Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/10/1982 Meeting (2) - e e .... .. M I NUT E S Eugene City Council City Council Chamber May 10, 1982 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: D.W. Hamel, Mark Lindberg, Brian Obie, Emily Schue, Betty Smith, Cynthia Wooten. COllt'JCILORS ARSENT: Eric Haws, Gretchen Mill er. Regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was called to order by His Honor Mayor Gus Keller. I. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Ordinance Levying Patron User Fee in Connection With the Eugene Performing Arts Center (memo, ordinance distributed) City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced Dick Reynolds, Executive Director, Eugene Performing Arts Center. Mr. Gleason said that on December 10, 1980, the Room Tax Subcommittee had held a special meeting to discuss the need for addi- tional revenues to supplement existing Room Tax funds, thereby providing ade- quate funding for the Convention and Visitors Bureau, the Performing Arts and Conference Centers, and for the local arts community. He said that on March 5, 1981, a task force was formed to identify and evaluate sources for additional funds. He stated that, following a hearing on September 23, 1981, the Room Tax Committee and the Room Tax Task Force had met jointly and agreed to recommend implementation of a patron user fee for patrons of the Performing Arts Center; to table for future consideration the suggestion of applying a tax of one percent to the gross receipts of Eugene restaurants; and to reject the sugges- tion of a $250 annual tax on amusement devices. Mr. Reynolds said it was anticipated that the proposed patron user fee would generate approximately $75,000 in the first year of operation of the Performing Arts Center. The fee of $.25 per ticket would be applied to each of the 300,000 tickets he estimated would be sold in that first year. Mr. Reynolds said that both the Room Tax Committee and the Performing Arts Commission had recommended adoption of this fee. Public hearing was opened. There being no public testimony, public hearing was closed. MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 10, 1982 Page 1 e CB 2456--An ordinance levying a user fee tax in connection with the Eugene Performing Arts Center; adding Sections 3.810 and 3.812 to the Eugene Code, 1971; amending Section 3.990 of that code; repealing Section 3.996 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. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. Councilor Smith said that she had chaired the Room Tax Committee during con- sideration of this issue. She said that committee had considered a number of options and had joined with the Performing Arts Commission in unanimous recom- mendation of the user fee. She said that through the user fee, those who benefit from the center will be supporting it. Ms. Smith encouraged councilors to adopt the ordinance. Council Bill 2456 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 18961 e B. Ordinance Concerning Amusement Devices, Arcades, and Game Tables (memo, ordinance distributed) Mr. Gleason introduced Jim Packard, Chief of Police. Chief Packard said that the purpose of the proposed ordinance amendments was to reduce the likelihood of criminal behavior in arcades and to enhance a proprietor's ability to manage his/her customers by providing for convenient visual inspection of the rremises. He said convenient and speedy visual inspection was also important to the work of the Police force in its effort to prevent any criminal activity or passing of contraband. Mr. Packard said that the language proposed in the amendments would update language in the present ordinance to cover not only coin-operated amuse- ment devices but also those using tokens or time rental. Chief Packard said that one of the key points in the proposed amendments was the requirement of adequate lighting. He said that the five candlefoot power proposed was equivalent to the amount of light a person with average vision would need to read a newspaper held at arm's length. Councilor Wooten asked how the amendments would affect existing businesses. Chief Packard responded that there would be no immediate impact on existing businesses but that there could be an effect at the time of business license renewal. He said that representatives of the affected industry had been con- sulted and that the proposed language represented compromises reached as a result of discussions with them. He recognized that, despite these efforts at compromise, there were still some objections to the amendments. Public hearing was opened. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 10, 1982 Page 2 , ' e e - Edward Hill, 105 West Q Street, Springfield, represented Mitchell Hutchinson. Mr. Hill said his client objected to the proposed change in the definition of arcade. He said that the existing ordinance applied only to establishments open to all members of the public, including juveniles, but that the proposed amend- ments would make the ordinance apply to establishments such as Mr. Hutchinson's which serve only adults. Mr. Hill said his client also objected to Section 3.180 (I-a) of the proposed ordinance, which requires amusement devices to be located in an open area, with no stalls or partitions. Mr. Hutchinson felt that maintaining the machines in his establishment in an open area would increase rather than decrease any behavior problems. Mr. Hill urged the council to maintain the existing definition of the ordinance as applying only to businesses open to all members of the public and to delete the amendment that would require removal of partitions. Mr. Hill reminded the council that the behavior problems experienced in the past at the site of Mr. Hutchinson's business had occurred three years ago under a previous management. He said that the Police Department was no longer experiencing such problems. Cheryl L. McCown, 2598 Willamette Street, represented Charlie's Pool Hall. She said that she has operated amusement centers for 12 years. She said that the Eugene Amusement Device Operators Association had met with Mel Olson, Police, to review the first draft of the ordinance amendments and had asked why the City was considering such an ordinance when there were no problems with amusement centers under the existing ordinance. She referred to a letter dated January 20, 1982, which the association had written in rebuttal to the proposed amend- ments. She said that councilors should have received a copy of this letter. Ms. McCown said that the association wanted the definition of amusement centers separated from the definition of adult book stores in the City Code. She read the opening paragraphs of the proposed amended ordinance and said that she did not feel the situations described in paragraphs two through four were represen- tative of the amusement device industry or of the City's experience with that industry. She felt these paragraphs should be deleted. She said that, aside from the objection to these paragraphs, the Eugene Amusement Device Operators Association had no major objections to the amendments. She felt that the prohibition against locating amusement centers within 700 feet of a school was too restrictive and suggested that the 700-foot figure be reduced. She reiterated that amusement centers should not be placed in the same category as adult book stores under City Code. There being no further testimony, public hearing was closed. Chief Packard noted that Charlie's Pool Hall was a well-run operation and hoped that Ms. McCown had not misunderstood the intent of the amended ordinance, which was a preventive more than a corrective measure. He said that the 700-foot figure had been used to address concerns expressed by parents who do not want their children to pass by amusement centers on their way to school. He said that the average City block is approximately 300 feet on a side. Mr. Packard said that the intent of the amendments was not to single out adult or juvenile amusement centers but rather to provide crime prevention. MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 10, 1982 Page 3 e Mr. Packard said he disagreed with remarks made by Mr. Hill. He noted that Mr. Hutchinson's business was not currently licensed by the City for use as an arcade. He also noted that in hearings regarding appeal of the denial of a business license, Mr. Hutchinson had said that he was unable to control the behavior of his clients because of the partitions between stalls in the amuse- ment device area of his business. Councilor Obie said that he had had no contacts from with the location or operation of amusement centers. council should enact ordinance amendments to address exist. citizens who were concerned He did not feel the a problem that did not Chief Packard responded that the amendments were measures to prevent crime. He said that with reductions in staff numbers and staff time, members of the Police force can work more effectively if a building is well-lit and allows an at-a- glance inspection. He said that the ordinance makes owners and managers of amusement centers responsible for control of customers' behavior. Councilor Smith agreed with Ms. McCown's statement that the first, second, and third paragraphs of the amended ordinance were inflammatory and raised issues not applicable to Eugene's situation. She suggested that the ordinance be rewritten to address this concern. Ms. Smith also agreed with the suggestion of dealing separately with adult amusement centers and those serving people of all ages. Responding to Ms. Smith, Les Swanson, City Attorney, said that separating out a particular business or narrowly defined business type for regulation would raise constitutional issues and could lead to legal appeals. e Councilor Wooten agreed with Ms. Smith and felt that the opening paragraphs of the amended ordinance should be reworded. Ms. Wooten asked Mr. Swanson whether the City could regulate amusement centers offering explicit, adult material separately from other centers. Mr. Swanson said that attempts at such regula- tion would impinge on the legally sensitive area of freedom of speech. He therefore advised the council to regulate a broad rather than a limited class of businesses. Councilor Lindberg felt that the council should identify the dangers, if any, to the public health, safety, and welfare presented by amusement centers and that the ordinance should not be amended unless there is evidence of such dangers. He requested Chief Packard to provide the council with documentation regarding such dangers. Chief Packard said he would provide documentation of the problems that have arisen in other cities where amusement centers have not been regulated. Mr. Lindberg asked how the portions of the ordinance dealing with lighting and removal of partitions parallel ordinances governing taverns. Mr. Gleason responded that State law deals with similar concerns in taverns. Councilor Schue said that she has had calls from citizens in her ward who were concerned with a proposal to locate an amusement center near a junior high school and that there is citizen concern regarding this issue. e MI NIJTES--E ugene City Counc il May 10, 1982 Page 4 e Councilor Obie said he did not believe the council should adopt the proposed amendments unless there is factual evidence of the need for them. Councilor Hamel agreed and said that the proprietors of amusement centers and the parents of children who frequent them should be responsible for dealing with problems at the centers. Mr. Gleason said that, at the request of the Mayor and council, staff would return with information and factual evidence on'the nature of the problems with amusement centers and rewording of the preamble to the ordinance. He said that staff and the City Attorney recommended against separating adult centers from those open to all members of the public, because of the constitutional challenges that could result. Ms. Smith withdrew her request that the two types of centers be separated. I-C. Ordinance Concerning Housing Revenue Bonds (memo, ordinance distributed) e Mr. Gleason introduced Greg Byrne, Department of Housing and Community Conser- vation (HCC). Mr. Byrne said that the Federal Mortgage Subsidy Bond Tax Act, enacted in 1980, had greatly restricted the use of state or municipally issued mortgage revenue bonds. He noted, however, that Eugene's Central Planning District had been identified as an area of chronic economic distress, which would have the effect of reducing the restrictions somewhat in this area. Mr. Byrne said that State law requires cities wishing to exercise their authority to issue bonds to adopt by ordinance standards and procedures for such issuance. He said that the ordinance before the council had been developed by the Joint Housing Committee with the help of the City Attorney's Office. He reported that the Joint Housing Committee unanimously voted to recommend adoption of the ordinance. Mr. Byrne said that adoption will allow the City to issue housing revenue bonds but provides no guarantee that revenue bonds will be a feasible financing alternative locally. Mr. Lindberg supported the ordinance as an appropriate stimulus to Eugene's housing market. Responding to questions from Mr. Lindberg and Ms. Wooten, Mr. Byrne said that, from a practical point of view, the minimum amount for bond issuance would be $3 million to $3.5 million. He said that an application for bond issuance could be made for one major project, for several smaller projects, for a rehabilitation project, or for a project or projects that would combine new construction with rehabilitation. Councilor Wooten asked whether the Joint Housing Committee had discussed adop- tion of similar ordinances by Springfield and Lane County. Mr. Byrne responded that at present only Eugene and Portland qualify for the program, but that there is a possibility that the Lane County Housing Authority could issue housing revenue bonds for rehabilitation. Responding to further questions from Ms. Wooten, Mr. Byrne said that the State regulations governing housing revenue bonds include stipulation that the project be in an urban renewal district, in an area eligible for Community Development Block Grant funds, or in an area in which the assessed value of the land was less than $8 per square foot in 1975. He said that these requirements would aid the program in meshing with City goals for compact urban growth. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 10, 1982 Page 5 Public hearinq was opened. There being no public testimony, public hearing was closed. e CR 2458--An ordinance concerning housing development projects; adding Sections 2.1100, 2.1105, 2.1110, 2.1115, 2.1120, 2.1125, 2.1130, and 2.1135 to the Eugene Code, 1971; 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. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. Council Bill 2458 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 18962 II. ORDINANCES FOR FIRST READING--LEVYING OF ASSESSMENTS CB 2459--An ordinance levying assessments for paving, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and pedestrian way within Deertrail Subdivision and southwesterly portion of Treehouse PUD (79-48). e Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be read the first time and referred to the Assessment Hearing Panel for hearing May 17, 1982, with panel recommendations to be brought back for council consideration May 24, 1982. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. CB 2460--An ordinance levying assessments for paving and sanitary sewer on Seneca Road from Roosevelt Boulevard to 1st Avenue (79-51). Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be read the first time and referred to the Assessment Hearing Panel for hearing May 17, 1982, with panel recommendations to be brought back for council consideration May 24, 1982. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. CB 2461--An ordinance levying assessments for sanitary sewer to serve Willakenzie Island annexation area #1 (AZ 78-11) located generally adjacent to Tulip and Balboa streets, Greenacres Road, and Holly Avenue (80-64). Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be read the first time and referred to the Assessment Hearing Panel for hearing May 17, 1982, with panel recommendations to be brought back for council consideration May 24, 1982. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 10, 1982 Page 6 e e - CB 2462--An ordinance levying assessments for paving, sanitary sewer and storm sewer within and adjacent to Judson Subdivision (contract #80-23) (80-323). Mr. Obie moved~ seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be read the first time and referred to the Assessment Hearing Panel for hearing May 17, 1982, with panel recommendations to be brought back for council consideration May 24, 1982. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. CB 2463--An ordinance levying assessments for paving~ sanitary sewer~ and storm sewer within Fergus Manor Subdivision and within 160 feet of the boundary of Fergus Manor Subdivision (80-32). Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be read the first time and referred to the Assessment Hearing Panel for hearing May 17, 1982, with panel recommendations to be brought back for council consideration May 24, 1982. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. CB 2464--An ordinance levying assessments for paving~ sanitary sewer~ and storm sewer within Sundial Plat (80-44). Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, that the bill be read the first time and referred to the Assessment Hearing Panel for hearing May 17, 1982, with panel recommendations to be brought back for council consideration May 24, 1982. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. Meeting was adjourned to May 12, 1982. Respectfully submitted, ?d:~-d-~ .~ r, (~~~)~4- Micheal D. Gleason City Manager (Recorded by Darcy Marentette) MDG:OCM:db/CM26a6 MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 10, 1982 Page 7