Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 06/16/99 WS MINUTES Eugene City Council McNutt Room--City Hall June 16, 1999 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Scott Meisner, Nancy Nathanson, Pat Fart, Bobby Lee, Betty Taylor, David Kelly, Gary Rayor, Gary Pap~ Mayor James D. Torrey called the council to order at 5:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION A. Items from Mayor, City Council, and City Manager Mr. Fart requested an opportunity to reconsider the appointment of Tim Laue to the Police Commission. Mr. Meisner indicated he would make the motion for reconsideration. Mr. Torrey asked that the council consider the item later in the meeting. Mr. Torrey recognized the American Legion Beavers Boys State representatives present at the meeting: Nick Barger, Misha Kassel, Russel Dizer, Jr., Matt Elliott, Jeremy Morris, Matt Teyema, Kyle Sullivan, Ben Johnson, Jeremy Adams, Ryan Stoneberg, Chris Guisto, Rob Yencopal, David Redd, Jon Conklin, Jan Heltzel, Alan Weischedel, and Asa Langrell. The representatives identified their city of origin and position in Boys State. Mr. Pap~ arrived at 5:35 p.m. The president of Beaver Boys State, Nick Barber, presented a certificate of appreciation to Mayor Torrey. Ms. Nathanson discussed utility boxes, stating her belief they add to visual blight in the city. She expressed hope that staff could determine a way to begin to require screening for utility boxes so they were wholly or partially obscured from public view. She requested a report on her request. Ms. Nathanson reported the North End Scoping Group had finished its work and developed a preliminary set of recommendations. She anticipated a final report from the group would be forwarded to the council soon. She reviewed the titles of the sections of the document and highlighted some of the committee's recommendations. Mr. Rayor passed. Mr. Kelly passed. MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 16, 1999 Page 1 5:30 p.m. Mr. Pap~ thanked the mayor for his comments at the flag dedication ceremony at Skinner Butte on June 14. He commended the event. In response to a question from Mr. Lee regarding the nomination forms for the Citizen Charter Review Committee on Council Compensation, Mr. Torrey encouraged him to submit his nominations for later discussion. Mr. Farr echoed Mr. Papa's comments regarding the flag dedication ceremony. Mr. Farr discussed the programs that would be funded and operated in Bethel as the result of a successful grant application to the program formally known as "Weed and Seed." He emphasized the "seed" elements of the program, and added that the funding would also help support a proposed public safety substation in the area. Mr. Fart called the council's attention to a report updating the council on the Hyundai investigation. He said that County Assessor Jim Gangle had not finished his investigation, and he hoped to have something to report to the council by the end of July. He assured the community the council was addressing the issue. Ms. Taylor said that she understood Club Road was being changed to four lanes. A citizens committee had studied the area and recommended moving the road away from the river and leaving more room near the river. She said that if something had changed the public should be given an opportunity to comment, and requested more information. Ms. Taylor said that the City should do anything it could to keep Farmers Market downtown. She also suggested the council consider a bureaucracy-free zone downtown. Ms. Taylor asked if there was anything the City could do to prevent serial camping, where campers moved between neighbors. She added it was a more prevalent problem in some neighborhoods than in others. Ms. Taylor said that she heard a presentation from the internal performance auditor in Portland and would like discussion of a similar position in Eugene. Mr. Torrey referred the council to the minutes of the Public Safety Coordinating Council (PSCC), the PSCC Policy Group, the PSCC report, and a letter to President Bill Clinton seeking White House support for the United Front Action Plan for the Prevention of Youth Crime and School Violence. A-1.Reconsideration of Appointment to Police Commission Mr. Meisner moved, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, to reconsider the motion of June 14 in the matter of the appointment of Tim Laue to the Police Commission. Ms. Nathanson said it was important to reconsider the issue. The council made a mistake in acting on June 14, particularly when Mr. Fart had requested that the item be postponed to allow him to present. She called the council's attention to its operating rules, which the council had contravened. MINUTES-Eugene City Council June 16, 1999 Page 2 5:30 p.m. Mr. Kelly indicated he could support the motion to reconsider. He believed the council honored the spirit of Mr. Fart's request by ensuring that a voter from the prevailing side would resubmit the motion. The motion to reconsider passed unanimously, 8:0 Mr. Meisner moved, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, to appoint Tim Laue to a three-year position on the Police Commission. Mr. Farr expressed surprise that Mr. Laue's nomination had been rejected by the council given his tireless dedication to the field of public safety and his qualifications to sit on the commission. Mr. Laue had tirelessly worked on the issues involved. Mr. Laue would bring history on the topic to the Police Commission and would help focus the work of the commission. Mr. Farr referred to the diversity issue raised as a reason for rejecting Mr. Laue. He said he had discussed the issue of diversity as it related to Mr. Laue's appointment with Ron Chase, who had expressed disbelief that Mr. Laue was not appointed. He had believed that Mr. Laue should be on the commission. He reminded the council that Mr. Chase had worked for many years to ensure the Police Department was diverse and accountable. Mr. Fart reminded the council that Mr. Laue was dedicated to public safety, and would bring a great deal of knowledge and dedication to the commission. Mr. Lee noted his previous support for Tim Laue and said that given the position was still vacant the council needed to make a decision. He was persuaded by the arguments of Ron Chase, who had contacted him the previous day with his concerns. Mr. Lee said that Mr. Chase supported the appointment of Mr. Laue, and he concurred. He termed Mr. Laue the architect of the Police Commission, and the person who ensured the representation of the Human Rights Commission on the Police Commission. He noted Mr. Laue's dedication to human rights issues, and said he did not accept arguments regarding diversity. Mr. Rayor said he ran against Mr. Laue because he did not think Mr. Laue was doing a good job. He was reluctant to put Mr. Laue on another City committee for that reason. He said that having worked with the Police and PSCC, he questioned Mr. Laue's impartiality in dealing with the police and the issues the Police Commission would face. Ms. Nathanson replied to Mr. Rayor's remarks about the impartiality of Mr. Laue. She said that it was a legitimate issue, but she pointed out the commission would not review individual actions by officers but rather would provide oversight on policy and procedures. She said that she had given the matter of the individual appointment much thought, and it appeared to be a big deal for the council but not for the community. Ms. Nathanson said that people were more concerned that the commission worked well. She questioned whether the big deal was the person appointed or control over the process because it was a "mayor nominate, council appoint" process. Ms. Nathanson did not think there was a compelling argument against Mr. Laue as a member of the commission. She indicated support for the appointment of Mr. Laue. Ms. Nathanson reviewed the composition of the Police Commission. MINUTES-Eugene City Council June 16, 1999 Page 3 5:30 p.m. Mr. Pap~ moved, seconded by Mr. Kelly, to call for the question. The motion to call the question passed, 8:0. The motion to appoint Tim Laue to the Police Commission passed, 5:4; Mayor Torrey casting his vote in favor of Mr. Laue to break a council tie, and Mr. Meisner, Ms. Taylor, Mr. Rayor, and Mr. Kelly voting no. B.Work Session: Discussion of Joint City of Eugene and Eugene School District 4J Parks and Open Space Mr. Fart, referring to the agenda item title, noted that the City was also working with the Bethel School District on the same issues. Public Works Department Director Chris Andersen introduced Public Works staff present. She also noted the presence of David Piercy and Bill Hurst of School District 4J. She distributed copies of the tabloid associated Ballot Measure 20-03, the City's Parks and Open Space measure. The tabloid described how the City would use the funds identified in the bond measure as clearly as possible so people understood the intent of the measure. Ms. Andersen said that not all the concepts were fully developed at the time of the election, but staff had been working to stay as close to the intent of the measure as possible. Ms. Andersen said that the concept of a youth sports complex was developed and identified for two potential locations, one in north Eugene and one in south Eugene. The idea of a youth sports complex was to bring together a number of multi-use athletic and recreation activities on one site. The complex would appeal to a wide range of age groups and types of athletic endeavors, including both team and individual sports. The complexes would serve multiple functions and would have park-like atmospheres. Ms. Andersen said that it was City's intent throughout the development of the measure to work with the school districts on such complexes at school sites. Ms. Andersen said that at the same time Ballot Measure 20-03 was passed, voters passed a bond measure for School District 4J allocated $3.5 million to the districts to deal with its athletic/sports field news. After the election, the City and school district staff began to discuss how the opportunity to collectively work toward common goals could be taken advantage of. Over the course of the last few months there had been several neighborhood group meetings and three design charettes for the Churchill/Kennedy site, Sheldon site, and Cai Young site. Those meetings involved both interested neighbors and different user groups. Ms. Andersen discussed the community use approach. She said that the school district was committed to community use of its athletic field development. She referred the council to a chart on the meeting room wall that listed opportunities for use currently being considered by the school district. Ms. Andersen distributed a document entitled "Churchill/Kennedy Facilities and Associated Activities." She noted the school district board was meeting later that evening to discuss the "four- field concept." The intent as described by the school district was that all four sites would be intended for public use. The fields at North and South Eugene High Schools would be available for a shared-use schedule. Ms. Anderson referred councilors to the meeting packet, which included rough cost estimates of the various program elements described on the site maps included in the packet. She said that staff identified a $4 million target for the youth sports complex part of the measure, and emphasized the MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 16, 1999 Page 4 5:30 p.m. only way the City could develop the concept was to work collaboratively with the school districts. If the City attempted to develop bare ground in a similar manner, it would not be able to achieve the same blend of facilities and interaction between facilities possible under the plan. Ms. Andersen said that the individual site proposals were intended to soften the edges of each site, provide a more park-like feel, create an atmosphere in which the public felt invited to participate or merely be on the site, and supported each of the recreational activity opportunities with higher quality facilities that provided a longer playing season. She noted that several Oregon communities had selected artificial surface fields that could be used for multiple sports over a longer season because they did not have the same problems associated with heavy use of a turf field. Ms. Andersen said the intent of the suggested motion was to the give the staff a sense of the council's comfort level with the approaches proposed. That information would be communicated to the school district board. She said that the outcome of the issue was in part dependent on what the school district decided to do in terms of its multiple-field versus one-field issue. If the school district choose the one-field approach, the facility would be at the Churchill/Kennedy site; if the district choose the multiple-field approach, there would be a facility at each high school. Mr. Kelly was very interested in the concept of the youth sports complex. He said that youth needed places to recreate and hang out close to their homes. However, he said that the motion was so broadly worded he was unsure what an affirmative vote meant. He supported the complex concept but could not support the motion because it was too vague. Responding to a question from Mr. Rayor regarding the facilities at the involved high schools, Ms. Andersen said that North Eugene High School would have an artificial turf athletic field; because of the site's constraints, she anticipated that would be the only facility at that location. South Eugene High School would have an athletic field, but because the site was close to Amazon Community Center it would not be the site of a joint project. The Churchill and Sheldon high school sites were proposed for youth sports complexes. The school district had indicated that all four athletic fields would be available for multiple use by the public. Mr. Rayor did not see the Sheldon High School site on the map of projects. Ms. Andersen pointed out the location on the map in the tabloid. Mr. Rayor said that neither South Eugene High School or North Eugene High School were part of the original proposal, and asked if that meant another project would not happen. Ms. Andersen said no. The City had included funding youth sports complexes at two unidentified sites at a cost of $2 million each. Mr. Rayor wanted to ensure that the public received the best value for its dollar. He referred to an article in a recent edition of The Register-Guard about jocks at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado, and said that everyone had a different experience in high school, and he speculated his was different than the mayor's, for example. Mr. Rayor said he wanted to ensure that there was as much public use on the sites as possible. Ms. Taylor did not think the public voted on the parks and open space measure to support proposals such as the one before the council. She interpreted the proposal as the City "putting the parks money into football fields." Ms. Taylor said people had asked her if the City was going to take such an action before the vote, and she had checked with someone and said no. She said that some people almost did not vote for the school measure because so much was dedicated to football, and there were many people who did not think football was a wonderful thing and did not MINUTES-Eugene City Council June 16, 1999 Page 5 5:30 p.m. see it as part of the parks measure. Ms. Taylor maintained that the proposal changed the measure's intent and the council should hold a public hearing on the proposal so the public could express its opinion. Ms. Nathanson, chair of the Mayor's Parks and Open Space Committee, responded to Ms. Taylor's statement by saying that nothing had changed from the committee's recommendation. The committee had discussed youth sports complexes as a major element of the package, which included neighborhood parks, open space, and playing fields. Ms. Nathanson said that youth sports complexes were more than just playing fields. She said that the proposal was not a proposal to give money to the school districts to construct stadiums. Ms. Nathanson asked how multiple use of the athletic fields would actually occur. Who would play on the fields, and how would they be scheduled? Mr. Johnson said that the school district had offered to establish a user committee that would include nonprofits that use the fields, the City, and the school district to help guide the use of the fields. The school district was considering giving up control of the sites so the user committee could establish policies for use of the fields. He said that the major advantage to the City from cooperation with the district was the community use of the artificial turf surfaces, which would multiply the number of teams that could be accommodated within the community. Ms. Nathanson asked if the fields would be available to adult teams. Mr. Johnson said yes. Ms. Andersen said that the City was not aware when it prepared the ballot measure that the school district would be looking at a four-field concept and have $3.5 million to work with. She believed the park-like settings of the youth sports complexes would encourage even more community use of school areas than currently occurred. Ms. Andersen said that during the neighborhood charette process, concerns were raised about the impact from more activities on the neighborhoods, and staff tried to address those concerns through the site designs. Further site development would require more public input. Mr. Farr liked the youth sports complex concept. He said that it was a way the City could leverage public money to get more than it could as a single entity. He suggested that the more available the complexes were to the public, the more acceptable they would be to the neighborhoods. Mr. Farr said that school-aged youth tend to fall into two groups: those that participate in athletics, and those who participate in more artistic forms of expressions. He said that the youth sports complexes appeared to be focused solely on the athletic youth. He suggested that the City needed to do what it could to appeal to all youth. Mr. Farr said that the steps at Petersen Barn are occasionally used as an amphitheater for impromptu performances and talent shows, and he would like to see such a concept incorporated into the proposed youth sports complexes to broaden their appeal to other youth and community theater groups. Mr. Farr said it was his experience as a soccer player that the community's sports fields are generally pretty degraded. He said that the artificial turf was an important part of the design. Mr. Meisner expressed the hope that the intergovernmental agreements entered into by the City and school districts include the guarantee of public access that the council expected from this type of investment for more than a one-year period. Mr. Meisner did not think that the proposed sports complexes were actually easy to walk to for a majority of community residents. He urged the City's continued support of developments that were MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 16, 1999 Page 6 5:30 p.m. truly accessible to neighborhoods. Mr. Meisner endorsed the partnership between the school district and the City, although he noted his agreement with Mr. Fart's remarks about the need to serve other interest groups. He said that those who were involved in sports may not be involved in organized sports, and expressed the hope those individuals would not be forgotten. Ms. Andersen said that the council would receive a quarterly update in mid-July, and would receive at that time a list of the other development sites in the program. Mr. Pap~ noted his past involvement in the Field of Dreams Committee, which was focused on getting as many well-maintained fields as possible for youth of the community for all sports. He said that it was beyond his wildest dreams that the council would be looking at a proposal for four all-weather sports complexes. Responding to Mr. Meisner's remarks, Mr. Pap~ said that the school district had committed to the community's use of the fields into the future. He believed that the user committee was key to the success of the concept. That committee would exist in perpetuity. Mr. Meisner said that his remarks were also intended to address Mr. Kelly's concerns about the motion. He was interested in ensuring the terms of the agreement were clear, and that the agreement included the guarantee of community use. Responding to a question from Mr. Pap~, Ms. Andersen confirmed that the City intended to make some irrigation and drainage improvements to the sites identified. She added that the intergovernmental agreement will address long-term maintenance issues and jurisdictional responsibility. Ms. Andersen reiterated that the community's access to the youth sports complexes would be not only to the artificial turf field, but to the other facilities owned by the school district at those locations, including the programmable facilities. Responding to Ms. Taylor's concerns, Mr. Pap~ said that as he raised money to help pass the measure, he had committed to supporters that there would be at least two youth sports parks. He was convinced the proposal before the council met that commitment. Mr. Pap~ noted that the measure also provided at least $750,000 for improvements to neighborhood park ballfields. Mr. Lee asked if liability would be discussed in the intergovernmental agreement. Mr. Johnson said yes. Mr. Lee asked how liability would be handled. Mr. Johnson said that it would be handled in a manner similar to how it was addressed in the joint use agreements the City currently had with the district. Mr. Lee supported the youth sports complex concept. He also supported the collaboration with the school district. He said that it was an attempt to enhance what he termed an intergenerational partnership between community youth and the community at large. He was excited about the artificial turf fields. Mr. Lee thanked Mr. Piercy and Mr. Hurst for working with City staff on the proposal. Mr. Torrey pointed out the area between Cai Young Middle School, the Beltline, the Willamette River, and I-5, and said it would have a population the size of Florence in five years but there was not one park in the area. He said that the proposed park improvements in that area would be an immense benefit to the people living north of the Beltline. Mr. Torrey acknowledged that the proposed facility at Sheldon High School was opposed by the neighbors because of the parking situation, but he believed the same would be true no matter its location given the City's history in attempting to site sports facilities. MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 16, 1999 Page 7 5:30 p.m. Responding to Mr. Rayor's remarks, Mr. Torrey said that the five-year old children learning to play T- ball could not be called jocks. They would be using the facilities with their families. He expressed support for the proposal and hoped the council would move forward with it. Mr. Kelly said he wanted to reach closure on the issue of consistency with the ballot measure. He said that the council was talking about $4 million for two youth parks that included artificial turf fields. What the City was receiving from School District 4J was community access to fields it would not otherwise have access to, and semi-improved and serviced grounds that could be further improved at a lower cost than improvements on bare ground. Mr. Johnson also pointed to the disclaimer in the tabloid, which indicated that the fund allocations, land acquisitions, locations, and improvements could change based on a public review process. He said that the tabloid was a guideline. Mr. Kelly concurred. Ms. Nathanson noted that since the passage of the measure the council had received information about the sports fields that would be improved, upgraded, or installed. She suggested that helped to spread the pressure from the three sports complexes and ensured that there were accessible places for both structured and nonstructured play close to where people live. Mr. Meisner moved, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, to approve the concepts of joint development of youth-oriented facilities as described for Churchill, Sheldon, and Cai Young with Eugene School District 4J, and instruct the City Manager to develop an intergovernmental agreement to include a) community use of four artificial turf fields and other programmable sites, b) joint scheduling by establishment of a users committee, c) maintenance of facilities with council review of the terms of the intergovernmental prior to execution. Mr. Rayor referred to the 15 fields on school sites that the City was contributing to, and asked if there would be a usage charge. Ms. Andersen said no. She added that the proposal did not represent the first joint venture between the school district and City related to sports facilities. Mr. Rayor said that he wanted to ensure if the public put money into the fields, they were available to the public. Ms. Andersen agreed, adding that the majority of the usage could be attributed to Kids Sports. Mr. Rayor moved to amend the motion by adding discussion of the 15 schools and operating principles involved with that contribution as part of the agreement. Ms. Nathanson suggested that the issues were separate. Mr. Rayor's motion died for lack of a second. Mr. Meisner supported the partnership between the school district and City while noting his qualms about the wide range of facilities at each site and the potential confusion about access that might cause the public. He suggested that there may daytime access issues at some school locations, and hours might vary at the various fields, and it could be challenging to get the public to understand. The motion carried unanimously, 8:0. MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 16, 1999 Page 8 5:30 p.m. Mr. Rayor moved, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, to add discussion of the 15 schools and operating principles involved with that contribution as part of the agreement. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. C.Disposition Process for the Sears Building and Existing Library Properties Planning and Development Department Director Paul Farmer reviewed the staff recommendation for the disposition of the former Sears building and existing library properties in the downtown area, which was outlined in the meeting packet. Mr. Torrey adjourned the meeting of the City Council and convened a meeting of the Urban Renewal Agency. Mr. Meisner moved, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, to direct the City Manager to move forward with the sale of the Sears building and adjacent 1/8-block surface lot through a request for proposals process with the goal of maximizing the value of the Sears building property for the benefit of the new library, while at the same time assuring a future use of the property which furthers the City's growth management goals of creating a dense, vital, more attractive downtown by encompassing a variety of different uses such as retail, office, housing, and entertainment. The Planning Commission shall develop the Request for Proposals planning and design criteria based roughly on the June 16 draft criteria and shall return those criteria to the City Council for approval. The Planning Commission shall also evaluate Request for Proposals responses, and make a recommendation to the City Council acting as the Urban Renewal Agency, with the final project selection approved by the council acting as the Urban Renewal Agency. Ms. Nathanson said that she liked the Request for Proposals approach, but nothing in the meeting packet acknowledged the planning efforts that proceeded the draft planning and design criteria, such as the Downtown Plan. Nothing in the background materials indicated whether the ideas in those plans and studies had been incorporated into the criteria. She asked that staff ensure that the Planning Commission received that information, and to identify what had changed since those planning efforts were completed. Mr. Farmer assured her that the commission would receive that information, and it would also be incorporated into the Request for Proposals. Ms. Nathanson asked for more information at some point about the required planning and design criteria calling for three-quarters of the structure to be on or near the property line. She also suggested that the definition of "corner" as it related to the criteria for special corner treatment be clarified. Ms. Nathanson noted that the planning and design criteria stated surface parking was discouraged. She asked if the City only wanted to discourage surface parking, or if it should disallow it outright. Mr. Farmer said that he seen examples of retail development that did a good job of providing surface parking in a modest way, and there may be some uses that require surface parking for high turnover coming and going and some spaces required for the disabled. He suggested that the council may not want to prohibit surface parking outright. Mr. Farr said he generally opposed placing restrictions on business that inhibited a business's ability to operate. However, he believed the planning and design criteria were very important for a MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 16, 1999 Page 9 5:30 p.m. successful downtown development. He stressed the need for appropriate size and scale in a high- quality development that attracted both residents and nonresidents. Mr. Pap8 asked Mr. Farmer if the property appraisals took into account the restrictions being suggested in the planning and design criteria, and how those restrictions would affect the property's value. Mr. Farmer responded that the appraisal did not reflect the criteria, which staff attempted to ensure were not overly onerous. He said that the criteria could modestly decrease the price but could also increase the price because it could bring certain developers into the process who would read into the criteria the City's seriousness about having a high-quality project. It takes time and money to put together a high-quality proposal. Mr. Pap8 asked if the appraisal of the Sears property considered the value of the property with and without the building. Mr. Farmer said that the appraisal took into consideration the highest and best use of the property, and that there was the cost of demolition to consider. Mr. Pap8 asked if the City would realize a better price for the site if it demolished the building. Mr. Johnson said not necessarily; the appraisals for both the Sears and the library sites included the cost estimate for renovation, so it was fully disclosed in the appraisal. Ms. Taylor asked why the Planning Commission, rather than the council, should develop the planning and design criteria. She said that it would add more time to the process. Ms. Taylor also asked if anyone had considered that more housing in downtown could spur the need for a school, and the library building location may be a good spot for that use. Responding to Ms. Taylor's first question, Mr. Farmer said that staff discussed three options for developing the criteria: a department advisory committee, the council, and the commission. Staff concluded the department advisory committee process would take too long. Mr. Farmer believed there was an added benefit to the process of getting the view point of the commission, which dealt more specifically with development matters. Regarding the potential of the library site for a school, Mr. Farmer said that the school district had shown no interest in the site. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Mr. Torrey adjourned the meeting of the Urban Renewal Agency and convened the meeting of the Eugene City Council. Mr. Meisner moved, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, to direct the City Manager to move forward with the sale of the existing library property through a request for proposals process with the goal of maximizing the value of the existing library property for the benefit of the new library, while at the same time assuring a future use of the property which furthers the City's growth management goals of creating a dense, vital, more attractive downtown by encompassing a variety of different uses such as retail, office, housing, and entertainment. Two separate Request for Proposals shall be prepared for the existing library building site and for the surface parcel east of Olive Street. The Planning Commission shall develop the Request for Proposals planning/design criteria for City Council approval, and shall evaluate Request for Proposals responses and make a recommendation to the council, with the final project selection approved by the City Council. Ms. Taylor noted her previous question about the potential of the site for a school, and asked if staff had discussed the possibility with School District 4J staff. She suggested contact with the school district. Mr. Johnson believed it would take several hundred children downtown to spur the school district to open a downtown school. MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 16, 1999 Page 10 5:30 p.m. Responding to a question from Mr. Rayor, Mr. Johnson said that planning and design criteria had not yet been developed for the library property. Responding to a question from Mr. PapS, Mr. Farmer confirmed that the two Request for Proposals would be issued at the same time. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. The meeting adjourned at 7:29 p.m. (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 16, 1999 Page 11 5:30 p.m.