Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/18/1987 Meeting ~ e e . M I NUT E S Eugene City Council City Hall--McNutt Room February 18, 1987 11:30 a.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Debra Ehrman, Emily Schue, Cynthia Wooten, Freeman Holmer, Roger Rutan, Jeff Miller, Rob Bennett. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Ruth Bascom. The adjourned meeting of February 11, 1987, of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was called to order by His Honor Mayor Brian B. Obie. I. ITEMS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL, MAYOR, AND CITY MANAGER A. Legislative Priorities Mr. Holmer said he will be in Washington, D.C., next week when the council considers the action the Council Legislative Subcommittee took yesterday. He said he approves of the first three items on the list which are the Riverfront Research Park, Downtown Urban Development, and the airport expansion. He said they are worth pursuing. However, he hopes the council will indicate that reconstruction of the Ferry Street Bridge is urgent. B. Review of Planning Department Work Program Mr. Holmer said the council will consider the Planning Department Work Program while he is away. He said it is difficult to evaluate the priorities given items in the work program without having information about the staff resources of the Planning Department. He said the Planning Department's Work Program should include the economic development needs of the City and should be coordinated with the Development Department's Work Program. C. New Refuse Containers in City Mr. Miller said some people in the city have acquired green 90-gallon refuse containers that are emptied by trucks at the curb. He said the containers are often left at the curb and cause sight pollution. He suggested the council consider what can be done to decrease the pollution. MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 18, 1987 Page 1 - e e D. Nuclear Free Zone Task Force Mr. Rutan said the council received some correspondence indicating that 60 percent of the Nuclear Free Zone Task Force should be proponents of the nuclear free zone. Mayor Obie said he met with the writers of the correspondence. He said the Council Subcommittee on Commi ttees wi 11 i ntervi ew app 1 i cants for the task force and try to nominate people who represent the community. Mr. Rutan said he would like to have the task force be representative of the community. Ms. Ehrman said several task force positions were designated for representatives of specific organizations. The organizations nominated only one person and so the Subcommittee on Committees will nominate that person. E. Proposal to Fund Mahlon Sweet Airport Expansion Ms. Wooten wondered why the words "Revenue Backed" do not appear in the description of the General Obligation Bonds that will be on the March 31, 1987, ballot to fund the Mahlon Sweet Airport expansion. City Attorney Tim Sercombe responded that the words are not in the descri pt i on because a definite revenue source to repay the bonds before property taxes will be used was not identified. He said the council adopted a resolution indicating that certain revenue sources will be used to pay the bonds in lieu of property taxes but a specific revenue source was not identified. Mr. Sercombe said the council will consider issuing bonds that will be repaid with specific revenue from the airlines if the voters approve the ballot measure and those funds will be Revenue Backed General Obligation Bonds. Mr. Gleason said the City's Bond Counsel stated that the circumstances under which the bonds would become General Obligation Bonds would have to be in the ballot title if the bonds were described as Revenue Backed General Obligation Bonds and ballot titles cannot be that long. Mr. Gleason said the use of General Obligation Bonds saved the City about $1 million in debt service. Mr. Sercombe discussed the legal problems in trying to explain the council's intent. Ms. Wooten said the description of the ballot measure is confusing to people. Mayor Obie suggested the staff prepare an ordinance that will clarify the way the counci 1 intends to repay the bonds. Ms. Wooten agreed wi th the suggestion. F. Asian Celebration Ms. Ehrman said she attended the Asian Celebration on February 15, 1987. and a good crowd was present. MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 18, 1987 Page 2 - G. Appointments to the 5th Avenue Beautification Committee Mayor Obie suggested the staff distribute additional applications for the 5th Avenue Beautification District Committee to business owners and managers in the district. He said he would like Council President Ehrman and Vice President Holmer to process the applications. They agreed to do so. II. APPOINTMENTS: MAYOR I S NOMINATIONS TO THE REFUSE AND RECYCLING BOARD Ms. Ehrman moved, seconded by Mr. Holmer, to appoint the following nominees to the Refuse and Recycling Board: Anita Fletcher, 805 East 43rd.......... .term to expire 12/31/88 Jill Gaydos, 1631 East 26th.............term to expire 12/31/88 Answering a question from Ms. Wooten, Mayor Obie said the Refuse and Recycling Board recommends refuse collection rates and practices to the City Manager and City Council . The motion carried unanimously, 7:0. IIi. LEGISLATIVE SUBCOMMITTEE MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 1987 e Ms. Ehrman moved, seconded by Mr. Holmer, to approve the Legislative Subcommittee minutes of February 11, 1987. The motion carried unanimously, 7:0. Mayor Obie suggested a Legislative Subcommittee Action Sheet be attached to the minutes in the future. IV. CITY COUNCI L MINUTES OF DINNER/WORK SESSION OF OCTOBER 13, 1986; MEETING OF NOVEMBER 12, 1986; AND LUNCH/WORK SESSION OF JANUARY 7, 1987 Ms. Ehrman moved, seconded by Mr. Holmer, to approve the City Council minutes of October 13, 1986, November 12, 1986, and January 7, 1987. The minutes of October 13, 1986 and November 12, 1986, were approved 6:0:1 with Mr. Bennett abstaining because he was not on the council then. The minutes of January 7, 1987, were approved unanimously, 7:0. V. RESOLUTION REGARDING 1987 EUGENE CELEBRATION City Manager Micheal Gleason said the proposed resolution affirms the council's direction about the structure of future Eugene Celebrations. He sa i d the proposal i ndi cates a decrease in Ci ty funds from the 1986 Eugene Celebration. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 18, 1987 Page 3 e Mr. Miller said he is not comfortable with the City commitment indicated in the resolution of about $95,000 for the celebration. He said the memo indicates that the City will contribute $40,000 of in-kind support to the celebration in such services as police services and street sweeping. He said many other events are as good for the city as the Celebration and they would like similar in-kind contributions. Mr. Holmer said the proposal includes City contributions of $35,000 for staff and office support and $20,000 in cash. Res. No. 4022--A resolution regarding sponsorship, organization, and budget of the 1987 Eugene Celebration. Ms. Ehrman moved, seconded by Mr. Holmer, to adopt the resolution. Answering questions from Mr. Rutan, Mr. Gleason said events will be structured to fit the proposed budget. Mr. Whitlow reviewed the budget. He said $35,000 is for City staff and office services and $20,000 is for event and materials support. He said the event and material support expenses must be incurred in advance of the event. The budget includes $35,000 of revenue from the event and that revenue could be affected by weather. Another budget item is $20,000 from sponsorships, and he said that will not be spent until matching funds from the private sector are obtained. He said the City has adequate fiduciary control. e Mayor Obie said rain can be expected occasionally and a reserve fund for the Celebration should be established. Mr. Whitlow said the staff recommends that revenue in excess of the expenses be put into a reserve account for future Celebrations. Mr. Miller said the $40,000 of in-kind City contributions cannot be spent on other City programs. He said council action on this proposal indicates priorities and he wondered if other services, such as the library, should have a higher priority than the Eugene Celebration. He said he is willing to support the Eugene Celebration with $55,000 in City funds but he is not comfortable with supporting it with $95,000. He asked if the other 200 events that take place in the city should receive the same in-kind contributions. He asked specifically about the Fourth of July Fireworks event. He said council action on the Eugene Celebration will set a precedent. Ms. Wooten responded that the council will discuss its support for events and destination point activities in the future. She emphasized that the in-kind City contribution is not cash. She said the in-kind contributions are included in the budgets and work programs of City departments. She suggested the City develop a specific fund in the budget for special events. Mr. Miller suggested the council approve $55,000 for the Eugene Celebration and consider transferring the $40,000 in-kind contribution to the destination point activities budget. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 18, 1987 Page 4 e Mr. Rutan said the council must eventually consider the actual cost of in-kind contributions. He said he would like the Eugene Celebration to continue and become a self-perpetuating event. He suggested the City support the celebration financially in ways that will not result in the City losing money. For example, the staff support ($35,000) and support for events ($20,000) could be transferred to a non-profit organization. He suggested that organizations be told they can apply for in-kind contributions. Ms. Schue said the council decided the City would support the Celebration and approved the City.s investment in the celebration at its process session on February 4, 1987. Mayor Obie said the council directed the City Manager to propose a budget for City support of the Celebration. Ms. Ehrman said the Celebration consisted of 55 events last year and the current proposal is to limit it to 25 events. She said the in-kind contributions cannot be moved to other City departments. She said the City could request bids to manage the Celebration in the future but she does not think it could be done for 1987. Mayor Obie said he favors developing a bidding process for the Celebration. Mr. Bennett said he wi 11 support the motion and he favors Mr. Rutan IS suggestions. He said the proposal does not reflect the council's direction about the public/private split in support. He said the private sector should support the Celebration more in the future but it probably cannot do so this year. ~ Mr. Holmer said the proposal will decrease the Celebration events but the financial commitment of the City will be about the same as last year. He said treating in-kind support differently from other support creates problems. He said he will move to direct the staff to report recommended changes in the organizational structure of the Celebration to the council in November 1987. Ms. Wooten said in-kind support has not been calculated in the costs of the Celebration in the past. Consequently, the proposed budget represents a $40,000 decrease in City support. Mr. Rutan said he supports the Celebration but the proposed budget is too high. He said more money than budgeted has been spent in the past for the celebration and more will be spent in the future. He said cost overruns will be incurred. Referring to the proposed resolution, Mayor Obie said the Eugene Celebration Steering Committee should report to the City Council. Mr. Gleason agreed with the suggestion and Mayor Obie directed that the proposed resolution be changed as follows (material in parentheses should be deleted and underlined material should be added): e MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 18, 1987 Page 5 e e e Section 2. The Mayor is requested. . . This Steering Committee shall report to the (City Manager or his designee) City Council and advise (him in) it of the planning, production, and evaluation of the 1987 . . . Answering questions from Mr. Miller, Mr. Whitlow said the City does not have a process for billing in-kind services to the General Fund. Mr. Gleason said the City charges sponsoring organizations of other events for services. The in-kind services have not been charged to the Celebration because the City sponsors it. Mr. Miller suggested the in-kind services be charged to the Celebration so that expenses can be controlled. Mayor Obie said the City could contract with an organization for the 1988 Celebration. In that case, City services could be purchased. Mr. Miller suggested the council consider the $55,000 support and the in-kind support for the Celebration separately. Mayor Obie said he supports the present motion. Mr. Holmer suggested Mr. Miller move to add the in-kind support to the staff support in the proposed resolution so that the accounting is clear. Mr. Miller responded that $55,000 is enough to spend on the Celebration. Ms. Wooten said everyone would like an exact accounting of the in-kind expenses. Mr. Gleason discussed the way services have been provided for the Celebration in the past and said the proposed budget indicates the best estimate of the cost. Mayor Obie directed that Section 4 of the proposed resolution be changed as follows (material in parentheses should be deleted and underlined material should be added): Section 4. The City Manager is directed to report to the City Council by (March 1, 1988) December 1, 1987, on his evaluation. . Mayor Obie said the report should include an exact accounting of the in-kind support. The motion carried 5:2 with Councilors Ehrman, Holmer, Schue, Wooten, and Bennett voting aye and Councilors Rutan and Miller voting nay. MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 18, 1987 Page 6 VI. WORK SESSION: PROPOSED REVISIONS TO CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION ORDINANCE (CA 85-4) e Ms. Brody said the council held a public hearing on February 9, 1987, on the changes to the Condominium Conversion Ordinance recommended by the Planning Commission. She said the changes were initiated to streamline the ordinance, to make it conform to State laws, and to remedy administrative problems. She said the proposed changes to the purchaser protections and the housekeeping changes are not controvers i a 1 but the recommended changes to the tenant protections in the ordinance are controversial. Using charts on the wall, Robin Johnson, a consultant with the Planning Department, reviewed the following options to the Planning Commission recommendations concerning the tenant protections: 1. Tenants living in the building when the revisions to the ordinance are adopted would be eligible to qualify as special category tenants using the standards in the existing ordinance and would receive the tenant benefits in the existing ordinance. Tenants who move into the building after the revisions to the ordinance are adopted would be eligible to qualify as special category tenants using the standards recommended by the Planning Commission and would receive the tenant benefits recommended by the commission. e 2. The comparable housing and life lease benefits would be added to the tenant protections recommended by the Planning Commission for people who are 70 years of age or older, or who are disabled and who have incomes of 80 percent or less of the median income. Other people would receive the benefits recommended by the Planning commission. 3. Extend the Notice to Vacate period from 180 days to one year for tenants who have incomes of 50 percent or less of the median income and to two years for tenants who have incomes of 80 percent or less of the median income and who are 70 years of age or older and for disabled tenants regardless of their income. 4. Retain the tenant protections in the existing ordinance except for the rent control provisions. Ms. Johnson said the staff recommends approval of either Option #2 or #4. She said the definition of "disabled" recommended by the Planning Commission clarifies the "handicappedll category in the existing ordinance and she suggested the Planning Commission recommendation be retained. Ms. Johnson said the City's ability to impose rent control is preempted by State law. Therefore, she recommended that the Condominium Conversion Ordinance indicate that the rents of special category tenants should not be different from the rents of other tenants in the building. City Attorney Tim Sercombe explained the protection. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 18, 1987 Page 7 e Answering questions from Ms. Ehrman, Ms. Johnson said the number of people who would qualify as special category tenants under the existing ordinance or the recommendations of the Planning Commission would depend on the bUilding being converted. More special category tenants would be in the three privately- owned downtown high-rise buildings than in other buildings. Ms. Ehrman said Ms. Bascom called her and said she prefers the second option. Mr. Miller said the definition of IIdisabledll recommended by the Planning Commission includes emotional impairment and the definition seems to be an improvement of the definition of IIhandicappedll in the existing ordinance. Responding to a question, Ms. Brody said the new definition is broader than the old one and is not very controversial. She said the income categories recommended by the commission decrease the number of people who would become special category tenants. Ms. Schue said the recommendation to raise the age at which people automatically become special category tenants from 62 to 70 is reasonable because people who need special consideration would be classified as disabled. Mr. Miller reviewed the second option. He said he is concerned about the recommendation that the City should subsidize the services of a housing counselor. Ms. Johnson discussed the Planning Commission recommendation and said the commission recommended that the City recapture the cost of a housing co~nselor in the fees charged for the conversion permits. Ms. Schue said the developer should be charged the cost of the housing counselor. e Mr. Bennett said the community is not addressing the real issue. He said the existing ordinance indicates that a developer should assume the social responsibility of addressing the needs of elderly and disabled people and of people with low incomes. He said the public testimony addressed the needs of people who would be classified as special category tenants but the testimony did not indicate why a building owner should assume the responsibility of meeting the needs of special category tenants just because the owner wants to sell the property. He emphasized that the ordinance does not include single- family homes or duplexes in which disabled people, elderly people, and people with low incomes live. Mr. Bennett said the Condominium Conversion Ordinance indicates that the City will not pay for addressing the needs of special category tenants because the City does not want to take the responsibility. He said the owners of certain buildings will not be able to convert the buildings to condominiums if the community decides that a bUilding owner should have the responsibility for meeting the needs of special category tenants. In that case, he said the City should simply state that certain buildings cannot be converted to condominiums. Mr. Bennett said the issues he discussed have not been addressed by the community or the testimony. He said the staff recommendation does not address the issue or the Planning Commission discussion. He suggested the staff has listened to the public testimony. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 18, 1987 Page 8 e e e Answering a question from Ms. Wooten, Mr. Bennett said the issue has never been that there are not special category tenants who need special protections. The issue is, "Who should take the financial responsibility and the administrative responsibility for providing protections to special category tenants?" He added that a developer will pass as many costs of a condominium conversion as possible to the purchasers of the units. Therefore, the existing ordinance results in social costs that should be borne by the whole community being paid by the purchasers of condominium units who may have moderate incomes. Ms. Schue said the market for condominium units may improve and a developer will be able to make money by converting buildings to condominiums. She said the public cost of the effects of conversions on people living in a building should be a business expense of the conversion and a developer should calculate those costs when deciding about the conversion. Mr. Holmer said the real issue is, "Who should pay for the protection of speci a 1 category tenants?" He said the Condomi n i um Convers ion Ordi nance provides benefits for people living in specific buildings. He said the council should address the needs of everyone in the community and decide who should pay for benefits for special category tenants who live in places such as duplexes and mobile home parks. He said people in those places suffer as much trauma when they are displaced as people who live in high-rise buildings. He suggested the council approve Option #4 and remand the issue to the Planning Commission for a decision about who should pay for the protection of special category tenants. Ms. Wooten said she supports Option #4. Answering her question, Mr. Holmer reiterated his suggestion. Ms. Wooten said single-family houses and duplexes are not like large buildings that are converted to condominiums although displacement from mobile home parks may be an issue. She said the cost of protections for special category tenants should be calculated in the cost of converting buildings to condominiums and the costs should be paid by the developer. She said the protections in the existing ordinance should be retained. Ms. Ehrman said she also supports Option #4. She said developers did not testify that the existing ordinance has limited conversions to condominiums. She said she does not object to the Planning Commission considering displacement from mobile home parks but she does not think the commission should consider displacement from all residences. She said Option #1 might create bad feelings among tenants. She said 70 years of age is too high for people automatically to be included in the special tenant category. She suggested 65 years of age. Mr. Bennett said the existing ordinance "grandfathers" the tenant protections because tenants who move in after the Notice of Conversion do not receive the benefits. He said developers can make money converting buildings to condominiums under certain circumstances but from 1981 to 1983 there were many forclosures and reductions in rents. He said profits in housing are cyclical. MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 18, 1987 Page 9 e Mr. Rutan said the testimony concerning the condominium conversion has been important but developers have not testified and the council should remember fundamental property rights. He said the existing ordinance does not balance those rights. He said the Planning Commission recommendation represents much work over a long period. He said making money on a conversion should be separate from accepting social responsibility for special category tenants. He said he supports the Planning Commission1s recommendation with some changes. Ms. Schue said she supports Option #2. She said property rights are limited in many ways. For example, factories must pay for anti-pollution devices. She said conversions to condominiums cause adverse effects to some people and mitigating the effects is a cost of doing business. She said she does not support the moving expenses in the existing ordinance that permit people to profit financially by moving. Responding to a question from Mayor Obie, Mr. Bennett said comparable housing is an issue for disabled and elderly people with special needs and families that have low incomes. He said most renters in Eugene have month-to-month leases and most rental projects have a 75 to 100 percent turnover annually. He said the comparable housing issue is important only for people who consider a rental unit a permanent home. He said it precludes the conversion to condominiums of some buildings. If the council wants to do that, it should say so. Ms. Wooten suggested that Option #4 be amended to change the age at which people automatically become special category tenants and to change the moving expenses. e Mr. Rutan said he would consider Ms. Wooten's suggestion. Ms. Ehrman said she supports requiring receipts for moving expenses. Ms. Johnson said the Planning Commission recommended that actual moving expenses up to $500 be paid for special category tenants. Mr. Holmer said the Planning Commission recommendation has some merit and his support for Option #4 is to assure that the entire issue is considered. He said the issue is a social problem that affects many people and the council should consider it. Ms. Wooten said there are specific needs concerning conversions to condominiums that the council should address now. Later, the council could consider displacement from other facilities. Replying to questions from Mr. Miller, Ms. Brody reviewed the options. Ms. Johnson discussed the conversion of Delta Grove and North Green and said about 10 percent of the tenants in those developments became speci a 1 category tenants. That percentage would be reduced about 75 percent by the eligibility requirements recommended by the Planning Commission. Mr. Miller pointed out that people under 70 years of age who would suffer relocation trauma would be classified as disabled if the Planning Commission e MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 18, 1987 Page 10 . -- - recommendation is approved. Ms. Johnson said a physician or social service worker would determine who could qualify as disabled. Mayor Obie said Ms. Johnson has done an excellent job of presenting the issues. He discussed the market for condominiums and conditions when the existing ordinance was approved. He said he would like landlords to accept responsibility for tenants but they do not always do so. Therefore, the council should establish acceptable standards of behavior. He said he supports Option #4 and the housekeeping and definition changes recommended by the Planning Commission. He suggested the staff be directed to present an ordi nance to the council that incorporates the purchaser protections and administrative housekeeping changes recommended by the Planning Commission and a series of amendments that incorporate other possible changes to the existing ordinance that relate to tenant proections. The councilors agreed by consensus with his suggestion. Responding to a comment from Mr. Holmer, Ms. Wooten suggested the council direct Ms. Brody to report about the possibility of considering the displacement of tenants anywhere in the city. Ms. Brody said the council can consider that issue when it reviews the Planning Commission's work program. Answering a question from Mr. Miller, Mayor Obie said his direction is for the existing ordinance (Option #4) to be amended. Ms. Wooten added that the amendments should include the definition of disability, the age at which tenants automatically become special category tenants, and the payment of moving expenses. Mayor Obie said councilors may offer amendments when the ordinance is considered. Mr. Miller said he would like to see the effects of Option #2. Mr. Rutan said Option #2 includes many more Planning Commission recommendations than comparable house and lifetime leases. Respec~lY submitt ??~ ~~ Mi&~~G~~;a~~ City Manager (Recorded by Betty Lou Rarick) mncc0218 MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 18, 1987 Page 11