HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/12/1980 Meeting
e
M I NUT E S
EUGENE CITY COUNCIL
March 12, 1980
Adjourned meeting from February 10, 1980, of the City Council of the City
of Eugene was cal led to order by his Honor, Mayor Gus Keller at 11:45 a.m.,
with the following councilors present: Betty Smith, Scott Lieuallen, Eric
Haws, Emily Schue, Gretchen Miller, Jack Delay and D. W. Hamel. Councilor
Brian Obie was absent.
I. ITEMS FROM MAYOR AND COUNCIL, APPOINTMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS, AGENDA ADJUSTMENTS
A.
Proposed Meeting with Lane County Commissioners Regarding Airport
Jurisdictional Boundaries
e
Ms. Schue stated that she hoped the proposed meeting with the Lane
County Commissioners will be a productive one. Mr. Henry responded
that the question is one of timing. He has requested an update on the
plan in regard to the jurisdictional boundaries. The Coordinating
Committee is meeting once a week and has made progress resolving the
jurisdictional boundaries. They appear to be in agreement on most
areas, but there is one area north of the airport that has not been
worked out yet. Ms. Schue stated that she is concerned the council
respond to this invitation in a positive way. Mr. Keller stated that
the commissioners understand that we might be able to come to some
agreement. The Planning Commission presented a recommendation to the
Coordinating Committee outlining their position. Ms. Schue stated
that she wanted the matter dealt with so that the City Council would
appear in a positive light. Mayor Keller stated that a response could
be made to their letter. Ms. Smith stated that all of the councilors
had received a letter individually and there should be a joint res-
ponse. Mayor Keller directed staff to send a letter to this effect.
Mr. Delay asked if this was to include the Planning Commission recom-
mendation. Mr. Keller indicated that this is what the letter will
include.
B.
Expansion of EPAC Commission
Mr. Lieuallen stated that the council had previously talked about
expanding the EPAC Commission by two members. He would like the
manager to bring back an amendment expanding the commission from nine
to 11 members. At that time, the council could vote on the amendment
and also consider individuals to fill these positions.
C. Lane County Operational Ballot Measure
e
Mr. Haws asked for clarification regarding Lane County's proposal of
a ballot measure covering the operational costs for law enforcement.
He would like to be given additional information as it becomes avail-
able due to the possibility that such a measure would imply double
taxation. Mr. Henry responded that since the Sheriff's Office is
3/12/80--1
basically funded by a serial levy and most of their services are
outside the city limits, that for residents of Eugene it would appear tit
to have double taxation implications. Mayor Keller noted that the
County had withdrawn that proposal this morninq. Mr. Lieuallen stated
that apparently both the district attorney and the sheriff had with-
drawn that proposal from consideration.
D. Replacement on Tri-Agency Board
Mayor Keller stated that Mr. Lieuallen would like to withdraw from the
Tri-Agency Board. He would like to appoint Jack Delay to replace Mr.
Lieua1len.
Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that Jack Delay replace
Scott Lieuallen on the Tri-Agency Board. Roll call vote; motion
carried unanimously.
E. L-COG 208 Advisory Board
Mayor Keller stated that an appointment was needed for the L-COG 208
Advisory Committee. This group deals with such activities as the
River Road and Santa Clara study, the urban runoff study, the annual
sewage facility review process, population project, etc. He recom-
mended Betty Smith due to her involvement with the Metropolitan
Wastewater Management program, and stated that this committee would
perhaps meet monthly, but more likely quarterly. Mr. Lieuallen asked
who had set up this committee, and Mr. Keller responded that it was ~
created by L-COG. Mr. Lieuallen indicated interest in serving on this ~
advisory board and stated he would discuss this with Ms. Smith later.
F. Lenders' Task Force
Mayor Keller stated he would like two councilors to serve on the
Lenders' Task Force. Mr. Haws indicated he had no free time but would
volunteer anyway. Mr. Hamel indicated that he would like to serve on
this task force.
Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, that Eric Haws and
Bill Hamel be appointed to the Lenders' Task Force. Roll call
vote; motion carried unanimously.
G. Meetings
Mr. Henry announced the following meetings: Condominium Task Force--2
p.m., March 12; Board/Commission Chairpersons Workshop--6:30 p.m.,
March 12; Assessment Panel, March 17; the March 19 City Council
meeting is canceled.
e
3/12/80--2
e
II. ROUTINE ITEMS FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL
A. Approval of Council Minutes of February 20, and February 25, 1980
Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to approve council
minutes of February 20, and February 25, 1980. Roll call vote:
motion carried unanimously.
B. Call for Public Hearing (Map Distributed)
CB 2098--Call for public hearing for April 23, 1980, re: street vacation
for Lane County for property located along the north side of West
5th Avenue between Willamette Street and Charnelton Street (SV 79-7)
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. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. 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 voted aye: the bill was declared passed and numbered
18597.
e
C. Motion to Request Court to Excuse Charles T. Henry from Jury Duty
(Distributed)
Mr. Henry stated that his notice requested him to begin serving on the
jury April 15, 1980, two days prior to the departmental budqets being
presented to the Budget Committee for review. He noted that in the
past, people have merely called up to arrange to be excused from jury
duty. He stated that as a supervisor for the Eugene Police Department,
he would find himself to be in a conflict of interest. He stated that
rather than call in and ask to be excused, he would like to see action
from the Council as his employer.
Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to request that the
court excuse Charles T. Henry, due to present commitments as City
Manager of Eugene, from jury service.
e
Mr. Haws stated that he would like to see Mr. Henry participate in the
jury system and therefore he would not want to see him excused. He
would prefer to see him defer this jury service. Mr. Henry noted
that attorneys are automatically excused and Mr. Haws stated, in
rebuttal, that he has been involved in both State and Federal jury
service but was challenged each time. He stated he would vote against
the motion as he does not approve of excusing people from jury duty.
Roll call vote; motion carried 4:3, with councilors Delay, Schue,
Lieuallen, and Smith voting aye, and councilors Haws, Hamel, and
Miller voting no.
3/12/80--3
Mr. Henry added that physicians, vetrinarians, undertakers, etc.,are e
excused from jury duty.
II I. REVISION OF ACTIVE BETHEL CITIZEN CHARTER
(Memo and Resolution distributed)
Mr. H~nry stated that this revision would allow the Active Bethel Citizens group
to have a chairperson and a vice chairperson or co-chairpeople and the neiqhbor-
hood group felt they would be better served if their charter were more flexible
in this respect.
Res. No.3326 --A resolution approving and accepting the amendment to the
Active Bethel Charter.
Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to adopt the reso-
lution. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously.
IV. STATUS REPORT ON 1979-80 WORK PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS
(Information distributed)
Mr. Henry stated this 1979-80 status report on the priority work and programs is
based on the McKenzie Bridge Goal Setting Session. He would point out some
substantial accomplishments; the negative aspects would reappear until they were
solved or their significance was diminished.
e
Item I-A--Development of an energy program with EWEB--is well under way.
Item I-A-3--Have developed a plan; the report should come out in June of 1980,
instead of April as it listed on the status report. He noted they have received
compliments on how useful this information is.
Item I-C-1--Refine Growth Management policy, adopting revised community
goal s- -have been adopted.
Item I-C-2--Researching other city models--has been prepared; the council
will be receiving the report later in March.
Item I-D-1--Implementing T-2000 programs--Council received the report from OooT,
which will pOSSibly approve a substantial amount of money for the 6th and 7th
corridor development: the east-west link can become reality and land use ques-
tions in that area may settle down; they will act on this March 25.
Item I-D-3--Implementing carpooling and other alternate modes--carpools and
shuttle systems are under way and growing.
Item I-E--Deve10ping new conference and convention center bureau with other
interested groups--two board meetings have been held at this point.
e
3/12/80--4
e
Item I-H--continuing efforts with EPA, OEQ, LRAPA, to secure air quality
improvement through SIP, revisions--major battle was won with the Seed Council
and they are working with EPA to arrive at suitable revisions.
Item II-A--1, 2, and 3--Eugene Economic Development Committee--to review diverse
concepts for City Government, and rules for constructive economic development:
to develop a criteria for defining desirable industrial and commercial diversi-
fication ranging from tourism to electronics, and to explore policies for
assisting small businesses and existing businesses--council will receive a
report from EEDC this month and a meeting will be held March 25.
Item II-B3-00wntown development, implementing civic center development/performinq
arts center development--bid documents have been prepared and the opening
will be March 27, which is two to three months behind schedule due to design
changes and other reasons.
Item II--B3bHotel and convention center development--developer has received
financing offers; negotiations are not yet resolved, but will be resolved
soon; director, as well as the director of communications, have been recruited
and that will be announced shortly.
Item III-A--Development of adequate funding of general operations for period
1980-81 through 1985-86--is negative as far as revenue sources are concerned.
Item III-B--Plan and develop funding for major capital outlay projects--most are
awaiting better solutions to the general operating fund problem.
e Item III-B-2--Library expansion--is proceeding.
Item III-B-4--Airport terminal expansion--architect has been selected.
Item IV-C--Establish semi-annual retreats, half-day monthly meetings for council
and deformalizin9 Wednesday council meetings--Wednesday afternoon workshops
are being held every other month.
Item IV-D--Resolve condominium policy directions and take appropriate actions--
have enacted the moratorium ordinance and hope to have the condominium conversion
ordinance before the City Council in April.
Mr. Henry summarized these were the major items that had concerned the City
Council but there were a few other items he wanted to mention regarding indivi-
dual departments.
Under City Manager's Section:
Item I-G--Improve Tri-Agency animal control operations--is being worked on and a
director has been recruited but some code revisions need to take place.
Item I-I--Assist in 911 center project--could have 911 operating system by
January 1, 1981: consultant is working on implementation details.
.
3/12/80--5
Item V-A--Develop new budget preparation system and format for 1980-81--new ~
budget format will be developed: first report will come out on April 17. ,.,
Item V-E-1--Improve downtown parking enforcement--completed substantial amount
of work; are implementing program.
,
Item V-F--Arrange for $1.6 million in budget cuts for 1979-80--this was an
additional project and it has been completed.
Underi....he Airport section:
Item 1--The Master Plan update--has been completed and approved. Item 3--
Increase auto parking by 176 spaces--will be completed this spring.
Fire Department Item 12--Plan for establishing full-time station at Airport--
will be done by May 1, 1980; fund and install major portion of master satel-
lite system--constructing satellite station at 28th Avenue and Polk Street,
and converting NO.6 to satellite. Item 2--complete pumper No. 4--has been
completed.
HCC Item 4--Expedite downtown retail expansion; good progress is beinq made;
'have met with the developer and are in serious negotiations. Item 10--acquire
and expedite development of 39th Avenue and Hilyard Street site--has been
acquired for moderate-to-low-income housing.
Parks and Recreation Department Item 1--Several sites have been acquired in ~
South~ Hills land, Greenway land, other park sites by bond issue and other ,.,
sources. Item 2-B--arrange land exchange with Lane County and EWES for neigh-
borhood park at 17th Avenue and Charnelton Street--has been acquired.
Public Works Item l-S-i--Water use charge and equalization program--City
interim rate adjustment has been completed. Item 1-C--east bank trunk design--
out to bid and on today.s agenda. Items 3-A and -B--improve Roosevelt from 99
to Beltline--well under way for construction this year.
Mr. Henry indicated this was a summarization of what had been accomplished in
the past six months and he would be available to answer any questions at that
time or at a later time.
Mr. Lieuallen asked, regarding Item 1-0-1, working with ODOT on 6th and 7th
Avenue Corridor development, if this was from Garfield Street out west and Mr.
Henry responded yes, that sections east of Garfield Street are already funded
and in progress. Mr. Lieuallen asked what has been funded to date and Don
Allen, Assistant City Manager, said these funds would be for right-of-way
acquisition and an environmental impact statement on the western section. Mr.
Lieuallen then asked what the status was on the section from Jefferson to
Garfield. Mr. Allen responded the sections of 6th and 7th avenues will be
widened. Presently the section between Washington Street and High Street is
funded for 1980. The section between Washington Street and Blair Boulevard is
funded for 1986-82.
,
3/12/80--6
e
e
e
Mr. Lieuallen noted, regarding Item 1-0-2, working with the County on securing
Chambers connector, that he had thought the City was beyond the discussion
stages with the County and Mr. Allen responded that Lane County is the lead
agency on this. Mr. Lieuallen then wanted to know when the Connector miqht be
secured. Mr. Allen responded that the dates have been established in the T-2000
plan. However, funding has not been secured. Mr. Lieuallen asked what was
being done to pursue this with the County and to clarify tarqet dates. Mr.
Allen responded that meetings between staff and the technical committee are
occurring. They are attempting to establish timing issues on how to include
them in TIP, etc. No specific date for construction has been set.
Mr. Lieuallen asked, regarding Items II-A, 1, 2, and 3, the EEDC, at what point
EECD will bring the council a recommendation. Ms. Miller responded he would be
recelvlng a memo. Mr. Lieuallen asked if that would include policy recommenda-
tions and Mr. Henry answered that it would. Ms. Miller stated that the specific
recommendations on the easy questions will be included. However, they are
somewhat vague on the more definite issues. Mr. Lieuallen commented he did not
remember discussing the Airport fire station. Mr. Henry responded that it was
required by the FAA and would be built at the expense of the airlines.
V. CONDEMNATION AUTHORIZATION
(Memo and Map distributed)
Mr. Henry referred to the map and stated this condemnation would include that
area within the heavy blackened lines. The rest will be either across Park land
or along roadways and some area within H-J is involved. The reason for this
large an area is that the trench will be very wide. It could be as wide as 50
feet in some places. It will be under construction this summer with MWMC doinq
the construction and the City doing the engineering and land acquisition. He
further stated we need to acquire this land as soon as possible.
Mr. Delay noted that a lot of City effort and funding is going into this project,
including surveying, and asked if this is being billed back to MWMC. Mr. Henry
responded that it is. Mr. Delay asked what happens when they get to the river.
Bert Teitzel, Public Works, stated they would be going either under or over the
river and may put in another bike bridge.
CB 2099--An ordinance authorizing the institution of proceedings in
eminent domain for the acquisition by condemnation of property to
acquire permanent sanitary sewer easement and temporary construc-
tion easement for the East Bank Interceptor sewer from existing
Springfield treatment plant to proposed regional treatment plant
and to acquire fee simple title for expansion of the Wi1lakenzie
sanitary sewer pump station, and declaring an emergency.
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. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously, and the bill
was read the second time by council number only.
3/12/80--7
Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, that the bill be ~
approved and given final passage. Roll call vote: motion carried ~
unanimously and the bill was declared passed and numbered 18598.
VI. SPAY AND NEUTER PROGRAM
(Memo and Addendum distributed)
Mr. Henry stated that, after the interest shown by the City Council and by
staff in Tri-Agency, it was felt to be in the best interests of the City for the
City to handle the Spay/Neuter program. The City would assume full financial
and operational responsibility for the spay/neuter clinic and Lane County will
withdraw from the program. The City will be responsible for the total amount of
any budget deficit, if there is one for fiscal year 1979-80, or receive any
1979-80 surplus revenues above operating costs. The clinic staff will become
City employees on May 1, 1980. The City will have the option to contract with
the veterinarian for services, if desired. All clinic equipment will become
City property. The City has the option of tenninating the spay/neuter imple-
mentation program at any time, but if the City operates the clinic through June
30, 1981, the City will continue to make clinic services available to all
residents of Lane County and will not charge County residents different fees
from those charged to City residents. At this point it is self-sustaining and
has a backlog of people waiting to use the facilities. It should receive
revenue to meet all operating costs this year. Mr. Henry introduced Marge
Beck, staff for Tri-Agency, to give additional information.
Ms. Beck stated that as of February 1980, reported revenues were $5,600 above 4It
expenditures. Additional unreported revenues may be about $7,000, but finan-
cial reports are not available. She expects they will have revenues to pay for
all expenditures at the end of the fiscal year. The Budget Committee previously
appropriated $4,500 to cover any possible deficit, but she does not feel that
there will be one this year. Any revenue surplus, above expenditures, will be
reserved for next year.
Mr. Lieuallen asked what the relationship would be between Tri-Agency and SNIP.
Ms. Beck responded that they would be two separate programs. The City would
operate the SNIP program, the employees would be City employees, and the veterin-
arian would be on contract with the City. There will be a cooperative agreement
between Tri-Agency and the City. Mr. Lieua1len asked if the Tri-Agency director
would have authority for administration of this program and Ms. Beck responded
that the administrator would be the city manager. ~1s. Sr/litil wanted to know if
the additional revenues were because the program was understaffed and what the
impact of full staffing would be. Ms. Beck responded that there has been a
full-time veterinarian on staff since April 1979. In regard to revenues, there
is a slight carry-over, which was part of the unreported revenue from 1978-79,
the shot clinic revenues have been above what was estimated; and the spay/neuter
program revenues slightly below. Mr. Lieuallen asked what the County's position
was on this and Ms. Beck responded that Lane County approved of this approach
and they want the City to take over this program.
e
3/12/80--8
e
Mayor Keller stated that at one time he understood that the County was not
fulfilling its obligation, and then heard that the County would be funding this
program until May 1980. He asked for clarification. Mr. Delay stated that
under the current intergovernmental agreement, the two jurisdictions would split
any deficit at the end of the fiscal year. It was hoped it would be a self-
supporting program. The program, however, looked as though it would take about
a $9,000 subSidy for the second year of operation. Last year, the Eugene Budget
Committee adopted a budget approving an appropriation of $4,500 for any projected
deficit; Lane County refused to show any support for the clinic, financially,
politically, or any other way. However, the takeover is not happening at the
end of this fiscal year, so it really could not be said that they have not
participated. He further stated that all the City is doing is assuming respon-
sibility for a program which the County does not support and the City does
support.
Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to authorize the City
Manager to enter into an intergovernmental agreement transferring
the responsibility for.a low-cost spay/neuter program from the
County to the City, effective May 1, 1980.
Mr. Delay stated that this has been one program which comes near to self-
sufficiency and thinks it is an incredibly good program. They have performed
over 4,500 operations and given over 11,000 shots to cats and dogs. Due to a
combination of a public education program, the spay/neuter clinic service, and
more agressive enforcement there will be 5-6,000 fewer animals to be destroyed
thi s year.
~ Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously.
VII. RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCE RELATING TO TAX BASE ELECTION AND CHARTER
AMENDMENT RELATING TO TAX LEVY LIMITS FOR YEARS 1980-81, 1981-82 FOR
MAY 20, 1980, ELECTION
Mr. Henry stated the Budget Committee has recommended these resolutions and
ordinance because the City is required to have an election on a new tax base
on May 20. Any ballot measures must be submitted to the Lane County Election
Department by Tuesday, March 18, 1980. There have been discussions held regarding
the possibility of requesting a high tax base. One of the reasons for requesting
a high tax base is that State law says that all operating levies within the tax
base are eligible for the 30-percent property tax relief program. This would
avoid problems with an A and B ballot in that operating levies GS the B ballot
would not be eligible for the tax relief. He stated that one main element in
adopting a high tax base was to assure the public that the higher rate would not
be implemented immediately. To accomplish this, he noted the charter amendment
which establishes gross levy limits for successive years. $14 million and $16.5
million were proposed for the first two years and perhaps a third-year limit
should be considered. He indicated that these maximums meant an austere budget
could be approved each year by a two-thirds vote of the budget committee without
going to the voters for approval beyond these yearly maximums.
--
3/12/80--9
The voter~ would therefore have the opportunity to vote on any supplemental
budgets. The tax base, once established, could be used for a couple of years. tit
Oy~('o..boV"'la\ limits for individual years would be determined by using the State "
formula involving the Consumer Price Index and population growth factor, yet the
total would still be eligible for the 30-percent tax relief program. The
individual limits for each year were established in that manner. The charter
amendment: which would be on the May 20 ballot would take effect if the tax base
is approved. If the tax base did not pass, the charter amendment would not take
effect. The charter amendment could contain a sunset clause, on the amendment
to be effective June 30, 1982. Manager indicated that a gross limit of $19
million could be also be added for 1982-83. Also an amendment could be con-
sidered which would establish maximums but not sunset the two-thirds vote
requirement.
Mr. Henry further stated that the order in which the ballot measures occur can
be adjusted somewhat so that the charter amendment appears first and the tax
base second. If the council strays from these areas of consideration, the
proposal should go back to the attorney as this is a very precise and bindinq
commitment. They would need to call a special City Council meetinq.
Mr. Lieuallen stated he would like to hear additional discussion for having a
third-year gross levy limit without voter approval and not attaching a sunset
provision to the two-third vote requirement of the Budget Committee. Mr. Henry
noted that there is a gap in the third year from $16.5 million to $21 million.
They have used the growth and cost of living percentage, year to year, as used
in the State formula, and he thinks it is a rational approach. In regard to the
process, the staff has always felt that getting a two-thirds vote of the Budqet ~
Committee was highly desirable. He said that elections have not been won with .,
very narrow votes in the Budget Committee. Mr. Lieuallen stated that the
democratic process is of that simple majority vote. He stated including the
sunset clause would require that this process be reviewed periodically. He
would. like to have that review opportunity. He stated that establishing such a
process is a departure from the traditional democratic process. Mr. Delay
stated he disagreed with Mr. Lieuallen. He does not view it as a departure from
traditional democratic process. The process would be that major consensus of
the Budget Committee would be required on the core budget and alternative
programs would be decided by the voters. In regards to the review, if this
process fails, it will need to be dealt with before the sunset clause would come
into effect. He further stated he feels the process is the key factor to
provide the opportunity for people to decide whether or not they wish to con-
tinue funding projects to which they have become accustomed. He does not feel
this process should be sunsetted. Inclusion of this clause would just be to
reassure the community. Mr. Delay stated the process should be established:
then only the tax base wi 11 need to be updated every few years. In reqard to
the order of items on the ballot, he felt it might be better to put the charter
amendments first.
Ms. Smith stated she is pleased to see a third-year fiqure. She supports Mr.
Delay's comments and feels a two-thirds vote of the Budget Committee is very
important. She stated she felt it would be better to put the charter amendments
on first and then the tax base.
.'
.3/12/80--10
e
Ms. Schue stated she agrees with Mr. Delay's statement regarding the two-thirds
Budget Committee vote. She stated all of the "goodies" wi 11 come in the
supplemental budget where the voters will have an opportunity to make their
wishes known. She felt that the charter amendment should be placed first and
the tax base second.
Mr. Delay asked if something could be done with the ballot measure titles to
make them more clear. He stated the tax base does not make any reference to the
charter amendment and wondered whether wording could be incorporated tying the
two together.
Mr. Henry introduced Orval Etter, City Attorney's office, who said the State
statute does not describe the wording but does limit the number of words for a
title. The attorney's office was apprehensive about incorporating a condi-
tional proposition. They did not want to state that the tax base approval is
conditional on the passage of the charter amendment. Councilor Delay indicated
he did not want to make it conditional but asked if language could be inserted
into the title to state that the tax base would enable the charter amendment to
go into effect. Mr. Etter explained that there are wording limits for the
various sections of a ballot measure, and in the last statement in the explana-
tion, mention is made of the charter amendment. He read the last sentence of
the explanation, "In proposing a new base, the Council does not intend to
immediately levy taxes to the full amount possible under the new base, but
instead intends to be limited by the charter amendment submitted as measure No.
52," or this could be measure No. 51, depending upon the order in which they
were placed on the ballot. Mr. Delay felt that this was sufficient.
e
Mr. Lieuallen asked if what is currently before them is the new tax base,
the two-thirds vote on the tax base, majority vote on a supplemental budget, the
order of the ballot measures, and the sunset clause which applies to the two-
thirds vote at the Budget Committee level. He stated he wanted to include a
sunset clause for the two-thirds vote to enable a clear review at the end of the
two-year period. He stated he would like to amend the motion so this item could
be voted on separately from the rest of the package, as he does not want to
appear to be against the rest of the package. Mr. Delay stated he woul d 1 ike
discussion prior to the motion as to whether the sunset clause should be included
or not.
Ms. Schue stated she was becoming confused, especially in reqard to the sunset
clause. She stated that her impression was that the charter amendment was to
sunset at the end of two years, which now is three years, and now it seems that
the sunset applies only to the two-thirds vote, and requested .clarification.
Mr. Henry stated that a sunset clause is not included in this memo of March 12.
from Orval Etter and that a two-thirds vote woul d al wa.ys be requi red if the
sunset clause was not included. Ms. Schue said she felt that changed the intent
of what was stated previously in the Budget Committee meeting. They were
talking about using the State A maximum to base figures on. She said this would
enable the Council to levy whatever they wish, as long as it was approved by two
thirds of the Budget Committee.
"
3/12/80--11
Mr. L i euallen stated that if a two-thirds process cont inues, voters wi 11 .a
have an opportunity to vote on taxes other than property taxes. These ·
would not be under the six percent limit. Mr. L ieuallen stated that a
two-thirds. vote of the Budget Committee would define the core budget for the
City. This would continue to work even if other resources besides property taxes are
found.
Mr. De1ay:said that by dwelling on the limitation numbers one could lose the
focus of the proposal. He stated that he would have argued against putting the
limitation numbers in at all because he was afraid such figures would make it
more difficult to explain to the voters. He stated that the City could be
looking at other revenue sources in the future and that would make the limi-
tation numbers less meaningful. The process of guaranteeing the community an
annual vote would become more important. He stated that after a while all that
would be needed would be to update the tax base from time to time and the Budget
Committee can deal with the public on an annual basis with a supplemental
budget.
Ms. Miller felt the three limitations numbers were there more as an act of
good faith on the City's part. She hopes that the City can live within them as
a core budget. It is her hope that after three years, the process would be
working smoothly so they would not need to tie it to a limitation number or they
could make a more accurate determination for the core budget. She supports the
two-thirds process. She would like it to stay in the charter because she thinks
it will work but if it does not, they can revise the charter later. This is
making along-term commitment. It is such a basic budget that the Budget A
Committee will pr-obably be voting unanimously. ..,
Ms. Schue stated that what is being said is that as long as the proposed budget
is approved by two-thirds of the Budget Committee and within the tax base, that
amount can be levied without the vote of the people. She felt the concept miqht
be hard to sell to the public. The whole idea of indicating lim~tion numbers
is to tie the City into the State program. She felt removal of the numbers would
make things a lot more difficult to explain to the voters.
Mr. Delay stated that the limitation numbers are there. These figures may
become more irrelevant because of circumstances beyond control or by a vote of
the community as time passes.
Ms. Schue asked Mr. Delay if he was in favor of the proposal as outlined in the
March 12. memo from Orval Etter and Mr. Delay responded that he was.
Mayor ~el1er stated that the figures give credence to the proposal, although
they may become obsolete later.
Mr. L ieuallen stated that, to his understanding, although the base is at $19
million, and the first year the Budget Committee can only levy up to $14 million,
he does not see any language to that effect. He asked for clarification as to
whether the City could go outside the $14 million in the first years with a
supplemental budget. Joyce Benjamin, City Attorneyls office, stated that the
..
3/12/80--12
e
e
-
$14, $16.5, and $19 million is what the two-thirds membership of the Budget
Committee can levy without voter approval. A majority of the Budget Committee
can submit a supplemental budget above the core for voter approval. She stated
that the language Mr. Lieua1len was looking for is in Orval Etter's March 12
memo under Sect ion 3 D., "authorized by non-charter measure approved by the
voters after they approve th is amendment. II She further stated that the first
section of this memo is in regard to the two-thirds process. The limits do not
apply to a property tax levied to retire bond principal or interest, to a
property tax to finance an improvement or service in a special district created
by the City Council, or to a property tax levied serially for capital acquisi-
tion, construction, or reconstruction specifically authorized by the voters.
Mr. Henry noted that Item 3 0 makes it possible to go above the $14 million
in operations.
Mr. Delay stated that the only time he had argued against putting these limi-
tation in was if the tax base fails and an A and B ballot must be placed on
the June ballot. To use these figures in determining the A level is an additional
restriction.
Mr. Lieuallen asked if, in the third year, the Budget Committee has levied up
to $19 million, there is an ability to request a supplemental budget above
the six-percent limitation. He asked if this budget request would be limited by
the growth factors. He asked if one could go outside the tax base using the cpr
and growth factors. Mr. Henry clarified that this would be in the fourth year,
not the third year and that this would be correct.
Mr. Delay stated this does not eliminate the need for occasional adjustment
of the tax base.
Mr. Henry asked whether the ballot measure numbering should begin with the
charter amendment first. Consensus was to list the charter amendment first.
Mr. Henry stated there seems to be concensus on adding the 1982-83 limitations
but does not know where the council stands on sunsetting. Mr. Lieuallen sug-
gested voting on Mr. Etter's memo.
Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to adopt the
concepts as outlined in Mr. Etter's March 12 memo regarding
tax measures.
Mr. Delay stated that implicit in the motion but not in the letter would be
the renumbering of the ballot titles. Mayor Keller stated that would be
so noted.
Mr. Lieuallen moved to amend resolution 3328 by subjecting
the two-thirds/one-third process to a sunset clause after the
third year of operation. Motion died for lack of a second.
Roll call vote on the main motion; motion carried unanimously.
3/12/80--13
.
Res. No. 3327--A resolution submitting to the legal voters of the City of
Eugene a measure establishing a new tax base for the City
of Eugene of $21,250~000.
Ms. Smith moved. seconded by Mr. Lieuallen. to adopt the resolu-
tion. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously.
Res. No. 3328--A resolution submitting to the legal voters of the City of
Eugene a measure amending the Charter of the City of
Eugene to limit the amount of property taxes the City
Council can levy without voter approval for the fiscal
years 1980-81 and 1981-82, and 1982-83.
Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to adopt the reso-
lution. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously.
--
CB 2100--An ordinance ordering a special election to be conducted by the
Lane County Election Department on the 20th day of May 1980 for
the purpose of submitting to legal voters of the City of Eugene a
measure establishing a new tax base for the City of Eugene of
$21,250,000; and a measure amending the Charter of the City of
Eugene to limit the amount of property taxes the City Council can
levy without voter approval for the fiscal years 1980-81, 1981-82,
and 1982-83; adopting polling places and providing for all acts
necessary for the carrying on of said elections; and declaring an
emergency.
Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, that the bill be
read the second time by council bill number only, with the unani-
mous consent of the council and enactment be considered at this
time. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. 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: motion carried
unanimously; the bill was declared passed and numbered 18599.
Mayor Keller noted that members of the Budget Committee should be commended and
their willingness to step forward with a reasonable program should be noted.
Mr. Henry stated that the impact of this proposal on existing residences will be
to adjust the tax rate to approximately the Consumer Price Index.
The meeting adjourned to March 24, 1980.
Re~~/~d,
i":id Allen
Acting City Manager
[Recorded by Lynda Nelson]
~ CTH:LN:ky/CM8bl
3/12/80--14