Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/17/1980 Meeting M I NUT E S . Eugene City Council City Council Chamber December 17, 1980 11 : 00 a. m . PRESENT: Councilors Betty Smith, Scott Lieuallen, Brian Obie, Jack Delay, D. W. Hame 1, Gretchen Mill er, and Emily Schue. Councilor Eric Haws was absent. The adjourned meeting of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was called to order by His Honor Mayor Gus Keller. 1. ITEMS FROM MAYOR & COUNCIL, APPOINTMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS, AGENDA ADJUSTMENTS A. Duck Crossing Mr. Delay stated that he has seen a need in his neighborhood. On Patterson Street, where the Millrace crosses, there is a large volume of duck traffic. There are more and more near-accidents and a IIDuck Crossingll sign is needed. He would like for traffic engineers to examine this situation. He would recommend that the sign be installed securely since it may be hard to keep in place. Ms. Schue suggested that Mr. Delay might want to speak with the County since there . is a similar sign on Park Avenue. B. Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Meeting Mayor Keller stated that there are concerns about who will operate the sewage plant. He intends to attend this meetinq and request that the commission not take final action. The subcommittee has requested that information be received regarding plant operation which has not yet been provided. Ms. Smith indicated that she would like the City.s position to be known. The subcommittee was to con- sider costs of operation by Eugene, a private contractor, or by the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission. Last Thursday, they voted 3:3 to have the issue resolved by tomorrow. C. Appointments At a special council meeting held December 10, 1980, the following appointments were made to the Citizen Involvement Committee: Carol Cogswell, 2560 Inavale, to a term ending June 30, 1983; Howard Lindstrom, 451 West 13th, #10, to a term ending January 30, 1982; and Katherine Murdoch, 1040 West 16th, to a term ending December 31, 1981. At a special council meeting held December 10, 1980, the following appointments to the Community Development Committee were announced: David Hawkins, 3473 Chaucer Way; Stephen Robinson, 59 Adams; and Jonathan Stafford, 1060 Madison; for three-year terms endinq January 1, 1984. . MINUTES--Euqene City Council December 17, 1980 Page 1 Mr. Delay stated that at the special council meeting, the motion for the appoint- ments to the Citizen Involvement Committee included Gary Gillespie as first ~ alternate. He requested that staff research this. D. Cancellation of Dinner With Lane County Legislative Delegation Mr. Henry stated that the dinner with the Lane County Legislative Delegation has been canceled due to conflicts with the holiday season. This dinner will be rescheduled in January and probably will be held when the League of Oregon Cities holds its meeting with the legislators. E. Swearing~in Ceremony Mr. Henry stated that the swearing-in ceremony for the new City Manager, the Mayor, and the new City Councilors would be held January 5, 1981, at 9 a.m. This will be followed by a reception. F. Risk Management Report Mr. Henry stated that the first annual Risk Management Report had been distrib- uted . This report shows that this has been a successful program which has saved substantial amounts of money and has reduced the City's exposure to liability claims. He commended John Janzen, Risk Manager, and Gary Long, Staff Services Director. Mr. Janzen stated that they have tried to provide a viable, concise, read ab 1 e report. II. ROUTINE ITEMS fOR COUNCIL APPROVAL ~ A. Approval of Council Minutes of November 10, 1980, and November 26, 1980 Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to approve council minutes of November 10, 1980, and November 26, 1980. Ro 11 c a 11 vote; motion carried unanimously. B. Call for Public Hearings 1. Street vacation for Trygve Vik (SV 80-5) (map distributed) CB 2223--An ordinance calling for a public hearing for January 28, 1981; re: street vacation for Trygve Vik located at the westerly ter- minus of Holly Street west of Norkenzie Road. 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. Council Bill 2223 was read the second time by council bill number only. ~ MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 17, 1980 Page 2 l ; 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 18731. 2. Street vacation for Rivers Edge (SV 80-2) (map distributed) CB 2224--An ordinance calling for a public hearing for January 28~ 1981; re: street vacation for Rivers Edge located at the northern ter- minus of Van Buren Street, north of Lewis Avenue. 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. Council Bill 2224 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~ t~e bill was declared passed and numbered 18732. C. Resolution Regarding Ambulance Services (memo distributed) Mr. Henry stated that this resolution will implement a decision previously made by the council for rates for Medical Services Incorporated. This is a routine . item. Ms. Miller stated that the council had,agreed to adopt these rates for ~ix months and at the end of that time they would revert to the old rates unless the council changed them at that time. Mr. Henry suggested deleting the phrase following "for six months" of the resolution. Res. No. 3453--A resolution regarding ambulance services; amending resolu- tion Nos. 2742 and 3034; establishing new rates; and pro- viding for effective dates. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen~. to adopt the resolution as amended. Roll call vote. Roll call vote; motion carried 5:1 with Mr. Lieuallen voting no. III. FURTHER DISCUSSION ON PROPOSED ACQUISITION OF GILLESPIE BUTTE (memo distibuted) Mr. Henry stated that EWEB is now insisting on one cash payment instead of payments on an installment basis. Staff recommendation is to delay a decision for 30 days. He introduced Ernie Drapela, Parks and Recreation, to provide additional information. . MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 17~ 1980 Page 3 Mr. Drapela stated that this letter from EWES contains different terms from those contained in the information presented at the November 17 meeting. In view of this, he would suggest that this new information be presented to the . Joint Parks Committee and the item be returned to the council in a month with a recommendation. Ms. Smith noted that in view of this new information, it would be inappropriate for the council to act at this time. Mr. Delay asked if there has been miscommunication or if the EWES position had changed. Mr. Drapela stated that it was miscommunication. There are options that need to be explored, as this would be a major decision. Ms. Smith suggested that this could be placed on an agenda as a public hearing in the future. Ms. Schue stated that she had been receiving written materials from the neighborhood and feels it would be good to have a public hearing. Council consensus was to schedule this item for a public hearing on January 26. Ms. Smith stated that she hoped people would understand the reason for the delay. IV. ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING MANDATORY WEATHERIZATION STANDARDS FOR EXISTING RESIDENCES--INITIAL PRESENTATION (memo, ordinance distributed) Mr. Henry stated that this will be a preliminary presentation and it will be followed by a public hearing on December 22, 1980. He introduced Greg Page, Technology Coordinator, and Jean Reeder, EWEB, to provide additional information. Mr. Page stated that the proposed ordinance represented a great amount of work done by the public and-the EWES staff, and this effort addresses goals of the council. The program originally began on August 8, 1979, when Councilor Schue had asked to have an energy conservation program developed. Keith Parks, General Manager of EWES, was invited to talk with the council at their fall, . 1979, goals session. He had stated that there is a probability of electrical shortages within the next decade, and there is a need for conservation. He does not feel that voluntary efforts are working well enough. However, he informed the council that EWEB lacks police powers. Later, at the goals session, the City Council had voted energy conservation as their number one priority, and the Energy Conservation Policy Board was developed. On this board, the council was represented by Ms. Miller and Mr. Obie, the Planning Commission was repre- sented by Adrienne Lannom and Eleanor Mulder, and Camilla Pratt represented the EWES Board to develop an energy conservation program and bring it back to the council by the end of this year. The Policy Board had begun meeting in the spring of 1980. The energy supply and cost of energy had been discussed and it was determined that energy conservation is the cheapest way to provide additional energy. Also, conservation is the least disruptive to the environment. They examined the potential effects on the community and it was determined that shortages would affect the industrial sector first because of the State's curtailment program. Programs for use of solar energy in new PUD's and subdi- visions were developed. They helped the City and County to develop a small program enabling them to receive grants. Weatherization of existing residences would regulate homes built before July 1, 1984, when the State added insulation to their code and pre-empted local regulations. Staff worked with EWEB, remo- delers, and individual groups such as BEEP and Whiteaker Neighborhood. The information was presented at two public hearings in the spring, and was circu- lated through the neighborhood groups. Good feedback was received. In August, . MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 17, 1980 Page 4 "' the council requested that weatherization of existing residences on a mandatory basis be brought back to them in ordinance form. Improvements have been made to the ordinance since the original draft, but it basically remains the same as it . was in March. Adoption by the EWEB Board to provide financing for weatheriza- tion is very important. He introduced Jean Reeder. Ms. Reeder stated tbat the program has not yet been implemented, but it was adopted May 27, 1980. It will provide for zero-percent-interest loans for electric space-heat customers, matching grants for the most cost-effective measures installed by electric space-heat customers, low-interest loans for non-electric space-heat customers, availability of loans and grants for both landlords and tenants, provisions for loan payback at the time of sale for elec- tric space-heat customers or on a monthly payment schedule which may be assumed by any resident, and it will be totally independent of the ordinance with the exception that all proposed housing code measures will be covered by the finan- cinq program. On November 17, the Oregon State Attorney General's office issued the opinion that there is no need to change the Oregon Constitution nor to pass enablinq legislation in order for public utilities to offer conservation finan- cing. A test case pursued by EWEB has resulted in a Circuit Court ruling on December 2, 1980, and the judgment declares that the financing program does not violate the Oregon Constitution, State statutes, or the City of Eugene Charter. They expect that the Circuit Court decision will be appealed to the Oregon Court of Appeals, and they expect that a decision at that level will be made within two to six months. Voter approval of a revenue bond measure will be necessary to provide funds for the financing progam. This could go before the voters as early as March 31, 1981. They expect to be able to offer a financing program by the end of 1981. . Mr. Page stated that the financing proposal will be available for rentals as well as owner-occupied dwell"ings; it will be available for oil and natural gas customers; it will be effective for the rate-payer; and there will be no effect on the property tax. This ordinance would not become mandatory until 1985. Within the next four years, the board thinks that most residents will volun- tari ly comply. For those who do not comply by January 1, 1985, it would become mandatory. This ordinance would affect residential structures from single-family up to four-plexes. Of those dwellings, it would affect only those built before July 1, 1974, and they must meet the prescriptive standards which would be listed as part of the Eugene Housing Code: This ordinance is very different from the goal adopted by the City of Portland last year. It does not affect the sale of property; it is not dependent upon the availability of State or Federal funds; it only affects residential units up to four-plexes; there is a prescriptive code clearly defining what is necessary; administrative costs for inspection and enforcement will have a minimal finan- cial impact upon the general fund or property tax; and the utility will complete and certify the inspections. Only when new tenants or buyers request a change of service would the ordinance be enforced. There would be no effect upon those who live in homes who do not have housing code inspections. However, it would be a good incentive to weatherize for those on fixed incomes since it would save them money on utility bills. . MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 17, 1980 Page 5 Ms. Reeder stated that EWEB has had a conservation program for 3-1/2 years. Seven percent of their customers have had energy analyses. They have surveyed those customers and 50 percent of those people have responded. Approximately 15 percent of those who had their homes analyzed, have put in all of the EWEB . weatherization recommendations, and 40 percent have put in some portion of the recommendations. Mr. Obie arrived at the meeting. A recent survey sponsored by Bonneville Power Administration and the Pacific Northwest Utilities Conference Committee stated that 12 percent of the Pacific Northwest homes built before 1974 have no ceiling insulation, 44 percent have R-20 or less ceiling insulation, and 20 percent of rental homes have no ceiling insulation. Of Oregon residences built prior to 1980, 68 percent have no floor insulation, 54 percent have no moisture ground control cover, 78 percent have no domestic water heater insulation on the outside of the tank. There is no statistical information on the percentage of homes without heating duct insula- tion or without caulking or weatherstripping, so the figures they have compiled do not represent the savings that these additional measures could provide. The estimated energy savings assume that of the 20,000 homes in Eugene built before 1974, 45 percent are electrically heated. This estimate uses a 30-percent reduction in savings assuming that people generally keep their thermostats set higher when a home is well-insulated because it doesn't cost as much. The projected energy savings from ceiling and floor insulation of these homes should be estimated to be 27,470 megawatt-hours per year. Energy savings from water heater insulation in homes built before 1974 is estimated to be 4,782 megawatt- hours per year. The total savings is estimated to be 32,252 megawatt-hours per year or one-and-one-half percent of their total load. Additional savings would result from weatherstripping, caulking, duct wrap, and other conservation . measures generated by the educational aspects of the program. Implementation of this program will be through combined efforts of the City of Eugene and EWEB. When a customer requests a change of service, the EWEB service address records will indicate whether the dwelling was built prior to 1974 and whether or not it has been weatherized to Eugene Housinq Code standards. If Housing Code com- pliance is not indicated, the EWEB Conservation Center will offer a complete home energy analysis or a simple inspection to check for the eight housing code measures. EWEB will make every effort to work with the customer to arrange installation of the conservation measures. If the customer does not request an inspection within 90 days, EWEB will make three attempts to carry out an inspec- tion. It no inspection can be made, or if after six months and two inspections the residence does not meet the housing code standards, EWEB will notify the City. Additionally, EWEB will carry out a final inspection following City action. The estimated cost of inspections beyond what is expected to be provi- ded as a part of the new residential conservation service program is estimated to be $68,000 per year over an eight-year period, for a total program cost of $550,000. Mr. Page stated that the amount of power that would be saved would represent generation from a dam half the size of the one in Walterville at a cost of about 1/5 of new generation. The City would enforce the ordinance against any viola- tion, and an appeal process would be available for financial hardships or other . MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 17, 1980 Page 6 extreme cases. They can appeal either to the housing inspector, the Housing .Board of Appeals, or to the council. Administrative costs would depend upon violations. If an assumption can be made that 5 percent of the customers . would refuse to comply, the cost would be about $5,000 per year which seems minimal in comparison with the benefits to be received. This ordinance addres- ses council goals and carries with it a strong educational component. Financinq is available for everyone affected with minimal impact on the general fund. Mr. Delay asked if the thrust of this ordinance is to look at the most cost- effective means for additionalenerqy. Mr. Page responded that conservation is the most cost-effective means to the individual and to the rate-payer, as well as being the least restrictive. Mr. Delay stated that there are other conser- vation measures which are marginally cost-effective at this time, and they represent another pool of resources. If they would be done at the same time as the mandatory weatherization, greater benefits could be achieved. Financing those further measures later could be more expensive. He asked if the educa- tional program would identify the measures that qo beyond the requirements, and if the financing would include them. Ms. Reeder stated that they are offering individual home analyses and the financing will cover more than what is covered in the ordinance. Mr. Lieuallen stated that the December 12 memo from Mr. Page to the Mayor and council stated that other financial incentives may be available as well as the EWEB program. He asked for clarification. . Ms. Reeder stated that Bonneville Power Administration may have a program. The money will come to the utilities for conservation. Mr. Page mentioned that discussions have been held regarding rebates, payment to have the work completed, etc. . Ms. Miller stated that tax incentives are also available since people can get a substantial amount of money back for weatherizing. She noted that she had received a letter regarding the timing of the public hearing being held just before the holiday. The ordinance is what the Energy Conservation Policy Board had in mind, and though the public hearing will be available for specific changes, no changes have been made in the program thrust. They have also tried to involve people in the spring and the fall. Mr. Page stated that he has talked with many community groups, and citizen involvement has been substantial for the past 11 months. Mr. Delay noted that the Parks and Recreation Department has carried information in their Leisure Schedule in hopes of receiving more feedback. He feels it would help at the public hearing to summarize the general issues that were raised. He feels that part of the concern may come from misunderstanding. Mr. Page indicated that he would do this and that although the public hearing has been set for December 22, it could be held over. Mayor Keller thanked Mr. Page and Ms. Reeder for their presentations. He asked if Federal representatives from BPA would be attending the meeting also. Mr. Page stated that they have been invited to speak to the council regarding consumer billing credits. If mandatory weatherization seems cost-prudent, then EWEB could get lower wholesale rates. . MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 17, 1980 Page 7 Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to call a public hearing for December 22, 1980, to consider an ordinance establishinq mandatory weatherization standards for existing residences. Roll . call vote; motion carried unanimously. V. EUGENE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE A. Response to Council Questions Concerning Committee Report (memo and additional information distributed) Mr. Henry introduced Jim Farah, Planning, to provide additional information. Mr. Farah stated that this is in response to Questions raised when the council reviewed the draft economic development strategies prepared by the Eugene Economic Development Committee on May 21. The adoption of the bylaws, which is the next item, is to strengthen the bond between the Chamber of Commerce and the City of Eugene. The bylaws have been adopted by the Eugene Economic Development Committee and this will establish a Quorum of five members. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. L ieuallen, to approve the draft economic development strategies recommended by the Eugene Economic Development Committee in their memo of November 18, 1980. Roll call vote; motion caried unanimously. B. Adopt ion of Eugene Economic Deve lopment Committee Byl aws (memo and bylaws distributed) Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to approve the Eugene . Economic Development Committee organization and bylaws. Ro 11 call vote; motion carried unanimously. VI. ORDINANCES AUTHORIZING CONTINGENCY AMBULANCE SERVICE BY THE CITY OF EUGENE (memo and ordinances distributed) Mr. Henry stated that these ordinances would take effect if the service from Medical Services, Incorporated, ceased. If this happened, Eugene and Springfield would have to be able to provide these services, and these ordinances would enable them to provide the service and authorize collection of fees. Eugene would work with Springfield to use a uniform rate structure. A tentat ive schedule of rates has been distributed. These ordinances would authorize the City Manager to operate this service without formal budget appropriation and to submit it to the council for review as soon after as possible. This would provide for a method of operation and billing for a short period of time. A budget adjustment would then need to be brought before the council. This would be because they would need to spend $40,000 to $50,000 per month and there may be a delay until fees are collected. . MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 17, 1980 Page 8 CB 2225--An ordinance regardinq fire and ambulance services in the City of Eugene; amendinq Section 2.625 of the Eugene Code, 1971; repealing Sections 2.605, 2.610, 2.615, and 2.620 of that code; adding a new Section 2.604 to the code; and dec1arinq . an emergency. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieua11en, 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. Council Bill 2225 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 18733. CB 2226--An ordinance authorizing ambulance service and related expen- ditures and fees; adding Sections 2.606 and 2.608 to the Eugene Code, 1971; 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. Council Bill 2226 was read the second time by council bill number only. . Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieua11en, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote; all councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18734. VII. MEMORIALIZATION RESOLUTION REGARDING EUGENE ARTS FOUNDATION GIFTS (memo distributed) Mr. Henry stated that this resolution will allow naming of various parts of the Eugene Performing Arts Center as a result of gifts from Eugene Arts Foundation. This will facilitate the task of fund raising, and could be offered to those who are major donors. Additionally, the council will want to memorialize certain parts and sections of the building. The naming of the Performing Arts Complex, including the arcade and the garage, shall be by the council, taking into consideration the foundation's recommendations. He introduced Dick Reynolds, Performing Arts Center Director, to provide additional information if necessary. Res. No. 3454--A resolution defininq the respective roles of the City of Euqene and the Eugene Arts Foundation in the memorializa- tion of spaces and equipment within the Performing Arts Center arcade and immediate grounds. . MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 17, 1980 Page 9 Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. . Mayor Keller asked what would happen if a major contributor would want to have a gift remain anonymous. Mr. Reynolds stated that a donor might wish to memorialize in someone else's name. VIII. This item regarding a Finance resolution to increase overhead rates for public improvements was held over. IX. CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED BUILDING DIVISION ORDINANCES/RESOLUTION: 1) Adopting the International Conference of Building Officials Uniform Administrative Code with certain modifications, additions, and deletions, etc.; 2) Adopting the State of Oregon Structural Specialty Code and Fire and Life Safety Code with certain modifications, additions, and deletions, etc.; 3) Adopting the State of Oregon Mechanical Specialty Code and Mechanical Fire and Life Safety Code, etc.; 4) Amending Section 2.013 of the Eugene Code; 5) Amending Resolution 3324 by adding Sections 9 and 10; establishing fees in connection with inspections not covered by plan review and permit fees, etc.-- INITIAL PRESENTATION (memo and additional information distributed) . Mr. Henry stated that this item contained several amendments. The items being considered are: 1) an ordinance adopting the Uniform Administrative Code; 2) an ordinance adopting the State's Structural Specialty Code; 3) an ordinance adoping the State's Mechanical Specialty Code; 4) an ordinance amending Section 2.013 of the Eugene Code; and 5) a resolution establishing certain fees. These are commercial fees, not residential. He introduced Mick Nolte, Public Works Building Division, to provide additional information. Mr. Nolte stated that the first ordinance adopts the International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO) Uniform Administrative Code with certain (local) modifications, additions, and deletions, etc. The second ordinance adopts the State of Oregon Structural Specialty Code and Fire and Life Safety Code with certain (local) modifications, additions, and deletions, etc. The third ordi- nance adopts the State of Oregon Mechanical Specialty Code and Mechanical Fire and Life Safety Code, etc. The fourth ordinance amends Section 2.013 of the Eugene Code. The resolution amends Resolution 3324 by adding Sections 9 and 10; and establishing fees in connection with inspections not covered by plan review and permit fees, etc. . MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 17, 1980 Page 10 . One of the major changes would be to consolidate the four construction specialty boards into one construction codes board of appeals. A provision of charqinq a plan review fee for checking electrical, plumbing, and mechanical plans for .' commercial projects has also been added. Resolution No.5 will establish fee amounts for service inspections as provided for in the ordinance. Inspections and reinspection fees not covered by building permit fees which occur with a change of occupancy and affect single-family and restaurants will be $15 per hour for the majority. Mr. Delay stated that this consolidation should result in savinqs to the tax- payers and make it easier for both the City and for builders. He asked if they are addressinq the concerns that have been raised regarding inefficiency and difficulty of the process. Mr. Nolte stated that there are some restrictions on what can be done due to the State code requirements, but they are attemptinq to certify inspectors in more than one area. They will continue combining inspec- tions and permits as much as possible. Mr. Delay stated that it would be good to have this continue. Mayor Keller asked if this will reduce time for inspec- tions and issuance of permits. Larry Reed, Assistant Superintendent of the Building Division, stated that it already has. They have undertaken a program so that one plan reviewer can issue permits over-the-counter for faster public service. This has been occurring for about two weeks, and he hopes it will help on small jobs particularly. Mayor Keller noted that that would be appreciated and he is pleased to hear this. Mr. Reed stated they are looking at small-scale remodels and how to make it faster to review the plans. The hope is that this will not cause any problems in the field. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieua11en, to call a public hearing for December 22, 1980, to consider proposed Buildinq . Division ordiQances/resolution. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimous 1y. x. RESOLUTION REGARDING SPAY/NEUTER CLINIC OPERATION (memo distributed) Res. No. 3456--A resolution establishing objectives and policy for opera- tion of the Spay/Neuter Clinic. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieual1en, to adopt the resolution. Mr. Delay stated that it has been almost four years since this program was init i ated. The City should feel proud that it now has an operating program without general tax support that provides a low-cost service. There is public demand for this service and the clinic has been operating in the black. Five thousand fewer animals are being destroyed each year now than five years ago. Mr. Lieuallen asked if the cost is income-related or fixed. Mr. Delay stated that it is a fixed cost and the objective is to maximize the number of surgeries at the lowest possible price. Mr. Lieuallen noted there has been some confusion . MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 17, 1980 Page 11 . . between the terms "low-income" and 11ow-cost" and that it is important to differentiate between the terms. Mr. Lieuallen wondered what would happen to . the clinic operations if they were not operating in the black. Mr. Delay stated that he sees no need to use general fund moneys for clinic operations now and that any changes in funding would come from the council. This program is operating very well and is well within the black. The cost is not high, but it would not be unreasonable to include some general fund moneys, although it is not necessarily needed at this time. Ms. Miller stated that she is supportive of the clinic and thanked Mr. Delay for his work in this area. Mr. De 1 ay thanked the citizens in the community. Mayor Keller stated that the report from Tri-Agency in November stated that Greenhill Animal Shelter has reopened. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. XI. PRESENTATION OF LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES (memo and additional information distributed) Mr. Henry introduced Paqet Engen, Staff Services, to provide information on the 1981 legislative priorities. Ms. Engen stated that there are three issues that need to be reviewed with regard to the Legislative Session: the League of Oregon Cities priorities for the upcoming session; additional priorities for the City of Eugene; and the City's policy on testimony by City staff, commissions, and committees. She indicated that the council had received additional information. The top . priority concerns for the League of Oregon Cities are: 1) growth costs/capital financing; 2) LCDC post-acknowledgment system; 3) election dates; 4) workers' compensation reform; 5) fact-finding procedures; 6) unemployment insurance/ voluntary guits; and 7) health hazard annexation. Additional priorities for the City are industrial development revenue bonds, bondinq authority for weath- erization loans, and the Boundary Commission issue. The staff recommendation is to adopt the Eugene issues as legislative priorities for the City, to initiate discussions with Eugene's legislative delegation, and to ask council to take a formal position to cooperate with the League of Oregon Cities on the priorities identified by the League of Oregon Cities. Mayor Keller stated that as President of the League of Oregon Cities Board, he will be actively involved. Ms. Smith stated that she is a member of the League of Oregon Cities Legislative Committee and would request the council to approve the outlined priorities. Mr. Delay said he understands the League of Oreqon Cities initiatives and review process but asked what could be done to coordinate and enhance our relationship with the City of Portland since much of the effort is on Portland programs and po 1 i c i es . . MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 17, 1980 Page 12 Ms. Engen stated they are working together to work out this situation. The e League of Oregon Cities has a representative from Portland in addition to Paget. Sometimes the legislators are willing to try a program in a large city, but not extend it to a smaller city. Mr. Delay indicated that perhaps the council could help that along. Ms. Engen stated that only so much can be done at staff level and elected official ties are important. Mayor Keller asked if a strong commit- ment to the State Board of Higher Education could also be added as a City priority. Ms. Engen stated that this is possible and could be developed in the subcommittee process. Mr. Lieuallen stated he feels the council should be aware of other jurisdictions' priorities. Ms. Engen stated that most of the counties are putting their effort into court cost money and she has been working with them. Mr. lieuallen stated the the County will be working on. the issue of the functions of LCDC and the Boundary Commission. He would like a report on these efforts. The County's efforts to move the costs of courts to the State level could be in direct conflict with City priorities. Ms. Engen stated that this would conflict with urbanization. They need to pursue industrial development issues rather than ask for revenue bonding authority. There also may be other options. Mr. Henry asked if this might include administrative rule changes. Ms. Engen responded that it could, but this would have to be done by the legis- 1 ature. The other option would be to persuade the State to change their economjc development program to better fit the City's needs. This should be described to the Trade and Economic Development Committee. Mr. Delay stated he would like more information as he is not sure that not going after revenue bonding authority is the best route. There should be some authority for the City to deal with the City's own problems. Mayor Keller noted that Eugene would have the support of Salem and Portland in the proposal for cities above 100,000. Ms. Engen stated the Economic Development Committee has been looking at population figures but no -- recommendation has been made yet. Mayor Keller noted that Ms. Engen would be the senior lobbyist in the Oregon Legislature this year. Ms. Engen stated that this will be the first time Salem has had its own lobbyist. Mayor Keller stated he is looking forward to the reports from Ms. Engen. Ms. Engen stated there are informal items which need to be accomplished and the subcommittee will meet in January. Also, the previously canceled legisla- tive dinner will be rescheduled for January. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to accept staff recommendations as outlined in the memo dated December 11, 1980. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. Mayor Keller stated that any priorities for committee assignment should be given to him as soon as possible. The meeting was adjourned to December 22, 1980. Respe~~ '2 ~. Gl son City Manager 4IJ; (Recorded by Lynda Nelson) MDG:LN:pm/CM26a22 MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 17, 1980 Page 13