HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/30/1980 Meeting
-
e
e
M I NUT E S
EUGENE CITY COUNCIL
April 30, 1980
The adjourned meeting from April 28, 1980, of the City Council of the City of
Eugene, Oregon, was called to order by His Honor Mayor Gus Keller on April 30,
1980, at 11:30 a.m. in the Council Chamber with the following councilors present:
Betty Smith, Scott Lieuallen, D. W. Hamel, Gretchen Miller, Emily Schue, and
Jack Delay. Councilors Brian Obie and Eric Haws were absent.
I. ITEMS FROM MAYOR AND COUNCIL, APPOINTMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS, AGENDA ADJUSTMENTS
A. CETA Program--Ms. Smith explained that the RFP requests for proposals
are now out and targeted at the Eugene Summer Program. They are
expected to have a good response.
B. PAC Committee--Ms. Smith explained that the PAC Committee will con-
tinue at this time as the advisory committee to the Eugene CETA pro-
ject. Later this summer or early fall there will be a new, expanded
advisory committee.
C. Appointments--The Mayor held the recommendations to the Performing
Arts Commission over to next week, at Mr. Lieuallen's request.
D. Announcements
1. Joint Planning Commission/City Council Workshop--April 30,
1980, 12:45 p.m., McNutt Room.
2. Library Subcommittee Budget Review--April 30, 1980, 2 p.m.
3. Budget Committee--Wednesday, May 1, 1980, 7:30 p.m., McNutt
Room. The Budget Committee will also meet May 8 and 15.
E. Agenda Adjustments
1. Manager asked that Item V., Bancroft Poli~ies, be moved to
the top of the agenda.
2. Manager explained he received a letter dated April 24, 1980,
received April 28, from Medical Services, Inc., notifying the
City of a request to increase ambulance service rates beginning
May 1, 1980. To increase these rates without City review would
4/30/79--1
be a violation of the City Code. He had explained this to Mr.
Leonard. There is a study currently being done and the results
will be brought to the council in August or September. After ~
the results of the study are accepted, Eugene and Springfield
will agree upon a schedule of rates. In the interim, Eugene
will consult with Springfield on these proposed rates and bring
a recommendation to the City/Council on May 27, 1980, at which
time they will hold a public hearing. Mr. Delay responded that
the task force had told Mr. Leonard that he must submit any rate
increases through the normal process time frame. He suggested a
modest interim adjustment to meet Mr. LeonardIs needs pending the
conclusion of the study. Consensus was to review the interim
report May 22, 1980, and hold a public hearing May 27, 1980.
II. ROUTINE ITEMS FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL
A. Approval of Council Minutes of April 14 and April 16, 1980
Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to approve
council minutes of April 14 and April 16, 1980. Motion
carried unanimously.
B. Finance Resolutions (memo distributed)
Res. No. 3355--A resolution authorizing the transfer of operating
contingency monies in the General Fund to cover costs
of Touche, Ross & Co., study of Medical Services, Inc.
Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to adopt the
resolution. Roll call vote. Motion carried unanimously.
Res. No. 3356--A resolution authorizing the transfer of operating
contingency monies in the General Fund for the
installation and repair of fire hydrants.
-
Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to adopt the
resolution. Roll call vote. Motion carried unanimously.
Res. No. 3357--A resolution authorizing the transfer of non-contingency
appropriations within a given fund between programs
and/or object groups.
J
Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to adopt the
resolution. Roll call vote. Motion carried unanimously.
C. Jail Property Resolution
Res. No. 3358--A resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute
a deed for the jail property.
.
4/30/79--2
Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to adopt the
resolution. Roll call vote. Motion carried unanimously.
e
III. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. New Liquor License Outlet: Butcher Block Delicatessen (Retail Malt
Beverage); Located 1858 East 13th Avenue; Applicants: Patrick and
Roxanne Tancredi
Manager indicated all was in order for this new liquor license request.
It has been checked by the City departments.
Public hearing was held with no testimony presented.
Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to forward the
request to OLCC with recommendation for approval, subject to
conditions, if any. Motion carried unanimously.
B. New Liquor License Outlet: Friendly.s Market (Package Store License);
located 2749 Friendly; Applicants: Kenneth Barr and Terry Potash
Manager introduced the request and said all was in order; it had been
reviewed by staff.
e
Public hearing was held with no testimony presented.
Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to forward to
OLCC with recommendations for approval, subject to conditions,
if any. Motion carried unanimously.
IV.
BANCROFT POLICIES (Memo distributed)
Manager explained that with this ordinance, instead of a maximum of seven
percent interest, the City can charge whatever the State law allows, ten
percent currently. Mr. Long added that there is currently an investiga-
tion under way to determine if the interest rate could be raised to 12
percent. Manager read the provision in the proposed ordinance allowing
for reduction in rates as determined by the City Manager. Mr. Long
explained the council.s desire was not to make a profit, but not to
subsidize development either. The interest charge will be adjusted to
cover the cost plus the City.s administrative charge, but not to exceed
that allowed by law. There were four categories of projects originally
disGussed. The first category could not be changed to the higher rate.
The higher interest rate could be attached to other categories. The next
bond sale will be June 10. It will require a subsidy for administrative
costs, and possibly more.
e
4/30/79--3
Mr. Lieuallen inquired if the interest rates could be placed high enough
on future bond sales to cover the subsidy of the first bond sale. Mr.
Long replied that the City cannot make up deficiencies in bond sales in
that manner. It has to come from a direct tax levy or the General Fund.
Manager explained that the City has, in the past, made a profit on these
bond sales and it has gone into the General Fund.
Mr. Delay was concerned about the City's exposure created by the time
lag between the sale of the bonds and the previous contractual agreements
between the City and developer. He asked if the agreements could stipu-
late adjustable rates. Manager replied that Mr. Teitzel, Public Works,
would address this issue. Mayor introduced Randall Hledik.
Randall Hledik, Wildish Construction Company, PO Box 7428, said that in
previous testimony, the construction industry said it would support
increased interest rates for Bancroft bonding. They are into the 1980
construction season. Twenty subdivisions await council action. Further
delay would result in this construction season being severely impaired.
Unemployment would result. Late starts mean late completions. The
City, should they extend completions into 1981, would lose the revenue
for 1980. He urged council action to make Bancroft financing available.
CB 2112--An ordinance regarding interest rates on amounts due the City.
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.
,Mr. Delay presumed that the ordinance would apply to all situations that
it can. Manager replied that it could apply to one area, not another,
and then there was a "gray area." This "gray area" would need specific
council authorization and will be brought back to the council for con-
sideration.
Mr. Delay asked about the financial liability that could occur due to this
ordinance increasing the rates. Mr. Long replied this particular ordi-
nance does not seem to have any financial risk; it will improve the City's
situation. The next areas of consideration are the areas of potential
risk.
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 coun-
cilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and
numbered 18616.
4/30/79--4
<>
,.
.
.
--
"
1980 Project Schedule
.
Manager referred council to a memorandum dated April 21, 1980, from
Bert Teitzel, City Engineer, to Don Gilman, Acting Director of Public
Works, with an attached list of 1980 projects that the Engineering
Division recommends proceeding with.
tit
Mr. Teitzel told the council they would like to go ahead with the bid
nos. 1 and 2 groupi ngs. The groupi ng call ed "Unschedul ed 1980" 1 i sts '
projects that they would like to complete this year. Some preliminary
design projects have been delayed until 1981. Manager explained the
table and recommended that Bid No. 1 be awarded before the June 10 Ban-
croft bond sale date. Bid No.2 would be awarded after June 10. The
fund 491, District Improvement column, shows the additional liability
that would be added with those two groupings, $500,000.
Mr. Teitzel explained that they would like to proceed with those projects
shown in the tabulation as unscheduled subdivisions. The developer-owner
would pay the front-end engineering costs. The City would not have any
liability until it was let to bid. The subdivider-owner would be respon-
sible for any added costs to the City. This would cover any high interest
rate that the City pays on warrant sales. These would be awarded after
July if the bond market is still favorable. A favorable bond market would
be a continuation of the present downward trend. There may be additional
conditions that would apply to the subdivider after negotiating with the
bankers who would potentially buy the warrants.
Mr. Delay asked Mr. Teitzel about the engineering cost to be collected.
Mr. Teitzel explained the City had accounts outstanding for $90.000 in
engineering fees for these projects on the schedule. They would like to
collect that money from the developers and put the projects out to bid if
there was a favorable bond market in July.
Ms. Smith asked if this issue would be brought back to council in July.
Mr. Teitzel said the checkpoint would be at the time of the bid award of
individual projects.
Ms. Miller felt there was a potential in the bond market to look favorable
at the time the warrants are sold but not when the bid is let. The lag
time could create a deficit situation. Mr. Teitzel replied that Ms.
Miller was correct; the lag time could be one or two years for subdivi-
sions. Ms. Miller asked, if they approved the projects, would the risk be
shifted to the developer. Ms. Miller asked what would happen if the bond
market keeps climbing. Mr. Teitzel replied they are anticipating that the
State legislature would increase the ceiling on the interest charge
allowed for Bancroft bonds.
Mr. Delay asked what the worst-case situation would be. Mr. Long replied
there are two risks, even though one collects front-end costs. One case
would be that the interest rates would be so high that it would be necessary
e
4/30/79--5
~
~
to go to the General Fund to cover the deficit. The second situation is
that the lots would not sell; the assessments would not be paid; the
developer would go bankrupt; the City would foreclose on the lots and be ~
unable to sell them as well. If the situation were really bad, the City
could need to cover not only the interest deficit but the amount of the
bonds as well. It is the amount of the bonds that the City would be
called upon to pay from other sources. That is the worst-case situation,
not a prediction.
Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, that the council
approve the 1980 Project Schedule as outlined.
Mr. Delay said he was not comfortable with this schedule. It is a lot
of money and he did not favor taking ambiguous risks for the community.
Manager replied that it would monitored and evaluated as it progresses,
and if anything happens they will alert the City Council. On June 10
the overall status would be reviewed.
Mr. Delay asked if the City could protect itself against default in any
other way than a lien on the property. Mr. Teitzel said they had dis-
cussed requiring the developer to make a security deposit for the amount
of the contract, but it would limit the people who could proceed with
projects.
Ms. Miller said she was uncomfortable with the situation and would want
people to realize that it is still up in the air and Bancroft projects may
not proceed this summer. Mr. Delay felt the projects should go ahead,
although there is some risk. He said there was risk if they stood in the ~
way of this development. He would like to have the City Council study the ..,
situation in the fall before the next session of the legislature. Mayor
suggested having an interim report after June 10. Mr. Delay suggested
looking at the long-range questions in the fall before the 1981 building
season.
Motion carried unanimously.
V. INITIAL CONSIDERATION OF TRESPASS ORDINANCE/CALL FOR SPECIAL MEETING
A. Initial Consideration of Trespass Ordinance--Requested by Councilor
Miller
B. Call For SpeCial Meeting for May 5, 1980
Ms. Smith opposed the reading of the ordinance since the April
minutes of the City Council indicate that the issue was to come
before the council on May 12. People have been notified of that
date and they should have a chance to speak on the issue.
.
4/30/79--6
e
Ms. Miller indicated it was important to have the first reading today.
There were people present to hear the discussion and she would expect
more people on Monday. She had little doubt about how people in the
community feel about this issue. People have called and written to
her. She felt that it was important to have the public hearing next
Monday before the upcoming election so that people could see how
people will vote on this issue prior to the election. This issue has
been around for a year. The ordinance has been written for months.
It is a matter of one delaying tactic after another. She suggested
the smoking issue go on the Monday agenda as well.
Mr. Hamel could see no reason for not having the hearing on Monday,
May 12. He could see no reason for this political camouflage. It is
an important hearing and should follow the schedule.
Mr. Delay agreed with Ms. Miller. The positions one could take were
simple and straightforward. People could get to the meeting easily
on Monday. He would like to see the agendas free for other matters.
Ms. Schue agreed with Mr. Delay and Ms. Miller. The clean air ordinance
and this ordinance have been put off. She was agreeable to a special
meeting.
e
Mayor said it was always nice for those not running for office to make
political issues for those who were. He welcomed the opportunity. He
objected because, at the last meeting on this issue, they told people
that they could be heard and they would schedule a public hearing for
May 12. He questioned if the councilors would do this on other issues
and whether it was in the City's best interest. He asked the Manager
if they could notify all people previously in attendance. Manager
said he could not notify all the people. He could, however, notify
leaders who could notify others. Mayor indicated he would be in
Portland on Monday and he would like to be present at the discussion.
Mr. Hamel said that he would be out of town on May 5, 1980, as part
of his work schedule.
Vern Gleaves, 975 Oak Street, said on April 7, 1980, this was discussed
and the councilors agreed to a public hearing on May 12, 1980. He
objected to council scheduling a public hearing and then changing the
date. On April 2, the council had discussed whether this was an urgent
matter. Their own record indicated there was no emergency. He ques-
tioned whether this was the most important issue before the council at
this time. Although Councilors Delay and Miller have their minds made
up, he believed there would be opinions brought forth in the public
hearing that the councilors have never heard. At a time when public
officials' credibility is in question, this is damaging the council's
credibility within the community. He would have all the officials
present; he would like to hear all the comments.
e
4/30/79--7
-
Ms. Schue asked about the process. Mr. Long replied it was almost
entirely within the discretion of the council. The dates could be
changed; it was a question of equity and fairness.
Ms. Miller did not feel that they would lose valuable comments. .
The issues were straightforward and simple. They might hear the
same comments 50 times instead of 80 times.
CB 2107--An ordinance concerning defense to trespass; amending Section
4.805 of the Eugene Code, 1971; and declaring an emergency.
Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, that the bill be read
the second time by council bill number only at a special meeting
of the council, that a special meeting to be called for this pur-
pose, as well as for other purposes that might be put on the
agenda May 5, 1980, in the Council Chamber, and that enactment
of this bill be considered at that time after a public hearing.
Ms. Smith asked Ms. Miller if she would consider an amendment to
the motion changing May 5 to May 12, in light of the Mayor's and
Councilor Hamel's absence. Ms. Miller said she would not.
Mr. Delay and Ms. Miller explored other dates with the Mayor and
Councilor Hamel during that week. They could not agree on an accep-
table date.
e
Mayor asked council to consider what they were doing. He felt they
were not serving the public's best interest. He urged the motion's
defeat.
Motion carried 4:2, with Ms. Smith and Mr. Hamel voting no.
The proposed no-smoking regulations were held over to the special
Monday night meeting.
Meeting was adjourned to May 5, 1980.
~)~
Charles T. Henry
City Manager
(Recorded by Beth Conant)
CTH:BC:pm/CM8b15
e
4/30/79--8