Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 06/10/02 Meeting MINUTES Eugene City Council Regular Meeting Council Chamber-Eugene City Hall June 10,2002 8 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Betty Taylor, David Kelly, Nancy Nathanson, Scott Meisner, Gary Rayor, Gary PapS, Bonny Bettman, Par Farr. CITY COUNCIL MEETING Mayor James D. Torrey called the meeting to order. 1.CEREMONIAL MATTERS Mayor Torrey introduced Urban Forester Mark Synder. Mr. Synder introduced Robert Johnson from Tree City USA, who presented the Tree City USA Growth Award to Mayor Torrey. Mr. Johnson commended the City for being one of 38 Oregon cities to qualify for the Tree City Growth Award. He noted the criteria associated with the award, and said Eugene significantly exceeded those standards. Mr. Synder described some of the City's special tree-related projects, and introduced Troy Treger of the NeighborWoods Program, former Mayor Ruth Bascom, and John Weber of Parks Planning, who were instrumental in the creation of the Hayes Memorial Garden, who were present to display the Tree City USA award banner. Mayor Torrey thanked Mr. Johnson, Mr. Treger, Ms. Bascom, and Mr. Weber. 2. PUBLIC FORUM Mayor Torrey reviewed the protocol for the Public Forum. Will Kramer, 593 Sierra Street, Eugene, said he represented several Eugene business owners. He noted that Tillamook County had recently decided to adopt the State's guidelines regarding smoking. The City of St. Helens had also changed its law. That left Eugene with the only council- imposed smoking ban in the State. He read from the minutes of the St. Helens City Council withdrawing the ordinance. He appealed to the City to withdraw its ordinance. Sarah Coffelt, 1157 Elizabeth Street, identified herself as a cocktail waitress and said since the smoking ban was implemented, her wages had been cut in half, making it difficult to support her child. She said that the smoking ban made it more difficult to track customers. She did not want to have to take another job to support herself and her family. Cheryl McCabe, 362 North 42nd Street, said she owned the Old Pad Tavern and represented the Eugene Business Owners Association. She said the smoking ban in bars and taverns had a negative impact on those businesses. She referred to a document distributed to the council MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 10, 2002 Page 1 Regular Meeting showing Oregon lottery revenue figures. She said that the information reflected the totals of every location in Eugene, Springfield, and three other cities in Lane County. The information supported what had been reported to the council for several months. Ms. McCabe reviewed the figures, which showed a continuing revenue loss for those establishments. She noted those businesses that had gone out of businesses since the ban was enacted. Ms. McCabe appealed to the council to study those figures. Anne Fifield, 1144 West Broadway, EcoNorthwest, said she was hired by the Tobacco Free Coalition of Oregon to assess the overall impacts of the tobacco ban on the community. That assessment indicated that first quarter sales in Eugene were lower than the same quarter in 2001, but total sales were comparable to sales in 1997, 1998, and 1999. She suggested that higher sales in 2001 were an aberration. The total sales for video poker had increased when the ban was fully implemented. Many factors impact those sales; sales decline each year from July to September when the weather improved. In 2001, sales declined in the summer months in Eugene and did not go up in the fall months as usual, but there were other factors involved, such as the economic recession and the events of September 11. Martin Jones, 2300 Parkside Lane, an internist representing the Lane County Medical Society, said it was the society's stand that all places in Oregon be smoke-free. He thanked the council for enacting the smoking ban. He said that the evidence demonstrated that second-hand smoke was damaging to others. Making the community business-friendly was good for the long-term economic health of the community, but it should not occur at the expense of workers. The toxins in secondhand smoke cannot be removed from exhaust systems. He said that the workers in bars and taverns have more health risks and die younger. Those workers needed to be protected. He noted other communities in other parts of the country that were enacting similar legislation. He called on the bar owners present to join in a call for a statewide ban on smoking. Mayor Torrey closed the public forum. Councilor Farr spoke of his own personal dislike for smoking but said he also disliked having an uneven playing field for businesses. He said that the City's ordinance was causing businesses to fail. He said that the council needed to discuss the issue, or put it before the voters of Eugene. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor PapS, moved to approve the items on the Consent Calendar. Councilor Bettman had minutes corrections and pulled Item B. Councilor Bettman offered the following correction to page 1 of May 1, 2001, asking that the motion be amended as follows (italicized text added): "Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor PapS, moved to direct the City Manager, beginning in fisca/ year 2003, to use airport revenues and reserves to pay the Airport General Obligation bond debt annually..." Councilor Bettman noted that the word "accessible" in sentence 4 of paragraph 2 on page 10 of the May 13 regular meeting minutes should be "assessable." She also asked that the second sentence MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 10, 2002 Page 2 Regular Meeting in paragraph 3 be modified as follows (struck text deleted): "She indicated she would oppose the motion because of the financing, and because she did not think the inequities of the assessment system had nat been addressed." Councilor Bettman asked that sentence 3 in paragraph 3 on page 11 of the May 13 be deleted and replaced with the following: "She said there should have been a contract, or other documentation, circumscribing the City's limited role." Mayor Torrey determined there was no objection to the corrections offered by Councilor Bettman. Councilor Meisner offered a change to page 1 of the May 13, 2002, work session minutes, noting that the reference to the River Road/Santa Clara Facilities Advisory Committee should be to the River Road/Santa Clara Urban Services Committees. Mayor Torrey determined there was no objection to the corrections offered by Councilor Meisner. Councilor Nathanson referred to paragraph 6 on page 4 of the April 24 work session minutes and asked that the seventh sentence in that paragraph be changed to read "She hoped that any gas tax contemplated would be a countywide tax, or at least m~st a metropolitan tax." Referring to page 5 of the same set of minutes, Councilor Nathanson asked that the first sentence in paragraph 8 be modified to read "Councilor Nathanson cautioned staff about agdmst structuring..." Councilor Nathanson asked that sentence 4 in paragraph 1 on page 11 of the May 13 regular meeting be revised to read "She regretted that questioned4M~ the City fronted the money rather than ODOT..." Mayor Torrey determined there was no objection to the corrections offered by Councilor Nathanson. Councilor Pap~ referred to paragraph 2 on page 4 of the April 24 work session minutes and modified the first sentence to read "Councilor Pap~ asked if staff had quantified the bicycle path maintenance backlog..." Councilor Pap~ indicated that the reference to the airport runway in paragraph 1 on page 2 of the May 1 minutes was actually to the cross runway. Mayor Torrey determined there was no objection to the corrections offered by Councilor Pap~. Councilor Kelly asked that paragraph 1 on page 1 of the May 13 work session be revised to refer to economic forces. He asked that the reference to "vehicle hours of daily" in paragraph 5 on page 7 of the same minutes be changed to "vehicle hours of delay." He also asked that the last sentence in paragraph 6 be changed to read "...Councilor Kelly asked how the council could adopt the ordinances when it was stated the findings were still underway and not completed." MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 10, 2002 Page 3 Regular Meeting Councilor Kelly pointed out that the last paragraph on page 7 of the May 13 regular meeting minutes incorrectly referred to former City Manager Jim Johnson rather than City Manager pro tem Jim Carlson. Mayor Torrey determined there was no objection to the corrections offered by Councilor Kelly. Roll call vote; the motion to approve the Consent Calender, with the exception of Item D, carried unanimously, 8:0. The council considered Item D. Councilor Bettman expressed an interest in seeing the allocations being underwritten by systems development charges called out separately in the future. She could not determine the SDC-eligible projects from looking at the list of projects. She wanted a justification for why the reserves funds were accumulating when the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) was proposing a rate increase. The reimbursement SDCs show a beginning balance of nearly $5 million. It was her understanding that those revenues were more flexible than improvement fees, and she wanted to know if all SDC-eligible expenditures were being paid for by SDC revenues. She asked about the impact on rates if the nearly $4 million in reimbursement reserves were directed toward scheduled capital improvements being paid for by ratepayers. Susie Smith, General Manager of the MWMC, clarified that there was no rate increase proposed this year. There had been six years with no rate increases until the five-percent increase in 2001. She did not know what would occur in 2003, saying it depended on the economy. Regarding the MWMC's Capital Improvement Program (CIP), Ms. Smith said that the MWMC determined what percentage of the costs of every capital project could be attributed to a capacity increase. She agreed that the reimbursement element of the SDC was more flexible in terms of how the revenues could be spent. Ms. Smith said that the reimbursement portion of the SDC was allocated to the Reimbursement SDC Fund according to capacity. Then, because the MWMC did not receive sufficient revenue in the long-term from SDCs, it had to supplement, through user rates, a contribution to the Capital Reserve Fund. She said that the large fund balances at this time represented a peak in the continuing "ups and downs" of the CIP implementation. The size of projects created peaks and valleys in the expenditures. Ms. Smith said the SDC funds being collected now were "smoothed over" on a five-year basis, and every year the five years "rolls." The approach being used helped MWMC avoid rate spikes. She said that she could provide a table that showed the project-by-project breakdown between funding sources. Councilor Rayor said the commission had agreed to look at rate smoothing of the SDC because there were no large projects in the five-year horizon but there were large projects in the ten-year horizon. In the absence of the ten-year methodology, SDC rates would swing wildly. Responding to a question from Councilor Rayor, Ms. Smith said that the staff was recommending a change in the SDC methodology to take in a ten-year time frame because of the rate spike issue. MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 10, 2002 Page 4 Regular Meeting It was staff's intention to time the rate methodology change with the update of the MWMC's financial plan. That would occur in time for this coming year's budget cycle. She noted that the public works directors of the two cities had raised concerns about the sensitivity of the timing of impacts of the increases in SDCs on the development community. Responding to a question from Councilor Pap6, Ms. Smith clarified that MWMC was not collecting enough SDCs to fund an entire capital program. That was due to the fact the regional facilities were largely funded by federal grant moneys, and the MWMC could not collect a reimbursement SDC for the capital costs underwritten by those dollars. Consequently, the MWMC was "SDC poor" and to have adequate capital resources, the SDC must be supplemented by user-rate funded contributions. Councilor Pap6 expressed concern about building reserves and increasing fees to build enhancements he and other current ratepayers might not enjoy in the future. Ms. Smith noted that capacity expansions were funded by the SDC improvement component. Councilor Pap6 said that concerned him; if the money was being used for replacement, that was acceptable, but if the MWMC was using the money for future enhancements and smoothing the rates, he preferred that the enhancement be built when those who would benefit could pay. Ms. Smith said that there were three components that make up the capital programs, and the CIP is one part of that; another part was major rehabilitation and yet another was equipment replacement. Staff identified the element of each project needed for capacity expansion, and that was funded from the improvement component of the SDC. The remaining capital programs were funded by a combination of reimbursement revenues and user rate contributions that were budgeted to the capital reserve each year. Councilor Bettman agreed with Councilor Rayor about the ten-year planning horizon. Ms. Smith referred the council to Figure 9 in the MWMC's proposed budget, Capital Programs 5 Year Plan, and pointed out the spikes between the out years. She said that using the SDC in combination with the user rate contribution, the commission attempted to budget and manage using a five-year view. In addition, the commission had a "pay-as-you-go" philosophy and had no debt. To do so and manage spikes, sometimes it was necessary to build the reserves. The financial plan update, which the MWMC would review at the end of the summer and which the three local jurisdictions would be asked to adopt, would revisit the "pay-as-you-go" philosophy, which could impact the reserves accumulated in any given year. Councilor Bettman reiterated her interest in seeing the SDC revenues and expenditures tracked separately. She could not support the budget unless she saw where the $4 million in reserves would be spent and when it would be spent. She said that the ratepayers were subsidizing capital improvements that she thought should be paid for with SDCs. Ms. Smith said that the documentation requested was available and could be provided. Councilor Bettman asked if there was council support for delaying the vote on the budget. MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 10, 2002 Page 5 Regular Meeting Councilor Rayor clarified that MWMC would recommend no interlinkage between a transportation system maintenance fee and the regional SDC methodology and rate structure. Ms. Smith said that staff was not recommending such a linkage. Councilor Rayor, seconded by Councilor Pap~, moved to table the item until June 24, 2002. Roll call vote; the motion passed 5:3; Councilor Nathanson, Councilor Farr, and Councilor Meisner voting no. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Judicial Evaluation City Manager Carlson noted that City Code Section 2.011(10) required a formal citizen review of the presiding judge's performance in the last year of the judge's four-year term. A public hearing was part of that process. Mayor Torrey opened the public hearing. There being no requests to speak, Mayor Torrey closed the public hearing. Mayor Torrey noted the upcoming council work session on the item. 5. PUBLIC HEAR1NG AND POSSIBLE ACTION: An Ordinance Concerning Permitted Overnight Sleeping and Amending Section 4.816 of the Eugene Code, 1971 Richie Weinman, Planning and Development Department, introduced the item. He said that after having some experience in implementing the ordinance, staff was proposing minor changes to the existing ordinance. He did not anticipate controversy. Councilor Kelly asked why the revised ordinance distinguished between occupied and unoccupied property. Mr. Weinman said that in the case of unoccupied property, the City was concerned about the lack of eyes on the property and wished to avoid squatting situations. Responding to a concern expressed by Councilor Kelly regarding new Section 4.816(2)(c), City Attorney Glenn Klein said that 2(C) stipulated a property owner should provide a storage area with the capacity to store personal items; this was not a requirement that all personal items be stored inside. Councilor Kelly expressed appreciation for the clarification. Councilor Nathanson determined from Mr. Weinman that the ordinance changes represented no change in policy. Councilor Pap~ asked if"property owner" was defined. Mr. Klein said no. Referring to Section 4.816(c), Councilor Pap~ asked if trailers and campers were considered vehicles. Mr. Klein said yes. Councilor Pap~ asked if that was clear in the ordinance. He also asked if sanitary facilities MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 10, 2002 Page 6 Regular Meeting were defined. Mr. Klein said that term was not defined. Councilor Pap~ said that the terms being used should be defined, or someone would demand a shower when the intent was for a porta- potty. Regarding Councilor Papa's first question, Mr. Weinman said that the council committee charged to develop the text clearly identified the property owner as needing to give permission rather than tenant. Councilor Pap~ asked what happened when a property owner wanted it but the tenant did not. Mr. Klein said that depended on the private contractual arrangement between the property owner and tenant. Councilor Farr commended Mr. Weinman's work. Speaking to the concerns expressed by Councilor Pap6, Councilor Meisner reminded the council that the amendments were to an existing ordinance. He asked if the situation cited by Councilor Pap6 had been a problem, and if anyone had demanded a shower. Mr. Weinman said no. Councilor Meisner asked if the issue of whether a camper or trailer counted as a vehicle had come up. Mr. Weinman said no. Councilor Meisner said he had supported the original ordinance with some trepidation, given the negative impact of illegal camping on his ward. He said that the ordinance, in combination with the placement of signage prohibiting overnight camping and the City's contract with Whitebird, was working. He had previously received several complaints a week, and now received very few. Mayor Torrey opened the public hearing. There being no requests to speak, Mayor Torrey closed the public hearing. City Manager Jim Carlson asked the council to consider Council Bill 4792, an ordinance concerning permitted overnight sleeping and amending Section 4.816 of the Eugene Code, 1971. Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Pap6, moved that the bill, with unanimous consent of the council, be read the second time by council bill number only, and that enactment be considered at this time. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously. Mr. Carlson said that the council would consider Council Bill 4792 by council bill number only. Councilor Taylor was willing to take action because there was no one offering testimony and there was no controversy. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, and became Ordinance No. 20255. 6. PUBLIC HEAR1NG AND POSSIBLE ACTION: An Ordinance Concerning the Crimes of Furnishing Liquor to Prohibited Persons, Allowing Unlawful Consumption, Trespass in MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 10, 2002 Page 7 Regular Meeting the First Degree, Crossing Private Property and Assaulting a Peace Officer; Amending Sections 4.110, 4.808, 4.990, and 5.555, and Repealing Sections 4.131 and 4.732 of the Eugene Code, 1971 Lieutenant Rich Stronach was present for the staff report. He reviewed the proposed ordinance changes, noting they were intended to keep commonly used laws up-to-date with State statutes and department procedures. Councilor Farr asked why railroad property was treated differently than other private property. Lieutenant Stronach said that the ordinance enhanced the penalty somewhat for trespassers found on railroad properties due to the high risk of trespassing on such property. Councilor Farr asked if that meant the owners of railroad property received a higher degree of protection than other property owners. Lieutenant Stronach said no. Councilor Taylor asked if Eugene could have a different law from the State; for example, could Eugene decide that assaulting a police officer was not a felony? Mr. Klein said the council could delete that provision from local codes, but the State law would continue to apply inside the city limits. Mayor Torrey opened the public hearing. Ben Buzbee, 1306 East 18th Avenue, Student Body Vice President at the University of Oregon, thanked Councilor Kelly for alerting the student body to the issue, Officer Chris Kilcullen for sharing information about the issue with students, and Judge Wayne Allen for agreeing to delete the mandatory minimum sentences. He said that the students had wanted to ensure that the judges had discretion and could look at individual circumstances. He said that the diversion program was very important to the University's student body and had educational benefits that outweighed the benefits of a fine. There being no other requests to speak, Mayor Torrey closed the public hearing. Councilor Kelly appreciated the removal of the mandatory minimum sentences. Referring to the penalty schedule, he suggested that the penalty for furnishing alcohol to a minor be changed to parallel the graduated penalties in the 1999 ordinance regarding minor in possession instead of the proposed $5,000 maximum fine. Municipal Court Administrator Marilyn Nelson said that she discussed the issue with Presiding Judge Wayne Allen. Judge Allen had indicated that the court did not see many furnishing cases, and the offense was eligible for the Busted Diversion Program. Two of the three violations that were eligible for the diversion program were under consideration here, furnishing alcohol to a minor and allowing unlawful consumption. Of the three, the third offense, minor in possession, was the offense the court saw the most. Judges found furnishing to be the most serious of the three offenses. It was a deliberate act of providing alcohol to a minor. While $500 was a steep fine, a first-time offender diverted to the Busted Program would pay a total of $90. She said that only repeated convictions on the offense were involved, and the circumstances were very egregious. Ms. Nelson said that judges understood that the council was MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 10, 2002 Page 8 Regular Meeting concerned that penalties be stepped according to the severity of the offense. However, raising the maximum fine allows the judge more discretion. There was the potential that such a penalty would be imposed in an egregious situation. Responding to a question from Councilor Kelly, Ms. Nelson clarified that the Busted Program was not community service, but rather a diversion program. Councilor Bettman asked for further information about the role of the Eugene Police Department in enforcement action on behalf of the railroad, if that was an additional amount of monitoring on the part of the City, and if the City was reimbursed. She added that the information could be provided in the form of a memorandum. Councilor Rayor thought the penalties needed to be reconsidered in light of the 1999 minor in possession ordinance. He pointed out that those penalties had been worked out with the cooperation of the student body. Lieutenant Stronach said the intent of recommending the State maximum fines was to give the judge discretion to assess the fine he or she felt most appropriate. Ms. Nelson added that at the time the minor in possession ordinance had been adopted, the City did not have the Busted Program. The program had been developed for second-time offenders with a condition on the sentence and a reduced fine. Councilor Meisner said that the ordinance before the council was directed against those who provided, sold, or gave alcohol to minors and the visibly intoxicated. It was not directed against the minor. In the case of allowing, it was focused on the person who exercised control of the property, and he did not understand why the judge should not have maximum discretion. Councilor Meisner did not necessarily want to mandate a mandatory minimum fine for first offenses, preferring to give the judges discretion to look at the particulars of each case. He said that the ordinance before the council was not a minor in possession ordinance. He supported the ordinance. Councilor Nathanson concurred with Councilor Meisner's analysis. She thought the new approach being described seemed to be effective and useful. She thought the intent of the ordinance was to solve problems, not to collect money. Councilor Nathanson expressed appreciation for Mr. Buzbee's testimony, and said she was happy to know that programs developed with student assistance were working and had the attention of those who violated the law. She was gratified the City was working with the University to solve problems. Councilor Kelly said he would feel more comfortable if the stepped penalties were retained and scaled appropriately. He asked Ms. Nelson if she thought there would be strong staff push back if the ordinance were revised to accommodate the stepped approach. Ms. Nelson said no. She did not think the judges would object to the change, but it would be a limitation. MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 10, 2002 Page 9 Regular Meeting Councilor Taylor was also concerned about the jail time and the amount of the fine. She said that it would ruin some people's lives to pay $5,000. She wanted to keep the lower penalties, lower the fines, and eliminate the jail time. Councilor Pap~ suggested that the judge would use discretion when considering the fine. He preferred to leave the flexibility with the judge. If another judge came in and offended the community through misuse of the penalties, the council could revisit the ordinance. Councilor Bettman expressed support for the fines. She said that there were degrees of egregiousness concerned with the issue. She said that the judges must have discretion. Councilor Bettman pointed out the council heard no objection to the fines, and could reconsider them if they became an issue. Councilor Meisner concurred with Councilor Bettman. He wanted the judges to have discretion, and that included the potential of jail time. Without that authority, the community would not see reform. He emphasized that the violations involved were crimes, and in some cases crimes by predators of youth, and judges needed discretion in sentencing. Councilor Meisner asked Mr. Klein if incorporating the ordinance into the code precluded a State law enforcement officer from enforcing the State law inside the city limits. Mr. Klein said no. Councilor Meisner asked the council to keep the intent of the ordinance in mind. It was intended to protect children. Councilor Taylor said that there could be different judges in the future. She was concerned about the proposed maximum penalties. She said that an adult furnishing alcohol to a minor could be merely one month older than the minor. She hoped the council would postpone action. Councilor Farr said he was prepared to act and asked the council to move on. Responding to a question from Councilor Kelly regarding the changes related to trespassing, Lieutenant Stronach said that the ordinance was designed for the chronic shoplifter. The store issued a trespass warning against the individual involved. If the individual returned, instead of being a Trespass II, the violation became a Trespass I. The police could ask the individuals' intent, and if they stole again the intent was clear. City Manager Carlson said the council would consider Council Bill 4793, an ordinance concerning municipal code changes to coincide with State Statutes. Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Pap~, moved that the council bill be read the second time by council bill number only, and that enactment be considered at this time. MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 10, 2002 Page 10 Regular Meeting Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to amend the ordinance by striking the words "or one year in jail or both," to amended Section 4.9. Councilor Kelly expressed appreciation for the comments related to discretion but pointed out that the ordinance had existed to this point without jail time. Roll call vote; the motion to amend the ordinance failed, 5:3; Councilor Taylor, Councilor Kelly, and Councilor Rayor voting yes. Councilor Taylor said she would not support the motion because of the jail time being added and because the council was taking action tonight directly following the public hearing, during which testimony was offered. Roll call vote; the vote on the motion was 7:1, Councilor Taylor voting no. Mayor Torrey determined from Mr. Klein that the item could be brought up at any future council meeting for a second reading. 7. PUBLIC HEARING AND POSSIBLE ACTION: Exemption from Competitive Bidding for Design/Build Services City Manager Carlson asked the council for an exemption from the normal bidding and design process to replace sand filtration systems at Echo Hollow and Sheldon pools. Mayor Torrey asked legal counsel to determine how the process could be institutionalized so the council did not have to take action on each such exemption request. Councilor Bettman suggested it would be useful to have a post-project evaluation of past design/build projects even those that cost less than $100,000 so the council had data to look at so it could determine if there was a public benefit to the approach. She asked if the pool of candidates for bidding was local, regional, or national, and what happened if only one proposal was received. Ned Nebeta of the Facilities Division said an Request for Proposals (RFP) would be issued and anyone could respond to that RFP. He said that there were a number of companies with the expertise needed. Most of those companies were regional rather than local. He confirmed, in response to a follow-up question, that familiarity with municipal pools was an RFP requirement. Councilor Bettman hoped the contract was written in a way that protected the City from liability. Councilor Bettman asked why the work could not be done in the winter months, as opposed to the hottest month of the year. Mr. Nebeta said that Echo Hollow Pool would be closed at that time MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 10, 2002 Page 11 Regular Meeting anyway for maintenance as it was not very busy during the summer months. If the needed equipment could not be secured in time, the project would be pushed to the following year. Councilor Pap~ left the meeting. Mayor Torrey opened the public hearing. There being no requests to speak, Mayor Torrey closed the public hearing. Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Nathanson, moved to grant an exemption from competitive bidding for the replacement of the diatomaceous earth filtration systems at the Echo Hollow and Sheldon pools with sand filtration systems, and allow the City to issue a Request for Proposals using the alternative bidding method "Design/Build," to select the vendor to construct the project. Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to amend the motion by including as a caveat that the City would not implement the approach if there was only one response to the RFP. Councilor Kelly indicated opposition to the amendment because nothing required the City to accept the response to the RFP. He suggested that it was possible that the single response to would still save the City money as opposed to a competitive design/build approach. Councilor Bettman asked how the City would know it could save money if only received one response. Roll call vote; the amendment to the motion failed, 5:2, Councilor Bettman and Councilor Taylor voting yes. Roll call vote; the motion passed, 5:2; Councilor Bettman and Councilor Taylor voting no. Councilor Rayor commended the design/build approach. He did not object to authorizing the projects on a case-by-case basis. Councilor Farr agreed with Councilor Rayor, and said he wanted to make the design/build approach the City's normal way of doing business. The meeting adjourned at 10:01 p.m. (Recorded by Kimberly Young) R: 120021Central Services DepartmentlC ity Counci llccO 2061Om 2. wpd Respectfully submitted, MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 10, 2002 Page 12 Regular Meeting James R. Carlson City Manager pro tem (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 10, 2002 Page 13 Regular Meeting