Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/24/1985 Meeting (2) M I NUT E S Eugene City Council - City Council Chamber June 24, 1985 7 : 30 p. m . COUNCILORS PRESENT: Richard Hansen, Emily Schue, Freeman Holmer, Ruth Bascom Debra Ehrman, Jeff Miller. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Cynthia Wooten, Roger Rutan The adjourned meeting of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon was called to order by His Honor Mayor Brian B. Obie. 1. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. City of Eugene FY86 Budget (memo, ordinance, background information distributed) City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced the item. Finance Director Warren Wong gave the staff report. He said the Budget Committee recommended approval of the executive budget with a few modifications. The modifications involved funding for a library bookmobile and the "freezing" of all Federal Revenue e Sharing projects except the 8th and High property transfer, two traffic signals on Echo Hollow Road, the Skinner Butte transmitter, and the Chambers connector. Mayor Obie opened the public hearing. There being no requests to testify, he closed the public hearing. CB 2835--An ordinance adopting the budget; making appropriations determining and levying the annual ad valorem property tax for the City of Eugene for the fiscal year begin- ning July 1, 1985, and ending June 30, 1986; and declaring an emergency. Mr. Hansen 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. Councilor Miller said the gas tax passed by the Oregon legislature will pro- vide some unexpected revenue for street maintenance, and, therefore, some of the City funds budgeted for overlaying the streets may not be used. He sug- gested those funds could be used for the connector to the Owosso Bike Bridge which was eliminated from the budget. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 24, 1985 Page 1 Responding to Mr. Miller, Council Holmer said the Budget Committee had substi- tuted the Quaker Street Bridge for the Owosso Bridge in the budget. However, e there are many uncertainties about what can be done in FY86. He suggested the $90,000 line item in the budget be identified as "Bike Projects" with the understanding that the Public Works Department will construct as many projects as possible. He noted the proposed ordinance does not identify the projects. Councilor Ehrman hoped the City would not end up with two uncompleted projects. Mr. Gleason assured the council that projects will be finished. He said the staff understood the council's concern and will try to do both projects. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 6:0. Council Bill 2835 was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Hansen 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 became Ordinance No. 19335). Mayor Obie said Bill Sweet had entered the Council Chamber after the public hearing was closed. Mayor Obie gave Mr. Sweet the opportunity to address the council. Bill Sweet, 65 West 26th, said Police Chief Packard has been placed in the same position as the woman in the movie "Sophie1s Choice" who had to make difficult choices. Chief Packard was told by the council to eliminate the COP e Team which has been working with crime prevention. Mr. Sweet said any reduc- tion in police services will seriously erode citizens' rights to protection. He urged the council to restore police services if it is possible. Mayor Obie assured Mr. Sweet that the council and the City Manager share his concern. Mayor Obie recessed the meeting of the Eugene City Council and convened a meeting of the Eugene Urban Renewal Agency. B. Eugene Urban Renewal Agency FY86 Budget (memo, resolution distri- buted) City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced the item. Responding to a question from Ms. Ehrman, Finance Director Warren Wong said the Overpark Assessment District is included in the City budget. It is not included in the Urban Renewal Agency. The City budget reflects the rebates for the Overpark Assessment District property owners. Mayor Obie opened the public hearing. There being no requests to testify, he closed the public hearing. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 24, 1985 Page 2 Res. No. 9l5--A resolution of the Eugene Renewal Agency adopting the budget and making appropriation for the fiscal year beginning July 1,1985, and ending June 30, - 1986. Mr. Hansen moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to adopt the resolu- tion. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously. 6:0. Mayor Obie adjourned the meeting of the Eugene Urban Renewal Agency and reconvened the meeting of the Eugene City Council. C. Street Direction Change: East Broadway - Pearl to High Street (memo, map distributed) City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced the item. Nathan Duke of the Public Works Department gave the staff report. He said the proposed street direction change was included in the Downtown Plan. The block from Pearl Street to High Street will be converted from one-way traffic to two-way traffic. Answering a question from Mr. Obie, Mr. Duke said the conversion will be completed by the end of July. Councilor Bascom commented that the conversion may have an impact on bicycle riders. They will have to look in two directions. She suggested the Public Works staff monitor accident data on the block. Perhaps additional signs will be needed. Mayor Obie opened the public hearing. There being no requests to testify, he e closed the pUblic hearing. Res. No. 3926--A resolution establishing that East Broadway be changed from one-way to two-way traffic flow between Pearl and High streets. Mr. Hansen moved, seconded by Ms: Schue, to adopt the resolu- tion. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 6:0. D. Street Direction Change: East 8th Avenue - High Street East to Mid-Block Alley (memo, map attached) City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced the item. Nathan Duke of the Public Works Department gave the staff report. He said the half block of East 8th Avenue between High Street and the alley will be converted from two-way traffic to one-way traffic. An existing island in the street will be removed. Answering a question from Councilor Hansen, Mr. Duke said the half block between the alley and the bridge ramp on 8th will remain two-way in order to maintain circulation to the businesses in the area. Mayor Obie opened the public hearing. There being no requests to testify, he closed the public hearing. - MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 24, 1985 Page 3 Res. No. 3927--A resolution establishing that East 8th Avenue be changed from two-way to one-way traffic flow e from High Street to the mid-block north/south alley located approximately 200 feet to the east. Mr. Hansen moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to adopt the resolu- tion. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 6:0. II. CONSIDERATION OF FINDINGS AND ORDINANCE CONCERNING WEST 11TH AVENUE WIDENING (memo, findings distributed) A. Findings (Contract No. 85-11) City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced the item. City Engineer Bert Teitzel gave the staff report. He said no property owners appeared at a hearing before the Hearings Official. Responding to a question from Mayor Obie, Mr. Teitzel said 100 percent of the property owners signed the petition for the improvement. Mr. Hansen moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to approve the findings related to improvements on the north side of West 11th Avenue. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 6:0. B. Levying Assessments CB 2836--An ordinance levying assessments for paving, sanitary -- sewers, storm sewers, and sidewalks on the north side of West 11th Avenue from Tyinn to Seneca Road. Mr. Hansen 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; the motion carried unanimously, 6:0. Council Bill 2836 was read a second time by council bill number only. Mr. Hansen 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 became Ordinance No. 19336). III. CULTURE/LEISURE PLAN (memo, draft plan distributed) City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced the item. Mary Winston of the Parks and Recreation Department gave the staff report. She said the goal in the Culture/Leisure Plan has been adopted by the council in the Community Goals and Policies. Referring to Page 11-1 of the plan, she suggested the councilors review each of the policies. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 24, 1985 Page 4 POLICIES--CULTURE/LEISURE PLAN - Policy 1- Initiate and engage in public/private partnerships to: 1) finance culture/leisure activities; 2) develop and manage facilities; and 3) provide technical services. Mr. Holmer said there are advantages in cooperation, but a City government may have difficulty focusing on public responsibilities when it enters into a pUblic/private partnership. He also is concerned about the lack of a limita- tion on the phrases Ilfinance culture/leisure activities" and "develop and manage facilities" and the lack of a definition of technical services. He suggested the phrase "within our available resources" be added to the phrases. Responding to Mr. Holmer, Ms. Winston said the Planning Team was concerned about the financial responsibility of the City. Consequently, the Planning Team suggested the public/private partnership as an alternative to sole financing of culture and leisure by the City. Mr. Hansen wondered why the City should adopt the Culture/Leisure Plan. He said the City has much park land and there are many activities at the Hu1t Center. Ms. Winston responded that the Culture/Leisure Plan will formalize the Cityls commitment to culture and leisure. The council IS Six-Point Economic Diversification Program calls for adoption of a culture/leisure plan to recognize the economic impact of such activities on the community. Mr. Gleason commented that people asked the same question about land use questions in the past. He said the planning process for the Culture/Leisure Plan was a catalyst for bringing together different parts of the community. e Adoption and review of the plan will create the community of interest and partnerships that are needed. The City is a major property owner and needs to cooperate with the providers and users of culture and leisure. The Cu1ture/ Leisure Plan enables the City to capture a unique vision of itself. Answering a question from Ms. Ehrman, Ms. Winston said the Metropolitan Part- nership recognizes and recruits businesses by selling the community as a good place to live. The Culture/Leisure Plan emphasizes culture and leisure as an industry. Policy 2- The councilors made no comments. Policy 3- The councilors made no comments. Policy 4- The councilors made no comments. Policy 5- Recognize arts, sports, and leisure resources as essential compo- nents of the success of Eugenels Six-Point Economic Diversification Program. Mr. Holmer said the staff uses refinement plans for guidance. For that reason, he thought Policy 5 needed to be qualified or limited. He suggested, "There is a minimal mixture of arts, sports, and leisure resources that is essential . . . " He said the City should recognize there are not unlimited resources. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 24, 1985 Page 5 Ms. Bascom suggested the council approve the goals and policies of the plan and then discuss the City's role in culture/leisure activities when the e council reviews Section III of the plan. Several people responded to Mr. Holmer's concern. Ms. Ehrman suggested a statement which indicates the City is under budget constraints could be inserted so that it applies to all the Culture/Leisure Plan. Mayor Obie suggested the statement be a financially qualifying one. Councilor Schue suggested a paragraph about City financial constraints could be part of the introduction. Mr. Holmer wanted the financially-qualifying statement to be very evident. Mr. Gleason said the staff will develop the statement. Policy 6- The councilors made no comments. Policy 7- The councilors made no comments. Policy 8- The councilors made no comments. Policy 9- The councilors made no comments. Policy 10- Identify the need for and facilitate development of new sports, leisure, and arts resources. Answering a question from Mr. Hanson, Ms. Winston said the term "new sports" means new professional sports, such as a soccerteam,.to.the community. e Ms. Ehrman pointed out soccer is not a "new" sport, and Ms. Winston said the term will be clarified. Policy 11- The councilors made no comments. Policy 12- The councilors made no comments. Policy 13- The councilors made no comments. Policy 14- Develop and protect Eugene's image as a healthy, safe, and active culture and leisure center. Mr. Hansen commented that the City is not likely to attract people from long distances to its recreational facilities, and, therefore, should not emphasize attracting tourists to them. The Convention and Visitors Bureau attracts conventions. He favored promoting the city as an attractive place to live. Policy 15- The councilors made no comments. Policy 16- The councilors made no comments. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 24, 1985 Page 6 POLICIES--1984 EUGENE COMMUNITY GOALS AND POLICIES Ms. Winston said the rest of the policies had been adopted by the council as a e part of the 1984 Eugene Community Goals and Policies. Ms. Ehrman noted that the Eugene Celebration was not mentioned in the poli- cies. When the Celebration becomes an integral part of the community, she hoped that it will be included during an update of the Culture/Leisure Plan. Ms. Winston responded that no specific events were mentioned in the plan, but the policies imply the activities are appropriate and necessary to the com- munity. Policy 1- Develop programs that advertise the existing attractions of Eugene and promote Eugene as a destination point. Mr. Hansen said the statement indicates that Eugene will develop and advertise destination point activities by itself. He wondered why new partnerships should be formed. The City seemed to be developing additional programs with- out additional resources. Ms. Winston responded that the Planning Team hoped to encourage organizations to cooperate in developing programs. Mr. Hansen liked that wording. THE CITY'S ROLE IN CULTURE/LEISURE ACTIVITIES Referring to page III-3 of the plan, Ms. Winston said there are three ways to implement the plan. A Culture/Leisure Team could be formed which could be modeled after the Metropolitan Partnership, existing staff could implement the plan as resources become available, or the Lane Economics of Amenities Program e (LEAP) could be revitalized. Mr. Holmer said the proposed structure of the Culture/Leisure Team (page III-5 of the plan) did not seem to reflect the City's responsibility or provide a balanced approach. He is concerned about the presentation and protection of the public interest. The proposed members, as well as members of the Planning Team, represent the culture and leisure community. They do not represent the general public. Ms. Ehrman suggested a councilor should be on the Culture/Leisure Team. Ms. Bascom wondered if there is another vehicle or way to implement the Culture/Leisure Plan. Ms. Schue said she attended LEAP meetings regularly. Anyone interested in culture and leisure activities was invited to attend and discuss the activi- ties. She thought the organization would have to be restructured to carry out the goals and objectives of the Culture/Leisure Plan. Mr. Hansen questioned the wisdom of the Cityls taking on a new charge and a new organization. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 24, 1985 Page 7 Scott Lieuallen, Executive Vice President of the Convention and Visitors Bureau, discussed LEAP. He favored its re-creation. He said Mr. Holmerls e concerns are valid. Mr. Lieuallen agreed that the public interest should be protected. He did not think the organization should be advisory to the council. There was much energy in LEAP because members had a vested, finan- cial interest, he said. Members could discuss the long-range goal of commu- nity livability and economic development. Ms. Winston said the City staff will monitor implementation of the plan in an annual report to the council. The council would control City contributions to the implementation in the budget process. Mayor Obie suggested the appointment of a council subcommittee to formulate a recommendation concerning the role of the City in the implementation of the Culture/Leisure Plan. No councilors opposed the suggestion. He appointed Ms. Bascom, Ms. Wooten, and Mr. Holmer to the subcommittee and said it will be helpful if they can report to the council when it is scheduled to consider the Culture/Leisure Plan again on July 8, 1985. The meeting was adjourned at 8:20 p.m. ~ ;~, e (Recorded by Betty Lou Rarick) 1770C e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 24, 1985 Page 8 (i M E M 0 RAN DUM e June 19, 1985 TO: City Counci 1 FROM: Warren G. Wong, Finance Director SUBJECT: FY86 Budget On May 14 the Budget Committee adopted its FY86 Budget Recommendation, which it has forwarded to you for consideration and adoption. The Budget Commit- teels Budget Recommendation used the FY86 Executive Budget Recommendation as a base and modified it as a result of public input and Budget Committee deliberations. The following is a summary of the Budget Committeels Recommendation using the Executive Budget Recommendation as a base point: 1. Administrative Services - The Human Rights program was transferred in from the Executive Department. With the exception of the afore- mentioned adjustment, the Budget was approved as initially submitted. 2. Airport - Budget approved as initially submitted. 3. Eugene Development - Funds were transferred out to the Public Works Department to cover rent for the Building Division in the Eugene Hotel e and the Job Training Partnership Act Budget was eliminated to recognize the transfer of this program to the Southern Willamette Private Industry Council. With the exception of the aforementioned adjustments, the Budget was approved as initially submitted. 4. Executive - The Human Rights Program was transferred out to the Administrative Services Department and the Prosecutor's Contract was transferred to the Municipal Court Department. With the exception of the aforementioned adjustments, the Budget was approved as initially submitted in the Executive Budget Recommendation. 5. Fire - Budget approved as initially submitted. 6. Library - Funding for acquisition of a bookmobile was approved. With the exception of the aforementioned adjustment, the budget was approved as initially submitted. 7. Municipal Court - Funding for the Prosecutor's Contract was transferred in from the Executive Department. With the exception of the aforementioned adjustment, the Budget was approved as initially submitted. 8. Parks and Recreation - Budget approved as initially submitted. 9. Planning - Budget approved as initially submitted. e 10. Police - Budget approved as initially submitted. 11. Public Works - Funds were transferred in from the Eugene Development Department to cover the rent for the Building Division in the Eugene Hote 1 . With the exception of the aforementioned adjustment, the Budget was approved as initially submitted. ~..... 12. Capital Projects - With the exception of Fund 312, Federal Revenue Sharing General Capital Projects, the Capital Budget was approved as initially submitted. In fund 312, the Budget Committee adopted the e following changes: a. Deleted the following capital projects: 1. Owosso Bike Bridge Approach $ 80,000 2. Hult Stage Equipment Storage Area 70,000 3. Metro Public Safety Training Facility Study 30,000 4. Foreign Trade Zone Feasability Study 30,000 5. Hendricks Park Road Reconstruction 10,000 6. Delta Ponds Canoe Way Development 20,000 7. Library/Office Space Feasability Study 100,000 $340,000 ------- ------- b. Funds from the deleted projects were reallocated as follows: 1. Skinners Butte Transmitter Rebuild $200,000 2. Street/Alley Rehabilitation FY86 140,000 $340,000 ------- ------- c. Moved Hendricks Park Road Reconstruction Project, as deleted in "12a" above, to Public Works Department to fund from e Fund 311, Street/Alley Rehabilitation-FY86 Capital Projects. Given the uncertainty of continued funding of the Federal Revenue Shari ng program, the Budget Committee approved Ilfreezi ng" a 11 FRS Capital Projects with the exception of the following four projects: 1. Chambers Connector $100,000 2. 8th and High Property Transfer 279,700 3. Skinner's Butte Transmitter 400,000 4. Traffic Signals - FY86 130,000 $909,700 ------- ------- 13. Non-Departmental - Budget approved as initially submitted. In addition, the Budget Committee directed staff to forward the IInotesll from the various subcommittees to you for consideration as "legislative intent" (See Attachment). The Budget Committee Recommendation has been adjusted for two factors. First, annexations that took place in FY85 have been incorporated into the tax base and the property tax levy for FY86. With respect to the gross property tax levy, $23,962,977 will be levied to support the operating system and $3,408,338 will be levied to support General Obligation Debt Service. Using an estimated Assessed Valuation for FY86, this translates to a tax rate of $8.60 for operations (FY8S = $8.52), and $1.22 for debt service e (FY85 = 1. 30) . page -- 2 ~ The second adjustment is to incorporate Reserves for Encumberances for e outstanding purchase orders as of June 30, 1985. Purchase Orders represent obligations of FY85 appropriations for goods, services or equipment that will not be received as of June 30, 1985 but will be received and paid for in FY86. Council will hold a public hearing on the Budget Committee's FY86 Budget Recommendation on June 24 and will adopt the Appropriation Act and levy a property tax at that same meeting. cc: Budget Committee M. Gleason D. Whitlow S. Wagner M. Musso Attachment - FY86 Appropriation Act Budget Committee Notes page -- 3 fnbeh110 e e ~ e M E M 0 RAN DUM June 18, 1985 TO: Eugene Renewal Agency FROM: Warren G. Wong, Finance Director SUBJECT: FY86 Eugene Renewal Agency Budget On May 14 the Budget Committee adopted its FY86 Budget Recommendation for the Eugene Renewal Agency. The Budget Committee was designated by resolution as the reviewing body for the Renewal Agencyls yearly budgets. The FY86 Renewal Agency budget was approved as submitted in the FY86 Executive Proposed Budget. The City Council will convene as the Eugene Renewal Agency at the June 24 meeting to adopt th~ Renewal Agency.s FY86 Budget. cc: Budget Committee M. Gleason D. Whitlow S. Wagner e M. Musso Attachment - FY86 Appropriation Act e " RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE EUGENE RENEWAL AGENCY ADOPTING - THE BUDGET AND MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 1985, AND ENDING JUNE 30, 1986. The Eugene City Council, acting as the governing body of the Eugene Renewal Agency under ORS 457.045(3), finds that adopting the budget and making appropriations is necessary under ORS 294.480(3). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eugene City Council, acting as the governing body of the Eugene Renewal Agency, as follows: Sect ion 1. The budget as approved by the Budget Committee for the Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 1985, set forth in attached Exhibit IIA" is herby adopted. Section 2. The amounts for the Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 1985, and for the purposes shown in the attached Exhibit IIAII are hereby appropriated. The foregoing Resolution adopted this 24th day of June, 1985. e DIRECTOR - '" EXHIBIT "A" e EUGENE RENEWAL AGENCY FUND OPERATIONS DEPARTMENTAL Eugene Development $ 480,514 NON-DEPARTMENTAL Debt Service 508,222 Interfund Transfers 820,839 Miscellaneous 864,110 TOTAL OPERATIONS $ 2,673,685 CAPITAL PROJECTS 585,000 OTHER REQUIREMENTS Reserves $ 509,684 Balance Available 2,287.628 TOTAL OTHER REQUIREMENTS 2,797,312 e TOTAL EUGENE RENEWAL AGENCY FUND $6,055,997 --------- --------- FNGMERAR e -- . M E M 0 RAN DUM e June 18, 1985 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Public Works Department SUBJECT: EAST BROADWAY AND EAST EIGHTH AVENUE TRAFFIC DIRECTION CHANGES In accordance with recommendations made in the recently adopted Downtown Plan, the Public Works Department is proposing to implement street directional changes in two locations: East Broadway -- Pearl to High Street (one-way to two-way) East Eighth Avenue -- High Street east to mid-block alley (two-way to one-way) EAST BROADWAY -- PEARL TO HIGH East Broadway from Pearl to High is currently a two-lane, one-way, eastbound street. It is the only one-way segment located on Broadway between the Downtown Mall and Franklin Boulevard. The conversion of East Broadway in this e location from a one-way to a two-way street will require the reversal of the northernmost travel lane from east to westbound. Analysis of traffic flows 1.n the immediate area indicate that, initially, no parking removal, additional turn-pockets or travel lanes will be necessary as a result of this project. Thes~ measures may need to be taken in the future should traffic volumes increase to levels greater than currently expected. EAST EIGHTH AVENUE -- HIGH STREET EAST TO MID-BLOCK ALLEY East Eighth Avenue is a two-way street from High Street east to the Ferry Street bridge off-ramps. Traffic is carried on one east and two westbound lanes. The east and westbound lanes are separated by a raised median. Conversion of this segment of East Eighth Avenue to a one-way street would involve removal of the raised median and the reversal of the eastbound lane to create three westbound lanes. This proposal would minimize the occasional traffic back-ups that occur on the bridge off-ramp and would be consistent with the lane configuration on the west side of the Eighth/High intersection. It has been determined that each of these projects can be easily implemented at a minimal cost. Staff has received a generally supportive response from the affected property owners, business operators, and tenants. Both the Downtown Commission and the Planning Commission unanimously approved recommendations to the Counc il that the projects be given approval. These projects have been combined to minimize the duplication of public hearings and are not dependent on each other. If approved, the projects will be implemented in mid to late July. e ACTION REQUESTED Staff recommends, following a public hearing, approval and authorization of the projects as designed. East Broad\Na.y Str'eet Direction Charlge ~ I ExistiQg I tl I L "' ", .. .. ~ ~,.. ) - - - - - -'-""" ~ I ........ .... .... +- ... --.. - - - - - I ... -... I E. Broadway . 1* I I r . . ~1) Ci) 1111111111. - .c .. NORTH ca ~ 0) Q) -- - :t: Q. - <( ~ I Proposed It I 1 L , ... ... .... ... ) - - - - - - - n .dlI ~L,~c. ~. .... ... ... .. - - I .... ... I E. Broadway ltl I r- e e e . . Eas.LEighth Ave Str.t Direction Change · o' F er)k St. Bridge o Ramps ~ I Existirlg It .- .. .. /If' -- --------- .. .. E. 81tl Ave. <I- -- c ) .. ... .. .... \~ I I It I . .... "IIIIIIIIIL (I) .c >. Q) = - Ferry St. Bridge NORTH - I- e:( :c Off Rarnps ~ I Proposed It ... .. .. Jt' -- --------- .. .. E. 8111 Av'e. .. -- --------- .. .. .. ... \\ I I I * I .~ . e M E M 0 RAN DUM June 18, 1985 TO: Dave Whitlow, Assistant City Manager FROM: Bert S. Teitzel, City Engineer ~~ SUBJECT: Contract award and assessment for public improvement project The property owners for the following project were notified of a hearing before the Hearings Official to consider objections to the contract award and the proposed assessment. There were no unresolved problems or requests to be heard, and the meeting was cancelled. Contract No. 85-11 - Contract award and levying assessment of costs for e pav~ng, sanitary sewer, storm sewer and sidewalks north side of West 11th Avenue from Tyinn Street to Seneca Road This project was initiated in February, 1985 by a petition representing 100 percent of property owners. The City Council approved the project by Resolution No. 3915 on April 22, 1985, directing the Public Works Department to prepare plans and specifications and authorizing the costs of the improvement to be assess to properties within the improvement district 1n accordance with applicable sections of the Eugene Code, 1971. RECOMMENDED ACTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL: The first action should be to adopt the findings attached. The second action should be to approve the ordinance. e 'C- -. PROPOSED FINDINGS: e 85-11 - Contract award and levying assessment of costs for paving, sanitary sewer, storm sewer and sidewalks north side of West 11th Avenue from Tyinn Street to Seneca Road ~,. .- 1- The'project was initiated, advertised and bid in compliance with Section 9.165 through 7.185 of the Eugene Code, 1971. 2. Property owners proposed to be assessed had notice of the public hearing 'and reasonable opportunity to be heard as provided in the applicable sections of the' Eugene code, 1971- 3. The proposed assessments were calculated in conformance with the Eugene Code, Section 7.175 and 7.180. 4. There were" no requests for" hearing before the Hearings Official, and it is recommended' that the City Council approve the ordiance to proceed with the project and to levy assessments as proposed. RECOMMENDED ACTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL: e The first action should be to adopt the findings attached. The second action should be to approve the ordinances. LB1453GLB: e .~~ , M E M 0 RAN DUM y~ June 19, 1985 TO: Mayor and City Councilors FROM: Micheal D. Gleason SUBJECT: Self-funding Health Benefits Over the past few years, the City, like many other employers,has been working toward the objective of self-insuring some employee benefits. With the assistance of the City Attorney, we have examined the Eugene Code 2.585 to ascertain whether or not it allows the City to self-insure the health benefit program. We believe that it does; however, it should it clearer. Furthermore, it is possible in the future to self~fund other employee benefits. Accordingly, we would like to amend the Code to broaden the definition of the Risk Management Fund. Why self-insurance Self-funding means retaining the risk (expense) of loss instead of transfering that risk to an insurance company for a fee (premium). The City's current self-insurance programs--workers' compensation and general liability--are a mix of both insurance and self-insurance. We set aside runds to pay predictable losses and we buy lIumbrellall coverage to prote:t us against unanticipated catastrophic losses. The ,. health benefits program will be structured in the same manner. There are several reasons why we decided to self-fund our health benefits program: - The cost of administering a self-funded program is lower than the fee charged for the same service by an insurance carrier. - Being self-insured means the City owns the data about how the plan is being used. Access to da~a will allow us to order special reports that will give us a better understanding of where our health benefits dollars are being spent. With such information, we can tailor our program to fit our employees. We can also begin to better assist employees with their health maintainance through preventive and health education programs. - We want employee to understand the benefits plans and become smart health care consumers. Self-insurance gives the City the ability to customize benefit booklets, the explanation of benefit forms, and other forms of benefit communications. Summary The time is right to self-fund employee benefits. The annual growth rate of health care costs has slowed significantly, which minimizes the risk of unpredictable and un budgeted cost fluctuations. The decision to self- fund was based on the City's desire to achieve the most flexible, cost-effective, and service-oriented plan Dossible. We want to make .. certain that the Code clearly allows self-funding of employee benefits within the Risk Management Fund. If you have any Questions, please call Lana Linds~rom, Compensation Manager, at 687-5064. . ORDINANCE NO. tt' ---....--- AN ORDINANCE CONCERNING THE CITY'S SELF-INSURANCE PROGRAM; AMENDING SECTION 2;585 OF THE EUGENE CODE, 1971, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. I', '. .) '"the-City Council of the City of Eugene finds that: Th~ crey' is' authorized under state law to establ ish a self-insurance progY'am, ancl'dn'I,August 14, 1978 created a Risk Management Fund and provided for it~ adininistration by Ordinance No. 18329 (adding Section 2.585 to the Eugene Code, 1971) passed by the Council and approved by the Mayor on Febru- ary 7,' 1979. Substantial rnonetary savings have accrued to the City under the exist- ing program and additional savings would be realized by self-insuring employee benefits. Section 2.585 of the Eugene Code, 1971 should therefore be amended to clarify that the City's self-insurance/risk management program ., includes the self-insuring of employee benefits. Therefore, THE CITY OF EUGENE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Sect i on l. Based upon the above findings, which are adopted and incor- porated herein, Section 2.585 of the Eugene Code, 1971, is amended to read and provide: 2.585 Risk Management Fund - Administration. ( 1 ) On August 14, 1978, in Ordinance No. 18247, a risk management fund was created. It is the objective of the city to place, maintain, and carry-over from year to year in that fund, an amount sufficient to meet the cityls future liabilities, including but not limited to, developed claim costs, incurred but not reported losses, larger than anticipated judgments, --- emoloyee benefit ~rograms, and other contingencies. From time to time, appropriations to the fund may be made in accordance with the Local Budget :Jrdinance - 1 . M E M 0 RAN DUM ,e June 19, 1985 TO: Mayor and City Councilors FROM: Micheal D. Gleason SUBJECT : Self-fundinq Health Benefits Over the past few years, the City, like many other employers, has been working toward the objective of self-insuring some employee benefits. With the assistance of the City Attorney, we have examined the Eugene Code 2.585 to ascertain whether or not it allows the City to self-insure the health benefit program. We believe that it does; however, it should it clearer. Furthermore, it is possible in the future to self-fund other employee benefits. Accordingly, we would like to amend the Code to broaden the definition of the Risk Management Fund. Why self-insurance Self-funding means retaining the risk (expense) of loss instead of transrering that risk to an insurance company ror a fee (premium). The City's current self-insurance programs--workers' compensation and general liability--are a mix of both insurance ana self-insurance. We set asioe funds to pay predictable losses and we buy "umbrellall coverage to prote:t us against unanticipated catastrophic losses. The ,.. nealth benefits program will be structured in the same manner. There are several reasons why we decided to self-fund our health benefits program: - The cost of administering a self-funded program is lowey' than the fee charged for the same service by an insurance carrier. - Being self-insured means the City owns the data about how the plan is being used. Access to data will allow us to order special reports that wi 11 give us a better understanding of Where our health benefits dollars are being spent. With such information, we can tailor our program to fit our employees. We can also Degin to better assist employees with their healtn maintainance through preventive and health education programs. - We want employee to understand the benefits plans and become smart health care consumers. Self-insurance gives the City the ability to customize benefit booklets. the explanation of benefit forms, and other forms of benefit communications. Summary The time is right to self-fund employee benefits. The annua~ growth rate of health care costs has slowed significantly, which minimizes the risk of unpredictable and unbudgeted cost fluctuations. The aecision to self- funa was Dased on the City1s desire to achieve the most flexible, cost.-effective. and service-oriented plan possible. We want to make ~ ce~t.ain ~hat t.he Coae Clearly allows self-funding or emoloyee benerits within the Risk Management. ~und. If you naVE any questions. p'ease cail Lana L..inast.fom. Compensation Manager, at 687-5064. .. (0) The finance officer;,.o~,>design~ shaTli~mainta:;n <l,cqmplete e.. and accurate file Of all claims an'~' paymet1t,s\OIadell1tlO:"'s'u'bl1Vi'lt,"\d quarterly report to the city manager on the acti.viti'es 'of the'ri$k management fund. t''" jt1 \ G~:~" t"- :: ,..... .' .' " : _ ,\",- Sect ion' 2.' 'Fha.,it 'th~t"mattat.scOltt:.amed'her~'j nt'on'ter,n' 'the pub 1 i c we 1 fare --- ". ,. ~ '(~ and safety~;ahd>iri'~'orC1et to insure the.'or'tfe:rly ~;mp1l~frtentation of the proce- dures proyide~ f9r' her'ein an em:ergency is her:eby;~l€t~gd,tdexist, and this Ord inan~e&hall,~ become effect lve il11l1ed iately upon its passage by the City Council and approval by the Mayor. ,', "'- "\~ "",,, A' " ,;':: Passed by the City Council this ,l\pproved'by ttH~ Mayor th i s _ day of June, 1985 _ day of June , 1985 "-....~~~,, ...." .",..'-"...-..... . ""'~ C Hy Recorder ;~ayor -.. Ordinance " 3 -. ~ . .. In any event, the City has made a strong commitment to staffing implementation of the Plan, refer to page 111-2. Recently a new position was created in the Parks and Recreation Department to faci 1 itate a focused, coordinated marketing program for Eugene's e culture/leisure resources that will foster the City.s image as a culture/leisure center. Regardless of the level of City involvement, a staff task team will monitor Plan implementation and prepare annual reports to the City Council. 3. Discuss purpose of Suggested Actions as contained in Chapter I of the Culture/Leisure Plan Appendix. Following tentative action by the Council on the above items, staff will prepare an ordinance to adopt the Culture/Leisure Plan. Council action is scheduled for July 8. pltbmem6 e e . ""-,; '" M E M 0 RAN DUM e June 19, 1985 TO: City Counci 1 FROM: Planning and Parks and Recreation Departments SUBJ: CULTURE/LEISURE PLAN Background Following the May 13 public hearing on the Culture/Leisure Plan, the Council decided to postpone taking action on the Plan to allow for further discussion. During Council review of the Plan at a May 8 Council work session concerns regarding the Plan revolved around: 1) financial implications of the Plan ,for the City and 2) the nature of the proposed public/private partnership. Since the May 13 public hearing, additional concerns and suggestions have been expressed to staff by various Councilors and by representatives of the Planning Team, Linda Devine and Scott Lieuallen.. Action Reauested Staff recommends that the Council proceed at the June 24 work session in the following manner: 4It 1. Review and approve the policies contained in Chapter II. 2. Review and approve the appropriate level of City participation in implementing the Plan with other community organizations. Currently the Plan proposes forming a Culture/Leisure Team. Refer to page 111-3. An alternate approach would be to help facilitate the revitalization of the Lane Economics of Amenities Program (LEAP). LEAP operated for two years bri ngi ng together part i ci pants in culture/leisure activities from both the private and public sectors. It is a vo 1 unta ry group open to any i ndi vi dua 1 or group with an interest in culture/leisure activities including for example, the Eugene-Springfield Convention and Visitors Bureau, the Lane Regional Arts Council, the Oregon Museum Park and the University of Oregon. LEAP has provided a valuable opportunity for networking and resource sharing. With some staff support from the City, LEAP could be revitalized and become a culture/leisure trade association similar in concept to the Software Council whose development was fostered by the BATeam. The LEAP could play an important role in implementing the plan by providing: 1) networking and resource sharing opportunities, 2) an interface with the City's economic and culture/leisure assistance programs, 3) an opportunity to develop seminars, conferences, and trade shows, and e 4) a forum for advocacy.