Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 06/24/02 Work Session MINUTES Eugene City Council Work Session McNutt Room--Eugene City Hall June 24, 2002 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: David Kelly, Gary Pap~, Nancy Nathanson, Gary Rayor, Pat Farr, Scott Meisner, Betty Taylor, Bonny Bettman. CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION Mayor James D. Torrey called the meeting to order. A. Items From Mayor and City Manager Mr. Meisner said the event at Trainsong Park had been a great event. He thanked everyone who participated. Mr. Meisner said the second train to Eugene had been removed from the House of Representatives cut list thanks to the efforts of House Transportation Chair Bruce Star. He noted that it remained on the Senate's cut list. He said he would keep the council apprized of new developments. Ms. Bettman called for clarification of whether the council had any role in the development of the Crescent site that was originally planned as the new location for Sacred Heart Hospital. She also asked if there was anything that tied the developer to the proposed/presented plan or whether the owner of the property could sell the property after it was re-zoned. Ms. Taylor questioned whether the proposed Crescent development site fit the City's requirements for density. Ms. Taylor raised concern over speeding traffic on Amazon. She called for a discussion on whether the City policy priority should be to accommodate traffic or to make things safer for pedestrians. Regarding pool hours, Ms. Taylor expressed concern that the open hours were too short. She questioned what the hours were before the new pool was built and whether there were any comparison figures for pool hours in other cities. Ms. Taylor opined that the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) commissioner should not be appointed as a voting member of the Metropolitan Policy Committee (MPC). Although she was not in favor she said the council should have a discussion on the matter. MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 24, 2002 Page 1 Work Session Ms. Taylor called for a discussion on changing the way Budget Committee members are appointed. In response to a question from Ms. Taylor regarding the West Eugene Parkway and whether it would be an ex parle contact for councilors to discuss the matter, City Attorney Jerry Lidz commented that if there was a quasi-judicial decision, ex parle contact rules would apply. He noted that this did not mean that councilors could not talk about the matter or discuss it with others but said that those contacts would have to be disclosed and placed on the record. City Manager Jim Carlson said the parkway was a plan amendment and not a quasi-judicial decision. Mr. Kelly clarified that it would be a local ©D©T staff representative that would be appointed to MPC and not the region commissioner. Mr. Kelly called for staff ideas on how to follow-up on Ms. Taylor's ideas on Budget Committee member selection. Referring to a citizen letter from Whitey Lueck that raised street lighting concerns related to the Broadway reopening, Mr. Kelly called for staff feedback on whether light pollution had been a consideration in planning the street reopening. He noted that by the City's new code standards the current street lights on Broadway would not be allowed. Mr. Pap~ noted that the Human Rights Commission had held its first hearing on proposed code amendments. He said the matter would be before the council in the near future. Mr. Pap~ agreed with Ms. Taylor regarding changes in selection of committees and suggested that all committees be selected by ward. Mr. Rayor expressed his support for People Powered Fridays. He said the street bike path system was working and was a great way to get around. Mr. Rayor said the train issue was of great importance to Eugene. Regarding the comments made by Ms. Bettman on the development on the Crescent site, Mr. Rayor said he would trust the system but commented that he did not want to see a loss in residential land. Mr. Fart said he would welcome a change in how committees were chosen. In response to a question from Mr. Fart regarding a Convention and Visitors Association of Lane County (CVALC©) discussion on planning in the north end and the net effect of loss of parking in the area if the Oak Street extension was constructed, City Manager Carlson said that a condemnation resolution had been passed by the council that called for improved access to the train station. He noted that the planning process had been going on for three years and there was not much time before the federal dollars for the project would disappear. He said that an offer had been made to the owner of the property and negotiations were in the final stages. He said it would be a significant change to start coming up with new access areas at the current stage of the process. MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 24, 2002 Page 2 Work Session In response to a question from Mr. Farr regarding whether the federal money could be re- channeled into other elements of the improvements, City Manager Carlson said there would not be time to redefine what else the money could be used for and added that the planning process would have to start from the beginning regarding improving access to the site. Mr. Farr noted that there had been public concern over the way the plans for the area were released to the public. He stressed that the businesses in the area were a significant draw of people to the downtown area. Mr. Meisner said council adopted the North End Scoping Group study, where the plan for the area was clearly stated. Ms. Nathanson said the more important question was when to start planning structured parking for the north end of downtown. Ms. Nathanson raised concern over the open nature of drug dealing in the downtown area and asked for a report on what was being done to address the situation. Ms. Nathanson called for a report on community use of the Hult Center and what venues are being used instead of the Hult Center. Ms. Nathanson called for a report on use of forfeiture funds and how it relates to problem- oriented policing strategy. Mayor Torrey reported that the Lane County Board of Commissioners had invited the City Council to rename a prominent thoroughfare in honor of Martin Luther King, Jr. He said, if there was an interest, he wanted a volunteer to serve in the discussion. Ms. Bettman volunteered to take part in the discussion and encouraged the other councilors to provide input as well. Mayor Torrey suggested scheduling a work session on Budget Committee recruitment in September. There was general consensus. Mr. Rayor called for a discussion of the route that Oak Street will take to the train station. He opined that Oak Street could "swing a little to the east" and enclose more parking inside. Mr. Meisner suggested consulting Human Rights Program staff regarding diversity efforts while selecting committees. He also suggested reviewing statutory limitations on committee memberships. Ms. Nathanson raised concerns about changing recruitment processes for committees in the middle of the current recruitment effort. B.WORK SESSION: Discussion of Recommended Amendments to the Eugene City Charter Mary Walston of the City Manager's Office provided a brief summary of previous council action on charter amendments. She remarked that the council had gone through the noncontroversial (housekeeping) matters on May 29. She said the evening's work session would be a review of MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 24, 2002 Page 3 Work Session minor revisions. She noted that the council had left off at Section 14 at its previous charter work session. Mr. Kelly thanked staff for additional alternatives on conflict of interest revisions to the charter. He said that all three of the options remove the "pecuniarily interested" concern that occupied previous discussion. He expressed his preference for Option 3, saying it was similar to the provisions adopted by Salem and Lake Oswego. Ms. Bettman stressed the need for more clarification on what the problem was with the original charter language. She said the charter was for the benefit of the citizens of Eugene and not for the convenience of City officials. She stated that she would vote for the benefit of the citizens of Eugene and expressed her preference for Option 3. She noted that she would have an amendment to offer when the item came to a vote. Ms. Bettman raised concern over putting something on the ballot that would be perceived as rolling back restrictions. She opined that such a ballot measure would not pass. Mr. Meisner expressed his favor for Option 3. He commented that there would always be perceived conflicts that did not rise to the level of true conflicts of interest and added that the charter language could not cover every eventuality. He suggested that domestic partnerships as well as spousal partnerships should be considered when defining conflicts of interest. Ms. Taylor suggested just substituting the phrase "domestic partner" for "spouse" in the charter language. In response to a question from Ms. Taylor regarding the language around expenses being paid for with City funds and the reason the wording did not say "taxpayer funds," Mr. Lidz said the City only had control over City funds. City Manager Carlson noted that City funds also included things other than tax money, such as user fees. He said City funds was a broad definition. Regarding the proposal on section 14, Mr. Pap8 said any of the options were better than what the proposal currently was. He expressed a preference for Option 1 but would reluctantly vote for Option 3. In response to a question from Mr. Pap8 regarding conflict of interest language in State statutes that had evolved since Eugene's charter provision and the reason for duplicating what already existed in State statutes in the charter, Mr. Lidz said that the language would stay in Eugene's charter even if the State repealed its conflict of interest statutes. Regarding Option 1, Ms. Bettman noted that there was a very strong charter provision in the present charter for conflict of interest and added that Option 1 just reiterated that the City would comply with the State statute which was substantially diminished from Eugene's charter. She said the current charter language should be replaced with language that was at least as strong as the existing language. She said that going with Option 1 would severely diminish the conflict of interest provision in the charter. She said she would vote against Option 1. Regarding Option 3(5), Ms. Bettman suggested adding "or avoiding detriment" to the end of the statement. She stressed the importance of the council having a unanimous decision on what was put on the ballot. MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 24, 2002 Page 4 Work Session Mr. Kelly, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to refer Section 14, the section on conflict of interest, based on staff Option 3, taking into consideration comments about domestic partner, financial gain, outside discussion to the ballot in the November 2002 election. Mr. Meisner said he would support the motion. He noted that the courts had recognized domestic partnerships for years and added that financial interests could be created through such commingling. Mr. Pap~ said conflict of interest became more problematic when talking about business partners. He noted that a person could have numerous business partners and said that in limited partnerships a person might not even know all of their partners nor could they expect partners to willingly disclose financial information. He said it was almost an impossibility to enact anything that included business partnerships. He said he would not vote for the motion and added that it was in the best interest of the community to not prohibit any citizen who was qualified to serve from serving whether or not they had a business interest with the City. Mr. Kelly stressed that Option 3 would not prevent anyone from serving if they were qualified. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to amend the motion by adding a sub section six to Option 3 with the following language added: No city official shaft grant, or make available, any special consideration, treatment, or advantage to any citizen beyond that which is available to any other citizen. Ms. Bettman said the source of the motion was from the Ethics for Public Officials out of Salem that was in Appendix G of the Citizen Charter Review Committee's report. She noted that there was a similar provision in the charter of Snellville, California. She said the language stated what people would naturally assume but was a positive statement to add to the charter. Mr. Meisner clarified that the meaning of the statement meant that all citizens are equal. In response to a question from Mr. Meisner regarding whether such language had ever been litigated, Mr. Lidz said he was unaware of any case where similar language had been litigated. He said the language was general enough that it would stand mostly as a statement of principal but, from a lawyers perspective, because the language was so vague, there was potential for disagreement of its meaning. He recommended caution in adopting code language from other cities into the charter of the City of Eugene. Ms. Bettman said she would be open to the idea, if the wording was not legally defensible, that it could be deleted from the charter language. She offered a friendly amendment to her amendment, which was accepted by the seconder, to add the phrase as long as it was legally defensible. Mr. Pap~ commented that he could support the statement but added that it was more broad than just a conflict of interest statement and suggested putting it in its own section. MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 24, 2002 Page 5 Work Session Ms. Nathanson echoed Mr. Pap~ that the amendment language was not related specifically to conflict of interest. She added her desire not to do anything that would prohibit mediation when considering issues or cut off the ability to mediate good policy making. Mr. Fart raised concern over the vagueness of the wording. He said he would not support the amendment. Mr. Rayor said he would vote against the amendment but would support Option 3. Ms. Taylor said she would support the motion. Mr. Fart raised concern that the vagueness of the wording would open the City up to more litigation. The amendment passed, 5:3; Mr. Fart, Mr. Pap~ and Mr. Rayor voting no. Mr. Pap~ said he was against the main motion. He said Option 3 should be done by ordinance rather than be included in the charter. Mr. Fart was also against the main motion as amended. He commented that there was good State legislation regarding conflict of interest already existing. The main motion passed, 6:2; Mr. Fart and Mr. Pap~ voting no. C.WORK SESSION: Nonproperty Tax Revenue Sources City Manager Carlson noted that the work session had been scheduled to continue the discussion on non-property tax revenue sources. He said staff needed direction on two issues: 1. What is the intent of the new revenue; offsetting property taxes, paying for future general fund shortfalls, etc.? 2. What non property tax revenue source did the council prefer? City Manager Carlson noted the council had narrowed the list to a gross receipts tax, a personal income tax, a corporate income tax, and a general sales tax. City Manager Carlson noted that the meeting packet contained some information on business license program proposals from Springfield and Salem. He stressed the need for direction on the two issues outlined above. In response to a question from Ms. Taylor regarding whether the option of a business license tax had been eliminated, City Manager Carlson said that was not one of the four choices that was chosen when the motion was made to narrow the list of options. He noted that the option had been considered previously. Ms. Taylor expressed a desire to reconsider business license taxes since the City of Portland seemed to be having success with that type of revenue. MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 24, 2002 Page 6 Work Session Mr. Meisner said there was no real guidance from the survey distributed because of the way it was worded and the few councilors who responded. He said the survey did not ask the right questions and did not ask questions in a way that made them answerable. Mr. Meisner said the intent of the new-found revenue would be for an across-the-board property tax offset and stressed the importance of keeping that in mind as a legislative priority. Mr. Meisner voiced concern that Eugene would be taxed for services that benefitted the entire region. He stressed the importance of looking at regional solutions for regional problems. City Manager Carlson commented that the discussion was about revenue sources that the Eugene City Council could initiate or put on the ballot. Mr. Kelly stressed the importance of clear direction to staff. He said he wanted to ask the voters about new revenues and give people a say in Eugene's taxes and services. Mr. Kelly commented that not much revenue could be gained by a local corporate income tax. Mr. Rayor said the problem was that there is continuing upward pressure on property taxes in any event despite measures taken by the City of Eugene. As an example, he cited 4J school district bond measures which added eight percent to an average property tax rate. He said if the motion were passed, then any new fees would require separate elections. Ms. Bettman said she was not in favor of a sales tax. She said there should be a nonproperty tax revenue source for addressing the library levy and added that patrol officers and firefighters should be prioritized at the top of the list of unfunded strategic needs. She called for a new priority list for City services, saying that the last one was out of date. She said that City Manager Johnson had promised a chance for re-prioritizing the list but noted that it had never happened. She said the youth levy had provided great service but when it was weighed against other needs of the City it did not have the same priority as core services. She added that where the money was spent was significant in the decision. In response to a question from Mr. Fart regarding what the next step was, City Manager Carlson said it was to pass motions on the use of the proceeds and on the instrument for getting funds. Mr. Fart said there was no desire in the community to add another level of taxation. He raised concern over creating even more of an imbalance between Eugene businesses and other nearby jurisdictions. Mr. Pap8 said the library funding should be coming out of the General Fund. He agreed with Ms. Bettman that there should be a priority for funding core services. He stressed the need for the good will of the voters in any plan the council approved. In response to a question from Mr. Pap8 regarding whether there had been any public surveys done regarding revenue measures, City Manager Carlson said that no surveys had been done on that particular issue but noted that the results of the various attempts at city- and county-wide revenue measures over the last 15 years. Ms. Nathanson expressed concern that it was not the right time to deal with the issue. She wanted to see ideas from the community and commented that those ideas would have a higher MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 24, 2002 Page 7 Work Session likelihood of passing with the voters rather than something originating with that particular council at that time. She raised concern over the current condition of the local economy, the role of Eugene in the metropolitan area, and the need for funding of core services with multiple funding mechanisms. Mayor Torrey said he was opposed to gross receipts tax. He reiterated Ms. Bettman's concern regarding the need to re-prioritize City services with voters. Mr. Kelly wanted to see a proposal that would add services and broaden the tax base and would lower property taxes by a significant percentage as part of the redistribution package. He said it was too early to survey the public. He said it would take time to develop good questions for a survey that got useful answers. Ms. Bettman said the success of any measure would be tied to what the revenue source was dedicated to. She said that revenue sources needed to be aligned with service priorities. Mr. Rayor said he would vote against moving ahead at the current time. He said he did not believe in operating levies. He expressed concern over increasing taxes and opined that the City had not done enough to address the funding problems with PERS and retiree medical benefits. In response to a question from Mr. Pap8 regarding which presented option would be the easiest for staff to administer, City Manager Carlson said it was the income surtax, (either on the personal or corporate structure). He said the gross receipts tax would be next simplest. He said a sales tax would be the most difficult because none of the local businesses had the mechanisms for collecting it. Mr. Pap8 stressed the need to get the general public educated on the issue. Ms. Taylor expressed a desire to go to the ballot with a proposal to cut property taxes if new taxes pass. She suggested a combination of gross receipts and income tax surcharge. Mr. Farr said the current council was not the right council to put forward a decision. He suggested letting the community put the ideas forward before taking action. He raised concern over trying to force something on the voters. Mr. Meisner suggested that the Budget Committee re-prioritize services each year before each new budget process. He said this would provide a fresh look at what current priorities were when each budget cycle began. Mr. Meisner commented that Oregon had one of the most regressive income tax rate systems for Iow income taxpayers. He stressed the need, if an income tax surcharge were passed, for a significant exemption for Iow-income taxpayers. He expressed a desire to see the County and especially the State to look at the entire revenue and expenditure structure of the State. Ms. Nathanson noted that there was an annual community survey. Judging from those, she said she had seen no public demand for new revenue sources to expand City services. She stressed the importance of arranging for a community dialogue. She was against taking any action at the current time. Mayor Torrey said that it was not the time to start the process for finding new sources of revenue. He said he would vote in opposition if there was a tie vote. MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 24, 2002 Page 8 Work Session Mr. Kelly said it was a legitimate thing to ask the public what services it was willing to pay for at the ballot box. Mr. Kelly, seconded by Mr. PapS, moved to direct staff to develop and bring back for city council consideration options for using proceeds from a new non-property tax revenue source to establish a permanent funding source for services currently supported by the Library Levy and Youth Levy, to address the General Fund shortfall, to address other unfunded strategic needs as identified in the multi-year financial plan, to optionally restore cuts made since Ballot Measure 47, and to optionally include a reduction in property tax. Ms. Bettman said she would support the motion. Ms. Nathanson said she would oppose the motion. Mr. Pap8 said he would oppose the motion. The motion failed, 5:3; Ms. Taylor, Mr. Kelly, and Ms. Bettman voting yes. The meeting adjourned at 7:52 p.m. Respectfully submitted, James R. Carlson City Manager pro tern (Recorded by Joe Sams) MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 24, 2002 Page 9 Work Session