Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/17/1989 Meeting - I . - - CITY COUNCIL GOAL SETTING SESSION FEBRUARY 17-18, 1989 Present: Mayor Miller; Councilors Ehrman, Schue, Bennett, Boles, Green, Bascom, Rutan, and Holmer. (Schue arrived late) Facilitator: Sharon Thorne FRIDAY, February 17, 1989; 4:00 p.m., Treehouse Restaurant Sharon Thorne began by reviewing the agenda for the Goal Session. Friday's activities include a round table discussion by each Councilor of his/her personal goals for 1989; a summary of the efforts and accomplishments of the 1988 goals; a review of the Council communication ground rules; dinner; and setting the agenda for Saturday's work; and a discussion of the recommendation from the Council Committee on Committees regarding revisions to the Budget Committee process. Sharon presented a summary of her issue survey and inter- views with the Councilors including the major topics mentioned by Councilors as being important, and how the Council as a group perceived the goal setting process. Rutan suggested that the there was a great deal to work on and that the group work during dinner. The Council agreed to do this. Sharon then asked each member of the Council to share something that might be a goal in his/her life but may not necessarily be related to the Council; something that he/she would wish to share with the group. Green began the round table discussion by thanking the other members of the Council for the unanimous vote on his appointment to the Council. He said that he is to learn more about the issues, and that it is also a good opportunity to establish where the group is going. He wants Eugene to be one of the 10 best cities in the United States and feels that it can be accomplished. Erhman asked about Green's school status. He replied that will graduate at the end of this term and that after graduation he wants to become a high school teacher. Bascom then shared with the group her pleasure in being an old timer on the Council. She said that she was also pleased to be the Council president this year. She discussed her goals for the next fours years by beginning with a discussion of her work since 1981 on the Eugene Bikeway System. In that time she wrote and marketed a book about the Eugene Bikeway System. Today, she took the last few copies to the Public Works Department as the book is now out of print. She is interested in alternative forms of transportation, and in the next four years would like to see the completion of the East Bank bikeway from Owosso to Valley River Center. The problem in the past has been the property around Marist High School, but Rutan shared items of a personal nature; 1989 will be an important year for his DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 1 ... \' " - e business. His company Oregon Venture Capital is beginning to show fruition, after two years. One of the business to grow out of this is Movietel, an in- hotel movie video operation. It is now the second largest in the United States and will soon be opening a branch office in Dallas. This business will require that he travel more, but this should not interfere with Council duties. He also mentioned that he and his family have just moved into their new home and wish to invite the other members of the Council to the house for an informal social occasion. Holmer said that at some point one should learn to retire and when he retires from the Council, be that in 2 or 6 years, he will shift his attention to the Arts. He also said that he has been delighted to serve on the Council and the Arts Commission. He noted that the first meeting of citizens around the Ferry Street Bridge issue will be happening the very near future, and he will be keeping his eye on that project. Ehrman said she is trying to balance her life between her work (Public Defend- er) life and her Council commitments. She has foresees no changes in her career at this time, but if one should occur it would most likely take her out of Eugene. She does not anticipate running for a third term. Next year she might take an extended vacation to Europe. Schue shared that last year had been a good one for her family. She had a new granddaughter and a new daughter-in-law. She and her husband both have an interest in legislation, so they are both deeply involved in the current legislative session. Bennett stated that one important item for him this year was to gain additional wisdom, that is to sit down and take stock of how issues affect him and others, and that he hopes to be able to make a better case for his point of view. He said that his business is such that he carries certain type of baggage and that he hopes to be able to make an objective appraisal of serving on the Council and being a real estate developer at the same time. Miller discussed the activities and events in which his family is involved. He mentioned that he scheduled family time as well as work time so that the two are in balance. He said he felt his family is handling his transition and schedule changes very well. Boles started by discussing his background and how he arrived in Eugene. He is a experimental psychologist by training and has also done consultant work in the public sector. In 1976 he moved to Eugene to work at the U of O. Since that time he has been involved in many community activities most recently including the City Budget Committee. He said he is proud to be on the Council and that we can solve problems as a city. During his tenure on the Council he has learned that if no one hears you, it doesn't matter if you're right. He wants to work on transition from neighborhood group participant to the Council policy making role. He said he was interested in the creative process and had developed a software package several years ago called "Brainstormer" which was a way to look at how ideas are created and processed. Further, he said that he hopes to be able to reduce the tension between the "alternative community" and the business community, and underlined his position which is not blind opposi- DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 2 e - tion to process, but opposition to blind progress. He felt that there were a number issues in the community in which a blend of opportunity and concern for the environment could be realized. After the first round of more personal thoughts around the table, Sharon Thorne asked the group to share their personal goals as Councilors for the next year. Green began by saying that he wanted to focus on bringing the community closer to the City Council; improving relationships with constituents so that they feel that they are a part of the process. He felt that the Council needs to take the first step in this process. He would also like to focus on parks and recreational opportunities and have a supervised park program, like the one he experienced as a child in New Orleans. He said that the real quality of Eugene is in its livability, but that we can make it better. He would like to explore other sources of revenue to help generate a better economy for the community. Again he underlined his desire that all citizens in the community feel a part of the process and get the most out of what our community has to offer. Bascom stated that one of her concerns are parks. She mentioned the formation of the Eugene Parks Foundation, the City Pride project and the Tree Commission. She feels that Eugene's tree program is poorer than those in Seattle, Portland, or Salem and wants to work to change this. The PARCS Department has been working with the Tree Commission to develop new resources and programs for the improvement of trees. She feels that Alton Baker Park is a challenge, and wondered how to deal with such a park in a municipal area. She supports the concept of "Eugene Summer" and feels that it could be very attractive to tourists. If the library measures passes she intends to spend a great deal of time on how it will all fit together. She expressed some displeasure about being drawn into the Sister Cities program, and expected that she would go to Irkutz in May which would be a drain on her personal time. Rutan felt that the Council was on course and expressed the sentiment "if it ain't broken, don't fix it" around certain matters. He said that in the last 4 years a great deal has been accomplished, but that we can do a lot more, and continue to support what has been done. He felt the Council has done a good job on the 1988 "short list", and in his review of the City Manager's report on the 1988 Council Goals, felt that the Council has a record of accomplishing what it sets out to do. He cited the library as an example of this. Holmer discussed his style in dealing with issues and said that he hoped to improve his effectiveness by not throwing gasoline on the fire; he said that he finally figured out that part of him still was operating in the classroom mode, in which he was more concerned with the "rightness" of the issue rather than winning the issue. He stated that he felt that the Council should focus more on policy and that too much authority has been delegated to boards and commis- sion, for example the library project. He suggested that the Council members might consider discussing the Manager/Council form of government, and felt that the Council is getting too involved in the administrative details of the City operations. Ehrman said that the library is an issue with which she wishes to continue. Her goal in this term is to get the library constructed and finished, and DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 3 e e underlined that the vote is the key to getting the project underway. She} stated that she feels a gap between the Council and the community, and thl public hearings citizens don't provide a great deal of input, as only a f~w people attend. Because of this the Council must rely on staff to make deci- sions. She suggested that the Council may need to have a series of meetings in every ward or hold "town hall" meetings. She stressed that the community needs to be involved and mentioned the Voter's Pamphlet Committee as a good example of citizen involvement; she feels that the community needs to be better educated about the issues. Another issue expressed as a concern was that of air quality; especially from pollution from wood stoves and automobiles. She mentioned that it was ironic that wood stoves had been promoted several years ago around the energy crisis and now they were creating an air quality problem. It was her feeling that the Council needed to take the lead on this air quality issue, and must also weigh the long and short term benefits in an issue. She wondered about long term issues and suggested that twenty years might be a target for issues; in this she used the example of parking garages, and recalled Councilor Boles' characterization of "warehouses for dinosaurs". She stated that her committee work was important to her and saw this an opportunity to pursue her interests in the community. She briefly mentioned the need for economic development and said that Eugene has a great deal of potential to exploit, include "Track City" and the "Eugene Summer" ideas. Finally, she said that we need to work with the new personalities at the Metro Partnership and come to some consensus around the issue. Schue commented on the relationships in the Metro Partnership. She said that her work with the League of Oregon Cities is very important, and that her work on the highway funds committee has proved to be very interesting. She shares Councilor Green's concerns about community input into the Council process and wondered what types of adjustments should take place to insure that the public is informed. She mentioned that four people at the table had been elected in uncontested races and felt that this decreased opportunities for candidates to get out into the community and express ideas and debate the issues. She suggested that perhaps the city has outgrown its current methods of educating and communicating important issue information to the community. Bennett began by discussing his feelings about the neighborhood groups and how they fit into his ward. He expressed disappointment that so few people attended the neighborhood meetings, and felt that it was almost impossible to get neighborhood groups to function. He said that the people in his ward have opinions on issues, but they do not participate in neighborhood groups, unless it is around a specific issue. He also noted that in some parts of his ward the neighborhood groups are aggressive, activist, and liberal but that they represent only a small segment of his ward. He suggested that the Council needs to take a hard look at how and where citizens participate and how the Council can get the most representative feedback on issues. The initiative petition is an issue he would like to review. He was concerned about the amount of time and resources that can be consumed by a relatively small segment of the population. He wondered if that was really "grassroots" politics, and suggested that the ordinance on the initiative petition process fe review for changes which would require a greater number of signatures to place an issue on a ballot. DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 4 e e Miller stated he sees this year as an opportunity to bring several issues to fruition, including the concept of intergovernmental services to achieve economies of scale; and urban transition in the River Road/Santa Clara area. He also said that he foresees dynamic changes on Council issues. He mentioned that he wishes to explore the idea of pay for Councilors and would soon be presenting a letter to the Council on the subject. He expressed concern about the need to have qualified people serving on the Council, and at time accurat- ely representing the community. Overall, he sees the next year as an exciting opportunity to under take a number of projects. Boles discussed his concern regarding the public's participation. In his opinion, the neighborhood groups are not the only forum in the community; there are others but they are not always representative of the community as they tend to be focused on one issue. He said that the issues are what draw the citizens to participate, and stated that he would like to see some type of survey to find out what members of the community think about a number of issues. The survey could be used as an opportunity to look at issues which are important to the community as a whole and also as a means to integrate community issues, such as urban mass transit or light rail. He felt that there were a number of good ideas among the citizenry and that a survey might yield some creative, innovative and fun ways to deal with community issues. This was the end of the "around the table" sharing of personal goals. Miller then gave a report on the 1988 Council Goals. He summarized the efforts and progress around the 1988 priorities. (A copy of the complete report and a summary of the report were distributed in advance to the Councilors.) Sharon Thorne then lead a discussion of the Council ground rules around communication. (A summary of the Council ground rules was distributed in advance to Councilors.) During that discussion it was noted that any Councilor could call for a process check at any point, if he/she were feeling in need of clarification about an issue. Ehrman mentioned that at the last Council meeting it seemed that public testimony had taken up too much time. Miller said that he did not have the timer and that he didn't feel comfortable about cutting off some of the later speakers because the first one had taken so much time. It was noted that the time would be used at future meetings and that speakers would be informed when their time was expired. Boles commented that it was important to him that he receive news or informa- tion in person and not through the newspaper. Rutan also commented that it was important that Councilors talk to each other and not carryon conversations through the media. Ehrman mentioned that the Monday night sessions were to be more formal, and that Councilors should be addressed as "Councilor ". Wednesday sessions are less formal and in those Councilors can use first names. Bascom added that if a Councilor was going to be absent, it was alright to hold over items, if requested by that Councilor. DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 5 e e Holmer mentioned that although there was an established policy of not respond- ing to the testimony from witnesses, it might sometimes be helpful if the Councilors could ask a question of the witness. Boles suggested that a witness could be asked a question during a break, on a somewhat informal basis. Schue said that she also at times would like more information from the witness, but also doesn't want to open up a dialogue or personal exchange with the witness. Miller suggested that questions of a witness be funneled through staff. Rutan said that people can call the Councilors at City Hall if they want to talk to the Councilors. Boles said that he sometimes was frustrated at public hearings because there seemed to be no way to have a thoughtful middle ground discussion of the issues. Miller then suggested that questions to a witness be passed through him, and he, as chair would exercise his discretion in asking a question of a witness. The others in the group agreed to this and agreed to try it for a while in Council meetings. Rutan said he appreciated that process by which the Council President made the motion and the Vice President provided the second as a means to get the issue on the table for discussion. Holmer expressed that sometimes he preferred to make his comments on an issue prior to the motion, so that the motion could be properly amended. Miller wondered what the best use of time was around this matter. It was generally agreed that it worked well to use both methods, and that there was no perceived problem(s) about making amendments to motions. Rutan reminded the group of the ground rule that states that a majority of the Council must agree before proceeding with a project that would require a great deal of staff time. Holmer also mentioned that the same rule held for the development of ordinances by staff; a majority of the Council must agree prior to directing staff to develop the ordinance. Bennett made the comment that sometimes he feels he gets too much information; and wondered if everyone needed a copy of the full ordinance. He said he would like more general and less detailed information. Boles wondered if a one page summary of an ordinance could be prepared on the changes and new passages of ordinances. Rutan suggested that for longer ordinances, longer summaries be prepared. Ehrman questioned if it was necessary to receive the minutes of the Planning Commission and Downtown Commission, and suggested that summary minutes would be more helpful for her. Holmer responded that he wanted to see the full text of ordinances, and in lieu of full minutes suggested that Councilors listen to the tapes from meetings and review summary minutes. Boles said that he would like to see an expanded summaries on the agenda item summaries and that he would prefer a summary of the Planning Commission meetings, instead of the full text of the minutes. Schue stated that it would be extra work for the staff to provide a summarized version of minutes in addition to the full minutes, and that she preferred to read the full minutes, as she does read all of the material in the agenda packet. Boles suggested that a checkoff list be prepared to indicate which items are to be included in each Councilor's agenda packet. Gleason indicated that such a system would be very difficult to implement, as the agendas are systematically prepared, and customizing the packets would greatly reduce the efficiency of the system. Boles requested that the Council consider the use of a consent agenda. There DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 6 e e was general agreement that this option be used on Council agendas. Ehrman requested a list of the next Council President and Vice President, and also reminded other Councilors that the microphone were on at all times during the Council meetings. Boles noted that the video tapes of the Council meetings were reused after a month or so, and wondered if there was any interest among Council members to archive these tapes. The group did not have any great desire to save the Council meeting tapes and agreed it was alright to reuse the tapes. This concluded the discussion of Council communication ground rules. Sharon Thorne then discussed the results of her telephone interviews with the Councilors. She listed the topics which were most frequently listed as concerns by Councilors. These were: Financial Stability Economic Development Metro Partnership Social Goals: Housing Public Safety Library Urban Strategy/Intergovernmental Relations (i.e. with Springfield) Downtown Human Rights Commission Rutan said that the Council is currently processing the issue of Human Rights Commission and that it should be taken off the list. The other Councilors agreed to this. Ehrman said that the Library should be taken off the list, as the Council has dealt with it and has come to a conclusion about how to proceed. Bascom stated that this was true, but that it should still be on the list; however the Council did not need to discuss it within the Goals Session framework. The other Councilors agreed to this. Bascom suggested that citizen participation be added to the list. Holmer suggested that a part of this issue was the role of the Council in policy making and requested that an item on charter amendment allowing the Council to appoint department heads and other staff be added to the list of Council goals for discussion. Rutan responded that while he respected Holmer's point of view, he had a different philosophy of management and did not wish to discuss the charter amendment. Bennett said that he has felt frustrated by the budget cycle and has some questions about the role of the Council, the manager, and staff. He indicated that he would like to review the current relationships. He also said that he would like more information from the manager regarding opportunities to reduce the budget, instead of each individual Councilor trying to understand all of the details of the budget. He indicated that a discussion of roles would be of help to him. Schue supported the idea of a broader discussion of the relationship between staff and the Council. She said that her constituents complain to her, but that sometimes she has to explain that DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 7 e e she cannot do anything, because the staff is in charge. Rutan explained his view of how the Council, manager and staff all work together, and used the analogy of a corporate board of directors. It was decided that a process session would be the best place for a future discussion of this item. Boles requested that transportation be added to the list. The other members of the group agreed to do so. Miller announced that the members of the Council would take a short break in the morning to attend the kickoff for the library campaign. Ehrman wondered if the Council needed to discuss the social goal of housing again. Boles said that the social goal needs to look beyond just the housing issue. It was decided that it needed to stay on the goals list, but that it did not need to be discussed within the Goals Session. Rutan stated that economic development doesn't need to be on the list because CCED has a set of well defined goals around this issue. Ehrman felt that the item needed to be discussed to help inform the new members of the Council about the issue. Miller wanted to keep it on the discussion list and indicated that it would be related to the Metro Partnership item. He also indicated that he had a brief report on the Metro Partnership which would help in the review of the issue. Financial stability was discussed and it was decided that it would be on the list, but that it would not be discussed within the Goal Session. It was also decided that there would be no new balloting on the financial stability items. Miller questioned the other group members about priorities of goals, and if some items should be dropped from discussion due to time limits. Bennett said that he wanted to discuss each item and that the group could use a time to monitor discussion to allow time for each item. Boles said that he does not feel compelled to discuss all the items on the list, and that if certain issues go beyond the time limit, then the group should plan to meet again. The group generally agreed that time would be divided equally among all topics so that each could be discussed. The group then listed items under each goal. Under economic development these items were listed: report from CCED review of Metro Partnership Ehrman mentioned that Miller has been attending the Metro Partnership meetings and wanted to know the status of the Partnership. Holmer wanted to know about the components and cost of the Partnership. Under the public safety item the group listed: fire deployment crime drugs community policing focus patrols DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 8 e e Regarding the urban strategy item, Rutan said that he thought it was not the same as intergovernmental relations. Bennett felt that this referred to common police and fire forces between Eugene and Springfield. It was decided that urban strategy related to the economies of scale notion and the annexation issue. Listed under the downtown item were the following: parking transportation safety access/visibility housing LTD tax increment district organizations involved in downtown Under the citizen participation item the group listed: public hearings initiative petitions neighborhood groups representation - alternatives town hall meetings boards and commissions feedback mechanisms use of TV For the transportation item, the group listed: fairgrounds alternatives to automobiles This concluded the discussion of the goal session items for Saturday's discus- sion. Sharon Thorne then turned the meeting over to Jeff Miller, as the Council wished to discuss a proposal from the Committee on Committees regarding the Budget Committee process. Miller presented the memo and noted that the proposal would result in a reduced number of Budget Committee meetings, and that Councilors would need to agree to the proposed ground rules. (A copy of this memo was distributed in advance.) Holmer said that there were certain parts of the proposal which he felt needed clarification. Rutan responded that the proposal refers only to the Budget Committee process and not the Council processes. He said that when the Budget Committee recommends the budget it is not necessarily a done deal, and that the Council still has discretion regarding the budget. Schue wondered about the impact of making such a change in the budget process. Rutan noted that the dynamics of the Budget Committee are different that those found on the Council. Boles felt that the proposed changes violated the spirit of the Budget Commit- tee process. Rutan indicated that he wished to debate the issues as a Coun- cilor and not within the Budget Committee. Boles said that there was a long standing relationship with the citizens on the Budget Committee and this needed to be reviewed from the lay person point of view. Holmer asked if the Commit- DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 9 e e tee on Committees had outlined a more detailed role for the mayor, or if a mayor's message, like the manager's message, had been included. Holmer also asked about the review of the CIP. Rutan responded that the Budget will review only the first year of the CIP, because beyond that it is redundant. Rutan said that Councilors can bring any ideas to the Budget Committee, but not to the Council after the Budget Committee has passed on the budget. Holmer asked what would happen if new information or facts were obtained after the Budget Committee passed the budget, but before the Council adopted it. Ehrman responded that new facts were okay, but new issues were not. Boles discussed the possibility that an item could be defeated 11-5 in Budget Committee, but pass with the Council on 5-3 vote. Rutan wondered if the Budget Committee represented a defacto vote of the Council. Schue mentioned that a part of the problem last year was the failure on the part of some councilors to attend all of the budget committee meetings. Bascom them moved and Bennett seconded that the Council adopt the proposed revisions to the Budget Committee schedule for the FY90 budget. The motion passed, with Boles being the only nay vote. The meeting was then adjourned until 8:30 a.m., Saturday, February 18. DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 10 It e CITY COUNCIL GOAL SETTING SESSION FEBRUARY 17-18, 1989 Present: Mayor Miller; Councilors Ehrman, Schue, Bennett, Boles, Green, Bascom, Rutan, and Holmer. Facilitator: Sharon Thorne SATURDAY, February 18, 1989; Valley River Inn, Rogue Room Sharon Thorne began the session by outlining the topics the group agreed to discuss. These were: Financial Stability How to set priorities How to instruct Manager Economic Development CCED Report Review of Plan Metro Partnership Report from consortium Components Cost Public Safety Fire deployment Crime Drugs Community policing Focused patrolling Urban Strategy/Intergovernmental Relations Annexation Springfield Unincorporated areas Downtown Safety Accessibility Housing LTD Tax Increment CRM Parking Organizational structures, commissions, etc, Citizen Relations DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 1 - e Initiative petitions Neighborhood groups Public hearings Other alternatives - town hall meetings, surveys, etc. Transportation Fairgrounds Alternatives to autos It was also decided that air quality would also be discussed in the session, specifically concerned with field burning issues and wood stove regulations. The group agreed to keep the social goal of housing on the priority list, but not to discuss it in today's discussion. The same was true for the library issue. Finally, the Council agreed to use a process session to discuss a charter amendment regarding the Council's involvement in appointment of staff and departmental reorganizations. Before the Council began the discussion of the items, Ehrman indicated that she would make a report to the Budget Committee on the changes to the Budget Committee schedule that the Council adopted at the February 17, 1989 session. The group then began work on the goals. It was decided that the Metro Partner- ship and Economic Development could be grouped together as one goal, but that they would be discussed separately. Gleason then gave a report on the status of the Metro Partnership. He said that the partners (i.e. the Board of Directors) went through an assessment of how the partnership should be organized, and through this assessment have reaffirmed that the partnership needs to exist. It is seen as a valuable economic development tool, but some of the parties involved feel a need to redefine how the organization works and how is carries out it broad mission. Gleason said that he feels the partnership needs to do more to integrate resources and be less of a "stand alone" agency. More players need to be involved such as LCC and the State, and the partnership should be the piece of the picture which integrates the various parts. He mentioned the fact that the private sector side of the Partnership was interested in making a connection with the World Trade Council, and that the state is also interested in making connections with foreign trade relationships. In sum, he said that this in not the time to walk away from the Partnership, but it is the time to reassess the Partnership's organization and focus. Boles asked if there was a forest products component within the Metro Partner- ship. Gleason responded that there was a forest products council and that was the unit dealing with forest products concerns. Holmer wondered who would be in charge if a the current Partnership organiza- tion were changed. DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 2 e e Miller responded saying that there would still be a board in charge of the Partnership, but that a concern is how to effectively interface and integrate the resources available to the Partnership. Gleason replied saying that the board is time consuming and is not as effective as it could be. He is not sure of how the Board will be structured, but it does need to appoint an executive director, and it needs to scale back focus. He feels that the Partnership needs to be a receptor for contacts, as there are many contacts now occurring. It needs to be able to hand off projects and contacts, as opposed to being so focused on recruitment. He again mentioned that the state linkage is an important role for the Partnership. Bascom said that as the Council representative on the Partnership Board she attends meetings. She feels that an emphasis should be placed on local business assistance and issues related to that focus. She mentioned that John Lively, as the State representative, was doing a good job. She also feels that the Partnership is important, but supports scaling back on the Partnership's focus. Holmer mentioned that the City's contribution could be scaled back and be used to impact another area of interest. Gleason suggested that the focus needed to be returned to the Metro Team concept. This would be a group of people who develop and process proposals after they are received by a broader range organization, like the Partnership. This team would also be good in small business development and organization. Rutan gave a recent history of organized economic development in the Eugene area beginning with the Lane Economic Foundation and later the Oregon Pacific Business Foundation. He noted that the emphasis of these organizations was recruitment, which at the time was the trend in business, as many companies were then in an expansion mode. In his opinion the downfall of these organiza- tions was due to the over emphasis on external recruitment of businesses at a time when business trends indicated a slow down in expansion. He questioned to what extent the City wished to be involved in the recruitment business. He said that today's business climate is more reactive than proactive. That is looking at what is happening now and responding to that, as opposed to trying to create or attract a new business. For these reasons, he favors an approach which emphasizes development of local resources and enhancement of local businesses. He supports a reactive role for the Partnership, instead of a proactive role. Ehrman supported the idea of small business assistance and a change in focus for the Metro Partnership. She also supports the "receptor" role for the Partnership and feels that the development of local small business is a more appropriate role for the City. Boles commented that he felt it was more appropriate for the public to be involved in the development of small local businesses. He also has some concerns about the structure of the Metro Partnership, but wishes to continue working through internal business assistance. He feels that we have the to DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 3 e e handle the internal staff work. Miller said that he see some good work in the Partnership and does not wish to throw out the baby with the bath. He feels that the action is in small business, not in the large issues. He wants to avoid duplication of efforts, but be able to react in a positive manner. Green said that he wishes to maintain Partnership and sees it as a good stable way to recruit, but that we need to be careful about what businesses are recruited. In his opinion the greatest local resource is the people, and that we should stimulate the local businesses. The emphasis should be in our own back yard and the recruitment activities of the Partnership should be stream- lined. Schue agreed with Green about the people being the greatest local resource. She said that she would like to see the Partnership be more involved in the information and referral aspects of business development. She sees it as a funnel and receptor and being able to hand out parcels to the players. Bascom stated that she supported Schue's and Rutan's positions. She feels that the local networking functions of the Partnership are important. Rutan recommended that the Mayor, Council President and Vice President review the issue and develop a proposal for review by the entire Council and talk to other members of the Partnerships and that these activities should be completed by April 1. Miller suggested that the Council hold off this type of action until after the Partnership has its retreat. The retreat will provide some information about how the Partnership wishes to proceed and after is it over, the Council will be better able to make decisions about it. Boles said that he favored Rutan's approach, and wants not to waste time with ideas that aren't supported. Rutan responded that when in a business situation, he always prefers to "write the contract", so that he can set the terms of the agreement. Bascom suggested that the discussion from the retreat be brought the Council Committee on Committees. Miller suggested that a report from the Council Committee on Committees be completed prior to the retreat and that the report be presented at the retreat. The group decided to accept this suggestion and finished the discussion on this topic. The next topic the group discussed was economic development. Rutan began by distributing a memo from CCED and providing a report on the CCED recommenda- tions. In that memo the wetlands issue is discussed as an economic development concern. Special events were also listed as a means to improve economic development in the area. DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 4 e e Bascom commented that she like the idea of Eugene being developed as a destina- tion point and sees it as an opportunity to promote Eugene. Rutan also mentioned that CCED had discussed issues relating to the PIC and how the business community is being served. A report will be coming to CCED. He also said that the special events have been a positive experience. Miller suggested that the idea of a sports council was being considered as a means to promote the area. He also said that he wishes to look at the Sister Cities program with regards to the economic development that it could bring. He sees this as a tie in to the visitors bureau and the Fairboard. He wondered how the group could formulate a goal statement and direction around this issue. Schue said that she like the special events ideas, but that it was important to concentrate on a few so that we did not lose sight of the end result. She felt that it was important to select a few and do those well, because of the complexity of coordinating activities. Ehrman commented that the CCED program looked good to her. Boles expressed supported for Schue's point of view and warned that it was important not to spread ourselves too thin. He felt that the wetlands issue was also related to the infrastructure issue. Holmer commented on the wetlands issue by saying that perhaps we needed to be more aggressive in our efforts to resolve the issue. He noted that it had been on the agenda for a year now and that he thinks we cannot afford to wait to let others resolve the matter. Ehrman noted that it was not just a City issue; the State and Federal govern- ment were also involved and it was somewhat unclear as to who has the lead on the matter. Miller commented that he felt it was important to know what has gone on with the wetlands matter. Holmer responded that he is aware of what has happened, but the issue needs a higher level of resources. Bascom commented that the wetland is a very important issue and share some of the concerns of the other Councilors. Rutan said that the group must take a serious look at the issue, because it is so large, and must look at ways to more qUickly resolve the issue. Bennett stated that it was important to bring the community along on this issue; and that a part of the resolution of the issue was the definition of wetlands on the City's ability to influence that definition. Rutan supported this and expressed concern that we not fall behind on the plan to resolve the wetlands issue. DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 5 e e Miller then asked Sharon Thorne to draft a statement around the Metro Partner- ship and economic development. Bascom stated that the wetlands issue needs to be elevated on the priorities. The group then took a break to go to the library campaign kick off. When the group returned the draft statements which Sharon Thorne had written were reviewed. In his review of these Rutan noted that the group needed to look for areas around which attention could be focused, a work plan that was action and results oriented; a short list of items. Miller wondered how the group could measure their progress towards the goals. Green suggested that this was done by auditing performance. Bennett discussed how the group could be accountable for the end results of the goals. Boles then discussed his concerns about measuring goals and stated that one cannot be held accountable for things one cannot control.. Gleason said that the City staff now collect data on the number of firms being helped, the number and dollar amount of loans being processed, and that an audit function was to be conducted in the near future. Bennett said that he felt two ways to measure accountability in this area were in the number of new jobs created and in the change in income. Gleason responded that those things were being measured, but that it was not always easy to measure or quantify the City's contribution, and also noted that many of the improvements in the local economy were not the sole consequence of the City's efforts. Boles agreed with Gleason and suggested that the number of jobs created through the loan packages was an example of a more realistic indicator. Sharon Thorne then asked for clarification noting that the group was now discussing measuring results and not the goal itself. Rutan suggested that CCED could examine the goals and then develop an evalua- tion of the goals. He also stated that it may be helpful to look at the long term goals or mission of the City to develop goals, and that the issue and items being discussed now were really action issues. Holmer noted that goals are used to identify targets and from that objectives are developed. To illustrate this point he used the example of air quality. Rutan responded that the priority was economic development and the goal was a DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 6 e e statement what we want to accomplish and the work plan is a statement of how we will accomplish it. He felt that the Council has meaningful priorities and that those were substantive enough to give a sense of where the group wanted to go with the issues. He suggested that CCED work on these issues and bring more details back to the Council. Miller proposed that the Committee on Committees review the issues and bring a proposal back to the Council, and if there is no agreement on the item, it can be a topic at a process session. The group finished their discussion of this item and then decided to discuss citizen relations next. Schue began on this topic by saying that the citizen meetings regarding the library issue did not work well; the issue is too complex for the structure that was set up to present it to the public. Ehrman mentioned the discussion around the library parking issue within the Voter's Pamphlet committee. Rutan agreed with Schue's position. He noted that the neighborhood organiza- tions were not attended by a great number of citizens. He feels for the most part the people are happy and sometimes when there are only a few citizens at hearings he feels good because people aren't there to complain. He thinks the emphasis should be on creating opportunities for citizen involvement, but doesn't want to create something that doesn't work. Miller said that he thought the issue here was that information sharing; how can the citizens being affected by an issue be informed about it. He suggested that a publication of some type might be used to fill the information gap that he thinks exists in the community on certain issues, such as the library. Boles noted that the neighborhood groups are not necessarily the only structure with which the Council can communicate. He said that he would like to get a sense of where the community is on the issues, like tax issues. He suggested that a good random sample of the community be surveyed to get a more realistic impression of what is of importance to the community. He also said that he would like to have a town hall type meeting. Bascom noted that the survey might be a good idea, but that it would not just be to present information; it should be used to gather input from the comm- unity, and especially around certain issues. Schue agreed that getting information out was needed and in theory agreed with Miller's newsletter comment. However, she noted that 4-J regularly puts out a community newsletter and wondered how many people read it. In her opinion, people will read information about a hot issue and that people are interested in specific issues. She said that thought needs to be given about how a newsletter would work. She mentioned that cable TV is a resource that might be used to communicate issue related information to the public. Bennett said that he wants to get information out to the community, but noted DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 7 e e that people tend to get information only about those issues which directly affect them. He feels that the every four year election process works well to get information out to the community. Holmer said that his neighborhood regularly had 30 to 40 persons in attendance and that it works well around almost all issues. He also said that since the Council is elected it is important to keep in mind the distinction between representing the community on the issue and the "rightness" of an issue, as these are not always the same. He also mentioned his concerns regarding the initiative petition process. He wants to take a look at revising the current ordinance and creating something more realistic. Ehrman noted that the Cle had recently looked at the neighborhood issue and wondered about the staffing level and if the staff should keep the neighborhood groups going. She also said that the Voter's Pamphlet was an information source for the citizens and that she was pleased with the way it had turned out so far. She questioned the use of a survey and would hope that a survey would be used to determine the next issue, as opposed to driving the issues placed before the Council. She felt the survey issue could be referred to the CIC. She liked the idea of the town hall meetings and noted that the one held at Olive Plaza had been very successful in her opinion. She wants to strengthen her contact with the community and feels that face to face contact helps that contact. Green said that he feels it is important for the Council to go to the people, and although the logistics of any event might be difficult, it would be a sign to the community that the Council wants to hear the community. He mentioned that cable access might be used to bring the Council to the community. Schue commented that town hall meetings combined with Council meetings could be an educational process for the community and suggested that a short business meeting could be conducted in conjunction with an issues related meeting. Boles wanted to know if it would be possible to hold Council meetings in the wards on a rotating basis, and noted that it would be good for Councilors to see other wards and other issues. Miller said that if a survey was done it would indicate a high regard for the work the Council does, and noted that the fact that several Councilors have run unopposed is most likely due the fact that the citizens are pleased with the job they have done. He supported the idea of having meetings in different locations, but noted that there may be logistical problems at certain loca- tions. Holmer said that before moving the Council meetings it may be a good idea to survey the area to see if anyone would attend. Schue noted that Gerlinger on the U of 0 was not a good place for a meeting as it was not wheelchair accessible and has insufficient parking. Miller said that he wants to have meetings in different locations because it provides a new perspective on matters. DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 8 e e Rutan supported the review of the initiative petition process as well as the survey, but with the reservation noted by Ehrman. He also wondered what was a more effective way to get citizen input and at the same time concerned about keeping costs down. Bennett said that outreach is important, but the whole process still requires people talking to one another and coming to meetings. He doesn't see a problem on people coming together on a specific issue. He felt it was a good idea to make the Council more accessible, but warned that the other Councilors should not assume that the people are not being heard if they don't attend meetings. Miller then suggested that some of these ideas be put on paper, those he listed included a market survey, meetings in different locations, and holding meetings in areas affected by issues. Boles said that he read the "How Sweet It Is" advertisement in the paper regarding the progress on the airport, and wondered if the paper could do something similar around community issues on a somewhat larger scale. He also indicated that he wished to review the initiative petition process. Bascom suggested that a goal of citizen participation be developed. Rutan responded that citizen participation is not the primary issue. Ehrman said that the issue is citizen relations is the issue. Miller said that the Council needs to look at working more with print and electronic media to get the message out to the community. Bascom mentioned that the crc is looking at restricting the neighborhood groups. Bennett also mentioned his interest in looking at the initiative petition process. Gleason then discussed the current ordinance and how it might be changed, stating that the City could use the State standard as a high number, but couldn't go above that number. Miller expressed his concern that the initiative petitions absorbed a great deal of community resources. Boles commented that he would like to get more data on the numbers and look at the State standards and then try to make a decision around the initiative petition issue. Erhman noted that the number of voters in mayoral election may fluctuate greatly from year to year and that we needed to get a stabilized number for the petition process. Bascom wondered if this was a goal or just something for the Council to talk DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 9 e e about during the year. Miller said that this was something that he wanted to work with during the year. Ehrman wants to look at issue of citizen relations, because it does come back to the issue of Council goals. Boles commented that he supports this as a goal, but noted that the Council cannot do everything and by necessity will have to leave some items off the list. Ehrman said that she is sensitive to the citizen criticism and wants to do something about citizen relations. Rutan said that he thought this was a good idea, but that it was a work plan item, rather than a priority. Bascom moved to put it on the list, but questioned if it was a priority. It was decided to put citizen relations on the priority list, but that it would be ranked later. The next topic the group discussed was air quality. Bennett introduced this topic. He has been attending the LRAPA meetings and presented a staff memo from a recent LRAPA meeting. He felt the position in the memo regarding the field burning issue was too strong and wanted to get a sense of where the other Councilors were in regard to this issue. Schue noted that the PM-10 standard for air quality noted in the memo is a federal standard and that the City must do something to meet that standard, especially around the wood stove issue. Ehrman suggested that a LRAPA subcommittee be set up to look at issues from a jurisdiction point of view. She also noted that she thought the consensus among the Council was opposition to field burning, but not an immediate ban on field burning; a phased approach to the elimination of field burning but with no specific target date. Schue noted that there is a distinction between sanitizing the field and burning the waste, and that different methods were employed to do both. Boles wondered if this was the type of input Bennett needed. Bascom noted that the weather controls have worked well to alleviate the problem in Eugene. Rutan felt that the Council position should be to force technology to deal with the field burning issue and get on with it. He thinks that the real problem, however is wood stoves, not field burning. DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 10 e e Miller supported Rutan's statement, and stated that there should be an immedi- ate ban on burning stacks of straw. He felt the problem in Eugene was due to slash burning and wood stoves. Schue noted that the smoke management program has been in existence for 10 - 12 years and has been effective in keeping the smoke out of Eugene, but it has put the smoke in other communities. Boles agreed with Rutan on the wood stove issue, and he supported the LRAPA memo because it will drive the field burning issue. Bennett felt that the LRAPA statement was too strong for his support, and wanted to go away with a sense of where the Council was on the issue. Miller said that Council position is in support of a phased pullout of field burning, so he did not feel okay about the LRAPA memo. Bennett was concerned that the Councilts support of the elimination of field burning not be construed to be in support of an immediate ban of field burning. Ehrman said that the Council's position on field burning could be presented to the LRAPA subcommittee. She continued that the real issue is wood stoves and discussed the LRAPA voluntary compliance plan. She said that at some point LRAPA may have to look at a mandatory ban on wood stoves and a fine structure for violations. Finally she noted that Eugene may have to take the lead in the area on this issue. Boles said that he agrees with Ehrman, and that he would reluctantly support a limitation on wood stoves. He said that there must be stringent controls on burning garbage in wood stoves, and that he felt it was important to look at a conversion path for those whose sole heat source was a wood stove, especially senior citizens who must figure out a new way to heat. Schue said that at this time LRAPA has no authority to enforce the air quality violators, but in her opinion the burden would fall on the local government, as it would be hard for LRAPA to enforce laws in the Eugene, Springfield or Lane County entities, as it is a regional problem. Ehrman noted that although strides had been made in the wood stove industry, it still was not enough to control the problem. Rutan said there are two issues, I} the Council position on field burning and 2} the wood stove issue in which the Council must decide how to enforce the issue and how tough it will be on the issue. Boles said that in addressing the issue of air quality, the Council must also address the issue of auto traffic pollution. Ehrman noted that of the three local governments, Eugene is the only to prohibit backyard burning; and in this matter Eugene has taken a forceful lead. Boles stated that the issue of automobiles needed to be separated from the DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 11 e e issue of fossil fuel. The group decided that this was enough discussion on this topic and adjourned for lunch. After lunch the group took up the issue of downtown. Miller commented that many forces are now driving the downtown; urban renewal, tax increment; how to use the tax increment district to improve the downtown, how to revitalize the area, and so forth. Schue wanted to know if the tax increment district could be used for housing? Miller said that it could be used for infrastructure development. Gleason said that it could be used to leverage a position with the housing authority. Ehrman said that she would like to know who all the players are in the down- town. Bascom noted that she likes the idea of special downtown districts. Boles said that downtown should be a priority, and that the Council should look at consolidation and have a focusing agency for downtown issues. Bennett discussed the recently created Downtown Eugene, Inc. and gave a history of his interest in the downtown area, especially with regard to his development project. He feels the downtown is at a cross road now, and what happens now will have a long term effect. The efforts to improve downtown now are piece- meal and perhaps an incremental process is needed to know what to do next. He also said that the streets must be opened to improve access to downtown. Boles said that the Council needs to discuss the downtown as it is a major issue, and this brings him back to his concern that a central coordinating organization needs to be in place. He also said the Council needs to look at transportation as an issue for downtown. Miller said that if downtown was an issue, the Council needed to set a goal around it. Part of this goal could be to create a process to integrate the visions for downtown, which at this time, are not clear. Another part of the goal could be looking at how all the components fit together. He also sugges- ted that the Council might use a process session to have a "visioning session" for the downtown. Rutan said that the Council has deferred to the Downtown Commission and that the Commission has been dOing the nitty gritty work. He suggested that the Council could be more actively involved in the downtown organizations and take an intensive look at what's happening downtown. Bascom asked about the LTD issue, and felt a need for closure on the matter. DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 12 e e Schue noted that the City has a downtown plan and a Downtown Commission. She said the Council can assume more interest in downtown, but the group needs to have realistic expectations about downtown. She also said the Council needs to think more about the LTD issue. Boles said that if the Council is looking at change, the piecemeal efforts will not work. Ehrman suggested that the Council review the downtown plan and make an assess- ment of how the plan is working. Holmer noted that the Planning Commission and the Downtown Commission are both involved in the plan and that they would need to be involved in an assessment of the plan and structure issues. Miller suggested that a process session could focus on the downtown plan issue. In this plan review the Council could begin to create a vision for downtown. He said the Council needs to take the leadership role on this issue and that the plan needs to be revisited with the other downtown players to get a sense of direction about where it is going. Rutan said that first the Council must come to an assessment of where the downtown and downtown plan is; in other words is there a problem downtown and see if other groups have that same opinion. Schue agreed that the issue needed to be reviewed, but wondered if the Council was the group to engage in the effort. Bascom suggested that the Council pull together a concentrated review of the plan and redefine the direction of downtown with all players. Green supported this idea by saying that he felt it was important to redefine the downtown direction, and suggested that the Council have a session just on downtown issues. Boles agreed with this idea, but also wanted to look at the Urban Renewal districts and review the overall issue in light of organizational issues. Rutan said that the plan needed to be reviewed and the next steps need to be outlined. Further, he said the plan needs to be updated in light of new opportunities in the downtown area. Ehrman added that she wanted to include the other organizations involved in the downtown. Miller noted that the area to be address was the downtown area, as opposed to the downtown core. The group agreed to this and listed the downtown concerns on the goal list. The next issue the group discussed was transportation. DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 13 e e Boles presented his ideas on the use of flatland cable cars in the Eugene area. He felt the cable car idea was a way to integrate a number of issues in Eugene and do something that was fun and innovative in the process. He mentioned that a UMTA study through the U of 0 was soon to be undertaken and perhaps the cable car process could be folded into the study. Green said that he liked the idea of street cars, and that he had grown up with them in New Orleans. Bennett said he liked the idea and wondered about the economic impact of the cable cars. Ehrman noted that parking issues were a concern for her related to transporta- tion. Boles said that the cable car idea was something that he felt warranted staff time to review and investigate. He also mentioned that Fairground as a transportation issue. Holmer wanted to know more about the planning project and if LTD would be involved. Miller responded that LTD would be player. He also noted the success of Portland's light rail project, and based upon this supported the idea of looking into the cable car idea. Bascom said that the cable cars were an awesome dream, but one that may be worth looking into. She mentioned that an individual was trying to put in a mini rail system in the Alton Baker Park area this summer. She commented that is was important to look at the realities of such a project. Gleason suggested that this idea be tied into the UPTA study and that the Public Works department take a look at the issue and develop a work plan which would include LTD as a player. The work plan would include staff and fund resources required to examine the project. Ehrman agreed with Gleason by saying that it was worth looking at but that it would be a lot of work and would involve a number of players. Schue mentioned that there was a billing in the legislature which would add a $10 fee to vehicle registration fees and that perhaps this location option money could be used to fund part of a cable car system, if the bill was revised and if the county would agree. Gleason said that a study of the issue was a good place to start. Holmer suggested that staff prepare an outline of a work plan and an estimated cost and that Councilor Boles have input in that process. Boles also suggested that the project have a tie in to the infrastructure committee. DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 14 e e Ehrman then brought up the issue of the Fairgrounds. She said that she wants to be sure that the City is involved in any decisions regarding the Fair- grounds, and that the county cannot assume that their decisions about the Fairgrounds are final. Gleason agreed that the City needs to be involved in the Fairground issue and suggested that the Council have a meeting with the Fair Board on Fairground issues. He also suggested that the Council may wish to consider naming a liaison with the Fair Board. He also suggested that a goal might be to direct staff to make a recommendation regarding the Fairground and that another goal might be to direct staff to come back with more information on the proposed LTD move. Miller proposed that the goal statement around transportation be to have in place in 1989 a work plan which includes and agreed upon sight for the new LTD downtown transfer station. The group agreed to this statement and finished with the transportation topic. The next topic they discussed was urban transition. Ehrman noted that urban transition ties into citizen relations. Boles commented that he felt that a part of the resistance to annexation was the perception that the neighborhoods, especially River Road/Santa Clara, would be greatly changed. He felt that if the people in those areas were assured that the character of the neighborhood would not change, they might be more interes- ted in annexation. Rutan said that the City needs to explore other options around the annexation issue. Miller suggested as a goal that the City have in place a process to provide urban services in those areas. He also said that the City does not have the option to do nothing about this issue in the next year. Bennett said that the City needs an aggressive annexation policy and that he is at the point where he is ready to fight the issue, but does not know exactly what would be involved in such a fight. Boles wanted to know if there was some way to work with the county the leverage the service issue, and suggested that there may be ways to work the issue of duel jurisdiction around annexation issues. Holmer suggested that the City could annex all of Beltline and then use the island method to annex the remainder of the area. Green wanted to know if a septic tank tax could be imposed as a means to get River Road/Santa Clara people to hook up to the sewer. Holmer said that he also wants to discuss the joint provision of urban services and supported Miller's efforts in this regard as he feels it is one way to reduce costs. He wondered where other Councilors were with this issue. DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 15 e e Miller responded that the City must find a way to deal with the larger issue of urban services and that the annexation issue is just one piece of the urban strategy issue. Rutan said that the City needs to develop a new strategy around annexation, as the current plan was not working. He also said that we have a sewer problem and that it needs to be fixed, and that annexation is a part of the whole issue. Ml11er asked how the joint provision of urban services fit in to this issue, and how it could be framed as a goal. Rutan responded that the City needs to develop a new annexation strategy. Miller then discussed his efforts concerning combined metro services, such as 911, fire response and the like. He said that there are saving potential in the administrative costs of these services. He also mentioned that this issue is still at the discussion level only. Rutan asked what time frame the Council had in mind around this issue. Boles commented that the piecemeal approach will not work with the annexation issue. Miller then suggested that the goal for this issue be to look at possible economic efficiencies with other government agencies. Ehrman asked if this topic also included intergovernmental issues. She said that she was disappointed with EWEB in their response around the library issue. Rutan suggested that relationships with EWEB could be improved if the parties would call each other before the issues hit the media, so that all parties would know what was happening. The group then decided that they were satisfied with the discussion of the urban strategy topic and then moved on the public safety topic. Ehrman began the discussion by noting that drugs and crime were a major problem for not only the community but for the entire country. She wondered how the problem could be solved, and said that more money hardly seems to make a dent in the problem. Rutan agreed that this was an issue about which they were all concerned. But, he felt that there was a need to define the problem in more specific areas, and especially in terms of how the City can address the problem to make some impact. He suggested that the crime issue may be a priority issue for members of the Council and that some others items might have to come off the priority list to make room for it. He felt the Council needed to discuss the matter to assess how bad the problem was and what steps should be taken to resolve the issue. DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 16 e e Green stated that the Council needs to take steps to get the community more involved in the things, and by doing so a safer atmosphere in the community can be created. Schue said that the issue needs to be broken up into two pieces; the crime side of the drug issue and the demand side of the drug issue, why do people want to use drugs. She wondered what were the responsibilities of the parties involved including the parents, schools, and police. She wondered if more prevention was more important than more enforcement. Boles commented on the supply side of the drug issue by saying that decriminal- ization of drug would be one way to face the supply issue and would also serve to reduce the jail overcrowding issue. He noted that the jails are now somewhat like a revolving door. He also mentioned Portland had been consider- ing a law which would hold the landlord responsible for drug related activities in a property owned by that landlord. This gives the landlord some discretion about who is renting properties. Miller said that he will proposal to the Council that three additional officers be hired to deal with traffic violations and as back up for other police calls. He said that he thought the crime situation could be improved by enhancing the community service officers, crime prevention, and community policing efforts. Gleason then discussed the activities of the community service specialists in the West University area. Holmer requested more information about community police and focus patrols, and requested that staff prepare such a report with costs and level of service information. Bascom felt that some intervention was possible at the basic park program activity level, and that this could also be a positive way to involve kids in the community. She suggested that a recreation program would be a good idea. Miller responded by also commenting that sports are another way to involved kids and it was an alternative to drugs. He suggested that the Council adopt a goal to outline a series of options regarding the use of community service officers, and also to outline how other resources might be used to impact crime, such as parks and recreation facilities. Boles supported Councilor Bascom and said that it was necessary to get back to the basic parks program as a way to impact crime. He then asked Gleason how the city involved the parents when a young person was involved in some sort of crime or other incident. Gleason responded by saying that it was not always the poor kids who ended up involved with the law. Now, many middle class families are being involved, and that the problem was not a police problem, but a family problem. Bennett stated his support for the community police officers and wanted more information regarding costs and accountability. DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 17 . e Green discussed his work with kids in sports and schools. He said that kids are falling into crime because there is not enough for them to do. He said kids need to get involved, and that the police should playa positive role for kids. He suggested that police officers could be involved in park programs and provide a positive role model for kids, because it is important to reach kids when they are young. He suggested that supervised park programs be put in place as a way to reach kids and address crime via the prevention mode. Ehrman commented that the Youth Commission had put forth a request for more youth oriented services and activities. Miller wondered what impact additional services would have on the budget. Boles commented that the Council could choose to reconsider the financial stability issue and look at the resource question. Bennett responded that now was not the time to look for additional revenues. Rutan said that he didn't feel it was necessary to look at additional resour- ces. In his opinion the City has enough resources, but needs to look at priorities and how to use resources to address those priorities. Ehrman commented that if the library vote passed, the Council will have to look at additional resources. Gleason responded that the financial stability issue had been a year long process and it had been very instructive. He then outlined his proposal (which he previously presented to the Council) on how the budget would be balanced in the next two years. He also said that after the budget was balanced as per his plan there would be very little for any new actives, and thus it would come down to a matter of choices. The discussion then turned specifically to the issue of financial stability. Boles said that there are new revenues out there and that at some time he would like to revisit the financial stability issue. Then the Councilors discussed how they would rank these goals. It was decided that the Committee on Committees would review these goals and then make recommendations to the Council for further discussion and approval. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 4:30 p.m. DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION PAGE 18