Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/24/1990 Meeting e M I NUT E S Eugene City Council McNutt Room--City Hall September 24, 1990 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Emily Schue, Rob Bennett, Ruth Bascom, Shawn Boles, Freeman Holmer (after 5:50 p.m.), Roger Rutan, Bobby Green, Debra Ehrman (after 6:20 p.m.). The regular meeting of September 24, 1990, of the Eugene City Council was called to order by His Honor Mayor Jeff Miller. 1. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES FINANCING STUDY Tony Mounts, Finance Director, reviewed this item. He said that in July 1989, the council established the Committee on Development Services. The charge of this committee was to review each of the development services provided in the General Fund and to prepare a recommendation on the appropriate level of fee support versus general tax support for each of the e services. Committee recommendations were based on a review of service descriptions, review of full cost information, and review of existing and potential revenue sources. Mr. Mounts said that the committee recommends that general tax support for development services be reduced by up to $2.4 million over a five-year period. The committee also recommends that the Council Committee on Development Services be disbanded and that staff make periodic progress reports to the full council over the next five years to provide updates on progress towards these goals. Mr. Mounts said that staff analyzed each service to develop an estimate of the full costs based on the FY90 budget and reviewed all revenue sources to determine the level of fee support. The services were divided into categories according to the individual or group which benefits from the provision of the service. The major categories included in the study were direct customer services, general business services, and general public services. The committee recommended the following reductions in general tax support over a five-year period: *Direct Customer Services $2,330,000 *General Business Services 20,000 *General Public Services 93,000 In summary, Mr. Mounts said that if the committee recommendations were e adopted, the General Fund support could be reduced by up to $2,443,000 in FY90 dollars. MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 24, 1990 Page 1 e As a member of the Council Committee on Development Services, Councilor Boles provided the council with a report on the committee's recommendations. He pointed out several basic principles which guided the committee's deliberations. The committee felt that it was important that any change in the current method of fee support be implemented gradually. Also, the committee felt that hardships and/or additional costs associated with the appeals system should highly influence the ultimate fee to be paid. When considering the amount of fees which would be levied, Mr. Bennett asked whether the committee compared the proposed fees with fees currently charged by other jurisdictions. In response, Mr. Boles said that the committee did some comparison with other jurisdictions. Mr. Bennett pointed out that one benefit of General Fund support is that it allows an annual review of the cost to the City of providing a service. He voiced concern that without this annual review, the City's ability to monitor fees would be reduced. Mr. Boles responded that the committee recognized this concern and suggested that the City contract with an independent auditor to serve that evaluative function. Responding to a question from Mr. Rutan, Mr. Boles said that there are administrative caps on the amount the City can charge for some services. In some cases, the committee has suggested that the City pursue legislative action to raise these cap limitations. Mr. Mounts also noted that in the case of building permits, if a jurisdiction can show that it needs to charge more for the services than the present ceiling allows to recover the full e cost, it may be able to do so. Mr. Boles summarized the committee's recommendations: A. Direct Customer Services 1. Annexation The committee recommends that the current level of general tax support be maintained. This recommendation supports the council's policy to encourage annexation activity within the urban growth boundary. Mr. Bennett pointed out that the presence of individual annexation requests demonstrates that annexation provides some benefit to individuals. He felt that the current level of tax support should be reduced and that fees should be increased. Mr. Holmer disagreed. He felt that the City should be encouraging annexation and said that increasing fees would only discourage annexation. 2. Business/liquor licenses Mr. Boles stated that business license fees are established to recover the full cost of providing the service. The committee recommends that liquor license review fees should be increased to the State ceiling and that the e City pursue legislative action to raise the ceiling. MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 24, 1990 Page 2 e 3. Land Use Information/Applications Mr. Boles indicated that the committee is divided on whether to recommend full cost recovery over a five-year period or continue the current level of general tax support. The committee recommends that if full cost recovery is chosen, fee increases for conditional use permits issued for day-care/group- care dwellings and mobile home hardship permits be accomplished over a ten-year period. Mr. Holmer felt that the City should be encouraging the provision of land-use information by choosing to continue the current level of general tax support. Mr. Rutan said that he disagrees with the committee recommendation for this issue as well as for construction permits and business permits. He said that by consuming these services, private property owners are acting in the public good. While he agrees that private property owners should pay a portion of the costs associated with providing these services, they should not be required to pay the full cost of such regulations. Following the committee recommendation, he warned, could have serious economic development consequences. Mr. Holmer reiterated that the City should provide preliminary General Fund support for the provision of land-use information and applications. Mr. Boles said a major committee concern raised during deliberations had to e do with growth-related cost increases. The committee felt that rather than allowing the City to continue bearing the costs associated with growth, those who are directly responsible for that growth should pay. Mr. Rutan suggested that the council hold an additional work session to discuss those items which are still disagreed upon. Mr. Boles said he is opposed to having an additional work session on this report. He reasoned that until the recommendations in this report are implemented, the City must continue to subsidize all services as it is currently doing. 4. Local Business Assistance Mr. Boles indicated that the committee recommends elimination of general tax support over a five-year period. Ms. Schue said that before she can support the committee recommendation, she would need additional information from the business community on how crucial City support of this program is to them. She also suggested that the City ask the Southern Wil1amette Private Industry Council (SWPIC) if it would continue the program without City support. Mr. Holmer noted than part of the function of the local business assistance program includes the provision of demographic and market information as well e as workshops and seminars. He said the City should consider whether this type of information is of sufficient community value to justify General Fund tax support. MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 24, 1990 Page 3 e Mr. Green felt that with the current level of unemployment in our community, the current level of fee support for this program should be maintained. 5. Construction Permits Mr. Rutan reiterated his concern that the industry should not be required to pay the costs associated with regulation. Ms. Bascom felt that because the industry benefits from this, the City should seek full cost recovery. Mr. Holmer pointed out that on this issue, the committee felt that the builder should pay the permit costs. He noted, however, that the costs should not be so high as to become a deterrent to construction. Ms. Schue also noted that the building developer will eventually pass any additional costs on to the consumer. Mr. Miller pointed out that building developers said they would be willing to pay increased costs if the City would guarantee the timely and efficient provision of services that have been requested. He also suggested that the council hold a public hearing on this issue to get feedback from those who would be impacted. Mr. Rutan agreed. Mr. Boles suggested that the City analyze any changes which are made within e this study after it has been implemented for a year. Mr. Boles said that he is reluctant to support a public hearing because of the amount of time which has already been taken on this issue. He also noted that those persons who have a direct financial interest in this proposal would be most likely present to testify. Persons who represent the larger public are not likely to be present. Ms. Bascom stated that the City has already reviewed this issue in its general financial planning efforts and has provided several opportunities for public comment. She would not favor a public hearing. Ms. Ehrman said that because of the controversial nature of this proposal, the City would benefit from greater public input. Mr. Green and Mr. Bennett concurred. Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Bennett, to hold a public hearing on the Developmental Services Financing Study. Assistant City Manager Dave Whitlow agreed to provide the council at its next Wednesday work session with a possible date for the public hearing. Mr. Boles reiterated his reluctance for supporting a public hearing. The motion carried unanimously, 8:0. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 24, 1990 Page 4 e Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Ms. Ehrman, to amend the committee recommendations to reflect a continuation of the current level of General Fund fee support with respect to the Land-Use Information/Application service and the Historic Preservation Program. The motion carried unanimously, 8:0. Mr. Bennett suggested that the cost of the Wetlands Study be combined with cost of the Storm Water Drainage study. II. TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE Christine Andersen, Public Works Department, reported on the status of the proposed changes to the tree preservation ordinance. She noted that the City Council will be holding a public hearing on October 8, 1990, to consider changes to the tree preservation regulations. Ms. Andersen stated that the City of Eugene and Lane County planning commissions held a jOint public hearing on the tree preservation ordinance at which they received a great deal of public testimony both in favor of and in opposition to the tree ordinance. Representatives of the Tree Commission were present at the hearing and presented a list of recommended changes to the ordinance. Ms. Andersen reminded the council that at its request, the Lane County Board e of Commissioners adopted interim tree preservation regulations in April 1990, for the area outside of the city limits but within the Eugene urban growth boundary (UGB). Interim regulations will sunset on December 1, 1990. Ms. Andersen emphasized that this issue has moved very rapidly. Although the Eugene and Lane County Planning Commissions have met jointly to discuss this issue, several unresolved issues still remain, particularly with respect to tree-cutting regulations in the area between the city and the UGB. In order to meet the December 1 deadline, staff recommends that the ordinance be divided into two parts so that regulations for the area within the city limits will be separated from regulations for the area between the city and the UGB. Mayor Miller asked about the likelihood of having a single metropolitan-wide tree preservation ordinance. Ms. Andersen said that with continued opportunity for discussion, it is possible that the City will eventually have a single ordinance. She noted, however, that the City's ordinance might not be the same as Springfield's. Allen Lowe, Planning and Development Department, gave a slide presentation on the proposed ordinance. He noted that within the past few years, the City has begun to recognize the need for the better management of tree-cutting practices, particularly in the South Hills area. He explained that several areas within the urban growth boundary have been logged prior to initiation of annexation proposals for the sites. While those areas were clearly intended to be covered by policies within the South Hills Study, at the time e the logging occurred, areas outside of the city limits but within the UGB were not subject to the City's tree preservation ordinance. MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 24, 1990 Page 5 e Mr. Lowe highlighted several of the proposals contained within the proposed code. He indicated that the most controversial provision in the proposed ordinance is a prohibition on all slash burning within the UGB. This was proposed out of concern for air quality and fire protection. Mr. Lowe noted that at the Planning Commission public hearing, the commission received community feedback regarding exempting City government from tree- cutting permit requirements. Public testimony was almost unanimously opposed to this provision. Ms. Ehrman asked how the proposed ordinance would make it possible to avoid clear cutting. In response, Mr. Lowe said that City staff will have the authority to determine the appropriate level of tree cutting. Mr. Boles noted that one of the ordinance provisions specifies a limit on the total number of trees which can be cut. He asked how this would be monitored. Mr. Lowe responded that tree-cutting permits would be required for cutting to exceed the five-tree-per-acre limit. He noted too that tree cutting, particularly for areas within the south hills, is subject to a great deal of community policing. Those persons who live in the area will likely help the City monitor this provision. Regarding appeal authority, Mr. Boles stated that because the land in question is urbanizable land, the City's Hearing's Official should be responsible for hearing decision appeals. He noted that if that is unacceptable with the Lane County Board of Commissioners, then the e Metropolitan Policy Committee (MPC) should serve as the hearing body. Ms. Schue said that MPC would not be a good hearing body because each of the jurisdictions on this committee has veto power. Mr. Lowe emphasized that this ordinance is a compromise document. The City will have to work with the County commissioners to resolve this issue. Assistant City Manager Dave Whitlow suggested that the council might seek direct verbal contact with the Lane County Board of Commissioners to discuss its concerns on this issue. III. WEST EUGENE WETLANDS STUDY--PROGRESS REPORT Steve Gordon, Lane Council of Governments (L-COG), provided the council with an update on the West Eugene Wetlands Special Area Study in preparation for its November 15 final workshop on the study. He said that preliminary staff recommendations and a draft plan for the restoration and preservation of wetlands will be presented at that workshop. Mr. Gordon said that many community workshops and forums have been held to educate the public and receive feedback on the wetlands issue. Community response has been very helpful. He said that the City will continue to work with State and Federal agencies on wetlands issues. e Responding to a request for clarification from Mr. Bennett, Mr. Gordon said that the City has tried to identify every possible means of funding available for mitigation. It tried to assemble a financing package that ties the costs MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 24, 1990 Page 6 e of mitigation to the benefits. A Systems Development Charge (SDC) will most likely be a part of that package. Mr. Bennett voiced his concern with using SDCs as a means of financing wetland mitigation. He said that it is unfair to expect the development process to finance wetland mitigation in the future. Mr. Gordon pointed out that the comprehensive wetland plan for the west Eugene area is being proposed as a model for wetland problems in other areas of the city as well. The strategies laid forth in this particular study may have benefits far beyond just the west Eugene area. Responding to a question from Ms. Ehrman, Mr. Gordon said that in the process of developing its own mitigation strategies, the City has reviewed comprehensive wetland plans from a number of other communities. He emphasized that innovative wetland mitigation strategies are still needed. Mr. Rutan inquired about the status of Spectra-Physics. Mr. Gordon responded that mitigation for Spectra-Physics is currently under construction. Mr. Bennett commented that he is still interested in the possibility of using increased water flow from the "Emerald Canal" to assist in wetland mitigation. Mr. Gordon responded that part of the west Eugene mitigation plan for the west Eugene area addresses the potential of enhanced water flow in the Millrace. He pointed out that mitigation solutions for the west Eugene area can be found without identifying additional water sources. e Mayor Miller commended Mr. Gordon and L-COG for the extensive amount of time and effort it has invested in developing strategies for wetland mitigation. The meeting of the Eugene City Council adjourned at 7:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, . . -:', ' .j ~. ../~, " :~..",,~,:,; .' "~ \f Micheal Gleason City Manager (Recorded by Traci Northman) mncc 092490-530 e MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 24, 1990 Page 7