Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 01/10/05 WS 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 Papd. 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 Home/ess 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 ofthe 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 hearing, 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 concem. 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 %ity government 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