Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/20/1992 Meeting e e e M I NUT E S Eugene City Council McNutt Room--Eugene City Hall May 20, 1992 11:30 a.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Shawn Boles, Bobby Green, Ruth Bascom, Debra Ehrman, Randy MacDonald, Paul Nicholson, Kaye Robinette, Roger Rutan. The adjourned meeting of May 13, 1992, of the Eugene City Council was called to order by His Honor Mayor Jeff Miller. I. ITEMS FROM THE MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL, AND CITY MANAGER A. Proposed Sewer User Fee Increase Mr. Rutan recalled that the council previously received the proposed sewer user fee increase and councilors were asked to contact staff with any concerns. He said the topic was discussed by the Council Committee on Infrastructure and the Metropolitan Waste Management Commission; both are recommending adoption of the new rates. B. Siting of the Lane Transit District Station Mr. Rutan said he has the proposed agenda for the Lane Transit District (LTD) Station siting process. He expressed concern with the involvement of the council late in the process and the extended time line. He suggested the council send a representative to the meeting of the LTD board this evening with the message that the council supports the project and wants very much to be involved in the ongoing process. Mr. Boles agreed with Mr. Rutan but suggested the matter be brought up at the meeting of the Metropolitan Policy Committee by Ms. Bascom at its May 21 meeting. Ms. Bascom agreed to do so. The council agreed to present a letter to the LTD board this evening advocating for expansion of those involved in the process and indicating that the City wants to be an active participant in the siting of the station. Ms. Ehrman agreed to attend the board meeting this evening and present the letter. MINUTES--Eugene City Council 11:30 a.m. May 20, 1992 Page 1 e C. Tax Court Ruling Mr. Rutan said that the recent Tax Court ruling may have an impact on the Olive Street opening project and asked for the City Attorney's Office interpretation. e City Attorney Bill Gary said the City of Portland case does not affect the power of the Urban Renewal Agency to make expenditures at all. He said that the question is whether bonded indebtedness incurred by the agency is under or outside the cap. Regardless of the Portland case, the net result is that the City of Eugene is not directly affected now. It may have a future effect in the event that the Supreme Court affirms the Tax Court decision. He explained that under the statute that was adopted to implement Ballot Measure 5, each jurisdiction is required to classify its bonded indebtedness as inside or outside the cap. The Eugene Urban Renewal Agency (URA) classified all its bonded indebtedness as outside the cap. That triggers a period of time when any collection of electors may file a legal challenge to that classification. The City of Portland opted to file a declaratory action itself to get a determination. The City of Eugene was a party to the suit but withdrew when a group of electors filed a challenge to its classification. The suit challenging Eugene's classification was dismissed at the request of the plaintiffs, with prejudice. Furthermore, the time frame for challenging the classification has expired. Therefore, the classification made by the URA stands and is not subject to challenge. Future classifications, however, may be impacted by the decision. Responding to a question from Mr. Rutan, Mr. Gary said that what is a proper use of URA funds may change, impacting future decisions. Mr. Boles reminded the council that it expects a report back on the design of the intersection of Broadway and Olive Street before the project goes forward. D. Change of Maximum Speed-Reconsideration Ms. Bascom expressed gratitude for the staff reconsideration of maximum speed designation on Patterson Street. E. Willamette Institute of Science and Technology (WISTEC) Ms. Bascom said that WISTEC is doing well under new leadership. F. Mike Barba Mr. Boles expressed sorrow at the death of Mike Barba and said he should be remembered for his positive contributions to the community. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council 11:30 a.m. May 20, 1992 Page 2 e G. Storage Tank Removal Issue Mr. Green said that an issue has arisen over the removal of an aboveground storage tank from a business on Highway 99. He is working with the owner and the City's Hazardous Materials Task Team for resolution of the problem. Mr. MacDonald arrived at the meeting. H. Parks and Recreation Commission Mr. Green reported on the Parks and Recreation Commission's meeting, saying the commission expressed concern that it was not involved in the decision to combine the maintenance divisions of Public Works and PARCS. I. Roosevelt Middle School's Mentor Program Mr. Nicholson introduced Ethan Lindsey, a student involved in the Roosevelt Mentor Program. J. June 29 Process Session Mr. Robinette received confirmation that the process session scheduled for June 29 will begin at 5:30 p.m. Mayor Miller adjourned the meeting of the City Council and convened the Urban e Renewal Agency. II. BROADWAY PLAZA PROJECT Mr. Gleason reminded the council that it had tentatively approved the Broadway Plaza project concept, but had asked staff to negotiate a different position with regard to parking. He said there was agreement on a different position, one that uses a loan arrangement rather than a grant arrangement. Lew Bowers, Planning and Development Department, said staff has analyzed whether the on-site structured parking option is better or worse than the adjacent surface parking option. He said both staff and the Downtown Commission (DC) recommend on-site parking for the following reasons: it makes the project more marketable; it leads to more dense development; and it uses less land. Mr. Bowers said staff negotiated with the developer to minimize the City's participation in the project. The recommendation is to loan $500,000 towards the cost of parking and make another loan for $220,000, which is the value of the land. The Urban Renewal Fund expenditure is $500,000 and the $220,000 is foregone revenue for the land. He explained that the developer has calculated that there is approximately $900,000 in additional costs to siting e MINUTES--Eugene City Council 11:30 a.m. May 20, 1992 Page 3 e e e a housing project such as this in the downtown core rather than further away, $720,000 of which would be defrayed by the City. Mr. Bowers compared the $9,600 cost to the City per unit with two other projects which also involved the City. The cost per unit for the Tiffany Building project is $15,000 and for the Richardson Bridge project it is $30,000. Mr. Bower said the agreement is for the City to loan the developer $500,000 at 3 percent interest for 30 years, and $220,000 at 0 percent interest for 30 years. He noted that there is a subsidy involved due to the low interest rates. Mr. Bowers explained that the City would be paid from 25 percent of the net cash flow, increasing up to 35 percent later as the project generates more cash. He said that is sufficient to retire both loans if the project performs as expected. Responding to a question from Mr. Boles, Mr. Bowers said the City would be in second position for claim on assets, the bond holders would be in the first mortgage position. Responding to a question from Mr. Nicholson, Mr. Bowers explained the net cash flow as follows: revenue, operating expenses paid, bond holders paid, and then the City is paid. Mr. Boles noted that the developer plans to use the 10-year property tax exemption program, providing a small return to the City. In response to a question from Ms. Ehrman, Mr. Bowers said that 20 percent of the 75 units will be rented to tenants with incomes less than $50,000 and 50 percent to tenants with lower-than-median incomes. Mr. Boles wondered if the proposed design was consistent with the American With Disabilities Act (ADA). The developer expressed his intention to comply with the ADA. Mr. Boles moved, seconded by Mr. Green, to approve the use of urban renewal funds for a below-market-rate loan in the amount of $500,000 for the construction of on-site parking at the Broadway Plaza Project, and a loan in the amount of $220,000 to reflect the value of land. Roll call vote. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Responding to a question from Mr. Nicholson, Mr. Gleason said there is not much room to restructure the loan package, because the income stream is not adequate. He noted that if the project performed well, the City would profit by getting paid back quicker. Mr. Boles expressed concern that the project's design has its back turned on the City's downtown. In response to Ms. Ehrman, Mr. Bowers said that approving the funding package would leave a balance of $3,000,000 in uncommitted urban renewal funds. MINUTES--Eugene City Council 11:30 a.m. May 20, 1992 Page 4 ~ Mayor Miller adjourned the meeting of the Urban Renewal Agency. e e III. ORDINANCE CONCERNING WEST EUGENE WETLANDS SPECIAL AREA STUDY Steve Gordon, lane Council of Governments, said the meeting material includes the draft Plan and Technical Report for the West Eugene Wetlands Special Area Study and recommended changes by the Planning Commission. He said a public hearing was held on April 8, followed by more work with the property owners and tenants in the rural portion of the wetland plan jurisdiction outside the metropolitan plan boundary. A special workshop was held in Peterson Barn on May 2, with about 100 people in attendance. Mr. Gordon said a packet including 62 pieces of written testimony from the public hearing, the minutes of the hearing, 14 pieces of written testimony from the workshop, and a 50-page summary of issues and response from staff was previously distributed to councilors. Mr. Gordon said staff considered the citizen input and has developed four proposals for the council's review. Staff recommends removal of "primary area" and "secondary area" references, removal of any colors outside the metropolitan plan boundary from the maps, and creation of a new section in the mitigation chapter of the plan. The new section would contain two short paragraphs that explain the intent of the plan toward that area, in one goal and three policies, with one recommended action. Briefly, the section says that the plan imposes no policy restrictions in that rural area. The only thing it does is allow willing property owners to sell property that meet the criteria set forth in the section for use in the mitigation program. Mr. Gordon said that staff will continue to work with the Board of County Commissioners who have a third reading and a public hearing on the proposed plan on June 3. The plan is scheduled for action on June 24. He said if the commissioners propose changes, these would then come back before the council. Mr. Gordon said staff hopes to have the plan adopted by June 30. Responding to a question from Ms. Bascom, Mr. Gordon said that the council has lobbied Congress for funds to acquire wetlands and wetland restoration sites. He said the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) would be nervous about participating in a program with local governments if there were not a connection in the plan to the program that this community is trying to get the BLM to help implement; that is, to pool community resources to allow sound urban development on some wetlands in west Eugene, to protect those wetlands that have the highest value, to create a regional mitigation bank in order to manage the cost of the program, and to do that with willing sellers. Mr. Gordon said dropping that reference to the program would not leave enough land to meet the community's need. In response to a question from Ms. Ehrman, Mr. Gordon said that staff is crafting individual responses and supporting landowners in their effort to sell by working with lending institutions. Pages 3 and 4 of the MINUTES--Eugene City Council 11:30 a.m. May 20, 1992 Page 5 "--" recommendations, he said, make it clear that sales have to be willingly negotiated at fair market value. Mr. Boles moved, seconded by Mr. Green, to adopt the amendments to the West Eugene Wetlands Plan recommended by staff (assuming the council prefers Option 3). The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. CB 4365--An ordinance adopting the West Eugene Wetlands Special Area Study Plan. Mr. Boles moved, seconded by Mr. Green, that the bill, with unanimous consent of the council, be read the second time by council bill number only, and that enactment be considered at this time. Roll call vote. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Mr. Boles moved, seconded by Mr. Green, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0 and became Ordinance 19853. Mr. Nicholson said the report does not address the issue that the City ought to be preserving the wetlands that are within the urban boundary. Some see the City's action as promoting industrial use of urban wetland, while going outside the boundary to buy property to create wetlands to compensate. Mr. Gordon said that in the process of identifying wetland within the metropolitan plan boundary, staff attempted to gather the best information about the relative value of those wetlands. Staff not only considered how that land looks today, but how urban development would affect it over time and what the public's investment in that land is. The wetlands recommended for development a) have low wetland value, b) were located in places where preservation was impossible, and c) prOVide an opportunity to recoup the public investment. Neil Bjorklund, Planning and Development Department, made the point that staff has not inventoried wetlands in "the secondary study area." Those sites identified for mitigation may currently be wetlands or may historically have been wetlands. Mr. Boles asked for staff's perspective on where the City went awry with respect to public involvement. Mr. Gordon said such an evaluation will be conducted after the plan is adopted, and recommendations will be forwarded to the council. IV. WORK SESSION: COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS FOLLOW-UP DISCUSSION Ms. Norris recalled that during the Eugene Decisions process, the council has received feedback related to City salaries and benefits. This item continues '"-,,, MINUTES--Eugene City Council 11 :30 a.m. May 20, 1992 Page 6 e the council's April 29 discussion regarding the City's current compensation market position, steps the City is taking to contain benefit costs, and recommendations made in the Coopers & Lybrand audit and by the Chamber of Commerce Task Force. Mr. Norris said the council's current policy is that "employee compensation be comparable to public and private sector compensation paid in the relevant recruitment area." She said the questions are as follows: Should the City continue to set compensation according to comparable organizations in a relevant recruitment area, what should the City's position be in relation to the market data (currently the City is at plus or minus 5 percent of the mid-point), what data should be use to determine cost of living changes (the consumer price index or cost of labor), should the City attempt to collect additional survey data from local public and private sector employers, and should the City continue to collect survey data at the current frequency of every other year for non-union positions and prior to negotiations for union positions. e Ms. Norris said that 26.4 percent of the City's total personnel cost is fringe benefits. She said the total salary cost in the calculation includes regular, seasonal temporary help, interns, and overtime wages. She also explained that not everyone who works for the City gets a full benefit package. Mr. Boles asked for an estimate of the number of employees that fall into each of the categories, including proportionate compensation. Mr. Gleason said about 80 percent are full time, regular employees. With regard to the Cost of Labor (COl) versus the Consumer Price Index (CPI), Ms. Norris said the Local Government Personnel Institute said all Oregon arbitrators use the CPl. She also noted that Coopers & Lybrand agreed that in union environments, the CPI is what is used; while non-union environments tend to use the COL. Ms. Norris said staff recommends using more local survey comparisons, using criteria developed from the council's previous discussion. This means recruiting from the geographical area where the City can get a sufficient number of qualified applicants, and also where it can get applicants who provide the ethnic, cultural, and gender diversity the City seeks. Ms. Norris said the communities used for these comparisons would be those that are economically similar enough to the Eugene area to provide relevant compensation data. She recommended organizational criteria be established, such as that employers have a size and structure that is relevant to the City's, provide similar services, have a formal personnel system, and employ at least 40 of the positions for which the City surveys. There was a brief discussion about whether the percentage of benefits costs relative to the total wages paid should include the wages of those who do not receive benefits. Mr. Boles pointed out that the City's formula deflated the percentage. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council 11:30 a.m. May 20, 1992 Page 7 ~ Mr. Rutan that the issue is community perception. It is important to determine the facts and decide what to do about it. He said the council needs to decide to what degree it wants to communicate this complicated topic to the citizenry, and what kinds of changes it wants to make internally with regard to personnel management. Mr. Nicholson expressed agreement with Mr. Rutan's comments, saying the council needs to decide who, if anyone, and in what manner, should the actual practice of the policies be reviewed, as well as determining what sort of information it wants out of such a review. Citing time constraints, Mayor Miller felt it would be useful for staff to develop a list of policy statements for the council to agree or disagree with. Mr. Boles suggested the council discuss what will be put forth to the public during the Eugene Decisions workshops in June. He also asked that all City employees be grouped under the different categories with benefit/wages ratio. Mr. Boles also advocated placing a benefit value on quality of life and security of employment. He also asked that staff analyze the cost of benefits to family members with regard to payment of insurance premiums. Lauren Chouinard, Human Resource and Risk Services, explained that the City's current practice with regard to health care insurance is to coordinate benefits when two insurance policies are involved. e The council agreed to continue the discussion in a future meeting. The council meeting adjourned at 1:45 p.m. ~~~ City Manager A~ (Recorded by Yolanda Paule) MNCC 052092-1130 e MINUTES--Eugene City Council 11 :30 a.m. May 20, 1992 Page 8