Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 01/14/02 Meeting MINUTES Eugene City Council Regular Meeting Council Chamber--Eugene City Hall January 14, 2002 8 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Betty Taylor, David Kelly, Nancy Nathanson, Gary Rayor, Gary Papd, Bonny Bettman, Par Fart. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Scott Meisner. CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING Mayor James D. Torrey called the meeting to order. 1. Ceremonial Matters Public Works Director Kurt Corey presented Mayor Torrey with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Community Rating System award in recognition of the City's activities to reduce flooding. He briefly mentioned some of the activities for which the City received the award. Public Works Director Kurt Corey presented a FEMA Certificate of Recognition to Public Works Department staff member Jennifer Dragovitch, former manager of the City's Community Rating System Program prior to her reassignment to the Planning and Development Department, for her work in helping the City achieve a Class 7 rating in the NFIP Community Rating System. Jason Heuser, Eugene Intergovernmental Relations Manager, provided Pam Berrian of the Information Services Division with the League of Oregon Cities Award in recognition of her work during the last legislative session to preserve local control over telecommunications. Ms. Berrian thanked the council for its policy direction and Information Services Division Director Randy Kolb for his support. 2. Election of City Council Officers for 2002 Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Farr, moved to elect Councilor Kelly as President of the City Council for 2002. Roll call vote; the motion to MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 14, 2002 Page 1 Regular Meeting elect Councilor Kelly President of the City Council for 2002 passed unanimously, 7:0. Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Farr, moved to elect Councilor Pap~ as Vice President of the City Council for 2002. Roll call vote; the motion to elect Councilor Pap~ Vice President of the City Council for 2002 passed unanimously, 7:0. 3. Public Forum Mayor Torrey reviewed the rules of the Public Forum. Marshal Peter, 2602 Agate Street, director of Directions Services, asked the council to keep in mind looming difficult economic conditions and the anticipated increase in demand for social services. He was concerned about the possibility that the General Fund moneys presently dedicated by the City to the Human Services Commission (HSC) would be redirected to drug and alcohol treatment funding, and suggested it might be a discussion for another time. He said that drug and alcohol treatment will be needed but it should not be at the expense of other services. Ron Chase, 924 Sunnyside Drive, asked the council to follow the will of the voters and follow the intent of Ballot Measure 3 without reducing funding to other human services. He discussed the ineffectiveness of drug enforcement and suggested that the community had not gotten the return on its investment in the war on drugs, and called for a better balance between supply-side and demand-side remedies. As a manager of a transition program at Sponsors, he had seen many people turn their lives around and become productive citizens with the help of substance abuse treatment. He said that the City was fortunate to have several treatment options available, and having more space available in those programs would strengthen the efforts of other human service and corrections programs in Lane County. Mr. Chase noted his agency would not benefit from his advocacy. Jeanne Bensen, 1524 McKinley Street, the chair of the Human Services Providers Network and director of Catholic Community Services, endorsed the comments of Mr. Peter and Mr. Chase. She said that her agency was seeing more families who had never before had to seek a food box or rent assistance. She said that the HSC funded the types of support services that gave people the opportunity to maintain their recovery and become self-reliant community members. Carmen Urbina, 788 Blackfoot Avenue, a member of the Alcohol and Drug Planning Committee and Human Services Providers Network, suggested the HSC was the best body to coordinate funding between agencies, but the Alcohol and Drug Planning Committee was the best body to determine where the funds related to Ballot Measure 3 needed to go. She emphasized the close ties between the HSC Continuum of Care and the Alcohol and Drug Continuum of Care. She MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 14, 2002 Page 2 Regular Meeting asked the council not to use the Measure 3 funds to supplant the funding it now contributed to the HSC. Judi Grieg, 2053 Smithoak Street, thanked City Manager Jim Johnson for his research into her organization's ability to fly the Missing in Action/Prisoner of War flag. She said that while the organization did not get exactly what it wanted, it was "a foot in the door" and the organization continued to want the flag to fly everyday to heighten government awareness of the need to "get our people back home." She asked that the organization be allowed to fly the flag for the first time on Armed Forces Day because people were largely unaware of the holiday. As it fell on a Saturday, more people might be able to attend a ceremony. She also thanked Mayor Torrey for his work on the effort. Nick Urhausen, 2858 Warren Street, urged the council to put a measure related to the citywide election of city councilors on the ballot. He said that while he was signature-gathering for a similar measure, he learned that people did not want to elect all councilors at-large. About half of the voters were undecided. People supported signing the measure once they learned it was to allow for a public vote. He thought the council, rather than a political action committee, should put the measure on the ballot. Laurence Hablen, 780 Club Way, Executive Director of Lane County Legal Aid, asked the council not to reduce its General Fund contribution to the HSC because of the dedication of drug forfeiture money to drug and alcohol treatment. He wanted the council to direct the funding toward drug treatment as supported by the voters, but hoped the council would treat the commission's budget very carefully. Chas Nebergall, 1357 West 8th Avenue, No. 20, employed by ShelterCare, asked the council to fund drug and alcohol treatment, noting the positive impact that such treatment had on those with mental illness who were served by his agency. He noted his agency did not benefit from his advocacy. Irene Alltucker, 1720 West 25th Avenue, speaking on behalf of the Relief Nursery, indicated her support for the comments of others in the Human Services Providers Network. She said that to further reduce the HSC budget at such a time would have a very detrimental effect on the community and the families served. Mayor Torrey called for council response to Public Forum comments. Councilor Kelly thanked those who spoke during the forum, and said the council would discuss the issue of the forfeiture funds later in the evening. Councilor Bettman also thanked those who spoke and acknowledged Ms. Dragovitch and Ms. Berrian for their fine work. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 14, 2002 Page 3 Regular Meeting Councilor Pap6 asked City Manager Johnson to provide the council with information about how the City was able to evaluate the effectiveness of the HSC. He was not willing to direct the drug forfeiture money to the HSC without having an ability to evaluate the outcome. Councilor Nathanson clarified for the benefit of viewers that the drug forfeiture money was not new money; the City was merely considering taking action to redirect the funding to drug treatment as many councilors and community members believed was the intent of the voters in passing Ballot Measure 3. She said that drug treatment was one of the many human services needs the HSC supported. She questioned if those offering testimony to the council had offered similar appeals to the Lane County Board of County Commissioners or City of Springfield regarding the use of Ballot Measure 3 dollars. Councilor Taylor acknowledged the concerns of those testifying and said she would prefer to allocate a set amount of funding for drug treatment rather than the forfeiture money, which was an unknown amount. She thought, in addition, that those supporting Ballot Measure 3 were less interested in drug treatment than in reducing the amount going to the police. She anticipated, however, that she would vote to dedicate the funds to drug treatment because at this point it was the only way to fund drug treatment in light of the increased need. She thought if the City could find a way not to affect its contribution to the HSC, it should do so. Councilor Rayor agreed that the funding involved was not new money, but pointed out that it would require a new source of money to continue the Interagency Narcotics Task Force. Councilor Nathanson informed the audience that she would propose using some Contingency Fund dollars to help human service agencies assist low-income residents with energy costs. Mayor Torrey closed the Public Forum. Councilor Farr left the meeting. 4. Consent Calendar A. Approval of City Council Minutes November 21, 2001, Work Session November 26, 2001, Work Session November 26, 2001, City Council Meeting November 28, 2001, Work Session November 28, 2001, Council Goals Session December 10, 2001, City Council Meeting B. Approval of Tentative Working Agenda C. Call for a Public Hearing on Withdrawal from Special Districts D. Resolution 4697, Acknowledging Receipt of the City of Eugene, Oregon, Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2001 MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 14, 2002 Page 4 Regular Meeting E. Approval of Exemption from Competitive Bidding for Design/Build Services F. Resolution 4698, Concerning the 2001-2003 Biennium State Budget Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Pap~, moved to approve the items on the Consent Calendar. Councilor Bettman had minutes corrections and also asked that Item F be pulled. She offered the following corrections to the minutes. She asked that the first sentence in paragraph 2 on page 5 of the minutes of November 21 work session be amended to read "cost of housing" rather than "house of costing." Referring to the minutes of the regular meeting of November 26, Councilor Bettman asked that the phrase in paragraph 3 on page 7 that now read "the hospital know" be changed to "the hospital could know." Referring to the minutes of December 10, 2001, she asked that the following be added to the second sentence in paragraph 12 on page 5 (italicized text added): "She suggested that due to prevailing council sentiment the amendment wouM likely result in an overct[[ decrease..." Councilor Rayor pulled Item E. Councilor Nathanson also pulled Item E. She offered the following corrections to the minutes of the work session of November 26, 2001, asking that the third sentence in paragraph 3 be changed to read "Amending the ordinance could invite a court challenge." She also asked that the last sentence in the same paragraph be amended by the addition of the phrase "that would worsen the regulatory situation." Referring to page 6 of the November 28 work session minutes, Councilor Nathanson asked that the first sentence in paragraph 6 be modified to read "... she did not believe the totals reported included the value of all in-kind services or other costs." Referring to the work session minutes of November 28, Councilor Taylor asked that in the remarks attributed to her on page 4, the phrase "in defense" should be changed "to explain her anticipated vote" and the entire text of the letter she read be substituted for the remaining text. Councilor Kelly offered the following corrections to the minutes. Referring to the November 21,2001, work session, he asked that the phrase in the third paragraph on page 7 that read "defined a social service" be changed to "defined social services to be inventoried." Referring to page 14 of the November 26, 2001, work session, he asked that the motion to amend be changed from "voting no" to "voting yes." Referring to the regular meeting minutes of the same date, he asked that the motion on page 18 that commenced with "Roll call vote" end with the phrase "in opposition to the motion" instead of "in opposition to the amendment." Councilor Kelly said that the November 28 minutes should indicate the meeting was a Goals Process Session rather than a Goals Setting Session. He corrected a reference in the minutes to the "Institute for Sustainable Ethics and Economics." Referring to the December 10, 2001, regular meeting minutes, he asked that the heading of the minutes be changed to indicate it was a regular meeting held in the Council Chamber. Mayor Torrey determined there were no objections to the changes suggested to the minutes. Roll call vote; the motion to approve the Consent Calendar, with the exception of items E and F, was unanimous, 6:0. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 14, 2002 Page 5 Regular Meeting Mayor Torrey solicited council comments on Item E. Responding to a question from Councilor Rayor, Public Works Director Kurt Corey said staff viewed the skateboard park project as requiring an exemption from the competitive bidding process because the design- build vendor may not be selected on the basis of the lowest dollar price. Councilor Bettman said she was satisfied the project in question was relatively small and asked if there would be an opportunity for staff to evaluate the success of the approach for the council's benefit. Mr. Corey said that upon completion of the project, there will be a project evaluation report. Councilor Nathanson endorsed increasing the number of skateboard parks in the community so that youth did not have to depend on an adult with an automobile to travel to one. She asked if staff had received the information from the National League of Cities she had secured regarding skateboard parks built with prefabricated segments, and how that fit into the City's current approach to such facilities. She asked how other cities' costs compared to Eugene's, and if the use of prefabricated segments would allow more facilities to be built. Mr. Corey indicated he had not personally reviewed the information provided by Councilor Nathanson. He said that the design-build process lent itself to innovation, giving staff the ability to explore a wider variety of approaches. Councilor Pap~ determined from City Manager Johnson that the City had not used the design-build approach before. He asked Mr. Corey if he had employed the approach in his former employment. Mr. Corey indicated he had been involved in a variation on the approach. Councilor Pap~ commended staff for its willingness to try the approach. Roll call vote; Item E passed unanimously, 6:0. Speaking to Item F, Mayor Torrey said that the chair of the Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations, Councilor Meisner, was not present but wanted to recommend to the council that it table the item until the City determined what the legislature was to do, and endorse or not endorse those actions. He concurred with that recommendation. The council indicated willingness to postpone action. Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Pap6, moved to table Item F. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 6:0. City Manager Johnson indicated that the City's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report was "clean" and thanked Finn Cronin and Dee Ann Hardt of the Central Services Department for their work. 5. ACTION: An Ordinance Concerning State Traffic Laws and Amending Section 5.005 of the Eugene Code, 1971, and Providing an Effective Date; and an Ordinance Concerning the Crimes of Harassment, Trespass, Violation of Privacy, Research, and Animal Interference, Interfering with a Police Officer; and Interfering with Public Transportation; Amending Sections 4.7267, 4.808, 4.810, 4.907, and 4.990, and Adding Sections 4.827 and 4.977 of the Eugene Code, 1971 MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 14, 2002 Page 6 Regular Meeting Marilyn Nelson of Municipal Court was present for the item. She indicated that the changes proposed to the City Code through the first ordinance were a result of changes made to State traffic laws during the last session of the Oregon Legislature. Mayor Torrey opened the public hearing. There being no requests to speak, Mayor Torrey closed the public hearing. City Manager Johnson said that the council would consider Council Bill 4780, an ordinance concerning State laws and amending Section 5.005 of the Eugene Code, 1971; and providing an effective date. Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Pap~, moved that the bill, with the unanimous consent of the council, be considered by council bill number only, and that enactment be considered at this time. City Attorney Glenn Klein asked the council to amend Section 1 of the ordinance by striking the phrase "including any amendments thereto by the Oregon Legislative Assembly." Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Pap~, moved to amend the ordinance by striking the phrase "including any amendments thereto by the Oregon Legislative Assembly." Roll call vote; the amendment to the motion passed, 6:0 City Manager Johnson said the council would consider Council Bill 4780 by council bill only. Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Pap~, moved that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote; the amended motion passed, 6:0, and became Ordinance No. 20244. Ms. Nelson spoke to the next ordinance, saying that two years ago the Oregon Legislature redefined the jurisdiction of municipal courts with regard to violations and misdemeanors. Both Municipal Court and Circuit Court have concurrent jurisdiction. That superceded the current City Code. However, the council had the opportunity to limit the jurisdiction of violations and misdemeanors that could be heard in Municipal Court. Mayor Torrey opened the public hearing. There being no requests to speak, Mayor Torrey closed the public hearing. City Manager Johnson said that the council would consider Council Bill 4781, an ordinance concerning the crimes of harassment, trespass, violation of privacy, research, and animal interference, interfering with a police officer; and interfering with public transportation; amending sections 4.267, 4.808, 4.810, 4.907, and 4.990, and adding sections 4.827 and 4.977 of the Eugene Code, 1971. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 14, 2002 Page 7 Regular Meeting Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Pap6, moved that the bill, with the unanimous consent of the council, be read by council bill number only, and that enactment be considered at this time. Councilor Rayor, seconded by Councilor Kelly, moved to remove Section 4.827 from the proposed ordinance. Speaking to the amendment, Councilor Rayor believed incorporating the ordinance into the City Code could be controversial, and thought the issue better addressed at the State level. Councilor Kelly agreed with Councilor Rayor, saying that if the section was not included in the local code, the violation could not be managed through the Municipal Court. He thought there were philosophical reasons for including or not including such violations in the code. Councilor Kelly added that violations such as the one identified in the section had to him an air of scoring political points. He said that the same was true for the violation related to research and animal interference; there were laws at both the State and federal level that addressed the same type of offenses. Councilor Nathanson asked staff if it was aware of the opinion of the Municipal Court judge and its opinion about the sections being added. She asked what it said to the local community, the Police Department, and the State if the City chose not to include the section. Ms. Nelson responded that the reasons for the existence of Municipal Court needed to be considered. The court reflected the values of the community. For example, traffic enforcement sanctions were high on the list of the court's priorities because of its importance to the community. Regarding the attitude of the police, Ms. Nelson said that the court has an agreement with the Police Department that cases such as protest cases that generate media interest will be cited in Circuit Court, which was better able to handle them. She added that the situations were often reviewed on a case-by- case basis. There were also benefits to the organization in maximizing the number of cases that could be handled by Municipal Court because of fine and fee revenue, but more significantly because of savings in the Police overtime budget, because the Municipal Court was better able to coordinate with officers' work schedules. In addition, the court leases jail space from the County, which gave the court the ability to ensure that prisoners served their sentences and were not matrixed out for lack of space. Councilor Nathanson did not find the issue of fee revenue in terms of the violation in question very compelling. She believed that the community was very concerned about the issue of personal safety, but the court, for example, did not prosecute murders, which went to another level. She said that a decision not to include the violation in the code was not a reflection of its lack of importance, but rather a reflection of the council's desire to find an appropriate venue for the violation. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 14, 2002 Page 8 Regular Meeting Councilor Bettman concurred with Councilor Nathanson regarding the section in question. She suggested that adoption of the section could potentially mean more police overtime if police were required to respond to protests or demonstrations, and that could be a good reason to let the violation be addressed at the State level. Ms. Nelson did not anticipate any of the code changes before the council would affect police enforcement in any way; the issue was the venue in which cases were heard. Omitting particular sections or section from the ordinance would not change the ability of the police to cite people for those offenses, or for those offenses to be heard in Municipal Court; for there to be a limitation, the code must specifically state that those offenses may not be heard in Municipal Court. Councilor Kelly questioned, given Ms. Nelson's remarks, the practical effect of including or not including the section in the code. Ms. Nelson responded that it clarified, for both the community and the police, that the offenses were to be heard in Municipal Court. She clarified that the legislative change allowed police officers to cite offenses under the State statute to Municipal Court. Mayor Torrey indicated he would support the amendment in the case of a tie. Councilor Pap~ determined from Ms. Nelson that the typical practice of police officers filing felony charges that would go to State court was to file lesser, related charges in State court as well. He further determined that the opposite could occur under State law, but that had not been police practice. Roll call vote; the vote on the amendment was 5:1, Councilor Pap~ voting no. Roll call vote; the amended motion passed, 6:0. City Manager Johnson said the council would consider Council Bill 4781 by council bill number only. Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Pap~, moved that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 6:0, and became Ordinance No. 2045. MEETING OF THE URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY OF THE CITY OF EUGENE Mayor Torrey adjourned the meeting of the Eugene City Council and convened a meeting of the Urban Renewal Agency. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 14, 2002 Page 9 Regular Meeting 6. ACTION: Resolution 1018 Acknowledging the Receipt of the General Purpose Financial Statements of the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Eugene, for the Fiscal Year Ending June 20, 2001 Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Pap~, moved to approve Resolution 1018 acknowledging the receipt of the General Purpose Financial Statements of the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Eugene for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2002. Mayor Torrey thanked the City Manager and his staff for the clean opinion issued by the auditors. Councilor Rayor thanked the auditing firm, Rove, Muller, and Swank, for the fact a human signed the Statement of Opinion. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 6:0. Mayor Torrey adjourned the meeting of the Urban Renewal Agency and reconvened a meeting of the Eugene City Council. 7.Reconsideration of Ordinance No. 20242, an Ordinance Concerning Forfeiture, and Amending Sections 4.245, 4.247, 4.251, 4.253, and 4.255 of the Eugene Code, 1971 Councilors asked questions of Mr. Klein clarifying the process of reconsideration, and what was being reconsidered. Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Nathanson, moved to amend Section 4.255(3) in the original ordinance by revising the second sentence to read "As authorized by State law, funds deposited in the General Fund of the City shall be used exclusively for drug treatment." Councilor Kelly expressed concern that the motion to amend redirected money already budgeted in the current fiscal year for another purpose. City Manager Johnson concurred. Councilor Rayor determined from City Manager Johnson that the result of the motion would be the elimination of the phrase "for residents of Eugene" and the deletion of the last sentence in the subsection. Councilor Bettman withdrew her amendment. Councilor Nathanson withdrew her second. Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Kelly, moved to amend Section 4.255(3) in the original ordinance by replacing the second sentence in the ordinance with the following: "For fiscal year 2003 and thereafter, forfeiture MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 14, 2002 Page 10 Regular Meeting funds deposited in the General Fund of the City shall be used exclusively for drug treatment," and by deleting the third sentence. Councilor Nathanson did not support the newly phrased amendment. Councilor Pap~ asked if the motion would mean the funds in question would go to the HSC, or if they would be directed to drug court. City Manager Johnson pointed out that there was nothing in the motion that spoke to the answer to that question. He anticipated that staff would return to the council with options for how to spend the money on drug treatment. Councilor Kelly supported the amendment because it spoke to the testimony the council received at the public forum and provided money for drug treatment without automatically reducing other human services funding. He said that the amendment allowed funding levels to be determined in the budget-setting process rather than by ordinance. Responding to a question from Councilor Nathanson, City Manager Johnson suggested that the deletion of the text related to whether the funding would count toward the City's' Human Service Commission funding had no practical difference; the Budget Committee could do what it wished. Councilor Bettman said the original text dedicating the funds to Eugene residents was added to satisfy councilors who believed the City paid more than its share of the HSC budget. Because of its specificity, that direction became difficult to implement. She pointed out that the City could act alone to fund different social service strategies, as it had done in the past with CAHOOTS. She said the amendment would allow the City to fund additional treatment beds, for example, allowing police officers to take addicts to detoxification rather than putting them in jail, causing the potential for someone to be matrixed out. She agreed with Councilor Kelly that the decision about HSC funding was a budget decision; the ordinance in question was generated by passage of the State ballot measure, and she was not willing to second-guess the intent of the voters. Councilor Rayor indicated his opposition to the amendment. Mayor Torrey noted the potential of a 3:3 tie. He said he was inclined to support the amendment because the final funding decision would be made by the Budget Committee and ultimately approved by the City Council. Roll call vote; the amendment to the motion passed, 4:2; councilors Nathanson and Rayor voting no. Roll call vote; the amended motion passed, 6:0. City Manager Johnson indicated the council would consider Council Bill 4772 by council bill number only. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 14, 2002 Page 11 Regular Meeting Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Pap6, moved that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote; the motion passed, 6:0, and became Ordinance No. 20242. Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Pap6, moved to direct the City Manager to find ways to achieve the maximum possible benefit to the City of Eugene residents and to City government from the increased expenditures from alcohol and drug treatment that result from forfeiture. Councilor Kelly and Councilor Pap6 accepted a friendly amendment from Councilor Bettman to delete the phrase "alcohol and." Councilor Nathanson supported the motion as an opportunity for City staff to work with Lane County and the HSC toward performance measurements. She said there was not enough money to fund everything, and the community needed to fund the programs that were most effective. She acknowledged the potential financial pain involved for the organizations providing such services. Councilor Pap~ endorsed the remarks of Councilor Nathanson. He had found every drug and alcohol treatment program worthy, but some were more worthy than others. He wanted the City Manager to look for ways the City could measure and hold the programs involved accountable. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 9:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, James R. Johnson City Manager (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 14, 2002 Page 12 Regular Meeting