Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 04/14/08 Work Session M I N U T E S Eugene City Council Work Session McNutt Room – City Hall 777 Pearl Street—Eugene, Oregon April 14, 2008 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Chris Pryor, Bonny Bettman, Andrea Ortiz, Mike Clark, Jennifer Solomon, Alan Zelenka, Betty Taylor. COUNCILORS ABSENT: George Poling. Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. A. COMMITTEE REPORTS AND ITEMS OF INTEREST FROM MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER She welcomed Jon Ruiz, the new city manager, and thanked Angel Jones for her service as interim city manager. Mr. Ruiz said he was pleased to be in Eugene and thanked the council for placing their trust in him. He looked forward to working with the council and the community on many challenging issues. Mr. Pryor also extended his thanks to Ms. Jones for her service. He said the Lane Council of Governments (LCOG) had adopted a revised budget for the current year and recommended a budget for the next year. He said there had been some increase in human services funding and some decreases in other areas, but the overall budget was in good financial shape. He attended a meeting to solicit suggestions from the public in safety improvements to Bailey Hill Road and was impressed by the group’s willingness to find workable solutions and Public Works’ support of that effort. He said the West Eugene Collaborative (WEC) continued to meet and was developing information to share with the community on the WEC’s activities. Mr. Zelenka said he had been ill and missed several meetings. He would provide an update on Metropolitan Policy Committee (MPC) activities in a memorandum to the council. Ms. Ortiz welcomed Mr. Ruiz. She reported that the Lane Regional Air Protection Authority (LRAPA) had discussed a potential ban on outdoor burning, such as fire pits. She said those were not allowed inside the City, but were allowed outside City limits. She said LRAPA was also reevaluating what environmental factors it monitored. She said she was chair of the Human Service Commission, which continued to be concerned with budget issues and how to meet community needs with fewer resources. She commended City employee Norm Babcock and wished him well. Ms. Ortiz announced there would be a Whiteaker cleanup parade, with costumes optional. She was pleased to see the Downtown Neighborhood Association was again active. She had attended a meeting on the design of Elmira Street. MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 1 Work Session Ms. Solomon said the project to reconfigure and rebuild Elmira and Maple streets was underway and designs were being discussed with the neighborhoods. She commended staff for their efforts and responsiveness to the public. Mr. Clark thanked Ms. Jones for her service and welcomed Mr. Ruiz. He reported that Police Commission members had the opportunity to attend operations academy training and thanked staff that helped commission- ers gain a better understanding of department operations. He said the commission was also reviewing the Magellan Report and there was considerable interest among staff and commissioners in the subject to taking police cars home. Mr. Clark said a Human Rights Commission work group was developing a resolution related to mental health policy and another group was discussing revisions to the hate crimes ordinance to incorporate State violations in the City’s code. He said the taxi accessibility work group was also developing recommendations for the council. He recognized longtime Human Rights Program employee Karen Hyatt, who was leaving for a position with the University of Oregon, and thanked her for her years of service to the community. He thanked Kurt Corey and Mark Schoening for their work with neighbors on improvements to Bond Lane. Ms. Taylor also welcomed Mr. Ruiz and thanked Ms. Jones. She expressed her regret at the closure of the Willamette Repertory Theater company. She announced a combined meeting of the Southeast and Crest Drive neighborhood associations at which candidates for mayor and the Eugene Water and Electric Board (EWEB) would be speaking. Ms. Bettman thanked Ms. Jones for her work and welcomed Mr. Ruiz. She referred to a resolution related to the 190 agreements being considered by the Lane County Board of Commissioners and asked for a memoran- dum from staff explaining how it would impact the City, as well as any information that might be available on how the County would be impacted. Ms. Jones replied that staff was already preparing that information. Mr. Clark said he had attended a County Commission meeting at which the 190 agreements were discussed. He said it appeared the County was seeking opportunity to incorporate more into the agreements than just planning and development and examine what the County could do to assist citizens who lived outside the City. Ms. Piercy stated that there was agreement at the recent joint elected officials meeting to discuss the 190 agreements. She reported that 700 trees were planted on Arbor Day and said how fortunate it was that Eugene had an urban forest program that reflected the importance of trees to the community. Mr. Pryor explained that Mr. Poling had requested that the council allow him to miss meetings while he was receiving training from the General Services Administration. Mr. Pryor, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved that Councilor Poling’s council seat is not declared vacant pursuant to Section 23 of the City Charter for the next ten weeks. Ms. Bettman suggested that the alternates for Mr. Poling’s boards and commissions assignments should be notified and arrangements made for them to receive meeting notices and information. Ms. Piercy noted that under the Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations (CCIGR) rules she could substitute for a member at that member’s request. MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 2 Work Session The motion passed unanimously, 7:0. B. WORK SESSION: Potential Hospital Citing Ms. Jones introduced Planning and Development Department director Susan Muir to present the item. Ms. Muir used a slide presentation to provide an overview of potential hospital siting in Eugene. She said the council had director staff to develop a work plan with timelines and cost impacts for the Riverfront Site and continue conversations on the 4J and Register Guard site. She used aerial photographs of the Riverfront site to illustrate the proposed development site. She reviewed McKenzie Willamette Medical Center and University of Oregon Riverfront site issues related to location, size, timing, process complexity, land and financing. She said the University’s requirements were addressed in detail in its April 7, 2008, letter included in the agenda packet. Ms. Muir said an initial steps in the project would be to identify 60 acres—the equivalent of 21 square blocks—in the vicinity of the University, identify the financial resources for that acquisition and determine how to align the University and McKenzie Willamette’s timelines. She said the council options included: 1) support continued negotiations with the University of Oregon and McKenzie Willamette to see if timeline and financial issues could be resolved, 2) support continued discussions related to the 4J site, and 3) support continued discussions related to the Register Guard site; those options were presented as potential motions and the city manager’s recommendations was to support options 2 and 3 as the two North Eugene sites appeared to be the only ones that appeared to meet the hospital’s siting criteria. Ms. Bettman asked how staff determined what financial resources would be required for the Riverfront site. Ms. Muir replied that the resources were based on what the University required and staff’s estimate of the replacement value of the property. Ms. Bettman asked if McKenzie Willamette was no longer interested in the Riverfront site. McKenzie Willamette CEO Maurine Cate indicated that the hospital found the location on the Franklin Boulevard corridor very interesting as a hospital site. Ms. Bettman said the University was negotiating to its best advantage and the City should do the same. She was in favor, as long as McKenzie Willamette was interested in the site, in continuing negotiations. She noted the hospital did not need all of the acreage and saw the site as being very advantageous to the community and still a compelling location. She listed a number of instances of the City’s generosity to the University over the years, in addition to cooperation on several ongoing projects and suggested those should be used as leverage in continued negotiations. Ms. Ortiz commented that it would be very challenging to identify an area the size of 21 square blocks within the City’s footprint. She said McKenzie Willamette did not need all of the Riverfront site and was willing to continue the negotiations. Mr. Zelenka indicated he liked the Riverfront site for a hospital and it would require creative thinking to address the University’s needs, although he was puzzled about why the University required the entire 67 acres. He said the Civic Stadium site could possible be considered in the negotiations and favored continuing to pursue the Riverfront site. MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 3 Work Session Mr. Pryor said the information was useful in understanding the practical aspects of the Riverfront site. He wanted to retain the Riverfront site as an option if McKenzie Willamette was still interested, but concerned that there were insurmountable obstacles. He wanted to continue to move forward with the three sites, but if one was not practical from a financial perspective, the council should know that soon so it could consider other options as decisions needed to be made within the hospital’s timeline. Ms. Piercy said the question was whether negotiations had been approached by all three entities from the perspective of how the Riverfront site could be made to work for everyone. Ms. Jones replied that was the framework for the initial discussions as that was the first choice for a hospital site, but the reality was that the site was not for sale and the University had plans for the property and its proximity to the campus was extremely important. She thought if there was more time some of those issues could be resolved, but that was not likely to happen within McKenzie Willamette’s timeline and staff was trying to identify other possible scenarios; it was disheartening to realize the challenges that would have to be overcome in terms of limited time and resources. Mr. Clark agreed that the timeline was a key issue and echoed Mr. Pryor’s remarks. He asserted that the people of Eugene deserved a hospital, whether at the Riverfront site or a location in North Eugene. He noted that the property taxes from a hospital would help considerably to solve some of the City’s financial challenges. He hoped to accommodate McKenzie Willamette’s needs. Ms. Taylor agreed with Ms. Bettman’s comments regarding the City’s efforts over the years to accommodate the University. She was not interested in devoting any staff time to the 4J or Register Guard site as neither was advantageous to the community. Ms. Bettman commented that all sites would require a Metro Plan amendment and zone changes and that would preclude the council’s moving to support the sites without evaluating the pros and cons. She said the McKenzie Willamette and University timelines appeared to be close and if the expertise did not exist within the City organization to engage in hard negotiating it should contract for that expertise. She would add that to the first option. She asked how much of the Riverfront site was within the Riverfront urban renewal district. Ms. Muir indicated that 100 percent of the site was within the district. Ms. Bettman said the University was a nontaxable entity and any development it did on that property would be paid for by diverting taxes from the County, the schools and the City’s General Fund and subsidized by City taxpayers. She asked about the process for sunsetting an urban renewal district or expanding the spending limit for the purpose of siting a hospital. City Attorney Glenn Klein replied that expanding the spending limit would require the Urban Renewal Agency (URA) to initiate the amendment, Planning Commission public hearings and an ordinance adopted by the City Council, which would be subject to referendum. He said the timeline was approximate 100 days and the increase in maximum indebtedness could be tied directly to hospital siting. Ms. Bettman felt that was an option for funding acquisition of the property and the taxes paid by the hospital would go back into the urban renewal district. Ms. Ortiz declared a potential conflict of interest as she was employed by Sacred Heart hospital. Ms. Bettman asked why McKenzie Willamette was not negotiating with either the 4J School District or the Register Guard for the North Eugene sites and why the EWEB site was not being considered now that operations were being moved to another location. Ms. Muir said staff was still exploring any site that might MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 4 Work Session fit the hospital’s needs, including the EWEB site. She said the hospital had indicated that certainty was very important and the two north sites had not risen to the top as it did not appear there was unanimous support for either site. Mr. Zelenka commented that Ms. Bettman’s suggestions had merit and he was intrigued that Ms. Cate indicated McKenzie Willamette was still interested in the Riverfront site, which meant the council should continue its interest in the site and more creative thinking could result in a hospital in Eugene. Ms. Piercy pointed out that considerable work was done on the EWEB site, but it was eliminated because EWEB had no plans to move; now EWEB was moving and the possibilities for the site changed dramatically. She thought there were challenged with all of the sites and it was a matter of time to work through those issues. She said if the City really wanted a hospital on the south side of the river it was reasonable to continue to negotiate on the Riverfront site, as well as revisit the work done on the EWEB site. Mr. Pryor, seconded by Ms. Bettman moved to support the continued discussions re- lated to the 4J site and the Register Guard site as potential hospital sites in Eugene. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Zelenka, moved to substitute a motion to support the continued negotiations with the University of Oregon and McKenzie Willamette Medical Center to see if the timeline and financial needs of the University can be ne- gotiated to better align with the timing needs of the hospital and the financial re- sources of the hospital and the City of Eugene and to direct the city manager to con- sider bringing in outside expertise to negotiate some of the elements of financing, land acquisition and other elements to expedite negotiations and position the City to best advantage while addressing the needs of the University and the hospital. Ms. Bettman spoke in support of her motion and the importance of engaging in negotiations with all assets and requirements on the table. She said the Riverfront site was in the best interest of the community’s health care, the hospital’s needs and the City’s tax base. Mr. Pryor was not certain it was an “either/or” situation and his original motion could be passed, followed by Ms. Bettman’s motion. Ms. Bettman suggested a friendly amendment to add options 2 and 3 to her motion. Mr. Pryor said he would add those options as a friendly amendment if he could also include a requirement that a final decision would be made by the end of May, based on the hospital’s timeline. Ms. Bettman asked if the end of May was a hard date. Ms. Cate replied that given the length of time the hospital had been seeking an appropriate site it was time for the hospital to make a decision in the next month or two. Ms. Bettman agreed to accept a friendly amendment to include options 2 and 3 and require a decision to be made by the end of May. Mr. Clark urged the council not to send a message that it preferred the hospital in Springfield rather than a site in North Eugene. He could support the motion as it kept all of the options open. MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 5 Work Session Ms. Solomon expressed concern that the council had no backup plan if the Riverfront site could not be successfully negotiated by the end of May. She feared the hospital would be lost to Springfield. Ms. Taylor said she would not support the motion with the inclusion of options 2 and 3, which would devote staff time to the two North Eugene sites. Mr. Pryor felt that options 2 and 3 represented a backup plan that could be pursued if there was no decision on the Riverfront site by the end of May. Ms. Jones added that staff would also be exploring other sites within the City and would work on any that appeared to meet the hospital’s needs, in addition to the sites included in the council’s discussion. Ms. Ortiz urged unanimous council support for a site because the hospital needed to be certain of support for its move to Eugene. She would support the motion as it included all of the options and hoped councilors would support the other sites if the Riverfront site was eliminated. Ms. Bettman said her intent was to be inclusionary and her first priority was to have a full service medical facility available to the highest concentration of population in Lane County, which was the South Eugene area. She said if it came to a choice of life-saving services south of the river or not in Eugene, she would support south of the river. She said it was not as important to have the hospital in Eugene as it was to have it accessible to the concentration of population. th Ms. Piercy reminded the council that the 12 Avenue and Willamette Street site was also a possibility. Mr. Clark noted there were sites in Springfield north of the river and hoped the council’s action would not result in driving the hospital north of the river, which would be the worst scenario from the City of Eugene’s perspective. The motion to substitute, as amended, passed, 5:2; Ms. Taylor and Ms. Solomon vot- ing in opposition. The substitute main motion passed, 5:2; Ms. Taylor and Ms. Solomon voting in op- position. C. WORK SESSION: Downtown Public Safety Issues Ms. Jones introduced Police Chief Bob Lehner to discuss the issue of downtown public safety. Chief Lehner said the concerns about downtown public safety resulted from policing issues related to disorderly behavior. He said the Eugene Police Department (EPD) was asked to develop short-term and long- term strategies for addressing those problems. He said the Special Program to deploy foot and bike patrols in downtown was intended to provide overtime based resources for two officers for one 10-hour shift seven days per week from April through October. He said a focused response to a situation involving a particular downtown business owner had addressed the problem while in effect, but it was not sustainable from a staff resources perspective. MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 6 Work Session Regarding mid-range strategies, Chief Lehner said an enhanced hate crimes ordinance would help to mitigate that type of situation. He said another potential strategy might be adding foot and bike patrol capacity between October and April, although financial capacity was lacking. He said longer range the City could consider enhanced enforcement or exclusionary zones. Captain Pete Kearns said the short-term strategy of foot and bike patrol, particularly on West Broadway, had been effective in reducing behavioral crime activity and chronic race-based activity that did not meet the criteria for an intimidation crime as defined by statute. He said that once the patrol ended the activities immediately resumed. He noted that assigned to the summer bike patrol was voluntary. Ms. Ortiz said she had hoped for some specific language regarding an ordinance related to the Park Blocks. Captain Kearns said there were currently restrictions that applied to the Park Blocks that excluded someone for a period of time based on violation of certain park rules, which included the Park Blocks, but enforcement would require assignment of a full-time officer. Chief Lehner added that specific language was not proposed pending direction from the council on the subject of exclusionary zones. Ms. Ortiz asked if including language on hate-related harassment in an ordinance would be an effective tool for curtailing the offensive behavior seen on the street. Chief Lehner said it would be an effective tool because currently some very offensive behavior was not illegal and officers could not do anything about it; offenders were aware of that. He said such an ordinance had been used successfully in other communities. Mr. Clark hoped the council would provide direction to staff with respect to budgeting for winter months patrol and ordinance language in addition to the work on hate crimes that would address offensive behaviors. He gave some examples of behaviors that some business owners had been subjected to, including death threats and vandalism. He did not feel that officers had the appropriate support and tools to deal with the increased level of those offenses. He said those behaviors would need to be addressed if the City wished to encourage more people to live in the downtown area. He hoped officers would be given the ability to exclude for a period of time specific people for specific behaviors, similar to the approach taken in other communities. In response to a question from Ms. Piercy, Chief Lehner said that some of the behaviors cited by Mr. Clark were illegal, but EPD lacked the capacity for consistent enforcement. He said some of the lower levels of harassing behavior were not illegal. Ms. Piercy asked for information about the type of complaints seen in the downtown area over the last several years and the time of year they occurred. Chief Lehner said that information could be provided, but some of the problems were in categories that were significantly underreported. Mr. Pryor said there were two problems: the need for a law against certain behaviors and activities and the capacity to enforce the law. He said lack of enforcement often encouraged more bad behavior and the council should be cautious about assuring that any ordinances could be consistently enforced. He agreed that what was occurring in downtown was unacceptable and was interested in enhanced enforcement and exclusionary zones. He said that trespass was an effective strategy for removing inappropriate behavior, but there had to be a concurrent discussion of enforcement capacity. Chief Lehner explained that enhanced enforcement or penalty zones tended to be easier to enforce than exclusionary zones, particularly with respect to property that was open to the public at all times. MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 7 Work Session Ms. Taylor asked what types of offensive behaviors were currently not illegal. Chief Lehner said that presently under Oregon law it was not illegal to shout racial epithets at someone, but in many other jurisdic- tions there was a distinction between making a general hate-related statement and directing that statement against an individual with the intent to annoy, harass or harm that person. He said it was that distinction an ordinance would address. Ms. Taylor asked how an exclusionary zone would function. Chief Lehner said catching someone in an exclusionary zone engaged in an act specifically prohibited under the exclusionary statute would result in a sentence that excluded that person from the area for a period of time, with the exception of certain things such as medical appointments. Ms. Bettman asked for clarification on what Mr. Clark hoped to accomplish with the work session. She would support another work session to pursue in greater detail what the City could do with respect to exclusionary or enhance enforcement zones or other strategies if that was the intent. She agreed with Mr. Pryor about the need to address enforcement capacity as a part of any discussion of strategies. She would support consideration by the CCIGR of incorporating the issue of certain hate crimes in its legislative agenda if they were not already a part of State statute. She asked about problems deploying the Special Program bike and foot patrol to its full capacity. Chief Lehner explained that the intent was to hire and deploy two officers for a downtown parks patrol, but with the department’s existing staffing deficit it would be 18 to 24 months before those officers were available and then there would be no capacity to backfill. He said a special projects fund was recommended to allow the department to more efficiently deploy that number of hours of officers in that capacity. He said that was an overtime assignment and it was difficult to consistently deploy officers for ten hours a day, seven days a week. He said funding was sufficient to deploy to capacity but in the long-term more employees had to be hired. Ms. Bettman said it appeared that coverage was costing more because it was overtime, which meant there was overall less capacity. Chief Lehner clarified that for the same amount of money, staffing capacity to deploy through overtime meant more hours on the ground less expensively than hiring full-time staff. Mr. Zelenka said he was appalled by the downtown racist behaviors, but concerned about exclusionary zones and civil rights violations. He was interested in a hate-related harassment code for the City and would support the CCIGR reviewing whether it should be part of the City’s legislative agenda. Mr. Klein said the City had home rule authority to adopt criminal statutes but would need to research any specific proposal to assure there was no conflict with State statutes. Ms. Solomon said she would support any strategies that improved the livability of downtown Eugene, which was a critical element to the success of redevelopment efforts. She said that funding for EPD should be increased so police had the capacity to enforce laws. Ms. Piercy commented that more guides and more people working in downtown would help to improve conditions in downtown. She said lack of capacity throughout the criminal justice system also exacerbated the problem. Chief Lehner noted that nine new officers had been hired and would be deployed in May. Mr. Clark asked if the new officers would have any meaningful impact on what was happening downtown. Chief Lehner said incremental addition of positions over time was the key because that increased the ability to deploy officers for special projects. He said with a deficit of between 50 and 80 officers in patrol alone it would be some time before there was a significant difference. MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 8 Work Session Mr. Clark said studies had indicated the mere presence of officers was a crime deterrent. He hoped the council could agree to request the continuation of the additional downtown staffing levels from October through April and consider that in the budget process. He also wanted to council to consider an exclusionary ordinance and longer-term solutions that would involve many entities from a systemic perspective. He hoped that options 2, 3 and 4 in the agenda item summary would be supported. Ms. Ortiz appreciated the council’s discussion of downtown problems, but was not comfortable with the concept of an exclusionary zone ordinance until there had been further conversations. She asked for clarification of the difference between enhanced penalty and exclusionary zones. Chief Lehner said that enhanced penalty zones would designate high enforcement zones in which the rules would be posted and an ordinance would be enacted to impose enhanced penalties for violation of specific ordinances within a zone. He said an exclusion zone would establish an enhanced sentence that would exclude someone from an area based on conviction of certain violations. He said that trespass could not be used for public property. Mr. Clark, seconded by Ms. Solomon, moved to support options 2, 3 and 4 as pre- sented in the agenda item summary. Ms. Bettman indicated she would not support the motion without another work session to provide direction to staff about ordinance language. The motion passed, 5:2; Ms. Bettman and Mr. Zelenka voting in opposition. The meeting adjourned at 7:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Angel Jones Interim City Manager (Recorded by Lynn Taylor) MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 9 Work Session