HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 06/26/06 City Council MeetingM I N U T E S
Eugene City Council
City Council Meeting
Council Chamber—Eugene City Hall
June 26, 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 and welcomed
everyone to the meeting.
1. CEREMONIAL MATTERS
- Afro-Academic Cultural, Technological, and Scientific Olympics (ACT-SO)
The winners of the Afro-Academic Cultural, Technological and Scientific Olympics (ACT-SO) presented
their winning submissions. Yasha Stubbs presented her vocal piece and Jarret Anderson performed his
winning oratorial.
Mayor Piercy read a proclamation honoring Ms. Stubbs and Mr. Anderson for their work. The proclama-
tion underscored that the community winners would move on to compete on a national level in Washington,
DC. She presented copies of the proclamation to the two honorees.
2. PUBLIC FORUM
Mayor Piercy reviewed the rules of the Public Forum.
Zachary Vishanoff
, Patterson Street, said he had been looking closely at the new courthouse building and
observed that there were trailers parked behind that property. He alleged that the trailer residents had
worked for the former cannery that occupied the property and that many former employees of the cannery
were now homeless. He commented that he would like to see a world where curious journalists photo-
graphed sites such as the one with trailers on it. He wanted people to think about how architecture, tax
breaks, and urban renewal could devour a community or enhance it. He opined that the federal courthouse
was devouring the area around it “through secrecy and through wonkish details.”
Allan Erickson
, 29559 Clear Lake Road, Eugene, stated that the Hinchey-Rohrabacher Medical
Marijuana Amendment was going before the United States Congress in the last week of June. He explained
that the amendment was an adjunct to the Department of Justice funding bill that would deprive the Drug
Enforcement Agency (DEA) and the Department of Justice from using funds to go after medical marijuana
patients in any of the states that had such legislation. He underscored that the amendment would not affect
MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 26, 2006 Page 1
Regular Meeting
states without such legislation. He asked the councilors to ask Congressman Peter DeFazio and other
Oregon representatives to back Mr. Hinchey on the amendment. He noted that the amendment gained
momentum every year and most recently four of the Oregon representatives supported it and only one
opposed it. He hoped that no one doubted the legitimacy of medical cannabis. He acknowledged that for
years it had been touted as a cancer-causing agent and countered that recent studies suggested this was not
so. He cited a study that indicated that cannabis actually helped to fight cancer in some situations. He had
letters prepared for the councilors to sign.
James A. Greig
, 145 Ruby Street, spoke on behalf of Americans for Safe Access, stressed that he was
advocating strictly for medical use of cannabis. He said he had been in Washington, DC, lobbying for the
Hinchey-Rohrabacher amendment. He met with 21 members of Congress and both Oregon State Senators
and most of his meetings had gone well. He stated that the Death with Dignity Law did not allow patients
in their final stages of life to get “their medicine” through a pharmacy. He noted that California adopted a
dispensary system. He said until regulations were passed by the State or Federal government that would
classify cannabis as a Schedule 3 medicine, obtaining the medicine was a dilemma faced by medical
marijuana users. He added that people also faced employment loss and the loss of custody of children. He
supplied information on the addictive properties of a number of drugs including nicotine, caffeine, and
alcohol, and also on the “gateway theory,” which showed that tobacco was proved to be more of a gateway
drug than marijuana. He stated that federal forfeiture laws could be brought into play and a person
growing medical marijuana for personal use could lose his or her home. He encouraged the council to
agree with Congressman DeFazio and other supporters of the Hinchey-Rohrabacher Amendment. He
added that he was a medical marijuana user because of chronic pain due to arthritis and related muscle
spasms and problems associated with glaucoma. He had been able to reduce his dependency on pain pills
through use of medical marijuana.
Mayor Piercy closed the Public Forum and called for council comments.
Councilor Kelly thanked the speakers in the Public Forum. He encouraged Mr. Greig and Mr. Erickson to
obtain signatures to the letters during the council break.
2. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of City Council Minutes
- May 10, 2006, Workshop
- May 22, 2006, City Council Meeting
- May 24, 2006, Work Session
- May 31, 2006, Work Session
B. Approval of Tentative Working Agenda
C. Approval of Minutes, Findings, and Recommendations from the Hearings Official and Adop-
tion of Resolution 4882 Forming a Local Improvement District for Paving, Constructing
Curbs and Gutters, Sidewalks, Street Lights, Water Quality Bioswales, and Stormwater
Drainage on River Avenue from 200 feet East of River Road to 100 feet West of Beltline
Highway (Job #3693)
D. Transfer of Water Pollution Control Facility Property from the City of Eugene to the Metro-
politan Wastewater Management Commission
MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 26, 2006 Page 2
Regular Meeting
Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to approve the items on
the Consent Calendar including the minutes, as amended, from the May 17, 2006,
Work Session.
Councilor Papé pulled Item D.
Councilor Kelly said he had previously submitted minutes corrections. Mayor Piercy noted the corrections
and deemed them, without objection, approved.
Councilor Bettman indicated she also submitted corrections to the minutes. Mayor Piercy deemed the
corrections to the minutes, without objection, approved.
Roll call vote; the motion to approve the Consent Calendar with the exception of
Items D, passed unanimously, 7:0.
Regarding Item D, Councilor Papé assumed that it was part of the intention of the agreement finalized one
year earlier to finalize the conveyance of ownership of the property to the Metropolitan Wastewater
Management Commission (MWMC). He wondered why the property was under the ownership of the City
of Eugene in the first place, whether Eugene had paid for the property and, if it had, whether Eugene was
being compensated adequately for it. City Manager Dennis Taylor asked Wastewater Division Director
Peter Ruffier to respond to the questions.
Mr. Ruffier stated that the proposal before the council sought to transfer 95-plus acres to the MWMC to
complete the definitions and the ownership of the regional wastewater treatment plant. He said the original
boundary covered approximately 62 acres.
Councilor Papé asked why, if the City of Eugene owned it and had acquired approximately 30 more acres,
had there not been some compensation paid. Mr. Ruffier replied that there had never been any compensa-
tion paid for the original Eugene Wastewater Treatment Plant, nor had there been any compensation paid to
Springfield for the original Springfield treatment plant, both of which were envisioned to be transferred to
the MWMC in the original 1977 agreement that formed the commission.
City Attorney Glenn Klein understood Councilor Papé’s question somewhat differently. He explained that
the additional acres had been purchased by the City of Eugene and, at that time, MWMC had either
reimbursed the City or fronted the money for it. He clarified that the transfer had been conducted in this
manner for legal reasons. He underscored that the City of Eugene had not paid for this property from its
funds.
Councilor Papé asked if this was the case for the original acreage. Mr. Ruffier replied that the original
acreage had never been compensated for by a transfer of funds. Councilor Papé ascertained from Mr.
Ruffier that the City of Eugene paid for the original 62 acres and asked why no compensation was being
offered for it. Mr. Ruffier stated that the original agreement envisioned a transfer of funds, but over the
years, staff wrestled with the issue of who owed what and for what. He asked the council to keep in mind
that the regional wastewater system served both Eugene and Springfield and roughly two-thirds of the
ratepayers were in the City of Eugene and one-third in Springfield. He clarified that the ratepayers would
pay for the facility in that proportion. He reiterated that Springfield abandoned its wastewater facility and
had not been compensated, just as Eugene had not been compensated.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 26, 2006 Page 3
Regular Meeting
Councilor Papé asked if the Springfield wastewater treatment facility could be cleaned up and sold to
someone else for development. Mr. Ruffier responded that under the IGA, when the County Service
District (CSD) was formed in 1978 to raise funds for the regional facilities, the CSD had to be owners in
order to issue the bonds. He said the agreements indicated that the CSD was the owner and, in return, the
CSD leased the property to the MWMC with an option to purchase for $100 and this option was exercised.
He stated that all of the documents indicate that the MWMC was the owner in equity, though the titles had
never been transferred over.
Councilor Papé asked if the MWMC paid rent for the property. Mr. Ruffier replied that it had not.
Councilor Papé surmised that Eugene was, in essence, donating its facility. Mr. Ruffier affirmed this,
adding that Springfield had also donated its facility.
Councilor Papé pointed out that Springfield’s facility was no longer needed. Mr. Ruffier explained that it
had been abandoned in the original agreement and Springfield had given up value in its original facility
when it joined the regional facility.
In response to a follow-up question from Councilor Papé, Mr. Ruffier stated that Springfield still held the
title for its facility but intended to transfer the title to the MWMC.
Councilor Papé asked legal counsel if the City of Eugene was obligated to conduct the transfer. Mr. Klein
said he could not answer this question. He suggested there be a postponement.
Councilor Papé observed that the property went all the way to the river and wondered why the City of
Eugene was transferring the property to that point. Mr. Ruffier replied that it was part of the original
Eugene Wastewater Treatment site and all of it was being transferred to make it a clean transaction. He
added that there really was no expansion beyond the existing boundaries of the original facility.
In response to concern expressed by Councilor Papé regarding the City’s desire to continue expanding the
parks areas along the river, Mr. Ruffier assured him that the City would reserve easements for the bicycle
path and other recreational amenities in the Greenway.
Councilor Papé, seconded by Councilor Bettman, moved to table Item D, transfer of Water
Pollution Control Facility property from the City of Eugene to the Metropolitan Wastewa-
ter Management Commission. Roll call vote; the motion passed, 5:2; councilors Poling
and Kelly voting in opposition.
Councilor Papé expressed concern that the timing of this item might harm the City’s ability to be
compensated by the MWMC in the Local Improvement District (LID) for River Avenue. Mr. Klein said he
would review this and return with the answer at the next meeting and a motion could be made, if necessary,
to reconsider Item C, the adoption of Resolution 4882 forming the aforementioned LID.
City Manager Taylor felt that staff could determine whether tabling the transfer would affect who
participated in the LID before the end of the meeting.
Councilor Bettman asked if it would be possible to “reserve some of [the property] back” since the MWMC
might not need the whole property.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 26, 2006 Page 4
Regular Meeting
Mayor Piercy suggested that since the item had been tabled, Councilor Bettman reserve her questions for
Mr. Ruffier and the City Attorney until after the meeting.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 26, 2006 Page 5
Regular Meeting
4. PUBLIC HEARING:
An Ordinance Concerning Condominiums and Manufactured Dwelling Parks; Amending Sections
2.1060, 2.1064, 2.1070, and 2.1074 of the Eugene Code, 1971; and Declaring an Immediate Effec-
tive Date
City Manager Taylor asked Grants Manager for the Community Development Division of the Planning and
Development Department (PDD), Linda Dawson, to address this issue.
Ms. Dawson explained that the public hearing sought testimony on proposed code revisions governing
condominium conversions. She noted that the City regulated such conversions since 1981. She listed three
basic provisions to tenants in existing units and to potential purchasers that were listed in the code:
1. The developer is required to hire a housing counselor to assist the tenant in finding a comparable
unit;
2. Monetary benefits for moving costs are provided to special category tenants, i.e. people with low
incomes, elderly people, and persons with disabilities;
3. Purchasers are made aware of the building conditions.
Ms. Dawson stated that this issue had arisen from recent interest in condominium conversions. She said
four changes were being proposed and those changes had been reviewed by the Housing Policy Board
(HPB). The HPB forwarded a recommendation to adopt the ordinance. She listed the changes, as follows:
1. The requirement for a certified engineer report was changed to a requirement for a more commonly
available report from a reserve specialist;
2. The moving costs would be tied to the Federal Uniform Relocation Act, to ensure that costs were
kept current in the market;
3. The requirement for the city building inspection was being eliminated;
4. The tenant’s right to stay was being clarified so that it was understood the tenant had 120 days
from the time the application for the permit was received.
Ms. Dawson noted that action on this item was scheduled for July 10.
Councilor Bettman asked if Springfield had the same language in an ordinance. Ms. Dawson replied that
she was not aware that the City of Springfield had such an ordinance.
Councilor Bettman observed that the moving expenses were only reimbursable if the displaced tenant
moved within the City limits of Eugene. She felt that under this provision a tenant would be “almost
penalized” if he or she moved to Springfield.
Councilor Bettman asked if any testimony had been received by the HPB regarding the reduction of time
the tenant had a right to remain in an apartment. Ms. Dawson responded that there had been some concern,
though no testimony, on this but she felt it was good to distinctly delineate the time period. She said it was
approximately the same amount of time, ultimately, but now it was clearly tied to the issuance of the
permit.
Councilor Bettman asked Ms. Dawson to characterize the testimony on that issue given before the HPB.
Ms. Dawson replied that there had been a brief discussion of the HPB.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 26, 2006 Page 6
Regular Meeting
Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing.
Zachary Vishanoff
, Patterson Street, asked if this request for changes in the rules had come from
developers Connor and Woolley.
Staff responded that it had not.
Mr. Vishanoff felt the Lincoln School Apartments were being “lost to condos.” He thought a way to
mitigate that would be to take the old Condon School and convert it to apartments. He opined that there
were “so many of these old schools that [one] could get the chance to live in.” He urged the City to conduct
an audit of low-income housing.
John VanLandingham
, 335 North Grand Street, said he was an advocate for the ordinance passed in
1981. Additionally, he had helped to write the ordinance. He clarified that no one testified before the HPB
about the decrease in time to 120 days, but the HPB discussed it extensively. He related that County
Commissioner Bobby Green expressed concern with it. He said the majority of the members were
comfortable with a 120-day limit as it was 120 days from the issuance of the permit and the process was
significantly longer than that. He averred that if the council had an issue with this change, the HPB would
be amenable to removing it. He underscored that the limited amount of moving expense money had been
their biggest area of concern.
In regard to Councilor Bettman’s question, Mr. VanLandingham said he could not recall why the moving
expenses were limited to the city of Eugene.
Mayor Piercy closed the public hearing.
Councilor Kelly indicated his intention to introduce an amendment, included in council packets regarding
payment of moving expenses; specifically tying the amount to the Fixed Residential Moving Cost Schedule
set forth by the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance Real Property Acquisition Policies Act.
Councilor Kelly opined, regarding the ordinance, that though policy stipulated that there be a mix of
housing types, there were not enough condominiums, particularly given the aging population.
Councilor Bettman said she would introduce language to amend the ordinance to include a broader area in
the parameters for the payment of moving expenses. Additionally, she wondered if the change in
requirements from an engineering report to that of a reserve specialist would compromise standards. Ms.
Dawson responded that such specialists were commonly used across the nation. She offered to get more
information on this issue. Councilor Bettman wished to know where the liability would fall.
In response to a question from Councilor Bettman, Ms. Dawson explained that the owner had to give notice
to the tenant that the conversion was pending and, no sooner than 30 days and no later than 60 days from
that point, the owner was required to apply for the permit.
In response to a question from Councilor Taylor, Ms. Dawson said the original instigation for the
ordinance was that it had become impossible to obtain the required certified architect’s report and one
could not conduct a conversion without such a report under the current ordinance. Additionally, the
moving costs had been set in 1986 and had not been updated.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 26, 2006 Page 7
Regular Meeting
Councilor Taylor asked why a tenant would want a residence converted to a condominium. Ms. Dawson
replied that she received a copy of the tenant surveys from the Lincoln School Apartments and there were
different responses from everyone. Some were happy because they wanted to buy the apartments, some
were sad because they would have to move, and others were neutral.
Councilor Taylor asserted that the City was contributing to homelessness by facilitating the conversion.
Ms. Dawson pointed out that the City’s downpayment assistance program, funded through the Community
Development Division, helped people to purchase their own homes. Condominiums were an affordable
option in many cases.
Councilor Kelly noted that the rents were pretty high at the Lincoln School Apartments. He doubted if
anyone renting there would become homeless as a result of the condominium conversion.
Mayor Piercy added that the closure of manufactured home parks was a long-term issue that was coming
before the council later in the year.
5. PUBLIC HEARING:
Resolution 4883 Adopting an Inflationary Adjustment of Systems Development Charge Rates for
Regional Wastewater System
City Manager Taylor stated that Engineering Data Services Manager for the Public Works Department,
Fred McVey, was available to answer questions.
Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing. Seeing no one who wished to speak, she closed the public
hearing.
Councilor Bettman noted that there had been some materials at the councilors’ places and asked if there
were any changes from the material in the packet. Mr. McVey replied that the packet had been incomplete,
but there were no changes to the materials.
5. EXECUTIVE SESSION:
Held pursuant to ORS 192.660(2)(h)
Mayor Piercy convened an Executive Session in the McNutt Room at 8:30 p.m. to consult with legal
counsel regarding current litigation or litigation likely to be filed.
The regular meeting of the City Council reconvened at 9:16 p.m.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 26, 2006 Page 8
Regular Meeting
7. ACTION:
Lane Plywood Measure 37 Claim for Compensation (M37 05-1)
Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to adopt Attachment B
(Option 4).
Councilor Poling said he would support the motion primarily based on the conversation the council had
with legal counsel. He wanted to stress that each one of the Ballot Measure 37 claims would be decided
based on individual factors and the council would not be “rubber-stamping” them. He commented that the
ballot measure had a lot of problems associated with it.
Councilor Bettman opined that the claim demonstrated that Ballot Measure 37 was nothing short of
institutional anarchy. She said the implications of either decision were complicated.
Councilor Kelly agreed with councilors Poling and Bettman. He thought all of the possibilities were
“ugly.” He recalled that ads for the ballot measure suggested that people who wished to make homes for
their adult children on their land would be unable to do so and that they would not be able to gain
retirement income from long-time ownership of property. However, the cases that were being brought for
judgment had nothing to do with this. He hoped the voters would see the “monster they have created.”
Councilor Papé called it being between a “rock and a hard place.” He concurred with the councilors’
comments. He was unhappy with the State Legislature’s apathy with the issue as the Legislature had been
warned in 2001 and had not taken that opportunity to address the issue.
Councilor Solomon echoed her colleagues’ sentiments regarding the “utter predicament” the council faced
with this claim. She was uncertain that the proponents of the ballot measure understood what they were
writing into law. She did not believe that the staff recommendation was in the spirit of what the voters had
approved and said she would oppose it.
Councilor Taylor said she would reluctantly support the motion. She agreed with Councilor Kelly’s
comments.
Mayor Piercy commented that however the council voted on the item, it was apparent that she and the
councilors felt a tremendous responsibility for the future of the community. She felt the council had faced a
very difficult set of choices and she commended the legal expertise that the City Attorney brought to the
table.
Roll call vote; the motion passed, 6:1; Councilor Solomon voting in opposition.
8. ACTION:
Appointment of Presiding Municipal Judge
Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to reappoint Judge Wayne Al-
len to another four-year term as Presiding Judge of Municipal Court, and direct staff to re-
new his contract.
Mayor Piercy spoke glowingly of Judge Allen’s service.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 26, 2006 Page 9
Regular Meeting
Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0.
9. ACTION:
A Special Ordinance Granting an Exemption to the Application of Eugene Code, 1971, Section
6.200 (Ordinance to Renew Five-Year Exception to Application of Eugene Code 6.000 (Open
Burning) for Prescribed Wetland Management Burning)
Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved that the City Council
adopt Council Bill 4927, an ordinance concerning a five-year exception to the
Eugene Code for prescribed wetland management burning.
Councilor Bettman said it was disturbing to her that a concerned citizen had been unaware of the public
hearing that had been held on this item. She expressed appreciation for the explanation that had been
provided and for staff’s response to that citizen. She asked for an explanation of the noticing process.
Natural Resources Manager for the Parks and Open Space Division, Sarah Medary, stated that the process
had begun in early May. She related that staff had begun preparing materials at that time to meet the
deadlines. She said notice of the hearing had been published in The Register-Guard on May 26 in the same
manner as all public hearings. She added that it had also been listed in the public meetings calendar.
Councilor Bettman ascertained from staff that the public hearing was publicized in the form of a legal
notice.
City Manager Taylor emphasized that the hearing was publicized in the way that all of these types of
actions were publicized. He said since this action was a renewal of a previous action and was backed by
scientific information provided by Parks and Open Space staff, it did not seem to require any extraordinary
public involvement process.
In response to a question from the City Manager, Ms. Medary acknowledged that no one spoke at the
public hearing and the only communication received had been the email sent earlier in the day.
Councilor Bettman commented that she really relied on the public to bring forward issues that would give
her a more comprehensive look at the decisions before her. She wondered if it would be possible to publish
City Council agendas and notices for public hearings on the Metro Television channel before or after the
scheduled meetings so people could see what was coming up and be engaged in issues they were concerned
about in a timely way.
City Manager Taylor pointed out that this information was available on the City Web site. He thought
staff could explore the possibility of including notice on Metro Television.
Councilor Bettman opined that when no one testified at a public hearing on an important issue it repre-
sented a failure on the part of the council. She felt it was the council and staff’s responsibility to make sure
the public was informed.
Councilor Taylor said she knew the two people who were concerned about this item. She asserted that they
were active in their neighborhood association and seemed to be on top of the issues. She wondered if it
MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 26, 2006 Page 10
Regular Meeting
would be possible to postpone action for further consideration. She asked staff if the planned burning was
scheduled for the fall.
Ms. Medary affirmed that the burning would not start until fall, but the permit process, putting the plans
together, and gaining the necessary approvals to move forward happened much earlier.
City Manager Taylor asked if the council intended to hold in abeyance action on the basis of testimony
from one person out of all of the people in the community after the public hearing and on the day of action.
He noted that most of the issues raised by the email had been resolved by staff response. He opined that if
the council delayed action every time one person weighed in on a public hearing it would make the political
process cumbersome and costly.
Councilor Taylor stressed that it was two people and not one person that sent the email.
Ms. Medary said she had received a second email from that concerned citizen that asked why staff had not
included information published in a paper by the Oregon State University in the information provided to the
council. She reported that she had looked into this and the specific research and paper had been cited in
information given to the council that had been published by Ed Alverson, the ecologist working for the
Nature Conservancy.
Councilor Taylor alleged that the director of the Lane Regional Air Protection Agency (LRAPA) did not
know about the issue until she had called it to his attention. Ms. Medary responded that this was the fourth
five-year exception and the City had been working with LRAPA every year. Councilor Taylor countered
that the director was new.
In response to Councilor Taylor, Ms. Medary affirmed that prior to the burn, the Parks and Open Space
Division had to obtain permits from the Fire Department, LRAPA, and the Oregon Department of
Agriculture.
Councilor Taylor reiterated her desire to wait two weeks before taking action.
Councilor Taylor asked if there was no way to protect wildlife when conducting such a burn. Ms. Medary
replied that most things did move out of the way.
Councilor Kelly did not believe the council would learn anything substantive over the next two weeks. He
reiterated that LRAPA had to issue the permit. He expressed appreciation for the response that Parks and
Open Space Division staff provided, saying it had helped to “re-convince” him that if the goal was to
promote wetland health, this was the best way to do so. He averred that burning was working at “the broad
eco-system level.” He felt the larger issue that had been raised was how to increase public awareness of
every item of concern that came before the City Council. He commented that he did not know what
substantive step the council could take to increase public involvement. He noted that the new portal Web
site the City had instituted was purported to allow people to sign up on interest lists so that they would
receive an automatic email when a public hearing or action was coming up that might be of concern to
them. He asked for an update on how this was progressing. He added that publishing full page ads in the
Eugene Weekly and The Register-Guard would draw more interest in council actions but it would also cost
a great deal of money.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 26, 2006 Page 11
Regular Meeting
Councilor Bettman indicated her support for the motion. She felt the staff work on the item had been
exhaustive. She did not think the Legal Notices section of the newspaper was often read by the public and
wondered what other means could be used to increase public awareness.
Mayor Piercy said she would venture to say that it did not matter how many ads were placed in the
newspaper or how adequate the noticing was, there would always be people who would miss the fact that a
public hearing was being held.
City Manager Taylor pointed out that in the spirit of trying to gain more meaningful participation in the
public process, the council had decided to try holding meetings that consisted of only public hearings. He
noted that the first extra meeting for that purpose would be scheduled for September 18.
Councilor Taylor suggested that notification sent to the neighborhood associations might increase public
attendance at hearings.
Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0.
Mr. Klein reiterated that he would get more information regarding the tabled item so that the council could
reconsider the Consent Calendar item regarding the LID on River Avenue if necessary. He asked that
anyone with further questions submit them to staff.
City Manager Taylor noted that this meeting was one of the first meetings available through “streaming
video” on line.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dennis M. Taylor
City Manager
(Recorded by Ruth Atcherson)
MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 26, 2006 Page 12
Regular Meeting