Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/09/1991 Meeting ~~ e M I NUT E S Eugene City Council McNutt Room--City Hall December 9, 1991 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Mayor Jeff Miller, Shawn Boles, Kaye Robinette, Ruth Bascom, Bobby Green, Debra Ehrman, Paul Nicholson. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Randy MacDonald, Roger Rutan The special meeting of the Eugene City Council was called to order by His Honor Mayor Jeff Miller. I. EUGENE DECISIONS PROCESS CHECK Ms. Bascom said that she will be announcing her political intentions tomorrow at noon in the Council Chamber. A. Data Analysis e Barbara Bellamy, City Manager's Office, summarized the Eugene Decisions pro- cess to date. She stated that the council is now at its second process check, in which it may evaluate the process and amend it if necessary. She then introduced Bill Simonsen and Ed Weeks, of the University of Oregon. Mr. Weeks distributed copies of the three types of surveys mailed to citizens as part of the Eugene Decisions process. He also distributed a summary of key data elements, which indicate how the team proposes to analyze data from the three surveys and the workshops. He indicated that meetings with the subcommittee have been helpful in determining how to approach the analysis. Mr. Weeks said that there are two main types of data collected during the public involvement process: data that are statistically representative of the population of voters in Eugene; and data that are not. He said that there were three instruments used in measuring the key data elements (e.g., services, tax sources, and service improvements). The instruments were ques- tionnaires which varied in terms of types of questions asked and amount of information given. They are termed "ivory," "blue," and "BOB" (build-your- own-budget). The ivory questionnaire asked questions about preferences for services, users fees, and taxes. This level of questioning is important to attain information about fundamental questions, such as whether the City should be involved in certain services. The blue questionnaire asked these types of questions, but also provided respondents with information about the costs of the services or fees. The BOB version provided information about e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 9, 1991 Page 1 e service costs, plus constrained respondents by requiring them to balance the budget. Mr. Weeks said that response rates for the qu'estionnaires to date for ivory, blue, and BOB are 68 percent, 64 percent, and 46 percent, respectively. He added that follow-up procedures are one week behind for the BOB version. A 70-percent response rate is expected. Mr. Weeks distributed a summary of demographic characteristics--gender, ten- ure, age, and household income--by type of survey. He said that the charac- teristics of the respondents of the random sampling versus those of the self-selected participants of workshops or tabloids were similar. Mr. Weeks referred to several displayed posters. Mayor Miller clarified that all displays reflect hypothetical data only. Mr. Weeks said that the manner in which participants balanced the budget will be examined--whether they proposed only budget cuts, only increased revenues, or a combination of the two approaches. Also examined will be the extent to which each approach was used. At the next level of analysis, the types of budget items suggested for reduction or increase will be examined. Regarding revenue, types of revenues suggested for increase, various sources used to produce the increase, and the degree of support for these sources will be examined. Regarding services, specific services suggested for reduction, the degree of reduction recommend- ed, and possible alternatives to budget cuts will be examined. Services for which either no reduction is recommended or no support is recommended will be easily identified at this level of analysis. The same methods of analysis e will be used for service enhancement recommendations. All results can be cross-referenced by demographic characteristics as well. Mr. Nicholson wondered if an analysis could be conducted which presented the net support for each service. Mr. Weeks said that the only services for which consistent data are available on enhancement are affordable housing, community policing, fire redeployment, new library, and tourism. Mr. Boles said that the purpose of the first analysis is to present initial data which would trigger additional analysis from the City Council. In agreement with Mr. Nicholson, Mr. Weeks said that the workshop data would provide necessary data to conduct the type of analysis he was requesting. In response to a question from Mr. Boles, Mr. Weeks said that when providing percentage data, he would also provide the base and the proportion of the total respondents each analysis was including. Mr. Weeks suggested that the January 8 report present the data from all re- spondents. Subsequently, on council direction, subgroups could be examined. Mr. Nicholson pointed out that the analysis would "wash out" differences between services in which some participants recommended budget cuts and other participants recommended revenue increases. He said that this analysis would portray citizens as recommending no change for a service in which citizens were actually split. Mr. Weeks said that the analysis will contain the en- hancement data from the workshop. However, the BOB instrument does not pro- e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 9, 1991 Page 2 e vide a means for measuring enhancement. Mr. Nicholson requested analysis which would present a picture of how controversial the service is. B. Scheduling A brief discussion was held regarding the January 8 meeting. Ms. Bellamy said that the initial analysis may not be available until the day of the meeting. Mayor Miller said that it is difficult to have a meaningful discus- sion on data that are not available before the meeting. Mr. Weeks said that the data presented and the analyses conducted will be sound, but that the team will not have much time for "digestion" of the material. Consequently, the team will not be providing many conclusive comments, but will provide meaningful summary tables and text. Ms. Bellamy added that there is too much raw data to present in the January 8 report. Ms. Ehrman expressed a prefer- ence for waiting a week for the report in order to receive a more meaningful report. Mr. Boles disagreed, stating that if the council falls a week behind at this point in the process, it loses a week later in the process. Mr. Weeks thought that it more important for the City Council to have time to think about the data than for the team to think about it. He said that after the initial analysis and discussion, additional analyses could follow. Mr. Boles suggested that the team provide the summary by January 6, if possible, and that the council discuss the data on January 8, if it feels that discus- sion would be meaningful. Ms. Ehrman suggested that between January 6 and 8, the team could be doing further interpretive analysis. The council and the team agreed, by consensus. e C. Did the Second Round of Public Input Accomplish its Goals? Mr. Nicholson said that that he was generally pleased with the second round of public input. He expressed a desire for the council to attend to how the city could "do things differently" as opposed to merely changing what is already in place. Mr. Boles agreed, stating that the second round of public input did not address how things would be done differently in the future, but only asked about the past. He added that the third round may address long- range strategies, such as volunteerism, privatization, consolidation, or efficiency. Mr. Nicholson said that the council has not asked the public for ideas or strategies, but only about revenue and services. He said that, in terms of the current process, open ended questions are not likely to produce meaningful answers. He recommended that the council consider systematic strategies by which operations can be examined, in search of improvements. Mr. Gleason agreed, stating that a concrete focus on the future is desired. He said that the committee could focus on volunteerism, consolidation, privatization, and efficiency, developing strategies by which those compo- nents can be measured. Mayor Miller pointed out that the City has begun to do things differently. Mr. Nicholson commented that the public wants the City to examine strategies which will increase efficiency and will result in less cost to the public. He expressed a desire to begin identifying concrete opportunities to apply strategies that will yield results in the long-run. Ms. Bascom pointed out that staff can assist in identification of strategies. It was agreed that the committee would identify steps that have been taken in e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 9, 1991 Page 3 e this process and the best way to proceed. Mr. Nicholson emphasized that the City has been responsive to the citizens so far and will continue to do so. D. Are There Changes That Should be Made to the Process Design Mr. Boles said that the council has yet to decide what kind of additional sampling would be most beneficial for the third round of public input. He said that more information about the current input is needed in order to answer that question. However, he emphasized that public participation in round three should be as broadly based as possible. He said that as options get narrower, a broader response base is desired. The question remains as to the best format for that broadening. He said that a very clear response mechanism is needed and a tighter funnel through which information reaches the council. In response to a question from Ms. Ehrman, Mr. Boles said that broad-based sampling would include sampling of those who were highly involved with public involvement, those who have no interest in public involvement, and those in between. Ms. Bascom commented that she received a lot of negative feedback from the tabloid. Others councilors reported the opposite. Ms. Ehrman said that the response rate may not have been as high as from the other surveys, but that the tabloid was also an attempt to contact and educate the public. Mr. Nicholson pointed out the the public may view the third round of involvement differently than the others. He said that during the third round, the public will be responding to specific recommendations of the council. In add it ion, the third round will be the last round. Mayor Miller pointed out that con- e ducting the sessions after elections would be preferred. Mr. Gleason said that by the third round, the council should know how the previous instruments were successful in measuring certain issues. In response to a question from Mr. Green, Ms. Bellamy said that running an advertisement in the newspaper is cheaper than a mail out, but that a mail out reaches more citizens. Mr. Green expressed his preference for a mail out. In response to a question from Mayor Miller, Mr. Boles said that the third round of public input will ask different questions than the first and second, and will require different exercises. Mr. Gleason pointed out that the third round should exclude the public decision-makers. The councilors agreed. II. FINALIZATION OF 1992 CITY COUNCIL GOALS A. City Council Goals Mayor Miller clarified the process for approving the goals as one of consen- sus and that motions would be unnecessary. Goal I was approved, as edited on October 30. It reads: "Financial Strate- gy: Through the Eugene Decisions process, develop a community-supported, sustainable, multi-year service and funding strategy." Regarding Goal II, Ms. Bascom said that the word "wider" could be used in- stead of "entire" when referring to the downtown area. She said the intent - MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 9, 1991 Page 4 e is to encourage involvement from the business community. Ms. Ehrman suggest- ed the following wording: "Encourage community participation and energy so that we can revitalize the area." Mr. Nicholson said that one intent of this goal is to encourage downtown development. In response to Mr. Boles, Mr. Gleason said that that intent is reflected in the Central Area Transportation Study and the Commercial Lands Study. Mr. Nicholson said that the City has not given developers any reasons to develop downtown and the area is not structurally desirable. Mr. Boles said that this goal captures that intent by stating the goal of restructuring and refocusing. Mr. Nicholson preferred to include the entire metropolitan area, as opposed to only the downtown area. He said that the downtown is intrinsically connected to all other areas and cannot be viewed as a neighborhood. Mr. Bascom suggested that the council discuss the issue at next October's goal session. The council agreed. Goal II reads: "Downtown: Refocus and restructure our efforts in the wider downtown area. Encourage community participation and energy so that we can revitalize the mall area. The council agreed on the following wording for Goal III: "Library: Develop a financing plan to construct and operate a new library, consistent with the Eugene Decisions process." There were no changes suggested for Goal IV. The council approved the fol- lowing wording: "Social Goal/Housing: Through intergovernmental coopera- tion, provide funding for permanent low-income housing units." Darcy Marentette, City Manager's Office, said that Mr. MacDonald requested e that the words "and Federal" be added after the phrase "helping to shape State . . .". In response to Ms. Bascom, Mr. Gleason said that the council is taking a leading role in shaping State and Federal transportation policy. At Ms. Ehrman's suggestion, the following 'wording was agreed upon: "Trans- portation: Implement new strategies for alternative modes of transportation. Focus on increasing bus ridership and supporting use of bicycles. Pl ay a leading role in shaping State and Federal transportation policy." It was agreed that if Mr. MacDonald was not in agreement with any revisions, the goals would be revisited on January 8. Mr. Boles emphasized the importance of the goals in providing a basis for acting as a council to ensure integrated efforts. B. Work Priorities 1. Highway 99 North, Phase II Mr. Boles suggested that the scope be broadened. 2. Emergency Management After a brief discussion, the council decided to discuss this issue further at another work session. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 9, 1991 Page 5 e 3. Solid Waste Mr. Nicholson commented that the work plan developed should address short- term and long-term issues. 4. Wetlands The council agreed to incorporate this issue into the body of its work plan. 5. Arts and Tourism as Economic Drivers It was agreed to incorporate this issue into the work plan as well. III. OTHER BUSINESS Mr. Boles said that Greg Evans has been working with staff of the Safeway Corporation in retaining the store on 6th Avenue in Eugene. He said that there is an opportunity to meet with Safeway management in Oakland. Mayor Miller said that it is important for a City Councilor to do this. Mr. Boles requested council approval to do so. The council had a brief discussion, in which Mr. Boles offered to provide more information on the subject. Mr. Robinette moved, seconded by Ms. Bascom, that the City have a presence on the issue of retaining the Safeway on West 6th Avenue, and that Mr. Boles serve as a representative of e the City Council. Mr. Gleason clarified that the motion's intent is to allow Mr. Boles to at- tend a meeting with the Safeway management in Oakland, if one is necessary. The motion passed, 5:0:1 (Mr. Boles abstaining). Mr. Gleason brought up the issue of the Richardson Bridge housing project. He said that the major component is financing through tax credits. In order to receive tax credits for this year, at least 10 percent of the funding must be spent. This has proven not to be as easy as anticipated, because of the difficulties in gaining clear title. He said that the County is willing to make expenditures, provided those expenditures are backed up. There are four ways the City could provide this backup: 1) with Federal funding from the Home Program; 2) through the Eugene Decisions process; 3) with utility funds (sewer, water, etc.); or 4) with General Fund dollars. He said that $100,000 must be expended, resulting in a need of $40,000 to $80,000 for backup funds. He requested that the authority be given to the Housing Authority to make the decision. Mr. Gleason said that the maximum General Fund exposure is $100,000, with a probable exposure of $40,000 to $50,000. In response to a question from Mr. Robinette, Mr. Gleason said that if the authority is not granted, the project will not get the tax credits. Mr. Boles moved, seconded by Ms. Ehrmans, to authorize the City Manager to act in a manner such as to allow the Housing e- MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 9, 1991 Page 6 -,. Policy Board to proceed with the Richardson Bridge Housing Project this year. The motion passed unanimously, 6:0. The meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Re??~ .~~ 110.- Micheal Gleason City Manager (Recorded by Kathy Varner) mncc 120991 e' e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 9, 1991 Page 7 ...... ,_.