Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/20/1982 Meeting . - - M I NUT E S Eugene City Council City Council Chamber January 20, 1982 11:30 a.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Brian Obie, Betty Smith, Mark Lindberg, D. W. Hamel, Cynthia Wooten, Gretchen Miller, and Emily Schue. COUNCILOR ABSENT: Eric Haws. I. ITEMS FROM MAYOR & COUNCIL, APPOINTMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS, AGENDA ADJUSTMENTS A. Councilor Absence Councilor Obie noted that he would be out next Monday and would also miss the two following Wednesday meetings. B. Legislative Subcommittee Briefing Ms. Smith stated that the Legislative Subcommittee met last week and today to review the various proposals from the past week in the special legislative session. They will be asking the council to take a City position. She noted that at the January 13 meeting, the Legislative Subcommittee supported the Governor's revenue proposals. These are proposals such as income to the general fund through a speed-up of employer payment of withholding tax, increased efforts in collection of delinquent taxes, additional income through investment, increased beer and wine taxes, and increased liquor taxes. The subcommittee discussed adopting priorities which they will press for. They feel that the University funding should be maintained, but noted that if all current programs are maintained, additional funding is necessary. There will be a draft formal recommendation for a temporary personal and corporate income surtax. This should not increase what Oregonians paid in 1981 since there will be a Federal tax deduction to offset this. Ms. Smith noted that discussions clarifying the council's position on priorities and revenue options could occur at council's January 25 meeting. C. Appointments Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to appoint the following: Air70rt: Janet Amundson, 938 East 22nd, Eugene, 97405, term to expire 1/1 86 (reappointment); Barbara McCarty, 1660 Stoney Ridge, Eugene, 97405, term to expire 1/1/86 (reappointment); Downtown Development Board: Ed Farley, 86081 Lorane Highway, Eugene, 97405, term to expire 1/1/85; Allan H. Pierce, 2515 Terrace View Drive, Eugene, 97405, term to expire 1/1/85 (reappointment); Nita J. Robertson, MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 20, 1982 Page 1 . 1436 Fetters Loop, Eugene, 97402, term to expire 1/1/85 (reappointment); Mayor will be making a recommendation for the fourth position on this board at a later date. Public Solicitations Commission: Kathleen Lawlor, 65 West 36th, Eugene, 97405, term to expire 1/1/86 (reappointment). Construction Codes Board of Appeals: David Shellabarger, 2427 Riverview Street, Eugene, 97403, term to expire 1/1/87 (reappointment). Performing Arts Commission: Randi Young, 1580 Skyline Park Loop, Eugene, 97405, term to expire 1/1/86 (reappointment); Sally Weston, 2595 Highland Drive, Eugene, 97405, term to expire 1/1/86 (reappointment); Gary Williams, 1144 President, Eugene, 97401, term to expire 1/1/86 (reappointment). Gamblin! Committee: Steve Hessel, 2438 University, Eugene, 97405, term to expire /1/84 (reappointment); Lieutenant Guy Mattoon, 2515 Jeppesen Acres Road, Eugene, 97401, term to expire 1/1/84 (reappointment). Zoning Board of A~jea1s: Robert M. Glass, 2186 University, Eugene, 97403, term to expire 1/ 87 (reappointment). Bicycle Committee: John Rep1inger, 41 West 35th Avenue, Eugene, 97405, and Stephen Bunnell, 3110 Portland, Eugene, 97405, for undetermined terms. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. e II. ROUTINE ITEMS FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL A. Approval of Special City Council Minutes of December 7, 1981; Dinner Session Minutes of November 9, 1981; Joint City Council/Planning Commission Work Session Minutes of December 14, 1981; and Legislative Subcommittee Minutes of January 13, 1982 (distributed) Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to approve the special City Council minutes of December 7, 1981; dinner session minutes of November 9, 1981; joint work session minutes of December 14, 1982; and Legislative Subcommittee minutes of January 13, 1982. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. B. Payment of Bills, Claims, and Progress Payments (listings distributed) Res. No. 3620--A resolution authorizing payment of bills, claims, and progress payments for the period January 6, 1982, through January 20, 1982. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 20, 1982 Page 2 c. Improvement Petition: tion--assessable cost: Charnelton Street (affected property on peti- sewers, 100 percent; City costs, none) - Res. No. 3621--A resolution authorizing sanitary sewer construc- tion on 7th Avenue from the alley between Charnelton Street to Olive Street (2023) Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. III. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Alley Vacation for Judith Lindsay (AV 75-2) (map and background information distributed) Mr. Gleason introduced Jim Croteau, Planning. Mr. Croteau stated that staff has appeared before the council previously on this proposed alley vacation. This is in the Laurel Hill Valley. It is a 12-foot- wide alley that is 130 feet long. The council considered this item in September and upon hearing testimony, they postponed their decision. The refinement plan team has reviewed the issues, and they do not consider it as part of the trans- portation issue. Therefore, they have recommended vacation. They do recommend bicycle and pedestrian easements, as well as private easements, to abut the property. e Public hearing was opened. Judith Lindsay, 1985 Riverview, stated that she agrees with the staff presen- tation. Emily Turnbull, 1990 Augusta, stated that she lives in a room in a house on that street. Motorcycles use the street. It is a dangerous situation, and she would like to see it closed. People have had to drive onto yards because of traffic coming down the hill. Tom Tedford, 2005 Riverview, stated that he is in favor of the closure also. It is dangerous on Augusta Street and there is a blind entrance to Riverview. This was never meant to be a street, but it has become a thoroughfare. The City would be better off having it closed. Property owners do not oppose the closure. There being no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. CB 2357--An ordinance authorizing vacation of a 12-foot-wide alley running west from Augusta Avenue 130 feet. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the council, and that enactment be considered at this time. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 20, 1982 Page 3 Council Bill 2357 was read the second time by council bill number only. e Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote; all councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18909. B. Consolidation of CETA Advisory Councils 1. Ordinance Amendment (memo and ordinance distributed) Mr. Gleason introduced Gary Long, Staff Services. Mr. Long stated that the briefing memorandum explained the proposed ordinance and the recommendation for consolidating the three CETA councils into a single, 27-member, Eugene Private Industry Council. The minimum membership on the con- solidated council is determined by Federal regulation. This should streamline the advisory process and reduce staff costs. A listing of those individuals being recommended for membership on the combined council was distributed to the councilors. Those nominated have served on previous CETA advisory commissions. Staff recommends appointment of the nominees. e Public hearing was opened; there being no testimony, public hearing was closed. Mr. Lindberg noted that on the three previous CETA committees, there were three City Councilors serving. Now, it is being suggested that two councilors serve with one councilor as an alternate. Councilors Emily Schue and Bill Hamel are being recommended to serve, with Councilor Lindberg as an alternate. CB 2409--An ordinance concerning CETA Advisory Councils; amending Sections 2.013, to 2.137, 2.139, and 2.141 of the Eugene Code, 1971; repealing Sections 2.125, 2.127, 2.129, 2.131, 2.133, and 2.135 of that code; and declaring an emergency. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Council Bill 2409 was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote; all councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18910. 2. Consideration of Mayor's nominations to CETA Eugene Private Industry Council (memo distributed) Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to appoint the following, including Councilors Schue and Hamel serving on the Eugene Private Industry Council, with Councilor Lindberg serving as an alternate: e MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 20, 1982 Page 4 - Les Bischoff, 2740 Harlow Road, Eugene, 97401, term to expire 9/30/83; Jim Bjork, 2555 Portland Street #34, Eugene, 97405, term to expire 9/30/82; Judy Bronson, 1711 Delrose, Springfield, 97477, term to expire 9/30/84; Liz Cawood, 1728 Minda, Eugene, 97401, term to expire 9/30/84; Rich Cook, 2810 Madison, Eugene, 97402, term to expire 9/30/83; Jim Holst, 1582 Hackamore Way, Eugene, 97401, term to expire 9/30/84; Ada O. Lee, 2610 Highland Oak Drive, Eugene, 97405, term to expire 9/30/83; Cliff Kaylor, 4840 Mahalo Street, Eugene, 97405, term to expire 9/30/82; Ken Masterson, 490 Palomino Drive, Eugene, 97401, term to expire 9/30/84; Ray McIver, 2540 Snelling, Eugene, 97401, term to expire 9/30/84; Doug McKay, 450 Stonegate, Eugene, 97401, term to expire 9/30/82; Mary Jane O'Brien, 1892 Olive, Eugene, 97405, term to expire 9/30/82; Larry Murray, 3272 Strathmore, Eugene, 97405, term to expire 9/30/84; Dave Plant, 1701 River Loop 1, Eugene, 97404, term to expire 9/30/84; John Prior, 531 East 40th, Eugene, 97405, term to expire 9/30/83; and Jack Wesolowski, 82086 Lost Creek, Dexter, 97417, term to expire 9/30/83. Ms. Wooten stated that she is concerned about the Youth Commission and would like to know who would be their representative. Mr. Long stated that that would be up to the Mayor, but staff would suggest someone from Looking Glass. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. e IV. ADOPTION OF ANNUAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (memo and background information distributed) Mr. Gleason introduced Jim Farah, Planning. Mr. Farah stated that at last Monday's meeting, a public hearing was held on the CIP, focusing on fiscal year 1982-83. Staff would like to respond to questions posed from the council. Kirk McKinley, Planning, stated that he would address cost benefits of the City providing and purchasing shelter housing and cost benefits of the EWEB conservation projects. He was contacted by three separate agencies regarding housing. The City currently pays $44 per day to keep someone in jail. From July to September 1981, Buckley House turned away about 120 people, which ended up costing the City money because those people had to go to jail. Most other cities have provided shelter housing with Community Development Block Grant funding because they have a social services orientation. In regard to the conservation cost-effectiveness, John Etter, Parks Design, had told him that Parks would take up to one year to perform an energy audit. Most energy savings will be through caulking, weatherstripping, and adding insulation. Ms. Schue asked whether all people who were turned away from Buckley House would end up in jail and whether there were other alternatives available, such as Womenspace. Mr. McKinley responded that if Buckley House is full, those people e MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 20, 1982 Page 5 e will be put in jail. For one year at the current rate, it would cost $20,000 per person. Mr. Lindberg asked about Eugene Emergency Housing. Mr. McKinley stated that it is difficult to get the figures from the computer. There are no hard statistics. Mr. Gleason added that since the state has actively started moving people out of mental health facilities, there has been an increase in the number of people at police and information service counters. Mr. McKinley added that Family Shelter House put up 915 people in 1981, and turned away 415 people. Mr. Lindberg stated that from study groups and other meetings he had attended, he feels it would be foolish to put construction off. He feels there should be an analysis done to link this concern with other high-priority City projects. He does not feel there should be an immediate focus to turn the City's energies toward social services, but that there should be follow-up done. Ms. Schue indicated agreement with Mr. Lindberg. She would rather see the $20,000 spent on housing individuals in the jail spent on more useful housing needs. Mr. McKinley added that there are only four temporary shelters in Eugene. Ms. Wooten stated that she had hoped an item could be placed in the 1983-84 CIP, but for this year because of the need, they might want to look at the Civic Emergency Fund, which could be used until something could be done. e Ms. Smith stated that she would want a thorough analysis prior to any "band-aid" approach. These agencies are struggling to fill the needs in the community. The entire focus should be addressed as well as the role that city government should play. It should be determined whether this is a long-term City respon- sibility. Mr. Obie wondered, if the City pays for the jail services, who pays for those cases that originate from the County. Mr. Gleason responded that he, Chief Packard, George Morgan, and Sheriff Burks had met about this issue. There is now an itemized billing for jailing costs. This is no longer the problem that it was. The amount of funding from the State detox program has not yet been determined. Ms. Wooten stated that since the CIP has been circulated, she has been concerned about raising $47 million to pay for these improvements. She does not feel the City can go to property taxes for the entire package. She has tried to think of how to cut those items of least importance. A model should be developed of alter- natives with different levels of funding so it can be more easily determined what is affordable. She distributed copies of information she had presented to the Budget Committee. While only $47 million is projected for this year, it is the General Fund question that needs to be dealt with. Without General Fund moneys coming in, there will be $20 million going out. Alternative 1 on the information sheet distributed shows what it would be without this revenue. Alternative 3 on her information sheet shows the last link of the Eugene sewer trunk line. She feels this could be a good way to proceed. The council must look at ways beyond property taxes for funding mechanisms. She is hoping that housing will be discussed further at a later time. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 20, 1982 Page 6 e e e Ms. Schue stated that she needs more clarification from staff as to what they are being requested to do with regard to the Capital Improvement Program. She thought the decision would be based on what would be desirable for funding, and priorities would then be established for how and when. Mr. Gleason responded that that is correct. The budget process is the arena where this will be done. He is sorry staff did not make it clear. Staff did not have the authority to make recommendations; that is up to the Budget Committee. The Revenue Committee will have to examine this issue; the Budget Committee will prioritize the pro- jects. Each budget year, it will be determined what can be afforded. Ms. Schue stated that she thinks it will be valuable for the council to indicate to the public their recognition of the needs. The council must talk more about the revenue aspect, though. Ms. Wooten indicated agreement, but noted it is diffi- cult to adopt a plan without any priorities. Ms. Schue reaffirmed that the council would only be stating what is desirable and then the problem is to determine how it can be done. Ms. Wooten stated that not having the "hows" is what worries her. Mr. Gleason added that the Capital Improvement Plan has received input from many sources. It has a planning tool, but there is no authorization inherent in the development of the plan to proceed. This planning element and the authorization element happen to coincide this January. The council could 1) adopt the plan as a planning document and send it to the Budget Committee for prioritization; or 2) they could pass the entire document to the Budget Committee and in that context, work through the document, initially establishing this year's priorities and then going on to the next year's. Mr. Lindberg asked if this would be a planning document for 1982-92 rather than for 1981-91. Mr. Gleason responded that that is correct. Mr. Lindberg stated that this fills the planning need. Ms. Smith stated that this plan should be addressed at the Budget Committee level, but if the document goes to the Budget Committee, she asked if there would be a timing problem. Mr. Gleason responded that there would not, with the exception of the sewer trunk lines and the decision regarding the 911 program. Ms. Smith stated that the responsibility for the total document except for the sewer and the 911 projects should then go to the Budget Committee. She would support the Budget Commmittee review and recommendation. Ms. Wooten noted agreement, but she assumes the council, as part of the Budget Committee, will be looking at a reduced plan since it is not possible to finance $47 million worth of projects. Ms. Schue stated that when they are talking about adopting the CIP, there are recommendations from staff and the Planning Commission. She asked how these will fit in. Mr. Gleason stated that the Planning Commission and staff recommendations are to include some items and to prioritize the rest. The executed document is the budget and the planning document is the CIP. The CIP leads to the budget document. The CIP could be adopted as is, or council could say it is blurred and send it to the Budget Committee and have them prioritize and adopt the CIP in smaller portions. Then, the City Council could deal with the long-term planning document next year. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 20, 1982 Page 7 e e e Ms. Schue stated that she would like to adopt this plan and use it as a planning tool for those items that can be accomplished. The planning element and the financing considerations are two separate issues, and it is unfortunate that those projects listed are expected to be completed so soon. Ms. Miller added that this is an attempt to list the needs and approximate costs for the next decade. It is not a commitment to complete all the projects, but a way to discuss the options in a more consolidated fashion. This was a planning exer- cise to help the council make more intelligent decisions. This is a long-term list of desirable projects. She would be willing to authorize further action on the West Eugene sewer trunk line. Most projects listed are either necessary or very desirable. The Budget Committee should do the prioritization. She is afraid, however, that if the CIP goes to the Budget Committee, it will be more difficult to keep the priorities for each year straight. Ms. Wooten said that clarity is desirable, but she would rather have the council deal with the annual CIP and come back later with the ten-year CIP. Mr. Obie noted that he would like to move ahead with the plan and would like to see it refined later. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to adopt the annual CIP with the Planning Commission recommendations. Ms. Schue stated that the planning element should be the responsibility of the City Council so it is best to handle it this way. She would support the motion. It would help keep the authority clearer. Mayor Keller stated that lay members of the Budget Committee do not have the policy background that the council does, and it would cause much frustration. At least there is a document, and that is important. No commitments have been made. They are looking at a general operating plan and will take advantage of it at every opportunity. This will be far better than anything previously. Mr. Lindberg agreed that the pUblic would most likely be happier if the process were smoother. He would support the motion. Ms. Smith asked if the council will be adopting the planning process and the Budget Committee will be dealing with the priorities. Mr. Obie stated that the Budget Committee will establish the priorities. Ms. Wooten indicated support for the planning document but feels it appears to commit the council to some- thing for which there are no resources for accomplishment. She feels the public should know this is not a commitment for expenditures and it should be approached very carefully. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. Ms. Wooten stated that it is important to note that the council is not raising property taxes to pay for $500 million worth of projects. V. ORDINANCE/RESOLUTION REGARDING OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION LICENSE APPLICATIONS: ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW (memo, ordinance/resolution distributed) CB 2410--An ordinance authorizing the City Manager to make recommend a- . tions to the Oregon Liquor Control Commission on behalf of the City Council; providing an appeal there from; amending Section 2.007 of the Eugene Code, 1971; adding Section 2.1100 to that code; and declaring an emergency. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 20, 1982 Page 8 e Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. Council Bill 2410 was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote; all councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18911. Res. No. 3622---A resolution involving procedures for recommen- dations on liquor license applications and repealing Resolutions 2917 and 3405. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. e VI. STATUS REPORT ON EMEGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE (report distributed) Mr. Gleason introduced Ev Hall, Fire Chief. Mr. Hall stated that a memo from him and Virgil Nave, Fire Chief of Springfield, had been sent to Steve Burkett, City Manager of Springfield, and Micheal Gleason, City Manager of Eugene. This brief was a status report on emergency medical service. Since May 5, 1981, the EMS system has come a long way. Eugene has five ambulances, three staffed and two backup. Springfield has two staffed ambulances and one backup ambulance. Staffing for each ambulance is a driver who is a certified EMT 1 or 2, and a technician who is a certified EMT 3 or 4. All EMTs 3 are being cross-trained as firefighters, and all fire suppression crews are being trained as Medical First Responders. The ambulances are serving a 1,000-square-mile area with a population of 150,000. There is a two-tiered response pattern--basic life support with a fire truck, and advanced life support with an ambulance. Standards of response have been refined. The basic life-support standard is four minutes. This is being achieved 97 percent of the time. Ambulances arrive within eight minutes 96 percent of the time. In outlying areas, the basic life support standard is six minutes. Crews in the rural areas are meeting the six-minute response time. Advanced life support is given to the rural areas within 11 minutes. - Mr. Hall continued by saying that from May 5, 1981, to January 14, 1982, they have had 3,676 emergency runs. They have carried 2,657 patients. They do not always transport a patient due to patient refusal, disregarded by first responders, and DOAs. The neonatal system is still a problem area. These calls always originate outside Eugene from hospitals. There has been a problem with the collection rate. However, insurance companies must now pay charges for infants under six months of age. So, collections are improving. The overall collection rate is also improving. There is a better EMS system, better service, and better placement of ambulances, as well as more certified EMTs 1, 2, and 3 than under the private carrier. Costs are also lower than with the old provider. Response time is better than with the old provider. The quality is higher, and the EMS staff are still working to improve it. Now 20 medications are carried on the ambulances and allowed to be administered instead of the 12 that were previously allowed. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 20, 1982 Page 9 e, e e- Mr. Hamel stated that he thinks the service is great, and knows that the people are experienced. However, the business end leaves a lot to be desired. He feels strides should be made immediately to improve this. As it is, the public is paying for these services. Mr. Gleason stated that when receipts are age- dated to about 100 days, they are approaching a lO-percent collection rate, and they hope to make it 90 percent. This is a new business and it is improving. They have had to change the claims system three times. They are targeting 10 percent for bad debts in good economic times, so considering the economy, per- haps things are not so bad. There is no metropolitan claims system, and there probably will not be until the council makes its final decision. Mr. Hamel has raised a serious concern, but it does not mean financial instability. Freeman Holmer, Chamber of Commerce, stated that he is very concerned about the rate of collection. More current data is needed. As of October 31, 1981, the bills over 120 days old had outstanding debts of over $65,000, with a l8-percent delinquency rate. He would urge the council to have frequent reports regarding co 11 ect i on. Ms. Miller expressed appreciation to the Fire Department and EMTs for the quality of their service. She feels they are doing an excellent job. If the collection question is going to be pursued, it will take some time. She would request that staff keep the council advised. She feels it has a lot to do with billing insurance companies and welfare, plus how long it takes to receive money. She would like to be kept informed. Mayor Keller asked if the City responds to areas outside the city limits. Mr. Gleason responded that they do. Mayor Keller asked what the billing process is for calls outside the city. Mr. Gleason stated that part of the system that needs to be refined is how the City can stop subsidizing out-of-city calls. This is a metropolitan service. There is the possibility that the charges are not enough and that the services too good. Billing sequences change from Fire Department to department. Also, the City is a backup for mutual-aid calls. Mayor Keller stated he is sure there is some fine-tuning to be done. This is a good first report and the areas for improvement are recognized. Mr. Gleason added that responses have been the first concern but if staff is to continue, more energy can be put into the receivables system. Mr. Hamel stated that the services are the greatest. He feels that this is the way to go and that the services should not be cut. The meeting was adjourned to January 25, 1982. ;?~~ Micheal D. Gleason, City Manager (Recorded by Lynda Nelson) MDG:LN:pm/CM8a11 MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 20, 1982 Page 10