Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/17/1981 Meeting MINUTES - Eugene City Council City Hall Counc i 1 Ch amber June 17, 1981 11 : 30 a. m . COUNCILORS PRESENT: Brian Obie, Betty Smith, Mark Lindberg, D. W. Hamel, Cynthia Wooten., Gretchen Miller. ABSENT: Councilors Emily Schue and Eric Haws, Mayor Keller. Adjourned meeting of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was called to order by Her Honor Acting Mayor Gretchen Miller. 1. ITEMS FROM MAYOR & COUNCIL, APPOINTMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS, AGENDA ADJUSTMENTS A. Weed Control Ms. Wooten stated that public agencies are trying to manage weeds. She is concerned about the amount of herbicides being used in public parks and public 1 ands. She is very concerned about the use of 2,4-0 and 2,4,5-D and would like e information on what other agencies use these particular herbicides within the City limits. Ms. Miller stated that a report would be brought back to the council. B. Ice Cream Social Invitation Ms. Miller stated that the council had received an invitation to attend an ice cream social. She noted that she would pass it along so that any interested councilors might attend. C. Electric Energy Committee Ms. Miller stated that she had received a letter from L-COG asking that the council appoint a representative to the Local Electric Energy Committee for power planning in the Northwest. This is a result of the Northwest Power Bill and local utilities and general governments, along with the Bonneville Power Administration, have been invited to serve on this committee. She asked that interested councilors let her know of their interest because she would like to appoint someone by next Wednesday. D. Resource Recovery Advisory Board Ms. Miller stated that Lane County has asked for a representative from the council to be appointed to the Resource Recovery Advisory Board. Councilor Wooten has indicated that she would like to serve as the initial representative. Council concurrence was that Ms. Wooten be appointed. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 17, 1981 Page 1 E. Announcements -- Mr. Gleason stated that a public hearing will be held at 7:30 p.m., June 18, 1981, regarding ambulance rates. The interim rates are being modified to the same rates that the Springfield City Council has adopted which are less than MSI was charging but with some changes from the interim rates. He feels that the two cities should be charging the same rates. F. Firefighters' Association Mr. Gleason stated that an announcement indicating settlement of the Firefighters' Association labor negotiations is premature at this time, although negotiations are progressing well. II. ROUTINE ITEMS FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL A. Approval of City Council Minutes of May 20, 1981, and May 26, 1981; and Legislative Subcommittee Minutes of June 9, 1981 (distributed) Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to approve City Council minutes of May 20, 1981, and May 26, 1981; and Legislative Subcommittee minutes of June 9, 1981. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. B. Finance Resolutions (memo, exhibits distributed) e Res. No. 3532--A resolution authorizing the transfer of contingency appropriations within a given fund to official budget categories. Mr. Gleason stated that this resolution is to transfer contingency appropriations to official budget categories for elevator repair and fleet service. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. Res. No. 3533--A resolution authorizing the transfer of non-contingency appropriations within a given fund between official budget categories. Mr. Gleason stated that this resolution is to transfer funds from capital outlay to the operating budget which will enable the continued lease of word processing equipment that had been originally planned for purchase. It was determined that leasing was a better arrangement, due to technological advance- ment. Ms. Wooten asked the purpose of the cash register system in the Downtown Development District fund for the Public Works Department. Loren Stubbert, Finance Services Division, said this is used in the Parking Administration operation for the sale of parking permits. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 17, 1981 Page 2 Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to adopt the resolution. - Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. Res. No. 3534--A resolution acknowledging adjustment to estimated revenues and authorizing the adjustments to appropriations and expenditures related to those revenues. Mr. Gleason stated that this resolution is to acknowledge adjustments in esti- mated revenues and appropriations, and deals primarily with the CETA program. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. C. Call for Public Hearing 1. Easement Vacation for Halvorsen/Bennett (EV 81-3) (map distributed) CB 2320--An ordinance calling for a public hearing for July 29, 1981; re: easement vacation for Halvorsen/Bennett for property located south of Royal Avenue on the west side of Driftwood Drive. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, 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 2320 was read the second time by council bill number only. e Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote; all councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18814. 2. Easement vacation for Vernon Cooper (EV 81-4) (map distributed) CB 2321--An ordinance calling for a public hearing for July 29, 1981; re: easement vacation for Vernon Cooper for property located on the northeast corner of Larkspur and Tabor Street, west of Norkenzie. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, 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. Ro 11 call vote; motion carried unanimously. Council Bill 2321 was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote; all councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18~15. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 17, 1981 Page 3 III. PUBLI C HEAR I NGS e A. Consideration of Resolution Exempting Performing Arts Contracts from the City's Public Contract ~aw (memo distributed) Mr. Gleason introduced Dick Reynolds, Executive Director of the Eugene Performing Arts Center. Mr. Reynolds explained that this resolution is necessary for the Performing Arts Center to hold the kinds of events which will provide a diversity to the public. This will be accomplished in three ways: 1) contracting with local groups for their own productions; 2) contracting with promoters for productions which the promoters have chosen; and 3) the center will also contract for events of its own choice, to try to assure the wide diversity of entertainment which the Performing Arts Commission and EPAC have been charged to provide. They will be holding at least two series on an annual basis and some single events as well, such as a jazz festival in the summertime. Present contract law requires that all City purchases go out to bid, but this would be impossible for performing situations. They need to negotiate directly with performers and promoters to make a good selection for a wide diversity and to be able to preserve artistic freedom. Staff feels that all performing arts contracts relating to the use of the Performing Arts Center should be exempt from the public contract law. Ms. Wooten asked for clarification as to how this conforms with State contract 1 aw. Les Swanson, City Attorney, stated that under the home rule provisions, the City of Eugene feels it can exempt situations like this from local bidding 1 aw. State contract laws are different from the City's ordinances which would e make the City in potential conflict with the State, but the legal opinion is that the City can authorize this exemption under its own ordinances due to the home rule provision. Ms. Smith asked if this could be under the same provision as "Sole Provider of Services." She also asked if this could be opening up other changes in contract bidding by providing this opportunity. Mr. Swanson stated that contracting for arts services is complex. Either one negotiates for a particular performer that is desired or those people do not perform. The artist, in that case, is the sole provider. Exemptions could be granted indivi- dually or, by adoption of this resolution, all contracts which relate to the Performing Arts Center would be exempted. This ordinance is not a significant exception to the contract bidding policy. Ms. Smith noted that this recommenda- tion is coming from the Performing Arts Commission and asked if local artists have concerns with these exemptions. Mr. Reynolds stated that they do not. They understand this is the way it must happen. It is a foregone conclusion. No objections have ever been noted. Mr. Lindberg asked what the decision-making process was for awarding performing arts contracts. He indicated concern with people who might feel that there is not a wide enough diversity or performers who feel the process is unfair. Mr. Reynolds explained that Ordinance 18508 is the enabling ordinance which allows the Performing Arts commission to make recommendations necessary for a wide diversity of performances for a cross section of the community. It also appears in the commission's bylaws. It is staff's responsibility to make sure that the diversity occurs. They have been asking citizens for input for the e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 17, 1981 Page 4 kinds of performances that are desired and to show that staff is open to e recommendations, although not all recommendations can be pursued, due to the cost of certain performers or the size of the hall. Also, some performers that are destrtngto appear here may not be making a Northwest tour or there could be other reasons that certain performers could not come, such as illness. They are trying to have as many types of entertainment as possible represented within the five-week opening. Staff and the commission are open to recommendations whether they are formal or informal, from the public and the council. Mr. Lindberg asked if the avenue of complaint would be through the commission. Mr. Reynolds responded that it would, and if the commission is not satisfied with the work staff is doing, they could come before the council. Public hearing was opened; there being no testimony, public hearing was closed. Res No. 3535--A resolution exempting from the City's public contract law as a class all Performing Arts contracts relating to the use and operation of the Performing Arts Center. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote; Motion carried unanimously. B. Consideration of Ordinance Increasing Garbage Collection Rates (memo, ordinance distributed) Mr. Gleason stated that the Garbage Board is recommending an increase in garbage collection rates. He introduced Terry Grondona, Finance. Ms. Grondona stated that in compliance with code section 3.255, the licensed e garbage haulers have submitted financial information supporting their request for an 8.9% increase in rates for garbage service in the City, effective July 1, 1981. Comparison of the composite financial information for last year shows that operating expenses have increased 6.4%, 96.4% of the revenue received by the haulers, leaving only 3.6% as wages for the owner-operators this year. Net income has dropped from 5.7% to .1%. The justification which the haulers presented to the Garbage Board for the proposed rate increase included a number of operational increases. During the past 12 months, the price of diesel fuel rose 19%, gasoline rose 16%, oil increased 33%, hydraulic oil increased 53%, the price of tires increased 25-30%, and labor costs rose 16.7%. This industry has been affected more than the Consumer Price Index indicator because it is petro- leum product related. The proposed rate increase schedules the basic residential service charge at $4.90 for one 32-gallon can picked up weekly. By passing on the County dump site user fee of $1.10, the monthly charge would be $6.00. The Garbage Board feels this 8.9% increase is a reasonable effort to match the increases which this industry has experienced in the last year. The projected raise and percentage of revenue for owner wages and net income based upon the previous rate increase did not happen because expenses did not remain at the same level, but instead increased. The Garbage Board further recommends that the council adopt the County user fee as part of the City Code. In the past, due to equipment efficiency variations between the haulers, the County fee levied at the transfer site also varied between customers. However, effective January 1, the County determined the transfer site charge based on the weight of the truck which should eliminate the variations in County fee costs passed on to the customer. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 17, 1981 Page 5 Therefore, the City can now incorporate the user fee schedule into the code, e which will enable consistent regulation to occur as it was intended. An amend- ment to section 3.255 merely clarifies the requirement of the garbage haulers for provision of financial information on an annual basis. The amendment to section 8, paragraphs 1 and 2, addresses language and would be inserting "worker" in place of "men." She noted that Wally Swanson, chair of the Garbage Board, is present if additional information is necessary. Ms. Miller asked why the dump site fee is being included as part of the City Code. Ms. Grondona stated that this was discussed at the Garbage Board meeting. The fee has varied because of equipment efficiency and now the fee is based on tonnage and there will be no variances. Ms. Miller asked if it is being recom- mended that the user get a prorated charge. Ms. Grondona stated that the exact County fee for one can per week is $1.10. Ms. Miller asked if people's charges may vary. Ms. Grondona stated that that occurs depending upon how many cans are picked up, but the same methodology would apply per can. Ms. Miller asked if that fee will add up to what the hauler has to pay. Ms. Grondona stated that current information shows that it would be what the hauler has to pay. The County had provided information which substantiates that. Ms. Miller asked if the haulers are in agreement. Ms. Grondona stated that some of the haulers were present and they could address that question. Ms. Wooten asked if there would be less waste because of higher fees and if there would be any incentive to reduce the amount of refuse. Ms. Grondona stated that that was not discussed at the Garbage Board meeting. Public hearing was opened. e Bob Fenstermacher, 2267 Olive, stated that he is manager of Sani-Pac. He is speaking in favor of the proposed increase. The basic rate being proposed is $4.90 for the service with an additional $1.10 for the County fee, which is a pass-through fee for each 32-gallon can. The rate increase is 8.9 percent. Since the County fee of $1.10 is remaining the same, the actual proposed rate increase being requested is only 7.1 percent on the basic rate. Ms. Mi 11 er asked if their firm had kept track of how much money they had billed customers for the County fee and if that works out to what the County charges the haulers. She would like to know if it is really a pass-through fee. Mr. Fenstermacher responded that it is very easy to determine what they pay the County and they also know what they bill their customers and it comes out the same. By using a " rat i 0, they had been ab 1 e to provi de a rebate to their customers, until the County started charging by the ton, because their equipment is very efficient. The County determined that the charges would be based on the number of tons and determined the differential, which is based on $16 per ton. This works out almost exactly to what the customers are charged. Waste is heavier when wet so sometimes they are charged more than when the waste is light during the summer, but on an annual basis it works out. Ms. Miller asked if he foresaw a reduction in the amount of waste picked up. Mr. Fenstermacher responded that at this time there has been no reduction, although that is a possibility. They did notice a decrease in the amount of waste when the County began charging a fee. Ms. Wooten asked what the average amount of waste per household is in Eugene. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 17, 1981 Page 6 Mr. Fenstermacher stated that most families are one-can households. He stated e that when one looks at the amount of service provided to the households, this is a very reasonable charge. He asked where else one could have someone drive to a residential site on a weekly basis with expensive equipment to pick up waste and remove it to a remote site 4.33 times a month and only charge $4.90. Scott Bales, 88686 Oak Hill Cemetery Road, stated that he is part owner of Royal Refuse. They have been experiencing double-digit inflation with the products they use to provide the service to their customers. However, he has questions about incorporating the County fee into this proposal. Sani-Pac representatives noted that they had been giving a rebate to their customers and Royal Refuse is able to do that. He is not sure that people understand what has happened. In July, when the County started charging the fee, there was a difference between what was collected from the customers to cover this fee and what the haulers paid at the dump site. Gary Schafer, 3938 Josh Street, stated that he is with ACME Disposal Service. He supports the increase. Their firm is a small business with two employees and it is impossible for them to absorb the dump fee without the ability to pass those charges on to the customers. He feels the dump fee is in line with what they are charging their customers. He indicated that he had kept count of the number of cans he picked up and it worked out exactly. Lee Johnson, 2897 Tomahawk Lane, stated that he feels this is a reasonable request. He has looked at his records as a customer from October 1975 to July 31, 1980. His total garbage collection fees have increased 100 percent e within that four-year period. The percentage of increase per year has been 24.39 percent, which he feels is excessive. However, at this time, the Garbage Board has done a good job of keeping the rates down. He indicated that the company which provides his service has two small vehicles which pick up and dump into a larger truck. This is a depression and many people will work cheaply, so perhaps that is why they can afford three people for one street. He does not know how else they could add to their service. He feels the previous rate increases were excessive but that this one is in line. There being no further testimony, public hearing was closed. CB 2322--An ordinance concerning garbage services; amending Section 3.255 of the Eugene Code, 1971; repealing Sections 3 to 9 of Ordinance No. 18629; establishing new rates for garbage services; and declaring an emergency. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, 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. Ms. Wooten asked if the user fee automatically increases to the consumer if it is raised by the County. Ms. Grondona responded that it would have to come back before the council in order to increase the amount charged to the customer. Ms. Wooten stated that she understood that this fee would be fixed, unless it would be reconsidered at a later time by the council. Ms. Miller felt that the reason e that this went so smoothly was due to the good financial accounting system. MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 17, 1981 Page 7 . Council Bill 2322 was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote; all councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18816. IV. ANNUAL REPORT OF EUGENE CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT COMMITTEE--PRESENTATION TO BE MADE BY CHAIRPERSON (report distributed) Mr. Gleason introduced Darcy Marentette to deliver the second annual report of the Eugene Citizen Involvement Committee. Ms. Marentette stated that the CIC has been very active, they have expanded their membership, and they are working very well together. They have formed four working subcommittees. There has been active communication with the neighborhood leaders. Terri Vanderpool has done a good job staffing the commit- tee as have others in the Planning Department. The questionnaire results from those people participating in recent land-use decisions have been distributed. An analysis will be brought back at a later time. Those City departments involved in the planning process seem to be working well according to the results of the survey. The Hearings Official ~rocess was rated very good. In the future CIC hopes to involve a more diverse group in these processes. Cur- rently, the majority of those who participate are active citizens who are highly educated. They are now trying to involve more people by developing an informa- tional brochure for the planning process. This brochure will tell people how to e deal with the process and how to take part. Many written comments were received from those who did not like the public hearing process, since staff can rebut but those providing testimony cannot. CIC may make a recommendation on this at a later time. Also, CIC is working on a community curriculum program for work- shops for secondary school teachers. This program had been proposed for this year but was delayed due to funding problems. They are now working on locating funds. She requested that the council and Planning Commission let them know if there are ways in which the CIC can help. Planning Commissioner Barkman has asked CIG to take a look at the neighborhood charters regarding businesses having voting members and that is something they will be working on. Ms. Schue had requested the council to look at the assessment process and they should have responses ready in the fall. Adrienne Lannom, representing herself as a citizen, stated that she had concerns regarding the hearings panel and the Zoning Board of Appeals. They will be making recommendations soon about this. Ms. Wooten noted that she had enjoyed representing the council on this commit- tee. The committee members work well together. They are a very diverse group. Ms. Miller noted that she is pleased to see the projects they are tackling and the answers they are coming up with. V. EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES REVIEW (memo distributed) Mr. Gleason stated that Mr. Obie would be providing background on this item, but first, he had some comments to make. The City's emergency medical ser- vices are moving from a transition period into a stabilization and study phase. e I MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 17, 1981 Page 8 A review of the fees is currently being undertaken. Mr. Gleason said he will be e reviewing the operational charges. Mr. Obie will be addressing policy changes. Currently the ambulances are operating on a stabilized basis of about 110 to 120 runs per week. Approximately 70 percent of their runs are within the city limits. They have billed between $55~000 and $60~000 over this time period and it looks as though these operations can continue on a break-even basis. There is a mutual aid relationship with Springfield which is working out very well. The average response time per run last week was 3.2 minutes. Since the time that the cities began working with the ambulances~ the average run has been under 3.5 minutes at all times. Seventy percent of the runs are code 3 emergency runs. They feel that part of the success is due to better deployment with five stations rather than with only two locations as MSI had. Mr. Obie stated that there are still technical problems that need to be addressed and this is his concern. With the change from private to public involvement~ there is no need for political involvement. However, he feels there is a need for the council to monitor the situation and receive feedback. He has suggested that a staff review board be created with two persons appointed by the Eugene City Manager, two persons appointed by the Springfield City Manager, one person appointed by the County General Administrator, and one person appointed by the chair of the Lane County Fire Defense Board to represent the rural fire districts. Those officials would be responsible for operation of the system and should provide direction and policy decisions. The staff review board would compile and analyze basic and advanced life support response times in both urban and rural areas, evaluate the success of meeting medical quality of care stan- dards, review the rate structure in comparison with other cities, monitor e revenues and expenditures and billing collections, and monitor any other item which staff. council. or the public feels is appropriate to an analysis of municipal ambulance operation. In addition, this board should come back to the council with a rate-setting procedure recommendation, various reports on income and expenditures, and one year from now a recommendation should come from the board regarding the scope of service. A public hearing could be held at that time. He would like for the City Council and the County Commissioners to hear in a public hearing how citizens feel the ambulance provisions are going. At that point, they could decide if the review would be held on an annual basis. He feels the council should review the rate-setting methodology. It is also important that expenditure and income reports be received on a timely basis. Ms. Wooten asked what the rates are now in comparison with those that MSI charged. Mr. Gleason stated that the interim rates are considerably lower than MSI's and the proposed rates now will be slightly higher than the interim rates, yet less than those of MSI if the council had approved their rate increase request. Bill Haley, Finance, stated that the base rates and mileage are the same as MSI charged, but the mileage is computed differently. Service time at $1.25 per minute is the same as MSI charged, but all other charges or procedures are sUbstantially less than MSI was charging. Ms. Wooten asked how much less the average bill is. Mr. Haley stated that in March of 1981, the average bill from e MINUTES--Eugene City Council , June 17, 1981 Page 9 MSI was $235. With their rate request, the average charge would have been $301. - The average with the cities providing ambulance service has been $183 and with the increased rates being proposed, it would bring the average up to about $225. Mr. Gleason noted that the current rate increase being considered will be brought before the council to approve. Ms. Wooten asked if any members of the medical community would be represented on the staff review board. Mr. Obie stated that there would be two ex officio members from the medical community. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to adopt and recommend to Springfield and Lane County that they review and approve the creation of the staff review mechanism of the Staff Review Board to replace the Emergency Medical Services Task Force. Mr. Gl eason noted that both oLthe pther agencies are agree-able to thi s. r'1s. Mi 11 er stated that this is a solid and well thought out proposal. She feels the review in one year is a good idea to see how well services are functioning. Staff has done a good job. In one year~ review of the scope of service for alternative providers of non-emergency services would be a good idea. There is a need for cooperation with the medical community as well as with Springfield and Lane County to maintain good communication and quality of care. Reactions to any emergency medical problems must be very fast and she feels this would help give clear channels of direction. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. e Mr. Gleason indicated that he would take this proposal to the other agencies and if it is approved, he will bring it back to the council as a formal resolution. The meeting was adjourned to June 22, 1981. Respectfully SUb~ ~~. Micheal D. Gleason City Manager (Recorded by Lynda Nelson) MDG:LN:ky/CM26b20 /tI MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 17 ~ 1981 Page 10