HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 11/13/01 Work Session MINUTES
Eugene City Council
Work Session
McNutt Room--Eugene City Hall
November 13, 2001
5:30 p.m.
COUNCILORS PRESENT: Betty Taylor, David Kelly, Nancy Nathanson, Scott Meisner, Gary
Rayor, Gary Pap~, Bonny Bettman.
COUNCILORS ABSENT: Pat Fart.
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
Mayor James D. Torrey called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order.
A. Items from Mayor, Council, and City Manager
Ms. Bettman had no items.
Mr. Rayor had no items.
Ms. Taylor asked why work session requests, such as the one she made with two other councilors
for a work session on animal control, expired.
Ms. Taylor said that she had received calls from Amazon residents concerned about the removal of
playground equipment from City playground; the residents wanted to know if neighborhoods had
any influence over what happened to playgrounds.
Ms. Taylor said constituents contacted her to let her know the installation of traffic-calming
devices on 33rd Avenue did not leave room for bicyclists to travel and made travel more difficult
for pedestrians.
Ms. Taylor said she received a request from a blind constituent for audio walk signals at the
intersections at 30th Avenue and Hilyard Street and at 29th Avenue and Willamette Street. Mary
Feldman of the Human Rights Program had indicated to her that several cities used them. Ms.
Feldman had also indicated their use was somewhat controversial; the National Council for the
Blind supported such devices and the National Federation for the Blind opposed them.
Ms. Taylor questioned what had happened to the meeting that was planned between the Board of
County Commissioners, mayor, and council president.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 13, 2001 Page 1
Work Session
Ms. Taylor advocated for the appointment of a committee consisting of the council president, vice
president, and one other councilor to begin the search for a new City Manager.
Mr. Kelly thanked councilors for their participation at the booth at the Chamber of Commerce
Business-to-Business Expo, saying it was enjoyable to communicate with people on such an
informal basis. He asked City Manager Jim Johnson to look out for similar informal opportunities
for interaction for the council.
Mr. Kelly noted the first meeting of the Downtown Advocacy Alliance, which brought together
people with an interest in downtown to work on focused proposals. The alliance was formed by
Downtown Eugene, Incorporated (DEI). He spoke enthusiastically of the first meeting he
attended, saying about 80 people representing a variety of interests attended. DEI hoped the
alliance with be an ongoing effort with a membership program, and Mr. Kelly suggested that the
City set an example by purchasing a membership.
Mr. Meisner indicated regret for the announced resignations of City Manager Jim Johnson and
Police Chief Jim Hill. He indicated understanding of those decisions, but said that the departures
created quite a challenge for the council. He expressed appreciation to the manager for his service.
Mr. Meisner expressed his sorrow at the recent vandalism of the Red Cross' new local offices. He
asked staff to investigate ways beyond police enforcement that the City could assist the Red Cross
as it reconstructed the facilities, suggesting fee and second inspection waivers.
Mr. Meisner introduced Jason Heuser, the City's new Intergovernmental Relations Director. The
council welcomed Mr. Heuser.
Mr. Pap~ thanked Mr. Kelly for involving the council in the expo, saying his time in the booth was
well-spent. He hoped the council continued to be involved in such efforts.
Mr. Pap~ concurred with the remarks of Mr. Meisner regarding the departures of Mr. Johnson and
Chief Hill.
Mr. Pap~ requested a report on the Ayres Road improvements. He asked if modifications to the
street improvement were planned, and hoped that, given the design was a new one, the council
would receive periodic reports on how well it functioned.
Mr. Pap~ said that, along with several other councilors, he had attended the recent League of
Oregon Cities conference in Eugene. He had gone to a session on Ballot Measure 7 led by City
Attorney Glenn Klein and a session on what other cities were doing with their airports and learned
about the various types of assistance available through the State Department of Aviation. He
suggested that Eugene could take advantage of that assistance.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 13, 2001 Page 2
Work Session
Mr. Pap~ thanked the voters for their support of the West Eugene Parkway and said he was
surprised by the turnout for a single-issue ballot measure. He hoped the council would move
quickly to get the parkway "back on track."
Mr. Pap~ reported that work on the bicycle path near the river had commenced.
Ms. Nathanson echoed Mr. Kelly's comments regarding the Downtown Advocacy Alliance. She
had also attended a meeting of the alliance, and was now communicating with both alliance
members and City staff regarding naming certain districts in the downtown neighborhoods,
signage, and art. She anticipated that she would send a message to the council in the new few days
describing how those concepts were supported by statements in the Greater Downtown Vision,
and hoped the council could facilitate the implementation of those concepts without much more
processing.
Speaking to the current budget process, Ms. Nathanson expressed some level of dissatisfaction
with the process. It was difficult to ascertain which programs actually worked well in comparison
to others, and the timing of the process often meant the committee had no impact on the budget
year. She called for a deliberate, collaborative process between the Human Services Commission
and Public Safety Coordinating Council because of the many points at which those groups
intersected. She cited drug and alcohol treatment as an example of something with implications for
the delivery of both public safety and social services. There was no planned or deliberate
coordination between the two bodies, and "big bucks" were involved. She wanted to determine
how those funds could be allocated in a way that helped the most people in need.
Mr. Johnson reported that Mayor Torrey recently attended a meeting of the Citizen Charter
Review Committee, during which he had discussed the use of the mayor's veto authority with the
committee and had suggested the committee consider an expansion of that authority. Mr. Johnson
had pointed out to the committee that topic was not part of its charge, and he now was requesting
the council's input on the committee's interest in researching the topic. He did not think the effort
involved would take long. He indicated it was still the committee's intent to finish its work by
December 31, 2001. A majority of councilors present (Mr. Rayor, Ms. Nathanson, Mr. Meisner,
and Mr. Pap~) supported the examination.
Mr. Johnson indicated the committee believed that review of the charter issues related to the
Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) would require examination by another group, perhaps
including EWEB representatives; otherwise, the committee would not meet its deadline.
After brief discussion, the council agreed that the committee would sunset by December 31,2001,
forward its recommendations to the council, and then the council could appoint a differently
constituted committee to address the charter issues regarding EWEB.
Mayor Torrey said that if he had not heard from the councilors regarding their council committee
assignments within 30 days, he would assume that the current committee assignments were
acceptable.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 13, 2001 Page 3
Work Session
Mayor Torrey announced that a countywide security summit was planned for Thursday, November
15, 2001. He encouraged the council to submit any questions, suggestions, or concerns to Fire
Chief Tom Tallon, Mr. Johnson, or Chief Hill.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 13, 2001 Page 4
Work Session
B. WORK SESSION: Award of Environmental Management System Certification:
International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14001
James Ollerenshaw, Technical Services Manager of the Wastewater Division, overviewed the
division's success in developing and implementing an Environmental Management System
following the framework of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14001
Standard. He circulated the certification the City had received in recognition of its
accomplishment. Mr. Ollerenshaw provided a brief definition of an Environmental Management
System, reviewing the characteristics of such a system. He described the steps the division had
taken to develop the plan and noted the training, auditing, and certification process associated with
the system. Mr. Ollerenshaw called the council's attention to a list of benefits associated with the
system, outlined on page 14 of the meeting packet.
Mr. Johnson termed the process of developing the system rigorous and noted that only six
wastewater treatment plants in the country had gone through the required steps and were
registered under the ISO 14001.
Mr. Pap~ commended the City's efforts. He said that the effort was comprehensive and daunting.
Few public organizations had taken on the task of seeking the certification.
Mr. Rayor also commended the City's efforts and said Eugene had put its best foot forward for the
regional wastewater management system. He said that the long-term results would be felt in lower
costs and wiser use of resources.
Mayor Torrey asked if private sector organizations in the community qualified for the certification.
Mr. Ollerenshaw said that Sony and Hynix had qualified. He noted that to be out of compliance
with the ISO 14001 standard would result in loss of registration. Mayor Torrey also congratulated
staff on the certification.
C. JOINT MEETING: Annual Meeting with the Human Rights Commission
The council was joined by Human Rights Commissioners Marcy Middleton, Steven Deutsch,
Andrea Ortiz, Jennifer Self, James Dean, Sara Rich, Mo Young, Alexis Reed, Jean Grendler,
Bahati Ansari, and commission staff Greg Rikhoff, Mary Feldman, Francisca Johnson, and Karen
Hyatt. At the request of Ms. Ortiz, chair of the commission, Human Rights Commissioners
introduced themselves.
The commissioners provided an overview of work activities over the past year. The commission's
work activities were grouped under the following categories: 1) preventing hate crimes; 2)
responding to September 11; 3) encouraging community awareness; 4) working cooperatively with
the Police Department; 5) building commission capacity; 6) improving accessibility; 7) developing
the Human Rights Support System; and 8) supporting diversity.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 13, 2001 Page 5
Work Session
Ms. Middleton provided a brief overview of the commission's activities over the past year in the
area of hate crimes, specifically noting the very successful Oregon Hate Crimes Conference co-
sponsored by the commission.
Mr. Deutsch expressed appreciation to Chief Hill and Mr. Johnson for their support of and
commitment to human rights, particularly in response to the events of September 11. He discussed
the commission's work in response to the events of September 11, acknowledging the efforts made
by City leaders.
Ms. Middleton reviewed the commission's efforts in encouraging community awareness, which
included the Walk for Farmworker Justice and various outreach efforts conducted by the
commission.
Ms. Ortiz provided information about the commission's work with the Police Department, which
included cooperative work on racial profiling, diversity trainings, the hate crimes conference, and
joint meetings with the Police Commission.
Ms. Middleton discussed the commission's efforts in building commission capacity, stressing the
commission's efforts at self-education. Ms. Ortiz noted the commission's participation in the
Police Department's diversity trainings, which in many cases involved commissioners taking time
off work without pay.
Ms. Ortiz called the council's attention to the information on complaints processed through the
Human Rights Support System. She noted that because of budget constraints, no advocacy
training had been done in some time to allow current advocates to hone their skills.
Ms. Ortiz reviewed the commission's goals for fiscal year 2002, which were reflected in the
commission's work plan on pages 25-30.
Mr. Dean, chair of the Human Rights Commission's Accessibility Committee, expressed
appreciation for Ms. Taylor's earlier information request on pedestrian safety devices for the blind,
and emphasized the committee's networking with various groups, including the Police Department,
on pedestrian safety and access. He said that many approaches were being tested in different cities,
but there was a difference of opinion as to what was safe. The committee was working actively on
the issue. He also mentioned the committee's work on updating the Accessibility Guidebook.
Ms. Rich, chair of the Human Rights Commission Education & Outreach Committee, discussed the
commission's efforts to establish a domestic partnership registry. A work group would be formed
to determine how the registry would work and how the process could move forward.
Ms. Rich briefly noted the commission's work to establish Eugene as a Human Rights City. She
encouraged the City Council to have a work session on the subject, and to discuss any issues or
concerns the commission could address in ordinance form.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 13, 2001 Page 6
Work Session
Ms. Ortiz spoke to the subject of homeless advocacy, saying the commission did not have a plan to
deal with it as it was a larger community issue, but it believed there needed to be a united
community effort to address the issue.
Ms. Ortiz invited questions on the commission's work plan and past year's activities. She asked
the council to consider how the commission could assist it in its work.
Mr. Meisner referred to the possible code amendments the commission was proposing and
expressed hope that the City Manager's Office staff would bring the items to the council so it could
initiate the formal ordinance adoption process.
Mr. Meisner expressed appreciation for the commission's assistance to court defendants, but
cautioned it could go beyond mere translation as court proceedings were often very difficult to
understand. He cautioned the commission against creating an advocacy process for a single group.
Mr. Meisner supported the commission's examination of a domestic partnership registry.
Mr. Meisner encouraged the commission to ask the council if it wanted councilors to respond to
events or incidents or become involved in particular events.
Mr. Meisner said he hoped that a way could be found to involve the entire community in the issue
of homelessness, and to raise awareness that homelessness was a community problem.
Mr. Kelly agreed with Mr. Meisner that the commission should ask the council to attend events,
but emphasized "the earlier the better." He thanked the commission for the work it did and
commended its annual report. He also commended the Hate Crimes Conference, characterizing it
as both extraordinary and eye-opening. Mr. Kelly said that the work done by the commission since
September 11 was excellent.
Mr. Kelly termed the work plan both ambitious and top-notch. He suggested that the commission
collaborate with Richie Weinman of the Planning and Development Department on homelessness
issues. He said that the subject was an extraordinary challenge.
Mr. Kelly suggested that Eugene could look to the experience of other cities that had passed laws
establishing domestic partner registries. He wished the commission luck on the effort. He
commended the commission for its collaborative efforts with other organizations and groups.
Ms. Nathanson said the commission did a tremendous amount of work every day through its
various subcommittees. She had been somewhat surprised at some of the tasks the commission
wanted to take on given its heavy work load. She suggested more strategic planning occur in the
future, with consultation with the council prior to the time the work plan was printed. Ms.
Nathanson had some suggestions for additions to the work plan, but she was now reluctant to
MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 13, 2001 Page 7
Work Session
suggest them given the commission's proposed work load. She reiterated that an earlier check-in
would be useful.
Referring to the Sister City Program, Budget Committee, and Planning Commission, Ms.
Nathanson suggested that the commission's assistance could help those groups reach their full
potential. She wanted to see some brainstorming and collaboration occur between the commission
and Sister City Program, and indicated she would talk about the commission's relationships with
the Budget Committee and Planning Commission at another time.
Ms. Taylor also endorsed the commission's work on a domestic partnership registry and suggested
it examine the ordinance passed by the City of Ashland. She was glad to see the work proposed
for pedestrian safety, and hoped that the effort encompassed all types of pedestrians. Ms. Taylor
thought that more people than those the commission identified needed advocacy in court,
suggesting that those who were not accustomed to being in court or those who were not career
criminals also needed help. She commended the annual report and thanked the commission.
Ms. Bettman said the commission did great work. She acknowledged the commission's liaisons
with other committees and commissions, and said members brought both expertise and a sense of
inclusiveness to those groups. Ms. Bettman asked the commission to consider advocating for
inclusiveness and diversity on City boards and committees, adding she was "envious" of the
applications the commission received for membership. She asked the commission to encourage its
applicants to apply for other City boards and commissions.
Ms. Bettman expressed appreciation to the Human Rights Commission for its response to the
events of September 11.
Ms. Bettman commended the work plan. She was glad the commission had the enthusiasm to take
on the tasks it had identified. Ms. Bettman indicated she would ask the City Manager to schedule
a work session on Eugene as a Human Rights City.
In response to Mr. Meisner's earlier comments, Ms. Rich noted that the commission had drafted a
City Manager/Leader Crisis Response Memorandum that it hoped would help those in positions of
leadership to respond in a crisis. Mr. Meisner clarified that he was less concerned about what to
say than when to say it; he had not been called to respond to events in the past. He reiterated the
need for the commission to contact the council.
In response to Ms. Nathanson's remarks about the need for earlier examination of the work plan,
Ms. Ortiz noted that the commission's joint meeting with the council had been pushed out because
of the council's heavy work. Because of that delay, she asked the council to approve the work
plan with an end date of June 2003.
Mr. Pap~, the council's liaison to the commission, said the commission was composed of fine
citizens who did excellent work, and he was pleased to be a part of it. He acknowledged the many
MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 13, 2001 Page 8
Work Session
volunteers who served on commission subcommittees, and said the outreach of the commission
was incredible. He particularly commended the commission's outreach to members of the Muslim
community following the events of September 11.
Mr. Pap~ agreed that the work plan was ambitious and encouraged its acceptance.
Mr. Rayor commended the work plan. He said the commission did a great job. He endorsed the
work plan items related to the domestic partnership registry, the proposed ordinance revisions, and
the designation of Eugene as a Human Rights City.
Mayor Torrey recognized Ms. Feldman of the Human Rights Program staff for her work on the
accessibility improvements the council would see in the remodeled Council Chamber. He said that
anyone would be able to attend council meetings in the future.
Mayor Torrey called for extra vigilance in the next few months as events unfolded in the Middle
East.
Ms. Nathanson said that the commission's subcommittee structure allowed citizens to become
involved without being members of the commission. She suggested that the commission and staff
open a informal dialogue to determine if there were Budget Committee or Planning Commission
activities that could be done in a subcommittee setting.
Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to approve the Human Rights
Commission's goals and work plan for fiscal years 2002-2003. The motion
passed unanimously, 8:0.
Ms. Middleton recognized and thanked Mayor Torrey, Mr. Farr, and Mr. Pap~ for their support
and continued program funding; Mr. Johnson for providing staff and support and living the vision
of diversity and making diversity a priority; Police Chief Jim Hill for making human rights and
diversity a Police Department priority; Captain Steve Swenson for his work as Police Department
liaison to the commission; Captain Becky Hansen and Captain Elvia Williams for their work on the
Racial Profiling Project; Sergeant Tim McCarthy and Sergeant Kel Williams for working
cooperatively with the Human Rights Support System; Officer Jen Bills and loaned staff Tracy
Schermerhorn of the Public Works Department for their work on the Hate Crimes Conference;
Kate Rowles of the City Manager's Office for her work as liaison to the commission; Helen Towle
of the Human Resources and Risk Services Department for her training at the process retreat; and
the Minutes Recording staff for keeping clear and concise records. She also thanked all City
employees who took diversity to heart, and extended a "big thank you" to the Human Rights
Program staff. She led the applause for the Human Rights staff.
The council took a three-minute break. Mayor Torrey reconvened the meeting.
D. WORK SESSION: SpecialDistricts
MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 13, 2001 Page 9
Work Session
The council was joined for the item by Assistant City Manager Jim Carlson, Mr. Ruffler, Fred
McVey of Public Works Engineering, City Attorney Jerry Lidz, and Larry Hill of the Central
Services Department. Mr. Carlson reminded the council that the discussion was part of its efforts
related to the goal of fair, stable, and adequate revenues.
Mr. Carlson characterized special districts as an alternative to the property tax, saying they offer an
opportunity for the creation of a more adequate and stable revenue source for particular urban
services. He reminded the council of the existing Oregon property tax system, which limits growth
of property tax revenues to three percent on existing taxable development. No matter how fast
real market values increased, the City could only expect a minimum three-percent increase in
property tax revenue; the only exception was the additional value of new taxable development.
Mr. Carlson said the other way of increasing property tax revenues was through the annexation of
developed areas. He noted that, currently, the City had a passive annexation policy.
Mr. Carlson briefly noted the changes made to the property tax system through the adoption of
amendments to the Oregon Constitution in the form of Ballot Measure 5 and Ballot Measure
47/50.
Mr. Carlson discussed the advantages and disadvantages of special districts, saying district
formation or annexation to a special district was a way to generate additional permanent revenue
to fund urban services. While the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan assumed
that cities are the most appropriate provider of urban services, it was written before the passage of
the tax limitation measures. The plan's current provisions preclude the use of special districts to a
large degree, so the use of such districts would likely require a plan amendment. Other advantages
include that the use of such districts relies on property taxes, which is familiar to the voters; it can
create a new permanent rate; it potentially releases existing General Fund resources by removing
services that compete for those dollars now; the district can focus on a single service, suggesting
improved service delivery; and the district can provide regional services outside the urban growth
boundary.
Mr. Carlson said that disadvantages to special districts include the fact that districts are a property
tax-based solution, and special districts with permanent property tax rate limits would utilize part
of the measure 5 general government limits, which could lead to compression; a special district
would provide competition for local operating levies and bonded indebtedness; the single service
focus of a special district did not have to balance competing priorities as did a city; and the City
may no longer be providing a service that enhances its image. Further, Mr. Carlson said, formation
of a special district would require a vote, and such districts would be the peer of the City, outside
of its control. He suggested the services that were the most likely candidates for special districts
included library services, parks and recreation services (where the potential for annexation to an
already formed district existed), and fire suppression services.
Mr. Carlson invited comments and questions.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 13, 2001 Page 10
Work Session
Mr. Meisner determined from Mr. Carlson that the City staff did not believe a parks and recreation
district could legally levy an admissions tax to underwrite its costs; such a tax would be within the
purview of a general purpose government. Mr. Meisner further clarified that a special district
could have one level of taxation for the service it delivered, not differing levels of taxation within a
single district. Mr. Carlson confirmed that was true for library districts.
Responding to a question from Mr. Meisner, Mr. Carlson said that the special district boundaries
could be the same as the city's boundaries.
Mr. Rayor asked about the differences in the tax rates levied by the Willamalane and River Road
parks and recreation districts. Mr. Carlson attributed the difference to the fact that River Road had
a high tax rate for the high level of service, and a residential property base, so there were no
commercial or industrial properties contributing to the district. In addition, the River Road district
used general obligation bonds to purchase and build facilities, and those expenses do not come out
of the general tax rate.
Responding to a question from Mr. Rayor, Mr. Carlson clarified that if the territory of Eugene
were included within a special park and recreation district, the City would be able to maintain its
tax rate while park and recreation costs would be met by the district. The City would then have
more money in the General Fund for other services. He added that the council always had the
option of levying less; the permanent maximum rate stays constant.
Responding to a question from Mr. Rayor regarding the addition of a service to an existing county
service district, Mr. Carlson said that such districts were a "special breed" of districts in that they
were more flexible in terms of boundaries and services provided. One of the options staff
identified was to increase the services provided by an existing service district. There may be ways
of creating a new district that could offer a variety of services and be drawn in a different
geographic manner.
Mr. Rayor asked if Springfield was interested in creating service districts. Mr. Carlson said yes.
He noted that Springfield already had a park and recreation district. Springfield was interested in
forming a library district for the same reason as Eugene: it was the only way to increase revenue
from property taxes for urban services on a permanent basis. Mr. Meisner clarified that Springfield
was not proposing to form a library district in conjunction with Eugene, but to extend service east
and northeast from Springfield to increase the tax base.
Ms. Taylor asked if the city could annex to a special district. Mr. Hill said that Metro Plan and
Lane County Local Government Boundary Commission policies discourage such annexations.
Theoretically it was possible, but he was unsure it was consistent with the Metro Plan, leading to
the staff recommendation that the plan be examined for possible amendments.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 13, 2001 Page 11
Work Session
Ms. Taylor suggested special service districts could capture the costs of serving nonresidents. Mr.
Carlson agreed. Ms. Taylor asked if a road maintenance district could be formed. Mr. Carlson
said yes; such a district would be a county road district, and the Board of County Commissioners
would be the controlling body. He said that such a district would be funded by property taxes.
Ms. Taylor said that perhaps if property taxes were used to underwrite special districts, the City
could reduce property taxes and find some other form of revenue to pay for the services it still
delivered.
Mr. Kelly thought that several councilors interpreted "special district" more generically than staff.
His focus was on ways in which geographic areas could cooperate in delivering a service. He
acknowledged he had not known that special districts were so strictly governed by the Oregon
Revised Statutes and limited to property taxes as a revenue source. Mr. Kelly hoped any further
work done by staff answered the question of whether there were other ways for multiple
government agencies to coordinate and deliver services without recourse to property taxes or a
separately elected oversight body. He wanted to avoid the "peer-to-peer" relationship between a
district and the City.
Mr. Kelly asked if a park and recreation district could deliver one element of parks and recreation
services, such as youth recreation, while the City continued to administer its parks and provide
adult and senior recreation services. Mr. Carlson did not think so, pointing out that the City would
not be able to limit the nature of such districts once formed, as they were independent entities
controlled by the provision of the Oregon Revised Statutes. Mr. Carlson said that there were
limitations to county service districts. The Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission
model was a county service district with an intergovernmental agreement that determined the
governance model of the district. Although the Board of County Commissioners were, by law, the
entity overseeing the district, the board had delegated some of its responsibilities to Eugene and
Springfield through an intergovernmental agreement. He said that a similar approach could be
taken to a library district.
Mr. Pap~ determined from Mr. Carlson that double majority provision in Oregon law was triggered
for the formation of a special district, or the election must occur in conjunction with a general
election. Mr. Pap~ did not think the council should preclude the option of forming a special
district but he was not necessarily in favor of taking that approach. He was concerned the result of
such districts could be voter backlash as the council placed what he termed de facto taxes on the
ballot and the total accumulated.
In regard to annexation of additional households to the city, Mr. Pap~ said he could not support
annexation. He thought the City should keep its doors open to annexation but people should be
coming to the City for annexation, not Eugene seeking to annex Lane County residents to raise
revenues.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 13, 2001 Page 12
Work Session
Ms. Bettman agreed with Mr. Pap~ about the cumulative effect of the formation of special
districts. She said that the result could be tax bills from five differing taxing entities that did not
exist before, with the cumulative effect being taxpayers were paying more for services than they
were before. She noted that her focus during the discussion of the issue at the council's goal-
setting session was on a revenue source to replace the property tax. Unless the formation of a
special district substituted for the property taxes that the City collected for the service previously
rather than resulting in an overall increase in taxes, she would not be supportive.
Ms. Bettman noted that the formation of a special service district to provide social services was
contemplated in the early 1990s and rejected in favor of the one percent formula, which was also
ultimately dropped. She thought that it was still an appropriate service to consider in the context
of a special district.
Ms. Bettman suggested that the Metro Plan created obstacles to the formation of special districts
to avoid the jurisdictional conflicts that could arise. She concluded that she was not enthusiastic
about pursuing the subject further.
Ms. Nathanson liked Mr. Kelly's suggestion that intergovernmental agreements could be a vehicle
for regional service delivery. She agreed with his remark that several councilors had different ideas
of what might be possible. She suggested that the council step back and discuss the purpose for
the agenda item. Was it scheduled because the council was interested in a particular service it
wished to improve and expand, because the City needed to do a better job, or because the citizens
wanted more? Was the City trying to increase revenues or decrease pressure on the General Fund
budget? Ms. Nathanson thought there was council interest in expanding and improving certain
services. If so, which services were of interest? She cited the library, youth services, parks, and
public safety as possible examples. Tax equity among those being served had been mentioned by
some councilors. She also asked if the City was trying to find a way to provide single services.
Regarding the suggestion that youth services could be provided through a special district, Ms.
Nathanson expressed concern that the result would be a program where youth participation
depended on the manner in which the service was funded.
Mayor Torrey noted his appointment to a statewide committee charged to address the issue of
transportation funding in Oregon, adding that a part of the committee's charge included the need to
educate the State that there is a problem. He emphasized the need for public education regarding
"what it is that needs to be done that isn't being done that they haven't noticed needs to be done."
Mayor Torrey said that the council also needed to be concerned about the political viability of its
proposals, and not give the impression the council was trying to "sneak up on" the public and lay a
new tax on it.
Mr. Kelly emphasized that the council was examining the tools available to it, which was necessary
to have a community conversation. He thought another motivation for the discussion was to find
taxing mechanisms that were permanent, as opposed to the library operating levy, which was
temporary funding for a service the public considered permanent.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 13, 2001 Page 13
Work Session
Mr. Kelly was reluctant to support the staff-suggested motion, which included a joint meeting with
the other jurisdictions, given that the council was not interested in the types of special districts
regulated by Oregon Revised Statutes. He did not want to completely preclude further discussion
of those types of districts, but thought the council's interest was more in other mechanisms that
could be used to foster jurisdictional cooperation and avoid the situation mentioned by Ms.
Nathanson regarding the relationship of funding to youth participation.
Ms. Nathanson expressed concern that some of the City's parks were located in the River
Road/Santa Clara area, where they would be used by nonresidents not paying toward the City's
parks and open space bond. She said that while she did not want anyone in that area to pay twice
for parks and recreation, but something seemed inefficient about the situation. Eugene was taking
the high road in planning for additional neighborhood parks in an area not yet part of the city. It
was the right thing to do, but she suggested how that occurred was a separate issue.
Ms. Nathanson said that the Human Services Commission met earlier in the day to discuss funding,
and the commission had directed its staff to advise the chief executive officers of the three local
jurisdictions that commission wanted discussion about equity and revenue issues. She suggested
that perhaps the white paper prepared by staff for today's discussion could be used in that context.
Ms. Taylor thought of a special district as having the purpose of advocating for a service, such as
parks or libraries, and they would spread the costs and share the benefits. She observed that she
been raised in a place where there were seven governing bodies with different boundaries with
seven elected oversight boards. She urged caution about the formation of special districts. She
requested information about how the council could spread the costs and share the benefits of
selected services.
Responding to a question from Mayor Torrey, Mr. Carlson indicated that staff needed no further
direction at this time; the presentation was the last in a series scheduled before the Budget
Committee heard the Six-Year Financial Forecast.
Mayor Torrey adjourned the meeting at 7:53 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
James R. Johnson
City Manager
(Recorded by Kimberly Young)
MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 13, 2001 Page 14
Work Session