Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/13/1980 Meeting .. e M I NUT E S EUGENE CITY COUNCIL February 13, 1980 Adjourned meeting from February 11, 1980, of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon,. was called to order by His Honor Mayor Gus Keller February 13, 1980, 11:45 a.m., Council Chambers, with the following Councilors present: Betty Smith, Scott Lieuallen, Jack Delay, D. W. Hamel, Eric Haws, Brian Obie, Gretchen Miller, and Emily Schue. I. ITEMS FROM MAYOR AND COUNCIL, APPOINTMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS, AGENDA ADJUSTMENTS e e A. Goodwill Bowling Challenge--Mayor Keller introduced Mr. Bin Bain, Lane County Assessor, who issued a challenge to the City Council to participate in a bowling match for Goodwill, on Saturday, March 8, at Emerald Lanes. Mr. Bain indicated that either he or Mr. Lieuallen can be contacted for additional information. Mr. Bain stated that the County team would consist of the five Commissioners, the Sheriff, the District Attorney, and himself, or the representatives of those people. He also indicated the County team is challenging the legisla- tive delegation from Lane County and expressed his hope to see the Councilors at the bowling match. Mayor Keller indicated that he is looking forward to beating the County team. Ms. Smith moved to appoint Scott Lieuallen to be the coach for the City Council team. Ms. Schue seconded the motion. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. B. Correspondence from Lane Transit District Regarding Downtown Transpor- tation--Ms. Miller referred to the letter from Kenneth H. Kohnen, President of the Board of Directors of Lane Transit District. This letter is in reference to development of transportation in the down~ town area. She noted that a letter has been drafted indicating Council support for improvements in the public transportation system in Eugene. This would be in concert with the adopted transportation plan which establishes a goal of diversion of automobile trips to mass transit. Ms. Miller suggested that the Council authorize Mayor Keller to sign this letter and deliver it to the Secretary of Transpor- tation, Neil Goldschmidt, when he speaks in Eugene on February 20. This letter would be in support of keeping public transit in the downtown area. She also indicated that various hearings would be held on the study that is being done and felt that support for potential funding would be much stronger if this letter were given to Mr. Goldschmidt. Consensus was to authorize the letter and Mayor Keller responded that he wo~ld be happy to carry the message to Secretary Goldschmidt. 2/13/80--1 " C. Downtown Employees Parking--Mr. Haws stated that he had been approached by a citizen with a petition bearing approximately 1,000 signatures who would like to be able to present this at an upcoming Council meeting, preferably on Monday night. Mr. Keller asked for clarifica- ~ tion of the purpose of the petition. Mr. Henry indicated that the petition was in regard to the Downtown Development Board's parking management program and the dissatisfaction of various employees with that program. He also noted that he had received a. memo from Nita Robertson regarding downtown parking, dated February 7, 1980. The memo contained a request from Ms. Robertson to be placed on the agenda for the Monday night meeting on February 25. The memo also stated that they would like an opportunity to discuss the present downtown parking program and possible alternatives to this program. Nine hundred two signatures have already been collected with about 20 additional petitions still to be collected. The memo also indicated that the estimated amount of time for discussion of this item would be one hour. Mr. Henry noted that it would be proper to have this issue placed on either the Monday, February 25 agenda or on the Wednesday, February 27 agenda. Mayor Keller asked whether this group had appeared already before the Downtown Development Board; Mr. Henry responded that he did not believe they had. Mr. Lieuallen arrived at the meeting. Mr. Haws indicated that it was his understanding the primary interest of the group was to get the process started for dealing with this matter. He also asked whether there exists a policy and/or procedure for the public to present petitions to the Council. Ms. Miller stated that she would be happy to hear from anyone or any group who would give advance notice for an item to be placed on the agenda. Ms. Smith indicated her support in hearing from any group, but suggested that it might be helpful in this instance for this group to meet first with the Downtown Development Board before coming to the Council. Mr. Obie agreed with Ms. Smith's comments. Ms. Miller stated that, although it would be helpful if the group would meet first with the Downtown Development Board, if they chose not to do that she would still be willing .to hear from them on the issue. Mayor Keller indicated agreement in referring the group to the the Downtown Development Board since they developed the program. He felt, if the group met with the Council first, they would still be most likely referred to the Downtown Development Board. Mr. Haws and Ms. Schue were in agreement that a policy was needed regarding the process for citizens to present petitions to the Council. Ms. Schue further indicated that she does not want any citizen to feel that the Council is unwilling to listen to people, even though they may refer them to another agency or Board after hearing the issue. Mr. Henry stated that he felt the proper course should be to let the group know that the matter would probably be referred to the Downtown Development Board and suggest to the group that they try DDS first. e 2/13/80--2- e However, if they are unwilling to do so then they could present the item to the Council. Mayor Keller indicated that the strategies for th i spark i ng progr am were implemented on a tr i a 1 bas is,. and if peop 1 e feel these strategies are not working, then the Downtown Development Board would want to hear from citizens rather than receive a mandate from the City Council. Mr. Henry further added that the group would have to go to the Downtown Development Board, either as the first step or after speaking with the Council. Ms. Smith indicated her preference would be to suggest the group go to the Downtown Development Board first. Consensus was that if they chose not to go to the DDS first, the item should be placed on a Council agenda. Mr. Haws indicated agreement with this, but still felt the need for formulation of some policy regarding petitions. Mr. Henry indicated that there is a process presently for handling of petitions. Generally, they are brought to him and then he or the staff refers them to the Council. Rarely is a request involving a petition rejected by the staff. However, if a petition were rejected by staff, citizens would still have the option of presenting the petitions or the issue to one or more Councilors. Mr. Henry also indicated that occasionally he will refer citizens to another board or agency first. Ms. Miller noted agreement with Mr. Haws regarding formulation of a pOlicy; she also felt that anyone who wished to be placed on an agenda and to be heard should be allowed to do so, even if it would be more productive if they met with another agency or board first. Mr. Delay noted agreement with Mr. Henry that it might be more produc- tive for the citizens to meet with the related agency or board first, but if they do wish to appear on the agenda it would depend on the size of the agenda. Mayor Keller stated that he was in agreement with the current policy. He felt that not having a formally defined procedure allows for flexibility in dealing with these cases. e Mayor Keller noted that some issues probably would still need to be presented to Council first, since there might not be an appropriate board or agency to refer them to. He further stated, however, that in this case he would prefer that this group of citizens be encouraged to meet with the Downtown Development Board first. Mr. Henry further elaborated that this group noted they would be boycotting downtown businesses before they appear on the agenda. D. Appointments to Human Rights Commissions (Memo distributed)--Mr. Henry noted that the Subcommittee recommendations for appointment to the Commissions on the Rights of Handicapped, Aging, and Minorities had been presented to the Council. At its February 6, 1980, meeting, the Subcommittee mov.ed to recommend the following appointments. e 2/13/80--3 The Commission on the Rights of Handicapped recommended members are: Collin Gray, 750 River Road; Connie Woods, 4830 Garnet; Bjo Ashwill, 2936 Wi 11 amette; all with termsendi ng January 1. 1983. The recom- mended alternates are: Irene Richman, 1333 Oak Patch #38; and Patrick tit Wallace, 2499 Oak. Mr. Henry indicated the Subcommittee motion had carried unanimously for these recommendations. The Commission on the Rights of Aging recommended the following appointments: G. G. Goldthwaite, 2310 Van Ness; Mindy Coombs, 3790 Willamette; and Karla Chambers, 1563 Arthur; all with terms ending January 1, 1983. Mr. Henry indicated additional. recommendations would be forthcoming and that the motion from the Subcommittee had .carried unanimously for these recommendations. Recommended appointments for the Commission on the Rights of Minorities were: John Cadena, 165 North Polk #9; Parthava Behesht-Nejad, PO Box 3387; and Abe Brooks, 523 Antelope Way; all with terms ending January 1, 1983. The recommended alternate was Marcine Anderson, 1325 West 15th Avenue. The recommendations carried unanimously by the Subcommittee. Ms. Smith noted that although there are still some positions available for members and alternates in the Human Rights Commissions, these are the people who have been interviewed and are recommended. Mr. Lieuallen commented that there are still some positions open due to inadequate interest in the positions. However, the majority of the people who did apply were quite an impressive group of people. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, that the recommend a- ... tions for appointments to the Commissions on the Rights of Handicap- ~ ped, Aging, and Minorities be approved. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. E. Meetings--There is a joint work session with Council and the Eugene Renewal Agency at 12:45 p.m. today following the Council meeting. There is a Budget Committee meeting Thursday, February 14, 7:30 p.m. Thursday, February 14, there is a Community Development meeting on the Block Grant Program. Energy Board meeting will be held February 27. Assessment panel meeting will be held Monday, February 18. Mr. Henry indicated that Mr. Hamel would not be able to attend and another Council person would be needed to attend this meeting. Ms. Miller volunteered. F. Revised Monthly Financial Report (Report distributed)--Mr. Henry noted that thlS 1S a two-part report showlng both revenue and expenditures. He further noted that this is the December report and that the next report will include the budget cuts. e 2/13/80--4 e G. National League of Cities Conference--Mr. Henry asked the Councilors to think about who might wish to attend the National League of Cities Conference being held in March during spring vacation. Ms. Smith asked if any staff might be planning to attend and Mr. Henry responded that, at this point, no one from the staff had been assigned to attend this meeting, which would be the Washington legislative conference, and participation would help ensure continuation of the revenue sharing and block grant programs. 11. APPROVE COUNCIL MINUTES OF JANUARY 28, 1980, AND JANUARY 30, 1980 Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to approve Council minutes of January 28, 1980, and January 30, 1980. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. 111. PUBLIC HEARINGS e e A. Alley Vacation for St. Mary's Catholic Church (AV 79-3) (Map distributed)-- Mr. Henry noted that this proposed alley vacation had been reviewed by the Planning Commission and there would be a fee of approximately $16,000 for this vacation. Manager introduced Don Gilman, Public Works, and Bill French, Planning Department. Mr. French noted that this vacation is based on a condition of a blanket easement to provide maintenance access to existing EWEB and City facilities. He also noted that this is a 14-foot-wide alley. Mayor Keller opened item to public hearing. Dick Williams, representative for St. Mary's Church, indicated he would be available to answer any questions. Mr. Henry suggested that the council bill be given a first reading and that the second reading be given when the money is deposited. CB 2076--Authorizing alley vacation for property located from Lincoln Street to Charnelton Street between West 10th Avenue and West 11th Avenue. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, that the bill be read the first time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that second reading be given upon receipt of the deposit. Ms. Miller indicated that she had a general concern that sometimes the Council acts in haste approving alley vacations and she would like to make certain that no alley vacations are being approved that would be considered a part of the downtown transportation network. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. 2/13/80--5 "- B. Street Vacation for Countryman, Inc. (SV 79-4) (Map distributed)-- Mr. Henry noted that this street vacation is an old street that is an existing right-of-way.' He also noted that since it is an exchange of ~ right-of-way, no charges would be assessed to this street vacation. Mayor Keller opened public hearing. There being no testimony, public hearing was closed. CB 2077--Authorizing street vacation of a public right-of-way located between West 25th Avenue and West 25th Place, north of Garfi e 1 d Street. ' , Mr. French stated that, the right-of-way would not be extended north toward West 25th, since there are single-family residences which would prevent the extension of Garfield. He also stated that the ,Planning Commission did review this and noted that existing easements must be . . ..pf malntalned. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, that the bill be read the second tim~ 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. t Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, that the bill be approved and given final ~assage. Roll call vote; all Councilors present voting aye, the bi 11 was decl ared passed and numbered 18579. e C. Easement Vacation for Land Dynamics (EV 79-13) (Map distributed)-- Mr. Henry stated that this is an easement vacation of a sanitary sewer easement and that the Planning Commission had reviewed and approved this easement vacation. Manager introduced Mr. French who noted that this easement is being vacated and the comprehensive sewer plan has been relocated and will not be using this 30-foot easement. CB 2078--Authorizing easement vacation of a sanitary sewer easement located north of West 37th Avenue between West 35th Place and Lawrence Street. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, 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. . Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All Councilors present voting aye, ,the bill was declared passed and numbered 18580. e 2/13/80--6 IV. DISTRIBUTION OF AN ALTERNATIVE MODES BROCHURE (Ordinance distributed) 4It Mr. Henry stated that this final topic is an ordinance change to enable City staff to inform violators parking in the downtown free parking area of alternative methods of transportation. He noted that this change is being presented since the current ordinance states that it is a viola- tion to place anything other than a ticket on violators' cars. The request is to allow warnings and other notices of alternative modes of transportation to be placed on cars legally. He also stated that this is primarily a technical amendment to clarify the process in dealing with long-standing violations. Mayor Keller asked whether tickets being placed on automobiles is a violation of the current ordinance. Mr. Henry responded that tickets are not in violation, but that warnings are. Manager introduced Mr. Long, City Attorney, who stated that the current Code prohibits placing anything other than a ticket on someone else's auto. Mr. Long further stated that the purpose of the current ordinance is to prevent litter, automobile damage, and traffic hazards. However, Lane Transit District wishes to place information regarding alternative transportation modes on windshields of cars and so it would be necessary to amend the City Code if this is to be allowed. e Ms. Smith asked whether this would be applicable to both public and private property. Mr. Long responded in the affirmative. He further stated that the change would add to the present ordinance the words "or a governmental body." The intent of the amendment would be that no person other than the owner or a governmental body would be allowed to place handbills or other information on an automobile. Ms. Smith indicated if the ordinance were amended to allow governmental bodies to place notices on vehicles, it would be extremely important that this is not abused. Mayor Keller indicated his agreement. Mr. Obie indicated he was not totally supportive of promoting what appears to be a double standard where the City or other governmental bodies would be allowed to place handbills or other informational items on automobiles and private groups would not. His preference would be to initiate some sort of permit system. He felt that the amendment would need to be broadened if he was to support it. Mr. Delay suggested that perhaps narrowing the language of this ordinance might be a better solution since the purpose mentioned is a specific and selected purpose, that is, to help eliminate a particular problem dealing with select violators, not the general public. He felt more restrictive language might be appropriate. Mr. Delay asked if the language could be added to state lion a selective basis for a particular purpose." Mr. Long said that more restrictive language could be placed in the ordinance. e 2/13/80--7 e Mr. Lieuallen asked for clarification. His understanding was that the information was not to replace tickets but was to be limited to suspected violators. Mr. Long responded that the intended target is suspected violators of the free parking program. Mr. Lieuallen stated that he felt Mr. Obie's objections to be valid regarding what would appear to be a double standard allowing governmen- tal bodies to place notices on vehicles and not allowing the public to do so. Mr. Long stated that one solution might be to confine the information distribution to the downtown development district area and to confine it to information pertinent to the parking program. Mr. Henry indicated that perhaps language could be included that the governmental agency may distribute information upon specific request of an agency which could not be done unless it was approved by the Council . e Ms. Miller stated that she understood that the distinction was one of using autos as temporary billboards versus informing suspected violators of alternative modes of transportation. She also stated that perhaps the ordinance could state "provided the governmental body may place traffic regulation information in conjunction with tickets or warnings." Ms. Schue was in agreement with Ms. Miller's idea that this be looked at in conjunction with traffic violations and suspected violations and that the ordinance could be city-wide. Ms. Smith indicated that there were two courses the Council could follow: either they could amend the ordinance during the Council meeting, or they could ask staff to bring back an amended ordinance which would be tied with the violation situation, the latter being more acceptable. Mr. Lieuallen indicated that he would like whatever information is to be distributed to violators or suspected violators to include specific information on alternative modes of transportation such as riding bicycles and the problems that bicycle riders incur. Mayor Keller indicated that the consensus of the Council was to bring back amended CB 2079, the ordinance concerning distribution of handbills for alternative modes of transportation, which would amend Section 4.060 of the Eugene Code, 1971, and to declare an emergency. Upon motion duly made, seconded and passed, the meeting was adjourned to February 20, 1980. Ch~)~ City Manager ~ (Recorded by Lynda Nelson) LN:al/CM27b10 2/13/80--8