Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 07/26/99 Mtg MINUTES Eugene City Council McNutt Room--City Hall July 26, 1999 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Scott Meisner, Nancy Nathanson, Pat Farr, Bobby Lee, Betty Taylor, David Kelly, Gary Rayor, Gary PapS. Mayor Torrey called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. He provided an overview of the public forum rules. 1. PUBLIC FORUM Jim Lynch, 2350 North Terry Street, raised concerns about road repairs in his area. He also called for bringing up the number of crew members on fire trucks to four people. He submitted a letter to the councilors. Carol Berg, 2510 Augusta Street, spoke of the rights of the people to gather, without being suppressed by the police, to discuss the common good and common goals. Nick Urhausen, 2858 Warren Street, spoke about the committee for councilor compensation. He provided his plan for providing city councilors per diem money. Ginger Gietzen, 1540 McKinley Street, spoke for the Westmoreland Wetland Advocacy Group. She provided information on the progress of purchasing the wetlands located at 14th Avenue and City View Street. She called for the City to seek ways to negotiate with the property owners for the purchase of the land. She stressed that the group had not been successful in purchasing any of the land up that point. She noted that the owners only wanted to sell the full acreage, and added that trying to buy smaller parcels they could "de-motivate" the seller. She called for the City Council to ensure that the site became public land. Kevin Early, 2152 Carmel Avenue, raised concern over the proposed sports complexes being suggested for local high schools. Misha Seymor, 1313 Lincoln Street, raised concerns over Hyundai Corporation in Eugene. He questioned the reasoning for not allowing panhandling outside of the public library when The Register Guard was allowed to solicit newspaper subscriptions in the same location. He also raised concerns with trees being cut down near 5th Street Public Market. Mayor Torrey closed the public forum. MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 26, 1999 Page 1 7:30 p.m. Mr. Pap~ addressed the concerns of Mr. Early regarding the youth sports complexes. He noted that the complexes were not just football fields, but were also for soccer. He also noted that the fields were all-weather facilities that would be used all year. Mr. Farr commented on the Danebo fire station and its use of the street Mr. Lynch discussed. He called for a council discussion over funding street improvements on a street that provided access to a fire station. Mr. Kelly thanked Carol Berg for her participation in the July 16 gathering. He spoke in favor of the July 16 gathering and said that it was an example of the way political change and discussion should happen. He also addressed some of the concerns raised by Mr. Early. He said that it was important to realize that more than just football fields were being built. He cited the picnic area in one of the complexes as an example. Ms. Taylor also thanked Carol Berg and the others who participated in the July 16 gathering. Regarding Mr. Early's concerns over the sports complexes, she said that there had been a significant redirection of funds without sufficient citizen involvement. She called for more public input on the sports complex issue. Mr. Lee also complimented Carol Berg's efforts. He added that he wished there were more people like her in the area that could help to build a civic infrastructure. He also thanked the anarchist community for working with the Eugene Police to find an alternative way to express their views. Regarding council pay, Mr. Lee stated that he would not support any measure unless there was a public vote on the issue. Regarding the Westmoreland wetlands he stated that the council should take all wetlands issues very seriously. Mr. Farr also spoke positively of the July 16 gathering and thanked Carol Berg for her participation. Mr. Meisner called for information on the current zoning of the Westmoreland wetlands and the possible effects on the inventory of residential developable land. Mayor Torrey spoke on the Westmoreland wetlands issue. He stated that it would be helpful to get a complete valuation of the surrounding land. CONSENT CALENDAR Mr. Meisner, seconded by Mr. Fart, moved to approve the items on the City Council consent calendar. Referring to the minutes of May 26, Mr. Kelly asked that the reference in paragraph 8 on page 9 to the City structure be changed to the City charter. Referring to the June 14 minutes, he asked that the second sentence in paragraph 10 be changed to indicate he was referring to the refinement plan, rather than the Metro Plan. Referring to the June 16 minutes, Mr. Kelly said the word "group" should be changed to "grounds." Regarding the minutes of June 28, Mr. Kelly noted that the footer contained the incorrect date. Regarding the June 30 Joint Elected Officials meeting, Mr. Kelly said asked that the fourth sentence in paragraph 5 on page 7 be revised to read, "He MINUTES-Eugene City Council July 26, 1999 Page 2 7:30 p.m. added it was important to go to the voters once, hence the importance of a revenue share component for public safety." Referring to the minutes of the April 14 Joint Elected Officials meeting minutes, Mr. Meisner noted that the council was reviewing the minutes for the second time because he had previously pointed out that the remarks attributed to Jim Carlson in paragraph 3 on page 6 made no sense. He said that no tape of the meeting was available to check those remarks, and he would drop his objections, although he still did not understand the statement. Referring to paragraph 7 on page 2 of the minutes of May 26, Mr. Meisner said that the residential uses he mentioned were on the east end, rather than the west end, as the minutes incorrectly stated. Referring to paragraph 4 page 7 of the June 30 Joint Elected Officials meeting minutes, Mr. Meisner asked that the sixth sentence in the paragraph be modified as follows: "...and now it is $1.85 million for County services, maintenance, and backfill." Mr. Fart offered a correction to the May 26 minutes of the City Council. He referred to paragraph 9 and asked that the reference to security guards in the second sentence be modified by prefacing the reference with the phrase "school-district employed." Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0 (Ms. Nathanson not yet having arrived at the meeting). mm. PUBLIC HEARING: ORDINANCE CONCERNING ONE PERCENT FORART IN PUBLIC PLACES, AND AMENDING SECTIONS 2.638 AND 2.640 OF THE EUGENE CODE, 197'1. City Manager Jim Johnson introduced the topic and presented background information on the ordinance. Mayor Torrey opened the public hearing. Seeing no one wishing to speak, he closed the public hearing and called for councilors' comments or questions. Mr. Kelly spoke in support of the ordinance. Mr. Pap~ clarified the fact that whatever art was included in the purchase price of a City acquisition, the ordinance would require spending an additional one percent of the purchase price on art. Mr. Fart also supported the ordinance but urged that, in seeking the artwork, the City should look to local artists first. City Manager Johnson asked the council to consider Council Bill 4697, an ordinance concerning one percent for art in public places, and amending sections 2.638 and 2.640 of the Eugene Code, 1971. Mr. Meisner, seconded by Mr. Fart, moved that the bill, with unanimous consent of the council, be read a second time by council bill number only, MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 26, 1999 Page 3 7:30 p.m. and that enactment be considered at that time. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0 (Ms. Nathanson not yet having arrived at the meeting). City Manager Johnson asked the council to consider Council Bill 4697 by number only. Mr. Meisner, seconded by Mr. Fart, moved that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0 (Ms. Nathanson not yet having arrived at the meeting), and become Ordinance Number 20163. Ms. Nathanson arrived at the meeting. IV. PUBLIC HEARING: AN ORDINANCE CONCERNING GRAFFITI; AND AMENDING SECTIONS 6.005, 6.010, 6.080, 6.100, AND 6.990 OF THE EUGENE CODE 1971 Mayor Torrey called for councilors' questions of staff. Ms. Taylor questioned the wording of the ordinance as it pertained to assessment of fees from property owners for graffiti abatement. City Attorney Glenn Klein clarified that one of the amendments to Eugene Code was to make sure that property owners were not assessed charges for graffiti abatement. Mayor Torrey opened the public hearing and reviewed the process of offering testimony for those wishing to speak. Amy Cannata, 1310 Lemery Lane, cited her Master's thesis on graffiti and called for a legal outlet for graffiti artists. She suggested creation of a free wall for graffiti artists. Terry Connolly, 1401 Willamette Street, raised concerns over the costs of graffiti abatement. He stated that law enforcement was the responsibility of the City and called for a more timely response from the city on abatement. John Brown, 1260 Charnelton Street, thanked the City Council for dealing with the graffiti issue. He supported the City Council in its efforts. Steven Lopez, 40 East 24th Avenue, spoke in support of the graffiti movement and called for the creation of a free wall for graffiti artists. Dylan Freeman, 3025 Portland Street, spoke in support of a free wall for graffiti artists. He urged the council to provide an avenue for free expression. De Norval Unthank, 2770 Capital Drive, reiterated the comments of the other speakers. He urged the council to listen to people who study the issue. Rosemary Raterman, 920 West Hilyard Street, reiterated the comments of the other speakers. She also called for the creation of a free wall for graffiti artists and urged the council to help steer kids toward healthy expression. MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 26, 1999 Page 4 7:30 p.m. Misha Seymour, 1313 Lincoln Street, urged the City Council to give people something to care about. He added that the City should get rid of the "big giant" advertisements on the sides of busses as part of its graffiti abatement efforts. Madronna Holden, 3470 Potter Street, commented that "just saying graffiti is not art won't make a difference to graffiti artists." She opined that graffiti artists would still be as active as ever. She also called for the creation of a free wall for graffiti artists. Matt Watkins, 966 West 8th Avenue, urged the council to try to understand graffiti art before making any decisions on the ordinance. He spoke in support of giving kids a creative outlet by creating a free wall for graffiti artists. Trilce Navarrete, 708 West 26th Avenue, spoke of the complexity of the graffiti issue. She stressed that graffiti was art. She called for creation of a free wall for graffiti artists. She said a free wall would teach youth to solve their issues in a positive manner. Hector Hernandez, 300 North 22nd Street, stressed that graffiti is art. He called for the creation of a free wall. Richard Crawford, 405 Lincoln Street, stressed that graffiti was art. He suggested the City become partners with graffiti artists. Jim Evangelista, 34460 Meyer Road, spoke as a public artist. He stressed that graffiti was an art form. He urged councilors to channel the creative outlets of the City's youth in a positive way. Heide Banner, 2910 Madison Street, said graffiti was beautiful artwork. She urged the council to provide an outlet for creative energy by the creation of a free wall for graffiti artists. She also urged the council to not make art a crime. Mayor Torrey closed the public hearing and called for comments and questions from the councilors. Mr. Farr supported the free wall idea. He asked for a work session on creating free walls for graffiti artists. Mr. Lee wondered if free walls would help the graffiti situation. He said that he was open to the idea of a free wall but stressed the idea of expressing oneself with the consent of the property owner. Mr. Meisner raised concerns over possible "not in my back yard" (NIMBY) attitudes from citizens regarding a free wall. He clarified with City Manager Johnson that any property owner could open a free wall on his/her building. Mr. Rayor provided context on the graffiti issue. He supported the idea of the City providing a free wall for graffiti artists downtown. MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 26, 1999 Page 5 7:30 p.m. Mr. Kelly supported the idea of a free wall for graffiti artists. He suggested finding business owners who would provide free walls on their property. He stressed that there were two issues involved with the proposed ordinance, the issue of vandalism and the issue of providing an avenue for the free expression of art. He added that the phrasing of the title of the pamphlet released by Public Works called "Graffiti Is Not Art" would not be effective with the target audience the information was intended for. Mr. Pap8 expressed his desire to understand the graffiti issue. He asked Mr. Lopez if it was permissible to paint over someone else's graffiti art on a wall. Mr. Lopez replied that it was something he had become accustomed to with the limited amount of space which was legally available to work on. He added that artists painted over each other's work and called it battling. In response to Mr. PapS's question regarding the possibility of graffiti artists having to paint on walls or could they paint on canvas provided, Mr. Lopez said that the tradition of the art form was to paint on walls. Mr. Pap8 expressed his desire to discuss the issue further with Mr. Lopez at a later date. Ms. Taylor called for a number of free walls around the city. She stressed the importance of having more than one. Mayor Torrey spoke against the idea of free walls. He read a statement regarding free walls to the city councilors. He added that the Mayor of Corvallis had commented that there had been a substantial growth in the amount of graffiti art in the area surrounding Corvallis's free wall. He suggested a 90-day experimental free wall to judge the impact to the surrounding area. It was noted by the Mayor that action on the proposed ordinance was set for August 9, 1999. Viii. (MOVED AHEAD OF ITEM V) ACTION: ORDINANCE REGARDING A METRO PLAN AMENDMENT, REFINEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE FOR JAMES FAMILY TRUST (MA 98-01, RA98-01, Z99-02) City Manager Johnson asked councilors to consider Council Bill 4695, an ordinance denying an amendment to the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan Diagram and the Willakenzie Area Plan Diagram to redesignate property identified as a portion of tax lot 3500, Map 17-03-29-11, from medium density residential to commercial; denying an amendment to the text of the Willakenzie Area Plan Oakway Subarea Policy #2 to allow additional commercial development; and denying the rezoning of a portion of tax lot 3500 from R-1 Low-Density Residential to C-2/SR General Commercial with site review subdistrict (James Family Trust). Mr. Meisner, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, moved that the bill, with unanimous consent of the council, be read a second time by council bill number only, and that enactment be considered at that time. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. City Manager Johnson asked the council to consider Council Bill 4695 by number only. Mr. Meisner, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, moved that the bill be approved and given final passage. MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 26, 1999 Page 6 7:30 p.m. Mr. Pap~ clarified that the council was voting to deny the amendment when the Planning Commission had voted unanimously to recommend granting the amendment. Mr. Kelly disclosed an inadvertent ex parte contact with Gil James. He also noted that in his opinion the James Family Trust proposal did not meet the criteria for a refinement plan amendment. Mr. Meisner spoke in support the motion and said that he would continue to watch closely any proposed zone change that resulted in the loss of residential land. Mr. Rayor stated his support of the motion, saying that the amendment was at odds with the council's goals related to infill development and maintenance of the urban growth boundary in its present location and the property extended too far into the residential area for compatibility. Screening was inadequate to protect those properties. Mr. Lee declared an inadvertent ex parte contact with Gil James. He spoke in support of the motion. Mr. Lee said that nodal development was a great concept, but he was worried that the downtown would suffer as a result. He called for more council discussion about the future of downtown and about community planning, adding he was unlikely to approve more commercial designations without that discussion. Mayor Torrey called for any other councilors who wished to declare ex parte contacts. Mr. Meisner declared an ex parte contact with Gil James, noting it was focused on process, not the substance of the amendment. Mayor Torrey reported that he had an ex parte contact with Gil James on a process matter only. Ms. Nathanson noted that the applicant could put a single-family house on the site without a change in designation, and suggested that was not a means to achieve the City's density goals. She pointed out that if the amendment was approved and the property rezoned, any development would have to conform with the democratically developed refinement plan. Mayor Torrey commented that if there was a 4:4 vote he would vote in opposition to the motion. He stated his concern that the council had allowed the applicant to go through considerable effort only to be told at the last minute that the City Council wanted to make a statement. Roll call vote; the motion passed 5:3, with councilors Nathanson, Fart and Pap~ voting in opposition, and became Ordinance Number 20162. V. PUBLIC HEARING: ORDINANCE CONCERNING THE EMERGENCY CODE; ADDING SECTION 2.10555; AMENDING SECTION 2.1990 OF THE EUGENE CODE, 197'1; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Environmental Manager Chuck Solin provided the background on the City Council work session discussion of June 28, 1999. He noted that the City lacked an ordinance that allowed a MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 26, 1999 Page 7 7:30 p.m. declaration of emergency during a level three disaster. He provided information on the process of actually declaring an emergency. Mayor Torrey opened the public hearing. Robin Terranova, 2720 East 40th Avenue, spoke against the ordinance, calling it martial law. He raised concerns about the police purposefully escalating situations to provoke conflict. He also raised concerns over the infringement of the people's right to peacefully assemble. Steven Heslin, 440 1/2 Blair Boulevard, spoke in support of the ordinance because he believed that passage of the ordinance would fan the flames of cynicism against City government. Ed Pliml, 922 West 4th Street, spoke as the vice president of the Whiteaker Community Council. He spoke about the efforts of his neighborhood to increase readiness for Y2K or other disasters. He mentioned Community Emergency Response Training and the need for the public to be ready to be self-sufficient. He said that the emergency ordinance was a slap in the face to all those who made those efforts. Betsy Brown, 1947 Garfield Street, spoke against the ordinance. She said that it was too vague and too dangerous. She noted that under the ordinance, citizens would have no legal way to appeal the decisions during an emergency. She said that it threatened the rights of all citizens. She urged the councilors to reject the proposed ordinance. There was spontaneous applause from the audience. Mayor Torrey called a three-minute recess. Wren Davidson, 2295 Riverview Street, spoke against the ordinance. She suggested that the City Council rethink the ways of dealing with emergencies. Jennifer Wilson, 912 Lawrence Street, spoke against the ordinance. She said that the people are the city and that the communities could care for their members. Jason Smith, 674 Madison Street, spoke against the proposed emergency ordinance. He called on councilors to draft a plan that did not require armed enforcement. Lawrence Carver, 2791 Bell Avenue, read a letter to the council against the proposed emergency ordinance. He said the fact that the ordinance was brought to a vote before the City Council constituted a conspiracy of two or more individuals to deprive the citizens of the City of Eugene of their rights under Title 42 USC Section 1985, paragraph 3. He then read the law into the record. He remarked that those who constructed the proposed ordinance engaged in an illegal conspiracy proscribed by federal law. Rob Whittier, 111 Garfield Street, urged caution to the City Council in adopting the emergency ordinance. He commented that, under the proposed ordinance, the City was trading freedom for expediency. He urged the council not to prepare for disaster by stepping on the backs of the people. Judy Andrews, 3105 Van Avenue, spoke against the proposed emergency ordinance. She said it would allow a violation of her personal privacy and the privacy of her family. MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 26, 1999 Page 8 7:30 p.m. Erica Hovet, 875 West 38th Avenue, spoke against the proposed emergency ordinance. She said that she had been a resident of Eugene since 1966 and this was the first time she wanted to flee the city. She called for alternate methods than the proposed ordinance. Nick Routledge, East Blair Housing Co-op, spoke against the proposed ordinance. He called the proposed ordinance an obscenity and said it went contrary to the laws of God. Ken Klein, 217 Sally Way, raised concerns over the wording of the ordinance. He also raised concern over the abuse to human rights that passage of the ordinance might cause. Misha Seymour, 1313 Lincoln Street, spoke against the ordinance. He raised concern over the abuse of human rights that passage of the ordinance might cause. Patricia Binder, 10 Crest Drive, spoke against the proposed ordinance. She urged the City Council to come up with better solutions in case of a disaster. She said that she felt that the City Council was at war with young people. Randy Shadowalker, Whiteaker Neighborhood, spoke against the ordinance. He commented that by passing the proposed ordinance the City Council would make his life as an activist that much easier. He raised concern over giving power to a person that was not elected. David Hinkley, 1308 Jefferson Street, spoke against the ordinance. He believed that it granted too much power to one person. He noted that there were no checks and balances on the person in charge and that the wording of the ordinance treated all disasters the same. He stated that the City Council oversight of the emergency code enforcement was an illusion because the council could only act if there was a quorum. He then suggested a two-man rule in making decisions about declaring a state of emergency. He submitted more suggestions to the council in writing. Sarah Heaton, 549 West Broadway, spoke against the proposed ordinance. She urged the City Council to let the people declare a state of emergency. Nicola Calvert, 549 West Broadway, spoke against the proposed ordinance. She said that the proposed ordinance was martial law and that it was a pathetic and sad response in the eleventh hour to Y2K. She opined that people would respond to the needs of their community if they felt that they lived in a community. Mark Rabinowitz, 2423 Friendly Street, raised concerns over the ordinance regarding confiscations by an unelected city manager. He noted that there was not a legal way to dispute decisions made under the ordinance. He commented that local laws cannot suspend federal laws and that it was hard to erase vandalism of democracy. Bob Podolsky, 2325 Riverview Street, spoke against the ordinance. He called the proposed ordinance deeply flawed. He commented that ethical ends cannot be reached by unethical means. Kathy Ging, 2878 Terrace Street, spoke against the proposed ordinance. She asked if the City Councilors wanted to go down in history as the suspenders of civil liberty in Eugene. She questioned the City's motives in proposing the emergency ordinance. MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 26, 1999 Page 9 7:30 p.m. Martin Champion, 1430 Willamette Street, spoke against the ordinance. He raised concern over the placement of the public hearing on the agenda and questioned why it was held at such a late hour. Mayor Torrey closed the public hearing and called for comments or questions from council. Mr. Kelly noted that there was not going to be action on the proposed ordinance until August 9, and said that people could still phone in, e-mail, or write in with additional information. He stressed that the proposed emergency ordinance was not the City's only emergency plan. He commented that the proposed ordinance was to guard against the few people who try to profit from an emergency instead of pulling together with the community. Mr. Fart left the meeting. VI. ACTION: ORDNANCE CONCERNING THEFT-RELATED OFFENSES; ANDAN ORDINANCE CONCERNING ALCOHOL-RELATED OFFENSES Mayor Torrey called for questions or comments from councilors. Mr. Rayor clarified with Judge Spence, Eugene Municipal Court, that these ordinances would bring the municipal code concurrent with State law. Ms. Taylor clarified with Judge Spence that the fines for alcohol-related offenses would be greater after passage of the proposed ordinances. Mr. Lee clarified with Judge Spence that some of the alcohol-related offenses were currently prosecuted through the State Circuit Court. He commented that without the information pertaining to the fiscal impact of the proposed ordinance, he would find it hard to support the ordinance. Mr. Rayor questioned Judge Spence as to the wording of the ordinance regarding community service and penalties other than financial. Judge Spence stated that community service was not something that should be applied on a regular basis because it was subject to failure and was onerous for the individual involved. In response to a question from Mr. Pap~, Judge Spence replied that, under the new ordinance, the increased fines could be lowered if the offender agreed to participate alcohol treatment, a victim impact panel, Alcoholics Anonymous, or another kind of program. City Manager Johnson asked the council to consider Council Bill 4693, an ordinance concerning alcohol-related offenses; adding sections 4.131, 4.191, and 4.908; and amending sections 4.155 and 4.990 of Eugene Code 1971. Mr. Meisner, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, moved that the bill, with unanimous consent of the council, be read the second time by council bill number only, and that enactment be considered at that time. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0 (Mr. Farr having left the meeting). City Manager Johnson asked that the council consider Council Bill 4693 by number only. MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 26, 1999 Page 10 7:30 p.m. Mr. Meisner, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, moved that the bill be approved and given final passage. Mr. Lee raised concerns over the ability of his constituents to pay the increased fees. He stated that fining offenders was not the answer. He stressed the need for public education. Mr. Kelly stated his appreciation that there was now a provision in the language of the ordinance for differing fines for first time and repeat offenders. Mr. Meisner stated that, by passage of the ordinance, offenders would receive greater individualized attention from the Municipal Court than from the Circuit Court. Mayor Torrey stated his hope that the council would support the bill. Ms. Taylor preferred to postpone consideration of the ordinance, and stated that if the council voted that evening she would be voting against it. Mr. Pap~, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, moved to call the question. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0 (Mr. Farr having left the meeting). Roll call vote; the motion passed, 6:1 (Mr. Farr having left the meeting), with Ms. Taylor voting in opposition, and became Ordinance 20160. City Manager Johnson asked the council to consider Council Bill 4694, an ordinance concerning theft-related offenses; and amending sections 4.820, 4.825 and 4.930 of the Eugene Code, 1971. Mr. Meisner, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, moved that the bill with unanimous consent of the council, be read the second time by council bill number only, and that enactment be considered at that time. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0 (Mr. Farr having left the meeting). City Manager Johnson asked council to consider Council Bill 4694 by number only. Mr. Meisner, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, moved that the bill be approved and given final passage. Mr. Lee stressed his desire to make the changes in the ordinance known to the University of Oregon and the local high schools. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0 (Mr. Farr having left the meeting), and became Ordinance 20161. Mr. Rayor left the meeting. VII. ACTION: RESOLUTION APPROVING ALTERNATIVE TO SiX PERCENT IN LIEU OF TAX PAYMENT ON STEAM SALES FROM THE EUGENE WATER & ELECTRIC BOARD MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 26, 1999 Page 11 7:30 p.m. Mr. Meisner, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, moved to adopt Resolution Number 4599, approving alternative to the six percent in-lieu-of-tax payment on steam sales from the Eugene Water and Electric Board. Ms. Nathanson left the meeting. Responding to a question from Mr. Kelly, Dick Helgeson, Eugene Water & Electric Board, indicated that the steam plant had converted to natural gas as its primary fuel, and had phased out the wood waste operation. He anticipated that the facility would operate as long as it had customers in the downtown area using it as a primary energy source. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 5:0 (Mr. Farr, Ms. Nathanson, and Mr. Rayor having left the meeting). Mayor Torrey adjourned the meeting at 11 p.m. Respectfully submitted, James R. Johnson City Manager (Recorded by Joe Sams) MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 26, 1999 Page 12 7:30 p.m.