Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 01/14/98 Work Session MINUTES Eugene City Council McNutt Room--City Hall January 14, 1998 11:30 a.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Pat Fart, Nancy Nathanson, Tim Laue, Scott Meisner, Bobby Lee, Betty Taylor, Laurie Swanson Gribskov, Ken Tollenaar. The January 14, 1998, lunch meeting of the Eugene City Council was called to order at 11:30 a.m.; Mayor Jim Torrey presiding. I. REPORT FROM COUNCILORS NATHANSON AND TAYLOR ON NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES CONFERENCE Ms. Taylor reported on three workshops she had attended at the conference. One regarded citizen involvement. She discussed the tools used by other communities for citizen outreach and involvement, which included government schools, neighborhood leadership colleges, guidebooks to city services, council agendas broadcast on public access television and printed in newspapers, free parking for city council meetings, public computer access kiosks, monthly newsletters, and weekly newspaper columns. Ms. Taylor was particularly interested in the idea of a monthly newsletter to all citizens with space for all neighborhood organizations to include neighborhood news. She said that she had also attended a session on the news media and a session on affordable housing. Ms. Taylor suggested that the council might be interested in hearing a presentation from Portland staff on that community's efforts in the area of affordable housing and inclusionary zoning. She said that presenters indicated housing was only one element of poverty reduction, and the issue required collaboration at all levels of government. Ms. Nathanson reported that she had talked to a representative of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) at the conference about the fact Eugene's emergency operations center ought to be relocated for safety purposes but there was no funding to underwrite the move. She had shared information with the FEMA representative about Eugene's risk factors, including the risk of conflagration and the risk of earthquake, and learned that FEMA had started a new program Eugene might want to apply to for assistance. Ms. Nathanson indicated she had asked the manager and Intergovernmental Relations Office to look into the matter. Ms. Nathanson discussed the Showcase of Cities, an exhibit area at the conference where cities displayed information about innovative or successful programs. She had been particularly interested in an exhibit from Champagne, Illinois, about that city's neighborhood-based service and program delivery systems. Champagne had a project called Campus Town 2000 that Ms. Nathanson likened to the West University Partners Project. She ordered a report regarding the Campus Town 2000 project and was arranging for copies for Mr. Lee as well as for representatives of the City's interjurisdictional partners. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 14, 1998 Page 1 11:30 a.m. Ms. Nathanson reported on a workshop she attended entitled "The Business of Government: Banking on Productivity." She described a "productivity bank" established by Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and said she would like to consider a similar approach in Eugene. Ms. Nathanson said that she had provided information about the workshop to the City Manager. Ms. Nathanson said that the National League of Cities has initiated a project entitled "Municipalities in Transition." She read a description of the project to the council and noted that Eugene was one of 22 participating in the project. Ms. Nathanson anticipated that the information resulting from the survey would help to focus the league's governing boards and policy committee on issues, as well as inform participants what cities were facing, how they were the same, and how they differed. She offered an example of the types of issues that were being discussed, mobility and migration. Ms. Nathanson said that, after consideration, she had concluded that Eugene saw issues differently than many other communities, but had some commonalities with other cities that also have universities. She said that suggested to her differences between communities were more attributable to environment than size. Responding to a question from Mr. Lee regarding national trends in local control, Ms. Nathanson confirmed it was an issue for participants. She said that it was important that the issue be addressed in writing instead of people merely complaining about unfunded mandates. Ms. Swanson Gribskov suggested that the government school described by Ms. Taylor seemed similar to Eugene's Police Academy, and the City might want to extend that effort in the future. II. LAND USE CODE UPDATE DISCUSSION Mr. Torrey reminded the council that he had recommended that four independent groups be asked to review the Land Use Code Update. He had made his recommendation because he had heard many comments about how complex the update was and how the community could benefit if the update received more scrutiny than was planned. Mr. Torrey said that often, the council and staff were so involved with such projects that about the time they were beginning to feel comfortable with the project the public was just beginning to hear about it. He hoped that the recommendation would result in an intensive review from divergent groups who could reach out to other sections of the community for feedback they could provide to the City in an organized fashion. Mr. Farr supported Mr. Torrey's recommendation, saying that he considered it one of the greatest steps the organization had ever taken toward citizen involvement. He looked forward to the results. Mr. Farr left the meeting at 11:55 a.m. Cathy Briner, Planning and Development Department, said that the Planning Commission endorsed Mr. Torrey's recommendation with the caveat that the review would postpone the adoption of the update through a period of heavy construction. The commission proposed to meet with the council in late April; following that meeting, the commission would hold the public hearings it had originally scheduled for February. Ms. Briner said that the commission also MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 14, 1998 Page 2 11:30 a.m. wanted comment from other groups' expertise on the topic, such as the American Institute of Architects, and would arrange for that to occur. Ms. Briner said that the recommendation would have an impact on the budget for the update, as it resulted in a six-month extension of the process. She referred the council to a process schedule, distributed prior to the meeting. Ms. Briner said that information sessions would occur as planned. Mr. Meisner expressed support for Mr. Torrey's recommendation and stressed that it not exclude other groups from providing a review of the update as well. He hoped the City would encourage such reviews by providing staff assistance to those groups similar to that provided to the four groups identified by Mr. Torrey. Mr. Meisner also hoped staff could focus the groups' input by asking focused questions. For example, were the proposals in the Land Use Code Update consistent with the policies in the Growth Management Study and the TransPlan update? Ms. Briner said that Teresa Bishow of Planning and Development Department anticipated that comment, and had proposed such a list; staff would incorporate Mr. Meisner's suggestions. Mr. Meisner acknowledged the commission's concern about postponing adoption of the update but said he was not adverse to accelerating adoption of some elements of the update as appropriate. He suggested that staff could ask the review groups if there were elements that should be adopted earlier. Ms. Taylor indicated her concurrence with Mr. Meisner's remarks. She asked why Mr. Torrey was proposing review by both the Homebuilders Association and Chamber of Commerce as she believed the two groups would have the same views. Mr. Torrey said that the two groups had differing constituencies; the chamber represented a wide variety of businesses, particularly small businesses. Ms. Taylor said that both groups were pro-growth. Mr. Torrey agreed, but believed that there was a division of interests represented by the two groups. He believed that those interests would be balanced by the views of the other groups reviewing the update. Ms. Nathanson said that there were some elements of the update she would like to implement while Eugene was still experiencing growth. She anticipated more activity during the upcoming summer than Eugene experienced a decade past. Ms. Nathanson asked when the Permit and Information Center experienced the highest level of activity, and could the adoption process be scheduled to ensure that the update's impact were felt. Ms. Briner said that Eugene no longer experienced the same type of construction cycle it had in the past; construction occurred all year- round. She said that accelerating adoption of elements of the update would have both a financial impact in terms of staffing and would require the time of both staff and the appointed and elected officials. Ms. Swanson Gribskov supported Mr. Torrey's recommendation. She believed it represented an attempt to balance viewpoints. She cautioned the council against establishing a cumbersome, complicated process in an attempt to be inclusive. She shared Mr. Torrey's hopes the four groups could be a conduit for other input. Ms. Swanson Gribskov acknowledged the potential of additional costs from early adoption and suggested that the City Manager return to the council with an estimate of additional cost ramifications during the upcoming budget process. She said that the commission might want to consider the opportunity of conducting a pilot project through the conditional use permit process while the update process continued. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 14, 1998 Page 3 11:30 a.m. Mr. Meisner said that early adoption was needed not just to get those desirable elements of the update adopted so they had an impact on construction, but to ensure that undesirable development did not occur. Regarding Ms. Swanson Gribskov's comments about the use of the four groups as a conduit for input, he said that the project had such immense consequences he wanted to ensure that any other group wishing to comment could advise the council in a similar fashion directly during the same time period. Responding to a question from Ms. Nathanson regarding Ms. Swanson Gribskov's suggestion for a pilot project, City Attorney Glenn Klein said that the council could amend the code related to conditional use permits to allow such pilot projects to occur with the Hearings Official's approval. He said that staff would need more information on the types of projects contemplated. Ms. Nathanson asked staff and Mr. Klein to do more research on what code amendments were required and the risk of such an approach. Ms. Elmer said that it would be preferable to adopt and implement the entire code at once due to the increased cost of incremental adoption. She indicated staff would return with the information requested by Ms. Nathanson. Ms. Briner said that the commission had discussed the same issue and proposed that accelerated adoption of certain elements of the code be one of the questions that the City offered to the review groups. Mr. Meisner reminded the council that it had already taken steps toward early adoption of elements of the update, such as the adoption of minimum density standards. Ms. Nathanson concurred. Mr. Tollenaar moved, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, to approve the suggested time schedule and review and adoption process for the Land Use Code Update as outlined in the agenda packet. The motion passed, 7:0. III. REPORT FROM OTHER COUNCIL COMMITTEES Mr. Torrey reminded the council of the interviews for the vacant right-to-know advocate position on the Toxics Board on January 15. Mr. Torrey announced that the Martin Luther King, Jr., Day event was scheduled for January 18 at South Eugene High School at 4 p.m. Mr. Lee reported that the council's Homeless and Shelter Task Force changed its name to the "Council Committee on Homelessness and Youth." The committee was considering developing a comprehensive long-range approach to the populations concerned, as well as intervention and prevention programs targeting certain demographic populations at risk of being homeless. The committee changed its mission statement to reflect its broadened approach. Mr. Lee said that the committee had established a deadline of April 1 for a plan the council could consider in April, with the goal of implementing the committee's recommendations in May. Mr. Fart returned to the meeting at 12:20 p.m. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 14, 1998 Page 4 11:30 a.m. Mr. Fart said that the committee was monitoring the success of the emergency camping ordinance. He said that it was fairly quiet in the areas where camping occurred. Maps had been printed to show people where camping was allowed. Mr. Fart said the committee was attempting to involve the public schools and alternative schools in a discussion of why children do not want to be in school. The committee will solicit input from youth about the subject and ways school attendance could be encouraged. Mr. Farr said that different youth need different services, depending on their backgrounds and living environments. The committee would attempt to identify those differing needs so it could target the correct groups. Mr. Meisner asked the committee to keep in mind that a broader discussion of shared responsibilities and primary responsibilities must occur with the other jurisdictions. He did not want there to be an assumption that the municipal government could solve all youth problems on its own. Mr. Fart said that the committee had agreed it did not want to reinvent the wheel or completely shoulder the burden of homeless people and youth. He said that there were many service providers throughout the county providing services to those populations; the committee hoped to facilitate their work and their working together to maximize the few dollars that existed. Mr. Lee said that legislative action that created a statewide service infrastructure was preferable, and he believed that one would be proposed in the next session. However, he believed that government at the local level had certain responsibilities because of the costs associated with not addressing the populations in question. Ms. Swanson Gribskov asked that the committee include property owners in the industrial area and church leaders in the evaluation of the emergency camping ordinance. Ms. Swanson Gribskov said that the day time curfew under discussion had public safety ramifications for both the council committee and the Public Safety Coordinating Council (PSCC). She said that the council must track the interrelationships between many ongoing policy issues related to prevention and youth. Mr. Torrey said that a meeting would occur on February 4 that involved elected officials in Lane County, local service providers, local school principles, and officials of the City of Salem to discuss the logistics of a day time curfew. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 14, 1998 Page 5 11:30 a.m. IV. REPORT FROM THE COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON FINANCE Mr. Tollenaar reviewed the work done to this point by the Council Committee on Finance (CCF). He said that the committee had considered three questions in its deliberations about a revenue measure: 1) does the City have a need for more money, and what are those needs; 2) what kind of revenue source or revenue sources should be considered to meet those needs; and 3) when was the appropriate time to go to the voters. Mr. Tollenaar said that the committee identified five needs that were all related to some extent to public safety: 1) continued expansion of community policing; 2) recreation programs for youth; 3) library operations; 4) park maintenance; and 5) affordable housing. The committee had heard a variety of reports on those areas and spent considerable discussion on the topic of revenues and revenue measures. Mr. Tollenaar said that early in January, the committee developed a consensus on the following recommendations: 1) the City Council communicate with the PSCC that the council was prepared to support a Lane County public safety levy with a strong emphasis on prevention and intervention. The committee assumed that the measure would be offered to the voters in November and that the measure would be a five-year property tax levy; 2) the council should forego going to the voters with a ballot measure in May, and establish a broad-based "blue ribbon" citizen committee to review the City's post-Ballot Measure 50 situation, and advise the council about possible revenue measures to be submitted to the voters this year and in future years. Regarding the second recommendation, Mr. Tollenaar said that the committee agreed that the impact of the Ballot Measure 50 cuts approved by the council had not been fully experienced or even perceived by the community, and it may take months for the community to understand the extent to which public services have declined. He pointed out that many of the reductions approved had yet to be implemented. Mr. Tollenaar said that additionally, the committee believed there was insufficient time to organize a campaign for the May ballot. He said that during the upcoming spring and summer, the council will receive more firm information about the yield from the new property tax rate and the specific features of the PSCC's proposal. Mr. Tollenaar said that there was no strong consensus among committee members about the elements of a possible May measure. As the committee considered the alternatives, it considered the relationship of the library and parks maintenance components to capital proposals that were not yet ready for implementation. The committee agreed that it did not make sense to move forward in advance of the capital outlay proposals. Mr. Tollenaar said that the committee acknowledged the defeat of the tax designed to support affordable housing and feared that including it in a measure would be a liability. The committee further agreed that the City was not prepared to move forward on a community policing measure given the information contained in the PERF study. Mr. Tollenaar anticipated that the proposed citizen committee would review the Six-Year Financial Forecast and validate from a broad perspective that the organization's present revenue structure would not support even the reduced level of City services. The committee could create the citizen support and leadership needed for successful passage of a revenue measure. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 14, 1998 Page 6 11:30 a.m. Ms. Taylor said that her fears about the council committee had been realized; the committee had spent considerable time on the topic and now was concluding it was too late. She said that the council was elected to make decisions and she questioned why it should appoint another committee. Ms. Taylor agreed that it might be necessary to wait until the fall for separate measures related to the parks, library, or community policing, but she wanted to proceed immediately with a measure to restore recreation services. She said that people were aware of the situation and they care. Ms. Taylor said that much study had been done in Eugene about taxes. She said that Eugene Decisions indicated people want businesses taxed more than households. She pointed out that Oregon has the 43rd lowest tax burden on businesses, and the 5th highest tax burden on households. Mr. Torrey said that all the councilors probably favored one source of revenue over another. He said that a split vote on the council about a revenue measure would doom the measure. Mr. Fart appreciated the work of the committee and indicated his support for its recommendation, which he termed a prudent one. He believed more community input was required before the council sought additional revenues. Mr. Fart agreed that the impact of the council's service reductions had not been felt by the community at large. He said that the council should allow the community to understand what was occurring before asking it for more money. He pointed out that the council was able to restore several services that had been eliminated as a result of higher than anticipated property tax revenues. Mr. Fart believed that the City was "running a little bit fat" in some areas, and that when that "fat" was trimmed lost services could be restored. He favored an election in November 1998 or later. Mr. Meisner agreed that the community was not completely familiar with the depth of the reductions, their impacts, their costs, or how Ballot Measure 50 worked. He said that the council began working on the reductions far in advance of their implementation, and that put it in the awkward position of having to reinstate funding for some services in advance of their elimination when the Tax Assessor calculated the property tax revenue total. People never experienced the reductions at all. Mr. Meisner said that in addition, some people misunderstood the impact of Ballot Measure 50 and believed that the City was receiving additional funding rather than less funding. He said that he would like to restore services as soon as possible, but was less optimistic than Ms. Taylor about the passage of a revenue measure. Mr. Meisner did not support the concept of a new citizen committee. He said that a broad based committee would still represent only a few people, and it was vital that the council engage the entire community about how it feels about services and capital needs and their relative priorities. Mr. Meisner said that the council's adopted goals should not be ignored so a new subset of people could formulate new goals. He also questioned the role of the Budget Committee in the process and wondered when the topics of tax equity and reform would be addressed. Mr. Meisner questioned the use of the term "blue ribbon," asking who it referred to, and how the committee would be representative of the community. Mr. Tollenaar said that the proposed committee would include representatives of all socio- economic elements in the community. He said that the council needed to educate the public about the fact current resources were inadequate to carry the current service system into the future. Mr. Tollenaar noted that the committee had been unable to reach consensus on a taxing source. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 14, 1998 Page 7 11:30 a.m. Mr. Laue said that with the reduction of the anticipated revenue cut and the restoration of some programs, he did not perceive community demand for a revenue measure to replace lost services. He said that unless the council was willing to commit to go back again and again to the voters for a new revenue source, it risked the possibility of losing an election and not being able to seek new revenues for a long time, such as had occurred with the library. Mr. Laue noted his own opposition to an increase in property taxes and his support for a business receipts tax and personal income tax on high-income individuals. He stressed the need for consensus among the councilors about a tax source for a successful election, but did not think that the council would reach consensus in time for the May ballot. Mr. Laue said that his support for a new committee was not strong. He thought a committee would be good if it could generate support and increase community education, but he feared that would not be the outcome. Ms. Nathanson suggested it would be appropriate to separate the topics of the need for a committee and the timing of the revenue measure. Ms. Nathanson said that it appeared the committee was not saying it was too late for the May ballot, but rather too early for such a proposal. She thought people were largely aware of the tax burden shift, but she was unsure where that shift should be mitigated. Ms. Nathanson pointed out that Governor John Kitzhaber had recently convened a task force to discuss tax reform at the state level. She thought that process could have an effect on Eugene. Ms. Nathanson concurred with Mr. Meisner about the public's misperception of the fact the anticipated reduction was less than initially believed. The word "windfall" had been used by the press. Ms. Nathanson thought people were confused and did not understand that the result was a smaller budget cut. She said that the lag-time between the council's reduction decisions and their implementation had added to the confusion, although the council had been attempting to act prudently. If the council had implemented every change immediately, the link between Ballot Measure 50 and the City budget would have been obvious. Ms. Nathanson said that there was a lack of community consensus about a revenue source. However, she was unsure that a new committee would find consensus. Ms. Nathanson said that if a revenue measure included money to repair and upgrade parks equipment or facilities that currently place a demand on the General Fund, the council might free up some money in the General Fund. Ms. Swanson Gribskov did not support a May ballot measure. She though the council should allow the service reductions to be implemented because the community was not yet familiar with the new service system. The organization should prove to the community it can live within its means. Ms. Swanson Gribskov said that any future ballot measure should look to a new vision of the future, as opposed to replacing what had existed. Mr. Lee agreed. Ms. Swanson Gribskov questioned whether there was an appropriate time to offer the voters a new measure given that 1998 was an election year and there would be new councilors who must MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 14, 1998 Page 8 11:30 a.m. be considered. She was concerned about what the State might do, and the timing of that process and its relationship to the City's decisions. Ms. Swanson Gribskov noted that the PSCC was discussing a five-year serial levy for the November 1998 ballot and she was concerned about the integration between the services proposed to be supported by the levy and the measure the City placed on the ballot. She agreed that it was premature to request funding for community policing at this time because the City's interjurisdictional partners at Lane County and the District Attorney's Office were not prepared for the increased service demand. Ms. Swanson Gribskov indicated she had not decided about her position about the proposed committee. She agreed that education was necessary but worried about proceeding with a cumbersome process. She suggested that there was a parallel between the proposed committee and Lane County's Future Focus Committee, and the council might wish to give that subject more thought. She wanted to ensure any process agreed to did not duplicate the City's budget process. Mr. Lee agreed that core services were inadequately funded at a time of increasing service demand, demand that could be partly attributed to an aging population. He believed changing demographics required different services that the City was unprepared to delivery. Mr. Lee said that the council must be honest about that. He was not prepared to put a measure on the May ballot. However, he said that the council must continue to tell the public about the effect of Ballot Measure 50. Mr. Lee said that Eugene needed a new community vision, and he hoped that discussion could occur. Mr. Torrey recommended that the council shelve the concept of the proposed committee. He said that the council needed to do something similar to ensure that citizens understand what would occur in the next fiscal year, when current service levels could no longer be supported by anticipated revenues. Mr. Torrey said that if the council wanted to reinstate services, it could prioritize them for inclusion in the next year's budget. Ms. Taylor believed that the public was better informed about the impacts of Ballot Measure 50 than councilors knew. The media could help inform the public about a new tax measure. She said that restoration of recreation services did not represent a step backwards as their reduction was not planned by the community. Ms. Taylor moved, seconded by Mr. Laue, to place a net business income tax on the May 1998 ballot. Mr. Meisner indicated he would be unable to support the motion if it included a single tax source. He believed such a tax was inadequate and would harm the council's chance of passing a personal income tax. He agreed that a revenue measure would not pass if it was not supported by the entire council. Roll call vote; the motion failed, 6:2; Ms. Taylor and Mr. Laue voting yes. Mr. Torrey said that absent a motion to the contrary, he assumed there would be no City revenue measure on the May 1998 ballot. Given the lack of consensus regarding the proposed committee, Mr. Fart suggested that the council return to the topic later. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 14, 1998 Page 9 11:30 a.m. V. UPDATE ON THE REORGANIZATION OF THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE Ms. Elmer referred the council to a handout distributed prior to the meeting illustrating the new organizational structure in the City Manager's Office. The meeting adjourned at 1:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Vicki Elmer City Manager (Recorded by Kimberly Young) r: 1998~adm~cis~cc980114m 1. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 14, 1998 Page 10 11:30 a.m.