Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/26/1988 Meeting (2) e M I NUT E S Eugene City Council Council Chamber--City Hall September 26, 1988 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Cynthia Wooten, Ruth Bascom, Freeman Holmer, Jeff Miller, Roger Rutan, Emily Schue. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Rob Bennett, Debra Ehrman. The regular meeting of the Eugene City Council was called to order by Mayor Brian B. Obie. Mayor Obie welcomed members of the public and said the council has a mandatory adjournment time of 10:30 p.m. unless extended by a majority vote of the council. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: ORDINANCE CONCERNING PROPERTY FORFEITURE FOR CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES - Lieutenant Vic Mann gave the staff report. Mr. Mann said the Department of Public Safety COPS) asked for council input on incorporating language including attempts in the ordinance. He said that language is now in the draft and that the council may delete it without causing any other changes in the document. Mr. Mann said District Attorney Doug Harcleroad is supportive of the ordinance and that a letter to this effect had been given to each council or. Jack Roberts, 965 Sherwood Place, spoke in favor of the ordinance. He said it is his goal to have the Eugene public schools be drug-free by the time his son starts school. Mr. Roberts said the council has a chance to send an important message to drug dealers and manufacturers in the area. He said Lane County and Springfield have adopted a similar ordinance and felt Eugene should too. Tom Hoyt, 975 Oak Street, said he was representing the Rotary Club of Eugene and Springfield. He said the Great Rotary Duck Race will be held on October 8, 1988. All the proceeds from the event will go toward drug abuse. Mr. Hoyt said the silent majority in the Eugene/Springfield area are tired of Eugene being the drug capital of the United States and this is the time to do something about it. Mr. Hoyt said the community needs to make it tough for drug dealers and manufacturers to operate in this area. He said this ordinance may face constitutional challenges, but he encouraged the council to pass the ordinance as a message and let the constitutional questions be worked out in the courts. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 26, 1988 Page 1 . e Randy Prince, 1736 Olive Street, spoke against the ordinance. He feels the ordinance is part of an admirable attempt to stop drug use in America, but feels this law will work no better than other attempts to control drugs by stopping the dealers. He said controlling drugs at the point of use is now considered to be a better solution to the drug problem. Mr. Prince said there is debate about whether this ordinance is constitutional because it interferes with personal freedom. He said the question councilors must consider is whether it is better to do everything possible to stop drugs, even if it may be unconstitutional, or whether it is better to do everything possible to protect the values of liberty and justice upon which America is based. Mr. Prince felt that if the council passed this ordinance, it would make young people cynical about the law because it contradicts the core principle of our country. He said he is confident that the effort to stop drug use will work better without the property forfeiture ordinance. William Conde, 23005 North Coburg Road, believes that under the Oregon State Constitution it is unlawful to confiscate one's realty for any conviction. Mr. Conde pointed out that the way forfeiture ordinances work, the arresting agency splits the proceeds with the agency under whose law the property has been confiscated. For this reason, he feels the attempt to pass this ordinance has more to do with money than with trying to help anyone or to make a better society. Mr. Conde said there is no room in society for laws such as this one. He said if the council is truly concerned about people and e drug addictions, they should approach the issue with more understanding and compassion. He said the longer and harder law enforcement agencies crack down on drugs, the nastier the drug problem in society will become. Mayor Obie closed the public hearing. In response to a question from Ms. Schue, City Attorney Tim Sercombe said the issue of whether this ordinance is constitutional comes up in several ways under the Oregon Constitution. He said some of those constitutional issues are now being tested in an appeal of Lane County's forfeiture ordinance. Mr. Sercombe said the City Attorney's office feels this ordinance is constitutional under both the Oregon and Federal constitutions. He said there is not clear judicial precedence on some parts of the ordinance, however. Mr. Sercombe said the City Attorney's office does not believe that Article I, Section 25 of the Oregon Constitution with respect to corruption of blood and forfeiture of state prevents this type of ordinance. He said there are also issues about whether this process is criminal or civil; the effect of this classification will determine the process due to a person who is the subject of a forfeiture ordinance. Mr. Sercombe said the City Attorney's office believes this is a civil process and that criminal procedures do not apply. He said another issue is whether the State law has preempted local law-making authority in this area because of its classification as a criminal law. He . MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 26, 1988 Page 2 . e did not believe State law has preempted local law-making authority in this regard. Ms. Wooten asked two hypothetical questions to get a feel for the scope of the ordinance. She felt it was imperative to be clear about the ordinance because real estate forfeiture is a serious action. CB 3070--An ordinance providing for the forfeiture of realt personal, and intangible property that facilitates the commission of certain prohibited activities; authorizing a civil action to enforce such forfeiture; adding Sections 4.245t 4.246t 4.249t 4.251, and 4.255 to Eugene Code, 1971; and declaring an emergency. Ms. Wooten movedt seconded by Ms. Bascomt that the billt with unanimous consent of the councilt be read the second time by council bill number only, and that enactment be considered at this time. The motion passed unanimouslYt 6:0. Council Bill 3070 was read the second time by council bill number only. Ms. Wooten movedt seconded by Ms. Bascomt that the bill be approved and given final passage. All councilors present voting ayet the bill was declared passed and became Ordinance No. 19577. e II. PUBLIC HEARING: ORDINANCE CONCERNING ADOPTION OF CHAPTER 38 OF THE STATE BUILDING CODE Building Official Larry Reed gave the staff report. He said the issue of a new sprinkler ordinance was first raised in 1984-1985 as part of a long-range plan for the Fire and Emergency Services Division. In 1985t a policy aimed at shifting fire protection from the City's Fire Department to the private sector by building fire protection into structures was adopted. Mr. Reed said beginning in August of 1987, seven public meetings were held before the Building Construction Advisory Committee (BCAC). The purpose of these meetings was to hear concerns about the policy and to help BCAC in forming its recommendation to the council. Mr. Reed said the BCAC decided to recommend the adoption of Appendix Chapter 38 of the State Building Code to the City Council. He reviewed some of the findings of the BCAC including the fact that the City of Eugene has had a local fire sprinkler code since 1974; the City's firefighting capabilities have been developed around a local sprinkler ordinance. The BCAC also found that fire loss does economic harm to the community through the decrease of the property tax base and the loss of jobs when a business is closed because of fire. The BCAC also recognized that the adoption of Appendix Chapter 38 will result in higher construction costs in some casest but felt that sprinkler installation costs are recovered by the lower fire insurance e MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 26t 1988 Page 3 . , premiums. For high-hazard uses, recovery of costs may occur within two to . three years. For low-hazard office and retail uses, recovery of costs may take seven to ten years. Mayor Obie asked about the impact of the ordinance. Mr. Reed said it would build additional fire protection into private buildings in the form of either more compartmentalization or fire-sprinkling in smaller buildings than required by the current ordinance. Mr. Reed said the size of building affected by this new ordinance will vary according to construction type and the occupancy classification. For most retail uses, buildings over 5,000 square feet will be required to comply with the new standards. Multi-family residential uses will be required to comply as well. Mr. Reed said multi-family dwellings over 15 units will be required to meet these standard under the new State Building Code in January 1989. Mr. Holmer asked how much construction costs would increase for buildings subject to the ordinance. Mr. Reed said building costs will increase by one to two percent. Mayor Obie asked Bill Johnston of BCAC to tell the council about the dialogue the committee had regarding this ordinance and how he views the ordinance as a member of the construction business. Mr. Johnston said members of BCAC felt the additional costs created by complying with the ordinance could be reimbursed over a period of time. He said the ordinance would apply mainly to buildings between 5,000 and 10,000 square feet. e Ms. Wooten asked what impact sprinklers would have on the attempt to construct new low-income housing. Mr. Cleland said in most cases to which the new ordinance would apply, the State Building Code will require sprinklering. Mr. Gleason added that because this is a Uniform Building Code issue, the Federal government typically requires that the current standards be met. For this reason, he felt new low-income housing would be required to have fire sprinklers whether or not the City adopts this ordinance. Mayor Obie asked whether existing uses would be required to meet the new standards when making modifications. Mr. Reed said if the use hazard classification of a building were changed, it would have to comply with the ordinance. Mayor Obie opened the public hearing. There were no requests for recognition. Mayor Obie closed the public hearing. CB 3071--An ordinance for the adoption of Chapter 38 of the Oregon State Structural Specialty Code. Ms. Wooten moved, seconded by Ms. Bascom, that the bill, with unanimous consent of the council, be read the second time by council bill number only, and that enactment be considered at this time. The motion passed unanimously, 6:0. Council Bill 3071 was read the second time by council bill number only. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 26, 1988 Page 4 e Ms. Wooten moved, seconded by Ms. Bascom, that the bill be approved and given final passage. All councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and became Ordinance No. 19578. III. EUGENE/SPRINGFIELD METROPOLITAN PARTNERSHIP QUARTERLY REPORT Vicki Dietmeyer, Executive Director of the Eugene/Springfield Metro Partnership (ESMP), gave the quarterly report. Ms. Dietmeyer said the industry research ESMP has been working on for the past two years was completed in late June. She said ESMP will now be working on marketing packages aimed at each of the ten industry sectors that ESMP will be concentrating on. Some of the marketing materials have been completed. Marketing recruitment adVisory councils will be formed to look at more extensive marketing strategies for each of those sectors. Ms. Dietmeyer reviewed several recruitment cases the ESMP has pursued. During the second quarter of the calendar year, 114 cases were handled. Activity in the third quarter was slower in this area and across the state. Ms. Dietmeyer said the United Parcel Service signed a lease in Springfield recently. The ESMP has been working on this project since 1986. The ESMP has also been working on a case for a secondary wood-processing firm that has outgrown its facilities in another Oregon community. She said this firm has e concerns about the tax rates in the area, being able to get an enterprise zone, and dealing with issues of the Lane Regional Air Pollution Authority. Ms. Dietmeyer said the Fantus Company has brought several cases to the ESMP. Recently an insurance company decided not to locate in the area in favor of Tucson, Arizona, because of the rain. Ms. Dietmeyer said there are four Japanese firms considering location in this area. A meeting of the Oregon Economic Development Department (OEDD), both City Managers, and representatives of the area Chambers of Commerce will be held to brainstorm on extra steps that may be taken to indicate that the community is able to understand and adapt to Japanese businesses and Japanese people. Ms. Dietmeyer described a special marketing package detailing the area's cultural and business relationships with Japan that had been assembled for one of the firms. Mr. Miller asked how serious of a problem the community faces because of wetlands issues. Ms. Dietmeyer said this is a critical problem. She said it is estimated that 75 percent of Eugene's industrial properties are wetlands. Ms. Dietmeyer said ESMP hopes that some developers will be willing to deal with the wetland issues now so that a prospect will not be caught in that process. She said it is hard for her to understand why other states are not dealing with wetlands issues. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 26, 1988 Page 5 . Mr. Rutan asked if the recently improved economic conditions have affected the ESMP. Ms. Dietmeyer said many companies have approached the partnership because of Oregon's improved economy. On the other hand, she said many prospects are concerned that there will not be enough labor force because of the low unemployment rates. IV. CALL FOR A PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING AN ALLEY VACATION (SELCO CREDIT UNION) (AV 88-4) Ms. Wooten moved, seconded by Ms. Bascom, to call for a November 7, 1988, public hearing to initiate an alley vacation request by Selco Credit Union (AV 88-1). The motion passed unanimously, 6:0. V. RESOLUTIONS RECONCILING RESERVES FOR CAPITAL PROJECTS AND ENCUMBRANCES Mr. Gleason said last year at the end of the budgeting process the council and the budget committee requested that the reconciliations for projects in process at the end of the fiscal year be done by resolution. Res. No. 4098--A resolution authorizing the transfer of funds from the Reserve for Capital Projects accounts to departments. e Res. No. 4099--A resolution authorizing the transfer of the balance of the Reserve for Capital Projects accounts to Balance Available. Res. No. 4100--A resolution authorizing the transfer of funds from the Reserve for Encumbrance accounts to departments. Res. No. 4101--A resolution authorizing the transfer of the balance of the Reserve for Encumbrance accounts to Contingency of Balance Available Accounts. Ms. Wooten moved, seconded by Ms. Bascom, to adopt the resolutions. The motion passed unanimously, 6:0. The meeting was adjourned to September 28, 1988. Respectfully submi}ted, ,-' " '; :',:__:;;.;7 .. 'r.Uchea1 GWa~s~"y~"'~~""-<,, t ' b i ty Manager/, ',' (Recorded by Tanya Northman) mncc 092688-730 . MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 26, 1988 Page 6 .