Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 3A: Approval of City Council Minutes ECC UGENE ITY OUNCIL AIS GENDA TEM UMMARY Approval of City Council Minutes Meeting Date: November 13, 2006 Agenda Item Number: 3A Department: City Manager’s Office Staff Contact: Lynda Rose www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-5017 ISSUE STATEMENT This is a routine item to approve City Council meeting minutes. SUGGESTED MOTION Move to approve the minutes of the September 25, 2006, City Council Meeting, October 9, 2006, Work Session, October 9, 2006, City Council Meeting, October 16, 2006, Work Session, October 16, 2006, City Council Meeting, and October 23, 2006, Work Session. ATTACHMENTS A. September 25, 2006, City Council Meeting B. October 9, 2006, Work Session C. October 9, 2006, City Council Meeting D. October 16, 2006, Work Session E. October 16, 2006, City Council Meeting F. October 23, 2006, Work Session FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Lynda Rose Telephone: 682-5017 Staff E-Mail: lynda.l.rose@ci.eugene.or.us L:\CMO\2006 Council Agendas\M061113\S0611133A.doc ATTACHMENT A M I N U T E S Eugene City Council City Council Meeting Council Chamber—Eugene City Hall September 25, 2006 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Jennifer Solomon, Bonny Bettman, David Kelly, Andrea Ortiz, Gary Papé, George Poling, Chris Pryor, Betty Taylor. Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order and welcomed everyone to the meeting. 1. PUBLIC FORUM Mayor Piercy reviewed the rules of the Public Forum. Peg Renkert , 589 Covey Lane, related that on May 21 her house was demolished by a 90-foot-tall, 30,000-pound electrical transmission tower, causing over $200,000 in damage. She had been away at a fundraiser, but usually on that night of the week she had a family night at her house. Had her family been there, she felt they could have come to serious harm. She alleged that she encountered difficulties in her attempts to get “more than lip service and attitude” from the Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) in this matter. She said the Quail Run Homeowners Association (QRHA) and the Harlow Neighbors Association (HNA) supported her efforts. She alleged that EWEB staff had destroyed evidence, kept information from her, and refused her requests to have access to the destroyed concrete tower. She related that she had been told by an EWEB representative that the concrete from the tower had gone to Eugene Sand & Gravel to be crushed. She inquired about the concrete at several such businesses, including Eugene Sand & Gravel, and no one seemed to know anything about it. She asserted that EWEB was hiding something. She stated that the QRHA was trying to get the towers rerouted, but EWEB had decided to keep the towers where they were. Kerry Lancy , 3626 Oxbow Way, Ms. Renkert’s daughter, felt that had May 21 been “a normal Sunday” for her family, she and her children would have been in the living room that was been crushed by the tower. She was very upset by this. She asserted that EWEB had withheld information and possibly provided false information about where the remains of the poles are. She alleged that EWEB did not include the citizens of Eugene in its decisions and actions. She cited as evidence EWEB’s unwillingness to discuss relocating the transmission lines. She recalled that EWEB was chartered by the City of Eugene to serve the interests of its citizens. She asked the council to require it to provide the information and to ask it to work with the QRHA and HNA in a participatory process to explore options for rerouting the poles. She noted that these types of poles were located all over the city and predicted that another one would fall. MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 25, 2006 Page 1 Regular Meeting Clement Bosch , 469 Covey Lane, president of the QRHA, stated that when two poles broke, one falling on Ms. Renkert’s house, Quail Run area residents had ceased to feel safe. He averred that residents living by the towers were greatly concerned that one would fall on them, too. He said EWEB agreed to replace the two fallen towers and the two next to them with steel towers. While he felt that was a good start, he did not think it was enough. He stated that EWEB would not replace a fifth tower, the one that was immediately north of the one that had failed, although it was leaning. He related that EWEB indicated that the tower would not lean after the wires were reconnected. He did not feel this was reassuring, especially to the residents who could see the leaning tower from their windows. He stated that the towers had been placed there in the 1970s prior to any residences and were supposed to stand for at least 100 years. He thought EWEB’s 35-year-old assumptions were not valid today. He questioned how EWEB could think that it would not happen again. He said according to meteorologists violent weather was on the rise and predicted there would be more storms of great magnitude. He reiterated Ms. Renkert’s requests for more information and cooperation in rerouting the towers. Renee Gottesman , 473 Covey Lane, member of the board of the QRHA, had been out of town when the towers fell. She had been shocked to return to the damage that occurred. She said people had lost confidence in the structures. She related that she was present at the EWEB meeting at which the Quail Run residents testified. She was disappointed in EWEB’s response to this situation. She hoped that the City Council could exert some influence on EWEB. Matt Svoboda , 492 Covey Lane, stated that he and his wife looked out their bedroom window at the leaning transmission tower. He related that it was scary to look at. He urged EWEB to replace it with a more stable tower or, better yet, to move the whole set of towers. He read the tail end of Ms. Renkert’s statement as she had run out of time. Ms. Renkert wanted to emphasize that this type of transmission tower was in use in many different areas of the community. She wished to underscore that EWEB’s Website encouraged the public to participate in the utility’s process. She no longer believed this was true. Keith Nastiuk , 489 Covey Lane, stated that the number one issue the QRHA was addressing was that EWEB felt the utility facilities were there first and, therefore, should not be relocated. He averred that the dynamics of the area had changed and there was now a community of 200 people living there; some residents with a sizable investment in the area. He believed EWEB officials needed to sit down with all of the residents in order to provide them with the opportunity to work with EWEB staff to relocate the towers. He asserted that the towers no longer belonged there. Kate Perle , 4740 Wendover Street, registered her opposition to the “ongoing street annexations” in the River Road/Santa Clara area. She had seen a notice on a telephone pole regarding a street annexation scheduled to be considered on October 5. She was angered by this, as street annexations were supposed to be voluntary. She alleged that the residents who applied for annexation of their property in order to get a building permit were asked by staff if the street adjacent to them could be “piggybacked” onto their annexation and the residents had said no. She alleged that staff had proceeded with this annexation request anyway. She felt the street annexations were surrounding residents and removing from them the right to vote should “wholesale” annexation eventually happen. She called this an insidious, underhanded, and highly unfriendly treatment of the community. She asserted that City staff talked about annexation and likened it to being a band-aid that needed to be ripped off and would only hurt for a little bit. She found this offensive because the River Road/Santa Clara area was “not a sore on the edge of Eugene.” Rather, it was a “vibrant, valuable community” that she felt the City should treat with dignity and respect. She averred that the River Road/Santa Clara community was filled with capable collaborative “folks” who were interested in a positive future, but if City staff “continued to step on peoples’ toes” it would cause irreparable harm to area residents’ trust. She stated that both the Santa Clara Community Organization MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 25, 2006 Page 2 Regular Meeting and the River Road Community Organization opposed connecting street annexations with property annexations. Additionally, she thought the reason for the annexations was that if the City annexed the streets on its own, it would have to pay the fee, but by tacking it on to an existing annexation request this was not so. Claire Syrett , 363 Adams Street, stated that she was a member of the Sustainable Business Initiative (SBI) Task Force and a representative of workers’ interests. She hoped the council would support the recom- mendations of the SBI Task Force and would understand that they were the first steps in moving the local economy towards true sustainability. She related that initially the task force had no idea what a daunting task they were undertaking. The process, approach, and goals, she felt, were uncharted territory for Eugene, as bringing business, environmental, government, and worker interests together to seek ways to promote sustainable business practices had never been done before. She hoped the council and community would build upon this work to continue to move the initiative toward success. She averred that success must include equal footing for the consideration of workers in the local economy. She noted that the press had focused on the environmental recommendations. She underscored that without the deliberate inclusion of the needs of workers and the greater community the initiative would fail. She said how workers were encouraged to do the work of the sustainable business would be critical to the success of the initiative. The Eugene/Springfield Solidarity Network (ESSN) and the Labor Education and Research Center researched local workers’ views on sustainable business and found great support for the concept and those businesses seen as sustainable. She related that workers also expressed skepticism that business would give the workers and their needs co-equal status with the needs of protecting the environment. She asserted that workers wanted real standards by which they could judge whether or not a business was sustainable and that included worker treatment and positive interaction with the community. She noted that there was struggle within the task force about how to set measurements for sustainability with regard to workers’ concerns, while environmental measurements were seen as acceptable. She felt this should be of concern to those who wanted the initiative to succeed. She also felt it offered an opportunity for leadership on the part of the City Council to work through the “sticking points.” th Kartar Khalsa , 795 East 37 Avenue, member of the SBI Task Force, thanked the Mayor for the vision and courage that it took to put the SBI group together. He highly encouraged the City Council to support the recommendations of the SBI. He said the most important part would be to set up a system that would live beyond this current administration and be self-sustaining for the length of time it would take to achieve the goals that had been set. He urged the council to establish a system to set an office or commission of sustainability to ensure the efforts were continued. He felt this was an opportunity for the City to take a leadership role and to partner with business and the Chamber of Commerce, in order to develop sustainable business and to bring new sustainable business to the community. He asked the council to look at the SBI recommendations carefully and to make the investment now for the future, because the future would be different. He averred that the resources available in the future would be different. He stated that he wanted a sustainable future for the children. Kathy Johnson , 465 Covey Lane, echoed the points made by her Quail Run neighbors. For he, it boiled down to an issue of safety, which should be the first priority. She believed EWEB was putting dollars and cents above the safety of the community. She urged the council to help bring EWEB to the table to come up with a viable solution that would be safe for all of the community. Randy Stender , 2898 Powderhorn Street, recommended the Council Chamber be converted into a Cultural Center. He reminded the council that DIVA submitted a statement of interest, signed by many of the cultural organizations in town, requesting the opportunity to do so. He noted that the signers included David Turner, director of the Jordan Schnitzer Museum, and Bob Hart, of the Lane County Historical MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 25, 2006 Page 3 Regular Meeting Museum. He related that they discussed the establishment of an outreach gallery for the University of Oregon. He thought this would be a bridge to the “town and gown” issue the town faced. He suggested the County-owned “butterfly” parking lot location for a new City Hall site. Jan Swanson , 489 Covey Lane, stated that she had bought a home in the Quail Run neighborhood because of the quality of construction. She wanted EWEB to take responsibility for the accident that occurred on May 21 and replace and relocate all of the poles. Carolyn Kranzler , 2660 Cresta De Ruta, urged the City of Eugene and the council to take a proactive role in the development of the city center as a comprehensive cultural center. She averred that adopting the theme “arts and outdoors” was a first step. She said the next step would be to provide funds and the direction to facilitate that development. She asked that the City retain the current City Hall complex as a cultural center. She thought the building was well-suited for it. She envisioned a mixed-use facility with arts-related retail, galleries, art schools, and live theater. She suggested that the Council Chamber could be used for films, videos, and cultural presentations. She asked the council to imagine the surrounding plaza as a sculpture garden. Noting she was an architect, she registered her objection to razing a serviceable building. She asserted that the City had done this many times in the past. She objected strongly to the expenditure of $500,000 “just to clear the site.” She also thought relocating city offices twice was a waste of money. She echoed Mr. Stender’s recommendation that the “butterfly” lot be utilized for a new City Hall site. st Lisa Arkin , 436 West 21 Avenue, a member of the SBI Task Force, thanked Mayor Piercy for convening the task force. She remarked that she had gone into the process with the idea that she knew a lot about sustainability, given that she was the executive director of the Oregon Toxics Alliance, but the task force experience had taught her how little she knew. She commended the work of Bob Doppelt and his interns for the leadership they provided, especially given that there were 16 members. She related that she had participated in a day-long retreat and had been paired with fellow member Rusty Rexius to explore the concept of sustainable purchasing. She said they spent three hours talking about it and determined they could “barely make the thinnest of recommendations” because of the vastness of the subject. She recommended the City lead by looking into a process by which products with toxic elements could be identified and by finding readily available alternatives. She hoped the council would take the task force’s recommendation seriously and create a commission and an office for the future. Pauline Hutson , 1025 Taylor Street, said she watched the City Council discussion on the Jefferson- Westside Neighborhood and had become concerned that there might be some misunderstandings about the economic circumstances of some of the residents there. She wished to underscore that she and her partner had lived in the neighborhood for five and a half years; they were a one-income family that could not afford to move. Their vehicles were more than 20 years old and they could not afford to replace them. She said the neighborhood featured diversity in households and economic backgrounds, with a mixture of renters, homeowners, and landlords. She noted that she and her partner were active members of the Chambers Area Families for Healthy Neighborhoods (CAFHN), which had a continuing interest in ensuring that the neighborhood remained attractive and safe. She added that 40 percent of the residents in the CAFHN area were renters. Jozef Siekiel-Zdzienicki , 1025 Taylor Street, did not believe bed and breakfasts were zoned correctly. He stated that such a business could have up to five rooms to let but was not required to provide off - street parking, though motels were required to do so. He said bed and breakfasts were 24-hour commercial ventures and could be noisy at all hours, seven days a week. He objected to the placement of bed and breakfast businesses in residential neighborhoods. MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 25, 2006 Page 4 Regular Meeting st Scott Bartlett , 1445 East 21 Avenue, recalled the different city managers who had served Eugene over the years. He read in The Register-Guard that City Manager Dennis Taylor might be “lured” away by a job in Lawrence, Kansas. He valued all of the elected officials. He had met Mr. Taylor several times and understood that Mr. Taylor had originally come from Kansas. He remembered hearing that Robert F. Kennedy was a source of inspiration for Mr.Taylor. He appreciated the natural tensions that happened between a city council that would want “legitimate oversight” and the city manager who acted as “the traffic cop” that juggled all the elements of the City. Having viewed the City Manager on Channel 21 and read about him in the newspaper, he concluded that Mr. Taylor was a very decent human being, motivated by high principles. He averred that our country needed to be in touch with its greatest political thinkers on both sides of the aisle as we enter into difficult troubled waters. He presented a picture of John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy, and Ted Kennedy to Mr. Taylor that he had owned for 30 years. The City Manager graciously accepted the picture. Bob Kline , 594 Covey Lane, chairman of the Harlow Neighborhood Association and a Quail Run resident, related that he and his wife had witnessed the transmission lines fallen across their backyard. He attended two meetings with EWEB and felt that while many questions were asked, not many had been answered. He reiterated that transmission towers were all over the City and averred that this was not just a Quail Run issue. He asked if no one had oversight over EWEB. He read a resolution passed unanimously by the Harlow Neighborhood Association that demanded that neighborhood residents be allowed to participate in the process to place the towers and to inspect the damaged remnants of the tower that fell. Zachary Vishanoff, on Patterson Street, averred that if the City denied discussion of adaptive reuse of the current city hall complex “with people who really know about that stuff” it would be “continuing its destructive pattern.” He reiterated his unhappiness with the razing of the closed cannery building, now the location of the new federal courthouse. He asserted that adaptive reuse was “real sustainability.” He said the problem with new urbanism was that it always made “it new” and did not respect existing communities. He was afraid that creating a sustainable business initiative without public input to point out potential pitfalls, would allow there to be ways for a pesticide producer to declare itself sustainable. He noted that there had not been much public input at the SBI Task Force meetings. He was concerned that sustainabil- ity was a “slippery term.” He asserted that there were many “Fortune 500” companies with sustainable initiatives and he did not want them expanding in Eugene. He wanted a public hearing to be held. He recommended that the councilors Google the following: “Smart Growth: Smart or Not.” Charles Biggs , 540 Antelope Way, expressed his agreement with the Quail Run residents’ demand to inspect the remains of the concrete towers, the testimony objecting to the annexation of roads, and the supporters of the Sustainable Business Initiative. Regarding the latter, he had tried to attend as many of the meetings as he could. He encouraged the City Council to learn as much as possible about the “triple bottom line: the environment, the economy, and the social aspect.” He thought it important to engage in “whole system thinking” and asked that the City Council think about how sustainable a decision they were about to make would be in all aspects of it. He wished to see sustainability permeate the status quo of local government. Cary Thompson , 966 Jackson Street, expressed his support for the work of the SBI Task Force. He hoped the report would not sit on a shelf and gather dust. He thought the initiative was an opportunity to engage in ongoing collaboration between city staff, the University of Oregon, the general public, and the business community. He urged the council accept many of the recommendations, especially the recommen- dation to form an office of sustainability and board or commission. MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 25, 2006 Page 5 Regular Meeting David Hinkley , 1350 Lawrence Street #1, said he had provided initial comments in regard to opportunity siting and infill to the council via email. He asserted that infill was not being built to destroy neighbor- hoods, rather the intention was to provide housing for people, in many cases affordable housing. He noted he was one of the “48 percent” of Eugene residents that rented. He averred that rental housing was more susceptible to market forces than owner-occupied dwellings. He felt that if there was a limited amount of housing available, the people willing and able to spend the most money for housing would have a roof over their heads while “the rest of us end up in cars and under bridges.” He underscored that the City needed to ensure that there was adequate rental housing available to meet the need. He felt that zoning out large portions of the city as “permit-able” places to develop rental housing was not a way to address the problem. He said he was seeing and hearing people who, for a variety of reasons, were worried about the impact infill would have on their neighborhood. He wished to point out that a large number of homeless people might have a greater impact. He added that apartments were residential in nature and renters were people deserving of a place to live. Chris Bush , 495 Covey Lane, a licensed electrical engineer, stated that he had moved into the Quail Run neighborhood 18 months earlier. He noted that prior to being an electrical engineer he had worked as a lineman and that he was an electrocution survivor. He was bothered that the residents were not able to analyze the failed structures. He found the circumstances regarding the remains of the towers that were alleged to have disappeared to be “suspicious.” He read a passage from a chapter entitled Accidents Waiting to Happen in an engineering book that stressed the importance of keeping the discussion of the cause of a failed of a structure as open as possible. He had formerly believed that “[his] industry” would proceed to do the right thing but he no longer had confidence in this. He related that he walked or rode his recumbent bike under the transmission lines every day. He said it was common that the industry was finding that projected lifespans of such structures were compromised by unexpected corrosion of the steel supporting members. He asked why such an important lesson was “destroyed.” Rob Handy , 455-½ River Road, echoed Mr. Bartlett’s comments regarding the City Manager. He restated the recommendation from the Neighborhood Leaders Council for the work plan the council would review on September 27. He related that the council had two priorities: 1) the implementation of infill compatibil- ity standards and 2) the next generation of enforceable neighborhood plans. He said they also had a companion motion that talked about preserving the natural environment, which was a high priority “encompassing a broad spectrum of tasks and projects” including watershed and wetlands protection, stormwater management, tree preservation and more. He indicated he would send the full text of this advisory. Mr. Handy advised, regarding the River Road neighborhood, that first the City should “do no harm.” He said this needed to be kept in mind when looking at how to balance development, heritage neighborhoods, and the protection of the stability and quality of those neighborhoods. He wanted to examine how low- impact development standards could be designed and implemented. He also wanted to look into how the City could preserve its green space. He asked the council to consider how to incorporate things that everyone talked about in the transition project. He felt the “nice things from the framework strategy” should be implemented city-wide, or if not city-wide at least on a case by case basis in the River Road/Santa Clara neighborhood. He asserted the neighborhood was trying to “prove the. . . new culture of trust” and if area residents could see those elements “on the ground” it would be helpful. He echoed Ms. Perle’s concerns regarding street annexations. He noted that Planning and Development Department (PDD) staff had called street annexations reasonable and logical. He opined that this was not “panning out.” He questioned why the City was looking to create a contentious situation for a possible short-term gain. MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 25, 2006 Page 6 Regular Meeting Mike Morin , 361 West Broadway, #12, wished to second the comments of Ms. Syrett. In regard to the Sustainable Business Initiative, he averred that if profits were to be made then profits should be reinvested in the community. He declared that sustainability must address global warming, peak oil, noise, and air and water pollution. He said by 2020 people needed to radically reduce their dependence on the automo- bile. He lauded Mr. Rexius for the work he had done, but disagreed that the community should have as a goal to attract outside businesses. He questioned why the City would do so when it had “such a talent pool” associated with the University population. He said the big issue was equity; sustainability without equity and equity without sustainability would not work. He felt the goal should not be more rental housing and wages but rather the goal should be to give ownership to the less fortunate members of society. Mayor Piercy closed the Public Forum and called for council comments. She conveyed her appreciation for all of the work that the task force members had done on the Sustainable Business Initiative. She wished to point out that the process had included two community forums, surveys, 750 people, and 50 people on a technical advisory committee in an attempt to be as inclusive as possible. She thanked the people who spoke about the initiative for coming to the council meeting. She also expressed appreciation for the people who spoke on other topics. Councilor Papé echoed the Mayor’s comments regarding the public testimony. He had been very concerned and disturbed to hear of the Quail Run homeowners difficulties in communicating with EWEB. He intended to call EWEB Commissioner Ron Farmer regarding the tower issue. He noted that unless there were issues related to money, the City Council had very little influence over EWEB. Councilor Papé was also concerned about the practice of “piggybacking” street annexations on top of property annexations. He asked for a memorandum in response to Ms. Perle’s testimony. He thought there should be a community discussion on this issue. Regarding the reuse of City Hall, Councilor Papé said he was concerned with the safety of the structure. He explained that the City had obtained several studies of the seismic inadequacies of the structure. He averred that he would not put a public place in the place of the City Hall without improving the building structurally. He added that the City would not have the resources to provide the needed seismic upgrades. Councilor Solomon said she also wished to have a memorandum clarifying the council’s authority over EWEB. She wanted to know what the council could do to encourage EWEB to move on the issue. She thanked the Quail Run residents for coming down and testifying. Councilor Solomon announced that residents in her ward, the North Eugene/Bethel/Danebo area, would have an opportunity to provide comments on September 26 to the Mayor and her at the Albertson’s Store. Councilor Poling said he had the same question regarding the delineation of authority over EWEB. He urged his colleagues to do what they could to ask EWEB to work more closely with the Quail Run residents. He declared that something must be done about the problem. He said he had been invited to view the damage and had been amazed. Councilor Kelly thanked the members of the public for their testimony. He seconded Councilor Solomon’s request for a memorandum regarding the council’s legal authority over EWEB. He thought if nothing else Councilor Poling could draft a letter to EWEB for the City Councilors to sign. MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 25, 2006 Page 7 Regular Meeting Additionally, Councilor Kelly suggested that the City Council hold a work session on the annexation policy. Councilor Taylor expressed concern about the River Road area residents, especially given that the residents that had testified had talked about their trust being destroyed. Councilor Taylor echoed the comments of her colleagues regarding the Quail Run issue. Continuing, Councilor Taylor also agreed with Mr. Morin regarding whether to attract outside business. She preferred to preserve local businesses. Councilor Taylor, noting she was in the minority, reiterated her preference to save the existing City Hall and continue using it for that purpose after retrofitting it. Councilor Ortiz supported the proposal to have a work session on street annexations and also supported the idea of sending a letter to the EWEB Board. Councilor Ortiz had been moved by the picture of the Kennedy brothers presented to the City Manager. She was saddened by the news that City Manager Taylor was considering another city management job. She supported his need to do what was best for him but hoped he would remain in Eugene. Councilor Bettman commented that EWEB had come up “over and over” as an issue. She asserted that there was “no oversight” over EWEB. She said EWEB’s authority was granted to it by the City charter and given that the charter was created by the people of Eugene it would be up to the people to change the charter. She opined that EWEB was “an entity unto itself with virtually no oversight except the oversight that happens internally.” Councilor Papé asked if a work session was scheduled with EWEB. City Manager Taylor replied that the Mayor and he had been trying to meet regularly with EWEB and had discussed having a joint meeting. He related that a tour had been set up for November 15 to understand better the property issues associated with their location. 2. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of City Council Minutes - August 14, 2006, Work Session - August 16, 2006, Work Session B. Approval of Tentative Working Agenda C. Approval of Exchange of Real Property Interests on Franklin Boulevard D. Appointments to Lane Workforce Partnership Board Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Ortiz, moved to approve the items on the Consent Calendar. Councilor Bettman indicated she had submitted a minutes correction electronically. She also wished to pull Item C. Mayor Piercy deemed the correction, without objection, approved. MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 25, 2006 Page 8 Regular Meeting Councilor Papé also wanted to pull Item C. Roll call vote; the motion to approve the Consent Calendar with the exception of Item C passed unanimously, 8:0. Councilor Bettman asked if the City had formally applied for an easement from the Oregon Department of Transportation and whether the application easement had been rejected or denied. City Engineer for the Public Works Department, Mark Schoening, replied that the City had not formally applied for an easement, but had consulted ODOT regarding its access policies. In response to a question from Councilor Bettman, Mr. Schoening affirmed that the Tedron properties were the only properties adjacent to the existing City-owned property. Councilor Bettman asked if that property surrounded the City-owned parcel. Mr. Schoening replied that the ODOT right-of-way lay on one boundary and the Tedron properties bounded the other sides of the property. Councilor Bettman asked how wide the long and narrow parcel was. Mr. Schoening surmised from the aerial photo that it was approximately 10 feet wide on one end and 20 feet wide on the other. In response to a follow-up question, Mr. Schoening explained that the Millrace lay between the back of the building and the railroad. Councilor Bettman recalled that when looking at a property exchange with the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) she had been told that “property in the water does not count.” City Manager Taylor asked if she was talking about property lines within the Willamette River. Councilor Bettman affirmed that she was. City Manager Taylor explained that those principles did not apply in this instance. Councilor Bettman felt the Tedron property was a useless strip of land and the City was trading a prime piece of property for it. She opined that the City had not made a formal application for a right-of-way and then had used hearsay as a justification for trading a prime piece of property for a substandard piece of property. This did not make sense to her. In response to a question from Councilor Papé, Mr. Schoening said while he did not know the exact terms of the easement, it was for protection of the Millrace and having control of the property adjacent to the city- owned park property. Councilor Papé asked if there was any way to purchase enough property or to get enough of an easement to further develop the bicycle path. Mr. Schoening replied that this was part of the intent. He assured Councilor Papé that there would be enough “dry ground” between the railroad and the Millrace to build onto the bicycle path. Councilor Papé asked if anyone had looked at the property to ascertain whether there was enough property to give a level of flexibility in planning for future uses. Mr. Schoening did not know the answer to that question. Councilor Papé, seconded by Councilor Bettman, moved to table the item until that answer was known. Roll call vote; the motion passed, 6:2; councilors Poling and Ortiz voting in op- position. MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 25, 2006 Page 9 Regular Meeting Councilor Kelly said he could not tell from the map how much of the easement was the Millrace and whether there was the potential of acquiring an additional easement from Tedron properties that could provide space for a bicycle path. He also understood that ODOT was in the process of transferring jurisdiction over a part of Franklin Boulevard to the City and asked if the City parcel in question was fronting on this portion of Franklin Boulevard. Councilor Bettman asserted that given that the area this property was located in was in a redevelopment process should the City “wait a few years” the City would make more money on the property. 3. ACTION: Resolution 4890; Expressing Support for Measure 20-114, A Measure to Change the Charter of Lane County Government City Manager Taylor explained that the Lane Board of County Commissioners and Jim Johnson had brought the proposed Resolution to the council. The material in the council packet was prepared by Mr. Johnson. Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Ortiz, to adopt Resolution 4890, expressing sup- port for Measure 20-114, a measure to change the charter of Lane County government. Mayor Piercy related that initially she had not supported the Public Safety District as she had been concerned that it would impact some of the other financial needs of the City. She had agreed to meet with the County and work on something that she could support. She and Councilor Kelly met with the commissioners and with mayors from throughout Lane County over the course of some months. She said they reviewed the services that were provided and the “holes” in the public safety system. She said over half of the resulting measure was dedicated to prevention, intervention, and treatment. She felt the City should support the public safety system. Councilor Kelly echoed Mayor Piercy’s comments. Councilor Solomon said she was satisfied that the measure had arisen from a thoughtful process. She called the existing system “dismal.” She appreciated that a rate had been set in the measure and that a property tax credit had been included. She noted that she was the City Council representative to the Public Safety Coordinating Council (PSCC). She stressed that at present the County had too few people trying to do too much work for public safety. She hoped the voters would support it. Councilor Bettman said she had sent a memorandum with questions. District Attorney Doug Harcleroad reviewed some of her questions. He said 100 percent of any reserve funds that were raised by this public safety tax measure would be dedicated to public safety. Lane County Intergovernmental Relations Manager, Tony Bieda, stated, in response to Councilor Bettman’s second question, that the mix of funds that were applied to the health and human services programs and services that the County currently offered would require analysis to determine how the public safety tax would be applied. Mr. Harcleroad noted that Councilor Bettman’s third question sought to clarify what process the County Commissioners would use to modify the revenue allocation proposal. He explained that the charter MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 25, 2006 Page 10 Regular Meeting amendment said, under (2), that through 2012 Lane County would focus increased revenue on significantly reducing illegal drug production, dealing, and use, especially methamphetamine; reducing family violence, enhancing drug and alcohol treatment programs for addicted adult and youth, and providing prevention programs to reduce future crime. He said the board had to do so for at least five years. There was a detailed list of all of the programs put together by the task force on which the Mayor and Councilor Kelly had sat. Regarding a question from Councilor Bettman that asked whether a $30 refund due to a renter who paid income tax could potentially be given to his or her landlord, Mr. Harcleroad stressed that it was not a refund; rather it was a credit that went to the individual that applied for the tax return. Mr. Harlcleroad stated, in response to another question from Councilor Bettman, that the cost to administer the program was estimated to be three percent, or $800,000. Councilor Bettman agreed that there was a deficit in funding the public safety services that the City did not address. She also agreed that the task force had done a good job of identifying the problems and the solutions. However, she opposed the funding mechanism. She believed it would lose at the ballot. She said she would have supported the tax if it had been configured differently. She said if it the measure failed, she would be happy to serve on the next tax force. Councilor Bettman said she had a problem with the measure as it was written because she felt it was a simple process for commissioners to add or take away services. She interpreted the language as allowing capital infrastructure to be built with this money. She asserted that the measure was not constrained enough to the “valuable services” people would endorse when voting. She called the charter amendment “a Machiavellian mechanism” that said the income tax would be limited. She thought the charter amendment should have “strictly called out” the percentages that would be allocated to prevention, treatment, parole, and the capacity at the jail. Councilor Papé said the need was well-documented and he trusted the commissioners to do the right thing. He also respected the process, though he would have done it differently. He supported the resolution. He was concerned by the greatness of the need. Councilor Poling thanked Mayor Piercy and Councilor Kelly for their comments. He stated that the matrix system for early release from the county jail had been put into use in 1986. At that time, he worked with a deputy and the worst crime for which arrestees were “matrixed out” had been a “Theft 3” or a Driving Under the Influence of Intoxicants (DUII). He said over the years, the cutoff point for the matrix system kept growing and the number of inmates kept growing and the caliber of inmate being released became more serious. He averred that the system had been crumbling since 1978. He declared that the measure was one of the best proposals he had seen over the years to try and help fund the law enforcement community in Lane County. He supported the measure and hoped that his colleagues would support it as well. He did not believe that a commissioner would come in 2013 and circumvent the charter amendment. Regarding the property tax credit, Councilor Taylor ascertained from Mr. Harcleroad that it was a credit for a portion of the taxes that went to the County. She said supposing a homeowner in Eugene paid $3,000 per year in property taxes, what portion of it would go to the County? Mr. Harcleroad replied that no property tax paid to the City of Eugene would be reduced. He stressed that the only property tax that would be reduced would be the portion paid to Lane County. MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 25, 2006 Page 11 Regular Meeting Councilor Taylor opined that this would be a much smaller amount than people would think it would be. She felt it was deceptive to give people the impression that they would receive a large refund. She asked how much of the administrative costs could be attributed to the reduction in property tax. Mr. Harcleroad responded that he would obtain that figure for the council. Councilor Taylor indicated that she was not ready to approve the resolution. Councilor Bettman agreed it was unlikely that a commissioner elected in 2013 would circumvent the intent of the charter amendment. She thought the rural patrols would be covered, according to the charter amendment language. She said the amendment was not the ordinance implementing the income tax and the programs as it basically limited the tax to two percent or less and dedicated it to public safety. She declared that public safety was a broad category. She felt because of this the ordinance could pay for rural patrols, the building of a jail, or building “any kind of building that could be construed as providing public safety services.” She asserted that the County could end up in the same position after ten years; that the majority of the revenues could ultimately be dedicated to infrastructure and the services would still not be funded. She wanted the charter amendment to be more constrained and circumscribed in order for her to support it. Councilor Papé asked why Mr. Harcleroad was at the council meeting and not a County Commissioner. Mr. Harcleroad explained that because of his position as District Attorney, he was more knowledgeable on the subject of public safety. Councilor Papé, seconded by Councilor Poling, called for the question. The vote was a tie; councilors Papé, Poling, Solomon, and Pryor voting yes; councilors Kelly, Taylor, Ortiz, and Bettman voting no. The Mayor voted against calling the question and the motion failed. Councilor Bettman asked how many of the other communities had endorsed the measure and, of them, how many had given unanimous support for it. Mr. Harcleroad replied that 12 cities had been asked to endorse the resolution. Veneta provided unanimous endorsement, Florence provided unanimous endorsement, Dunes City provided unanimous endorsement, Creswell provided unanimous endorsement, and a motion had been made to endorse it at the Coburg City Council but it died for lack of a second. Councilor Bettman asserted that Eugene residents would be subsidizing rural services. She could not support the resolution. Mayor Piercy shared her belief that it takes everyone to build a system together. The motion to approve Resolution 4890 passed, 6:2; councilors Taylor and Bettman voting in opposition. The meeting was adjourned at 9:32 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dennis M. Taylor City Manager MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 25, 2006 Page 12 Regular Meeting (Recorded by Ruth Atcherson) MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 25, 2006 Page 13 Regular Meeting ATTACHMENT B M I N U T E S Eugene City Council Work Session McNutt Room—Eugene City Hall October 9, 2006 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Jennifer Solomon, Bonny Bettman, David Kelly, Andrea Ortiz (via teleconference), Gary Papé, George Poling, Chris Pryor, Betty Taylor. Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. A. COMMITTEE REPORTS AND ITEMS OF INTEREST FROM MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER Mayor Piercy reported that she attended a biking and walking summit on October 7, 2006. She thanked Lee Shoemaker and Rob Inerfeld for organizing the event, and acknowledged the work of Congressman Peter Defazio and former Mayor Ruth Bascom for their presentations. She thanked everyone for attending the event. Mr. Papéarrived at 5:32 p.m. Mayor Piercy reported she attended the Gilham Elementary School Walk/Bike to School Day on October 4. She said the most recent evolution at the Fifth Street Public Market was successful, and a good thing for downtown Eugene. She said she contacted councilors Bettman, Pryor, and Taylor regarding whether the Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations should consider if the City Council should take a position on some of the initiatives on the November ballot that would affect the City of Eugene. She felt the City had a responsibility to take a position on Ballot Measure 39, Prohibits Public Body from Condemning Private Real Property if Intends to Convey to Private Party, and Ballot Measure 48, Amends Constitution: Limits Biennial Percentage Increase in State Spending to Percentage Increase in State Population, Plus Inflation. Ms. Taylor said the Lane Regional Air Protection Agency would meet October 10. She recently attended the League of Oregon Cities (LOC) Convention with Mayor Piercy and Mr. Papé. She said the presentation by Brady Adams on homeownership for low- and moderate-income people was particularly informative. Mr. Kelly said the Human Rights Commission scheduled a conference on October 20, at the University of Oregon, entitled, Choice in Mental Health Care as a Human Right: A Vision of Recovery and Success. He encouraged members of the public to attend. Mayor Piercy introduced Flo Alverge from the League of Women Voters. Ms. Alverge introduced a Russian delegation comprised of women from various cities in Russia who worked with government MINUTES—City Council October 9, 2006 Page 1 Work Session agencies and had political party experience. The delegation traveled to the United States under the sponsorship of Open World Leadership Center. Ms. Bettman said Angie Sifuentez, Vice Chair of the Police Commission, invited councilors and councilors- elect to the October 12 Police Commission meeting. She announced that Tod Schneider of the Eugene Police Department would offer a presentation on crime prevention through environmental design, and patrol officers would talk about strategies for making downtown safer. Mr. Pryor reported he attended the Workforce Summit sponsored by the Lane Workforce Partnership. He said a key point made at the event was the notion that economic development was not so much about jobs as about creating skilled workers, which placed a great emphasis on education and emphasized the need to be supportive of students in the Eugene area. Mr. Pryor thanked Richie Weinman, City of Eugene Planning and Development Department staff, and Pearl Wolfe, Lane County Human Services Commission staff, for their work on a presentation regarding an ambitious project of ending homelessness in ten years in Lane County. He expressed hope that the City Council would be able to dovetail its efforts on the priority issue with that project. Mr. Papé reported he attended the League of Oregon (LOC) Cities Conference, noting incoming councilors Mike Clark and Alan Zelenka also attended. He recommended an article in the September LOC newsletter entitled Large Format Stores and Transportation Choices: Where We Put Things Matters. He expressed his appreciation to City Manager Taylor for the manner in which the residents of Santa Clara had been kept informed about the construction schedule delays on River Road construction. Ms. Solomon indicated that the Housing Policy Board received a report that would be forwarded to councilors in the near future regarding on the first year of the rental housing code. She opined the first year of the code had been successful. She said the Active Bethel Citizens meeting at 7 p.m. on October 19 would feature a debate between candidates Chris Edwards and Debi Farr. She added that the Friends of Golden Gardens were hosting a walk in the park on October 21, between 11 a.m. and 1 p.m. City Manager Taylor extended congratulations to City Recorder Mary Feldman for her recent election as First Vice President of the Municipal Recorders Association. He went on to say that he recently toured Martin Luther King Avenue in Portland, a linear tax increment district, with the Portland Development Commission (PDC) in which development activities occurred on a neighborhood scale. He encouraged councilors to visit a business called Henry V Events, a national events management group that was an excellent example of adaptive reuse of what was once a warehouse, now transformed into a 100 percent green building. th B. ACTION: Supplemental Funding for WestTown on 8 Stephanie Jennings of the Planning and Development provided the staff report. She recalled that in 2005, the City Council selected the Metropolitan Affordable Housing Corporation (Metro) development proposal th for the WestTown on 8 project. She said the project consisted of 102 affordable rental units, and nine market-rate live-work units that would support the Downtown Plan with street-level activities and downtown housing. During the past year, Metro had worked to assemble financing for the project, overcoming a number of design-related and financing challenges. The project went out to bid during summer 2006, with a planned ground breaking in September 2006. When bids were returned, a significant funding gap remained that could not be covered by Metro’s existing contingency funds. Metro requested a loan from the City of MINUTES—City Council October 9, 2006 Page 2 Work Session Eugene that would allow Metro to fill that gap. Staff analysis of the request determined there would be a number of consequences of further delay that would result in additional project costs. Additionally, a staff review of readily available resources, determined the City of Eugene could make a loan up to $450,000 and that Metro has the capacity to repay the loan. Ms. Jennings added Metro received a commitment from Liberty Bank to cover the balance of the gap. Ms. Jennings stated that both staff and the Housing Policy Board recommended approval of Metro’s request. She said if the request was approved, Metro would be able to submit its final financial packet that would allow it to proceed with the State’s bond sale and groundbreaking in December. Ms. Jennings understood a citizen had raised a concern that the request would be in violation of United States Department of Housing and Development (HUD) regulations for public process. She offered a clarification of HUD procedures, asserting that HUD did not set a specific threshold for project change notification, but rather asked the City to designate the process. She added that the concern raised by the citizen was based on his experience with another project that had requested additional federal funds. The Metro proposal included only local funds in the additional request. Due to his relationship with Liberty Bank, Mr. Papé recused himself from participating in the discussion and th action on the WestTown on 8 request. Mr. Kelly said this was a great project at a great location. Ms. Ortiz looked forward to the groundbreaking. In response to Ms. Taylor, Ms. Jennings said there were nine live-work units. Ms. Solomon, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to direct the City Manager to approve the use of City funds for a loan to Metropolitan Affordable Housing Corporation for the West- th Town on 8 project, as proposed, and to include the necessary budget transactions on Sup- plemental Budget #1 in December. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. C. WORK SESSION: Campaign Finance Reporting Process City Recorder Mary Feldman offered the staff report. She said the purpose of the work session was to make the council aware of the campaign finance reporting process for candidates and political committees and to provide an opportunity for the council to consider whether the City of Eugene should require campaign finance reports in addition to those required by the State. If additional reports were required, those reports, at least, must be filed with the City elections officer. She said the cost for the City to implement its own electronic system would be in excess of $700,000. In response to a question from Mayor Piercy, Ms. Feldman said the new system had been developed at the State level to streamline and simplify the filing process, and to reduce filing errors and violations, while having a uniform procedure throughout the state. Mr. Kelly said the State system would provide more timeliness in reporting requirements, and said the City of Eugene should not duplicate the State’s plan. MINUTES—City Council October 9, 2006 Page 3 Work Session Mr. Pryor asked what advantages the City of Eugene would have by duplicating the State system. Ms. Taylor was concerned about when contributions would be published, and asked what publication requirements were in place. Ms. Feldman explained how the private electronic workspaces for individual candidates and political committee worked, and how they linked to the Secretary of State’s webpage. In response to Ms. Ortiz, Ms. Feldman said the existing $2,000 threshold for filing detailed reports would remain in place. Mr. Poling said accessibility of information on campaign activity for the public was a great benefit. He asked if the system could be revisited if there were problems with the State system. Ms. Feldman said the issue could be brought back to the City Council in the future. In response to Ms. Bettman, Ms. Feldman said campaign treasurers would be required to track aggregate contributions by donors. Ms. Feldman confirmed no City policy issues were related directly to the issue, and required that no local ordinance be repealed. Mr. Pryor hoped the Eugene Public Library could provide accessible electronic filing services for candi- dates. There was consensus that the council should take no action relating to ORS 260.163 at this time so the State’s electronic system and filing requirements would become effective January 1, 2007, without special provisions for Eugene candidates and committees. D. WORK SESSION: Transportation Priorities for North and West Eugene City Engineer Mark Schoening provided the staff report, reviewing the transportation priorities for West and North Eugene for consideration by the City Council. He introduced Mark Gillem from the University of Oregon (UO) School of Architecture and Allied Arts, and Stephano Viggiano from Lane Transit District (LTD). Mr. Schoening welcomed questions from the City Council. Ms. Solomon expressed concern about how access issues had been managed around the Norwalk Furniture Store during a prior construction project. Referring to the LTD corridor study, Mr. Kelly said he preferred to conduct two corridor studies, including Highway 99/6th-7th Avenue/7thAvenue and 11th Avenue, noting both were ultimately EmX corridors, but acknowledged there were not sufficient resources to do both studies. He said he was comfortable moving forward with the West 11th Avenue project. Mr. Kelly said the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) had not been collaborative in the Norwalk Furniture Store, adding the existing geography did not provide easy alternatives. Mr. Pryor liked the way the project was moving along, and said he would support an amendment that included a study of Beltline-Roosevelt Boulevard to West 11th Avenue. MINUTES—City Council October 9, 2006 Page 4 Work Session Ms. Bettman said she could not support studying West 13th Avenue, and noted that West 11th Avenue had good ridership. She said it was important to increase ridership rather than simply transferring the current ridership to the new system to make best use of the funding. Mr. Poling said when the Coburg Road EmX study was conducted, options along Crescent Drive, Chad Drive, Harlow Road, Garden Way, and Martin Luther King Boulevard were included in the discussion. He said it was imperative that property and business owners on other roads in the vicinity be included in any conversations that would impact them. Mr. Papé wanted to hear about land issues and Ballot Measure 37 issues that should be taken into consideration when conducting the transportation studies. Mr. Schoening said those elements had been included in the traffic model. He said the City of Eugene would be the lead agency on the transportation study, with the UO, LTD, ODOT, Lane County of Governments (LCOG) and Lane County as partners. In response to Ms. Solomon, Mr. Schoening said it would be difficult to study the River Road to Coburg Road corridor without including the Delta Highway/Beltline interchange. Mr. Kelly there was an opportunity to get some community consensus going with the West 11th Avenue corridor study, by involving businesses, 1000 Friends of Oregon, and other interested parties, in a short, collaborative brainstorming process. He noted planning was completed for improvements on the Beltline between Terry Street and Greenhill Road. Mr. Kelly said it was important that a corridor study for West 11th Avenue include the surrounding road network, including parts of Roosevelt Boulevard, West 13th Avenue, and others. In response to Ms. Bettman, Mr. Viggiano said including West 18th Avenue in the West 11th Avenue corridor study would be a stretch, in that the industry standard was one-quarter mile walking distance from an arterial. He added LTD would consider West 18th Avenue a different corridor for transit uses. Ms. Bettman said Highway 99 was a better fit for a corridor study than West 11th Avenue, and she would vote against the corridor for EmX. In response to a question from Ms. Bettman, Mr. Schoening replied there were multiple ways to do access management: amend the land use code to allow looking at each new development with access management in mind; and, look for opportunities to increase safety and mobility on existing corridors. Responding to Mayor Piercy, Mr. Viggiano said LTD staff thought West 11th Avenue was a strong transit corridor. He added the LTD Board of Directors had not yet taken a position, but would likely defer to the City of Eugene on corridor selection. Mr. Poling hoped the City of Veneta would be invited to participate in any West 11th Avenue corridor discussions. Mr. Pryor saw two times as many people getting on buses per mile on West 11th Avenue than on Highway 99, and it made sense to put the new service in this area. MINUTES—City Council October 9, 2006 Page 5 Work Session Mr. Papé disagreed with Mr. Pryor, noting the quality of the bus service was an unknown factor. He asked why the UO was a partner in the process, rather than a hired consultant. Mr. Schoening said the UO was participating as a technical partner in the process for planning and transportation issues. Ms. Taylor remained skeptical about EmX, suggesting that the City of Eugene should be studying street cars instead. She asked why the improvements would be made where people were currently riding rather than encouraging new riders along Highway 99. She asked how frequently service went to Veneta and if EmX service would be provided to Veneta. Mr. Viggiano responded that there were currently six trips daily to Veneta. He added that EmX was intended as an urban service, and there was likely not sufficient demand to offer EmX service to Veneta at the present time. Ms. Taylor believed the City of Eugene made too little use of the expertise at the UO. Mayor Piercy said the idea of a collaborative discussion about the corridor would be very helpful. She added she attended the city design institute where the UO was cited one of the best in the country for urban and transportation planning. Ms. Solomon agreed that the UO did have great programs, but expressed concern that the City transporta- tion study would be conducted by students rather than fully trained professionals. She did not want the project to be a “class project”, but supported student participation in the process. She asked if access management changes would come back to the City Council. Mr. Schoening said access management would come back to the City Council through the Planning Commission for changes to the land use code. In response to a question from Ms. Bettman, Mr. Viggiano said typical spacing between bus stops was approximately two blocks or six stops per mile. He added that spacing was approximately one-third of a mile on the EmX corridor. Ms. Bettman said the EmX gained time by offering fewer stops, and riders would get less service by needing to walk much further with EmX system, thus decreasing rather than increasing service. She said most communities that currently had EmX service used it as a commuter route to bring workers into the city core from outlying areas. She said she could not support EmX on West 11th Avenue as the only corridor study. She said she could support a study that included both corridors. Ms. Solomon, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to: ? Identify the Beltline Corridor from River Road to Coburg Road as the City’s top priority for funding in the State Transportation Im- th provement Program and West 11 Avenue from Terry Street to Greenhill Road as its second priority; ?th Identify West 11 Avenue as the City’s priority for the next EmX corridor study; ? Support a transportation corridor study of West 11th Avenue and the City’s application for $150,000 of STP-U planning funds for the study; and, ? Support the initiation of regulatory changes to the land use code and associated administrative rule that would implement access man- agement on the City’s arterial and collector street system. MINUTES—City Council October 9, 2006 Page 6 Work Session Mr. Papé, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to separate the motion into four separate mo- tions. The motion passed, 5:2, with Mr. Pryor and Mr. Poling opposed. Mr. Kelly said the idea behind transportation planning was working as an integrated system. He wanted the four elements to be looked at as one. City Attorney Glenn Klein explained that the under parliamentary procedures, the four motions were all on the table. Mr. Kelly offered a friendly amendment to the first motion adding the following: Identify a study of the Beltline Corridor from Roosevelt West 11th Avenue as a third priority for funding in the State Transportation Improvement Program. Mr. Papé expressed concern that the council had insufficient information to support Mr. Kelly’s amendment. The motion passed, 7:1, with Mr. Papé opposed. Mr. Kelly said most of the communities that Ms. Bettman said used the EmX as a commuter service were larger than Eugene, and this proposal was suited a community the size of Eugene. He said a light rail system was a key to improved transit service in Eugene. Ms. Bettman expressed concern that a lot of money would be spent on a study that was never implemented. In response to Mr. Papé, Mr. Viggiano said while two corridors were originally considered for the initial corridor (Coburg Road and Pioneer Parkway), only one could be funded, and the Pioneer Parkway corridor was ultimately selected. He added that only one corridor could be funded every six years. He said Coburg Road could be considered for future study. Mr. Kelly offered a friendly amendment to the second motion, revising it to read: Identify a study of the Beltline Corridor, Roosevelt Boulevard to West 11th Avenue as a City high priority for funding the State Transportation Improvement Program. Mayor Piercy called the question on the third motion. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Mayor Piercy called the question on the fourth motion. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Mr. Kelly, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved direct the City Manager to schedule a work session before year’s end on ways to improve the functionality of Roosevelt Boulevard as an east-west arterial by moving the necessary projects forward in a timely manner. In response to Ms. Solomon, Mr. Schoening confirmed that Mr. Kelly’s motion would include improvements to the Highway 99 and Roosevelt Boulevard intersection. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. MINUTES—City Council October 9, 2006 Page 7 Work Session A brief discussion about the council’s schedule through the end of the year followed. Mayor Piercy announced the council would discuss the Sustainable Business Initiative on Wednesday, October 11, but would not vote on the issue because councilors Ortiz and Pryor would not be in attendance. The meeting adjourned at 7:17 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dennis M. Taylor City Manager (Recorded by Linda Henry) MINUTES—City Council October 9, 2006 Page 8 Work Session ATTACHMENT C M I N U T E S Eugene City Council Regular Meeting Council Chamber—Eugene City Hall October 9, 2006 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Jennifer Solomon, David Kelly, Betty Taylor, Gary Papé, Bonny Bettman, George Poling, Chris Pryor. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Andrea Ortiz. Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. 1. CEREMONIAL MATTERS Proclamation Honoring Holt International Children Services Gary Gamer, chief executive officer of Holt International Childrens Services, introduced Pammy Chow of Holt International Childrens Services, her daughter Jade Chow, and Jade’s grandparents, Mary and Jack Karns. Mayor Piercy read a proclamation recognizing the work of Holt International, and proclaiming the month of October 2006 to be Holt International Month. She called upon Eugene citizens to recognize the work of Holt International. Mayor Piercy presented a copy of the proclamation to Mr. Gamer, who thanked the Mayor and the City of Eugene for recognizing the agency’s work. He noted that the Mayor, an adoptive parent herself, was very concerned with the issue of international adoption. Mr. Gamer recalled the inception of the agency 50 years ago when founders Harry and Bertha Holt began to work with orphaned children in North Korea. Over the years, there continued to be a need for the agency’s services in many parts of the world, such as Africa. He said that Holt International was the pioneer in international adoption and also helped with family preservation, domestic adoption, and crisis services in the countries of children’s origins. He reported that in 2005, Holt International helped 30,000 children around the world. Mr. Gamer said that Holt would soon commemorate its 50th anniversary and would convene a conference October 18-21 with the theme “Looking Forward: A Global Response for Homeless Children,” which he anticipated would be attended by people from around the world. The conference would include a gala celebration on October 19 to which he invited the council and members of the community. Jade Chow thanked the council for the proclamation making October Holt International Month. She asked the council to imagine what it would feel like not to have a child to love or to be a child without love. She said that would have been the situation for her and her mother if not for the work of Bertha and Harry Holt. th She was proud to be an adopted 8 grader from China. Ms. Chow said, “adoption is forever.” Mr. Papé noted his and the Mayor’s tour of the Holt campus outside Seoul, and said that Holt was much more than an adoption agency, as he personally witnessed. He commended the work of Harry and Bertha Holt and wished the agency well in its upcoming celebration. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 9, 2006 Page 1 Regular Meeting 2. PUBLIC FORUM Mayor Piercy reviewed the rules of the Public Forum. Zachary Vishanoff , Patterson Street, applauded the work of Holt International and noted his sister had adopted through the agency. Speaking to the earlier work session discussion concerning transportation priorities in North and West Eugene, Mr. Vishanoff suggested that the University of Oregon should not have a say in the EmX system because the owners of parcels that could benefit financially could make secret donations to the University to th influence its decision. He thought placing EmX on 13 Avenue would be a “huge can of worms,” and th would be more acceptable on 11 Avenue. He pointed out that the University attempted to acquire the th fairgrounds for a basketball arena, and that was located on 13 Avenue. Mr. Vishanoff suggested that those riding on the system be asked where the next route should be. He did not think the University should be encouraged to act like a developer, and did not think the community’s future should be turned over to University students unless more departments such as the Sociology Department were involved as the rich departments get to “intermingle with you” while other departments were marginalized. Mr. Vishanoff provided a packet of materials to the council that he asked it to review. John Brown , 101 East Broadway, thanked the council for making decisions that allowed him to remain in the community, as Eugene was a great place to live and raise and family. He also thanked the council for its dedication and the dedication of City staff to the task of taking care of the Willamette River. Over the past three years, the City had been very prompt in responding to issues. Mr. Brown asked the council to encourage other jurisdictions to be just as responsive, being good stewards of the river as well. He said that the community had no one to turn to for assistance with water quality, although there was supposed to be such an agency. Charles Biggs , 540 Antelope Way, applauded the Eugene Police Department for trying to find ways to save the taxpayer money by changing to a different paint job on patrol cars that would save money when resold. He hoped that it was true that the solid colored vehicles were easier to see. Mr. Biggs asked the council what it would suggest to the voters if the council chose to subsidize development by selling property for less than it was worth. Majeska Seese Green , PO Box 1214, Eugene, chair of the Whiteaker Community Council (WCC), said the WCC was excited about the hiring of new police auditor Christine Beamud as she felt it a big step forward for the community, made possible by passage of the charter amendment. She noted the reception that was planned for Ms. Beamud on October 17 at the Hult Center and said the WCC would help get the word out about the event. Those who attended would be asked to bring nonperishable food items for the needy. th Bob Suess , 260 East 38 Avenue, determined from Mayor Piercy that the council acted earlier on the th funding request for WestTown on 8 Avenue. He said he had been providing affordable housing in Eugene since 1961. He asked if $18,400,000 was actually required to construct 104 housing units. He pointed out that did not include the cost of land, and asked if the community really needed a “Taj Mahal” for subsidized housing. Mr. Suess believed the only residents who would benefit from the project were those who owned property in the downtown core. He had seen the “ups and downs” of such subsidies in downtown Eugene since he first moved to the community. Mr. Suess questioned the inclusion of retail space in the develop- MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 9, 2006 Page 2 Regular Meeting ment, and asked if the community was subsidizing business occupants. He noted the many benefits the development received in the form of waived fees and taxes. He said that his residents contributed 25 percent minimum of their rents for taxes and housing inspections, and his rents were below the rents proposed for th WestTown on 8 Avenue. Mr. Suess said that his company could become a nonprofit if it spent all revenues on management, administration, and other incidentals. He asked when such giveaways would end. Mayor Piercy closed the Public Forum and thanked all those who spoke. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of City Council Minutes - July 24, 2006, City Council Meeting - September 11, 2006, Work Session - September 11, 2006, City Council Meeting - September 20, 2006, Work Session B. Approval of Tentative Working Agenda Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to approve the items on the Consent Calendar. Mr. Kelly and Ms. Bettman noted their submittal of corrections to the minutes. Mayor Piercy deemed the corrections accepted. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0. th 4. ACTION: Supplemental Funding for WestTown on 8 Avenue This item was acted on at the earlier work session. The meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dennis M. Taylor City Manager (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 9, 2006 Page 3 Regular Meeting ATTACHMENT D M I N U T E S Eugene Urban Renewal Agency Work Session McNutt Room—Eugene City Hall October 16, 2006 6:15 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Jennifer Solomon, Andrea Ortiz, David Kelly, Betty Taylor, Gary Papé, Bonny Bettman, George Poling, Chris Pryor. Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the Eugene City Council acting as the Eugene Urban Renewal Agency (URA) to order. A. URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY SPECIAL WORK SESSION City Manager Dennis Taylor introduced the item, calling the council’s attention to the motion tabled when councilors considered the item on October 11. Planning and Development Director Susan Muir and Planning and Development Department staff Mike Sullivan and Denny Braud were also available to answer questions. Mayor Piercy reviewed the motion on the table: I move to direct the Agency Director to enter into a 90-day exclusive negotiation period th with TK Partners for the sale and development of the 10 and Charnelton development site based upon the proposal submitted, and to return to the City Council, acting as the Urban Renewal Agency, with the proposed terms of the sale and development following the negotiation period. City Manager Taylor recommended the URA first support the motion on the floor and then go into an executive session to discuss a negotiating strategy. Ms. Solomon arrived. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Mayor Piercy adjourned the meeting of the URA at 6:20 p.m. and called the URA into executive session. B. EXECUTIVE SESSION The executive session was held in accordance with Oregon Revised Statute 192.660(2)(e). The meeting adjourned at 6:52 p.m. MINUTES—Eugene Urban Renewal Agency October 16, 2006 Page 1 Work Session Respectfully submitted, Dennis M. Taylor City Manager (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES—Eugene Urban Renewal Agency October 16, 2006 Page 2 Work Session ATTACHMENT E M I N U T E S Eugene City Council Public Hearing Council Chamber—Eugene City Hall October 16, 2006 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Jennifer Solomon, Andrea Ortiz, David Kelly, Betty Taylor, Gary Papé, Bonny Bettman, George Poling, Chris Pryor. Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the public hearing of the Eugene City Council to order. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: An Ordinance Establishing a Real Property Value-Added Charge; Adding Sections 2.100, 2.105, 2.110 and 2.115 to the Eugene Code, 1971; Amending Section 8.005 of that Code; and Adopting a Severability Clause City Manager Dennis Taylor introduced Planning and Development Director Susan Muir and City Attorney Glenn Klein. Mr. Klein summarized the history behind the ordinance, which was proposed by Councilor Bettman as a way to develop funds to pay the cost of valid Ballot Measure 37 claims received by the City of Eugene. Where the City took an action that increased the real market value of a property, the City would recover a portion of the increased value and use that money to establish a fund to pay potential Ballot Measure 37 claims. Mr. Klein said that two categories were included in the proposed ordinance: one category in which a property owner or someone acting on the property owner’s behalf initiated such an action, and another category in which the council initiated the action. In the case of a property owner initiating an action such as a rezoning or redesignation in the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan), the owner would pay 25 percent of the increase in the property’s real market value to the City. When the council initiated such an action, affected property owners would not be responsible for payment of the charge unless the property owner decided to take advantage of the change in zoning or the UGB. If a property owner failed to pay the fee, he or she would be unable to apply for a building permit. Mayor Piercy reviewed the rules of the public hearing. She opened the public hearing. Roxie Cuellar , 2053 Laura Street, representing the Lane County Home Builders Association, said the ordinance demonstrated that the council needed to start deciding what its priorities were. She suggested that councilors’ goals for higher densities would be discouraged by such an ordinance. Under the ordinance, a property owner who developed ten acres of land originally zoned R-1 Low-Density Residential with a market value of $1 million would be obliged to pay the City $250,000 if the property was zoned to R-2 Medium-Density Residential with a market value of $2 million. That would deter many projects. Ms. Cuellar pointed out the home builders association would not care if the supply of low-density land was not MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 16, 2006 Page 1 Public Hearing rezoned to a higher density and its members could continue to build single-family detached houses. Those who wanted to increase density should care. In regard to annexation, Ms. Cuellar pointed out that some land, such as agricultural land, had a density lower than R-1. There were many such properties outside the city limits and inside the urban growth boundary (UGB). She said that such properties did not sell at the price of agricultural land; the market value of such a property was the same if zoned agricultural or R-1 because sellers of such properties knew the intended use. Using the Tax Assessor’s Market Value might not represent true market value in such cases at all. Ms. Cuellar asked that the record remain open for two weeks. Ms. Cuellar suggested local adoption of such an ordinance could be an impediment to discussions statewide. Portland was discussing a value-added tax to pay for infrastructure in areas where the boundaries were expanded because of a lack of funding for services in those areas. Jim Welsh , 2139 Centennial Plaza, representing the Eugene Association of Realtors, expressed concern about the impact of the ordinance on the costs of development and affordable housing. He believed that the ordinance creating the fee was a new land use ordinance under the definition of land use ordinance in Ballot Measure 37 and could create a whole new class of Ballot Measure 37 claimants. The council was contemplating a 25 percent devaluation of private real property upon any annexation, zone change, or Metro Plan redesignation. The regulatory reduction of value immediately occurs when owner was required to deposit 25 percent of the value of his development before the development process could occur. Mr. Welch said that imposing the fee would increase the cost of housing. He did not think the fee was needed because the City had not received a large number of Ballot Measure 37 claims and there was only three months remaining before the deadline for filing claims through the courts. Property owners will consider the charge excessive and unfair. The market evaluation process was fraught with pitfalls because of the ever-changing market. He asked how Ballot Measure 5 and 50 related to the tax. He asked if the charge did not represent double-taxation. Those he spoke to believed that it was. Mr. Welch said that the ordinance would have a further dampening effect on development in Eugene. th John Lauch , 715 West 4 Avenue, representing Eugene School District 4J, said the district believed that the proposed ordinance would result in lost revenue to the school district if adopted as drafted. The district had been experiencing significant declining enrollment over the last nine years, resulting in the need to consolidate and close schools. The district was disposing of such sites and he anticipated it would dispose of more in the future. Four sites that had been sold recently were still in public ownership or were now owned by a nonprofit agency providing quasi public uses. The district’s Santa Clara property was currently in escrow with a private developer and the property would require a zone change for the change in ownership to occur. The property value could be greatly enhanced by the zone change, which was reflected in the offer made to the school district. Under school board policy, revenues generated by such sales were first directed to the improvement of other district facilities. The ordinance would have a significant impact on revenues to the district and would impair improvement and upgrade efforts at existing school facilities. Mr. Lauch submitted written testimony. th Rob Zako , 1280-B East 20 Avenue, representing 1000 Friends of Oregon, concurred with the request to keep the record open. He said that according to Portland State University, one of 11 acres of farmland in the Willamette Valley was subject to a Ballot Measure 37 claim. Mr. Zako said it was “perhaps unfortu- MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 16, 2006 Page 2 Public Hearing nate” that subdivisions were being built next to farms, precluding those farms from operating, and rock quarries were being built next to residences whose occupants did not want to live next to a rock quarry. Mr. Zako averred that people who voted for Ballot Measure 37 did not know what they were voting for and then wondered why a development was happening next to them. He suggested the reason the ballot measure was in litigation was because it was poorly written, and thought it unfortunate the measure did not provide for a compensation fund and the legislature had been able to resolve the problems with the measure. He acknowledged Ballot Measure 37 as the law and maintained that if Oregon residents supported Ballot Measure 37 and the payment of compensation to property owners from a government action that reduced a property’s value, “it was inescapable logic” that they supported paying the government for increases in their property value from a result of government actions. Mr. Zako asserted that the measure’s ballot title contained information stating that the measure would cost the State billions, and people voted for it knowing that the government would have to pay those costs. Mr. Zako believed the ordinance was a reasonable approach given the existence of Ballot Measure 37, and 1000 Friends of Oregon commended City staff for coming up with a carefully written and workable proposal. Lisa Warnes , 5020 Nectar Way, said the ordinance seemed fair and reasonable to her as a solution to the serious problem brought on the state by the passage of Ballot Measure 37. It seemed fair that property owners who sought actions that benefited the value of their property should pay more. She agreed with the request to keep the record open. Zachary Vishanoff , Patterson Street, provided the council with a packet of materials and asked the council to consider the information. He believed that the council was enhancing the tools for zoning enforcement by the government and he did not think that citizens had a grip on the tools the City already had at its disposal to change their neighborhoods without their consent. He said that streamlining the City’s ability to go full speed ahead with “smart growth” was not in the public’s interest. He thought that smart growth in Eugene was already out-of-control. Mr. Vishanoff said that the idea that density was good for the community was a false premise given the increase in air pollution levels that would occur. He said that density also promoted flooding and was used as a premise for the redevelopment of riverfronts in ways communities could not afford. Those riverfronts were often “hijacked” by the research industry for “weird” research that did not benefit the public. Mr. Vishanoff suggested that the council supported density because it perceived the government “pork” for such projects as a sustainable prop for the economy, which he considered a mistake. Charles Biggs , 540 Antelope Way, favored the ordinance because when the Planning Commission had a member with a Ballot Measure 37 claim it was “time to level the playing field.” He asked that the ordinance be amended to disqualify those with a value-added charge from seeking other City subsidies. William Sellers , 6071 Mondavi Lane, said that he was working with a group of attorneys to block any taxes the City of Eugene attempted to put forth. He said that he was working to arrange a full, seven-year audit of the City to identify waste and fraud. He was amazed by the City’s wasteful spending. Road taxes had increased and it appeared the council wanted to be everything to everybody and that required more taxes. He said that excessive taxation needed to come to an end. The council should not be working to spend money so it could tax people the fastest way. Majeska Seese Green , PO Box 1214, Eugene, clarified that she was not speaking on behalf of the Whiteaker Community Council (WCC), but favored the ordinance as an individual and hoped the council would proceed with its adoption. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 16, 2006 Page 3 Public Hearing Ms. Seese Green said that the WCC did not oppose infill or density but wanted it done in a way that fit in with the neighborhood. The WCC supported infill compatibility standards. She said that the WCC did not appreciate being accused by a City staff person of having a NIMBY (Not in My Back Yard) attitude as recently occurred at a general meeting. She did not believe that the WCC had done anything to give that indication, and she did not think it was right for a City staff person to give that impression. Tom Slocum , 1950 Grand Drive, was opposed to the ordinance. He said that anyone who got property rezoned for an increase in value paid more in taxes on the property in question. They would develop the property and the City would receive increased revenues. He said the ordinance, if passed, would slow development to the point where the City would have further trouble paying its bills. He also anticipated that the City would encounter problems with areas such as Santa Clara, which if annexed would increase in value. The ordinance would preclude future annexations and residents of those areas would take advantage of the City services they could get without paying for them. Mr. Slocum suggested that 1000 Friends of Oregon think about the issue again as he believed the community’s failure to increase its UGB and the type of development the City required, which was not necessarily what people wanted, was resulting in the growth of satellite communities. Those who yelled most about sprawl were watching it happen right now. Mr. Slocum said that Eugene was the principle architect of that sprawl. If the ordinance passed, he believed that there would be more people wanting to move out to all the subdivisions that would be created outside the UGB in the county. Tom Hafferty , 4510 Manzanita Street, thought Oregon’s land use system was a visionary one that had avoided what he considered to be undesirable development in other places. He acknowledged the impetus behind Ballot Measure 37 and noted other communities were merely waiving their rules instead of paying compensation. He applauded the council’s desire to not give in to whatever changes people wanted to make to their private property but to actually step up and pay those owners compensation. He acknowledged that it would cost money to keep Eugene more livable but he thought the ordinance was an innovative way to do so. Developers would pay a one-time cost and he thought that was appropriate. There being no other requests to speak, Mayor Piercy closed the oral portion of the public hearing. Councilor Papé, seconded by Councilor Solomon, moved to leave the record open until 5:30 p.m. on October 30. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Councilor Ortiz thanked all those who spoke. She asked what time those wishing to provide written information to the council should do that. Mayor Piercy suggested that it be provided at the time when people signed up to speak. Council Coordinator Lynda Rose said that she could get any materials provided to her earlier in the day of the meeting to the City Council that same day, and information submitted at public hearings was provided to the council in its Thursday packet. She emphasized the need for staff to receive such materials so it could keep the public record accurately. Mr. Klein added that any testimony related to a land use proceeding should be provided to staff for distribution to the council as part of the official record. Councilor Ortiz encouraged those submitting such information to submit it before the meeting. Responding to a question from Councilor Poling, Mr. Klein clarified that property owners affected by an action of the City Council would not be required to pay for the increase in value until he or she applied for an “upzoning.” Councilor Poling asked if the property owner paid the value of the property at the time the MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 16, 2006 Page 4 Public Hearing upzoning occurred or when they actually took advantage of it. Mr. Klein said that he would respond in writing before the next council work session on the subject. Councilor Kelly said that the testimony opposed to the ordinance did not address where the City would get money to pay Ballot Measure 37 claims. He welcomed alternate ideas. The City had between $300,000 and $6 million in claims pending, and there was no final deadline for claims. Councilor Kelly said that creation of a fund to pay for valid claims could help the City to preserve its regulatory authority to continue to plan and adopt new land use laws. Councilor Kelly asked that another work session on the topic and council action be scheduled in this calendar year. Councilor Kelly asked Mr. Klein to provide a response to the point raised by Ms. Cuellar about the rezoning of agricultural land inside the UGB and a response to the claim made by Mr. Welch that the ordinance was a land use regulation. He complimented staff on the well-drafted ordinance. Councilor Papé asked how market value would be established. Mr. Klein said the assessor’s valuation would be used but it could be challenged by the property owner. If the property owner got an appraisal that differed from the assessor’s data, the City could get its own appraisal. Councilor Papé pointed out that the assessor was behind in his property assessments and asked how the City could get real values. Mr. Klein said he would respond in writing. Responding to a question from Councilor Papé, Mr. Klein confirmed that there were no exceptions in the ordinance for nonprofit agencies, and he did not think that was in opposition to State law. The charge would not be considered a property tax under either ballot measures 5 or 47/50. Councilor Papé asked if conditional use permits were covered by the ordinance. Mr. Klein said no. He reiterated that the charge was only triggered by a rezoning, annexation, or a change in designation in the Metro Plan. Councilor Papé thought that the granting of conditional use permits could increase a property’s value as well. Councilor Papé said the ordinance appeared not to restrict the use of the funds collected as a result of its adoption. He wanted to restrict the use of the funds so they could be used for nothing else but paying Ballot Measure 37 claims. Councilor Bettman thanked those who spoke and also thanked staff for its work on the ordinance. She said the ordinance was simple and fair. She supported Councilor Kelly’s suggestion for a work session and action by year’s end if possible. Councilor Bettman referred to the school district property and asked if the school district could secure the rezoning and sell the property and then the value-added would not be triggered until the purchaser applied for a permit. Mr. Klein said no, not the way the ordinance was drafted. If the school district applied for the zone change, it would be treated like any other private property owner. Councilor Bettman suggested that was the cost of the measure; the fact the school district’s property was worth more if zoned differently had everything to do with the City’s regulation of other property and the City’s provision of services. Councilor Bettman asked how real market value was calculated as compared to how it was calculated for Ballot Measure 37 claims. It appeared the ordinance excluded improvements from the calculation. Mr. Klein confirmed that. She asked how Ballot Measure 37 calculated value for a claim. Mr. Klein said there were three different ways properties were valued for Ballot Measure 37 claims. Occasionally an appraisal was submitted that included an appraisal of the land value without improvements; sometimes the appraisal MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 16, 2006 Page 5 Public Hearing would include land improvements; and most of the time the majority of claims were filed without any appraisal at all, and included a statement from the property owner or representative stating their opinion of the value of the property without regulation. Councilor Bettman asked if the courts had shown consistency in how land value was calculated. Mr. Klein said there were no cases that had addressed the issue. Ballot Measure 37 cases were just beginning to get filed, and the issues litigated thus far were more preliminary in nature, such as the question of who could file. Mr. Klein said most claims filed had either been denied or waivers had been granted. He was not aware of any cases where governments had paid a claim. Councilor Solomon said that the ordinance continued to feel like double taxation to her and she continued to oppose it. She asked about Mr. Welch’s remarks about the deadlines for filing Ballot Measure 37 claims. Mr. Klein said that the measure stipulated that claims must be submitted in two years or December 2 of this year or two years from the date a government applied the regulation to a piece of property. The initial deadline was for submitting a claim to a local government without submitting a land use application and applied to regulations existing as of the day the measure took effect. A property owner submitting a claim after December 2 would first have to go through a land use process and have the application denied; at that point, the owner had two more years to pursue the claim. Councilor Pryor asked how many current Ballot Measure 37 claims the City of Eugene faced. Ms. Muir said three were submitted. Lane County had received somewhere between 50 and 200. Councilor Pryor asked if Lane County had a Ballot Measure 37 fund. Mr. Klein said no. Councilor Pryor asked how Lane County was handing such claims. Mr. Klein said that the Board of County Commissioners was granting waivers. Councilor Pryor determined from Mr. Klein that no other Oregon city had such a fund as that being contemplated. Councilor Pryor said the ordinance represented uncharted waters. He said conceivably, the City could grant waivers instead of paying compensation. He questioned whether the City needed a fund of this size as it appeared the City could raise a great deal of money to pay claims that never occurred. Councilor Pryor was also concerned about the notion of double-taxation and thought the concept needed more development. He pointed out that no other city appeared to feel the need for such a fund. He supported having an additional work session as he was not prepared to support the ordinance at this time. Councilor Bettman said governments were waiving regulations because they lacked money to pay the claims. She questioned whether the City would need a planning division if the council could not pass new land use ordinances or regulations governing development because each one triggered a Ballot Measure 37 claim. The City would simply be waiving the regulations, and then one must ask if it was worth it to pay millions of dollars to pay for a planning division. Councilor Bettman asked Ms. Muir how many Planning Commission work priorities had Ballot Measure 37 implications. She believed that opportunity siting and infill standards had the potential of triggering many claims. Ms. Muir agreed, and noted that the new south hills standards could also trigger claims. She said she would provide that information to the council. Councilor Bettman said that Portland Metro was looking at a “windfall” tax to purchase conservation easements tied to Ballot Measure 37 claims. She would like to explore that possibility in Eugene. Councilor Papé asked if there was a way to place a lien on a property so a development could go forward without payment of the fee. Mr. Klein said he would include a response to that in his written materials. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 16, 2006 Page 6 Public Hearing Councilor Kelly said that Lane County granted waivers but that presented other land use and service challenges. Speaking to the concern that enormous amounts could be raised from the ordinance, staff’s estimate was that it would raise about $500,000 annually. The two claims the City Council had considered would take slightly more than half that amount. He thought that in light of the claims that had come forward, that was not a lot of money at all. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: An Ordinance Concerning Transportation System Maintenance Fees and Adding Sections 7.750 through 7.790 to the Eugene Code, 1971 City Manager Taylor introduced Public Works Director Kurt Corey and City Engineer Mark Schoening. Mr. Corey referred the council and audience to a depiction of the three-legged stool that represented the transportation system: 1) operations and maintenance; 2) new construction; and 3) capital preservation. He recalled the recommendation of the Budget Citizen Subcommittee to adopt a transportation system maintenance fee as part of its recommendation for long-term street funding. The proposal before the council would close the funding gap with a trip-based fee component based on five residential and four nonresiden- tial categories. He reviewed the current funding sources for operations and maintenance, noting that the service currently cost about $9 million annually and had only about $8 million in funding. He also reviewed the current funding sources for capital preservation, noting the current revenues of about $4.5 million annually are short of the $9 million revenue target. Mr. Corey noted the public education and outreach process that occurred in regard to the proposal. Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing. Larry Hale , 2450 Laurelhurst Drive, identified himself as a typical taxpayer. He said that Eugene had bicycle paths on nearly every street but could not afford to patch potholes. Lane Transit District (LTD) operated buses all over the community but proposed the EmX system at a higher cost. He said that the Eugene council gave tax breaks to nearly every big business that moved to town but could not patch the potholes. He believed that Eugene residents wanted their money properly used. He thought the City used “bait and switch” techniques to get people to support measures, but then the money intended for the streets was used for other purposes. If the money was to be for repairs, that was all it should be used for. Jim Hale , 1715 Linnea Avenue, supported repairing the street preservation backlog. He said the City’s gas tax should be increased for that purpose because it was already in place and an increase could be made without any new bureaucracy. The new tax would create a need for new public employees and new bureaucracies. Mr. Hale said that council conservatives should oppose the tax because for those reasons; council liberals should oppose it because it disconnected the decision to make a vehicle trip from the public costs associated with the decision. He said all councilors should oppose the tax because it was not a user fee; instead, it was a non-user fee and internally unfair in that it taxes all households regardless of their use of the road system and number of vehicles and businesses regardless of their profitability. In terms of businesses, it taxes them on the irrational basis that businesses, rather than people, generated trips. Grocery stores would be forced to pay the tax even though they could not control the shopping patterns of their patrons. Mr. Hale believed the biggest reason to oppose the fee and increase the gas tax was the loss of another Oregonian serving in Iraq and the need to reduce the community’s reliance on and addiction to foreign oil. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 16, 2006 Page 7 Public Hearing Karl Sunberg , 3318 Coraly Avenue, said there was a road maintenance problem in Eugene and suggested it might not be due to a shortage of money but to bad decisions about which roads got resurfaced. He thought the wrong roads got resurfaced. Now the City wanted a reward for those bad decisions to pay to resurface the overlooked roads and more roads that do not need it. He offered to loan his car to anyone who wanted to test the roads. Mr. Sunberg said that most west Eugene residents were used to bad roads because they traveled them every day, and he did not think the fee would change that. He said that road assessments were needed to improve many west Eugene roads and that would not happen because of residents’ limited income. He pointed out that there were many poor people in the community lacking basic services and the City was proposing to throw their needs “to the wind” to fix bumpy roads. He said “shame on us.” He said he would support a fee to address those problems. Mr. Sunberg said that the fee was actually a tax and the use of the word “fee” was an attempt to avoid State law. He anticipated its rejection by the court system. He said if the City needed more money, it should call the fee a tax. On behalf of the low-income, the disabled who would not own a car, and the elderly, he asked the council to find a real problem and fix it. th John Lauch , 715 West 4 Avenue, representing School District 4J, discussed the impact of the tax on the school district. He said that any fee would reduce the money available for local school operations. The district would pay approximately $107,000 annually if the ordinance passed. The district would not be reimbursed by the State for the cost of the fee and would have to find the money from its existing budget. He acknowledged the need to maintain the road system and noted that the district paid about $10,000 annually in City motor fuel purchases for that purpose. The ordinance would require the district to redirect public education funds to support street maintenance. Joel Pomeranz , 1171 Risden Place, representing the Oregon Restaurant Association (ORA) and Oregon Lodging Association, said the ORA supported the position of the Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce in regard to the proposed fee. He thought the fee was unfair because many of the restaurants that would bear the tax would be restaurants that were not trip generators but trip stop-offs. Restaurants operated under low profit margins of between three and seven percent, making it more difficult for such businesses to absorb additional fees. Eugene restaurants would be placed at a competitive disadvantage with those in neighboring communities. He agreed that funds for street maintenance were needed and indicated supported for the chamber’s bond proposal. Larry Reed , 4765 Valley Plaza Loop, representing JRH Transportation and Land Use Planning, opposed the proposed fee. He said that the fee was the wrong solution to a real problem. He said the proposal was not cost-effective as the cost of collecting $4 million annually would be around $700,000 and perhaps more, or about 17-½ to 20 percent of the total collected. The fee lacked accountability because it was not specifically dedicated to repair work between curbs and there was no guarantee it would be spent on the backlog. The City was asking the community for more money without making street maintenance a higher priority. He said that the streets had reached their current condition because past councils would not make street maintenance a priority. He preferred the use of general obligation bonds to catch up with the backlog a preferable approach. Bonding was equitable, offered certainty, demonstrated that the council was setting priorities, and provided accountability in that money must be spent on specific projects. Mr. Reed asked the council to explore the concept in more detail. Gary Wildish , 2424 Quince Street, supported reducing the maintenance backlog but not the backfill of Public Works administration costs. The only administrative costs that should be paid for by the tax should be only that directly related to street preservation projects. He encouraged the council to make maintenance of the streets a priority. He said any money from such a fee should be dedicated to curb-to-curb repairs and MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 16, 2006 Page 8 Public Hearing the repairs should be done by the private sector. Mr. Wildish suggested that the City dedicate the contribution-in-lieu-of taxes (CILT) it received from the Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) to the backlog. He said that the local business community already supported the transportation system as a large portion of LTD’s budget was provided by local business. Terry Connelly , 1401 Willamette Street, representing the Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce, said the chamber did not dispute the need for repairing the maintenance backlog. However, the chamber did not think the proposed fee was the right solution. He believed the ordinance was an improvement on the ordinance proposed previously, but the fee still lacked the conditions needed to make it work. Mr. Connelly said the chamber was very concerned about accountability as the money was not dedicated to curb-to-curb maintenance, which where the backlog problem existed. Future councils could chose to use the money for other purposes in the transportation system than the backlog. Future councils could also increase the fee without a vote or any certainty the money would go to the backlog. Mr. Connelly agreed with previous speakers who said the fee would not be cost-effective and would be expensive to collect. He said that many residents could not justify new fees when the council had not identified the backlog of street maintenance as a top priority or dedicated any additional money to it. The gas tax was one incremental step in solving the problem. Mr. Connelly said such fees had real implications for the cost of doing business, and that was hard for the chamber to ignore. David Hauser , 1401 Willamette Street, representing the Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce, said the chamber continued to support the local fuel tax and would continue to lobby the Board of County Commissioners to restore the partnership road moneys to Lane County cities. He said the chamber also supported the use of General Fund moneys to demonstrate the issue’s priority. Mr. Hauser suggested that the establishment of a long-term financial goal for street preservation similar to what had been done for a new city hall complex would be appropriate. Mr. Hauser said the chamber supported the exploration of using general obligation bonds to pay for a portion of the backlog, noting such bonds had been used successfully in Salem, Oregon. It had the advantage of providing greater accountability to the citizens, including a sunset that allowed evaluation of the ordinance, allowing citizen input into the prioritization of the backlog, and requiring the City to continue to make a case for funding. He said that if a well thought-out bond dedicated to curb-to-curb backlog was proposed, the chamber would work with the City for its passage. Lisa Warnes , 5020 Nectar Way, did not support charging a $5 fee to all residents, particularly low-income residents, suggesting that people might be forced to decide between heating their house and paying the fee. She said in light of the lack of a guarantee of how the money would be used, she did not support the ordinance. She said that the council should follow up on some of the suggestions made in testimony, and asked if a vehicle registration fee had been considered. Dave Perez , 2055 Patterson Street, Director of the YMCA and representative of United Way Executives, thanked Mr. Corey and his staff for their accessibility. He commended the chamber for preparing an alternative proposal. He asked the council to consider a waiver for nonprofit agencies and 501(c)(3) organizations given the significant and negative impact such a fee would have on those agencies’ abilities to provide services. Zachary Vishanoff , Patterson Street, asked the council to preserve his “right” to provide the council with materials directly prior to meetings. Speaking to the fee, he suggested a license plate that had a pothole be established to support road maintenance. Mr. Vishanoff objected to the money set aside for City Hall. He said that it seemed visionary and “feels smart” but he believed it undermined the public’s trust in govern- MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 16, 2006 Page 9 Public Hearing ment. He thought if the City spent the $25 million it was holding for a new city hall on street repairs now it would save money in the future. He said that the City had also paid money for repairs that benefited the federal courthouse without compensation from the federal government, and he questioned whether the roads would be used. Mr. Vishanoff called for the reconsideration of what he termed “expensive new two-way streets” and called for a public hearing whenever a street was converted from one-way to two-way. He also opposed the sale of neighborhood parks. Cheryl O’Neill , 24307 High Pass Road, Junction City, Executive Director of Womanspace, said she represented the Human Services Providers Network, which was concerned about the impact of such fees on nonprofit and 501(c)(3) organizations as they were not being exempted in the ordinance. She feared the community was moving away from support for its safety net. Ms. O’Neill said the lowest income people in the community would be affected by a loss of services. She suggested there were precedents for waiving such fees for nonprofit organizations and asked the council to examine that possibility in more detail to mitigate the impact of the fee on those organizations and recognize the social value they were providing. Charles Biggs , 540 Antelope Way, concurred with the remarks of the first three speakers. He said the proposed fee did not seem to be sustainable, would not actively discourage the use of roads, and would probably encourage the use of the roads “by the wrong types of peoples.” He suggested that the City should use the revenues from the telecommunications tax in the road right-of-way. Tom Slocum , 1950 Graham Drive, advised the council to listen closely to the chamber’s proposal and discard the fee proposal. He liked the proposal because he would get to vote for it, and he said he would. He thought the best thing about a general obligation bond was that “everybody was in on it.” He said that everyone used the streets and all should pay their share. Mr. Slocum agreed that EWEB’s CILT payment to the City should be considered for use in the right-of-way given what he considered the logical nexus created by EWEB’s use of the streets. Misha Seymour , 1313 Lincoln Street, #307, did not support the proposed fee. He used a puppet represent- ing a property owner to carry on a conversation with himself about his opposition to the fee. He asked what kind of tax was next. Mr. Seymour did not support City tax breaks for business and multi-family residential developments, questioning where the money came from. He questioned how there could be no money for roads. Ann Tattersall , 1385 Bailey Avenue, was opposed to the proposed fee, particularly the residential component. She termed the fee regressive and inequitable and suggested a chewing gum tax would make as much sense. The fee taxed those who made little or no use of the roads. She personally drove little and used a light weight car that did not tear up the streets. She indicated she could support an increase in the gas tax, which she considered more equitable as it would apply to those who actually used the streets. A tax for living in a house in Eugene had nothing to do with a resident’s use of the roads. th Howie Bonnett , 1835 East 28 Avenue, referred to his written testimony, provided to the council earlier. He objected to the proposed tax because it resulted in tax shifting such as that pointed out earlier by the representative of School District 4J. He said that the tax needed to be a tax on use, not on property. He thought the proposal inconsistent with the council’s goal related to financial resources, which called for fair and equitable system revenues, and inconsistent with the goal related to sustainable development as it did not meet environment needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs. Mr. Bonnett said that when someone wanted to use the transportation system, they should pay a fee. He said that his written testimony included some suggestions for proceeding, and he encouraged the council to form an advisory body to discuss the issue. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 16, 2006 Page 10 Public Hearing There being no other requests to speak, Mayor Piercy closed the public hearing. Councilor Ortiz thanked those who attended the hearing and spoke. She asked if the manager could provide the council with information on how much the gas tax would need to be increased to meet the needs identified by staff. Mr. Corey indicated that it would require about fourteen to fifteen cents per gallon to meet the need and generate $9 million annually. Councilor Poling said all who spoke agreed the streets needed to be maintained. He recalled that he had voted to rescind the fee previously on the basis that Lane County would assist in the road funding solution; that had not occurred, and Lane County was now contemplating ending its contribution to the City’s Road Fund. Councilor Poling wanted a fee that addressed maintenance needs on a curb-to-curb basis and said Section 7.750(2)(a) must be removed if he was to support the ordinance. He did not support paying for off-street maintenance with the fee. Councilor Poling said that increasing the local gas tax would be unfair to local gas station owners because it would be easy for motorists to drive to Springfield or other areas of the county and pay less. Councilor Poling indicated he would not support an ordinance unless the public voted to support it. Councilor Poling said that he had repeatedly tried without success to make street maintenance a council priority and he would raise the issue again. Regarding the suggestion for a local vehicle registration fees, Councilor Poling said that only the County or State could establish such a fee. Councilor Papé believed that progress had been made in that all now seemed to be aware of the street preservation problem. The issue now was how to fix the problem. The gas tax solved part of the problem but the City was still behind in its preservation backlog. He had not favored rescinding the fee and said that if that had not occurred, the City would not be in the situation it was facing today. Councilor Papé noted that Salem had bonded for road improvements for years and asked where the chamber had been three or four years ago when the City faced down the County without success. Councilor Papé agreed with Councilor Poling that the fee should be dedicated to curb-to-curb maintenance. Councilor Papé said that the City needed a reliable transportation system for emergency vehicles. He pointed out that streets were needed by all, even those without a vehicle. Councilor Pryor thought progress was made by the mutual recognition of the problem that existed. He suggested that the solution might involve a partnership approach. He thought that operations and mainte- nance projects should be paid for by ongoing money, so he would not be willing to drop a scaled-down fee altogether. He thought that preservation could appropriately be paid for by one-time money. The concept of bonding to pay for the City’s backlog of capital preservation needs made sense to him. Councilor Pryor said Eugene residents were willing to give money to governments they trust and believe will spend it appropriately. He said the council was obligated to demonstrate it could be trusted to spend the MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 16, 2006 Page 11 Public Hearing public’s money, and not to be talking about other solutions did not engender that trust. He wanted to generate trust with the public and proposed the council look at additional ongoing, stable money to pay for operations and maintenance and work with the public to solve the capital preservation problem. Councilor Kelly was “somewhat amused” by the discussion as it was clear to him there was no political will in the community to do anything about the problem. The council was now having the same discussion it had when the citizen members of the Budget Committee initially forwarded their recommendation six years ago. He said the council was “going around in circles” and he was convinced it would be doing the same ten years from now, and the roads would continue to decay. Councilor Kelly asked staff to prepare text for a motion raising the local gas tax by ten cents per gallon when the council took action on the ordinance. Councilor Kelly said he did not know what people meant when they discussed “curb-to-curb” maintenance. He asked if a bond measure could pay for operation and maintenance. Mr. Corey said it depended on the bond measure. The focus of testimony was on capital preservation. Mr. Corey said more research would be required as to what was eligible for bonding. Councilor Kelly said that bonding for capital preservation was no solution for the operations and maintenance shortfall, and invited a chamber proposal for that. Councilor Kelly said there was no dedicated source of funding for the maintenance and preservation of the off-street bicycle path. Mr. Corey agreed. Councilor Kelly recalled that five percent of the proposed fee was to be dedicated to bicycle paths, and said he would not support an ordinance that did not provide five percent of revenues to maintain the City’s off-street bicycle paths. Councilor Bettman asked if the fee could be referred by citizens to the ballot if adopted by the council. Mr. Klein said that residents would have 30 days from the time of the ordinance’s passage to collect the necessary signatures and turn them in to the City Recorder. Councilor Bettman referred to the ordinance and asked if the phrase “improve elements of the City’s transportation system” could be interpreted as providing for additional capacity. Mr. Corey said that the ordinance mirrored text from the old ordinance that prohibited new capital construction. Councilor Bettman interpreted Section 7.755(a) of the proposed ordinance as being general enough to allow the fee to pay for new lanes of increased capacity. Mr. Corey said that if the council desired the ordinance to be iron-clad in that regard, he would recommend the addition of text that clarified that intent. Councilor Bettman thought the City had extreme latitude in discounting, modifying, or waiving fees and she believed that led to increased fees for other users. Those residents with fewer resources were much less likely to be challenging and appealing fees and would be inequitably burdened by the fee. Councilor Bettman agreed there was a problem and suggested that the problem was exacerbated by the lack of action on the part of the State as well. Councilor Poling recalled that the issue of general obligation bonds had been discussed by the council in the past and he thought more consideration of that concept was needed. Councilor Poling said he understood the telecommunications revenues could not be used for street repairs. Councilor Poling believed that the revenues from the current gas tax were being put to good use. He noted the roads in his ward that had received a preservation overlay. He asked how much five percent of the fee MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 16, 2006 Page 12 Public Hearing would realize. Mr. Corey anticipated it would realize about $300,000. Councilor Poling asked if the City had that much work to do on the bicycle path that totaled that amount. Mr. Corey did not know, and said that the City was approaching the maintenance level of the road system on its off-street paths. Councilor Poling said when he talked about “curb-to-curb,” he was talking about the part of the road that cars traveled on. However, he would not object to earmarking a specific amount to off-street bicycle paths in the ordinance. He said the ordinance was vague on that point and it appeared the money could be spent anywhere. Councilor Kelly referred to the rate making standards on page 2 of the ordinance and the reference that the fee “may be based” on those identified components. He suggested that the word “may” be changed to “shall.” In regard to the equitability of the fee, Councilor Kelly believed that the fee would be more equitable if the base and administration elements were related to trip generation rates. Councilor Kelly said the gas tax moneys had been spent exclusively on road repair. He said that roads that might not appear to need preservation overlay received one to extend their life cycle and avoid the need to reconstruct the road. Councilor Taylor indicated support for spending money on bicycle paths but said she did not support the fee because it was not equitable. Those with a small house, no car, and little income would pay the same as a wealthy resident with many cars living in a big house. Councilor Taylor liked the concept of funding roads through the General Fund as a basic service. She called for a general discussion of the taxation system. Councilor Taylor did not support an increase in the local gas tax because people would drive to other communities to buy gas. Councilor Taylor also liked the idea of bonding to address part of the backlog. She said that the cost of roads that needed to be rebuilt, such as Crest Drive, would still be assessed to residents under the current proposal, and they would need to pay $5 monthly for the fee as well. She suggested that the City could include those roads in the projects to be funded through a bond. Councilor Bettman did not support a shift of General Fund revenues to pay for streets given that such funds were needed for other purposes. People who paid the gas tax expected the government would use the revenue to fix potholes. She maintained that would be the “quintessential double-dipping.” She suggested that those who argued for a general obligation bond for street preservation and the use of General Fund revenues for that purpose had also supported Oregon Transportation Investment Act (OTIA) I, II, and III projects, which were predicated on bonding against future increases in the registration fee, and Connect Oregon projects, which were predicated on bonding against lottery revenues. She maintained that systems development charge revenues were artificially low and the City did not have sufficient funding to pay for the new capacity it was building, so the City was shifting funding in order to pay for new capacity. Councilor Papé shared Councilor Kelly’s frustration at the council’s inability to find a solution to the street funding problem and said he did not want to pass the problem on to his children and grandchildren. He hoped the council could find a solution and was glad that all those who offered testimony recognized that there was a problem. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 16, 2006 Page 13 Public Hearing Councilor Papé said he used the bicycle paths frequently and had yet to see a pothole. He asked about the cost of a lane mile of bicycle path opposed to roadways. Mr. Corey said the costs were not so far apart on a unit cost basis. Councilor Papé thought the City could find the money it needed in the General Fund budget to preserve and maintain the bicycle paths. Responding to a question from Councilor Papé, City Manager Taylor distinguished between Qwest revenues and the EWEB CILT and suggested that staff provide the council with a memorandum regarding the reasons for directing the revenues to the Facilities Reserve Fund, and any limitations on those funds. Mayor Piercy believed the council had an opportunity to craft something everyone could live with. She asked if the City could mitigate the impact of the fee on low-income residents. Mayor Piercy said that the City Council was talking about being more supportive of the community’s schools and human service providers while discussing a fee that directly affected them. She asked the council to consider that issue. City Manager Taylor indicated that staff would return to the council with different scenarios showing the impact of a bond measure on transportation funding in relation to other funding sources. He said staff would also provide text restricting the use of the revenues. Councilor Bettman said there were billions spent in the state on the transportation system from a variety of sources. She thought it a failure on the part of elected officials that an adequate portion of that money was not set aside to preserve and maintain the existing system. The council was now asking the taxpayers to produce more money on top of that money. She opposed spending General Fund money on transportation when such a significant amount was being spent statewide. Regarding the money being set aside to replace City Hall, which she thought a responsible approach, Councilor Bettman said that money was transferred from services from each department to contribute to the cost of replacing City offices to continue to provide those services. She thought that to use that money to fill potholes would be unforgivable. The meeting adjourned at 10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dennis M. Taylor City Manager (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 16, 2006 Page 14 Public Hearing ATTACHMENT F M I N U T E S Eugene City Council Work Session McNutt Room—Eugene City Hall October 23, 2006 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Jennifer Solomon, Andrea Ortiz, David Kelly, Betty Taylor, Gary Papé, Bonny Bettman, George Poling, Chris Pryor. Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. A. COMMITTEE REPORTS AND ITEMS OF INTEREST FROM MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER th Mayor Piercy reported that the Holt International Children's Services 50 anniversary conference was attended by representatives from 33 countries. She noted the Bioneers Conference at Lane Community College and commended the Human Rights Commission and other community partners for the conference on mental health. She said the Southwestern Oregon Chapter of the American Institute of Architects presented the City of Eugene with a certificate of appreciation for leadership in sustainability for adoption of LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certification for City buildings. She shared an expression of appreciation and admiration for the performance of Eugene police officers during the recent incident at North Eugene High School. Ms. Ortiz stated she recently attended a leadership conference at Kah-Nee-Ta and would submit a written report. She felt the conference was very worthwhile and encouraged others to attend if they had the opportunity. She participated in an event at Golden Gardens Park over the weekend and was pleased to see a lot of people there, including many from outside of the neighborhood. She commended the efforts of Parks and Open Space Director Johnny Medlin. She also visited a local business involved with theater arts, Upstart Crow. Mr. Poling reminded everyone that November 7 was Election Day and ballots needed to be dropped off by 8 p.m. He was discouraged by an interview with someone who said he was not going to vote because he was not informed about issues. He noted that the deadline for Budget Committee applications was October 31. Mr. Kelly commended the Human Rights Commission for the recent Mental Health and Human Rights Conference at the University of Oregon. He said the event capacity of 300 attendees was filled by advance registrations. He said there was a rich discussion with local and nationally recognized speakers and consumer advocates and a report on next steps would be presented to the commission and the council. He said the Metropolitan Policy Committee (MPC) held a joint meeting with the Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) to review the draft Public Participation Plan and address the CAC’s concern with lack of clarity on its role and the MPC’s expectations. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 23, 2006 Page 1 Work Session Ms. Bettman commended the Eugene Police Department for its prompt and effective action in response to an incident at North Eugene High School. She announced that Intergovernmental Relations Manager Jason Heuser was leaving City employment for a position with Eugene Water & Electric Board as its legislative liaison. She thanked Mr. Heuser for his effective and knowledgeable service. Mr. Pryor reported that the Human Services Commission met on October 16 and continued its discussion of restructuring the commission to achieve efficiency and provide better service. He said a consultant would assist in streamlining a very complicated system and the commission agreed that changes would be brought back to their respective elected bodies. He noted that Eugene staff was given national recognition at a recent parks conference in Seattle and many employees were teaching classes based on some of the City’s unique programs. Mr. Papé urged citizens to vote for the parks and open space ballot measure. He reminded the public that he and Mayor Piercy would be at the Market of Choice at Delta Oaks on the evening of October 24 for a conversation with citizens but would be unable to discuss issues related to hospital siting because of the land use application likely to come before the council fairly soon. He said he intended to ask for an update or work session on the River Road/Santa Clara area community park to discuss progress. City Manager Taylor reported that he spent the afternoon helping the City of Florence interview candidates for a new city manager. He was pleased with the quality of candidates. He related that he was recently certified as a credentialed city manager by the International City/County Manager Association and noted that Oregon had the most credentialed city managers per capita. B. WORK SESSION: Alternative Mobility Standards City Engineer Mark Schoening stated that the Oregon Highway Plan (OHP) included alternative mobility standards (AMS) to address congestion in areas that did not meet adopted mobility standards. He introduced Lane Council of Governments Transportation Planner Tom Schwetz to explain the process for developing and adopting AMS. Mr. Schwetz presented an overview of AMS with a PowerPoint presentation entitled “Balancing Regional Mobility with a Vibrant Local Economy. He said development of AMS required local commitment to specific actions and many of those were included in the Central Lane MPO Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). He said congestion related to an excess of vehicles on a portion of roadway that resulted in speeds that were slower than normal at certain times and could be characterized as both “good” and “bad” congestion. He reviewed the positive and negative effects of congestion and said that congestion was a consequence of growth in the economy and resulting increases in dwelling units and employment and growth in urban levels of development and surrounding areas. Mr. Schwetz identified a number of variables that contributed to daily congestion such as special events, poor signal timing, bad weather, work zones and traffic incidents. He used a series of maps to illustrate geographic, population, employment, dwelling unit density and vehicle trip growth in the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area. He also illustrated the mobility dependence of area roadways, both state and local, and the locations of congestion currently and in 20 years. He said the next phase would be to discuss ways in which congestion could be addressed. Mr. Schwetz presented a comparison of mobility among Portland, Salem, and the Eugene-Springfield area. He said that the Eugene-Springfield area had half the congestion of most cities of comparable size, and MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 23, 2006 Page 2 Work Session Portland, which was seven times larger, had 33 times the congestion of the Eugene-Springfield area. He identified congestion implications as set forth in the Statewide Congestion Overview for Oregon. He said that next steps included: ? Compile results from assessment of alternative solutions ? Develop proposal for possible changes to State’s mobility standards ? Identify possible local commitments to include in proposal In response to a question from Mr. Pryor, Mr. Schwetz said that projections would be revised within the next two months to reflect elimination of the West Eugene Parkway. In response to a question from Mr. Papé, Mr. Schwetz said the rating system meant from a volume over capacity ratio standpoint that standards were established at a point where traffic could still move and the State’s standards assumed that 80 percent or less was meeting standards on a facility like Beltline. He said the State used a different measurement system than the local regional transportation plan, which used an A through F rating system. th Mr. Papé remarked how the council’s identification of the West 11 Avenue corridor as a priority related to other mobility needs that might be higher. Mr. Schoening said there were two approaches: capital th infrastructure such as improvements to Beltline and the corridor study of West 11 Avenue to consider alternative transportation modes such as EmX. He said options included adding more capacity to the system for all modes of travel and a different focus on the existing transportation system to achieve more capacity such as access management. He felt there was the right mix of strategies. Mr. Papé asked what the consequences would be if the City’s priorities were inconsistent with the OHP. Mr. Schwetz said that the region was working with the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) to ensure the consistency of any proposal presented to the Oregon Transportation Commission (OTC), although if the OTC determined a proposal was not consistent, it could decline to approve and require certain mitigation for those facilities out of compliance with mobility standards. Mr. Papé asked how managing land use to limit vehicular demand on State highways could be accomplished since the passage of Ballot Measure 37. Mr. Schwetz said that balancing the interests of the State and property owners would require negotiation among all of the interested parties. City Manager Taylor said Ballot Measure 37 would have an impact, which was why local solutions were being considered from a land use and transportation perspective and the legislature had commissioned the “big look” at the issue. Ms. Bettman commented that when congestion reached the point that it negatively affected the economic viability of property people would be willing to negotiate in order to decrease congestion. She was pleased that the AMS proposal would come to the council for approval before it went to the MPC. She said Eugene’s lower congestion compared to similarly sized jurisdiction was also good news. She asked how “peak” hour was defined with respect to congestion. Mr. Schwetz replied that the morning peak hour was 7:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. and the evening peak hour was 4:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. Ms. Bettman noted that much investment and infrastructure was predicated on peak hour congestion and asked if all jurisdictions used the same standard. Mr. Schwetz replied that the peak hour definition was a standard measure of congestion although jurisdictions varied in their responses. He said in some cases, such as Portland, used a two-hour peak period on some key facilities. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 23, 2006 Page 3 Work Session Ms. Bettman asked whether, if expanded, free bus services could be factored into the mobility standards model to determine its impact on congestion. Mr. Schwetz said that a methodology requirement was to consider a wide range of options and some analysis had been completed of the impact of expanding transit far beyond the current system. He said the challenge of analyzing the impact of free transit was lack of baseline data and a reference point to help predict people’s reaction. Mr. Kelly said the key to developing AMS was following State statutes and administrative rules. He underscored Ms. Bettman’s point that rush hour congestion was frustrating but should be put in perspective with traffic flow during the remainder of a 24-hour period. He was nervous about using terms such as “failure” at a specific level of service as it generally meant that traffic was still proceeding but drivers might wait through a second cycle of lights at an intersection. He said that failure could connote something more devastating to the public. Ms. Bettman asked why residential was not included as a component under congestion tolerant land use th facility in the comparison of congestion table. She also asked if the State had opted out of West 11 Avenue th east of Beltline since the agenda material only referred to West 11 Avenue west of Beltline. Mr. Schwetz said the facility east of Beltline was the City’s and the State would be willing to discuss the entire corridor but the State’s section where the standards would apply was west of Beltline. He said omission of residential uses in the table was an oversight as congestion-tolerant actually referred to a mixed-use area that would include different types of residential. Mr. Schwetz said that engineers analyzing congestion data had observed that at the point of levels of service E and F the system became unstable and the models were not useful in predicting what might happen. Mr. Papé asked if there were safety indices on the various levels of service. Mr. Schwetz said there was no standard related to safety but generally speaking the more congestion the greater the opportunity for accidents. Mayor Piercy noted that the community would gain some experience with free transit when EmX service began. C. WORK SESSION: Programming of Surface Transportation Program-Urban (STP-U) Funds City Manager Taylor said that Mr. Schoening would discuss resources available to address the backlog of preservation projects. Mr. Schoening stated that consistent with the council’s previous direction, pavement preservation projects were before it for review and approval before applications were submitted to the MPC. He said Attachment B to the agenda item summary was an outline of the STP-U funds programming process and timeline. He reviewed the list of pavement preservation projects set forth in Attachment A and explained how projects were selected. He said the list totaled approximately $20 million worth of work and the council was provided with the entire list instead of selected projects so that when the STP-U criteria was established by the MPC staff would have the flexibility to pick those projects that best matched those criteria. In response to a question from Ms. Bettman, Mr. Schoening said that staff would select projects that best met identified criteria in order to maximize the success of project funding applications. Ms. Bettman indicated she would be happy to approve the list. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 23, 2006 Page 4 Work Session Mr. Kelly commended Eugene’s staff for being steadfast in supporting the council’s adopted priorities during TPC discussions. He said that the criteria recommended by the TPC would come before the MPC for adoption and he and Mayor Piercy would continue to support council priorities. He noted that the metropolitan area received between $1 and $2 million in STP-U funds annually. Mr. Pryor, referring to the $20 million in projects on the list, asked approximately how much in STP-U funds would be available to the City in any year. Mr. Schoening said that Eugene might receive between 40 and 60 percent of total funds available. Mr. Pryor reinforced the point that the funds would make little progress in reducing the backlog of projects, which was growing faster than the STP-U funds available each year, and other options for addressing the backlog were required. Mr. Papé asked if Eugene typically received 50 percent of the available funds. Mr. Schoening said that when the funds were allocated by population Eugene received 42 percent. Mr. Papé asked if the council had a role in defining priorities by appointing people to the TPC or approving priorities annually or bi-annually. Mr. Schoening said the process was very complex and involved not only the TPC but required project coordination with EWEB and other entities as well as internally with a wide range of Public Works projects. He said that one of the factors in determining project priority was the practice of distributing both the inconvenience of construction and the benefits across the community. Ms. Taylor said she was pleased with the progress to obtain funding and agreed with the practice of distributing projects geographically. Ms. Bettman pointed out that while the STP-U funds were limited there was also the gas tax and dedicated system development charge transportation reimbursement and every bit helped. She said in the past the policy was to prioritize maintenance and preservation but the practice was not consistent with that. Mr. Kelly agreed that the council should not be involved in prioritization as the City’s engineering and financial model did an excellent job of monitoring projects and identifying the most urgent needs. Ms. Solomon, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to approve the attached list of pave- ment preservation projects as the basis for applications for federal Surface Trans- portation Program-Urban funds for FY07-FY09 to be programmed by the Metro- politan Policy Committee. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. The meeting adjourned at 6:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dennis M. Taylor City Manager (Recorded by Lynn Taylor) MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 23, 2006 Page 5 Work Session