Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/07/1977 Meeting M I NUT E S . EUGENE CITY COUNCIL September 7, 1977 Adjourned meeting from August 31, 1977, of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was called to order by Mayor Gus Keller at 12 noon on September 7, 1977, at King1s Table, Oakway Mall, with the following Council members present: \ Eric Haws, D. W. Hamel, Tom Williams, Ray Bradley, Jack Delay, Scott Lieuallen, Brian Obie, and Betty Smith. I. Items from Mayor and Council A. Councilor absence--Mr. Bradley will be out of town September 12 through 16. B. Metro Plan Policy Committee--Mr. Bradley announced a meeting Thursday, 7 a.m., Restaurant off Mohawk Boulevard, to consider amendments to the work policy which the various jurisdictions have adopted. He noted Mr. Delay would be attending as Council's repre- sentative. C. EWEB Tour--Mr. Bradley requested staff to report on the Water Master Plan and the role of the City. D. Recent Land-Use Decisions--Mr. Bradley requested staff to report to Council on some recent Oregon Supreme Court and Court of Appeals cases e regarding land-use decisions. E. Joint Meeting with Lane County Commissioners, Springfield, and Eugene City Council--Manager noted Commissioner Rust had requested a joint informal meeting to discuss various agenda items such as Womenspace, sewer problems, and update process of the 1990 Plan. The time and place would be mutually agreed upon. Manager noted the agenda would be agreed upon by an exchange of written communications. Mr. Delay did not understand the nature of the proposal. In discus- sions with Commissioner Rust, he thought the meeting was to establish agenda items which affected each jurisdiction and then each would address those agenda items in their individual meetings. Mayor Keller mentioned if there was to be discussion about sewers, there was already a mechanism functioning, noting the Wastewater Management Commission. He said there might be a need for more in- formation about what the Commissioners really wanted to discuss in that regard. Mr. Obie said he felt Council should consider an agenda item regarding exploration of more equitable distribution of funds generated by the County relative to urban and nonurbanized areas, perhaps on a per capita basis. Mr. Haws and and Mr. Delay concurred with the impor- tance of that topic. Mr. Delay continued that he thought it important e for elected officials to create some mechanism for working on the problem, to lay ground rules to insure where the money is going. Minutes 9/7/77--1 ~~ , It was consensus that Councilors would bring suggested agenda " items to Council meeting September 14. II. Code Revision: Section 2.770(3) Re: Municipal Court Operations--Memo . and ordinance distributed. Manager referred Councilors to memo from JUdge Frank E. Bocci, explaining the housekeeping change in the Code. The section now reads that, "Immediately after entry of plea of not guilty, the case shall be tried; unless for good cause an adjournment is granted." The proposed change will read that after entry of plea of not guilty the case will be "placed upon the trial docket for trial in the normal course." Judge Bocci reiterated this was a housekeeping amendment, and was avail- able to answer questions. He expressed appreciation for Council's adjust- ing the agenda to hear this item early so he could leave the meeting. Council Bill 1535--Concerning the Municipal Court amending Section 2.770(3) of Eugene Code and declaring an emergency was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting it be read in full. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, 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. Moti on carri ed unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18048. e III. Acceptance of FAA grant offer for $1,054,811 for Airport Improvements--Page 1 of Grant offer distributed. Bob Shelby, Airport Manager, said this was the first step in an airport improvement program. In revi ewi ng the development of funds, he noted that passengers contributed 8 percent, seven and one-half cents per gallon came from aviation fuel tax, registration fee on domestic airplanes, and a three-dollar departure tax on international departures. He said there were $3.2 billion in the trust fund and this grant was a portion of those monies. He said these funds are allocated on the basis of the activity at any given airport. If the $1+ million grant to Eugene were not accepted, the funds would revert back to the federal government. He said a grant amendment was expected in 60 days to cover $600,000 for the fiscal year beginning October 1. The airport hopes to receive more than $3 million from the federal Department of Transportation for 1979 improvements. The City IS share of the two-year project may be as much as $885,000, which might require a general bond issue to finance. The Airport Commission had voted to request Council to place the bond issue for this amount on the November ballot. Mr. Williams asked if the measure really needed to be voted on in November. Mr. Shelby responded it could wait until May, but it was hoped that the Public Works Department could begin the actual construction of the $1.7 million in the next construction season. Ms. Smith noted since there would be other possible election measures next year, she felt the November -- ballot would be the best time for this issue. She questioned Mr. Shelby as to whether the improvements would entail additional staff. Mr. Shelby replied no City staff, but there may be additional airline staff. 615 Minutes 917177--2 Mr. Lieuallen felt it critical that the public understand the bond issue e for the City's shar~ of the project will be repaid by the airlines and not the tax payers. It was consensus that Council would pursue a ballot election date at Council meeting September 14, with staff providing a memo to Coun- cilors showing the purpose of funding. Resolution No. 2746--Authorizing acceptance of FAA Grant offer for airport improvement, ADAP Project No. 6-41-0018-04 was read by number and title. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to adopt the resolution. Motion carried unanimously. I. Items from Mayor and Council Continued F. Sunday Library Opening--Manager stated that the Budget Committee had asked that specific plans be worked out in some detail for Council, referring to a memo distributed by James Meeks, Library Manager. James Meeks said Sunday openings of the Library would occur from October 2 through May 21, 1978. He said it was expected that over 1,000 people would be using the Library on most Sundays and felt it essen- tial to be fully staffed. He felt the generated action would neces- sitate the spending of approximately $18,000, it would change sche- dules of regular staff rather than paying overtime. e Mr. Lieuallen asked if the expected use were underestimated, would the staff be able to handle more people using the Library on Sundays? Mr. Meeks replied the slack would be taken up with CETA workers, work study students, volunteers, and some of the regular experienced staff. Mr. Williams requested City Manager give his recommendation. Manager replied Option 1, by using more professional staff, would theoretically give better service but that might make staff unhappy and COsts $3,000 morc. He felt there was not much difference in either option. Mr. Obie felt that through the budget process $20,000 had been allocated for the Sunday opening and he was not sure Council had to vote on the proposal. Assistant Manager noted Budget Committee had not made the actual transfer of funds and had asked City Council to authorize that transfer. Mr. Williams said he had no problem with the City Council transferring the funds, but he was not sure Council was the proper place to make the personnel staffing. He thought that should be the City Manager's function and felt uncomfortable with making personnel policies. Mr. Haws agreed that Council could give authority for transfer of funds and have City Manager decide on the staffing. e Minutes 9/7/77--3 ~.b Mr. Delay asked Mr. Meeks to characterize the major difference in Library functions between Options 1 and 2. Mr. Meeks replied with Option 1 more professional staff would be on hand to give better e service in the reference and children's areas. Mr. Delay felt Council had sufficient information to instruct staff to prepare the necessary resolution for transfer of funds. He felt a promise had been made to the public to allow Sunday openings. Mr. Lieuallen said he understood Mr. Williams' comment and agreed he did not feel Council should be going directly to staff but should go through the City Manager. However, he felt this was different in that it was a policy question, the public does want the Library open on Sunday and a commitment had been made by the City for that to occur. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to authorize City Manager to transfer funds not to exceed $20,000 for opening the Library on Sunday, beginning October 2 and closing after May 21, 1978. Mr. Hamel requested that Library staff keep Council informed as to the increased use of the Library on Sundays. Vote was taken on the motion which carried unanimously. G. Electrical Energy Conservation Program--Memo and graph distributed to Council. Greg Page reported to Council the electrical energy con- servation program seemed to be working well and the program would be continued. He said the average cutback in energy consumption had been 18 percent. The most substantial cutback had occured with the sewage treatment plant. Mr. Delay questioned whether more exploration could be done regarding e street lighting as that seemed to be the biggest consumer. He wondered if staff could re-examine policies to see what could be done. Mr. Page replied in regard to street lighting there were two problems: Establishing a policy for new lighting areas; and what to do with the existing street lighting. He said there were possibilities: replacing some street-light photo cells with time cells which would be quite expensive; and try to curtail the number of hours in use. Mr. Lieuallen asked if staff had pursued the private-commercial sector to request less consumption in their lighting. Mr. Page replied the responsibility for private use had been left to EWEB. Manager noted that area of savings and conservation had been incorporated into a statewide plan for emergency use by the governor. Mr. Delay felt perhaps Council should take some sort of action independent of the governor's emergency plan to save energy and taxpayers money. Mayor Keller noted Mr. Page had been working very hard on the problem of street lighting, noting frustration and hassles involved. He said an important factor was consideration for safety of citizens in the city. Minutes 9/7/77--4 e '. ~& ........ e IV. Public Hearing--That Portion of Lewis Street located between Jackson and Adams Streets (Safley) (SV 76-9) Unanimously recommended by Planning Commission July 11, 1977. Jim Saul, Planning Department, referred Councilors to a map of the area. He said it should be noted the property south of the street vacation is Sladden Park. The City had required the adjacent property owner to the west to submit the vacation request. The specific purpose of the request is to enhance Sladden Park. He said the Planning Commission had recommended street vacation based on two conditions: 1) Retention of a public utility easement for a sewer on the Lewis Street right-of-way; and 2) Construction of a driveway to Tax Lot 1401 and a turnaround area immediately south of Tax Lot 1401 by the developer of the River1s Edge PUD. Public Hearing was held with no testimony presented. Council Bill 1534--Vacating that portion of Lewis Street between Adams and Jackson streets was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Council member present requesting it be read in full. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, 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. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. e Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Ro 11 call vote. All Council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18047. V. Planned Unit Development Regulation--Proposed Revisions--Memo distributed to to Council. Manager noted the Planned Unit Development Regulation Code amendments had been discussed May 9,1977, by Council. The Planning Commission had recommended that PUD regulations be revised to transfer review of both diagrammatic and preliminary applications to a hearings offici al . The Council took tentative action to transfer review of preli- minary application to a hearings official with diagrammatic applications still being reviewed by the Planning Commission. The matter had been considered by the Planning Commission, with three alternatives recommended. Manager said staff would prepare an ordinance for a Monday night meeting for whichever alternative was chosen by Council. Mr. Saul reported that July 18 the Planning Commission reviewed the tentative action of the City Council and the majority vote preferred to keep both stages together and both to be reviewed by a hearings official. The Commission's second choice would be that both stages of the PUD reg- ulations be heard by the Planning Commission; the third choice would be to have the diagrammatic stage heard by the Planning Commission and preliminary stage heard by the hearings official. He said at this point - it would be helpful to have City Council give final direction for the appropriate ordinance. Minutes 9/7/77--5 ~19 - - - - , He noted for Council there were a number of other amendments that were included in the original report aimed at improving the review process and staff would like to see those amendments acted upon. He . noted also the Planning Commission had not submitted a formal recom- mendation regarding the question of appeal, saying this had been one of the concerns of Council about the PUD regulations being heard by a hearings official. The question of the appeals procedure was a policy choice in which the City Council could stipulate the appeal to the City Council rather than to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission was concerned that there not be a two-stage appeal process. In response to a question by Mr. Delay, Mr. Saul said there had been a difference of opinion as the Planning Commission continued to look at the alternatives. However, the majority opinion took the position the best course of action would be for both stages to be heard by a hearings official. The minority position was for the two stages to be sp 1 i t. Mr. Lieuallen asked Mr. Saul to explain in more detail the staff and Commission's objections to splitting the stages. He thou gh t the diagrammatic approval was the essential stage and wondered why the Planning Commission had such strong objections to turning over the preliminary approval stage to a hearings official. Mr. Saul prefaced his remarks by saying he would have to interpret the various Commis- sioners' feelings. He said there had been much discussion at the Planning.Commission level about the idea that the first stage involved subjective decisions and the second stage objective decisions. He thought a better term might be lithe degree to which one is required to e exercise judgment. II He said it was necessary to look at the factors to be assessed at each stage noting street improvements, sewer systems, utilities, and school systems. He said also it was necessary to make a determination that the project is consistent with the City plans and policies. The purpose of the first stage is to try to assess the impact of the development on the community as a whole and the sur- rounding neighborhood. The purpose of the second stage deals more with the actual physical design of the project, siting the architec- tural design. He said judgment would be exercised at both levels. Mr. Lieua11en reviewed his appreciation for the opportunity to deal with the land-use problem regarding the diagrammatic phase in the River1s Edge appeal heard in January. He felt land use was a very important issue and would be more so in the future. He felt that discussion in that particular appeal showed how important the dia- grammatic stage was. However, he would not object to splitting the two stages as long as there would be an appeal to the City Council and could see why staff did not want a two-step appeal process. Mr. Obie expressed the feeling that the citizens should have the access to elected officials regarding land-use matters. Mr. Wi 11 i ams said his concern was that people were making the assumption that elected officials have some decision-making authority. He understood these were quasi-judicial decisions and more a question of whether the applicant was in compliance with City Code. He felt land-use decisions are legalized decisions and belong with a group that has that kind of e legal training, i.e., a Hearings Official. Minutes 9/7/77--6 ~&O Mr. Long said Mr. William's statement was essentially accurate. He said the main question in these decisions was "does the proposal . conform to the standards set forth in the City code." He said it was an administrative judgment. Mr. Delay felt this was a judgmental process, and the Council is elected to exercise its judgment. He said if the appeal process was not to City Council, Council would not be in a position to deal with problems and/or make changes and adjustments to City Code. He felt City Council should be exposed to possible defects in the code. Ms. Smith expressed her opinion that one body should hear both stages. She would support the Planning Commission's recommendation that both be heard by the hearings official, and noted this would not lock in the Council as it could review and change the process in the future. She also noted her support of this decision by citing the workload of the Planning Commission. Mr. Lieuallen said he would like the Planning Commission to hear both stages. He felt it was necessary to define City Council.s accounta- bility and if the process went through a hearings official to the court, there would not be that accountability. His understanding of the Fasano procedures was that they were designed to keep the process open and not politicize it. Mr. Long said the Council notion that they decide matters on esta- blished criteria predates the Fasano design by a great deal. He noted e the Council is dealing with judgmental decisions in that it has to be a fair and open process; and that it is appropriate that the decisions be made by elected officials. Ms. Smith reiterated her feeling that both stages should be heard by one body, and did not have any problem with an appeal being made to the City Council. She strongly suggested Council try this method for a certain period of time and review the process after the trial period. Mr. Saul said the Planning Commission would probably like to see the appeals, but would recognize that as a Council decision. Mr. Bradley brought up the issue of the appeal process and whether it would be a matter of review of record or by de novo. Mr. Long replied it was the Council's ultimate decision to chose whatever form of appeal it wished. Mr. Bradley pursued the idea of a de novo appeal, citing allowance for open discussion and fairness to citizens. Mr. Saul said Council could face both theoretical and practical problems with a de novo approach. The practical problem could involve that frequently in an appeal hearing it is difficult to tell a citizen he cannot bring up a certain topic. The theoretical problem would include that under such a process, it might open the door to the possibility of a citizen saying, "forget it as to the Planning Commission hearing," and wait for the City Council hearing. He felt there had to be some determination made by Council as to whether the earlier decision made was in error. e Minutes 9/7/77--7 toEl , Mr. Long, in regard to the de novo appeal process, said it was like having two original trials. He said it would set up all sorts of possible strategies, i.e., delays, unfavorable position of legal , talents and economic resources, and numerous problems for staff. He . said, based on past experience, the two original hearings are not efficient and .sometimes not fair. Mr. Obie wondered what the present practice was on the appeals for PUD's. Mr. Saul replied it is now based on lion the record.1I He noted, however~ there had only been one appeal to date under PUD regulations. Mayor Keller felt that both stages should be heard by one group. Mr. Delay was willing to go along with that as long as appeal to City Council was maintained. Mayor Keller noted there would not be that many appeals based on the past experience, and this would be for a trial period only and could be changed in the future. Mr. Lieuallen saw three issues involved: 1) splitting the stages, about which he did not feel strongly; 2) the two levels of appeal, about which he felt a little more strongly--noting he was willing to give it a try but felt the Planning Commission should not be bypassed so there should be a two-step appeal process; and 3) the City Council would have to be accountable through the whole process. He said he did not oppose staff's proposals as long as the appeal process came to the City Council. He felt the appeal also should be lion the record.1I He requested legal staff to explore possibilities for creating a mechanism to accommodate new testimony in these quasi-judicial hearings. Mr. Haws did not feel a two-stage appeal process was proper, but it should be appealed either to Planning Commission or City Council, e because of the time element and money involved. Mr. Obie said, as he saw the proposal, the Planning Commission was giving up part of its workload by allowing the two stages to be heard by a hearings official. He felt the City Council should still be the appealing body, however. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Williams, that both diagrammatic and preliminary stages of PUD regulations be reviewed by a hear- ings official, with one appeal to the City Council, with review of the process in nine months. Mr. Bradley said he would not support the motion as he felt the appeal should be IIde novoll to allow open citizen participation. Mr. Lieuallen did not agree, saying it is not that kind of an open process and legal staff could create some mechanism for ground rules to accommodate new testimony. Mr. Delay concurred with Mr. Lieuallen saying Council was not deciding the exact appeals process now, but could address that issue later. It was consensus that Council would request legal counsel to come back with possibilities for creating more open testimony in quasi-judicial hearings. Vote was taken on the motion which carried with Bradley voting no; Haws abstaining; and all other Council members voting aye. . Minutes 9/7/77--8 It;81 . VI. Approval of Minutes--August 31, 1977 Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to approve Council Minutes, . August 31, 1977. Roll call vote. Motion carried unanimously. VII. Liquor License: Change of Ownership and Trade Name--From Lowe Markets, Inc., to Grocery Carts, Inc.; 1645 Coburg Road; applicant, Bill McCabe Manager noted staff had no objections and found all papers in order. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to approve and forward to OLCC. Motion carried unanimously. VI I. Improvement Petition Paving, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer on Best Lane from lone Avenue to 1300 feet north (1494); assessable costs: paving, 61%; City costs $2,000. Manager noted this was a complicated issue as it was necesary to acquire right-of-way to pave the street. He noted Council had taken a tour of the Best Lane area, and said the subdivision would be developed by Breeden. Brothers. Don Allen, Public Works Director, said staff was requesting approval of the improvement petition with the following conditions: 1) The developer provide access to the subdivision over this particular street; 2) The developer acquire the right-of-way and pay the cost, or provide the City the right-of-way; 3) The developer pay for the actual administrative costs if the City does acquire right-of-way by eminent domain. Mr. Allen said in the past the City had secured right-of-way only on arterials and - not on residential streets, but the City could exercise the right of eminent domain to acquire this right-of-way. Mr. Allen noted for Council that if it were necessary for the City to exercise the right of eminent domain, the matter would come back before Council and Council could address the issue of cost estimates to be billed to the developer at that time. In response to a question from Mr. Delay, Mr. Allen said the City had not acquired right-of-way on residential streets but had reserved the funding only for arterials. Mr. Haws wondered if the improvement petition were denied, what alterna- tives the developer would have. Mr. Allen said Council would then be in a position of whether or not to authorize improvements in the subdivision. Mr. Obie wondered if this was a situation of forcing people to pay for development of a street that does not need to be developed, noting that 39 percent of the people along the street do not feel it is necessary. Mr. Hamel said from taking a tour of the area there was no doubt the street should be developed before the subdivision begins. Mr. Lieuallen asked if the staff were asking the developer to pay for the ri ght-of-way and also the street improvement. Mr. Allen replied the developer would only provide for the right-of-way and this was a petition project so the property owners would be assessed for the street improvement. He noted the project would go through the public hearing process. In response to a question from Mr. Bradley, Mr. Allen said requiring the developer to bear the entire cost of the paving was not an option. - Minutes 9/7/77--9 b83 4 Leigh Iverson, 2869 Taylor, representative for Breeden Brothers, said they had been working since November, 1976, with Public Works Department on . this improvement. He said there were only three parties on the street who were not in agreement with the petition. He said there were plans to start construction immediately on the subdivision. However, the subdi- vider would wait until the street is completed before any lots would be so 1 d. .If the contractor were to have to wait until the street was improved before starting the subdivision, it would be nine months, the project would lose 68-70 jobs, and there might be a loss of $3/4 milliGn. He also noted the need in the city for lower-income housing and cited the instance of a Peppertree Subdivision which was to serve lower-income people for an 18-month period when, in fact, it was sold out in a four-month period. He said this was the only land available in the Willakenzie area and it was going to be developed for lower-income people. He said the subdivi- sion could move ahead and would be ready by the time the street pavings were to be done. He noted the Public Works staff had approached them and asked them to spend $6,500 to purchase the right-of-way and felt this was the first time, ever, a subdivider had been required to purchase a right-of- way. He felt asking the developer to pay the administrative costs if the exercise of eminent domain were used by the City was also a precedent. He said no actual costs had been presented to the developer. Mr. Bradley wondered if the subdivision were not to go in, if the improve- ments would be made. Mr. Allen replied no, the staff would not initiate them and the people in the area did not want them in at this time either. Ms. Smith said it seemed there were some details which still needed to be worked out between Public Works and the developer, and wondered if Council - could still approve the petition at this time. Mayor Keller said that was an al ternative. Mr. Williams felt it to be a logical alternative, as the eminent domain question would come back to Council and at that time costs could be considered and more information would be before Council. Mr. Obie moved, seconded .by Mr. Hamel, to approve the petition subject to the conditions as outlined. Motion carried with all Council members present voting aye except Mr. Bradley voting no. VIII. Council Assistance--Memos distributed. Mr. Williams stated his feeling for Council assistance was a need for an improved briefing paper laying out the options and choices. He suggested it include what Council was being asked to do, the options available, and what it should do. Mr. Williams left the meeting. Manager directed Council's attention to memo dated August 31 and asked them to discuss the outline and to develop criteria to meet the objec- tives. He noted the memo distributed at this meeting goes into more detai 1 . Minutes 9/7/77--10 e ~glf - " . Paget Engen reviewed the process in which the need was identified by Council at its work session in June, a memo had been sent to Council August 11, stating what the problems looked like and the criteria and som~ solutions. Subsequent to that, Councilors were interviewed and that information was now being used regarding the problems, criteria, and solutions. Mr. Lieuallen said he felt there was a conflict in the August 31 memo under number one--exploring alternatives and implications, "the Council often does not get the benefit of staff's consideration of alternatives other than the final recommendation.1I He felt there was a conflict between that statement and item three at the bottom of the page saying there is little need to formalize a process for exploring minority opinions. Ms. Engen replied the question was, do we need more time given to decisions on minor opinions, is there a need to work back in the process to make sure minority opinions are presented. Mr. Delay wondered if the question was whether or not the City as a whole should be working on minority problems or whether City Council should be developing its own minority opinions. Mr. Lieuallen wondered if it were a good idea to use staff to develop minority opinions of one Councilor, saying he felt providing assistants was a good idea. Mayor Keller questioned Counci10rs as to whether they felt they were spending less hours in Council work at this time than they were three months ago. Mr. Delay expressed feeling a very tight time crunch. He felt he should be doing more background and research, as there were e major issues coming before the Council. He felt he was not doing an adequate job and was not as advised and prepared as he would like to be. He did not like the feeling of just reacting to issues but would rather have a basic understanding of the issues in order to make good decisions. Ms. Smith said in regard to staff aides, that kind of assistance would be important for Councilors' briefing on major issues like updating the 1990 Plan. However, she felt a personal problem with having one person assigned to her, noting she felt as an elected official she was responsible to her ward to perform certain duties and attend certain meetings. Mr. Delay responded that different Council members would have different needs and do have different amounts of time available to them for research and background ma te ria 1 . He felt a staff assistant which would enable a Councilor to be more effective to be a good idea, noting it would not be forced on anyone Councilor but the Councilor could use the aide in whatever way the Councilor felt it important to him/her. Mr. Lieuallen said the reasons he felt assistants would be important were that there were fairly complicated issues coming up in the next few months and it takes him some time to understand the full implications of the decisions required of him. He needed time to talk to people and to study the background material to develop clarity. He felt if Councilors knew of issues coming up ahead of time, noting a two-month period, he would feel more comfortable in moving toward that decision. He said a Councilor should not ask the aide to make decisions but the aide could be used to do e research, set up meetings, and various other possibilities. Minutes 9/7/77--11 loBS - I : , Mayor Keller noted for Councilors that decision making is always the toughest part. He said sometimes it's easier to procrastinate. Even in . having aides do research, he noted that would be taking another person's opinion. He said the haste with which the Council makes decisions may bother all Councilors. However, he noted Council had the alternative of putting off any major decision for a couple of weeks for further time for study and research. He noted his empathy with the frustration of Councilors in trying to do a good job, saying this was a part-time job that takes all of a Councilor's spare time. However, he felt Councilors should be aware that as time passes, the process could become easier for them. He noted, .again, he understood the frustration in that Councilors are not able to attend all of the meetings which lead up to the major decisions that are made by Council. Such attendance might help Councilors to feel more informed, but most simply do not have that time. Mr. Delay noted that Councilr$ally.puts'off making decisions, citing the item of Council assistance talked about at the June 10 meeting, with the hopes that personnel would be hired and an experiment organized by Sep- tember 4. September 7 is the first time the Council has considered the issue in any discussion. He felt it was more true that there was not adequate debate or adequate discussion because of time pressures. He cited a great need for some type of Council assistance, noting a former Council had entertained the idea of financial reimbursement, and the fact that seven of nine votes of the present Council had listed this as the number three priority item. He said these indicated there was some per- ception of a need not being fulfilled. He said Council had before it a proposal that was going to reinforce and support the present form of government in assisting individual Councilors to make them more effective . in their jOb and to better serve the public. He cited his feeling of wanting to do a better job for the community but that he did not want to be paid or want to change the system of government. He reiterated his feeling of a need for Council assistance. Mr. Obie said he heard Mayor Keller saying if Councilors would just stick around, the job would become easier. He said he found himself in opposi- tion to that statement. Mayor Keller indicated he was trying to let Councilors know it was how they got through the frustrating period that is the most difficult time. Mr. Obie said he felt the only thing that kept him from being a more effective Councilor was available time, that it would be necessary to take time away from something else or for Councilors to be provided assistance in some form. He felt it very important to become a more effective Councilor and tp retain the citizen form of City Council rather than a professional one. Mr. Haws said he felt he was doing a superficial job and not doing the kind of job he would like to be doing for the City. He felt there was a need for some change in the system and thought Council should act on Mr. Delay's proposal for Council assistance in order to allow the Councilors to make use of that assistance to become more effective. Mayor Keller expressed appreciation to the thoughts of the Councilors, noting it was typical of the Eugene area for citizens to want to do a good job. . Minutes 9/7/77--12 ~g~ < Manager said Council would continue its discussion on the September 21 .. meeting and, hopefully, Council could arrive at some conclusions. He noted that the topic of transportation would be changed from that date. Ms. Smith requested that staff provide Councilors with fairly extensive information on the economic development discussion for next Wednesday. Manager noted that some materials would be distributed Friday, September 9. Mr. Delay requested that Council assistance be allocated adequate time for in-depth discussion. He said one alternative would be a Charter amend- ment, and asked staff to take the steps necessary so Council would be in a position to act and place it the November ballot. He requested that City Attorney figure out the basic vehicle for implementation. x. Quasi-Judicial Hearings Scheduled: 1. Rezoning from R-l to RP-SR for Tax Lot 9400 and from R-1 to R-2 SR Tax Lots 9200 and 9300, property located between 13th Avenue and 14th Avenue west of Chambers (Janisse) (Z 77-27)--scheduled September 12, 1977 2. Concurrent rezoning and annexation, property located between 1-105 and the Willamette River, west of Country Club Road (Zellner) (Z 71-34 and A 71-N), to City C-2 PD--scheduled September 26, 1977 - U~y ~~~' and passed the meeting was adjourned. C~arles T. Henry City Manage r CTH:DT/jpCM12a16 - Minutes 9/7/77--13 ~87