Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 02/13/02 Work Session MINUTES Eugene City Council Work Session McNutt Room-Eugene City Hall February 13, 2002 Noon COUNCILORS PRESENT: Betty Taylor, David Kelly, Nancy Nathanson, Scott Meisner, Gary Rayor, Gary Pap~, Bonny Bettman, Par Farr. CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION Mayor James D. Torrey called the meeting to order. Mr. Farr took an opportunity to clarify a quote taken out of context in The Register Guard. He clarified that he had said it would be a shame to open the new library without the new hours and expanded services that were being proposed in the upcoming library levy. He stressed that he was in no way criticizing the writer of the article. A.Work Session: Consideration of Council Contingency Account Funding Request Mr. Kelly, seconded by Mr. Pap~, moved to authorize the expenditure of $4,500 to promote reading and to foster a stronger sense of community via a collaborative initiative in which citizens meet and discuss ideas around the common themes found in Ken Kesey's "Sometimes A Great Notion." Ms. Nathanson stressed that she thought a community read was a good idea but said she would vote against the motion since she had already made a request to use the entire council social services contingency account to help social service agencies provide food and energy assistance to the community. She added her concern over the large amount of unanticipated costs to the community caused by the recent severe wind storm. Mr. Kelly acknowledged the importance of aid to social service agencies but stressed that a sense of community was important as well. He emphasized the importance of community building and noted that many other agencies were also donating to the community read program. He added that a strong first year for the program would help it enough to get its own funding in future years. Mr. Kelly went on to say that the remaining money in the council social services contingency account could be dedicated to social services energy assistance. He commented that the $4,500 for "Reading in the Rain" was infinitesimal when compared to the human services need. Mr. Meisner raised concern that the community read was not a free public participation project. He questioned whether it was an appropriate use of community funds. Ms. Bettman said the community read was a community building exercise with a positive goal. She said that there would be opportunities to address social service needs through the normal budget process. MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 13, 2002 Page 1 Work Session Mr. Fart commented that supporting the community read was an opportunity for the City to be in on the start of a good community program. Mr. Pap~ suggested putting the request through the normal budget process. He said the request did not come to the level of an emergency and noted that there were lots of worthy causes in the community that did not receive support from the City. Mr. Rayor supported the motion. He said the community read supported reading and youth recreation, and helped engage the community for the public good. Ms. Taylor supported the motion. She commented that the program would be a great community builder and added that it was timely with the opening of the new downtown library. Mr. Meisner reiterated Mr. Papa's suggestion that the request go through the regular budget process. Ms. Nathanson reiterated that she liked the idea of a community read but stressed her previous commitment to supporting social service agencies. The motion passed, 5:3; Mr. Pap~, Ms. Nathanson, and Mr. Meisner voting in opposition. Mr. Kelly, seconded by Mr. Pap~, moved to direct the staff to work with the Intergovernmental Human Services Commission to develop and implement a Iow income energy assistance program for service providers using the balance of the council social services account for Fiscal Year 2002. In response to a question from Ms. Bettman regarding the contingency money being disbursed in less than $5,000 increments, Mary Walston of the City Manager's Office said the original staff proposal was that the money would go to the Human Services Commission, which would develop the specific formula for disbursing the money to service providers. She acknowledged this was outside of the agreed-upon contingency process and there could be amounts larger than $5,000. Ms. Bettman said she was uncomfortable with using all of the contingency money for the year for one item and not having any extra money to address emergencies. She added her hope that the normal budget process could also address some of the social service needs. Mr. Fart reiterated Ms. Bettman's concern over spending all of the contingency fund. In response to a question from Mr. Fart regarding whether the City Manager had ever seen the entire fund spent on one item, City Manager Johnson noted that there were well over $100,000 in expenses due to the recent wind storm damage that would have to be paid for from another reserve fund. Mr. Meisner raised concern over the motion. He questioned whether the City was "the rescuer of last resort for everyone, and everything, in every circumstance." He said the motion made sense and noted that it was one-time funding and not an ongoing expense. He said he would support the motion with certain qualms. MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 13, 2002 Page 2 Work Session Mr. Meisner said the council needed to learn to exercise fiscal restraint in the future. Mr. Kelly offered a friendly amendment, which was accepted by the second, to make explicit in the motion that there was a $5,000 limit per facility in the allocation of the contingency funds. Mr. Rayor said the request was timely and well-considered. He said it was a wise use of the money and helped the Human Services Commission do its job. He stressed the importance of keeping track of donations of that type so the record could be shown to those who were interested. Mr. Pap~ said he would hesitantly support the motion. He reiterated Mr. Meisner's suggestion that the council use more fiscal constraint in the future. Ms. Taylor said she would support the motion. Mr. Fart clarified that the money would be spent within the taxpayer district of Eugene. The motion, as amended, passed unanimously. B.WORK SESSION: Consideration of City Wide Elections Ms. Walston noted that the current work session was a follow-up session to the council's December 12, 2001, meeting. She said that the council had run out of time at that meeting so there was no specific direction on any proposals. Ms. Walston noted that, since the December 12 meeting, the political action committee that was circulating a petition to put citywide elections on the ballot had ceased collecting signatures. She added that there had been public testimony on the issue during the council's last public forum. She said the central theme of the testimony she had heard was related to campaign finance. Ms. Bettman said she would vote against any motion that put citywide elections on the ballot. She noted that there had not been enough signatures to put the item on the ballot which suggested to her that there was no grassroots support for the idea. Ms. Bettman said that if citywide elections were implemented, a City Councilor would represent 140,000 people. She noted that a County commissioner represented 64,500 people, a State House representative represented 57,000 people, and a State Senator represented 114,000 people. She said that ward-based elections allowed a councilor to represent 17,500 people. She said this was a more manageable number and allowed councilors to keep in touch with their constituents and allowed people with moderate means to effectively compete in elections. Ms. Bettman noted that citywide elections/at-large elections had been challenged repeatedly by the Justice Department under the Voting Rights Act of 1965 on the grounds that citywide elections diluted the votes of minority voters. She said that there had been several lawsuits filed against jurisdictions using citywide elections by the Justice Department of the State of Oregon. She said citywide elections would be a backward step for the City of Eugene. MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 13, 2002 Page 3 Work Session Mr. Pap~ said he was convinced that the community wanted to discuss the issue and expressed a desire to put the issue on the ballot. He commented that the political action committee ceased collecting signatures because it had been requested to do so to allow a public discussion on the issue. Mr. Kelly said he had not heard a great deal public support for the idea of citywide elections. He suggested letting the redistricting plan work for a period of time and a discussion of campaign finance reform. He said that a ballot measure was not the way to initiate public discussion, likening it to catapults lobbing things back-and-forth over a wall. He said that public discussion needed to take place outside the context of a campaign. Mr. Kelly stressed the need for the council to work better together. He said the council could have the strong difference of policy opinion at the table that reflected the differences of opinion in the community but needed to make decisions and move on. Ms. Nathanson said redistricting would address the inequities in ward representation. She urged the council to let that process work. She suggested regular monitoring of ward populations and an automatic trigger for ward redistricting when representation problems occurred due to population. Mr. Meisner reiterated Mr. Kelly's comment that a campaign was not an effective, efficient or reasonable way to foster community discussion/education. He remarked that both sides of the issue were extremely polarized and added his opinion that there were advantages and disadvantages to both ward and citywide elections. Mr. Meisner said he had looked at the Justice Department actions taken and stressed that they had nothing to do with political persuasions of groups but rather to do with ethnic/racial minorities in large numbers, and said that it was a "sham" argument that did not apply to Eugene. Mr. Meisner said he would support Ms. Nathanson's idea of an automatic trigger for redistricting when it came in the form of a motion. He said he was not prepared to support a motion to put citywide elections on the ballot. He stressed the need to have an effective public discussion and not just throw accusations back and forth. Mr. Fart said he had asked City Manager Jim Johnson to bring the item before the council and supported the idea of letting the voters to solve the issue. He concurred with Mr. Kelly in that an election was probably not the best way to stimulate a public discussion but stressed that it was a way to get a lot of people talking about the issue. Mr. Fart said that there were compelling argument on both sides of the issue and reiterated Mr. Papa's desire to put the item on the ballot. He said he intended to make a motion to put the issue on the November ballot. Ms. Taylor said there had been too much discussion on the issue already. She believed that citywide elections were less democratic than ward-based elections. She raised a concern that special interest groups would be the only ones that could afford to get their message to the people. She defined a special interest group as people that expected to get an advantage that would lead to a financial gain. MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 13, 2002 Page 4 Work Session Mr. Fart, seconded by Mr. Pap~, moved to extend the time allowed for the item by ten minutes. The motion passed, 5:3; Ms. Bettman, Ms. Taylor, and Mr. Rayor voting in opposition. Mr. Rayor expressed his strong belief in the ward system of elections. He stressed that citywide elections separated councilors from their wards. Mayor Torrey said he had previously suggested an idea of four wards for the city with each ward having a ward elected councilor and a citywide elected councilor. He noted that there had not been a lot of support for the idea but noted that it worked well in many cities. Mayor Torrey opined that the council discussion was inconsistent. He noted that the council had voted to put instant run-off voting on the ballot when there had not been overwhelming voter support for the idea. He questioned the reason why the council was afraid to put the matter before the voters. He noted that the school board was elected citywide. He added that the councilors would still represent specific geographic ward boundaries if they were elected citywide. He said the council did a disservice to the city by not putting the matter on the ballot. Ms. Nathanson, seconded by Mr. Meisner, moved to direct the City Manager to bring back for council consideration a process for routine periodic evaluation of ward populations and a trigger to automatically initiate a ward boundary change process where the ward populations have exceeded a specified variance. Ms. Bettman said she would not support the motion since it was a new motion that preempted the current discussion. Mr. Kelly said the motion asked staff to come back with ideas that could be worked on in a work session. He said he would support the motion. Mr. Pap~ said he was in favor of the motion. Ms. Taylor said the motion needed to be discussed more before dedicating staff time to the idea. Mayor Torrey said Ms. Nathanson's motion was a legitimate idea. He stressed that the City had the technical know-how to accomplish the task and went on to say that if the council did not approve the idea the citizens of under-represented wards should take legal action to force the City to implement the idea. The motion passed, 6:2; Ms. Taylor and Ms. Bettman voting in opposition. Mr. Fart, seconded by Mr. Pap~, moved to place citywide election of councilors on the November 2002 ballot. Mr. Rayor indicated opposition to the motion. Mr. Pap~, seconded by Mr. Meisner, moved to table the motion. The vote resulted in a tie. Mayor Torrey voted in support of the motion to table, which MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 13, 2002 Page 5 Work Session passed, 5:4; Ms. Taylor, Ms. Bettman, Ms. Nathanson, and Mr. Rayor voting in opposition. C.WORK SESSION: Campaign Finance Issues Ms. Walston said the focus of the staff suggestions were on contributions and expense reports but noted that this did not preclude the council from coming up with other ideas. Ms. VValston said that her research into the matter showed that there were no cities in the State that had restrictions that were more stringent than those listed in the Oregon Revised Statutes. She added that there was a new website with council election information listed. Mr. Kelly said he supported the staff idea of posting contribution and expense information. He suggested a press release so the public would be more aware that the data was available. He suggested mandating electronic submission of contributions and expenses for future elections. Mr. Kelly said the motion he intended to make had to do with voluntary limits in campaign spending. He said that the municipality as the facilitator of such agreements had been used in other cities to draw attention to campaign spending. He noted that all of his ideas came from material that Ms. Walston had provided. Ms. Taylor stressed the need for more discussion on the issue. She also expressed a desire to see a rule regarding the posting of contributions and expenditures before the next election. She noted that not all citizens had access to websites and suggested publishing the information in the newspaper just before the ballots were sent out. Ms. Bettman made the following suggestions: 1. Time limit on contributions so that the deadline coincided with the second supplemental filing. 2. A reduction in the amounts qualifying for the supplemental filing, making them more consistent with a local campaign rather than a statewide campaign. 3. A provision in the resolution/ordinance that requires the City to print a minimum of two public service announcements reporting the cumulative contributions and expenditures in local papers, two days prior to the election. 4. Campaign contributions made by the candidate to his/her own campaign should abide by the same limits as any other contribution. 5. Depending on the limit set, include a provision that prohibits councilors from participating in decisions affecting contributors of more than a set amount ($100). 6. Limit the campaign contributions by entities which have contracted with the city in the past two years ($100). City Attorney Glenn Klein said it was important to distinguish between reporting requirements and limits on campaign contributions and expenditures. He said the City had the legal authority to MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 13, 2002 Page 6 Work Session publicize any reporting information, but noted that the City could have additional requirements to the State requirements for reporting for Mayor and City Council elections. He said that in his discussions with the State Attorney General, he had found that there was no express preemption but noted that the office had not researched whether there was an implied preemption. Mr. Klein said federal law prohibited limits on campaign expenditures but noted that it generally allowed limits for campaign contributions. He cited Article 1(8), which had been interpreted by the Oregon Supreme Court to say that there was no difference between campaign expenditures and contributions and therefore they could not be limited. He stressed that a restriction on when somebody could contribute to a campaign would not be valid. He added that there was another section, Article 2(27), that said a city/state may not pass any law or restriction or prohibit any form of contribution. Mr. Klein said a voluntary system of limits could be set up with incentives to participate but participation could not be required. Mr. Meisner urged caution in moving forward with the issue. He stressed that it was extraordinarily complex in nature and opined that whatever was voted on by the council would be legally challenged. He raised concern over incurring large legal costs. Mr. Meisner said there were already existing guidelines on voluntary reporting and questioned what Mr. Kelly's motion would do differently. Mr. Meisner raised concern that the ideas offered by Ms. Bettman would not be effective in a vote by mail system. Mr. Pap8 raised concern over trying to impose limits on contributions and expenditures. He said he would support the reporting of timely and accurate information. Mayor Torrey said his major concern was the disparity between incumbents and non-incumbents. He said putting a limitation on a non-incumbent to be equal to the incumbent was not fair. As an example, he cited his own campaign for the position of Mayor. He stressed the importance of name familiarity and urged the council to allow the person who had not had the same amount of public exposure a chance to present her/his point of view. Mayor Torrey urged an equitable discussion on campaign finance. Mr. Kelly said he was explicitly promoting voluntary limits to avoid the legal challenges that would come with mandatory limits. He noted that voluntary limits existed in many places in the country. He stressed that anywhere the motion he was about to make did not explicitly say voluntary it would imply voluntary, and would be part of a voluntary pledge program. In response to Mr. Meisner's question regarding how his intended motion would be different from the existing State law, Mr. Kelly said the State set a limit of no more than $2,000. He said, in the current environment, in a contested council race, that limit was too Iow. He suggested a limit that resembled the average spending of winning candidates over the last several cycles. Mr. Kelly said his intended motion was also different from the existing State law in that it would also indicate a voluntary limit on individual contributions. Mr. Kelly, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to direct the City Manager to draft an ordinance for voluntary spending limits on council/mayoral MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 13, 2002 Page 7 Work Session campaigns for public hearing an possible action on February 25, 2002. The ordinance shall include: 1. Total voluntary contribution limit amounts for councilor and mayoral candidates for both the primary and general elections. 2. A limit on total contributions per single contributor. 3. Outline of a mechanism for candidates to file a pledge of intent to abide by the voluntary limits with the City. 4. Benefits for candidates who file such a pledge. 5. At a minimum, the City shall prominently publicize in the print media and on the City's website a list of candidates noting who had and had not filed the pledge. 6. A voluntary time limit on contributions so that the deadline coincides with the second supplemental filing. 7. Campaign contributions made by the candidate to his/her own campaign should abide by the same limits as any other contribution. In response to a question from Mr. Rayor regarding why there should be an ordinance, City Manager Johnson said if benefits were to be provided for those who signed the voluntary pledge, then staff preferred that an ordinance be drafted. In response to a comment from Ms. Bettman regarding her second and third suggestions being able to be handled administratively, City Manager Johnson said they could be handled administratively at the specific direction of the council. Ms. Bettman noted that language on City ballot measures was left out of the motion but was not sure how such language could be integrated into the motion. She requested ideas regarding how that could be done. Ms. Bettman said she would support the motion. She noted the public support for campaign finance reform and added the voluntary ordinance had worked in other communities. In response to a question from Ms. Nathanson regarding how voluntary time limits might be a legal risk to the City, Mr. Klein said as long as the limits were voluntary there was not a large legal risk to the City. Ms. Bettman offered her third suggestion, a provision in the resolution/ordinance that requires the City to print a minimum of two public service announcements reporting the cumulative contributions and expenditures in local papers, two days prior to the election, as a friendly amendment to the motion. It was accepted by Mr. Kelly as a friendly amendment. In response to a question from Ms. Bettman regarding her second suggestion, a reduction in the amounts qualifying for the supplemental filing, making them more consistent with a local campaign rather than a statewide campaign, Mr. Klein said he believed the City could enact its own reporting requirements. He noted that there were some staff in the State Elections Division that believed that the City did not have that authority and added that the State Attorney General's Office had agreed that there was no express preemption but had not researched whether there was an implied preemption. MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 13, 2002 Page 8 Work Session Mr. Pap8 expressed his appreciation of Mr. Kelly trying to get the ordinance drafted before the year's primary election, but noted that the election process had already begun with candidates who had filed under the current set of rules. He urged the council not to rush the discussion. Mr. PapS, seconded by Mr. Farr, moved to table the motion. The motion failed, 5:3; Mr. PapS, Mr. Farr, and Mr. Rayor voting yes. Mayor Torrey called for a clear definition of in-kind contributions including newspapers that gave non-editorial time. The motion passed, 6:2; Mr. Pap8 and Mr. Farr voting no. The meeting adjourned at 1:30 pm. Respectfully submitted, James R. Johnson City Manager (Recorded by Joe Sams) MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 13, 2002 Page 9 Work Session