Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 02/28/05 Mtg MINUTES Eugene City Council Regular Session Council Chamber--City Hall February 28, 2005 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: George Poling, David Kelly, Betty Taylor, Jennifer Solomon, Chris Pryor, Andrea Ortiz, Bonny Bettman. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Gary Papd. Council President George Poling called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. He noted that Mayor Piercy and Councilor Papd were in Washington, DC, participating in the United Front lobbying trip. 1. PUBLIC FORUM Councilor Poling reviewed the rules of the Public Forum. Bruce Miller, PO Box 50968, expressed support for the Lane Transit District (LTD) bus drivers in their current contract negotiations. He felt the drivers needed to have adequate health benefits. He noted LTD Chief Administrator Ken Hamm was in Washington, DC. He did not think this was appropriate given the grave nature of the negotiations. He suggested the bus drivers merge with the health clinic at Lane Community College (LCC). Lyndell Wilkin, 3065 Whitbeck Boulevard, said a recent subdivision had been built in the backyard of a house on her unimproved street. Historically, she explained, the road was gravel, maintained under the "grade and gravel program" until that program had been cut. At this point, the 17 homeowners served by the road assumed responsibility for the road. She stated that it had become difficult to control the dust and keep potholes patched. Working with City staff, she said, the neighbors had been able to pave the road. She wished to focus on the damage caused by the development. She stated that neighbors had met with transportation engineer Gary McNeel regarding the development and had been assured that the road would be brought back to pre-construction condition with an additional inch of overlay on it. She underscored that prior to the development the road was level. Now there were dips and standing water and a lot of cracking. She related that after the construction, the neighborhood still had confidence it would be remedied, but now had been informed that the road was old and no one would be responsible for bringing it back up to its previous state. Carol DeFazio, 1437 West 10th Avenue, spoke on behalf of the steering committee for the Chambers Area Families for Healthy Neighborhoods (CAFHN). She explained that the group's members had formed the committee in order to be effectively involved in the Chambers Node Revisited (CNR) project. She noted that one goal of the CNR project was the creation and adoption of zoning codes that "promote maintenance of the residential character in the area between 18th and 13th avenues and Polk and Garfield streets." She said MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 28, 2005 Page 1 Regular Session CAFHN was a grassroots group of approximately 35 people that included owner-occupants, renters, landlords, and investors. She underscored that the destructive impact of infill on the west side neighborhood was an important issue for the group. She related that since the initial CNR meeting in the fall, CAFHN had been collaborating to help identify infill impacts and to get effective standards written and adopted. She shared that the group grappled with some of the same issues the council did, such as how to grow wisely and how to grow in a way that preserves the health and residential nature of the City's traditional core neighborhoods. She did not think the City could afford to ignore those questions. She conveyed the group's support for smart growth, adding that truly smart development did not squander the established neighborhoods that provide examples of successful, pedestrian-friendly, transportation-efficient lifestyles. She said the group's commitment had caused members to spend hundreds of hours on research and discussions and the result of this work, the Chambers Node Revisited Interim Neighbors report, was in the council packets for this meeting. She encouraged the council to read the report and visit the referenced Web site. Matt Purvis, 1391 West Broadway Street, said he had attended most of the CNR meetings and was involved in the previous Chambers area project a few years earlier. He explained that he had moved to that neighborhood because he valued the livability of the area and the easy access to downtown. He related that during the last few years he had witnessed a myriad of infill projects that severely compromised the quality of nearby existing homes. He noted that the coming weekend he would be helping another family move out of this neighborhood due to the diminishing of neighborhood quality. He opined that the qualities of the west side neighborhood were worth preserving. David Sonnichsen, 2435 Skyline Boulevard, stated that six years earlier he had been appointed to the East Alton Baker Citizens Planning Committee and he had found it difficult to find a context for the work the committee was intended to accomplish. He said much progress had been made since then and now each councilor had a copy of the most recent report from the group, now named the Whilamut Natural Area Citizens Planning Committee. He related that he had asked committee members to craft a statement communicating the one thing they wanted others to know about the park and to mention some of the most recent accomplishments of that group. He provided copies of those statements to the councilors for reference purposes as they made new appointments to the group. Deborah Jeffries, 3790 North Delta Highway, clarified that her statement was not about whether the Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) should be sold, but about the process. She clarified that she was not present for the recent EWEB hearing on the issue, but had extrapolated her information from the media. She called Councilor Bettman's remarks "bureaucratic bullying." She had not read nor was she aware of any council authorization for Councilor Bettman to state to the EWEB board the intent of future council action and whether it would support its use or financial contribution a particular buyer of that property. She believed a clarifying statement should be forthcoming if the council had made that decision in an executive session or another session. She likened the comments to "signing a blank check of support" prior to determining the real economic costs. Rob Handy, 455-½ River Road, discussed concerns about the future of the Union Pacific Railroad yards, including how pollution would be mitigated and how to proceed with planning for development in the event the railroad company did sell the property. He asserted that the City supported a comprehensive public planning process for the railyards, including a focus on tax exemptions for development of brownfield sites. He also acknowledged that tax abatement was harmful to schools. But he recognized the clear, demonstrable benefit of tax exemptions in the development of the economy and, more specifically, living MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 28, 2005 Page 2 Regular Session wage jobs. He thought economic redevelopment of the railyards could include an aquatic center, a regional sports complex, or a University of Oregon program for bio-remediation. He wondered if the City Council could ask what ;;the rush" was for getting an enterprise zone. He supported pursuing a master planning process for the railroad property. Jana Jackson, 1012 East 22nd Avenue, spoke in support of the actions of Officer Randy Ellis, who had spray-painted ;~No Soliciting" signs on some street comers to deter panhandling. She read into the record a letter signed by approximately 40 people expressing gratitude to and support for Officer Ellis. Copies were provided to the council. She underscored that she and the other signors of the letter disapproved of people ;;demonizing" Officer Ellis. Kevin Matthews, Box 1588, president of Friends of Eugene, noted that PeaceHealth had signed the settlement of a legal action which committed it to either sale or redevelopment of the Willamette Street site within two years. He hoped that the council would consider the implicit intention of something happening with a very ;;positive possible hospital site." Mr. Matthews alleged that the City was committing an error in Administrative Order 530501, which replaced Administrative Order 530207(f) regarding land use fees. He asserted that an interim city manager had signed it into being and it had not been adequately inspected. He said the order changed the basis of neighborhood association appeal fees to 25 percent of the land use fee, a change that increased the fees from a maximum of $250 to a maximum of $4,000. He predicted this would be crippling to neighborhood associations. Charles Tilt, 85581 South Willamette Street, believed the West 8th Avenue low-income housing development had not received an adequate public hearing. He thought the process had a ;;unique and narrow" perspective because of how it was purchased and how the Request for Proposal (RFP) process had been undertaken. He did not understand why there was not more public outrage and why the Downtown Neighborhood Association had not spoken out about it. He did not believe that the housing project would be compatible with its neighbor, the WOW Hall. He submitted his comments in writing. Kathy Ging, 2878 Harris Street, shared comments that she had gathered informally in opposition to the development of low-income housing next to the WOW Hall. She submitted a report she had written to the council. She listed the top reasons she felt the low-income housing development should not be constructed on the site, such as the challenges that the site presented for development, that she believed the public process was inadequate, that police visits to the site would be increased due to noise, noise attenuation might harm the adjacent historic WOW Hall, and that no research had been conducted on rehabilitation of the Ridenour Building. She asked that the council consider holding a public hearing. Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Pryor, moved to extend the Public Forum by six minutes. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0. Jonathan Pincus, 590 North 12th Avenue, #5, recognized that the WOW Hall had decided to embrace the low-income housing project planned for the lot adjacent to it. Speaking as a former manager of the WOW Hall, he felt the WOW Hall Board had made a ;;profound error" in taking that position. He thought the council had made a profound error as well in making the process a %ne value planning process." He encouraged the council to open up the process to a format that would allow all of the issues to be examined. MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 28, 2005 Page 3 Regular Session He was also concerned that the WOW Hall could be damaged in the process of attenuating noise issues. He noted that he had written the National Register of Historic Places nomination for the building. Charles Peters, 2435 Potter Street, member of the Board of Directors of the WOW Hall, wished to remind everyone present that the process for the development of the site adjacent to the WOW Hall had transpired over the course of more than a year and the public had many opportunities to comment on it. He stated that the Ridenour Building had been studied for 20 to 25 years and that the roof was being held up by columns and the walls were bowed. He explained that the WOW Hall supported the project because the developers had %ent over backwards" to attenuate the sound issues and because the developers were a non-profit that sought to benefit the community. He thought it looked like a win-win situation and that the WOW Hall could fare much worse with an adjacent commercial development. He supported approval of the project. Councilor Poling closed the Public Forum and opened the floor for councilor comments and questions. Councilor Kelly thanked those who testified for speaking at the forum. He averred that he did not hear anything in Councilor Bettman's remarks at the EWEB public hearing equivalent to what was reported in the paper. He thought the councilor's comments were misinterpreted by the reporter and asserted that one should not believe everything one read in the paper. Regarding the Whitbeck Boulevard situation, Councilor Kelly asked staff to provide a memorandum that indicated what the City committed to, what the condition of the street was, and what the City and the property owners could do to mitigate the situation. Councilor Taylor thanked everyone for speaking. She noted her familiarity with the Whitbeck Boulevard situation and agreed that the City had made promises that it had not followed through with. Councilor Taylor said, regarding the CNR project, that infill was damaging neighborhoods throughout the City. She thought the City land use codes needed updating. Councilor Taylor registered her agreement with Mr. Handy's assertion that the City should not be in a rush to form an enterprise zone. Councilor Taylor thought there should have been a greater opportunity for an open process in the potential development of the property adjacent to the WOW Hall. She called the WOW Hall a significant part of the Eugene downtown scene. Councilor Solomon thanked Ms. Jackson for testifying regarding the panhandling issues in the area where she did business. She appreciated that the topic was kept in the forefront of the council and hoped that the council would take steps to address it. She asked the City Manager about a report that covered the topic of panhandling that was slated to be presented. City Manager Dennis Taylor responded that there was a working group of people from the Public Works Department, the Eugene Police Department, and the City Attorney's Office who were working on this report and he was uncertain as to when it would be finished. He said he would bring it before the council when it was done. Councilor Bettman thanked those who testified. She thanked Councilor Kelly for his clarifying comments regarding her testimony before EWEB. MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 28, 2005 Page 4 Regular Session Regarding the WOW Hall issue, Councilor Bettman thought a larger issue was brewing as the City sought to create a 24-hour downtown while increasing population density there. She suggested the City address these concerns in the code through a delineation of the sorts of building materials one should use for noise mitigation. She asked staff to come up with some strategies for addressing sound conflicts between housing and entertainment venues downtown. City Manager Taylor surmised that she wanted research about what the best practices were across the country. Councilor Bettman affirmed that this was what she wanted and said she also wished to see what strategies were being used in this particular development. City Manager Taylor averred that the larger research item would likely take longer than the two-hour rule. He said he would determine the scope of it and provide her with further information. Councilor Bettman appreciated that Mr. Matthews brought up the land use fees issues. She remembered the administrative order and was uncertain, at present, as to how to remedy the situation. Regarding the CNR activities, Councilor Bettman agreed that infill could be a "good thing" if done well. She noted that the council had agreed over the course of its strategy session to pursue a neighborhood initiative that looked into ways to preserve neighborhoods. She urged the CAFHN neighbors to visit the City Web site and review the downtown housing analysis. Councilor Kelly asked for a memorandum regarding the change in land use appeal fees and possible strategies to address it. Councilor Taylor concurred, adding that it was alarming that neighborhoods would have to pay a huge fee to appeal a land use decision. 2. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of City Council Minutes - January 19, 2005, Work Session - January 24, 2005,Work Session - January 26, 2005, Work Session - February 8, 2005, Process Session B. Approval of Tentative Working Agenda C. Adoption of an Ordinance Concerning Prohibited Smoking and Amending Sections 6.225, 6.230, 6.235, 6.240, and 6.990 of the Eugene Code, 1971 Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved approval of the Consent Calendar. Councilor Bettman indicated that she had submitted corrections to the minutes electronically and asked to pull Item C. She asked if the council would have the work session on the Santa Clara park site prior to the council break. City Manager Taylor said this item was not on the tentative agenda at this point, but indicated that it would be triggered by the completion of the two appraisals, estimated to be done by May. Councilor Poling deemed Councilor Bettman's corrections to the minutes, without objection, approved. MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 28, 2005 Page 5 Regular Session Councilor Kelly indicated he had also submitted corrections to the minutes via email. Councilor Poling deemed the corrections, without objection, approved. Roll call vote; the motion to approve the Consent Calendar, with the exception of Item C, passed unanimously, 7:0. City Manager Taylor stated that the councilors had copies of an e-mail with a proposed amendment to include all public buildings in the smoking ordinance. Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to amend subsection (2)(k) of Section 6.230 of the proposed ordinance by removing the proposed deletion of the words ~publicly owned' and deleting the proposed phrase Gowned by the City,' both occurring in the first line of that subsection, deleting the remaining proposed revisions to subsection (2) and revising the lead sentence of subsection (2) accordingly. Roll call vote; the amendment passed unanimously, 7:0. Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to adopt Item C as amended. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0. 3. PUBLIC HEARING and POSSIBLE ACTION: FY06-FYll Draft Capital Improvement Program Councilor Poling stated that no action would be taken on this item at Councilor Papa's request. City Manager Taylor explained that this was the public hearing on the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) that had been discussed by the Budget Committee. He asked Patty Boyle, Senior Management Analyst for the Finance and Court Services Division of the Central Services Department to speak to the CIP. Ms. Boyle said the CIP was developed by compiling the capital projects found in adopted long-range plans and in the context of the City's long-range goals and policies. She further explained that the CIP was a planning document that provided policy-makers with a view of the anticipated capital investment in the City's infrastructure over the next six years and that it also acted as a basis for the proposed capital budget, though it did not authorize the spending of any funds. Ms. Boyle stated that copies of the CIP were posted to the Web site and were distributed to the chairs of all of the neighborhood associations, as well as the Planning Commission, the Budget Committee, and all interested parties. She noted that an opportunity to have a staff presentation on the CIP had been made to all neighborhood associations and opportunities to comment on the CIP were advertised in The Register- Guard and the Eugene Weekly. All public testimony was included in the council material packets for the current meeting. Ms. Boyle pointed out that both the Planning Commission and the Budget Committee had completed their review of the CIP and had recommended approval of it with amendments. She encouraged the council to identify any questions that might arise so that they could be adequately addressed prior to action on the item, now scheduled for March 7. MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 28, 2005 Page 6 Regular Session Mr. Poling opened the public hearing. Kevin Matthews, Box 1588, president of the Friends of Eugene and the Southeast Neighbors, said certainly ;;most of the stuff" in the CIP ;;bubbled up" from long-range plans, but asserted that some things had come up ;;rather suddenly" and were seemingly contradictory to such plans. He felt that what this meant was that it was simultaneously a long-range planning document which had marbleized in with it the projects and politics of the moment. He opined that the participation in the hearing was indicative of the level of public understanding about what was going on with the program. He said the council was the elected body that should provide a higher level filter on the community values. He averred that this was where the council should pay closer attention to the CIP. Mr. Matthews listed some of the projects that the Friends of Eugene did not think reflected community values and should not move forward in the CIP, as follows: B(6) City Hall, T(3) Patterson trench, P(6) Willamette River corridor acquisition (called ;;another subsidy for Triad at the riverfront"), and S(2) and (3) Greenhill and Royal node stormwater projects. He alleged that public sentiment supported an emphasis on acquisition rather than development in the Parks and Open Space CIP. He questioned the necessity of three street upgrade and capacity enhancements in his neighborhood. He also questioned the wisdom of including enhancements to the PeaceHealth Hilyard Street campus. He opined that without knowing what would happen there, nothing should be budgeted for it. Councilor Poling closed the public hearing. Councilor Bettman pointed out that she had asked staff to draft a motion for amending the ordinance to adopt the CIP. Councilor Bettman agreed with Mr. Matthews' assertion that there was not enough citizen involvement in the CIP process. She did not believe it was a failure on the part of the public. She alleged it was a failure on the part of the City to engage the public in a meaningful way. She hoped the City would find a way to make the document more %omprehensive." She wanted people to understand what the City was thinking of buying if the conditions were right and to understand how it would impact their lives and neighborhoods. She called it %ad" and %ounter to what the City was trying to achieve" in terms of broad public support for the work when no one showed up to testify on this. Councilor Taylor echoed Councilor Bettman's sentiments. She averred it was the City's job to find a way to get people involved. She also supported land acquisition over park development. City Manager Taylor said many of the ideas that were in the CIP came out of extensive public involvement processes, such as the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Plan, the Stormwater Plan, and TransPlan. He recognized that it was a challenge to find ways to involve neighborhoods and individual citizens and attain the best possible public process. 4. PUBLIC HEARING and POSSIBLE ACTION: An Ordinance Providing For Withdrawal of Territories From the River Road Water District and the River Road Park and Recreation District, From the Santa Clara Water District, and From the Junction City Water Control District MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 28, 2005 Page 7 Regular Session City Manager Taylor introduced Kurt Yeiter, Principal Planner, and asked him to explain the parameters of this year's ordinance. Mr. Yeiter stated that this was an action required annually. He said a public hearing was required by State law before the tax assessor could shift tax revenue from the properties that had been annexed, from the special districts that were providing the services to the City. He noted that fire districts were automatically transferred. He explained that there were 22 annexations that required withdrawal from the special districts, all of them initiated by property owners for development purposes and all of them approved by the Lane County Local Government Boundary Commission (LCLGBC). Councilor Poling opened the public hearing. Rob Handy, 455-1/2 River Road, said he was a Eugene resident. He likened the piecemeal annexation of the River Road area to a %low death by bleeding." He expressed appreciation for Councilor Pap6's work with residents of the River Road/Santa Clara area. He asked what the transition team was charged to do. He wondered if the City would support the task force's efforts in good faith or whether the task force would become under funded and underutilized and if within two years the City would choose to only annex. He said David Reed with the transition team was trying to identify the heritage values in the area that were worth saving in order to inform a strategy of negotiated annexation. He thought the challenge to the City was that one arm of the City often did not know what the other was doing and staff decision-makers were driven by projects that needed to be completed, sometimes losing sight of the ;;big picture." He averred that the challenge was how to get along with area residents and how to negotiate in a fair way with the area. He wondered if the transition team's work plan could be fully funded and whether negotiations of intergovernmental agreements (IGAs) with River Road Park District and the County Public Works should be ceased. He suggested postponement of the creation of the local improvement district on River Avenue. He thought an accountable and transparent process should be initiated for the proposed land swap for the Santa Clara Park. He recommended a moratorium on all new development in the area be enacted for two years in order for all of the issues to be resolved. Councilor Poling closed the public hearing. Councilor Poling ascertained that there were no objections to taking action at the present meeting. Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved that the City Council adopt Council Bill 4897, an ordinance providing for withdrawal of territories from special districts. Councilor Taylor acknowledged the frustration that some River Road/Santa Clara residents felt about the annexations, but wished to underscore that the present action was routine. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0. 5. PUBLIC HEARING: An Ordinance Concerning the Filing of Rabies Vaccination Certificates; Adding Section 4.403 to the Eugene Code, 1971; Amending Section 4.990 of That Code; and Providing For an Immediate Effective Date MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 28, 2005 Page 8 Regular Session City Manager Taylor stated that the public hearing was for an ordinance that was recommended by the Lane Board of County Commissioners and had grown out of recommendations from the Lane County Animal Regulation Task Force. He asked Carol Pomes, Purchasing Manager, to speak to the ordinance. Ms. Pomes provided an overview of the ordinance. She stated that the County board had approved a rabies vaccination reporting requirement and the ordinance under consideration would provide for enforcement of this requirement within the city limits of the City of Eugene. She said data would be used to increase dog licensing compliance and dog licensing revenue. Councilor Poling opened the public hearing. Deanna Diehl, 1343 Taft Street, volunteer with the Lane County Animal Regulation Authority (LCARA), called the ordinance a good idea. She worked at the animal shelter and had attended several of the task force meetings. She felt the task force had worked hard to come up with its report and recommendation. She supported the ordinance because it increased the LCARA revenue and the ability to collect it. She likened it to a user fee for parks. She felt a dog license was like an insurance policy that made sure a lost dog would be returned. Additionally, she expressed appreciation for the cattery. She shared a story of the rescue of a dying cat that was euthanized at the shelter rather than left to die on the street. She also wished to commend Barbara and Kylie for their work at the shelter. Cynthia Sinclair, 6825 F Street, Springfield, said she was a judge who heard dog bite cases in the Central Lane Justice Court. She was very aware of the pain and fear that goes on in a dog bite case. Presently, she explained, it was not possible to know for certain whether a dog had been vaccinated for rabies unless one called every veterinarian in the County. She stated that, with the ordinance, not only would this data be available, it would contribute revenue to animal control, possibly freeing up some of the current funding for other areas of the City that were in need. She also felt that some funding could be funneled into the Low- Cost Spay/Neuter Clinic as well as into increasing kennel capacity so that dogs would not be euthanized simply to make room for more dogs. She related that she had served on the task force and that the group had worked through its contentiousness toward a result they could all agree upon. Rita Castillo, 6825 F Street, Springfield, advocated for adoption of the ordinance. She did not want people in Eugene to undergo the terror of not knowing whether a dog bite would cause rabies. She related that the largest objection to the ordinance she had heard in the task force was that it would generate more paper work. She did not think that a little paper work should stand in the way of public safety. She underscored that no jurisdiction that adopted such an ordinance had ever rescinded it. She called adoption of it "the right thing to do," adding that it would save money and lives. Janetta Overholser, 30300 Cottage Grove-Lorane Road, Cottage Grove, said she had served on the task force. She stated that rabies had been in Lane County, though only rarely. She related that several baby bats had tested positive for it the previous summer. She thought there was a definite possibility that cats and dogs could be bitten and the disease transmitted to them. She stressed that no one would want to wait over a weekend to find out whether a biting animal had been inoculated against rabies. She echoed the concern expressed about animals being euthanized because quarantined animals were taking up valuable kennel space. She noted, too, that dogs do not understand boundaries, so it was important for the City and County to have consistency in this regard. MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 28, 2005 Page 9 Regular Session Roberta Boyden, 1568 Fairmount Boulevard, stated that she had been a veterinarian in Eugene for seven years and had served on the task force. She had worked in veterinary clinics in six states and this was the first state she had been in that did not have such a reporting mechanism for rabies vaccinations. She asserted that the ordinance under consideration was the norm and not the exception. She underscored that the threat of a rabies outbreak should be avoided at all costs. She noted she had lived in Maine during a rabies outbreak. She stated that it was beneficial to the community to know whether animals had been vaccinated. She said her concerns regarding client confidentiality had been addressed in the County codes. She averred that increasing licensure would help lost dogs be returned to their owners. She hoped the information would not be used to enforce City and County limit laws unless it was shown that the number of animals threatened the health and safety of the animals. Scott Bartlett, 1445 East 21st Avenue, asserted that every day, in thousands of communities, veterinarians routinely sent for triplicate copies of rabies vaccine records. He stated that he had been chairman of the task force. He noted that 30,000 dogs and cats had been euthanized over the previous 30 years. He said 83 percent of dogs in Lane County were not licensed as there was no systematic way to intersect with them to ensure licensure. He calculated that enactment of this ordinance would bring in approximately $257,000 in additional revenue. He suggested that some of this revenue be channeled into subsidies for the spaying and neutering of animals belonging to people with low incomes. He explained that the bottom tier of society was responsible for 60 percent of all euthanasia and impounds. He said while this issue did not have the political power or "sex appeal" that some issues did, it was still very important to take action to reduce animal euthanasia. Jack Dresser, 38131 McKenzie Highway, Springfield, scientist for the Oregon Research Institute, said there were 24 percent more pets in Lane County than there were households. He stated that humans had invited these animals to share their lives for 14,000 years and were obligated to take care of them. He related that his daughter had been attacked by dogs and it had been extremely beneficial to have immediate access to the dogs' veterinary records. He echoed the recommendation that some of the additional revenue generated by this ordinance should be used to subsidize spay and neuter services. He thought people would be more willing to pay the fees if they thought they were going for the benefit of animals and not just into the General Fund. He suggested that licenses be made more accessible, perhaps sold at convenience stores. Mary Ann Holser, 2620 Cresta de Ruta Drive, called owning a pet a privilege and not a civil liberty. She stated that a pet owner had a responsibility to keep that pet healthy and happy. She said one had a community responsibility as well to prevent the spread of disease from one's pet to other animals and people and that the government had a responsibility to protect the public health. She related that she had witnessed a rabies outbreak in New York State in which there were many infected raccoons, some of which had bitten dogs. She noted that Canada had complained because some of the rabid raccoons had crossed the border. Tom Holser, 2620 Cresta de Ruta Drive, related that he had recently visited an emergency room while in Los Angeles, California, because of a dog bite. He said California had strict laws about such reporting and it was determined immediately that the dog in question had not been vaccinated. He was forced to be vaccinated for rabies, a very unpleasant experience, but was pleased by how proactive the authorities were there. He expressed amazement that Lane County had an 80 percent failure rate for its licensing. Robert Hermann, 635 West 25th Avenue, supported the ordinance. He called it a "no-brainer" that the City would want to have accurate reporting. He noted that he and his wife, though not of great means, had a dog and licensed it as required by law. He was irked to hear that the majority of residents in Lane County did MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 28, 2005 Page 10 Regular Session not do so. He related that he had produced several public service announcements for LCARA and had seen the pile of dead dogs and cats after routine euthanizations. He felt many of them could have been someone's pets. He said the ordinance would be a great first step in reuniting animals with their owners. Councilor Poling closed the public hearing. Councilor Ortiz thanked everyone for testifying. She was glad to support the ordinance. She fek animals in the City were underserved. She hoped more people would take advantage of licensing their dogs. Councilor Taylor said she loved her dog and would not consider having a dog that was not licensed. She related that some people were concerned that with access to more money animal control officers would do more patrolling and issue more tickets. She said her "big concern" was that animal control officers would drive around neighborhoods and this was not good for the environment and not a good use of money. Councilor Poling reiterated that the council was not prepared to take action until March 7. He asked if it would be possible to include language that would take five percent of the fee and place it into low-cost spay and neuter procedures. Ms. Pomes responded that the City operated the Low-Cost Spay and Neuter Clinic and that Lane County applied five percent of its license fees and the City put two percent of its licensing revenues into low-income certificates for spay and neuter services. 6. ACTION: An Ordinance Concerning Motorized Transportation Devices and Motor Assisted Scooter Sales; Amending Sections 4.990, 5.010, and 5.990 of the Eugene Code, 1971; and Adding new Sections 4.979 and 5.160 to that Code Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved that the City Council adopt Council Bill 4892, an ordinance concerning motorized transportation devices and motor assisted scooter sales. Councilor Kelly wished to know the current park rules and whether it was a problem for mobility-impaired people, for which there was a broad exemption in the rules governing bicycle paths, to travel through a park to get to the bike path using a motorized transportation device. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0. Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Solomon, moved to direct the City Manger to do a preliminary list of key transportation corridors that lack on-street bike lanes and thereby limit the mobility of motorized scooters. The list would be brought to the City Council with a rough scope of work, including rough dollar costs, to create such lanes. City Manager Taylor asked for clarification on what was meant by transportation corridors. Councilor Kelly replied that he used that terminology because that was the terminology he heard transportation planners use. He felt professionals who understood where people started out and tended to go would be able to conduct such an analysis. MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 28, 2005 Page 11 Regular Session Councilor Poling expressed appreciation for the motion. He averred that there were people in the City who wanted to use alternate modes of transportation and the City of Eugene encouraged this. He indicated he would support it. Councilor Ortiz did not think it was the intent of the City Council to create hardships for people. While she did not condone the use of the motorized scooters because they were unsafe and helmets were not required, she felt some users rode such scooters because they could not afford a car and did not want to set them up for fines they could not afford to pay. Councilor Bettman supported the motion. She commented that 30 to 40 percent of the City land mass was paved and it was important to accommodate all modes of transportation on the streets. She wanted the City to distinguish between where it wanted its non-motorized vehicles to be, given that such a small portion of the right of way was designated for them. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0. 7. ACTION: An Ordinance Concerning Public Contracting; Adding Sections 2.1400, 2.1405, 2.1410, 2.1415, 2.1420, 2.1425, 2.1430, 2.1435, 2.1440, 2.1445, and 2,1450 to the Eugene Code, 1971; Repealing Sections 2.1200, 2.1205, 2.1210, 2.1215, 2.1220, 2.1225, 2.1230, 2.1235, 2.1240, 2.1245, 2.1250, and 2.1255 of that Code; Declaring an Emergency; and Providing an Effective Date Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved that the City Council adopt Council Bill 4896, an ordinance concerning public contracting. Councilor Kelly thanked staff for providing the list of differences from the old code to the new code. He asked, regarding packet page 208, what changes there were from the old code to the new code language regarding privately engineered public improvements (PEPI). City Attorney Jerry Lidz responded that it did not change the instances in which the City would ask a private developer undertaking a PEPI to tag on a piece of work for the City. He clarified that the request could be made without going through the competitive solicitation process if the six conditions listed on pages 7 and 8 of the ordinance were met. Councilor Kelly wished to affirm, given that the code did not confer any budget authority, that the piece of the project paid for by the City would need to be already committed through capital budget funds and that, if not, it would have to come before the council as a supplemental budget piece. Mr. Lidz indicated this was so. He cited two instances, such as when a catch basin by a development needed repair or a street improvement was needed, under which this situation could occur. Councilor Bettman appreciated the new format. Regarding the assertion that specific provisions determined when the City could engage in an informal solicitation for bids, she asked how the City would monitor informal bids and ascertain there was no favoritism. Ms. Pomes replied that the informal solicitation process had different thresholds for different solicitations. She said there was still competition and it was required that at least three competitive quotes or proposals be submitted. She related that staff looked at MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 28, 2005 Page 12 Regular Session various elements of the project, such as projected costs, and at market data for particular items to ensure it was within market range. She stressed that a multitude of factors were taken into consideration and it was conducted through the central staff of the PWD. Councilor Bettman reiterated her question and asserted that staff did not have a way to track smaller contracts over time. She averred that the same contractors were getting the bids most of the time. She predicted the City could find itself paying ~$900 for a toilet seat." She wanted to know what was being saved through this process. She alleged that the City was not tracking the various contractors, how contracts played out in the long run, and whether it was saving money. Ms. Pomes assured her that staff did track the contracts that were issued to various contractors and had multiple reports that indicated the aggregate amounts issued to a particular contractor. She reiterated that quotes were solicited and proposals were publicly advertised. She underscored that the City hired contractors both inside and outside of the community and tapped into a multitude of tools. She said it was difficult to absolutely determine what money was being saved, given the variables, but staff did use project estimates, cost comparisons, costs to other agencies, market agencies and so on, to make comparisons in pricing and quotes on projects. Councilor Bettman said she was not talking about a specific cost per procurement. She wanted more monitoring. She thought the statements in the AlS that said the practices were ~unlikely to promote favoritism" and would ~probably save money" should be supported by fact. She advocated for looking at ongoing practices and how to monitor and review them so that the City could track how many contractors were actually bidding and getting contracts through the informal bidding process. She wanted a check and balance and a %lear feedback loop." City Manager Taylor indicated that clear documentation as to how this occurred could be provided. He said it would be a matter of providing the council at regular intervals with such analysis. He recognized her point, but noted that the ordinance sought to respond to legislative changes. Ms. Pomes reiterated that staff had a lot of reporting tools and did review the reports on contractors on a regular basis. She averred the competitive process in itself should produce better results than a process without the competition would. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0. The meeting adjourned at 9:34 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dennis M. Taylor City Manager (Recorded by Ruth Atcherson) MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 28, 2005 Page 13 Regular Session