Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 01/31/01 Work Session MINUTES Eugene City Council Work Session McNutt Room--City Hall January 31, 2001 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Betty Taylor, David Kelly, Pat Fart, Scott Meisner, Gary Rayor, Gary Pap~, Bonny Bettman. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Nancy Nathanson. CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION A. Executive Session The City Council met in Executive Session pursuant to Oregon Revised Statutes 192.660(1)(e) and Oregon Revised Statutes 192.660(1)(0. B. Council Process Session Margo Helphand joined the council to facilitate the session. She reviewed the agenda. Minutes Process The council discussed the manner in which minutes corrections were processed. Mr. Meisner said the council had a process that seemed to work most of the time. Minutes were being received in a timely fashion, and were often provided to the council for a preliminary review. However, when the time came for adoption of the minutes, councilors offered clarifications rather than corrections to the record. He suggested that if a correction was a clarification of prior minutes or a substantiative change, it should be sent to the minutes recorders for review, per the agreed-upon process. Mr. Meisner wanted to ensure that the minutes reflected what was said, not what one wished one said. He suggested that clarifications be offered as such during the approval of minutes on a Consent Calendar. Mr. Kelly asked if Mr. Meisner was suggesting Minutes Recording staff always needed to check all changes with the tapes, which could be an added burden on staff. He said he tried to ensure that his corrections did not revise what was said, but the minutes were a summary rather than a verbatim transcript and sometimes meaning was lost in the summary. Mr. Meisner thought the process should be followed in those cases. He said that there had been occasions when changes were offered, and they were not reflective of what had actually been said. Ms. Taylor agreed that the minutes should reflect what had been said, and she had gone back to the video tape to ensure that the minutes reflected her remarks. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 31, 2001 Page 1 Work Session Mr. Fart thought Mr. Kelly and Mr. Meisner were both correct. He did not think it would take a lot of time for the recording staff to investigate substantive changes. Ms. Helphand confirmed that the council was clarifying and agreeing upon its previous policy regarding minutes corrections. Wednesday Meeting Time The council moved on to discussion of the time of the Wednesday meeting. Mr. Rayor said the council already had many daytime committee meetings and, as a full-time worker, he needed every hour of the day to fit things in. He said that he would play what he characterized as the "W-2 card," as a full-time worker paying property taxes. He supported retaining the 5:30 p.m. meeting time. Mr. Farr concurred with Mr. Rayor. He said that taking three hours out of the middle of the day was a hardship for someone working full-time. While he preferred middle-of-the-day meetings, he said they were impractical for him. Mr. Kelly noted his support for 11:30 a.m. meetings. He said no matter the meeting time, it would be an inconvenience for some members of the council. Because he was self-employed his time was more flexible. He said that many of his committee meetings were in the evening, and moving the council meeting to 11:30 a.m. would free up an evening for him. Mr. Kelly pointed out that 11:30 a.m. meetings worked for eight of the past ten years. While acknowledging Mr. Rayor's remarks about the "W-2 card," he said that councilors with young children at home also had a difficult time with evening meetings. Ms. Taylor also supported 11:30 a.m. meetings. She said that the councilors had heavy obligations at night already with neighborhood meetings and council committee assigmnents and suggested that those who have a difficult time with day time committee meetings attempt to change those assigmnents. She said that family time was important, and the council should be thinking about the future councils as well. She thought the former schedule represented a good balance. Ms. Bettman noted her attempt to get more day time committee assigmnents because of her family commitments. She agreed with Mr. Kelly that no one would be completely happy with the meeting time. She said that the council should keep in mind the diversity of the community and not preclude single parents from serving on the council because they could not be at home at night. Mr. Meisner respected the needs of those with full-time jobs that roughly corresponded to bankers hours. He had more flexibility. He pointed out that the council schedule would continue to include Monday evening meetings and one of the two other council meetings would be changed. He said that given the meeting time was fixed and the council generally finished as scheduled, he supported a return to 11:30 a.m. meetings and hoped that worked out for Mr. Farr. Mr. Meisner thought it fair to accommodate both schedules. Mr. Pap~ agreed with the comments of Mr. Rayor and Mr. Farr. He asked if the council should make such a decision in the absence of Ms. Nathanson. City Manager Jim Johnson noted that Ms. Nathanson did not ask the council to postpone a decision. Mr. Pap~ said that he would be unable to pay the same type of attention at MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 31, 2001 Page 2 Work Session noon meetings because it would interrupt his work day. He thought attendance in the evening council meetings was better than attendance at the noon sessions he attended prior to becoming a councilor. Mr. Kelly, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to return the council's Wednesday work sessions to 11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. Mr. Kelly spoke in support of the motion. He said that whatever its faults, the time worked well for many years. Mr. Fart wanted the council to take the vote with Ms. Nathanson present. He asked if Ms. Nathanson would be at the next council meeting. Mr. Johnson said yes. Mr. Fart indicated that he would vote for the motion so he could move that the council reconsider it at the next meeting. Mr. Rayor agreed with Mr. Fart, saying he would also move to reconsider if necessary, although he preferred to table the motion. Mr. Rayor, seconded by Mr. Pap~, to table the motion to the next meeting. The motion failed, 4:3; Mr. Farr, Mr. Pap~, and Mr. Rayor voting yes. The motion passed, 6:1; Mr. Rayor voting no. Three-Minute Time Limit The council moved on to discussion of the three-minute time limit for council comments. Mr. Rayor said he would prefer the time allotted for councilors' comments be shorter. He thought council comments could be briefer than they were. Mr. Farr agreed with Mr. Rayor. He said that the council spent too much time in meetings, and many people shared his observation. He said the reason the council spent too much time in meetings was because people repeated themselves. He wanted to adhere to strict time limits, and for councilors to search inside themselves and determine whether they could make the same point in fewer words. Mr. Meisner said that the first few years he was on the council there was no time limit and it worked fine, but that approach took discipline. He was not troubled by the three-minute limit and said the timer was a nuisance to watch but not intrusive. He disagreed to some degree with Mr. Rayor. There was an advantage to brevity, but the council format was based on discussion and persuasion. He agreed with Mr. Farr that councilors repeated themselves, but as the councilors represented their constituents and positions it was important they attempt to persuade and communicate. He thought for the most part the council's discussions were highly effective and helpful, and he found the information he heard useful. Mr. Meisner said that he also got impatient, but he did not want to limit comments for that reason. Mr. Kelly agreed with Mr. Meisner's remarks, adding that he appreciated having the timers because it gave him a discipline he might not otherwise have. He thanked Council Coordinator Kate Rowles for operating the timer. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 31, 2001 Page 3 Work Session Ms. Bettman felt strongly that the council was a deliberative body and the discussions it had were important to her and informative for the public. She often did not know how she was going to vote on an issue until a discussion occurred. She said the discussion often led to a better decisions than the options offered to the council by staff. Ms. Bettman said that three minutes was plenty of time for comment, and she often used less. Ms. Taylor wanted to adhere to the three-minute limit and thought two minutes might also be sufficient. She agreed that the public was informed by the council's discussions. Mr. Pap~ agreed with Ms. Bettman, saying that dialogue and discourse were the basis of democracy. However, brevity was an art form he thought few councilors had mastered. He said that redundancy and "beating a dead horse" occurred frequently at the council table. He asked the mayor to cut speakers off to accommodate the agenda if that was needed. Ms. Helphand summarized the discussion, saying the council wanted to keep the three-minute rule, wanted the mayor to monitor the discussion closely, and wanted councilors to have discipline. She said that the council needed to think about where it spent its time given its full schedule. She suggested the council evaluate the issue from time-to-time. Mr. Rayor said that he might request a personal point of process and talk over individuals who exceeded their three-minute time limit. Mr. Meisner did not think reducing the three-minute time limit for comments would do anything to overcome the problem of repetition. He suggested the mayor could help address the problem of repetition by limiting the council to two rounds of comments on an item. The council agreed to schedule future process sessions as needed. C.Goals Session Jan Bohman of the City Manager's Office, Assistant City Manager Jim Carlson, and the City's Executive Management Team joined the council and Mr. Johnson for the discussion. Ms. Bohman distributed documents entitled 2001-2002 City Council Goals and 1999-2000 Vision and Goals, and a memorandum entitled Executive Managers 'Key Strategic Issues for 2001-2002. Ms. Helphand said that on the 2001-2002 goals document listed under each broad goal area were the areas of concern identified by councilors in her interviews with them. She said that the issues identified by the executive managers were also listed. The information provided was intended to inform the council as it discussed its goals for the coming year. Ms. Helphand called the council's attention to an additional item, Review Roles of Mayor, City Council, and City Manager. She suggested that because of a lack of time, the council might want to schedule a work session on the issue, and hire a facilitator from the International City Managers Association to help in that discussion. Review Roles of Mayor, City Council, City Manager MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 31, 2001 Page 4 Work Session Mr. Kelly recollected a National League of Cities session he attended regarding policy governance, and suggested that any discussion be held in that context. He believed that would require a minimum full-day retreat. He supported such a retreat. Mr. Meisner did not think the council did a bad job in distinguishing roles. He was not always sure if councilors differentiated between their roles as individual councilors and the council as a whole in working with staff. He suggested the discussion was somewhat premature because the council had referred the broader issue to the Citizen Charter Review Committee. Mr. Meisner added he was not enthusiastic about the policy governance model mentioned by Mr. Kelly. Mr. Farr thought there had sometimes been a problem on past councils when stafftime was consumed at an individual councilor's request. He believed that the current council did not have the same problem. He said staff was charged with running the City on a day-to-day basis and the council was charged with establishing the policy that was the framework under which staff operated. He thought as long as the council remembered that, it would be easier for staff to do its job. Mr. Rayor said that when staff worked for one councilor it was usually with the knowledge and approval of the City Manager. Mr. Pap~ wanted to ensure there was coordination of such work through the City Manager's Office so normal operations and priorities were not disrupted. Mr. Johnson agreed with Mr. Meisner that the charter roles of the council, mayor, and manager may change but there were still the roles that the individuals involved had between each other. He thought the issue deserved more discussion, saying he would like to look into Mr. Kelly's idea about a six-hour retreat with facilitation by a member of the National League of Cities as suggested by Ms. Helphand. He agreed with Mr. Farr that the situation was better than it had been in the past. Mr. Farr said he hoped staff came to any discussion of roles prepared to be frank. Ms. Helphand confirmed there was general agreement that the council would spend some time on the topic later in the year. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 31, 2001 Page 5 Work Session Goals Setting Ms. Helphand reminded the council of its last goals-setting session, during which it developed a broad, long- term vision of the community. She referred the council to the goals statements it developed at that time, which were mounted on the meeting room wall. She reminded the council that it also determined it wanted to examine the action priorities associated with the more broad goal statements each year. She briefly reviewed the criteria the council established for the action priorities. Ms. Helphand asked if the council wished to revise the Vision Statement. Councilors expressed comfort with the Vision Statement. Ms. Helphand determined that the council continued to support the broad goal areas it established previously and that councilors had no changes to suggest. Responding to a question from Mr. Pap6, Mr. Johnson indicated he would provide the council with a copy of the State definition of sustainability. Mr. Meisner reminded Mr. Pap~ that the statement under the goal of Sustainable Community Growth and Change was not the definition of sustainability adopted by the council. Mr. Pap~ acknowledged Mr. Meisner' comment, but said he would like to revisit the topic in light of the work done by the State committee that developed the definition. Ms. Taylor believed it would profit the council to discuss the definition as well as how to implement sustainable practices at a later work session. Mr. Farr advocated for further discussion of the gaps in how the goals were being met, particularly in the areas of child and youth development, job development, and affordable housing. Ms. Helphand asked the council to consider its action priorities by goal area. Councilors reviewed the action priorities and made suggestions for changes. Safe Community Continue to implement Community Policing Develop and implement a comprehensive youth program in coordination with other agencies. Increase outreach to communities of color and disadvantaged Enhance Emergency Preparedness Continue to support Public Safety Coordinating Council (PSCC) to restructure the regional criminal justice system The council discussed a suggestion by Mr. Rayor that it redefine the first action priority's reference to community policing. Mr. Rayor thought of community policing as policing that was accessible to citizens when the police pass by on their rounds. He asked about recent media reports, questioning if the City had backed away from community policing without discussion MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 31, 2001 Page 6 Work Session Mr. Fart said the City needed to elevate the level of understanding in the community of the job the police are doing to overcome the disrespect and alienation some felt. He thought the City was doing so to some degree through the School Resource Officers Program. Mr. Meisner was committed to the first action priority but preferred not to list it as it was, as he did not know what it meant or whether it was achievable. He noted that the Police Commission was working to analyze the issue as well as the Hobson Report on staffing levels, and he did not want to preempt that effort. Mr. Meisner advocated for a specific action priority such as "Increase foot patrols in the higher crime areas." Mr. Kelly concurred with Mr. Meisner in that while all the council and staff wanted community policing, it was difficult to define what it was and how to achieve it. He agreed the statement was too broad, and recommended the council drop the item pending the work of the Police Commission or reword it to make it a focused priority. Ms. Bettman agreed the item was broad. She said that it could be revised to read "Refine community policing strategies," or "Refine community policing strategies by increasing foot patrols in the urban core" as an example. She did not think the council should completely drop the item. Mayor Torrey advocated for dropping the action priority and incorporating the concept of policing in the goal itself. He said that no one knew what community policing really meant. Mr. Johnson agreed with Ms. Bettman that the item should not be dropped entirely. He recommended that the council give staff new direction, such as "Analyze foot patrols." The City was going to do all the activities associated with the goal area. Mr. Johnson said that Chief Jim Hill wanted a goal with clear outcomes so he knows when it is done. Mr. Pap~ wanted to see goals that could be measured in some sort of specific time frame with benchmarks. He did not think the council had reached that point yet. He expressed disappointment that some items had "drifted." Ms. Taylor did not want to drop the priority and suggested it be retained as an idea. She did not think community policing would ever be "finished." She thought the item could be added to with specifics like foot patrols. Regarding the media accounts referred to by Mr. Rayor, Chief of Police Jim Hill stated emphatically that the City had not backed away from the philosophy of community policing. He believed there was confusion on the part of the council regarding the definition of community policing and reported that the department had a definition of community policing that 14,000 police agencies had agreed upon. Chief Hill said he would provide that definition to the council. He believed that the question was what the council wanted in terms of specific strategies. Chief Hill said that a foot patrol was one idea, but it was incomplete if the philosophy behind the program was not understood by police officers. The police needed to work with the community and get an idea of what the community's priorities were and come up with common strategies to deal with crime. Chief Hill said that he was concerned about officer safety because of low staffing levels and the lack of officer back-up. He said that the issue went beyond the mechanics of community policing if the City could not even provide an officer to respond to a call. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 31, 2001 Page 7 Work Session Mr. Johnson summarized the discussion, saying that it appeared the council wanted to modify the priority by making it more specific: it should not encompass only programs already ongoing. Mr. Rayor suggested that Growth Management Study Policy 19, "Expand City efforts to achieve community- based policing," could be an appropriate substitute for the first action priority. Mayor Torrey endorsed that approach. The council discussed the second action priority, Develop and implement a comprehensive youth program in coordination with other agencies. Mr. Meisner recommended the action priority item be dropped because it was being done and did not represent additional effort on the part of the City. He suggested instead "Work with other jurisdictions to develop a continuation levy." Mr. Kelly concurred, suggesting the priority be reworded to specifically mention Ballot Measure 20-37, multi-jurisdictions, and sustainable funding. Ms. Bettman agreed with the remarks of Mr. Meisner and Mr. Kelly. Regarding the third action priority, Mayor Torrey questioned if the priority should be enhanced with specifics about how it would be accomplished, such as through legislation or through the City's work on racial profiling. He said that the work of the committee addressing the issue needed to be communicated to the public to overcome feelings of disenfranchisement. Ms. Bettman supported the concept underlying the third priority but believed it was "fuzzy" and should be enhanced with specific actions. Mr. Johnson noted that the work plan items supporting the action priority were listed, and most of them were ongoing in nature. Mr. Meisner said the City had done much to accomplish the priority. He did not dispute the importance of the priority, but questioned whether it represented additional City effort. Mr. Johnson concurred. Mr. Meisner recommended the priority be dropped. Mr. Fart thought it important to keep focused on the issues but agreed with Mr. Meisner more specificity was needed. He also thought Mayor Torrey's points regarding communication was important. Mr. Pap~ agreed with Ms. Bettman and said that the priority should be more specific and measurable. Noting he would mention the issue again during discussion of Effective and Accountable government, Mr. Meisner said the City needed to be more proactive and affirmative in how it got the news out about what the organization does and has done. Referring to the fourth priority, Enhance Emergency Preparedness, Mr. Kelly suggested emergency preparedness be dropped because the work plan was largely focused on the Year 2000 issue, and replaced by an item regarding hillside fire danger. Responding to a concern expressed by Mr. Rayor, Mr. Kelly suggested that the work plan item Public Safety Facilities Development be made an action priority. Responding to a suggestion from Mayor Torrey that the council add an action priority reading "Support the Governance Committee's work to identify and consolidate intergovernmental public safety service elements," Mr. Meisner pointed out that listing the item would suggest additional effort on the part of the City. Mr. Johnson said that identifying ways to consolidate policing services within the metropolitan area would MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 31, 2001 Page 8 Work Session represent a new level of effort, which he estimated to be four to five months of staff work. Mr. Meisner asked if by supporting the committee the City was committing major resources to the effort. Mr. Johnson said no; there was some staff time associated with the effort but it was not major. Ms. Bettman thought the suggested item was reflective of an ongoing effort and that there were other important efforts that could be similarly listed. She did not want to diminish the council's commitment to the priorities it really wanted to see implemented. Sustainable Community Growth and Change Implement the Growth Management Study through the Land Use Code Update and other mechanisms Review TransPlan for consistent implementation with GMS, building regional consensus, and implement nodal development projects and principles Implement the parks and open space bond measure Foster afJbrdable housing, including subsidizing low-income housing. Collaborate with Lane County to better coordinate and streamline service delivery in the River Road/Santa Clara area. Regarding the first bulleted item, Mr. Kelly advocated for more focus. Referring to the work plan, he suggested as a work plan item "Use the council resolution on sustainability as one of the basic component for organizational decision making." As a further work plan item or action priority, Mr. Kelly suggested "Prioritize and begin implementation of the post-Land Use Code Update work plan." He suggested another work plan item or action priority: "Improve cost recovery related to land use and development." Referring to the fourth bulleted action priority, Mr. Farr said it was imperative to him that as the council implemented the new land use code, it was fully aware of what that did to the cost of housing, and made the community aware of it too. Ms. Bettman suggested as an additional action priority "Provide neighborhood and downtown stability by preserving existing housing and residential uses." Mr. Pap6 suggested the action plan needed something to address the economic underpinnings of the community. Mr. Kelly agreed a new bullet regarding economic development was needed, noting the issue was also mentioned by both the mayor and the executive managers. He said he did not want to form a new council committee, but wanted the entire council to grapple with the issues involved. He echoed Mr. Farr's comment about the affordable housing bullet, saying he wanted to keep the bullet but wanted to focus it more. If the council did something that increased the cost of housing, it needed to be willing to consider waivers or sliding scale fees for affordable housing projects, which could be mentioned in the work plan items under the bulleted priority. Ms. Taylor wanted to add something to the work plan items under the fourth bullet regarding ways the City could support low-income home ownership. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 31, 2001 Page 9 Work Session Ms. Bettman noted her interest in focusing incentives for waivers of fees on low-income home ownership. She had another action priority she wished to add somewhere in the document, a downtown fixed rail trolley. She considered it an economic strategy, transportation strategy, a land use strategy, and a downtown strategy. Mr. Fart agreed with Mr. Kelly that economic stability should be a separate action priority because there were those who suspected the country was on the verge of difficult economic times. He also agreed with Ms. Bettman that incentives were needed to provide low-income housing. He thought that low-income housing could be constructed with the City's encouragement. Mr. Meisner wanted to retain the priority related to housing affordability and incorporating the concept of flexibility in the type of housing provided. He also supported the inclusion of an economic development action priority. He suggested that staff consider Growth Management Study Policy 16 as it drafted the priority. Regarding the second priority, Mr. Fart emphasized the importance of regional consensus in adopting TransPlan. Mr. Rayor suggested a related work plan item was completion of City bicycle connections. Regarding the second priority, Mr. Meisner said that the work plan items needed to be recast to reflect the City's adoption of TransPlan and the work done by the Metropolitan Policy Committee subcommittees. Responding to Mr. Fart's point about regional consensus, Mr. Meisner agreed it was important but it worked both ways, and compromise did not mean the council just gave up its position. Ms. Bettman did not think it was appropriate to include all the things that the council wanted in TransPlan in the work plan or action priorities and suggested the council move on. Mr. Johnson believed that the second action priority violated the council's rules as it contained two major priorities and suggested it be redrafted. Mayor Torrey suggested that the third priority be changed to refer to regional parks and open space. Ms. Bettman wanted to change the priority to "Preservation of open space and natural resource assets through acquisition." She thought it achievable and did not think it had received a strong focus to this point. Ms. Taylor agreed. Mr. Kelly like Mayor Torrey's idea but wanted to retain the mention of the Parks and Open Space measure because it had not been fully implemented, the schedule had slipped, and he wanted to ensure the council continued to receive updates on the progress of implementation. Mr. Fart agreed. However, he pointed out that the City continued to acquire open space, including land outside the urban growth boundary. Mr. Johnson said that the City was ahead of schedule on some implementation items and behind on others, and staff would provide the council with an update soon. Healthy Natural and Built Environment Implement an approach using policy and technical teams for improved management of the City's environmental programs. Adopt a revised tree ordinance. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 31, 2001 Page 10 Work Session Review &e Downtown Plan, and revise or adopt new plan and boundaries. Develop and implement an integrated watershed plan for the urban area, including response to the listing of threatened species. Mr. Rayor referred to the first action priority and said he did not like it. He liked the text the council adopted in its Endangered Species Act resolution and wanted the priority to mirror it. Responding to a question from Mr. Meisner, Ms. Helphand said that the council would be reviewing and weighing the results of tonight's discussion at a later time and emphasized that none of the suggested revisions were permanent yet. Mr. Kelly suggested that the second bullet be revised as follows: "Adopt the revised tree ordinance, educate the community, and enforce the ordinance." Mr. Farr emphasized the importance of community education, whatever the council did with the tree ordinance. Mr. Meisner observed that the second priority was an area where he anticipated some of the future Land Use Code Update work items would be included and suggested cross-references to some of those items would be appropriate. Mayor Torrey suggested the third action priority be modified to read "Adopt the Downtown Plan, implement it," and include the related work plan items. Mr. Meisner clarified that the references should be to the downtown vision. Planning and Development Department Director Paul Farmer indicated he would draft new text. Referring to the fourth action priority, Mr. Farr stressed the importance of community education as few were aware of the magnitude of the salmon listing. Ms. Helphand observed that community education and communication was a continuing theme mentioned by councilors. Mr. Johnson believed that more specific text regarding the Endangered Species Act and the salmon listing was appropriate, and said that staff would draft something for the council to review. Mr. Rayor suggested as an additional action priority or work plan item "Maintain infrastructure and rights-of- way, promote operation and safety, and address adverse impacts." The council took a brief meeting break. D. Consideration of Resolution The council considered a resolution regarding the City's actions related to the potential acquisition of the AutoCraft site. Mr. Johnson reviewed the contents of the resolution. Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to accept the resolution. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 31, 2001 Page 11 Work Session Mr. Papd said he had talked to General Services Administration (GSA) staff in the last week and he did not want to increase or decrease the agency's obligations by being too specific in Section 2. He thought it important to include the potential of condemnation in the resolution. Mr. Pap6, seconded by Mr. Fart, moved to amend section 2 by removing "market" before the word "value," inserting the phrase "as provided by law" after the word "value," and deleting the remainder of the sentence. Mr. Kelly observed that he had been about to commend staff for the wording of Section 2. He thought that the section provided context for the negotiation. If the amendment was passed, he would not support the resolution. Mr. Meisner did not support the amendment. He thought it important to communicate to the public that the City did not intend to take the AutoCraft property and pay the owner nothing. He said that the section was merely a statement of what the law provides. Ms. Taylor agreed with Mr. Meisner and Mr. Kelly. Responding to a question from Mayor Torrey, Mr. Johnson said that the resolution as written recognized what was required by law. Mr. Fart agreed the council needed to address community perceptions about the AutoCraft situation. There were some in the community who thought that the City intended to take the property without compensation. He asked if relocation took into account revenue lost from the time the business was being relocated. Mr. Johnson did not know. Mr. Farmer said in his experience, the federal relocation process usually resulted in more compensation to the businesses than it would have realized in revenues. Mr. Fart emphasized the importance of locating the federal courthouse in Eugene and the need to be fair to AutoCraft and its employees. Ms. Bettman supported the resolution as drafted as it did not provide for more than what the law allowed. She noted her previous vote against the last resolution on the topic as she felt there had been inadequate exploration of all options. She strongly supported the location of the courthouse downtown; while she was unsure the Chiquita site was the best site, she believed it could work. Ms. Bettman supported the resolution. Responding to a question from Mr. Rayor, Mr. Johnson indicated he was satisfied with the text of the resolution. Mr. Pap~ said the City was in competition with Springfield for the courthouse, and Springfield would like to see AutoCraft succeed in its effort to retain its current site because that would mean the courthouse would go to Springfield. He said the council should ensure that the company was treated fairly and appropriately, but the reference to relocation benefits sufficient to enable AutoCraft to operate from another location was problematic because the company was arguing it could not operate from any other location in the community. Mr. Fart was confident the City could treat AntoCraft fairly. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 31, 2001 Page 12 Work Session The amendment to the motion failed, 5:2; Mr. Papd and Mr. Fart voting yes. Mr. Kelly suggested the word "relocation" in the findings be replaced by the word "location." The council accepted the change as a friendly amendment to the motion. Responding to a question from Mr. Meisner, Mr. Johnson clarified that the binding purchase agreement referred to in (b) was a binding purchase agreement with conditions. Mr. Papd offered as a friendly amendment the deletion of the word "sufficient" from last line in Section 2. There was no objection. The motion passed unanimously, 7:0. The meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, James R. Johnson City Manager (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 31, 2001 Page 13 Work Session