Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 10/22/01 Work Session MINUTES Eugene City Council Work Session McNutt Room--Eugene City Hall October 22, 2001 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Betty Taylor, David Kelly, Nancy Nathanson, Pat Fart, Scott Meisner, Gary Pap~, Gary Rayor, Bonny Bettman. CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION Mayor James D. Torrey called the meeting to order. A. Items from the Mayor, Council, and City Manager Ms. Bettman had an issue regarding Metro TV as the voice of local government, and its recent broadcast of a League of Women Voters panel on the West Eugene Parkway sponsored by the City Club. The issue arose for her because she did not think there had been balanced representation regarding the issue, calling into question whether the broadcast was neutral. Ms. Bettman believed that there should be criteria for neutrality. Mr. Johnson advised Ms. Bettman to direct her concerns to the Lane Council of Governments Board, which had oversight over Metro TV. The City had a contract for services (broadcasting City Council and Budget Committee meetings). Ms. Bettman noted that the previous week the council had allocated $20,000 for education and outreach on the issue of transportation funding, and she wanted criteria regarding how that information was developed and disseminated and assurances that the information was neutral. Mr. Rayor referred to the consultant's report for improving pedestrian crossings on Willamette Street, finished the previous summer, and asked that a copy be placed in the Council Office. He encouraged other councilors to read the report, saying he was very excited about the possibility of improving Willamette Street pedestrian and bicycle traffic along that part of Willamette Street, and enhancing opportunities for businesses through improvements to the street scape. Ms. Nathanson reported that she had recently attended a meeting at Petersen Barn and was pleased that, in spite of huge budget cuts in recreation, that community center, a permanent City asset, had been able to continue operating for community purposes. She thanked staff. Ms. Taylor said she would like to see Amazon Community Center restored to the point where it offered classes for people of all ages. Ms. Taylor reported on a constituent question she had received regarding Permit and Information Center hours. She encouraged staff to make the center accessible to nonprofessionals who were doing remodeling, such as during the noon hour. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 22, 2001 Page 1 Work Session Ms. Taylor asked if the City had nuisance laws related to noise from a heat pump. She noted that a constituent was told to call the Police Department. She thought there should be another option. Mr. Johnson indicated that noise violations had been moved from the Land Use Code to Chapter 4 of the Eugene Code, and were responded to by the police. He thought the heat pump would have to be very noisy to elicit a police response and citation. Mr. Kelly thanked councilors who had signed up for shifts at the Business to Business Expo. Mr. Kelly raised concern that the hearing for the forfeiture ordinance originally set for November 13 was rescheduled for that evening. He suggested a hearing be held that evening as well as held open for November 13, 2001. There was no objection, but Mr. Meisner said that he did not want to hear those that spoke tonight again on November 13. Mr. Kelly agreed, suggesting that the public hearing be continued to avoid the issue. Mr. Kelly thanked Mr. Rayor for his remarks on the Willamette Street crossings. He thought the report had exciting possibilities. Mr. Meisner noted a televison news report on the positive changes in the Whiteaker neighborhood since the advent of the foot patrol. He said that residents perceived the neighborhood to be as clean and safe as it had been in 12 years. The foot patrol had made a tremendous difference. Mr. Meisner thanked the council, Budget Committee lay members, and Police staff for the foot patrol. On behalf of the Citizen Charter Review Committee, City Manager Jim Johnson asked the council for direction on whether the committee should proceed with work on the following issues: 1) inconsistency in the meaning of the word "officers" in the charter; 2) mandated residence of City employees within the city limits; 3) deletion of the phrases "so help me God" and "under the pains and penalties of perjury" from the charter; and 4) streamlining of the current ordinance adoption process. He noted that the committee had already looked at Item 2 and had recommended no changes, but it was not in the committee's charge, and the committee wanted to know if the council wanted more work done. Responding to a question from Ms. Taylor, Mr. Johnson said that in 1995 the council adopted a resolution clarifying that the charter provision related to residency applied only to the City Manager and executive managers. Ms. Taylor called for more examination of the issue. Noting the shortening time line for the committee's efforts, Mr. Kelly indicated comfort with the work the committee did in regard to Item 2. Mr. Meisner agreed, suggesting that the City Attorney take a quick look to determine whether the charter and resolution were consistent. Ms. Bettman said she would like to have seen a memorandum on the issue of employee residency, with a discussion of the types of issues considered by the committee. She had some questions about the topic, including how many City employees lived outside the city limits and what implication that had for other City Council policies and goals. She thought it an issue worth looking at. Mr. Johnson indicated that the committee had that information, and the committee's discussion would be reflected in its quarterly report. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 22, 2001 Page 2 Work Session Mr. Kelly did not support further work on Item 3, suggesting that a memorandum might suffice. He thought that pursuing the item would "open a can of worms" that would detract from the more substantive changes the committee was considering. Ms. Bettman thought the phrase "under the pains and penalties of perjury" sounded negative, and regretted the lack of better options. There was no objection to the committee proceeding with further work on Item 1. With the exception of Ms. Taylor, who voiced support for both items, and Ms. Bettman, who supported examination of Item 2, there was no support for further work on items 2 and 3; other councilors acknowledged the work the committee had done on Item 2 and indicated that no more effort was needed. There was no objection to the committee undertaking further work on Item 4. Mayor Torrey reported that, at the request of a Eugene resident working at Ground Zero, he had gone to Adams Grade School to talk with students about his trip to New York City. He had told the students about a middle school in Brooklyn he had visited that decided to provide work socks to those working at Ground Zero. The resident who had been working at Ground Zero attended his talk, and had shared with the students a handwritten note that had accompanied a pair of work socks he had received from the Brooklyn school children. Mayor Torrey said that the City Council was receiving e-mails from citizens concerned about the permitting and construction of cell towers. At this point there was nothing the City could do about the issue. He suggested the possibility of discussing what could be done in the future, but expressed hope that the council was consistent in its message to constituents about the issue. Mr. Johnson noted that only two councilors had joined in a request for a work session on the topic. Mayor Torrey indicated the council would receive copies of a note he had sent to the Citizen Charter Review Committee asking members what they had left to do, their anticipated outcomes, and the money spent on the process to date and an estimate of what would be spent to complete the process. Mr. Rayor noted his request to staff for information regarding what was currently permitted in terms of cell towers. Mr. Johnson indicated the ordinance was on the City's Web site. B. Work Session: Metro Area Natural Resources Study The council was joined by Eric Wold of the Planning and Development Department, Mark Metzger of the City of Springfield, and Project Manager Kathi Weiderhold and Denise Kalakay of the Lane Council of Governments (LCOG) for the item. Planning Director Jan Childs and Planning Commission President Jon Belcher were also present. Mayor Torrey briefly left the meeting. Ms. Taylor, as Council President, assumed the chair. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 22, 2001 Page 3 Work Session Mr. Wold provided an update on the first phase of the Metro Natural Resources Study, reminding the council that the study was intended to satisfy the requirements of Statewide Planning Goal 5, which states that local governments shall adopt programs to protect natural resources for present and future generations. He noted the focus of tonight's presentation was riparian corridors, wetlands, and wildlife habitat. Mr. Wold reported that Goal 5 allowed for two basic approaches: 1) the Safe Harbor approach, and 2) the standard approach. Based on elected officials' input, staff had been using the Safe Harbor approach for properties outside the urban growth boundary but within the Metro Plan boundary. Staff was using the standard approach for property inside the urban growth boundary. Mr. Wold briefly described how the Safe Harbor approach worked, and outlined the standard approach using a diagram provided to the council. Mr. Wold reviewed the process time line and noted the receipt of extensive public input. He said that the public input improved the plan by clarifying site boundaries and identifying sites that had been developed. Additionally, five or six new sites were identified by the public. Mr. Wold reported that the three planning commissions had also reviewed the study, and their recommendations were reflected in the meeting packet. Mr. Wold briefly reviewed the site criteria and described their use in site evaluation. He anticipated that eventually, all sites in the inventory would have a recommendation regarding development, protection, or a combination of the two. Mr. Wold invited questions. Mayor Torrey returned to the meeting and assumed the chair. Ms. Nathanson said that the references to "tiers" as used by staff was not consistent with the terminology used in the West Eugene Wetlands Plan (WEWP). She would have found it helpful if the study had employed some of the same terminology, if possible. She questioned if it was too late to change the document. She also found the numbering of the tiers somewhat confusing in terms of the rigor of analysis required. Noting that there was another large planned unit development in her neighborhood currently under review by the City, Ms. Nathanson said that she had been happy to find the information on the Metro Natural Resources Study in her meeting packet. Mr. Rayor asked Mr. Wold to discuss the significance of the Goal 5 inventory and how it would affect development once in place. Mr. Wold responded that the inventory itself would allow staff to go through the remaining steps in the process. At the adoption stage, there would likely be new regulations that apply to sites, such as a new overlay zone, as well as incentives for property owners to help achieve some of the objectives of an open space system that reflects community values. Mr. Rayor asked where Portland Metro was in the Goal 5 process. Mr. Wold said that Portland was slightly behind Eugene. That community was focusing at this point only on riparian corridors and upland habitats, not wetlands. Mr. Rayor asked if the one-acre criteria for Tier I sites would be adopted statewide. Mr. Wold said no; all the criteria before the council were individual to the local plan. Goal 5 allows communities to develop their own criteria. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 22, 2001 Page 4 Work Session Mr. Rayor asked what Springfield was doing with the Tier 2 threshold question. Mr. Wold responded that the Springfield Planning Commission had discussed the criteria and several commissioners were concerned about the criterion related to a natural area greater than one acre and wanted to increase that to five acres. Several had asked for further explanation as to why the minimum threshold score of 17 was chosen for the habitat assessment as opposed to another number. Responding to a follow-up question from Mr. Rayor, Mr. Wold said that all three elected bodies needed to discuss the planning commissions' recommendations, and ideally there would be consensus; in the absence of consensus, the Metropolitan Policy Committee would be asked to resolve differences between jurisdictions. He noted that Eugene was the first jurisdiction to consider the plan. Mr. Meisner shared Ms. Nathanson's concerns regarding the terminology used in the different planning documents. Mr. Meisner questioned how much connectivity existed between the many similar planning efforts that were occurring for things such as the stormwater program, the Open Space Bond, and the Endangered Species listing. He wanted to know if staff was working together to ensure coordination happened. He disliked"jargon," and had legal concerns about protecting natural resources areas by regulation. Mr. Meisner noted the issue of exactions or takings, and questioned if the jurisdictional partners were interested in an acquisition program. Mr. Wold said yes. Staff was working closely together with the staff working on the other efforts mentioned by Mr. Meisner. Ms. Wiederhold indicated that staff would look closely at the study to see if the language could be made more consistent with the West Eugene Wetlands Plan. She added that, in terms of possible protection measures, staff supported a wide range of tools, and did not support a reliance on regulation alone. Mr. Kelly asked how future sites would be added to the inventory. Mr. Wold said that prior to adoption, sites meeting the significance criteria can be added to the inventory. Staff would propose a process through which new sites could be added following adoption. Ms. Wiederhold added that the issue of both adding and removing sites had been of concern for the Eugene Planning Commission as well. Mr. Kelly was impressed by the thoroughness of the work that had occurred with a limited budget, and commended the level of collaboration on the part of staff. He thought it was clear from the minutes that the planning commissions had given considerable thought to their recommendations, and he was willing to defer to those recommendations. Mr. Kelly indicated appreciation and support for staff's examination of a wide range of tools. For the benefit of the audience, Mr. Kelly said that the inclusion of a site on the inventory did not necessarily imply the site would be protected; that would be determined in the next phase of the study. Ms. Bettman determined from Mr. Wold that the wetland site in Skinner Butte Park, which consisted of a very wet grass lawn on the north side of the butte, was not included in the inventory because it did not score high in terms of the criteria and it was better addressed in the Skinner Butte Park Master Plan. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 22, 2001 Page 5 Work Session Ms. Bettman said it appeared that 30 of the 74 sites originally identified had been removed from the inventory because they had been developed. Noting the long time it had taken the study to reach this point, she asked if the inclusion of a site on the list increased pressure to develop the sites, and if staff had an idea of what percentage of the remaining sites would be developed because they were on the list. Mr. Wold responded that most of the 30 sites mentioned by Ms. Bettman were included in the West Eugene Wetlands Plan and were indicated on a wall map in light green. Those sites were identified in the very early stages of the previous version of the study and addressed through West Eugene Wetlands Plan. Mr. Wold did not have personal knowledge of any sites that had been purposely destroyed because people thought they would be included in the inventory, and was unable to speculate about the percentage of sites that might be lost. He acknowledged the development pressure that existed for sites in the south hills of Eugene and Springfield and the potential that some sites on the list would be developed before the plan was fully adopted in two years. He said that would not be because the sites were listed on the inventory, but rather because the land was zoned for residential use. Responding to a question from Ms. Bettman about the schedule for staff to check in with the elected officials on study progress, Ms. Wiederhold indicated that the next scheduled check-in was about one year out, after all study products were developed in draft form. Ms. Taylor shared Ms. Bettman's concern that sites would be lost to development before the study was adopted. She wanted to speed up next steps in the process to avoid that situation. Mr. Farr and Mr. Pap8 arrived at the meeting. Ms. Taylor asked if there had been discussion of tax waivers for preservation. Ms. Wiederhold said yes, indicating tax waivers were included in the list of incentives for further examination staff had previously mentioned. Ms. Taylor asked if there was a way to guarantee that a tax waiver granted for preservation could go beyond the current owner. Mr. Wold said that a conservation easement was generally the preferred approach, because easements lasted in perpetuity and were accompanied by tax benefits. Benefits from a tax waiver program would not last forever. Ms. Nathanson noted that a main objective of the West Eugene Wetlands Plan was to create, restore, or enhance contiguous wetlands rather than preserve a disconnected checkerboard pattern of wetlands. She asked if the Planning Commission had discussed how that concept did or did not manifest itself in the criteria before the council. Mr. Belcher noted that the commission discussed the concept as a potential criteria. He deferred to Mr. Wold for further explanation. Mr. Wold said that one of the study goals was to have a connected system to the degree possible, but a connected system was not a specific criteria for adding a site to the inventory. He said that it could be a criteria for the Economic, Social, Environmental, and Energy (ESEE) analysis. He added that one thing that distinguished the West Eugene Wetlands Plan from the study in question was that when the wetlands plan was developed there were still relatively large blocks of wetlands that had not been filled and could be connected. He noted that there were sites that may not necessarily be connected, but served as habitat for wildlife, such as birds, that could move between sites without the need for physical connectivity. Mr. Kelly noted testimony received by the planning commissions regarding Gillespie Butte, and asked staff to highlight its natural resources values to Parks staff. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 22, 2001 Page 6 Work Session Mr. Kelly was very concerned about all that could happen before the next elected official's check- in. He thought it would be very important to involve the planning commissions in a mid-course check-in, perhaps as staff went into the EESE analysis. Ms. Wiederhold agreed. She said that the issue came up at the commission level, and staff agreed to work with the planning directors to find a way to work another commission check-in into the schedule. Ms. Childs thought such a check-in with the commissions was doable in the time frame allotted. Mr. Kelly endorsed that approach. Responding to Mr. Kelly's concerns regarding Gillespie Butte, Mr. Wold said that Parks staff was aware of the natural resources on the site and was adopting interim measures in the park management plan. Ms. Bettman asked that staff provide a memorandum describing and summarizing the issues raised during the check-in with the planning commissions. Ms. Taylor thought a check-in with the council would be a good thing. She suggested that if there was no time, staff could check in with individual councilors. Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to proceed with the remaining steps in the Goal 5 process using the draft Significance Criteria and draft Inventory without any modifications to the significance criteria. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Ms. Nathanson raised the potential of tracking whether the City's habitat for wildlife improved as fertilizer use decreased or as residents converted managed landscapes to natural landscapes. She thought there would be a noticeable impact over time as residents moved to more native landscaping. She asked if staff had discussed that concept. Mr. Wold said yes. There were many examples of landscaping that met the objectives Ms. Nathanson mentioned, and it was likely to be one of the options in the policy recommendations offered by staff. C.Work Session: Energy Management Program Policies The council was joined for the item by Glen Svendsen, Meredith Cavender, Ron Sutton, Mike Penwell, and Lynn Eichner Kelly of the Facilities Management Division of the Central Service Department. Mr. Carlson and Keli ©sborn of the Planning and Development Department were also present. Mr. Svendsen provided a PowerPoint presentation overviewing the City's Energy Management Program policies and the organization's progress on the council's goal regarding sustainability. He identified the initial goals of the program as being to reduce the City's environmental impact, energy use, and to insulate the organization from future rate hikes. Mr. Svendsen said that sustainability had become an important principle in facility management activities and the Energy Conservation Program was one piece of a larger sustainability focus. The sustainability concept was incorporated into the City's energy management policies. Mr. Svendsen discussed the history of the Energy Management Program, the management and structure behind the program, the program elements, operations and maintenance practices, building design and construction for both existing and new buildings, and program funding changes related to policy changes. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 22, 2001 Page 7 Work Session Mr. Svendsen described the City's work on designing new buildings that meet the United States Green Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design ratings, noting that the new library was designed to achieve the council's Silver rating. Mr. Johnson noted the costs associated with certification from the council. Mr. Svendsen agreed, saying that the City was designing to the organization's standards without seeking certification due to the high cost of certification. He added that the council was in the process of issuing standards for building operations and maintenance as well as building remodels. Mr. Svendsen overviewed examples of the outreach and technical assistance offered by the Facilities Management Division to City departments to help them realize energy savings. Mr. Svendsen briefly noted the funding sources for implementation of the Energy Conservation Program. Mr. Svendsen invited questions. Mr. Meisner said he was happy to see the City take the energy issue seriously. He added that he had recently visited with former Public Works Director Chris Andersen in Boulder, and learned that city's fleet was being converted to hybrid vehicles with great success. Mr. Svendsen said that the Fleet Services Division was looking at several different types of hybrid vehicles for possible future fleet purchases, and owned two or three hybrid vehicles now. Mr. Meisner hoped that, as new vehicles were purchased, staff looked seriously at hybrid vehicles. Mr. Pap~ commended the presentation and the work being done by staff. He said he was impressed with the all-encompassing nature of the program. Regarding the library, he asked what additional efforts could be undertaken to achieve a higher rating from the United States Green Council. Mr. Svendsen responded that it was a programmatic issue as the criteria for the Gold rating included the inclusion of on-site day care facilities and other more programmatic elements. There was no day care planned for the library. Mr. Pap8 asked if the financial analysis was based on post-October Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) rates. Mr. Svendsen said that the financial analysis was based on current rates and would be reexamined again. Mr. Pap8 said he understood that Oregon State University might switch to four days of operations to save energy. He asked if the City had considered a similar approach for some nonemergency services. Mr. Johnson said that the concept posed interesting operational issues for the City as citizens expect it to be open. He added that staff would look into what Oregon State University was doing. Responding to a question from Mr. Pap8 about controlling energy costs associated with computers, Mr. Svendsen said that staff had been asked to turn off their computer monitors if they were away from their desk for a certain period or did not intend to use the computers for awhile. Monitors constitute about half the energy used by a computer. Even in the sleep mode, energy savings were marginal compared to turning the monitor off completely. Mr. Johnson added that employees have embraced the energy management program. Mr. Pap8 asked about the City's system for tracking energy use. Mr. Svendsen said that there were seven years of facility history by utility available. Mr. Sutton added that the City was hooked up to EWEB monitoring devices at City Hall and the swimming pools. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 22, 2001 Page 8 Work Session Mr. Rayor also commended the presentation and the information provided by staff. He said that the effort went toward achieving the City's sustainability goal. He complimented the City Manager and Facilities Management Division staff. Mr. Rayor termed the administrative order directing compliance with energy conservation measures "fantastic." Mr. Rayor noted he had attended the EWEB hearings for tiered rates, and the highest rates were being charged to the category that included street lights. He asked why that rate was so high. He also wondered if there was a chance to save energy related to street lights. He thought that EWEB would be interested in reducing that usage, which was an interest he shared. Mr. Johnson briefly noted the Public Works Department's streetlight change-out program, and indicated he would provide more information to the council. Mr. Kelly commended the work done by Facilities Management Division staff and said it was wonderful that the City could be a model for other energy users. He anticipated that the effort would be ongoing. Mr. Kelly suggested that the staff presentation be shared with others, including private sector companies. He was unsure if that meant classes, workshops, articles, or all those approaches. He noted a recent column in the Eugene Weekly regarding the University of Oregon's sustainability efforts, and suggested the City take a similar approach to sharing information about its energy management approach. He asked for staff's thoughts. Mr. Svendsen said that communities across the country were acting as clearing houses for information related to energy management for the private sector. Ms. ©sborn was charged with developing that element of the work program, and she was examining what had worked in other communities, such as Portland and Seattle. In response to Mr. Kelly's remarks, Ms. Nathanson suggested that the City communicate with the Lane Community College Business Center to see what it had done and how the work done by the City could be incorporated with the college's efforts. Ms. Nathanson also commended staff's work. She asked about the life expectancy of the equipment installed in the Atrium Building, and if the equipment would realize enough savings to recover its costs before it was replaced. Mr. Svendsen noted that some of the current equipment was more than 20 years old. He said individual components of the equipment were changed out over time, but the life of the more expensive, larger equipment was significantly longer than that of the individual components. Ms. Nathanson wanted to ensure that City lighting was both energy-efficient and easy for employees and citizens to work with. Ms. Kelly noted that the quality of flourescent lighting had improved dramatically over the last decade. Ms. Bettman thanked those who had the foresight to initiate the program. She said that it was saving a lot of money. Referring to the energy consumption savings target for new construction, Ms. Bettman determined from staff that was beyond what the minimum established by the Building Code. Ms. Bettman noted that the retrofit of the Hult Center and the Atrium Building resulted in a 23 percent reduction in total energy usage, so the City was already exceeding the 20 percent target in a retrofit project, even before adoption of more proactive policies; she questioned whether it was feasible to raise MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 22, 2001 Page 9 Work Session the target to 25 percent. Mr. Penwell clarified that staff addressed the target on a project-by- project basis and tried to exceed the code requirements. In some cases it was not feasible to attempt to achieve a particular percentage target. Ms. Bettman asked if the energy savings from retrofit projects supported new retrofits and new equipment, or if it was directed back into the General Fund. Mr. Svendsen said that staff had not yet addressed that issue. The cost recovery would be realized at the department budget level in the amounts they pay in future facilities rates once the existing energy conservation loan was repaid. Mr. Johnson anticipated that it would be some time before the City realized additional savings because of the recent electricity rate increase. Ms. Bettman flagged the issue for discussion during the next budget process. Mr. Farr said that there were two issues for him: the City's responsibility to lead and the cost savings realized by proactive energy management. He said that the new Fern Ridge Bicycle Path was very brightly lighted and he questioned if the path needed to be so well-lit. Mr. Johnson said that it was a security issue, based on the fact there were few structures nearby. Mr. Farr suggested that every other light could be turned off to save energy. Mr. Svendsen said that staff would discuss the issue with Public Works staff. Conformity of lighting on the path was an issue. Ms. Taylor commended staff for the work it had done. Mayor Torrey agreed. Mr. Pap8 suggested that people, departments, or buildings could be recognized for their energy savings. Mr. Svendsen said that staff was working on an approach that recognized the differing nature of facilities employees worked in, yet still recognized their efforts. D.Action: Appointments to Boards, Commissions, and Committees Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to reappoint Norma Dominguez to Position 1 on the Human Rights Commission for a three-year term beginning November 1, 2001, and ending October 31, 2004. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to reappoint Marcy Middleton to Position 3 on the Human Rights Commission for a three-year term beginning November 1, 2001, and ending October 31, 2004. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to reappoint Bahati Ansari to Position 4 on the Human Rights Commission for a three-year term beginning November 1, 2001, and ending October 31, 2004. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to appoint Melissa Mona to Position 2 on the Human Rights Commission for a three-year term beginning November 1, 2001, and ending October 31, 2004. Mr. Meisner explained that he wished to postpone the appointment to give a candidate who had received enough votes for an interview but who had been unable to attend the interviews on the date scheduled an opportunity to be interviewed. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 22, 2001 Page 10 Work Session Mr. Meisner, seconded by Mr. Fart, moved to postpone the motion until November 13, when the remainder of the Human Rights Commission candidates were appointed. Mr. Kelly clarified that the motion was not a reflection on the candidate, but merely a way to ensure that all candidates were considered. Mr. Meisner agreed. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Mr. Fart noted that there was an error in the calculation of the votes for Planning Commission candidates, which did not change the outcome: John Lawless received six votes; and Marlene Colbath received five votes. Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to reappoint Anne Marie Levis to Position 4 on the Planning Commission for a four-year term beginning on November 1, 2001, and ending on October 31, 2005. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to appoint Marlene Colbath to Position 5 on the Planning Commission for a four-year term beginning on November 1, 2001, and ending on October 31, 2005. Ms. Nathanson said that traditionally, the council appointed the candidate receiving the most number of votes in the council balloting to the longest-term position. She observed candidate John Lawless had received more votes than Ms. Colbath. Mr. Pap~, seconded by Mr. Fart, moved to substitute the motion with a motion to appoint John Lawless to Position 5 on the Planning Commission for a four-year term beginning on November 1, 2001, and ending on October 31, 2005. Mr. Pap~ noted that it had been some time since the commission included a design professional, and he was glad to see Mr. Lawless' appointment to the commission, given his involvement in other committees and commissions. Ms. Bettman said that the tradition mentioned by Ms. Nathanson sounded like a new precedent to her, and if she had been aware of it she would have not filled her ballot out as she had. She announced her desire to change her ballot to remove her support for Mr. Lawless. Mayor Torrey suggested that instead, the council take action on the motion on the floor. Mr. Kelly concurred. Ms. Bettman pointed out that Mr. Lawless was from south Eugene and Ms. Colbath was from west Eugene and said "let's see some consistency." Mr. Kelly opposed the amendment because of what he termed the "great hue and cry" about the lack of commissioners from west Eugene; now the council had the opportunity to appoint a west Eugene resident, and to make that person the one-year appointment instead of the four-year appointment seemed to him "a little inconsistent." Mr. Farr suggested that it did not make a difference if Ms. Colbath was appointed to the one-year term, because the council had little precedent for not reappointing people to boards and MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 22, 2001 Page 11 Work Session commissions who wanted to be reappointed; he expected whoever got the one-year term would be reappointed in one year. Mr. Meisner agreed with Mr. Fart, pointing out the person with the one-year appointment had the potential to serve nine years on the commission rather than eight. He noted that he was the only councilor indicating a preference on the ballot as to which person should be appointed to the full term, which did not give staff much guidance. The motion to substitute passed, 5:3; Mr. Fart, Ms. Nathanson, Mr. Meisner, Mr. Pap~, and Mr. Rayor voting yes; Ms. Taylor, Mr. Kelly, and Ms. Bettman voting no. The motion to appoint John Lawless to Position 5 passed unanimously, 8:0. Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to appoint Marlene Colbath to Position 6, a one-year term completion appointment on the Planning Commission beginning November 1, 2001, and ending October 31, 2002. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to reappoint Craig Wanichek to Position 7 on the Budget Committee for a three-year term beginning on November 1, 2001, and ending October 31, 2004. Mr. Rayor commended Mr. Wanichek's work on the Budget Committee. Mr. Fart moved to substitute the motion with a motion reappointing Jennifer Solomon to the Budget Committee. The motion to substitute died for lack of a second. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to appoint Robed Wallace to Position 3 on the Budget Committee for a three-year term beginning on November 1, 2001, and ending October 31, 2004. Mr. Fart moved to substitute the motion with a motion reappointing Jennifer Solomon to the Budget Committee. The motion to substitute died for lack of a second. Mr. Pap~ spoke in support of Mr. Wallace's appointment, noting his past service to the community of Spokane. Mr. Meisner endorsed the appointment of Mr. Wallace, saying he was impressed by his interview and enthusiasm to serve. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Mr. Farr, seconded by Mr. Pap~, moved to reappoint Jennifer Solomon to a four-year term on the Budget Committee. Speaking to the motion, Mr. Fart said it was rare for the council not to reappoint a member to the Budget Committee. He said that Ms. Solomon had served admirably and wanted to continue to MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 22, 2001 Page 12 Work Session serve. He pointed out that additionally, Ms. Solomon was a west Eugene resident, and the only person from Ward 6 on either the Planning Commission or Budget Committee. He commended her work on the Budget Committee and Budget Citizen Subcommittee. Ms. Bettman said geographic diversity on boards and commissions was important to some councilors. She believed that geographic diversity was one of several kinds of diversity the council should consider when making appointments. She thought that the Budget Committee lacked economic diversity and advocated for representation from Iow-income citizens. For that reason, she supported reopening the process, and trying to recruit unsuccessful applicants for the Planning Commission and Human Rights Commission vacancies to apply for the Budget Committee. Mr. Rayor supported the motion. He said that Ms. Solomon had a good interview, but she did not speak much at Budget Committee meetings. However, her interview persuaded him she could participate now. He said that he "was on the edge so much" and wanted to give Ms. Solomon the benefit of the doubt. Mr. Kelly disagreed with Mr. Rayor, saying that Ms. Solomon's participation had been an issue for him as well. He had expected by the third year of being on the committee that she would have been a more active contributor. Reappointing her would mean that level of contribution would continue for another three years. He would rather, given the limited pool of applicants, reopen the application process and attempt to get the diversity Ms. Bettman referred to. Nothing prevented the council from reappointing Ms. Solomon if another successful candidate was not found. Mr. Meisner concurred with Mr. Kelly. He expected that every member on the Budget Committee would "carry their weight." He had not heard Ms. Solomon speak to Bethel issues when they arose, and had no idea of her positions, values, or goals. Three years was an adequate time to "come up to speed" as well as greater participation in "what needs to be a collegial body." He concurred with Ms. Kelly that Ms. Solomon could be reappointed if no one else came forward. Mr. Meisner said he wanted an active participant who did not take the time of the committee without contributing. Mr. Farr said that like the council, there were two or three councilors and two or three lay members who dominated the floor. Every meeting the same people dominated the conversation. Other people were less forceful, and Ms. Solomon was not the only committee member who did not talk a lot. He said that it was his belief that if one did not have anything particular to say, or agree with the comments of others, why waste the time of the committee? He had talked to Ms. Solomon many times about her feelings, and believed that she was an active member of the committee whose next term would include more aggressiveness in speaking, even though that was not his preference. Mr. Pap8 did not want to set a precedent by reopening the process because the council did not like the pool of applicants. There was a sufficient pool of applicants for the committee and the process had been well-publicized. He did not favor gerrymandering the appointments. He agreed with Mr. Farr that time at the microphone was not the highest qualification for participation on committees and commissions. He pointed out that Ms. Solomon had participated in subcommittees at which none of the councilors were present. He had been personally contacted by Ms. Solomon about budget issues. Mr. Pap8 suggested that quiet lobbying could be more effective than "mike time" before the entire committee. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 22, 2001 Page 13 Work Session Ms. Taylor did not think the council had a big pool of applicants, and the application processes had been reopened before during her time on the council. Ms. Nathanson agreed that Ms. Solomon did not talk a lot during the first two years of her service but had made comments during the past budget cycle. She supported the motion. The vote on the reappointment was a 4:4 tie, Mr. Fart, Ms. Nathanson, Mr. Rayor, and Mr. Pap~ voting yes; Mr. Meisner, Ms. Taylor, Mr. Kelly, and Ms. Bettman voting no; Mayor Torrey cast a vote in support of the motion and the final vote on the motion was 5:4. Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to appoint Paula Holloway to Position 2, a business representative on the Toxics Board for a three-year term beginning on January 23, 2002, and ending on January 22, 2005. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to appoint Jennifer Gleason to Position 5, an advocacy representative on the Toxics Board for a three-year term beginning on January 23, 2002, and ending on January 22, 2005. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to appoint Marylee Bowman to Position 7, a neutral position on the Toxics Board for a three-year term beginning on March 4, 2002, and ending on March 3, 2005. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Mayor Torrey moved to appoint Kim Shore to Position 4, an interim appointment on the Police Commission for a two-year term beginning on November 1, 2001, and ending October 31, 2003. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. The meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, James R. Johnson City Manager (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 22, 2001 Page 14 Work Session