Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 3A: Approval of City Council Minutes ECC UGENE ITY OUNCIL AIS GENDA TEM UMMARY Approval of City Council Minutes Meeting Date: February 12, 2007 Agenda Item Number: 3A Department: City Manager’s Office Staff Contact: Lynda Rose www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-5017 ISSUE STATEMENT This is a routine item to approve City Council meeting minutes. SUGGESTED MOTION Move to approve the minutes of the December 11, 2006, City Council Meeting, December 13, 2006, Work Session, January 4, 2007, State of the City, January 8, 2007, Work Session, and January 8, 2007, City Council Meeting. ATTACHMENTS A. December 11, 2006, City Council Meeting B. December 13, 2006, Work Session C. January 4, 2007, State of the City D. January 8, 2007, Work Session E. January 8, 2007, City Council Meeting FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Lynda Rose Telephone: 682-5017 Staff E-Mail: lynda.l.rose@ci.eugene.or.us L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070212\S0702123A.doc ATTACHMENT A M I N U T E S Eugene City Council Regular Meeting Council Chamber—Eugene City Hall December 11, 2006 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Jennifer Solomon, Andrea Ortiz, David Kelly, Betty Taylor, Gary Papé, Bonny Bettman, Chris Pryor, George Poling Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the regular meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. She conveyed holiday greetings on behalf of the council to everyone present. 1. CEREMONIAL MATTERS - Presentation by Oregon Culture Delegation Mayor Piercy said representatives Henry Luvert and Peter Leung of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) led a delegation to China. She averred that China was important to the City of Eugene at present because of the upcoming Olympic track and field trials. She stated that Mr. Luvert brought greetings from Oregon to the cities they visited and brought back a gift from “our friends in China” to the City. Mr. Luvert and Mr. Leung presented a slide presentation of their visit to China. Mr. Luvert also presented a gift from Shangqui, a statue of a chicken that represented long life in the Chinese culture. 2. PUBLIC FORUM Mayor Piercy reviewed the rules of the public forum. Henry Luvert , no address given, presented an official letter inviting the Mayor and City Council to come to China. He related that the delegation found a desire among people in the Hunan Province to have a relationship with Oregon, specifically with Eugene and Corvallis. He said the Chinese people he met wanted to better understand the culture of the area, noting that Eugene was a place with which they were familiar. He added that, coincidentally the daughter of the vice president of a university they visited in China was currently a student at the University of Oregon. He stated that the government there was only 50 years old and it was evolving. The people wanted to do educational exchanges, exchanges with government, and with departments of the City. He was struck by the hunger the Chinese people demonstrated for anything the delegation and the area could share. He said the delegation found the Chinese culture fascinating. He related that people there treated the delegation graciously and with great honor and respect and, in some places, the members of the delegation were the first non-Chinese people many of the locals had ever seen. MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 11, 2006 Page 1 Regular Meeting Dr. Marlan Carlson , Chair of the Music Department of Oregon State University, thanked the council for taking the time to hear from the members of the delegation to China. He said that the Oregon Cultural Delegation’s relationship with China dated to the year 2000. He stated that in that time there had been at least a dozen exchanges on a cultural and educational level. He underscored that the relationship developed without any governmental assistance, having been entirely funded by donors with an interest in promoting the area’s relationship with China in general and the Hunan Province in particular. He said it was the hope on of the cultural education exchange program that these visits would form the basis for a much more intensive business and governmental relationship. He averred that business was good for culture and culture was good for business. He felt there were many opportunities for the business component of this relation- ship. He distributed handouts that summarized where they had been, where the process was now, and where they hoped it would go. He also passed out copies of a Memorandum of Understanding between represen- tatives of Hunan Province and the Oregon Cultural Delegation. He pointed to item (6), which stated that they would collaborate in organizing a visit to Oregon of approximately 15 top governmental heads from the province in order to discuss specific job creation opportunities in both Hunan and Oregon. He stated that the representatives of Hunan understood that “jobs, jobs, jobs” were the top three priorities of this country. He believed that something would come from this relationship to create economic opportunities for businesses in the Willamette Valley and for the work force in general. Peter Leung , no address given, chose to speak on diversity from his position as an NAACP official. He related that he came to the United States in 1972 and he felt that much had changed since then. The country moved from being “Eurocentric to world-centric.” He likened China to a rising giant and underscored the importance of working to understand this large nation and to cultivate a working relationship with it. He said there was an opportunity to join in three events this year, but the City Council needed to take the initiative. He related that he spoke with the Mayor about this and she indicated that Eugene had “a lot of sister cities” in mostly Asian countries. He did not think that should mean that all of the resources were allocated. He encouraged the council to show its leadership and that the City of Eugene cared about its evolving relationship with China. Mayor Piercy thanked Mr. Luvert, Mr. Leung, and Dr. Carlson for coming and for the presentation of the gift from Shangqui, Hunan. John Brown , 101 East Broadway, thanked councilors Solomon and Poling for their willingness to serve another four-year term. He also thanked Councilor Kelly for his service. He said Councilor Kelly always did his homework and was diligent and respectful. He noted that he disagreed with Councilor Kelly on some things, but nonetheless he would be “sorely missed.” He also thanked Councilor Papé for doing a “great job.” He said Councilor Papé made the example of getting out “and actually doing it” in his efforts to clean up trash along the Willamette River and participate in other civic endeavors. He felt the two incoming councilors were “admirable replacements” for the two councilors who were departing. Zachary Vishanoff , Patterson Street, wondered why the old federal building was not slated for any sort of adaptive reuse. He thought it could be a police station or a city hall. He wanted a detailed explanation of why it could not be reused for either one of those purposes. He thought if it could not be used it should be “wiped out” and a park should be constructed. Mr. Vishanoff said he had heard that the Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) would engage in master planning with the City regarding its riverfront property and that this was required by law. He wondered if the Governor or “somebody in Salem” had done anything to make the council conduct this master planning process. He said it was “interesting if the Governor was prompting it.” MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 11, 2006 Page 2 Regular Meeting Additionally, Mr. Vishanoff asked that planning for the Walnut Node be slowed down as it was dependent on the construction of a basketball arena. He suggested that putting it on the back burner would be a good idea because otherwise it would be a “doughnut node” and therefore would lack credibility. th Rene Kane , 254 West 14 Avenue, co-chair of the Jefferson-Westside Neighbors (JWN), related that the neighborhood group voted unanimously to support efforts by Chambers Area residents to ensure that future infill did not continue to erode and destabilize the character and stability of their part of the neighborhood. She briefly recapped the process by which the Chambers Area Families for Healthy Neighborhoods (CAFHN) collaborated with the City to generate the groundwork leading to the council-approved Chambers Special Area Zone. She stressed that the zone’s flexible and innovative standards were and are quietly supported. She stated that other than a recent Ballot Measure 37 claim, no complaints had been brought to the JWN Board. Ms. Kane felt the standards were proving effective against destructive infill while allowing great latitude in development and a manageable increase in density. She thought the property subject to the Measure 37 claim was an exceptional case that would require site-specific standards. Ms. Kane noted that the council already directed the Planning Commission to look at the broader concept of an alternative path for the development approval process as a way to address exceptional cases. She averred that this concept could eventually be implemented for a broad range of residential and/or commercial development and would also likely be an element of the opportunity siting program that was underway. She suggested that an alternate path would naturally apply to the Chambers Special Area Zone and others, and that new residential zones might arise from the infill compatibility standards program. She said the JWN encouraged continued consideration of an alternate path. The neighborhood group felt there was no need to initiate another public process to change the standards and to have the Planning Commission reexamine them. She predicted that “throwing the Chambers Special Area standards open again” would diminish community faith in the planning process. She conveyed the JWN Executive Board’s unanimous opposition to revision of the Chambers Special Area Zone at this time. Matt Purvis , 1391 West Broadway, member of the CAFHN steering committee, thanked councilors for the consideration shown for the work of the group during 2004 and 2005, which culminated in the approval of the Chambers Special Area Zone. He stressed that the process by which the zone standards had been formulated was extensive and public, including five forums and six meetings between staff, residents, and other interested parties. He recalled that the Planning Commission conducted one work session and held two public hearings prior to its 4:1 vote to recommend the standards as submitted. The City Council voted 5:1 to adopt the standards unchanged. He related that the process was supported by diverse groups such as the Home Builders Association and the Friends of Eugene. He did not believe this was the time to send the standards back to the Planning Commission for further consideration. th Carol DeFazio , 1437 West 10 Avenue, member of CAFHN, recounted the process CAFHN underwent. She reiterated that hundreds of hours had been spent in public meetings and discussion on infill standards and that she was proud of the results. She believed that now one councilor recently “seized on a mere pretense to try to undo the results.” She believed there was no problem with the standards that had been already approved and there was no call from the public to change them. She said the only motivation to send the standards back to the Planning Commission would be to try to provide opponents with the opportunity to undo what “they don’t like.” She felt a reversal would be a breach of faith. She asked the council to oppose Councilor Kelly’s motion because she believed it would “wound the public faith.” Rob Handy , 455-½ River Road, thanked the council for scheduling a work session on annexation policy. He suggested that residents of the River Road/Santa Clara area were “deeply troubled by what some staff are doing” in bringing street annexations to the Lane County Local Government Boundary Commission. He MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 11, 2006 Page 3 Regular Meeting felt whether the street annexations were reasonable and logical or not, they were “exacerbating” tensions in the River Road/Santa Clara area. He asserted that many people “would rather fight and die” than have property annexed to the City. He opined that it was not a healthy environment in which to govern. He expressed appreciation for Councilor Papé’s involvement in the area. He felt Councilor Papé had been “disrespected” by many people because of his efforts. He hoped Councilor-elect Mike Clark would carry on the interest in trying to “get something done.” He also expressed appreciation for Councilor Ortiz’s “deep involvement” in the issues of the area. He commented that the two Eugene councilors had an extra job in representing County constituents. Mr. Handy alleged that Commissioner Bobby Green abandoned his constituents in River Road. He hoped the City could look at an annexation strategy rather than an annexation plan. He wanted to halt street annexations for the present and to work on a “package” that could be accepted and voted upon by all residents. He said in looking at the land use code, he felt stormwater conveyance, the trees, density, and the skinny streets of River Road should be taken into consideration. He asked that those issues be prioritized for a special River Road planning district. Additionally, Mr. Handy thanked Councilor Kelly for his leadership and vision in the River Road/Santa Clara issues. Jozef Siekiel-Zdzienicki , 1025 Taylor Street, stated that 16 months of meetings had been instigated by Planning Division staff with a grant from the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) for $78,000 for consultant work. He said there were countless neighborhood meetings and meetings with consultants, the result of which was the Chambers Special Area Zone. He said a neighborhood standard for infill and density had been set and the Planning staff initiated work on similar standards for the entire city. He asked the council not to undo a ruling that only existed for a year. Mayor Piercy closed the Public Forum and invited comments and questions from councilors. Councilor Ortiz thanked everyone for coming. She asked the City Manager to ask neighborhood leaders to join the work session on the River Road area on January 22, 2007. Councilor Papé thanked everyone for attending the last official meeting in which he and Councilor Kelly would participate. He commented that it would be tough to leave, but it would be good to get “new blood” in the organization. He thanked Mr. Handy and Mr. Brown for their comments. In closing, he encouraged Councilor-elect Clark to pay attention to the River Road residents as some felt marginalized for years. He hoped that residents felt less marginalized after the work that had transpired in the eight years since he was elected. Councilor Kelly thanked those who spoke and especially Mr. Brown and Mr. Handy for the kind words. He noted that there had been a comment about the old federal building “just sitting there.” He related that the City continued to be told by the federal government and the General Services Administration (GSA) that, with the exception of the courtrooms, they still intended to fully use all of the space. He hoped that the City would look at utilizing the building should it ever become available. Regarding master planning for the EWEB riverfront property, Councilor Kelly explained that the subject emerged from the Downtown Plan. He said that before all or part of the EWEB site downtown gets reused, there should be a master plan completed for the whole site, though the Downtown Plan was silent over who should complete such a plan. He believed that this would be part of the discussion going forward as to who could best do that. MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 11, 2006 Page 4 Regular Meeting Councilor Kelly thought that while it was important to hear from the River Road Community Organization and the Santa Clara Community Organization at the work session, it was tricky, as having one set of people at the table raised concerns about who had not been invited to be at the table. He hoped that the chairs of the two community organizations would be at the work session in January. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of City Council Minutes - October 23, 2006, City Council Meeting - October 25, 2006, Work Session - November 14, 2006, Boards, Commissions, and Committee Interviews B. Approval of Tentative Working Agenda C. Appointment to Police Commission D. Ratification of Intergovernmental Relations Committee Actions of October 17, 2006, and October 26, 2006 E. Adoption of Resolution 4896 Granting a Measure 37 Claim and Waiving or Modifying Some Provisions of Chapter 9 or the Eugene Code, 1971, for Property Located at 1333 th West 19 Avenue, Eugene, Oregon (Assessor’s Map 17-04-36-13 TL 12100 – Judith M. Bush) Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Ortiz, moved to approve the items on the Con- sent Calendar. Councilor Kelly said he submitted a correction to the minutes electronically and he asked to pull Item E. Councilor Bettman said she previously submitted corrections to the minutes. Mayor Piercy deemed the corrections, without objection, approved. Roll call vote, the motion to approve the Consent Calendar with the exception of Item E passed, 8:0. Regarding Item E, Councilor Kelly indicated he was amenable to voting for the motion on the table but he wished to place another motion on the table after the current motion had been voted upon. Roll call vote; Item E, adoption of Resolution 4896 granting a Measure 37 claim, passed unanimously, 8:0. Councilor Kelly disputed the assertion that he would “go on a mere pretense” to undo everything that had been formulated in the Chambers Area Special Zone. Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Ortiz, moved to direct the Planning Commission to review the standards in the S-C/R-2 sub-area of the Chambers Special Area Zone and to re- turn to the City Council with recommendations for possible changes or a conclusion that no changes were appropriate. The review will consider that it was necessary to waive the standards using Measure 37 in order to add a single infill dwelling that the neighborhood association felt would improve the neighborhood, and will consider potential changes that would allow infill that meets the Chambers Special Area Zone size and mass standards. Councilor Kelly wished to clarify that he believed the City had an innovative standard, but that after a year he felt it was a good time to have the Planning Commission take a look at the standards in light of the overall MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 11, 2006 Page 5 Regular Meeting infill standards and the fact that although the standards were “fresh,” there was already a Measure 37 claim. He averred that the standards should be reviewed in order to determine if there was a way, with minor changes, to fine-tune the standards so that they would meet with the neighborhood’s approval. He thought it would dovetail well with the work that was slated to happen on infill standards and that it might allow some beneficial infill. He opined that it did a disservice to the growth management policies and the infill standards the City was working to develop to not review the standards in the Chambers Area Special Zone. Councilor Taylor commended the neighbors for their work. She thought the resolution of the claim had transpired easily and quickly. She saw no need to reopen the standards to review. Councilor Bettman recalled that there had been some expectation that the new infill standards could cause a Ballot Measure 37 claim when they were enacted. She commented that the neighborhood remained active and involved and worked to resolve the claim to the benefit of the claimant, the City, and the neighborhood. She said it did not make sense to add considerable work to the Planning Commission’s workload. She did not support sending the standards back. Councilor Papé noted his respect for Councilor Kelly’s planning ability and his desire to plan the community so that it provided a “great physical environment.” He recalled that the Chambers Area Special Zone had a sunset date in July 2008. Additionally, he felt the Planning Commission was tasked way beyond its capacity for getting the work plan completed. He said the process should go forward as established. Roll call vote; the motion failed, 7:1; Councilor Kelly voting in favor. 4. PUBLIC HEARING and POSSIBLE ACTION: An Ordinance Concerning the Police Auditor and Civilian Review Board; Amending Section 2.013 of the Eugene Code, 1971; Adding Sections 2.240, 2.242, 2.244, 2.246, 2.454, and 2.456 to that Code; and Providing an Effective Date for Implementation City Manager Dennis Taylor introduced the newly hired Police Auditor Cristina Beamud and asked her to introduce the ordinance set for public hearing. Ms. Beamud stated that the public hearing sought testimony on the proposed ordinance that would govern the work she did in the Police Auditor’s Office. She said the proposal had appeared on the City’s Web site over the previous ten days, in compliance with requirements set forth in the City Charter, and the original work had been framed through work with many stakeholders and primarily the Police Commission. Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing Zachary Vishanoff , a resident living on Patterson Street, wanted more specific information in regard to the investigations. He felt that some people would receive different treatment from other people. He hoped for a clear date for when action could be analyzed. He was curious as to how many patrol cars had video capacity. th Michael Carrigan , 1439 West 4 Avenue, spoke on behalf of the Community Alliance of Lane County (CALC). He said CALC had worked to pass the ordinance and he urged the council to pass it prior to the end of the year so that Ms. Beaumud could begin her work. He urged the council to preserve the integrity of the Police Auditor by guaranteeing that the office functioned independently from the City Manager and the MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 11, 2006 Page 6 Regular Meeting Chief of Police. He thanked the Mayor, City Council, Police Commission, and all others who had worked hard to create the Police Review Board and the position of Police Auditor and to pass the ballot measure. Charles M. Zennaché , 4845 Fox Hollow Road, averred that the ordinance was part of the community healing process and he urged the council to adopt it. He felt it was very important to recognize that the Police Auditor’s role was limited to reviewing adjudications and making sure the cases were adjudicated, handled, and investigated appropriately and that she should not be involved in discipline. He stressed that discipline should remain the purview of the Police Chief. He commented that community policing should be the end result, a situation in which the community knew the officers as individuals and the officers knew the community members. Regarding some of the issues in the ordinance, he believed that it should be clear that the Auditor’s Office was independent of the City Manager. He believed the ordinance, as proposed, did so and that the City Manager should give that authority exclusively. He urged the City Manager and the council to work in cooperation with the Police Auditor and to make it clear that the Police Auditor controlled her staff. He supported inclusion of language that made it clear that the Police Auditor answered to the City Council and not the Citizens Review Board. He recommended the council adopt the definition of what constitutes a criminal investigation suggested by Councilor Kelly. He also thought the Police Auditor should be free to ask for external assistance when necessary. Charles Biggs , 540 Antelope Way, looked forward to the day when the Police Auditor’s Office was open and the community had the opportunity to meet Ms. Beamud. He felt having the Police Auditor would help the community feel safer and better about itself. He hoped the new auditor would meet some of the “former victims.” He also hoped it would dispel the notion that the police overlooked things that should have been reported. He felt the Citizen Review Board should not be biased toward the Police Department or in opposition to it. He wished Ms. Beamud luck. Ruth Deumler , 1745 Fircrest Drive, urged the City Council to vote to support the Citizens Review Board. She felt that the Eugene Police Department (EPD), Chief of Police, City Council, Police Auditor, Civilian Review Board, and the public formed a great working team. She thought the relationship between the community and the police force would be better for it. She opined that the citizens of Eugene were surprised that this idea had not been voted upon before by the City Council. Rob Handy , 455 ½ River Road, urged the council to preserve the integrity of the Police Auditor’s function by keeping it independent from the City Manager and the police chief. He wished the council a happy holiday. Lisa Warnes , 5020 Nectar Way, commented that her concerns had been largely addressed. She echoed support for seeing the council vote on the item at the present meeting, especially given that two councilors were leaving. She suggested a vote would lend continuity to the issue. She also supported keeping the Police Auditor’s job independent of the City Manager and the Chief. th Will Shortt , 182 West 19 Avenue, asked to see the motion pass at the present meeting. He said it was not about “us and them,” rather it was about the community and about the people “on the front lines” of the community. He wanted all of the community to have confidence in the Police Department. He believed that the checks and balances the Auditor’s Office would provide would be critical to that confidence and to the ability of the police to work hand in hand with the community. Majeska Seese-Green , PO Box 11692, Eugene, conveyed support for the ordinance on behalf of the Whiteaker Community Council. She added that the Whiteaker Community Council also supported the amendments that Councilor Kelly intended to put on the table. She believed it would strengthen the MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 11, 2006 Page 7 Regular Meeting ordinance. She felt the ordinance was the product of a lot of work and had been generated through a transparent process. She thought many other parts of the City could benefit by this kind of community process. She noted that in addition to the involvement of the Whiteaker neighbors, Police Commission, and EPD, other members of the public including the Eugene Police Employees Association (EPEA) had participated in crafting the ordinance. She urged the council to take action at the present meeting. Susanna Fontana , 488 Blair Boulevard, echoed the comments of Ms. Seese-Green. She thanked the council for doing this work. Janet Marshall-O’Bryant , 85 North Madison, said she also wished to voice support for the ordinance. She expressed appreciation to the City Council for its efforts to bring the Police Auditor on board. She supported moving on the action at the present meeting. Additionally, Ms. Marshall-O’Bryant thanked councilors Kelly and Papé for their responsiveness and interest in establishing a quiet zone for trains through the Whiteaker neighborhood. David Hinkley , 1350 Lawrence, #1, averred that the Police Auditor had to be independent and it had to be perceived as independent. He felt that the credibility of the office would be called into question if it was not perceived as being independent. He said the office needed to be transparent, as well, and the public should know all of the results of any investigations. He believed that the public needed to know of any sanctions that resulted from an investigation because there was a need to know whether the penalty fit the “piece.” He asserted that Oregon Public Records Law allowed the council to determine whether this record should remain confidential or not. Mayor Piercy closed the public hearing and called for council comments. Seeing that no councilor wished to speak at that time, she asked if the council wished to take action on this item. Councilor Papé was not ready to take action at the present meeting. He wanted time to digest the informa- tion and to review Councilor Kelly’s intended amendments. Mayor Piercy indicated the item would be brought forward for action at the December 13 work session. Councilor Kelly stated that his amendments were intended to fine-tune the ordinance. He encouraged his colleagues to ask questions if they had them. Councilor Ortiz said she was willing to refrain from acting on this ordinance until the work session but she intended to support it. Councilor Bettman remarked that she wished to vote on the ordinance at the present meeting, but was glad that the council would vote at the work session. She provided her interpretation of Councilor Kelly’s amendments for the edification of those present. She said one amendment intended to provide a legal definition of when the conclusion of a criminal investigation was, and another one included wording to clarify that the Civilian Review Board was answerable to the City Council. She noted, regarding the latter, that it was implicit in the ordinance but not explicit. Councilor Papé, seconded by Councilor Solomon, requested that the record remain open un- til 5 p.m. December 12. MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 11, 2006 Page 8 Regular Meeting City Attorney Glenn Klein explained that a motion was not necessary because this was not a land use proceeding and there was no official record. He clarified that the motion would have to be withdrawn or voted upon, but a vote on the motion would not affect the ability of members of the public to continue to contact the councilors to provide input on the issue. Councilor Papé asked for comments from the City Attorney with regard to pulling the language and other applicable City policies and collective bargaining agreements. He wanted to know specifically how the effect of the amendment to 2.456(3)(a) which would delete the language “the investigation or criminal proceedings have concluded.” Councilor Papé withdrew the motion. Councilor Taylor indicated her support for the amendments to the ordinance and the ordinance. She said she preferred on principle not to take action on the same night as a public hearing. Mr. Klein asked that the requested memorandum be allowed to be disseminated to the public. Mayor Piercy ascertained from the council that there were no objections to making the City Attorney’s opinion on the amendments public. Councilor Poling agreed with Councilor Kelly in spirit. He said he could support all of the amendments except the two that deal with the verbiage pertaining to collective bargaining agreements. He related that in his 15 years as a police union member and 15 years on the management side of the bargaining table, he had come to realize and understand the importance of the collective bargaining agreements. He pointed out that police officers were not allowed to go on strike for wages or benefits, unlike other unions with the exception of fire employees. He said the police contract went into binding arbitration instead. He believed that there were issues and questions that needed to be answered regarding the ramifications of what would happen to the City if the amendments were passed as they were currently worded. He stated that as the amendments stood, he could not support them. Councilor Kelly said his amendment would strike the terms “applicable City policies” and “collective bargaining agreements.” He said the reason for striking the former was because it was too broad and the reason for striking the latter was because he understood that regardless of whether the language was in the ordinance, the collective bargaining agreement that was currently in force was legally binding for both the City and the Police Auditor. He stated that the reason he wished to strike the language regarding the collective bargaining agreement had to do with thinking ahead to a future negotiation of a future collective bargaining agreement. He believed that leaving the words in would allow the City Manager, police management, and the EPEA to reach an agreement that would be binding on the Police Auditor and the council, though neither entity would be a party to the negotiations. Councilor Kelly related that he had spoken with the City Attorney and the City Attorney proposed that there could be some language that indicated the current bargaining agreement clearly applied but in a future collective bargaining agreement the confidentiality provisions would not be broadened without involving the Police Auditor or the council in some way. He anticipated that if the amendment passed at the work session, the City Attorney would work to clean up the language, given that there was not enough time at present. Councilor Bettman averred that the phrase “City policies” was broad, undefined, and “could mean anything and could easily go beyond the law.” Regarding language that pertained to collective bargaining, she felt the amendment was strictly in relation to confidentiality of records. She stated that there were federal, state, and MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 11, 2006 Page 9 Regular Meeting local laws that governed this confidentiality and the City was required to function within them. She said in situations having to do with a union negotiating a contract “that goes above and beyond that law,” the ordinance should not be governed by the collective bargaining contract. She asserted that the ordinance as written would give the Police Chief, City Manager, and EPEA “the ability to dictate policy for the City of Eugene” as it pertained to the Police Auditor. Councilor Papé said it seemed that the collective bargaining agreement could not violate the ordinance or the law, but the law could not be changed to violate the agreement. He asked if it depended on what happened first. Mr. Klein responded that his colleague Attorney Sharon Rudnick seemed to think the language could be crafted to accomplish the objective Councilor Kelly sought. He added that in addition to being bound by federal, state, and local law, the City was also bound by the existing collective bargaining agreement and could not take carte blanche with what a future collective bargaining agreement could say. He stressed that the issue of confidentiality was a mandatory subject of bargaining. He said the council could direct the City Manager to not agree to broaden the confidentiality provisions but the council could not refuse to bargain on that subject and in the end, should there not be agreement the arbitrator would dictate what the collective bargaining agreement would provide. Mayor Piercy called for a five minute break at 9:05 p.m. 5. PUBLIC HEARING and POSSIBLE ACTION: Resolution 4897 Adopting a Supplemental Budget; Making Appropriations for the City of Eugene for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 2006, and Ending June 30, 2007 City Manager Taylor stated that this was the annual reconciliation of the budget. He asked Budget Manager Kitty Murdoch to briefly describe the issues subject to the public hearing. Ms. Murdoch explained that the first supplemental budget of the year contained $19.1 million in adjust- ments, primarily reconciliations of estimates put into the budget when it had been adopted. She cited, as an example, the beginning capital estimate which would be “trued up.” She said the budget also recognized new revenue and budget grants that had been awarded but not received in previous years were rebudgeted and new grants were recognized. She highlighted the supplemental budget, as outlined in the Agenda Item Summary (AIS). Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing. Kathy Saranpa , 3015 Friendly Street, chair of the Crest Drive Citizens Association (CDCA), presented a motion passed at the most recent meeting of the CDCA that endorsed the request made by the Crest Drive Community Team to have City staff request an additional $58,000 to enlarge the scope of the engineering survey to include Middle Crest. As a private citizen and member of the Crest Drive Community Team, she thought it was significant that the inclusion of Middle Crest originated in the traffic study that the neighbors had put together. She felt it indicated that the citizens and city staff had worked well together. She anticipated bringing a context-sensitive solution to the council later in the year. She supported adoption of the Supplemental Budget. John Barofsky , 2010 Hubbard Lane, thanked Councilor Kelly and Councilor Papé for their hard work. He asked that the citizen members of the Budget Committee receive a copy of the Supplemental Budget prior to its presentation. He said it would enable a greater understanding of the whole budgetary process. He had not known the supplemental budget was scheduled for approval until earlier in the day. He asserted that a MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 11, 2006 Page 10 Regular Meeting change in the budget of ten percent or greater required notification of the citizen members of the committee as well as a meeting of the full Budget Committee. He wanted the citizen members of the committee to be involved in the budget more fully in order to better prepare them for the task of working on the budget. Mayor Piercy closed the public hearing. Councilor Bettman wished to ensure that citizen members of the Budget Committee would receive information on supplemental budgets. Ms. Murdoch responded that it was as simple as requesting it. She said she would send out the same packet of information that the council members received to the citizen members. Additionally, she clarified that any time there was a 10 percent change in the budget, a supplemental budget was brought into play, but the citizen members were not required to be part of the approval process. She said if 10 citizens wish to have a “full Budget Committee look” at the supplemental budget, there could be a petition to do so. She noted that this had not happened during her tenure with the Finance Division. In response to a question from Councilor Bettman, Ms. Murdoch affirmed that the $900,000 capital transfer listed on page 119 of the Agenda Item Summary was not in addition to the capital transfer, but rather was the amount of the complete capital transfer. Councilor Bettman asked if the placeholder of $1 million for Phase 3 of the City Hall Master Plan would come to the council for approval of the plan for initiation of Phase 3 before the expenditure of the money was triggered. Ms. Murdoch replied that the supplemental budget would appropriate the funds so the funds could be spent. Facilities Division Manager Glen Svendsen added that the plan was similar to the other phases, as staff intended to come before the council to get direction on the scope and the dollar amount before they proceeded with the project. Councilor Bettman said, given that there was still council discretion regarding the spending for Phase 3 of the City Hall, she would support the supplemental budget. She noted that most of it was just business that needed to be “taken care of.” She pointed out that she had opposed approving the Connect Oregon funds, though the council had voted to support the funds. She asserted that it would bond on future lottery revenue and she likened this to putting children in the position of having to pay off lottery bonds. She alleged that the City was building “basically a warehouse” at the airport with the funds. She called it a “travesty.” Councilor Papé asked if the money for the Crest Drive context-sensitive planning process was coming from the General Fund. He wondered if it would qualify for a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG). City Manager Taylor replied that the funding would come from the council contingency fund. He did not think such a project would qualify for CDBG funds. Councilor Papé asked for clarification on the budget change for the Echo Hollow Pool. He noted that it had been referred to as an oversight. Ms. Murdoch responded that it was because of an accounting mechanism that was budgeted in two funds. She explained that the Facilities Fund had done the work and then billed the General Fund for Library, Recreation, and Cultural Services (LRCS). She said it had been put into the Facilities Fund but it had not been appropriately placed into the LRCS budget to pay the bill. In response to a question from Councilor Papé, Ms. Murdoch affirmed that the $1 million for the jet bridges would come out of Airport revenues. City Engineer for the Public Works Department, Mark Schoening, added that the jet bridges were replacements. MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 11, 2006 Page 11 Regular Meeting Councilor Taylor congratulated Mr. Barofsky for being “so involved and so well-informed.” She also commended the Crest Drive citizens who had cooperated with staff and each other in planning. She hoped it would turn out well. She asked Mr. Schoening to explain why Middle Crest had been added to the study. Mr. Schoening responded that the section was added because it was integral to the overall transportation system in that neighborhood and carried a significant amount of traffic and because it was a parallel route to Story Boulevard. He said of the initial allocation requested from the General Fund, $80,000 would be for the process and the public outreach and $160,000 would be for surveying and design. He stated that the latter could be rolled forward into a Local Improvement District (LID) at the conclusion of a successful process, allowing the City to recover the cost. He explained that the $58,000 for Middle Crest could also potentially be rolled into a future LID. Councilor Kelly noted that on page 127 a footnote said $1,611,000 would be rebudgeted for “externally funded transportation project.” He asked who was paying who and for what. Mr. Schoening replied that the agreement was with the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) and it had been fully executed; ODOT had paid the City $1.6 million. Councilor Kelly thanked Mr. Barofsky for bringing the citizen budget committee members’ interest in the supplemental budget to the attention of the council and staff. He also thanked Ms. Murdoch for being willing to disseminate the supplemental budget information to the citizen members. He encouraged staff to circulate the information to the citizen members a week before it came to the council as councilors were “used to reacting” to something read on Saturday on the following Monday; committee members might need more time to digest the information. In response to a question from Councilor Papé, Mr. Schoening reiterated that the General Fund would be reimbursed for any funds that could be included in the LID for Crest Drive. Councilor Papé encouraged staff to keep the council abreast of the situation on Crest Drive. He asked if CDBG funds could be used for the planning process. Mr. Schoening replied that Crest Drive was not in a portion of the City that met criteria for CDBG eligibility. In response to a question from Councilor Kelly, Mr. Svendsen affirmed that the remaining money for Phase 3 of the City Hall planning would be returned to the Facilities reserve fund. Councilor Kelly encouraged his colleagues to look carefully at the costs of Phase 3. Mayor Piercy ascertained that there was no objection to taking action at the present meeting. Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Ortiz, moved to adopt Resolution 4897 adopt- ing a Supplemental Budget; making appropriations for the City of Eugene for the Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 2006, and ending June 30, 2007. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Mayor Piercy adjourned the meeting of the Eugene City Council and convened the meeting of the Eugene Urban Renewal Agency at 9:39 p.m. 6. PUBLIC HEARING and ACTION: Resolution 1040 Adopting a Supplemental Budget; Making Appropriations for the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Eugene for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 2006, and Ending June 30, 2007 MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 11, 2006 Page 12 Regular Meeting City Manager Taylor asked Ms. Murdoch to speak to the item. Ms. Murdoch said this was a $4.8 million supplemental budget and as with the City of Eugene, the first supplemental budget engaged in a number of reconciling transactions for the beginning working capital and capital carry forward estimates. She said the key items to be reappropriated in the budget included payments to the City of Eugene for the Cultural Policy Review and the East Broadway garage. Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing. Zachary Vishanoff , somewhere on Patterson Street, reiterated his unhappiness regarding the demolition of the former cannery. He thought it would be “delusional” to name the area surrounding the new federal courthouse “Cannery Square” given that the cannery was gone. He felt the public planning process was flawed and would alienate the public. He wanted public discourse to occur regarding the riverfront area adjacent to the courthouse. He preferred that area to be returned to its natural state. Mayor Piercy ascertained that there were no objections to taking action at the present meeting. Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Ortiz, moved to adopt Resolution 1040 adopt- ing a Supplemental Budget; making appropriations for the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Eugene for the Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 2006, and ending June 30, 2007. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. The meeting adjourned at 9:44 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dennis M. Taylor City Manager (Recorded by Ruth Atcherson) MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 11, 2006 Page 13 Regular Meeting ATTACHMENT B M I N U T E S Eugene City Council Work Session McNutt Room—Eugene City Hall December 13, 2006 Noon COUNCILORS PRESENT: Jennifer Solomon, Andrea Ortiz, David Kelly, Betty Taylor, Gary Papé, Bonny Bettman, Chris Pryor, George Poling. Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. A. CELEBRATION OF SERVICE: Recognition of Outgoing City Councilors David Kelly and Gary Papé Mayor Piercy said this was a chance to express the council’s appreciation for councilors David Kelly and Gary Papé’s service to the City. She thanked Mr. Kelly for the help he provided to her on the Metropolitan Policy Committee (MPC) and for his “thoughtful conversations and thoughtful disagreements.” She said she particularly enjoyed traveling to sister cities in Japan and South Korea with Mr. Papé. She thanked both councilors for their service. Mr. Poling commended Mr. Kelly for always doing his homework. He thanked Mr. Papé for his help during Mr. Poling’s early service as councilor. Ms. Ortiz thanked both councilors for making her feel welcome. She said they were both good examples to follow as they worked hard. Ms. Solomon echoed the sentiments of Mr. Poling and Ms. Ortiz. She appreciated Mr. Papé’s legal expertise. To Mr. Kelly, she expressed appreciation that even when they had disagreed, he had been the model of civility. Mr. Pryor commented that it would be easy to view the City Council as a dysfunctional group, but it was part of the job to have conflicts and disagreements. He underscored that the councilors worked to keep the conflicts to the issues and not to the people. He said this had made the council strong. He shared his enormous respect for anyone who could do this job “like a leader.” Ms. Bettman thanked both councilors for their service. Ms. Taylor said she liked and respected both councilors. City Manager Taylor thanked the councilors for their service and for helping him grow personally and professionally. MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 13, 2006 Page 1 Work Session Mr. Kelly commended Mr. Papé for bringing an “independent voice” to the table. He thanked the Mayor and his colleagues, City staff, and the people of the city of Eugene who “care enough to get involved.” He also thanked the voters, adding that it had been a pleasure and a privilege to serve. Mr. Papé thanked the citizens of Eugene “who let us know how they feel.” He extended his gratitude to his colleagues and the Mayor. He added that he would miss Mr. Kelly. Mayor Piercy invited everyone to enjoy a piece of cake in their honor. B. ACTION: An Ordinance Concerning the Police Auditor and Civilian Review Board; Amending Section 2.013 of the Eugene Code, 1971; Adding Sections 2.240, 2.242, 2.244, 2.246, 2.450, 2.452, 2.454, and 2.456 to that Code; and Providing an Effective Date for Implementation (CB #4936) Police Auditor Cris Beamud highlighted the public hearing that had been held on December 11. She noted that Mr. Poling had submitted an amendment he wished to place on the table in addition to Mr. Kelly’s amendments. City Manager Taylor noted that City Attorney Sharon Rudnick was available to respond to questions. He hoped the council could take action on the ordinance during this meeting so that Ms. Beamud could begin her work. Ms. Solomon, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved that the City Council adopt Council Bill 4936, an ordinance concerning the Police Auditor and Civilian Review Board. Mr. Kelly, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to amend Council Bill #4936 to make the follow- ing changes: 1) Add a new definition to 2.452: Conclusion of any criminal investigation or conclusion of any such criminal investigation. A criminal investigation is deemed concluded when the appropriate criminal prosecutor decides either to press charges or to not press charges. 2) Amend section 2.240(1) to delete the words “oversee and.” 3) Amend section 2.244(7) to delete the words “oversee and.” 4) Amend section 2.240 to include a new section: (4) The Civilian Review Board shall serve as an advisory body to the City Council. 5) Amend section 2.456(2) as follows: The police auditor may require, and is authorized to contract for, an external investigation when the police auditor determines that an eternal investigation is appropriate. Necessary to reduce real or perceived bias or that the investigation requires specialized skills internal investigators do not have. 6) Amend section 2.456(3)(a) as follows: The police auditor shall have complete an un- restricted access to all complaint and investigative records and materials, and any other information necessary for the performance of his/her specified duties. As pro- vided in section 2.456(2)(d), the police auditor shall not have access to a criminal in- vestigation file until the conclusion of any such criminal investigation the investiga- tion or criminal proceedings have concluded 7) Amend 2.246 to fix a numbering error: the second (9) should be numbered (10) and the section numbered (10) should be numbered (11). MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 13, 2006 Page 2 Work Session Mr. Papé asked what the significance was of the deletion of ‘criminal proceedings from section 2.456(3). Mr. Kelly responded that he felt that there was language elsewhere in the ordinance that addressed this and that a criminal proceeding could conceivably span a decade. Ms. Rudnick noted that this was consistent with how things worked at present. The motion to amend passed unanimously, 8:0. Mr. Kelly, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to amend Council Bill #4936 to make the fol- lowing changes: 1) Amend 2.454(4) so that it reads as follows: To the extent permitted by Oregon Public Records Law, the auditor’s office and any investigators or consultants it may employ shall maintain the confidentiality of records and information in accordance only with applicable federal, state, and local law and other applicable city policies and collec- tive bargaining agreements. 2) Amend 2.246(9) so that it reads as follows: To the extent permitted by the Oregon Public Records Law, members of the Civilian Review Board shall maintain the confi- dentiality of records and information in accordance only with applicable federal, state, and local law and other applicable city policies and collective bargaining agreements. Mr. Kelly did not believe striking ‘applicable city policies’ would be controversial. He believed ‘city policies’ was overly broad. He said the “heart of the matter” was the collective bargaining agreement. Ms. Rudnick explained that the legal implications of the amendment were that the council could not legally exempt the auditor or the Civilian Review Board (CRB) from the application of the collective bargaining agreement because it was illegal. She underscored that every section of the City was subject to the collective bargaining laws and those laws would make it an Unfair Labor Practice (ULP), meaning it would be illegal to refuse to bargain in good faith or to fail to comply with a written collective bargaining agreement. She believed that the amendment, as it stood, would draw a ULP. With regard to the policies, Ms. Rudnick believed the applicable city policies referenced in the ordinance were those related to confidentiality as it pertained to personnel records. She did not think the council could exempt the auditor or the CRB from those policies because the policies were adopted administratively by the City Manager. She understood that Mr. Kelly was trying to provide surety that as policies were developed and contracts were being negotiated, that they would account for and meet the needs of the auditor and the CRB to have access to information in order to do the job the ordinance sets out that they should do, which was to review cases and police investigation in as transparent and open forum as could be legally provided. She said if including the language there was at issue for other reasons, the council should delete it. Ms. Rudnick did not see a way for the council to direct the outcome of collective bargaining agreements in an ordinance. However, she provided a suggested motion that would direct the City Manager and his designee on a policy basis to, when adopting personnel policies related to confidentiality or release of records or when negotiating collective bargaining agreements, either take into account or to meet the needs of the auditor and the CRB to have access to appropriate personnel information. She noted that using the phrase ‘take into account’ would give a little more discretion and left a little more room in negotiations but ‘meet’ would also be appropriate. She felt this would provide a way for the council to give direction to its MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 13, 2006 Page 3 Work Session employees, the auditor and the City Manager, on how the council wanted them to affect its policies in those arenas. Ms. Rudnick related that she had discussed this with Ms. Beamud. She felt Ms. Beamud was very clear on what changes were needed in the collective bargaining agreement in order to accomplish the intent of the ordinance, and so was the Eugene Police Employees Association (EPEA). She noted that the EPEA was concerned about the confidentiality issue because it related to personnel matters. Nonetheless, she was confident that an agreement would be reached on an amendment to the contract that would accomplish the changes that were needed. She said the intent at this point was that the auditor would work with the EPEA to resolve the sticking points in the contract. She believed that all sides were on the same page. Additionally, Ms. Rudnick submitted copies of the policies that applied to confidentiality and the release of information and the bargaining agreement for the councilors’ perusal. She highlighted the confidentiality clauses. She explained that none of the policies limited what the auditor could choose to review, but given that the CRB was not a supervisor or manager, a piece of information bound by confidentiality clauses could not be disclosed to them. Mr. Kelly indicated that if he could not legally amend the section in the way his motion intended, then he would move to delete the sections. Ms. Beamud agreed that deletion of the clauses was a good idea. She stressed that she understood she would have to follow the law and also that the collective bargaining agreement had the force of law. Mr. Poling thanked Ms. Rudnick for her clear explanation. He was willing to support deletion of the two sections from the ordinance. He expressed his confidence in the ability of Ms. Beamud to come up with something workable. Ms. Bettman asked if provisions could be added to a future contract that would reduce the Police Auditor’s access. Ms. Rudnick replied that in theory it could, but the City Manager would be violating the direction of the City Council if he or she allowed it. Ms. Bettman remarked that it was “just a motion.” She predicted that without Mr. Kelly to remind the council that the motion had been passed in five or six years, it could change. She said that basically, information was all the Police Auditor had, and access to the information was “really the only authority and power of the office.” She ascertained from Ms. Rudnick that at present information could be brought to the CRB if personal information was redacted. Ms. Rudnick stated that in the circumstances of ongoing investigations of community impact cases, the CRB could meet in executive session. Ms. Bettman supported the suggestion to delete the sections from the ordinance. She preferred the word ‘meets’ to the phrase ‘take into account.’ Additionally, she did not believe the qualifying word “appropri- ate” was necessary to the purpose of the language. Mr. Papé thanked Ms. Rudnick for providing the legal input. He was amenable to deleting the sections Mr. Kelly had moved to amend. Mr. Kelly withdrew his amendment. Ms. Bettman withdrew her second. MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 13, 2006 Page 4 Work Session Mr. Kelly, seconded by Mr. Poling, moved to amend Council Bill #4936 by deleting sec- tions 2.454(4) and 2.246(9) and renumbering other sections according. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Mr. Poling, seconded by Ms. Solomon, moved to amend Council Bill #4936 to delete the word “exclusive” from Section 2.450(3). Mr. Poling explained that during the discussions prior to the vote in August, the word ‘exclusive’ had been a sticking point. He believed, given that the City Manager had delegated his authority to the Police Auditor to hire staff, that the Charter restricted the City Manager from giving exclusive authority. He said as long as the Police Auditor and the City Manager continued to cooperate as they had demonstrated thus far, he did not see a problem with letting the word ‘exclusive’ remain. However, he wished to prevent the City from setting itself up for legal contentions and other problems should that dynamic change with different management personnel. He added that he fully supported the ordinance. Ms. Bettman thought having the word ‘exclusive’ in the ordinance was the “crux” of the issue and asking to have it removed took the council back to the same debate it had before adoption of the resolution. She felt the issue had already been decided. She asked Ms. Beamud for her opinion on the removal of the word. Ms. Beamud responded that her authority was either exclusive or it was shared. She said removal of ‘exclusive’ would take her back to the position of sharing the authority. She recalled that she had said a number of times that it would not cause her to leave the position; however, it would no longer be exclusive. Ms. Bettman believed the word ‘exclusive’ was the firewall between an independent auditor and the inclusion of the City Manager. She underscored that support in the community was for independence in the Auditor’s Office. Mr. Pryor observed that it was a quandary that this had come down to one word. He reiterated his support for the Auditor’s Office and his belief in what it stood for and what it sought to accomplish. He acknowl- edged legal advice that indicated the current wording could conflict with the City charter. He was aware that there was another opinion by another attorney but he had never seen it and it had never been provided to him. He wanted to see the Auditor’s Office move forward in the best possible way and, in that light, he asked for some final advice from the City Attorney in regard to whether the wording would create a conflict. City Attorney Glenn Klein responded that legal counsel believed that the council did not have the authority to delegate what the ordinance purports to delegate to the auditor. He said if the council adopted the ordinance with the word ‘exclusive’ in it, it would still be lawful, that the mere adoption of the ordinance did not create any liability for the City, the councilors or the Police Auditor. He stressed that liability would only exist dependent upon what happened “down the road.” He stated that if the Police Auditor ever hired someone that fell outside the parameters of the City Manager’s administrative order, which was broad, at that point there could be personal liability. Mr. Pryor indicated that while he supported Mr. Poling’s position he would oppose the amendment based on the legal information. Mr. Kelly opposed the amendment. He believed the bottom line for the success of the Auditor’s Office was the public’s impression of it. He felt the striking the word ‘exclusive’ would give the perception that it was a less independent office. MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 13, 2006 Page 5 Work Session Mayor Piercy commented that the issue had not changed; it was the same issue and there were the same disagreements. She wanted to support the Auditor’s Office and the CRB. She indicated she would oppose the amendment if her vote was required to break a tie. She added that she was anxious for the council to work with Ms. Beamud and to inaugurate the Civilian Review Board “that everyone has been waiting for.” In response to a question from Mr. Papé, Mr. Klein stated that the memorandum related to personal liability was confidential and the memorandum related to the City Attorney’s interpretation of the Charter was not confidential. Mr. Papé asked if the words in the ordinance were legally differentiated from the administrative order with the word ‘exclusive’ in it. Mr. Klein replied that the administrative order assumed that the City Manager had the authority to adopt the administrative order and the authority would come from the Charter. He clarified that the ordinance assumed that the Charter gave exclusive authority to the council and, therefore, the council had the power to give exclusive authority to the Police Auditor. He felt in this sense there was a conflict, but he did not believe adoption of the ordinance would in any way invalidate the City Manager’s administrative order. He said either the Charter gave exclusive authority to the manager or the Charter gave exclusive power to the council. He believed the administrative order would either remain valid because the council did not have the power to invalidate it or the administrative order was not valid to begin with. Mr. Papé opposed “the compromise” and indicated he would vote accordingly. Ms. Taylor opposed the amendment. She believed the word ‘exclusive’ was essential. Mr. Poling was not opposed to the ordinance. He merely wanted to clarify what authority it gave and to whom. Mr. Poling withdrew his motion to amend. Ms. Solomon withdrew her second. The main motion, as amended, passed unanimously; 8:0. Ms. Bettman wanted to bring up an issue. She said the council had scheduled a work session early in 2007 regarding the role of the City Attorney. She wished to remark on the “fact” that the City Attorney wrote a memorandum for the council “based on the opinion of the City Manager” after the City Council had adopted a resolution that clarified the charter language so that interpretation of any ambiguity was solely the purview of the council. She said the City Attorney had “adopted an opinion based on the opposite opinion.” She asserted that if the City Attorney was representing the City, including City policy, the underlying assumption of the memorandum should have been that the council had the authority to delegate the hiring and firing of staff to the Police Auditor. She saw that as a “major breach.” It reinforced her opinion that the City Attorney’s Office “represents the City Manager and not the City as a whole.” She intended to bring this up at the process session. Mr. Klein said the attorneys had a different view. He stated that as part of the materials for the scheduled work session, the City Attorney’s Office intended to provide comment about the issue Ms. Bettman raised. Mr. Kelly, seconded by Mr. Poling, moved to direct the City Manager as follows: When adopting personnel policies or negotiating collective bargaining agreements related to the release or confidentiality of personnel records, the City Manager will consult with the Police Auditor and, consistent with the law and the City’s duty to bargain in good faith, will adopt policies and negotiate collective bargaining agreements that meet the needs of the MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 13, 2006 Page 6 Work Session auditor and Civilian Review Board to have access to personnel information. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. C. WORK SESSION: Improvements to Roosevelt Boulevard to Improve its Functionality as an East-West Arterial City Manager Taylor asked City Engineer Mark Schoening to provide a brief overview of the improvements to Roosevelt Boulevard. Mr. Schoening explained that the item was a follow-up from the October 9 work session at which transportation priorities for north and west Eugene had been discussed. He said Roosevelt Boulevard had been brought up not as a staff priority, but as part of a discussion on how it could function better as an east/west arterial. He outlined the two projects that had been brought up with this goal in mind: ? The addition of a second left turn lane at the intersection of Highway 99 and Roosevelt Boulevard, which would remediate the safety issue brought about when the queue for the turn spilled into one of the through lanes during peak driving hours. There was an opportunity to work with the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) as ODOT had a safety and pavement preservation project for Highway 99 that was funded with construction anticipated in 2009. ? The extension of Roosevelt Boulevard through the Royal Node, connecting it through to the Bethel area at Avalon and Legacy Streets. He noted this project was contained in the Regional Transpor- tation Plan and TransPlan. Mr. Schoening stated that the latter project would require some restructuring of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) in order to prioritize projects, including some for which a public process had already been initiated such as the Maple/Elmira street project. Ms. Ortiz preferred to keep the Maple/Elmira Street project on the list. She called the intersection “scary.” Mr. Kelly supported the proposed motion for the extra turn lane. The suggested delay in an extension of Roosevelt Boulevard caused him concern. He felt in the aftermath of the demise of the West Eugene Parkway (WEP) it was important to explore various ways to strengthen the east/west street system in that end of town. He wanted to explore how the first phase of it could be worked into the current CIP. Ms. Bettman supported adding the extra turn lane in order to provide more safety and operational efficiency. She echoed Mr. Kelly’s comments, noting that one objective in that area was to enhance connectivity. She said that the extension seemed like an important link to make. In response to a question from Ms. Bettman, Mr. Schoening affirmed that the extension would impact wetlands. Ms. Bettman asked if the City would need an impact statement. Mr. Schoening replied that it would not if City funds were used. He said a permit would still be required but the federal NEPA requirements would not apply. Ms. Bettman asked what the extent of the impact on wetlands would be. Mr. Schoening was unsure at this time. Ms. Bettman expressed surprise that the specific information was not yet available. She also questioned why the extension was being presented as a choice over the Maple/Elmira Street project given that the former would be paid for with systems development charges (SDCs) and other assessments and the latter came from “other pots of money.” She also wondered why the Maple/Elmira Street project was presented as the “only choice to bump,” given the entire CIP was “full of projects.” MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 13, 2006 Page 7 Work Session Mr. Schoening clarified that the Maple/Elmira Street project was an example of what would have to be conceded should the council choose the different project. He underscored that both projects would be funded by a combination of transportation SDCs and assessments to adjacent property owners. In response to a follow-up question from Ms. Bettman, Mr. Schoening stated that there was no way to build the Roosevelt Boulevard extension without impacting wetlands. Ms. Bettman asked that staff bring back a look of what the impact would be and a list of options for projects that could be deferred. Mr. Schoening said project development had been funded in advance in the CIP for the Maple/Elmira Street project. He explained that the development of an extension project could be funded in the same way and this would provide a sense of how much of the wetlands would be impacted, how much right-of-way would need to be acquired, and a better sense of what it would cost. Ms. Solomon averred that the dual left-turn lane onto Roosevelt Boulevard was “sorely needed.” She asked if it had been scheduled for 2009. Mr. Schoening replied that an ODOT project had been programmed and anticipated construction in 2009 for safety and maintenance of Highway 99 between Barger and Washington Streets. He said the dual left-turn lane was not yet part of that project, though the concept had been brought to ODOT and the department had not said “no.” Ms. Solomon asked what the construction timeline was for the Maple/Elmira project. Mr. Schoening responded that it was slated for construction in the summer of 2008. Mr. Poling asked where the Royal Avenue mixed-use center would be located in relationship to Attachment A. Mr. Schoening replied that it was on both sides of Royal Avenue between Greenhill Road and Terry Street. In response to a follow-up question, Mr. Schoening said the City had some “nibbles” on potential development in that area. Mr. Poling wondered if moving ahead with construction of the extension would mean it would have to be constructed with consideration for how it would be situated in relation to the planned node. He asked if it would have to undergo a different type of construction than the rest of it or whether it would be better to wait until the private developers build the center to put the restrictions or limitations on the road. Mr. Schoening responded that either approach would arrive at the same result. Ms. Solomon, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to direct the City Manager to work with the Oregon Department of Transportation to secure additional funding for the Highway 99 – Barger Street to Washington/Jefferson Street project for the addition of a dual left turn lane from northbound Highway 99 to westbound Roosevelt Boulevard. Mr. Kelly, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to amend to add a new sentence to direct the City Manager to bring an amendment to the Capital Improvement Plan for project develop- ment for the extension of Roosevelt Boulevard to the City Council as it considered the Capi- tal Improvement Plan and to bring information regarding the impact the project would have on wetlands at that time. The motion to amend passed unanimously, 8:0. In response to a question from Mr. Papé, Mr. Schoening said ODOT had a budget of $6 million for the Highway 99 project that did not currently contain the dual left turn lane. He stated that ODOT would have to find additional funds to undertake that project. MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 13, 2006 Page 8 Work Session In response to a question from Ms. Bettman, Mr. Schoening said he surmised that the Highway 99 project consisted mostly of a pavement preservation project. The main motion, as amended, passed unanimously, 8:0. D. WORK SESSION Update on Commercial/Industrial/Residential Lands Studies This item was deferred due to a lack of time. The meeting adjourned at 1:27 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dennis M. Taylor City Manager (Recorded by Ruth Atcherson) MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 13, 2006 Page 9 Work Session ATTACHMENT C M I N U T E S Eugene City Council State of the City Hult Center for the Performing Arts—One Eugene Center January 4, 2007 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Jennifer Solomon, Andrea Ortiz, Betty Taylor, Bonny Bettman, George Poling, Chris Pryor, Alan Zelenka, Mike Clark. I. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS City Council President Jennifer Solomon called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order and welcomed those present to the annual State of the City event. She welcomed the many elected officials from other jurisdictions in attendance. II. MUSICAL SELECTION Those in attendance heard a musical selection, “How Can I Keep From Singing?” performed by the City Singers under the direction of Maureen Robeson. III. RECOGNITION OF OUTGOING CITY COUNCILORS Mayor Piercy recognized outgoing councilors David Kelly and Gary Papé for their service to the commu- nity. IV. ADMINISTRATION OF OATH OF OFFICE City Recorder Mary Feldman administered the oath of office to returning councilors George Poling and Jennifer Solomon and to incoming councilors Mike Clark and Alan Zelenka. Mr. Zelenka thanked Mr. Papé and Mr. Kelly for their work and Mr. Kelly for his support and hard work on the council. He thanked those who voted for him, his campaign committee, and his wife Susie Smith. He was thrilled to be the councilor representing Ward 3 and “proud to be a progressive in Eugene.” He hoped to focus on environmental protection and sustainability; on smart growth and increased density, livability, and neighborhood protection; and on a fair and open City government that “put the people’s interests above special interests.” Mr. Clark thanked Mr. Papé and Mr. Kelly for their service on the council and assistance to him. He thanked friends and supporters who encouraged him in his race. He acknowledged his parents, who had come from Portland for the event. Mr. Clark also thanked his wife Kim and children Elizabeth and Bryson. MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 4, 2007 Page 1 State of the City Mr. Clark asked the audience to consider what type of civic behavior members should demonstrate for their children. He said that it was an uncommon time and innovative solutions and cooperation were needed, but it was also a bipartisan time. He said that Mary Worth Montague once stated that “civility costs nothing and buys everything.” Mr. Clark challenged himself, the council, and others who participated in civic life to behave toward each other in a way they would be proud to see their children emulate and copy. He pledged to focus less on being a conservative councilor or liberal councilor and to focus on being a Eugene councilor. He thanked those present for the chance to work for them. V. MAYOR’S AWARDS AND RECOGNITION Mayor Piercy presented the Mayor’s Employee Recognition Award to Lynn Eichner Kelley for her contributions to the City’s sustainability efforts. Mayor Piercy presented the Mayor’s Sustainability Awards to Deb and Peter Noble of West Wind Forest Products, Dave Funk and Rusty Rexius of the Mayor’s Sustainable Business Initiative Task Force, and Bob Doppelt, Sara Mazze, and Ray Neff of Resource Innovations and the Institute for a Sustainable Environ- ment. She also acknowledged Mike Russo and Andrew Verner from the Lindquist College of Business and University of Oregon Recycling Coordinator Karen Kaplan, and other University faculty and staff who assisted with the Mayor’s Sustainable Business Initiative. VI. MUSICAL SELECTION Those present heard a musical selection for the occasion, “The Force Behind Your Grace,” written and performed by Phoebe Blume, who was accompanied by David Rand on guitar. VII. STATE OF THE CITY ADDRESS Mayor Piercy thanked Ms. Blume and the City Singers. She noted that Ms. Blume had written her song for the occasion. Mayor Piercy acknowledged and thanked her husband David. Mayor Piercy gave the following address: Good evening. I’m happy to see you all. Here we are tonight just at the closure of 2006 and poised to begin 2007. It’s time to reflect upon the year recently ended and to set goals for the year ahead. The world and our nation gave us much to be alarmed about in 2006, but hope for better times ahead is stirring. More than anything, we wish the New Year to bring: An end to war and conflict around the globe; ? Access to good mental and physical health care, education opportunities, housing, and jobs; and ? The adoption of policies and actions that respond to finite resources and global warming. ? In 2006 we faced grave national challenges. Yet Eugene remains committed to being a place where good things occur, challenges are met, and promises are fulfilled. We have pushed forward with great strength of purpose. MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 4, 2007 Page 2 State of the City This has taken much local leadership and local action. Thank you, City Council, for working hard with rigor and devotion, week in and week out. I especially thank our outgoing councilors, David Kelly and Gary Papé; the community appreciates your years of service. Thank you, City Manager, Dennis Taylor and City employees, for turning policy into reality, providing services for our community, making Eugene, Eugene. Thanks to you who volunteer in so many capacities, from parks, to library, to recreation, to public safety. Thanks to you who work on committees or commissions, and for neighborhoods, social services, businesses, environmental, or political groups and agencies. It is because of you all that we have such a wonderful place to live. Thank you, voters, for ensuring the future of our parks and libraries. What we accomplish, we do not do alone. Thank you, Eugene Water and Electric Board, Lane Transit District, Lane County, University of Oregon, Lane Community College, Bethel and 4J school districts, and all of our neighboring cities, for your work that helps our community thrive. You can turn to the booklet provided to you this evening for the highlights of 2006 in Eugene, our city goals and accomplishments. While I hope you will take pride and ownership in these achievements, we offer them with the caveat that they are but steps along a long path to a truly sustainable community. There are four important things you have the right to expect every year from your mayor and elected officials: leadership, vision, delivery on promises made, and goals set for the future. My vision is that, here in Eugene, we will meet the enormous challenges of a changing world and carve out new opportunities for our citizens while we preserve and enhance the livability of our community. Three key things are necessary to ensure the livability of any city: a strong economy, a commitment to social equity, and a healthy environment. These must not be seen as discrete, opposing goals, but rather as equal pieces of a larger whole. This is the true meaning of sustainability – that our success in achieving one is ultimately dependent on our success in achieving the other two. That’s why we worked hard on the success of all three this last year. Our city’s economic picture is healthier than it was just a few years ago, during the recession of 2001-2003. We have seen significant new development activity and increased employment. I am heartened by a relatively positive outlook and by some of the legislative initiatives proposed to address the basic needs of Oregonians. It is time for Oregon to end the slide downhill toward mediocrity and to once again live up to its reputation as one of the finest places in the world to live. A recent survey of Oregonians showed the majority are optimistic this state is going to head in a new and better direction. That would be good news for us because… In both economic health and social equity, we face significant challenges. Despite the recent economic upswing, an Oregon Employment Department study noted that wage inequality is increasing for Oregon workers, with “jobs in the low wage sector growing faster than jobs in average and MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 4, 2007 Page 3 State of the City high-wage industries.” Indeed, since 2003, 40 percent of all new jobs created in Oregon have been in low- wage industries. To take an example closer to home, of the 10 occupations projected to add the most jobs to Lane County’s economy in the next decade, nine pay average salaries that are lower than the county average of about $32,000 per year (Oregon Employment Department, December 2006). Here in Eugene, because we are a center for high wage occupations like education, research and develop- ment, manufacturing and wood products, health care and government services, and others, we might take solace in somewhat rosier economic projections than these. But Eugene is not an economic island; our economic future is intricately tied to that of the larger region and state. There are still too many in our community who do not have high-wage occupations, who struggle for food, housing, good physical and mental health services, and access to education and training. While we have noted institutions of education and a remarkable range of social services agencies, their funding has been inadequate. Fewer of our young people enter college to prepare for the future and too many of our citizens find themselves at the bottom of our economy. Developing additional high-quality job opportunities and support for education and social services will help all boats to rise. We also face daunting environmental challenges. From climate change to peak oil, scientists agree our world resources are finite and the planet is warming. Furthermore, there are ominous predictions of economic crises and threats to the social fabric if we do not, in the coming decades, directly confront our current dependence on non-renewable energy supplies and do not reverse the trend of global warming. While our federal government has been slow to either acknowledge or act on these threats, local governments both in the United States and in other countries have taken up the charge. So have we, and here’s how. Building on a long history of stewardship, the City of Eugene has stepped up to the challenge. We were recognized by Green Guide as the Number One Green City in America, for providing one of the healthiest, most environmentally conscious, energy-efficient, and least polluting places to live. We put policies in place that encourage green design and usage of alternative energy, prevent sprawl, and preserve a high percentage of green space. We are building our public transportation system and offering rebates and tax exemptions for using alternative power sources. We’ve enacted smoke-free public places, developed affordable housing programs, and supported efforts to improve local wages and provide social services. All these efforts are making a difference. We are talking sustainability here, the triple bottom line, caring for our natural resources and our people while building a strong economy. Both City of Eugene staff and elected officials are leading by example. We have been building a green fleet and have already reduced our carbon emissions by 500,000 pounds. We are currently purchasing 25% wind power, recycling, and using green products and building practices. We are promoting the use of alternative transportation and offer our staff bus passes. We are partnering on after-school programs, housing projects MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 4, 2007 Page 4 State of the City and support services for the homeless. We continue to invest in bike paths. Just this last year, we partnered on four local green building projects and on five business assessments of sustainable practices that can improve the bottom line. Eugene joined the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI)to help us measure carbon emission reductions. I partnered with 100 other mayors in signing on to the Kyoto protocol and have been working with them nationally on this effort. We are doing a lot but there is much, much, more to be done to respond to economic and social need and to slow down global warming and reduce our consumption of finite resources. To meet these challenges and to take advantage of the unique opportunities they present, I launched the Sustainable Business Initiative. Two years ago, Eugene already had undertaken many excellent green practices, creating a foundation that I believed positioned us for a quantum leap forward. With our university, our expertise, our entrepreneurial spirit and our deep concern, Eugene is uniquely positioned to lead, to provide some answers to world problems and to develop our economy through new job creation. We can respond to climate change, finite resources and the need for good jobs. I charged a task force to identify ways Eugene could support the growth of businesses that produce sustainable products and services, including alternative fuels, alternative energy, green investing, green building, alternative transportation, and natural foods, among others. Additional charges were to recom- mend how Eugene could support all businesses in adopting more sustainable practices, and educate the public about sustainability and the triple bottom line. The Sustainable Business Initiative task force engaged over 800 of our citizens and made 22 recommenda- tions, which were officially endorsed by council resolution on November 13, 2006. The first of these are the establishment of a city Sustainability Office and Sustainability Commission. These two bodies will be key to implementing the remaining SBI recommendations. (You can find the recommendations on the City’s web site.) The vision is for Eugene to become a center of sustainable businesses and practices, enabling us to respond to the challenges of a changing world and the needs of our citizens for high quality jobs and services that allow them to raise their families. This is a great vision and a doable one; an exciting opportunity for our future. Eugene works hard to fulfill promises. In the past year we have also focused on other key arenas of livability: ? We hired an independent police auditor. ? After public input, the council selected the “rockin’ butterfly” site (the butterfly parking lot next to the county building as well as the Rock n’ Rodeo building) as its preference for a new City Hall lo- cation. Downtown development advanced with the opening of the Federal Building and Tate condo- th miniums, the groundbreaking of WestTown on 8, and the selection of the Whole Foods and the Kemper project on the old Sears site. ? McKenzie-Willamette moved forward with locating a full service hospital in Eugene, which will help to ensure healthcare competition and complete choice in services. MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 4, 2007 Page 5 State of the City ? We responded strongly and swiftly to hate speech and passed a resolution affirming the human rights of immigrants. ? The City Council held a dialogue with representatives of communities of color and a 15-member Community Committee on Race was established. ? Library cards became available to the homeless and the council designated special funding in sup- port of homeless services. ? Eugene’s Human Rights Commission co-sponsored a mental health summit. ? The Neighborhood Matching Grant Program was reinstated, and new work on opportunity siting and infill standards was begun. ? Exciting plans were made for Eugene’s hosting of the 2008 Track and Field Olympic Trials. ? The Mayor’s Cultural Policy Review Committee took the first intensive look at the arts in 20 years. ? Congress approved the land swap to facilitate the development of the Eugene Wetlands Environ- mental Education Center. What about the goals for 2007? A lot of them will be about completing the work already underway. Here are the top 10 that fit this category: ? The Sustainability Office and the Sustainability Commission will be up and running, moving for- ward the 20 other SBI recommendations and our vision of being a center of sustainability. ? The Eugene Wetlands Education Center will break ground. ? I will focus even more strongly on Eugene’s Downtown development as a major piece of the com- munity’s livability, seeing the projects underway to completion and the successful development of new ones. We will need the help of everyone in this community. Downtown belongs in a very real sense to each of us. I understand the challenges, but remain convinced that we can overcome them. Just as I will support property owners and good development opportunities, I also believe the property owners have a responsibility for good maintenance and sidewalk appearance and we have the responsibility to keep it safe for people of all ages. If we want people to live businesses locat- ing downtown. It will always be a combination of local and national interests that will make down- town work. ? Arts have rightfully been identified as an essential part of the character of this community. Recom- mendations for new initiatives in culture and the arts will come from the Mayor’s Cultural Policy Review Committee this next year. It's time for the next evolution. The arts are also important to our downtown success and our economy. We have a growing number of gallery and performance opportunities. Please, everyone, come to the First Friday Art Walks and when you think of pur- chasing art for your homes or businesses, think of Eugene artists first. We should fill our streets with art and performances as often as possible, with a year-round calendar that appeals to all ages. Invite your friends and relatives. ? Another key part of our downtown is our city hall. We will continue planning for our new city hall as an important seat of democracy and governance in our community. It should be connected to our park blocks and farmer’s market, provide a great community meeting place and be an energizing MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 4, 2007 Page 6 State of the City visible expression of how much we honor our cultural and social diversity. We should get excited about this opportunity. Many of you talk about the need for architecturally appealing buildings. Just think of this one as a beautiful connector of our arts and outdoors and a symbol of us, this wonderful community. This is something you build for future generations, for Eugeneans far into the future. ? It’s also about how we live together. The Civilian Review Board will be in place as the next step in rebuilding confidence in public safety. In addition, we will work to have the best police responses possible to individuals experiencing mental health crises and the Police Commission will be bringing forward recommendations for council consideration. We will continue to work with the HRC to re- duce the stigma attached to mental health conditions. ? The Community Committee on Race will bring recommendations to the council for next steps to better ensure that everyone feels welcome in Eugene. We aren’t the community that we want to be until we achieve this. ? We will work with community partners to sponsor Project Homeless Connect in February and I will name a Mayor’s Blue Ribbon Committee on Homelessness. ? We will have a Neighborhood Summit to continue work on our Neighborhood Initiative, improving our usage of our neighborhood associations in key decision-making in Eugene. I hope you each par- ticipate in some way in your own neighborhood association. ? Finally, our road infrastructure is important. As promised, work is underway with local, regional and national partners to address West Eugene transportation needs in a way that will improve the livability of that area of our community. In addition to the substantial list of ongoing efforts, I propose five new goals for the year 2007: ? I would like to see a City Youth Advisory Committee put in place. Our young people have worked hard to have an increased voice in our community. They participated in the Sustainable Business Initiative, lobbied successfully for a LEADS meeting space, and led a huge free speech effort. ? I will issue a Mayor’s Neighborhood Climate Change Challenge for a 20 percent reduction in carbon emissions. Everyone wants to do his or her part. ? I will invite regional mayors to meet for discussion of mutual infrastructure issues. Working to- gether, we can better ensure the success of each community. ? I will call for a downtown planning meeting with the Board of County Commissioners. Eugene and Lane County each have goals for new and revitalized buildings and we could help each other in reaching those goals. ? In addition to my ongoing Mayor One-on Ones, I will meet with 100 businesses and non-profits to th assess any ways the city can be of assistance. Those in the West 11 corridor are of particular in- terest. Cooperation is needed. Remember that I mentioned cooperation? We’ll need more of that this year. To accomplish our goals we’ll need higher levels of cooperation and working together across jurisdictions -- for all our people and our future. I could say much more about both our challenges and our opportunities! But the bottom line is, among cities in Oregon as well as nationally, Eugene is a LEADER, and we have a lot to be proud of. To accomplish our goals for the future, each and every one us of needs to step up. Step up to more civic involvement, investment and more volunteering. Step up to the challenges I’ve outlined. MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 4, 2007 Page 7 State of the City Step up to the leadership that will guide our city – not just forward, but forward in a smart, sustainable way. Your city needs you and I hope you will continue to respond or even step up for the very first time. Together, we will create a proud, shared future. And, we can have fun doing it. I appreciate each and every one of you. I close with a quote from George Washington Carver: How far we go in life depends upon our being tender with the young, compassionate with the aged, sympathetic with the striving, and tolerant of the weak and strong. Because someday in our lives we will have been all of these. Let us strive to build goodwill in every situation. Happy New Year everyone! VIII. MUSICAL SELECTION Those present heard a second musical selection by the City Singers, “Vamudara,” accompanied by the Shamwari Marimba Band. IX. ADJOURN Ms. Solomon thanked those present for coming, and adjourned the meeting at 6:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dennis M. Taylor City Manager (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 4, 2007 Page 8 State of the City ATTACHMENT D M I N U T E S Eugene City Council Work Session McNutt Room—Eugene City Hall January 8, 2007 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Jennifer Solomon, Andrea Ortiz, Betty Taylor, Bonny Bettman, George Poling, Chris Pryor, Alan Zelenka, Mike Clark. A. COMMITTEE REPORTS AND ITEMS OF INTEREST FROM MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. She welcomed new councilors Mike Clark and Alan Zelenka as well as the members of the Human Rights Commission (HRC) present: Carmen Urbina, Surendra Subramani, Annette Leonard, Neil Van Steenbergen, Hugh Massengill, David Lottier, Rebecca Flynn, Jeremiah Megowan, Ibrahim Hamide, Christina Greening, Paloma Reza, and Jim Garcia. Mayor Piercy thanked staff for their assistance with the State of the City address and commended Ms. Solomon as master of ceremonies. She reminded everyone that there would be a Martin Luther King Jr. march on January 13, 2007, at 10 a.m. beginning at the Eugene Water & Electric Board site. She announced that the official launch of Lane Transit District’s new EmX Green Line service would be on January 14 at noon at the Downtown Athletic Club and she would hold her one-on-one meetings with constituents, in conjunction with Mr. Pryor, on January 11 at 5 p.m. at Schlotzsky’s Deli. Ms. Ortiz thanked HRC members for the many hours of volunteer service they gave to the City. She said that Willamette High School students would present the life of Martin Luther King on January 14 at 7 p.m. Mr. Clark thanked Ms. Piercy, City Manager Taylor and City staff for a successful State of the City event. Mr. Pryor said he attended the Springfield State of the City address and appreciated Mayor Sid Leiken’s remarks, particularly about prospects for Eugene and Springfield to work together. He urged the City of Eugene to take advantage of those partnership opportunities. Mr. Zelenka thanked outgoing councilors David Kelly and Gary Papé for their service to the community during their terms on the council. Ms. Taylor welcomed Mr. Clark and Mr. Zelenka to the council and congratulated Ms. Solomon and Ms. Poling on their re-elections. She commended Ms. Piercy for her State of the City address and her presenta- tion at City Club. MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 8, 2007 Page 1 Work Session Mr. Poling thanked Mr. Clark and Mr. Zelenka for attending many council meetings before they were sworn in as councilors. He appreciated their efforts to become well-informed on council matters. He echoed Mr. Pryor’s comments regarding the Springfield State of the City address. He asked about the status of the City’s commercial and industrial land study. City Manager Taylor said the City was not engaged in such a study at present and it was not on the Planning and Development Department’s work program for the next fiscal year. He said a work session on the subject was scheduled for later in the month. Ms. Bettman welcomed Mr. Clark and Mr. Zelenka to the council. Ms. Bettman moved to direct the City Manager to discontinue official City of Eugene spon- sorship of the 2007 Dr. Martin Luther King Day event, including the withholding of the City’s second contribution for the event in the amount of $150 that was previously commit- ted but not yet paid. The motion died for lack of a second. Ms. Bettman moved to direct the City Manager to have staff begin planning for a City of Eugene sponsored MLK Day event, starting with 2008, which celebrates the life and work of Dr. Martin Luther King and is a public event where every member of our community feels respected and welcome. The motion died for lack of a second. B. WORKSHOP: City Council Priority Issue – Joint Meeting with Human Rights Commission Human Resource and Risk Services Director Lauren Chouinard said he was the staff lead for the council’s priority on race and the purpose of the joint meeting with the HRC was to discuss a response plan to hate incidents. He said the need for such a plan was also discussed by the council’s Community Committee on Race (CCR). He introduced Phyllis Lee, the consultant who had facilitated the earlier Communities of Color meeting. Ms. Lee said the July 2006 Communities of Color meeting was one of the most stimulating, challenging, and rewarding experiences in her years of working with communities and government on equity issues. She commended all who participated. She noted that members of the public could not speak at a work session but invited those present to submit written comments to the council or commission. At her request, HRC members introduced themselves. Ms. Ortiz provided an overview of the community conversation on race during CCR meetings. She said the CCR was formed to address the many issues that arose during the Communities of Color meeting and those issues had been organized into the following categories: ? Public Agency Support ? Accountability and Measurement ? Dialogue, Education and Training ? Networking and Inclusion ? Publicity and Media MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 8, 2007 Page 2 Work Session Ms. Ortiz reported that one of the CCR meetings focused on hate incidents in the community and a draft plan for responding to those incidents was provided to the council for its consideration. She gave a brief overview of each of the categories and said that recommendations and next steps were being developed in each category. She said as the CCR moved forward with its work, it continually asked itself who was not at the table. Regarding the response plan for hate incidents, she hoped that a system of notifying elected officials and affected communities of those incidents could be developed so that allies could reach out to those who were the targets of hate crimes. Ms. Urbina said the CCR was evaluating the ability of the City to create change internally and externally and reach out to other jurisdictions and agencies to collaborate and bring about change. She said activities such as study circles and guest speakers and trainers could help bring about community norm change. Ms. Lee introduced Human Rights Program Manager Greg Rikhoff to present the hate incidents response draft plan. She pointed out that the plan represented a convergence of ideas from several sources, including work of the City Council, the CCR, and the Human Rights Program, and would create a new process for the City of Eugene. Mr. Rikhoff stated that a response to bias crimes and incidents of hate had been a long-standing goal of the council and HRC. He said the discussion would provide direction to staff on further refining the draft plan. He said research had not discovered comparable plans in other communities so Eugene was “inventing the wheel.” He discussed recent hate incidents in which graffiti was involved and said that while the community had a history of responding to those incidents, it lacked a strategic approach that could be tailored to each incident but in every case include the following elements: ? Support and empower the victims/survivors ? Inform and gain support from the community ? Protect the integrity of any criminal investigation ? Disempower and catch the perpetrators Mr. Rikhoff reviewed the definitions section of the response plan and noted that while the terms “hate activity” and “bias activity” were often used interchangeably, the term “hate crime” referred to a criminal offense that could involve a wide range of activities and targeted one specific individual, family or group. Ms. Leonard asked about the source of the hate crime definition. Mr. Rikhoff said the State’s definition was used. Mr. Rikhoff continued with a review of the proposed response steps. He said that a step for notifying elected officials and affected communities consistent with Ms. Ortiz’s request would be added. Ms. Urbina observed that organizations each had their own response to hate incidents, with some acknowl- edging the incident and following a protocol while others simply removed the visible evidence, such as graffiti, and moved forward as though it had not happened. She hoped that Eugene’s response plan could provide the basis for consistent protocols among public agencies and local governments. Ms. Piercy emphasized the importance of a timely response to an incident and hoped that was built into the plan. Mr. Rikhoff agreed, and pointed out that not only were responses different among entities, but how the incident was characterized also differed, which sent a confusing message to the community. MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 8, 2007 Page 3 Work Session Ms. Ortiz explained that her request for notification specifically meant that councilors would be notified as soon as an incident was detected. Ms. Piercy strongly supported Ms. Ortiz’s request as it was important for elected officials, as leaders of the community, to demonstrate they cared, understood what happened, and were responding to it, whenever and wherever an incident occurred. She added that notification should also include other elected officials such as county commissioners, as all leaders had a responsibility to respond. Ms. Urbina cited examples of incidents in the River Road area where graffiti was in areas both inside and outside the City limits and the difference between City and County responses to removing it. She also shared her experiences while counter-leafleting with those whose property had been targeted. Mr. Rikhoff explained that counter-leafleting was sponsored by the Community Alliance of Lane County (CALC) and provided support to victims of hate activities through personal contact by volunteers who provided information about available community resources. Ms. Flynn asked that counter-leafleting include materials in Spanish and other languages as well as English. She suggested that non-English radio stations could also be used to spread the message of community support for victims. Ms. Ortiz asked if hate activities were tracked at the local and state levels. Mr. Rikhoff said the Eugene Police Department tracked activities that were criminal in nature but it was difficult to maintain an accurate record of non-criminal activities. He said there were state and federal reporting requirements but many jurisdictions lacked the resources to comply; therefore, accurate data on the incidence of hate activities was not available. Mr. Rikhoff continued his review of response steps related to assessing and meeting the needs of victims and survivors, affected communities and the community as a whole. Ms. Piercy remarked that there was a balance between trying to be respectful of the individuals who were the target of a hate activity and informing the community so the community could stand up against that activity. Mr. Zelenka asked what types of services were available for victims and whether funding was available. Mr. Rikhoff replied that the County provided victims’ services through the District Attorney’s Office. Ms. Ortiz said the County provided services for victims of sexual assault and domestic violence but there was no funding for services to victims of hate crimes beyond what might result from restitution if the perpetrator was caught and convicted. Mr. Rikhoff noted that schools might provide services to students who were victimized but there was little available to members of the community at-large. Mr. Rikhoff continued with a review of steps to educate the larger community. He said that public statements in response to an incident should be timely and developed in concert with the affected parties to ensure they did not feel alienated or re-victimized. Mr. Pryor declared that it was critical for people in positions of authority and the general public to communicate the lack of community tolerance for hate activities. He used the example of drunk driving to illustrate an activity that was at one time somewhat tolerated; but, through a consistent and open campaign MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 8, 2007 Page 4 Work Session was now regarded as unacceptable. He said that same level of commitment should be focused on hate activities. Ms. Ortiz said CCR identified several ideas for further consideration, including requiring City-funded newsletters to insert articles on diversity. Ms. Piercy agreed there were different levels of response, but there should be an initial timely response that did not need to have all aspects fully refined with follow-up responses providing more detailed plans to address the incident. She emphasized the importance of immediately letting the community know that elected officials and local government cared and were concerned. Ms. Urbina said that while many residents were aware of the River Road incident, many others living in the same area were not. She said it was important to be less reactionary and more proactive in educating people about the problem and encouraging people to take positive steps to demonstrate lack of tolerance for that behavior. Mr. Garcia said he had taught Chicano studies for the past 15 years and found it necessary to incorporate in the curriculum lessons about who Mexican-Americans and Latinos were. He felt cultural competency to present an issue was an important consideration; the City could take the lead and be a good resource for providing a competent perspective about issues of race and defining the language to be used. Mr. Rikhoff asked if councilors were interested in being notified of counter actions such as leafleting or vigils that occurred in the community or in their wards. Ms. Ortiz stated she wanted to be notified of any counter actions so she had the opportunity to participate. Mr. Pryor observed that not everyone was at the same level with respect to understanding the nature, extent, and severity of the problem; some segments of the community were acutely aware of hate and intolerance and others had no idea what racism was or what it looked like. He said the City needed to do a better job of educating the community about the characteristics and mechanisms of hate so that people could not be ambiguous about its nature. He said that the culture would not change unless public awareness was raised about hate activities and their impact. Mr. Megowan said that significant educational work had been done with the study circles and that effort should be continued and expanded. He said that many people underwent an important change in attitude as a result of their participation in the study circles. Mr. Zelenka said the notification process should not stop at initial notification; it should be used as a tool to keep officials informed about community reaction and official responses in a series of notifications. Mr. Van Steenbergen announced that the third round of study circles would begin later in January and many of the facilitators were persons of color. He was pleased that City employees were encouraged to participate in the study circles. Mr. Rikhoff discussed the need to create a community climate that thwarted hate activity and identify strategies could send a message of zero tolerance for prejudice. He said one possibility was to host another hate crimes conference in Eugene; the last one was held in 2001 and over 600 people participated. MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 8, 2007 Page 5 Work Session Ms. Ortiz suggested developing a periodic City newsletter on issues of diversity, equity, and inclusiveness similar to the newsletters issued on subjects such as parks and recreation or stormwater. Mr. Megowan suggested creating “hate free” zones similar to the “drug free” zones throughout the community. He said that ideas from other initiatives could be customized to deal with hate crimes. Ms. Flynn said that when she went to Missoula, Montana several years ago she was concerned about being accepted in the community because she was a lesbian but seeing the “hate free” zone signs posted around the town was reassuring and welcoming. She strongly supported Mr. Megowan’s suggestion. Mr. Hamide agreed with Mr. Pryor’s example of the changing public attitude about drinking and driving and its applicability to hate crimes. He said that education was a key to that effort and channels already in place could be used to provide information; however, he also wanted to see the City take an active lead beyond simply responding to incidents. He said it was important for the community to hear the City’s voice on this issue. He asked if there was an official policy regarding zero tolerance. Ms. Ortiz said the council had signed a declaration regarding zero tolerance but it was not well-publicized by the media. Ms. Piercy agreed the City could do more to constantly reinforce the message and not rely on one-time actions such as a resolution or declaration. Ms. Leonard suggested developing “tag lines” for the end of City emails or a short, simple message that could work its way into the public consciousness. As an example she said that the phrase “greatest City for the arts and outdoors” had worked its way into her consciousness in just a short time and a similar approach could be used to send the message that Eugene was a community where everyone was welcome. City Manager Taylor commented that the Working City program was always looking for broadcast material and would be a good venue to periodically refresh the City’s message of zero tolerance. He said that message would be in an electronic format that could be made available for other uses. Mr. Rikhoff said the HRC had discussed the importance of councilors including that message in their regular communications with community groups and organizations. He said that diversity and inclusiveness should be part of a standard script about the City’s values and priorities and it could make a major difference when that message came from elected officials. Mr. Garcia said that capacity issues also needed to be addressed and creating “hate free” zones meant the City had to back that up with action. He said that an understanding of hate crimes and racism should be part of the minimum qualifications for any City employee and considered during the hiring process. Ms. Ortiz emphasized the importance of letting people who participate in the hiring process as members of an interview panel know the outcome of that process and expressing the City’s appreciation for their participation. Mr. Rikhoff said the draft plan would be processed through the CCR and HRC before it came before the council again. He asked for any additional input. MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 8, 2007 Page 6 Work Session Ms. Piercy hoped that the City could improve opportunities for people to participate electronically in discussions of issues and provide input. Mr. Chouinard encouraged councilors and commissioners to email any further thoughts or suggestions to staff. He said the draft plan would be available on the City’s website when it was more refined. Ms. Lee thanked everyone for their participation and stressed the importance of hearing from many voices and creating community engagement by helping people feel comfortable expressing their ideas. The meeting adjourned at 7:07 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dennis M. Taylor City Manager (Recorded by Lynn Taylor) MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 8, 2007 Page 7 Work Session ATTACHMENT E M I N U T E S Eugene City Council Regular Meeting Council Chamber—Eugene City Hall January 8, 2007 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Jennifer Solomon, Andrea Ortiz, Mike Clark, Betty Taylor, Alan Zelenka, Bonny Bettman, Chris Pryor, George Poling. Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the regular meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. 1. ACTION: Election of City Council Officers for 2007 Mayor Piercy thanked Councilor Solomon for serving as Council President in 2006. She also welcomed new councilors Clark and Zelenka to the dais. Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Ortiz, moved to elect Councilor Andrea Ortiz as President of the City Council for 2007. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Ortiz, moved to elect Councilor Chris Pryor as Vice President of the City Council for 2007. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. The council officers for 2007 were given a round of applause. 2. CEREMONIAL MATTERS - Recognition of Airport Manager Bob Noble Mayor Piercy presented Mr. Noble with an award. She stated that Mr. Noble served as Airport Manager since 2000 and was recently recognized as Airport Executive of the Year for 2006 by the Northwest Chapter of the American Association of Airport Executives, the highest form of recognition from the professional organization. She spoke glowingly of Mr. Noble’s accomplishments. Mr. Noble received a round of applause. - Recognition of Briana Schooley MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 8, 2007 Page 1 Regular Meeting Fire Chief Randy Groves presented the Fire and Emergency Medical Services Department’s Citizen Life- Saving Award to Briana Schooley. He explained that the award was presented to a person who performed an exemplary act, which was determined to be directly responsible for the saving of another person’s life. He related that Ms. Schooley saved the life of a stranger who had gone into cardiac arrest while running from one plane to another in Chicago’s O’Hare Airport. She performed cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (CPR) on him until emergency personnel arrived. He commended Ms. Schooley for her calm demeanor throughout the event. Ms. Schooley received a round of applause. - Presentation of Plaque from the National League of Cities Councilor Taylor presented a plaque from the National League of Cities to the City of Eugene for 50 years of participation. She received the plaque on the City’s behalf at the National League of Cities Convention in Reno, Nevada. There was a round of applause. 3. PUBLIC FORUM Mayor Piercy reviewed the rules of the public forum. th D. Cohen , 2115 West 12 Avenue, #6, spoke on behalf of the Learning Education Adventure Direction (LEAD) program. He thanked the City for providing space to LEAD for its Nuestro Lugar/Our Place Teen Center. He said they had been busy remodeling the space. He related that many businesses donated time, labor, and materials to make the center comfortable. He stated that the center would be opening on January 22 and the hours would be 3:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. on Mondays and Fridays and 3:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m., Tuesdays through Thursdays. He read the mission statement: “Our mission is to provide a safe, supportive, fun environment that promotes leadership, empower- ment, personal growth, and social change by and for low-income multi-cultural and/or at-risk youth ages 12 to 17.” He noted that multi-cultural included ethnicity, race, sexual orientation, transgender, identity, and disability and that at-risk included isolation, having divorced or separated parents, past and/or present abuse, substance abuse in the home, negative peer pressure, absence of adult or supportive role models, depression, trauma, a language barrier, unhealthy relationships, undocumented immigrant status, a parent or guardian in prison, teen parents, a lack of support for the teen, foster care, past or present participation in criminal activity, substance abuse, risky sex, school drop out, suicide, violence or gangs. Will Ross , 88470 Fisher Road, explained that the LEAD teen center held activities, some more improvised than others. He related that the center had a computer lab with seven computers, seven comfortable couches, an office with three computers, an “almost always fully stocked fridge,” and a homework and study space. He said they have used the center almost non-stop and had just finished training 21 volunteers for when the center opened on January 22. He announced that the grand opening was on January 26 from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. and invited the councilors to attend. Terra Williams , 1665 Oak Patch Road, #19, representing the Nuestro Lugar/Our Place Teen Center, explained that she was a graduate from the Churchill Alternative High School and a first-generation college student in her family, as not one family member had pursued education beyond high school. She had not known how to apply for college or financial aid and had no one to support her. She opined that the Churchill Alternative School did not seem to know that graduates of the school could be accepted at the MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 8, 2007 Page 2 Regular Meeting University of Oregon and, because of this lack of awareness, they “only train the students” to enlist in the army or go to community college. She related that Churchill Alternative School staff expressed surprise at her intention to attend the university, because no one had brought that up before there. She said they wished her luck. She stated that a LEAD mentor helped her by assisting her with essays, talking to counselors, and helping her with financial aid forms. She was now attending Lane Community College (LCC). She said this made her want higher education training at Nuestro Lugar and because of this they started an academic support program. She explained that with the help of some students at the University of Oregon Family and Human Services (FHS) Department the center was providing mentors and workshops to help with training for higher education such as SAT preparation, and on strategies to keep up one’s GPA, among others. The help she received was “tremendous” in her pursuit of higher education. She underscored that teens want to go to college and succeed in life. th Caleb Pruzynski , 470 West 27 Avenue, spoke on behalf of Nuestro Lugar/Our Place Teen Center. He said he was glad to see the councilors again. He thanked the council and the City for the space that had been donated. He stated that teens were commonly ignored by society. To him and others, the center represented a change for the better. He reiterated his gratitude, adding that they had made one of his dreams come true. Jason Georgianna , 765 Minosa Avenue, owner of Pacific Coast Cage Fights, stated that he promoted cage fight events and was an instructor for students wanting to learn the sport. He thought the ordinance that sought to prohibit unregulated fighting and put some rules in place was a good step forward. He noted that the State was already working on a parallel process. He felt in spirit that it was a good thing as it was what the sport needed and it was good for the athletes to take up safe practices. He said he would object to a proposed amendment that would ban minors from spectating, though he supported banning minors from fighting. He stressed that regardless of the outcome of the vote on the ordinance, he planned to have all fighters have blood tests before they compete and to have medical insurance in place. He underscored that he intended to maintain his standards. He averred that a lot of young people train in jujitsu, kick boxing, and wrestling and wanted to see such events. He called it a legitimate form of self-expression. Rachel Rodriguez Parra , 2036 South Shasta, Vice President of the NAACP, announced that the Martin Luther King, Jr. March was planned for January 15 starting at 10 a.m. at EWEB. The march would proceed down Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard to the National Guard Armory where it would culminate with refreshments and a program of guest speakers. She stressed that it was a great day to commemorate a great man. Arbrella Luvert , 2036 South Shasta, member of the NAACP Executive Board, said members of the Executive Board attended the study circles on racism January 5 through January 7. She called it one of the “most outstanding things [she] had gone to.” She urged the council to participate in the study circles. She stated that the circles featured some of the best materials she had seen and they were very well done. She averred that Cindy Carlson and Dr. Phyllis Lee had done an “outstanding job” in training the group as facilitators. She believed that if the councilors had not experienced the process they were missing out on something as a city that would increase the dialogue. She pointed out that tension arose because of lack of dialogue. She strongly encouraged councilors to train as facilitators, to take the training, and to participate in the circles. She stated that the circles would be starting in a few weeks and she believed it to be an excellent opportunity for City staff and elected officials to help to move the council priority on race forward. th Eugene Drix , 307-½ East 14 Avenue, expressed his love for the City. He wanted to talk about the two holes in downtown Eugene. He said most people start from the ground up, but given that they were holes, we could start from below the ground. He commented that this showed the City was a living organism because “most living organisms have two holes.” He suggested the City fill the holes with things the City MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 8, 2007 Page 3 Regular Meeting needed. He invited everyone to submit ideas about what to do with the holes. He averred the future was coming quickly and he hoped to inspire people to move forward. Zachary Vishanoff , Patterson Street, wished the council a happy new year. He suggested that Mayor Piercy participate in another City Club forum and that the topic should be the riverfront. He felt Kevin Matthews would be a good partner to speak with on that issue because he considered Mr. Matthews to be “brilliant.” He felt a City Club forum on the topic would motivate community members to become more involved in the riverfront property that the City could potentially purchase from EWEB. Mayor Piercy closed the public forum and invited comments and questions from councilors. Councilor Ortiz thanked everyone for coming to the meeting. She surmised that a group of young people was present as part of a class and thanked them for picking a council meeting to attend. She also wished to acknowledge the LEAD teens for keeping the council updated. Councilor Clark echoed Councilor Ortiz’s comments to the young people. He conveyed his appreciation for the invitation to the Nuestro Lugar/Our Place Teen Center grand opening. He added that he wished to respond to Mr. Pruzynski’s assertion that teens were easy to ignore as he believed that Mr. Pruzynski would be a “young fellow who would be very difficult to ignore some day.” Councilor Solomon commended Mr. Georgianna for his persistence as the ordinance had progressed. She said he had elevated her understanding of the sport and she appreciated his conscientiousness in working to keep the fighting a safe sport and his emphasis on education and self-defense. She said she would be making the amendment requested to not prohibit minors from watching the sport fighting events. Mayor Piercy thanked everyone for coming. She said she wished she could attend the grand opening of the Nuestro Lugar/Our Place Teen Center but she was scheduled to be out of town. She also wanted to thank Mr. Georgianna for working with the council and keeping it council informed. Mayor Piercy said to Mr. Vishanoff that if the City Club wished to invite her have a discussion she would be eager to discuss connections to the riverfront and the possibilities. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of City Council Minutes - November 8, 2006, Work Session - November 13, 2006, Work Session - November 15, 2006, Joint Elected Officials’ Meeting - November 20, 2006, Work Session - November 20, 2006, City Council Meeting - November 27, 2006, Work Session B. Approval of Tentative Working Agenda C. Adoption of Resolution 4898 Authorizing Issuance of Parks, Athletic Fields, and Preserva- tion of Open Space Bonds D. Adoption of Resolution 4899 Acknowledging Receipt of the City of Eugene, Comprehen- sive Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2006 Councilor Ortiz, seconded by Councilor Pryor, moved to approve the items on the Consent Cal- endar. MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 8, 2007 Page 4 Regular Meeting Councilor Poling said that he submitted a minutes correction electronically. Councilor Bettman said she electronically submitted minutes corrections. She thanked Councilor Poling for taking Councilor Kelly’s place in terms of finding some omissions and errors in the minutes. She remarked that she hoped councilors would not have to act as proofreaders. Mayor Piercy deemed the minutes corrections, without objection, approved. Roll call vote, the motion to approve the Consent Calendar passed unanimously, 8:0. Mayor Piercy adjourned the Eugene City Council and convened the Eugene Urban Renewal Agency at 8:10 p.m. 5. ACTION: Resolution 1041 Acknowledging Receipt of the Annual Financial Report of the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Eugene, Oregon, for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2006 Councilor Ortiz, seconded by Councilor Pryor, moved to adopt Resolution 1041 acknowledging receipt of the Annual Financial Report for the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Eugene for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2006. City Manager Dennis Taylor pointed out that the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Eugene had a clean audit “again” with no comments whatsoever. He called this a phenomenal achievement for any city. Mayor Piercy thanked the City Manager and staff for both of the reports, noting that it demonstrated that City staff was doing a good job at being fiscally responsible. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. 6. ACTION: Resolution 1042 Delegating Authority to Declare Official Intent to Reimburse Expenditures City Manager Taylor asked Financial Analysis Manager for the Central Services Department Sue Cutsogeorge to explain why the resolution was before the council. Ms. Cutsogeorge stated that the resolution granted authority to the Agency Director, also the City Manager, to sign the paperwork that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) required under certain circumstances. She explained that if an entity thought it was going to spend its own money and then later come back with a tax exempt bond to repay itself, it was required to declare this prior to spending the money. She said the IRS did this because it had an interest in ensuring that the fewest number of tax exempt bonds were issued. She underscored that the resolution did not authorize any spending or any debt nor did it require any issuance of any debt. She stated that the reason one of the delegations had been used by the city in the past was because of the General Obligation Bonds approved for parks. She said the City routinely did so at the point in time the council had committed itself to issuing debt. MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 8, 2007 Page 5 Regular Meeting Councilor Ortiz, seconded by Councilor Pryor, moved to adopt Resolution 1042 delegating au- thority to declare official intent to reimburse expenditures. Councilor Bettman understood that this was a different process than delegating the authority to the City Manager for Parks and Open Space bonds which was a defined amount of money. She asserted that the Urban Renewal District had a provision in its plan that indicated that $250,000 could be spent without coming before council for any project that “could be even loosely construed as benefiting the Urban Renewal District.” She did not think there were any constraints. She believed that this was not a $250,000 per year cap, rather it meant the City Manager could authorize “$250,000 period for any expenditures.” She called this vast latitude for expenditures. She was inclined not to support the resolution. She felt the same thing could be accomplished by bringing these things to the council. Mayor Piercy asked if there was a reason for following the procedure as per the resolution over the way that Councilor Bettman had mentioned in her comments. Ms. Cutsogeorge replied that the biggest difference between supporting the resolution and opposing it would be that opposition would result in Finance staff coming to three meetings instead of two, as staff would have to come and request the delegation authority that the City Manager would be given by the resolution. Mayor Piercy suggested that the resolution would cut a meeting but having these items come before the council alerted the council to activity. Ms. Cutsogeorge responded that the council would know about the activity because the first step in the process would be that the council would say it wanted to fund the project. This was the trigger for such a resolution. City Manager Taylor pointed out that every debt to be issued would require council action. Councilor Taylor said anything that caused the council to focus more on expenditures and caused the public to be more aware was a good thing. She was concerned about “how easy it is” to spend urban renewal funds. Councilor Bettman asserted that these items do not come often and could “certainly” be in the form of a Consent Calendar item with an explanation. She thought the “inconvenience” would be negligible but in terms of the “accountability factor” it seemed to have significance. Roll call vote; the motion passed, 6:2; councilors Taylor and Bettman voting in opposition. Mayor Piercy adjourned the meeting of the Eugene Urban Renewal Agency at 8:16 p.m. and reconvened the meeting of the City Council. 7. ACTION: An Ordinance Prohibiting Extreme Fighting; Adding Section 4.740 to the Eugene Code, 1971; and Amending Section 4.990 of that Code City Manager Taylor asked City Attorney Jerry Lidz to briefly describe the ordinance and the issues before the council. Mr. Lidz stated that the council had held two prior work sessions and a public hearing on the item. He indicated that the City had the right to ban or regulate amateur mixed martial arts, but the State had the exclusive authority to regulate professional fighting of all kinds. He said the general approach of the MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 8, 2007 Page 6 Regular Meeting ordinance was to prohibit extreme or cage fighting, but to exempt fights that comply with regulations the City Manager would adopt from that ban. He noted the four things that the regulations would cover were listed in the Agenda Item Summary (AIS). He added that a motion to amend the ordinance to prohibit the attendance of and participation by minors proposed by Councilor Bettman was listed as Option 2 in the AIS. Councilor Ortiz, seconded by Councilor Pryor, moved that the City Council adopt Council Bill 4930, an ordinance prohibiting extreme fighting. Councilor Taylor asked what would happen if the council did not adopt the ordinance. Mr. Lidz replied that amateur mixed martial arts would continue to be unregulated within the city limits of Eugene. Councilor Taylor commented that she had difficulty in adopting regulations for something she felt should be banned. She asked if Mr. Lidz believed the fights would be safer under the ordinance. Mr. Lidz responded that he was not an expert on mixed martial arts, but he thought in light of Mr. Georgianna’s comments and some of the regulations that had been proposed, regulating the practice was safer than allowing it to continue unregulated. Councilor Poling, seconded by Councilor Solomon, moved to amend the ordinance to add a Sec- tion 5 to require on-scene medical personnel with minimum paramedic rating. Councilor Poling believed it was imperative to have on-scene medical personnel who could address a crisis situation that might occur. Councilor Ortiz offered a friendly amendment to require a registered nurse or medical personnel with minimum paramedic rating on-scene. Councilor Poling said he was seeking to have someone on the scene with both the training and the equip- ment. Councilor Ortiz surmised that what Councilor Poling was suggesting was that Emergency Medical Services (EMS) personnel should be standing by. She asked if he meant he wanted a unit of service at the scene. Councilor Poling responded that he was not specifically thinking of an EMS vehicle. Councilor Bettman averred that such a person should be an emergency medical technician (EMT) with access to equipment. She felt there were ways for such services to be obtained, such as on an hourly basis. She believed it would help to have such treatment for all injuries and also for an immediate recognition of more severe injuries. Mayor Piercy asked if having paramedics on site was a requirement for any other sport where significant injuries could take place. City Manager Taylor was uncertain of the answer. He felt the rationale for Councilor Poling’s amendment was understandable given that mixed martial arts presented a unique environment and the council was voting on an originating ordinance. Mayor Piercy asked if there were enough EMS personnel to provide that kind of coverage. Mr. Lidz replied that the City did not have a lot of occasions where there was more than one event needing an EMS unit occurring at the same time. He said whether one unit or one EMT with equipment was available would have to be determined. Councilor Solomon remarked that she was having a hard time envisioning that an EMT with the equipment would just be available. She wondered whether personnel qualified for hire “on a Friday night” would MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 8, 2007 Page 7 Regular Meeting already be working in the public sector. She said it was difficult to vote on the amendment given that she was uncertain whether that was a reasonable expectation. Councilor Ortiz stated that the whole city was in grids for paramedic coverage and when one unit was engaged, other units had to cover the area. She said there was never a time that a unit would not be working. Councilor Bettman said it seemed there were plenty of events at which EMTs stood by. She predicted that if the amendment passed, staff would assess it and, if the ordinance needed further tweaking, staff would come back to the council. Councilor Pryor ascertained that Councilor Poling’s amendment was not specific to a government-employed EMT. Councilor Poling added that the person on site could be a doctor, as an example. Mr. Lidz said if it was council’s goal to require on-scene medical personnel but the council was wary of specifying exactly what kind, the ordinance could be amended to say that the City Manager’s administrative rules must require appropriate on-scene medical personnel without specifying the level of training. He suggested that the City Manager could then investigate what various levels of training would be appropriate and what equipment was available. Councilor Poling asked if adding at the end of his amendment “a paramedic rating or the equivalent to that” would be the same as Mr. Lidz’ suggested wording. He reiterated his feeling that it was necessary to have a high standard for the medically trained person on the scene. City Manager Taylor said the intent of the amendment was clear and wording that included “the equivalent to” would allow staff to clarify what that would be. He thought the amendment would be more understand- able if the delegation to staff to do so was clear. He added that it would be up to the promoter of the event to procure the medical personnel if required. Mr. Lidz suggested the following wording: “…require on-scene medical personnel with a paramedic rating or equivalent training.” Councilor Poling agreed that this was the motion he wished to make, as did the second. The amendment passed, 5:3; councilors Solomon, Clark, and Ortiz voting no. Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to amend the ordinance by adding a new subparagraph 5 to Section 4.740(2)(a), as follows: “Prohibit attendance of and participation by minors.” Councilor Bettman appreciated Mr. Georgianna’s intentions to modify the environment in which the events occur. She added that Mr. Georgianna was not the only promoter in the City of Eugene and the ordinance was being written to protect the public. She believed that it was “particularly egregious” to allow minors at these events where they could watch people locked in cages “go after each other.” She acknowledged that ultimately it was the parent’s responsibility, but she believed the fights desensitized young people to violence. Councilor Zelenka said the issue for him was whether this really rose to the level of having to ban minors. He pointed out that young people can watch this sort of sport on television. He had been struck by MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 8, 2007 Page 8 Regular Meeting Councilor Ortiz’s discussion of the cultural aspects of sport fighting. He did not support having a group of 10 to 14-year-olds go off against their parents’ will to participate and/or attend the events. Councilor Zelenka offered a friendly amendment to specify that minors could not attend unless accompanied by a parent. Councilor Bettman said this sounded good in theory, but she did not think they would be able to determine if a young person was being accompanied by a parent without checking identification. She asked the City Manager if the administrative rules would then require that identifications be checked and that minors were accompanied by the parent. City Manager Taylor replied that this was not a decision he could make based on the information provided. He said if this was the council’s will he would likely look at how other parental requirements were enforced. Mr. Lidz said the question in his mind was whether the administrative rules would add anything to Councilor Zelenka’s intent. He stated that the burden would be on the promoter of the event to ensure the rules were adhered to. Councilor Zelenka asked how age limits were monitored at movie theaters. Councilor Bettman said teens could go to a movie that was rated R with an adult. She opined that enforcement was lax. Councilor Pryor asked what the rules were for boxing and whether minors were allowed to attend. It seemed to him that the activity was similar to boxing and similar rules would be helpful. He underscored that the ordinance had been generated by concern for the safety of the participants and questioned the wisdom of “moving into public morals.” He did not want to get into what young people could or could not do. He felt that Councilor Zelenka made a good point. He was willing to support the notion of requiring young people to be accompanied by a parent. He said that if the amendment failed he intended to offer an amendment to that end. Councilor Solomon said she would not support the amendment. She did not favor prohibiting minors from attending. She felt the ordinance had done a good job of cleaning up the event. She also wanted to be careful if it came to crafting language requiring a minor to be accompanied by a parent given that some young people were being raised by guardians. Councilor Poling agreed with Councilor Solomon. He did not feel minors should participate but he did not want to restrict youth from attending. He reiterated that young people could watch worse on television. He said he would be amenable to including language that said no minors should attend without an accompany- ing adult. Councilor Ortiz said she was unwilling to support the amendment to prohibit attendance by minors, though she agreed they should not participate. She noted that watching such events was a part of her upbringing growing up in the Latino community. While she would not choose to attend such an event at this point in her life, she could not support preventing attendance by minors, given that it was still a spectacle some people watched as a family. She added that she would consider supporting an amendment that required an accompanying adult. Councilor Bettman wished to make a point about “children being allowed into these events.” She related that Mr. Georgianna acknowledged in one letter that one concern had to do with “cage girls that [were] MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 8, 2007 Page 9 Regular Meeting dressed too lasciviously.” She noted that Mr. Georgianna asserted he would tone down the way the “girls” would dress. She said she was sure that “half-naked women presiding over a bloody spectacle in a cage, with people beating each other to a pulp, makes money.” She averred this was fine for adults but it was not fine for “children.” She reiterated her belief that minors should be prohibited from the premises. Councilor Taylor indicated she would support the amendment. She noted the comparison one councilor had made to movies and commented that seeing something in real life was not the same as seeing it in a movie. Roll call vote; the motion to amend failed, 6:2; councilors Bettman and Taylor voting in favor. Mayor Piercy observed that there was support for the ordinance. She asked the councilors to consider whether they wanted to pass an amendment and have it come into play in the face of the impending state legislation. Councilor Pryor supported imposing some level of oversight. While he did not want the ordinance to be too prohibitive, he said he would like to see an effort to determine what the boxing industry did and to craft something similar to that. He did not want the people who were promoting mixed martial arts to go forward from this ordinance wondering what sort of restrictions the City would next place upon them. City Manager Taylor suggested that he and staff provide a range of options as a council assignment and provide it in the regular Thursday packet. Councilor Pryor said he was amenable to that. Councilor Zelenka, seconded by Councilor Bettman, moved to amend the ordinance to impose limitations on participation and attendance by minors without parental or guardian consent. Councilor Bettman offered a friendly amendment to delete the word participation. Councilor Zelenka accepted the friendly amendment. Roll call vote; the motion passed, 7:1; Councilor Clark voting in opposition. Councilor Poling, seconded by Councilor Bettman, moved to prohibit participation in the mixed martial arts fights by minors. In response to a question from Councilor Solomon, City Manager Taylor said he would provide a range of options as part of a response to the question raised by Councilor Pryor. He stated that he would, based upon the council’s action, probably promulgate rules that the council could comment on. Councilor Zelanka asked Councilor Poling to elaborate on the reasons for prohibiting minors from participating in the events given that minors participated in other sports. Councilor Poling acknowledged that minors did participate in other rough sports such as football, but he believed mixed martial arts fighting might be too aggressive for the younger age group. Councilor Pryor asked if minors were permitted to box. Mr. Lidz replied that he did not know. He noted that only professional boxing was regulated by the State. Roll call vote; the amendment passed, 5:3; councilors Clark, Ortiz, and Solomon voting in op- position. MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 8, 2007 Page 10 Regular Meeting Councilor Zelenka moved to amend the motion so that the ordinance would be enacted 30 days after the close of the legislative session. Mr. Lidz said he would have to look into it to be certain, but he had some doubt that an ordinance could be adopted with an unspecified enacting date. Councilor Zelenka rephrased his amendment so that it stated that the ordinance would be en- acted on August 1, 2007. City Manager Taylor said if the legislature took action sooner the council could take action before the date certain for enactment. Mr. Lidz noted that the City Manager would need some time to develop some administrative rules. Councilor Pryor provided the second. Councilor Poling could not support the amendment. He stated that staff had put a great deal of time into the ordinance. He felt the ordinance should be put into place now. Councilor Bettman indicated she would oppose the amendment. She pointed out that the council did not know what restrictions the State Legislature would approve and they could ultimately be a watered down version of the council’s intent in the ordinance. She underscored that the City’s legislative document was based on home rule. Councilor Zelenka said while he was prepared to vote for the ordinance and put it into place, he was concerned about spending a lot of staff time to create something that could potentially be redundant to what the State was doing. He felt passing the amendment and subsequent ordinance showed financial prudence and concern for staff time. Roll call vote; the amendment failed, 5:3; councilors Zelenka, Clark, and Solomon voting in fa- vor. Roll call vote; the main motion, as amended, passed, 6:2; councilors Clark and Ortiz voting in opposition. The meeting adjourned at 9:13 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dennis M. Taylor City Manager (Recorded by Ruth Atcherson) MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 8, 2007 Page 11 Regular Meeting