chamber's belief that the new ordinance
would create a new and separate community right-to-know program that resided in City Code instead of
charter. He asserted that the ramifications included that it would have to be set up in accordance with the
Community Right-to-Know Protection Act, it would be separate from the City Charter and would require
its own governing structure, the Toxics Board would have no jurisdiction over it, the program would
require its own source of funding, and would have to develop its own criteria regarding what must be
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 24, 2005 Page 3
Regular Session
reported. He predicted this would have no bearing on the new fee structure. He said it seemed to the
chamber that the City would want more information for the public and for itself prior to holding this
public hearing.
Zachary Vishanoff, Patterson Street, wished to register his concern about the proposed power plant for
the City of Coburg area, noting that it had been down-sized from what had originally been proposed.
Mr. Vishanoff related that he read a story in the newspaper regarding college student loans and saw that
the wastewater capacity for Coburg was being upgraded. He alleged this could be related to the power
plant.
Mr. Vishanoff reiterated his concerns regarding the University of Oregon's proposed construction of a
new basketball arena. He wanted more public debate about it. He asserted that the University of Oregon
Foundation was thinking of purchasing a former used car lot. He felt that given that the Williams Bakery
site had been purchased, the University could end up owning property up to Fairmount Boulevard. He
said the University must be "contained." He repeated that homes owned by the University on Moss Street
were still being kept empty although people needed places to live.
Terry Froemming, 2886 Bailey Lane, chair of the Harlow Neighbors Association, said he had been asked
by the Chase Garden Node Subcommittee to represent it in asking for City Council help and
consideration. He related that the Chase Garden Node was the association's number one priority for the
coming year. He stated that mixed-use development had not contained much in the way of retail services
and the node contained some of the densest concentrations of population in the City. He said the
neighborhood had a number of doctors' offices and no "grand store." He asked the council to support
holding a work session on mixed-use development and underscored that it was an important topic for the
Harlow Neighbors.
Janet O' Bryant, 85 North Madison Street, submitted copies of AIRS and CAD records regarding train
accidents from Blair Boulevard through High Street to the City Council. She reported that the Federal
Railroad Administration (FRA) had increased the decibel level at which train whistles can blast. Because
of where she lived she heard loud train whistles in her house many times per day and this caused real
livability issues for her. She recommended placing safety barriers at intersections so that the trains would
not feel the need to sound their horns. She said the barriers cost $13,000 apiece, and emphasized that an
investment of $100,000 or less could bring peace and quiet to a lot of neighborhoods.
Rob Handy, 455-½ River Road, quoted from a speech that River Road/Santa Clara Transition Manager,
David Reed recently gave before the City Club. Mr. Reed said the neighborhood had a history of mistrust
of the City of Eugene and a history of rapid development and that some felt this caused chaos. Others felt
this could be fertile ground for development of an entirely different relationship with the City of Eugene
and other service providers. Mr. Reed had suggested a transition plan that was smooth and transferred
responsibility for urban services within a Heritage Strategy, which would describe the route for
management of urbanization and of future annexation in ways that preserved community and
neighborhood values, retained, where feasible, community institutions, and forged new and creative
practices for the most effective and efficient delivery of urban services. He suggested this plan should
accomplish all this in the most practical and equitable manner and with the least community discontent as
possible. Mr. Handy commented that the Emerald Park and Recreation Center was the core community
institution of the River Road neighborhood and its tax base was being squeezed.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 24, 2005 Page 4
Regular Session
Kathy Ging, 2878 Harris Street, spoke in support of the Community Center for the Performing Arts, also
known as the Wow Hall. She said the center and the City were at a crossroads regarding the land
purchased by the City. She called the WOW Hall a unique community treasure. She predicted that
development only 13 feet away from the WOW Hall would harm the structure. She stressed that the
WOW Hall was a historic site that had been unchanged. She averred that she and others did not want any
money spent by the neighboring developer to mitigate the noise issue for the WOW Hall. She expressed
concern that any changes they incurred on the building could cause it to lose its National Historic Registry
standing. Instead, she wished for the Ridenour Building to be left as it was. She felt the building was
still viable and that it would serve as an adequate buffer to mitigate noise.
Mayor Piercy closed the Public Forum. She conveyed her appreciation for the work that local people
were doing to raise money for victims of the tsunami disaster in Southeast Asia. She also reaffirmed her
commitment to working with the City Council for a stronger, better relationship with residents of the
Santa Clara/River Road neighborhood.
Mayor Piercy offered to meet with Ms. Dunn and the other victims of the two former police officers to
convey her personal sorrow for the trauma they experienced. She acknowledged that what the women had
gone through must have been terrible.
Mayor Piercy called on the council for responses and comments.
Councilor Pap6 concurred with Mayor Piercy's comments with regard to the last issue and offered his
condolences and apologies on behalf of the City. He wished to clarify that the Police Commission was not
the only body that was looking into the incident and asked City Manager Taylor to repeat the toll free
telephone number for the International City Managers Association (ICMA) and the Police Executive
Research Forum (PERF). City Manager Taylor listed the number to call: 1-866-292-4860.
In response to further questions from Councilor Pap6, City Manager Taylor said complaints could be
made anonymously and that the resulting report from the review would be completed by March 1, 2005.
Councilor Pap6 said he did not realize that the train whistles had been allowed to be louder. He
commented that he could hear them in his neighborhood, which was some distance away from the train
tracks.
City Manager Taylor stated that train whistles had been an issue of community concern since the 1980s.
He said there was no specific proposal but as part of the work with the Public Works Department staff was
trying to outline what it would take to declare portions of the community "whistle-free." He
acknowledged there were traffic safety barriers, as cited in Public Forum testimony, that would be
required at the at-grade right-of ways and then there was a subsequent procedure required to get such a
designation. Councilor Pap6 requested a memorandum on the possible improvements and what it would
take to get the approval of the Federal Railroad Administration for a whistle-free designation.
Councilor Ortiz commended Ms. Dunn for her bravery for coming forward to speak in the Public Forum.
She wanted the City to look into the issues of why there were people in the sex trade and why people were
using drugs on the street. She called it a societal ill and hoped the City Council could delve further into
the issue.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 24, 2005 Page 5
Regular Session
Councilor Ortiz also wished to thank the citizen who testified about the train whistles. She recalled
hearing one earlier in the week that was loud and had caused her alarm.
Councilor Kelly thanked everyone for testifying.
In response to a question from Councilor Kelly, City Manager Taylor reiterated that the intent of the
survey regarding the land exchange for park space in the Santa Clara area was to get information from the
affected neighborhoods and from the City at large. He was uncertain if this could be adequately
accomplished with a telephone sampling of 400 households and offered to provide a memorandum further
detailing the survey process.
Councilor Kelly asked the Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations (CCIGR) could look at
Senator Morrisette's bill regarding the governance of LTD.
Councilor Kelly echoed Mayor Piercy's remarks regarding Ms. Dunn.
Councilor Kelly thanked the people involved with the tsunami relief benefit.
Continuing, Councilor Kelly asked the City Attorney to respond to assertions made by the chamber's
representative that the Toxics Right-to-Know ordinance slated for public hearing on February 14 was in
violation of State law.
Councilor Kelly also wished to join Councilor Papb in his request for a memorandum on reducing train
noise.
Councilor Taylor conveyed her admiration for people who tried to influence government actions. She
agreed with testimony that pointed to the importance of electing decision makers rather than appointing
them, as an elected official was more beholden to the public.
Councilor Taylor appreciated the people who were organizing the fundraiser for the tsunami victims. She
suggested a benefit be organized for the people who were victimized by former police officers Lara and
Magana.
Councilor Taylor expressed admiration for the persistence of both the Crest Drive Neighbors and those
concerned citizens involved in the Santa Clara committee for sensible parks.
Councilor Poling, noting he was a commissioner for the MWMC, said he had been in contact with the
City Manager regarding concerns expressed by the Lane County Home Builders Association.
Councilor Poling wished to clarify that the City of Coburg did not currently have a wastewater treatment
facility and there was some chemical seepage into the river that required mitigation. Thus, he said, the
expenditure for the early stages of development of wastewater treatment was entirely unrelated to the
proposed power plant.
Councilor Poling noted, regarding Mr. Rayor's report on LRAPA, that the Metro Partnership had applied
for $50,000 in grant money to help pay for the air monitoring system at the JH Baxter Company site.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 24, 2005 Page 6
Regular Session
In closing, Councilor Poling thanked members of his neighborhood association, the Harlow Neighbors, for
attending the meeting.
3. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of City Council Minutes
- November 17, 2004, Work Session
- December 6, 2004,Work Session
- December 6, 2004, City Council Meeting
- December 8, 2004, Work Session
B. Approval of Tentative Working Agenda
C. Ratification of Intergovernmental Relations Committee Actions of August 31,
November 10, 2004.
D. Adoption of Resolution 4822 Calling a Public Hearing to Consider Proposed
Withdrawal of Territories from the River Road Water District and River Road Park
and Recreation District, from the Santa Clara Water District and from the Junction
City Water Control District.
E. Adoption of Resolution 4823 Acknowledging Receipt of the City of Eugene, Oregon
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004.
Councilor Poling, seconded by Councilor Solomon, moved approval of
the Consent Calendar.
Councilor Kelly said he had previously submitted minutes corrections via email.
Councilor Bettman also had submitted corrections to the minutes electronically.
Mayor Piercy deemed the corrections, without objections, approved.
Roll call vote; the motion to approve the Consent Calendar passed
unanimously, 8:0.
Mayor Piercy adjourned the meeting of the City Council and called for a break at 8:30 p.m.
Mayor Piercy convened the meeting of the Eugene Urban Renewal Agency at 8:40 p.m.
3. ACTION:
Resolution 1034 Acknowledging Receipt of the Annual Financial Report of the Urban Renewal
Agency of the City of Eugene, Oregon, for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004
City Manager Taylor explained that this item was the same as the annual financial report for the City
included as Item E on the Consent Calendar.
Urban Renewal President Poling, seconded by Vice President Solomon,
moved to adopt Resolution 12034 acknowledging receipt of the Annual
Financial Report of the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Eugene,
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 24, 2005 Page 7
Regular Session
Oregon, for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2004. Roll call vote; the
motion passed unanimously, 8:0.
Mayor Piercy closed the meeting of the Eugene Urban Renewal Agency.
Mayor Piercy reconvened the meeting of the Eugene City Council at 8:42 p.m.
4. PUBLIC HEARING:
An Ordinance Concerning Prohibited Smoking; and Amending Sections 6.225, 6.230, and 6.240
of the Eugene Code, 1971
City Manager Taylor introduced Keli Osbom, Permit Review Manager for the Planning and Development
Department (PDD), and asked her to briefly describe the proposed changes to the smoking ordinance.
Ms. Osbom explained that the first change would expand the distance people were to stand away from
public buildings for smoking purposes to 25 feet, and this included operable windows and air intakes. She
stated that the second was a proposal to place in the Eugene Code a provision that allowed for outdoor
smoking areas. She said there was an administrative rule that allowed such smoking areas and the code
made no reference to the rule.
Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing.
Panla Ciesielski, 1783 Sweetbriar Drive, president of the Lane County Medical Society, restated the
society's support for the smoking ordinance that was in place. She reminded the council that 635
physicians from the local society had endorsed the ordinance in 2002. She called the scientific evidence
that exposure to secOnd-hand smoke was harmful immutable. She underscored that second-smoke
chemicals included systemic, reproductive, and development toxicants, mutagens, and carcinogens and
more than 50 compounds in tobacco smoke were known carcinogens. Ms. Ciesielski stated that second-
hand smoke exposure caused lung and nasal/sinus cancer, heart disease, and sudden infant death
syndrome. She listed the impacts of second-hand smoke on children, as follows: asthma induction and
exacerbation, bronchitis, pneumonia, middle ear infection, chronic respiratory symptoms, and low birth
weights. She noted that over 53,000 non-smokers were killed by second-hand smoke annually. She
conveyed the Lane County Medical Society's recommendation that the City Council apply the ordinance
to all publicly owned buildings.
However, Ms. Ciesielski indicated the medical society could not support the second part of the ordinance.
She said no one should be forced to breathe cigarette smoke while working.
Pat Cookson, 2350 Oakmont Way, speaking on behalf of the American Cancer Society, thanked the
council for enacting the tobacco products and smoking ordinance of 2000 to protect all workers. She
underscored that the American Cancer Society was dedicated to preventing, treating, and eliminating
cancer from all people's lives. She pointed out that tobacco remained the number one cause of
preventable death in this country, affecting both smokers and non-smokers. She related that the American
Cancer Society supported the first portion of the ordinance and the proposed ordinance provisions that
would allow other public agencies to impose similar restrictions. However, she said the society opposed
the second part of the ordinance that would incorporate the current administrative rule regarding outdoor
smoking structures into the code. She called the incorporation of the rule a "step backwards."
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 24, 2005 Page 8
Regular Session
Kevin Franken, 2646 Gay Street, strongly supported amending the ordinance to maintain 25 feet between
smoking areas and public buildings, including windows and air intakes. He related that he was very
allergic to cigarette smoke and this had caused him a great deal of discomfort while attending the
University of Oregon Law School. He said many times he had been forced to walk around to other exits
because of congregating cigarette smokers by the doors. He noted a previous speaker had said that
cigarette smoke did not know how to stay in the smoking section and shared the following quote, which he
had found on the internet: "Having a smoking section in a workplace is like having a peeing section in a
swimming pool." He stressed that cigarettes were the only product that, when used as directed, would kill
a person. He pointed out that entertainer Johnny Carson had just died from emphysema related to
cigarette smoking.
Julia Martin, 1013 Tiara Street, thanked the council for passing "this important piece of public health
legislation" in 2000. She wished to thank the council in particular for protecting those who were most
exposed, those working in restaurants and bars. She stated that when the laws were passed there were
only 16 cities, including Corvallis, with comprehensive smoke-free indoor workplace laws. She said since
those laws were passed, 80 more municipalities had passed such laws. She related that, in spite of efforts
by the tobacco industry, the States of Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, New York, and
California had passed laws making indoor workplaces smoke-free. She noted that Ireland, Norway, and
New Zealand had also passed such laws and countries such as Great Britain and Italy were in the process
of enacting smoke-free laws. She noted that regulations in dozens of communities made smoking in parks
and on playgrounds off limits. She supported the expansion of the ordinance language and echoed the
opposition of previous speakers to the incorporation of the administrative rule regarding outdoor smoking
areas into the code.
Susan Planner, 1788 Riverview Street, worked as a respiratory therapist. She explained that her job
focused primarily on providing therapy for people with chronic breathing problems. She related that many
of the people that she treated had tobacco-related diseases. She was grateful to the council for passing the
ordinance in 2000, stating that it had improved work places for many citizens. She commented that she
had been a volunteer for the American Lung Association and had heard people speak of how wonderful it
was to be able to go to smoke-free clubs and how wonderful it was for oxygen-assisted people to go out
without the worry of having a combustible gas around smoking.
Ms. Pfanner felt, however, that the second portion of the proposed ordinance was a step in the wrong
direction. She declared smoke-free legislation to be the trend of the future. She said she was proud to be
from a City that was in the forefront of such legislation.
Grant Itigginson, 800 Northeast Oregon Street, Portland, stated that he was the State Public Health
Officer with Department for Health and Human Services (DHHS). He said he performed a number of
roles, one of which was to monitor the enforcement of Oregon's Indoor Clean Act, passed in 2001 that
prevented all indoor smoking with the exception of smoking sections in bars and all bingo halls. He
complimented the City of Eugene on its progressive ordinance. However, he expressed concern that the
language regarding outdoor smoking areas in the proposed ordinance could violate both the spirit and the
letter of the law. He thought structures could be constructed that would be completely legal in the city of
Eugene but would be in conflict with State law. He wished to avoid a situation wherein businesses
believed they were constructing perfectly legal outdoor smoking structures only to be sanctioned for them
once they were completed. He stated that there was no research that a 25-percent open plane surface
structure had a significant effect in reducing the problems seen with second-hand smoke. He was also
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 24, 2005 Page 9
Regular Session
concerned, should this portion of the ordinance pass, that more Oregonians would be exposed to the
dangers of second-hand smoke.
Kira Fonarow, 1601 Olive Street, Apartment 612, said she was a 22-year-old University of Oregon
student. She explained that she had been bom with small lungs. She stressed that this made it difficult for
her to be around cigarette smokers. She thought smokers were disrespectful of the needs of others when
congregating around doors and windows to smoke. It caused her to hold her breath for as long as she
could to avoid breathing the smoke. She asked that the council pass the portion of the ordinance that
would mandate that smokers stand at least 25 feet away from building entrances, windows, and air intakes.
She remarked that if she had all of the power, she would eliminate tobacco altogether. She believed it was
worse than marijuana smoking.
Sarah Itendrickson, 1036 Adams Street, Lane County Public Health Officer, listed the many supporters
of the "very original, very successful" smoke-free ordinance, both individuals and groups. She said since
the passage of the law, the worker protection goals of the ordinance had been undermined in response to
pressure by bar owners, which resulted in an administrative rule that declared an arbitrary 25 percent open
to the air to be the same as smoking outside. Ms. Hendrickson averred this rule was based on no evidence
whatsoever. She stated that there was a vast quantity of air circulation data from entities such as the
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRE). She said a safe
ventilation standard for environmental tobacco smoke had not been set because ventilation did not work
and merely made a place smell better. She declared that the 25 percent rule had been based on no
precedent by any other city or jurisdiction and was temporarily adopted without opportunity for public
comment.
Ms. Hendricksonunderscored that Public Health had objected to the rule, both when originally proposed
and again when it was proposed to be incorporated into the code language. She stated that the 25 percent
rule continued to allow the construction and use of outdoor smoking rooms. She commented that they
were nothing similar to what she thought of as a porch. She said building permits had been granted to
places other than bars to construct similar rooms. She noted that even the administrative rule had not been
truly enforced as enforcement only occurred in response to complaints that were signed and submitted in
writing. She asserted that workers who were likely to complain were not likely to sign such a complaint.
Martin Jones, 2300 Parkside Lane, said he was a practicing internist who had worked with the Tobacco
Free Coalition of Lane County four years earlier to pass the ordinance. He wished to speak specifically
against the administrative rule. He felt the rule to allow covered smoking areas undermined and
"polluted" the original intent of the ordinance which was to protect workers and other non-smokers from
the "awful effects" of environmental tobacco smoke, otherwise known as second-hand smoke. He
reiterated that there was scientific consensus about the health impacts of second-hand smoke to non-
smokers, such as heart disease and emphysema among many. Mr. Jones noted that four years earlier he
had cited a study that proved there to be an increase in cancers and heart attacks among bar workers,
bartenders, and wait staff. He stated that working in a bar with smoking areas increased the probability of
developing angina or heart disease, heart attacks specifically, by 30 percent. He attributed this to platelet
aggregation caused by inhaling cigarette smoke. He explained that the smoke caused platelets to "glom
up" and clog arteries. He said scientific evidence suggested that even eating in a restaurant with a
smoking area increased the possibility of heart attacks. He stated that recent evidence had led the Center
for Disease Control (CDC) to notify all practitioners across the country, as a warning, that even small
doses of cigarette smoke could be a precipitant to heart attacks.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 24, 2005 Page 10
Regular Session
Mr. Jones stressed that the United States Surgeon General concluded that exposure to second-hand smoke
was a common health hazard that was completely preventable. He asked the council to "do the right
thing" and fix the loophole.
Mayor Piercy closed the public hearing. She thanked everyone for coming before the council to testify.
Councilor Kelly also thanked all who testified. He supported adoption of the 25-foot rule and the
rejection of the Codification of the administrative rule. He asked what would prevent the council from
broadening the language and setting a 25-foot rule for all publicly owned buildings. He suggested this
could be answered in a memorandum.
Councilor Kelly noted that the councilors had received a packet of photographs of the so-called outdoor
smoking areas. He opined that they did not look like porches so much as rooms with slats. He did not
believe employees were protected by these outdoor areas. He commended the Duck Inn, Rennie's
Landing, and Kow Loon for building actual outdoor smoking areas. Nonetheless, he wished to go beyond
the existing language and repeal the administrative rule. He underscored that existing outdoor smoking
areas would be grandfathered in. He also wished for better definition of"real" outdoor smoking areas at
some future point.
Councilor Bettman commented that the outdoor smoking areas were obviously rooms. She averred it was
"unfortunate that staff made the administrative rule" to allow this. She said it was inconsistent with the
legislative intent of the ordinance. She asked if employees were required to go into the outdoor smoking
rooms to serve customers and clean up. City Manager Taylor affirmed that they were.
Councilor Bettman hoped that the two portions of the ordinance could be separated. She suggested that
the City look at the outdoor smoking areas that met the requirements and codify what they looked like.
Councilor Kelly asked staff to define, in a memorandum, what was meant on page 127 by "separated from
floor to ceiling."
Councilor Pryor commented that the most significant point made in testimony had been made by Dr.
Higginson, in that the City's administrative rule could allow structures to be built that could be in
violation of State law. He underscored the importance of ensuring that the City of Eugene's laws were
consistent with those of the State.
Councilor Pap~ recalled that the administrative order was an attempt to assist the bar and restaurant
owners who claimed their businesses were going to fail because they did not have smoking areas. He
remembered that it was intended that employees should not be required to serve food or alcohol in the
smoking areas. He said people had the right to smoke, though he personally did not approve of smoking.
Councilor Taylor also recalled that the council had spoken very clearly about not subjecting workers to
second-hand smoke. She asked if this also applied to those workers who would have to clean up a
smoking area. She noted the issue had arisen in her ward wherein a residence was in close proximity to a
smoking area and the residents had complained. She asked what could be done in this case and whether
such outdoor smoking areas could be eliminated altogether.
Councilor Bettman asked staff to address the question of how an outdoor smoking room or deck interacted
with the 25-foot rule. She felt there was an "inherent incompatibility" there.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 24, 2005 Page 11
Regular Session
5. ACTION:
An Ordinance Establishing the S-HJM Historic Johansen-Moody House Special Area Zone and
Amending the Eugene Zoning Map
Councilor Poling, seconded by Councilor Solomon, moved that the City
Council adopt Council Bill 4888, an ordinance establishing the S-HJM
Historic Johansen-Moody House Special Area Zone. Roll call vote; the
motion passed unanimously, 8:0.
6. ACTION:
An Ordinance Levying Assessments for Constructing Sidewalks, Curbs, Gutters, Conduit, and
Storm Drainage System on Santa Clara Avenue from River Road to Approximately 600 Feet
West; and Providing an Immediate Effective Date (Contract #2005-10) (Job #4108)
City Manager Taylor explained that this was a final action for the levying of assessments. He said
Paul Klope, Principal Civil Engineer for the Public Works Department, was available to answer
questions. He noted that staff asked for an immediate effective date to avoid interest that would
accrue over the 30-days that ordinances took to go into effect.
Councilor Poling, seconded by Councilor Solomon, moved to approve the
Findings and Recommendations of the Hearings Official of January 13,
2005.
Councilor Bettman pointed out that it stated in the findings that the total City cost was $5,525 and asked
what fund that would come from. Mr. Klope responded that it was coming from the Transportation SDC
Fund and the Transportation Utility Fund. Councilor Bettman said there was no Transportation Utility
Fund. It was clarified that this was the gas tax.
Councilor Bettman noted that two properties were owned by the City of Eugene and asked, given that they
could not be assessed, where the $50,000 assessed for those properties was coming from. Mr. Klope
replied that it was coming from their building funds. City Manager Taylor elaborated that, for the Fire
Station, it was coming from the construction budget.
Assistant City Manager Jim Carlson explained that it was part of the original construction budget. He
underscored that extending sewer and water lines was part of the cost of constructing a building there.
Councilor Bettman asked if some of the money, when the construction budget had been put together, had
not been taken from the operations budget. Mr. Carlson replied that one component of the project had
been bonded and so there were limited tax obligation bonds being paid for out of the operating budget.
Councilor Bettman objected to the financing. She asked why there was not an ability to use SDCs to pay
for it as it was brand new capacity. Mr. Klope clarified that it was not new capacity. He said the
transportation SDC element was only for a small amount of sidewalk on River Road and a street repair.
He added that the City had deemed it prudent to accomplish the street repair as long as the project was
underway.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 24, 2005 Page 12
Regular Session
Councilor Bettman asked what other entities were being assessed. Mr. Klope replied that St. Vincent
DePaul, the Santa Clara Investment Group, the Laksidanta LLC, and PeaceHealth were also being
assessed. Councilor Bettman asked why the street was classified as a local street. She opined it should be
classified as a collector or an arterial. Mr. Klope did not know the reasoning behind the classification.
Councilor Bettman registered her opposition to the motion based on the funding package. She opined
there were hidden elements in the financing, such as the funding of the Fire Station using, in part,
operations money and that a small portion of the funding was being spent on the street.
Roll call vote; the motion passed, 7:1; Councilor Bettman voting in
opposition.
Councilor Poling, seconded by Councilor Solomon, moved that the City
Council adopt Council Bill 4890, an ordinance levying assessments for
Santa Clara Avenue. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0.
7. ACTION:
An Ordinance Concerning Motor Vehicle Fuel Dealer's Business Licenses; and Amending
Sections 3.465, 3.467, 3.474, 3.480, 3.483, and 3.484 of the Eugene Code, 1971
City Manager Taylor said Public Works Department Director Kurt Corey was available to answer
questions. He recommended that the ordinance be passed.
Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Pap6, moved to separate the
ordinance into two ordinances: one ordinance to c6ntain the gas tax
increase from section (2) of the ordinance and a second ordinance to
contain the balance of the ordinance.
Councilor Bettman explained that she did not support the gas tax but supported codification of the other
parts of the ordinance.
Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0.
Councilor Poling, seconded by Councilor Solomon, moved that the City
Council adopt Council Bill 4885, an ordinance concerning motor vehicle
fuel dealer's business licenses as written in the version handed out on
January 24, 2005.
Councilor Solomon asked if this ordinance addressed the issues raised by Ron Tyree at the public hearing.
Mr. Corey responded that the amended ordinance addressed his concern regarding the 80 percent refund
on diesel fuel used by vendors that pay weight/mile taxes.
Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to amend the
motion to delete the definition of 'weight receipt' from Section 1 of the
Ordinance, and to delete subsections (2) and (3) from EC 3.483 in Section
4 of the Ordinance.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 24, 2005 Page 13
Regular Session
Speaking to his amendment, Councilor Kelly said this was not a refund for diesel fuel sitting in a tanker
truck, but rather was a refund for fuel used while rolling down the road. He had asked staff if there was a
way to craft a broader refund so that a business with gasoline-powered vehicles that delivered out of the
area could have a mechanism for applying for a refund. He felt this was in the interest of fairness.
Councilor Solomon asked if the City of Springfield had an 80-percent diesel refund. City Manager Taylor
affirmed that it did.
Councilor Taylor indicated she would support the amendment for reasons stated by Councilor Kelly.
Councilor Pap6 appreciated the intent but questioned the pragmatics of implementation. He predicted that
drivers would mostly purchase diesel fuel outside of City limits.
Councilor Bettman asked, given that analysis had indicated that probably five to seven percent utilization
of City roads as opposed to the 20 percent figure that staff generated. Mr. Corey responded that the 80
percent/20 percent split mirrored the City of Springfield. He said a relatively small number of companies
fit into this category and received this refund.
Councilor Bettman asked if the refund was made annually and how it was checked for accuracy. Mr.
Corey replied that the refund program was administered through the Oregon Department of Transportation
(ODOT) tax group. He said the City had not had this particular provision in the ordinance to date so as a
matter of stewardship he averred it would not be a bad idea to check on it from time to time.
Councilor Kelly reiterated that his amendment was based on the principle of fairness, as a business with
similar patterns of driving that utilized gasoline for fuel should be able to qualify for such a refund.
Councilor Poling opposed the amendment. He said Eugene needed to keep a level playing field with
Springfield. He felt it was a fair and equitable way of dealing with the people who own trucking
companies but were running their businesses out of the community.
Councilor Kelly commented that, should the gas tax pass, Springfield would have a gas tax of three cents
per gallon and Eugene would have a gas tax of five cents per gallon, and this, in his opinion would not
maintain a "level playing field" between the two cities.
Roll call vote; the motion to amend failed, 5:3; councilors Taylor,
Bettman, and Kelly voting in favor.
Roll call vote; the main motion passed, 7:1; Councilor Taylor voting in
opposition.
Councilor Poling, seconded by Councilor Solomon, moved that the City
Council adopt Council Bill 4891, an ordinance concerning motor vehicle
fuel dealer's business licenses.
Councilor Ortiz, seconded by Councilor Pap6, moved to amend the
motion to add Section 3 to the ordinance to provide the following
language: 'Unless otherwise extended by the City Council, the
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 24, 2005 Page 14
Regular Session
amendment to subsection (b) of Section 3.467 shall sunset on February
25, 2008, and the tax will revert to its current $.03 per gallon.'
Speaking to the motion to amend, Councilor Ortiz acknowledged that some had referred to the ordinance
as a "band-aid" but averred that she was willing to help with the "band-aid" for the community. She
commented that the City needed to pay for its streets, even if gasoline became very expensive as a result.
She supported taking a comprehensive look, as the Mayor had recommended, at all of the funding pieces
including Lane County, ODOT, and others. She felt that placing a sunset on the gas tax would give an
ending date for that to happen by.
Councilor Pap6 did not think Eugene should "out-step" its neighbor, Springfield. However, he felt having
a sunset on the tax would help him to support its enactment. He agreed that more funding for roads was
needed.
Councilor Bettman voiced her opposition to the main motion. She reiterated her concern that road
funding was not being prioritized appropriately, citing as an example of her concern what she considered a
costly project that Lane County had undertaken to replace the one-lane bridge to Mount Pisgah
Arboretum. She was unwilling to ask voters for more money until the elected officials exercised some
discipline with the money they had.
Councilor Taylor said she would vote against the tax but for the amendment in case the gas tax passed.
Councilor Kelly thanked Councilor Ortiz for offering the amendment and indicated his support.
City Attorney Glenn Klein suggested a change in the sunset date to February 29, 2008. Councilor Ortiz
incorporated that as an amendment to the motion. Councilor Pap6, second to the motion, voiced no
objection.
Roll call vote; the amendment passed, 7:1; Councilor Bettman voting in
opposition.
Speaking to the main motion, Councilor Kelly said he had worked on the transportation maintenance
funding issue for most of his tenure on the council. He agreed with Mayor Piercy that the elected officials
needed to take a step back and take a broader look and see where some consensus could be found. He
reiterated his support for a transportation system maintenance fee (TSMF). However, he would oppose
the motion because he felt the diesel exemption created an inequity.
Councilor Taylor indicated her opposition to the motion.
Councilor Solomon, responding to comments about a lack Of discipline on the part of elected officials,
stated that there had not been an increase in the State gasoline tax for more than a decade and during this
period wherein revenues had remained the same, fuel efficiency and the cost of construction had
increased. She underscored that there had been a "myriad" of reasons that brought the City to its current
crisis. She called it unfair to place blame entirely on staff and the elected officials.
Councilor Ortiz felt compelled to support the tax. She acknowledged that it would not fix the problem for
good, but emphasized that the roads needed fixing, nonetheless.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 24, 2005 Page 15
Regular Session
Councilor Pryor expressed his distaste for taxing people. He felt he had walked into the middle of an
enormous problem with an immediate need for a remedy. He remarked that such a tax was easier to enact
with a known sunset date attached to it, adding that during the next three years the elected officials should
"turn over every rock" looking for modes of permanent funding for the City's road repairs. He supported
the motion, as amended.
Councilor Poling indicated his support for the motion. He noted the two-cent increase was in the total
originally recommended by the Budget Citizen Subcommittee. He expressed a willingness to sit down
with the County officials and whoever else was deemed necessary to determine other solutions to the road
problems. He said once permanent funding was found, he would support the elimination of the entire five
cent gasoline tax. He recognized that many people opposed the tax. He commented that people who
registered their opposition did not have an alternative solution to the funding issue to tender. He added, as
a point of information, that a person who drove 20,000 miles per year and whose vehicle got 20 miles to
the gallon would only experience a $20 increase in their annual expenses.
Councilor Ortiz appreciated the council's support for the amendment. She recalled paying 36 cents per
gallon for gasoline and recalled thinking that if it rose to 39 cents per gallon she would quit driving. She
noted that she now paid more than $1.50 per gallon and that this money went out of state.
Mayor Piercy indicated that she would support the motion in the event of a tie.
Roll call vote; the main motion passed, as amended, 5:3; councilors
Bettman, Taylor, and Kelly voting in opposition.
Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Bettman, moved that the
ordinance be put on the ballot in order to allow the people to vote for it.
City Attorney Klein explained that the council could not simply do so and suggested that the council move
to direct the City Manager to bring back an ordinance that would refer the gas tax to the ballot.
Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Bettman, changed her motion in
accordance with the advice of legal counsel. The motion failed, 6:2;
councilors Taylor and Bettman voting in favor.
The meeting adjoumed at 10:01 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dennis M. Taylor
City Manager
(Recorded by Ruth Atcherson)
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 24, 2005 Page 16
Regular Session