Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 06/09/08 MeetingM I N U T E S Eugene City Council Regular Meeting Council Chamber—Eugene City Hall June 9, 2008 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Mike Clark, Andrea Ortiz, Betty Taylor, Jennifer Solomon, Alan Zelenka, George Poling. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Bonny Bettman, Chris Pryor. Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the regular meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. 1. PUBLIC FORUM Mayor Piercy reviewed the rules of the Public Forum. Carol Berg-Caldwell , 2510 Augusta Street, wished to speak about the recently held press conference that sought to “address growing concerns about police/community relations.” She related that the conference had called for more public input to the Mayor, City Council, and the Police Chief regarding the Police Auditor’s office. She said, when asked, Mayor Piercy had reiterated her support for the program. She noted that mayoral candidate Jim Torrey had also indicated his support for the program but had expressed a preference for its administration to be handled by the City Manager’s Office. She noted that her group did not support the latter position. She listed the conference speakers and underscored their feeling that everyone needed to act together to “raise the bar on dialogue on police review.” She stated that as a result of this conference other community groups were planning their own projects to raise that bar. She thanked Mayor Piercy for attending, Mr. Torrey for responding and Councilor Ortiz for her support. Drix , West 14th Avenue, welcomed City Manager Jon Ruiz to Eugene. He reviewed the history of Oregon to the point at which Eugene had become a lumber capitol. He said now the trees were gone the people needed to figure out something else to do. He reminded everyone that Eugene would be seen by the eyes of the world during the Olympic Trials. He suggested that when people see others from out of town they should wave and smile at them and make them feel welcome. He felt that running was a non-violent way to communicate with other countries. Kimberly Gladen , 361 West Broadway, averred that the police union was engaged in “cyber-bullying.” She was offended by the cartoon caricature of Councilor Bettman that its website had featured. She did not believe the cartoon was free speech; she believed it was a cruel attack meant to marginalize an elected official “and the women and liberals” of the community. She declared this to be unethical, immoral, anti- Christian, and behavior unbecoming of a police officer. She opined that an attitude that it was “okay to marginalize women” was the root of the scandal brought about by the two officers who committed criminal MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 9, 2008 Page 1 Regular Meeting acts. She asserted that the perpetrators “got away” with their crimes because the local administration was “not bothered by it.” She declared that when the police were “allowed to bully” any member of the community the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan were betrayed, because every soldier had a mother and “some of those mothers were liberals.” She felt that by “bullying” the police union was “making a mockery of the sacrifice” the soldiers were making and “eroding national security by making it unsafe for the women.” She likened this atmosphere to the one that fostered toleration of concentration camps. She said the police were being paid to protect every member of the community and not just the conservatives. She averred that without equal protection “Al Quaeda will win” and if the liberals had been given a voice in China the schools that had fallen during the earthquake would have been built to code. She averred that if the liberal voice in Eugene continued to be “eroded” then the City would have the same issues going on. She asserted that the City was building a concentration camp without walls for many members of the society by not paying for human services and public safety. th Deb Frisch , 3003 West 11 Avenue, thanked the pesticide educator-activists from the University of Oregon for taking time out from their studies to educate the local people about the dangers of pesticides. She noted that she had read Silent Spring, she understood the dangers of Agent Orange, and she had seen Rachel’s Daughters – a documentary about environmental causes of cancer. She said until she saw a protestor dressed up as a “can of Roundup” at Ken Kesey Free Speech Plaza she “did not really get it.” Ms. Frisch discussed her antipathy toward athletics, including the Olympic Trials, and reiterated her contempt for local government and the budget process. She also expressed concerns that the Arena project planning was ill-conceived. th Brian Michaels , 259 East 5 Avenue, said he was an attorney in Eugene. He had studied the Taser issue that had occurred at the recent protest. He noted that he had a pretty good idea of the implications of tasering both on a national and international level. He related that Amnesty International had written several articles about Taser use and has pursued it as a civil rights issue. He stated that Tasers were considered a less-than-lethal or non-lethal device and were purported to be a safer more humane way of handling an incident than deploying a gun. He alleged that the Forest Service was using the Taser as an electronic control device and this was how the Taser was being deployed more in the public arena. He believed that in the protest incident everyone knew that the person who had been tasered would not have been shot with a bullet. He averred that being tasered was a torturous experience. He said there was a way for the council to determine how to use the Taser so that it was a less-than-lethal device and not an electronic control device. He wanted the use of a Taser to be limited to being used in lieu of shooting a suspect. th Rene Kane , 254 West 14 Avenue, chair of the Jefferson/Westside Neighbors (JWN), stated that there continued to be an active community discussion on infill standards. She averred that at the center of the discussion was the shared desire for a city that was livable, diverse, and where people of varying incomes could live in safe and welcoming neighborhoods that would thrive for generations. She applauded the residents who were working on this. She related that the conversation was not without conflict. She felt that if parties that had the best interests of the city at heart could work together, there would be a way to accommodate growth without sacrificing healthy and affordable neighborhoods. She suggested identifying specific locations where development of various types could and should occur. She noted that the JWN had volunteered to help the Opportunity Siting and Infill Compatibility Standards Task teams. She thanked the task teams for all of their hard work. Additionally, she thanked the council for including bicycle patrols for their neighborhood parks in the budget proposal. MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 9, 2008 Page 2 Regular Meeting Mark Rabinowitz , P.O. Box 51222, opined that the City of Eugene had a long record for torturing non- violent dissidents though it claimed to be a human rights city. He averred that though the City said it was interested in sustainability, the Mayor had voted for a Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) that included $817 million for widening highways. He said the plans assumed increasing traffic usage but he believed that traffic usage would decrease; it was now at its peak. He asserted that though the City and County faced budget cuts, the two jurisdictions were still giving tax breaks to “big polluters.” He declared that the two were “subsidizing the Beijing Olympics.” He thought this was “kind of appropriate” as he alleged one could not openly oppose the Olympics without being arrested and sent to jail. He also alleged that a family of a man killed by a Taser had been awarded $5 million and suggested that the City be prepared to budget such costs in its long-term financial planning. He said the City needed “bold leadership.” Amy Pincus Merwin , 2220 Sandy Street, declared that she had witnessed torture in downtown Eugene on May 30. She outlined her allegations as to what had happened to the young man who had been tasered. She believed the young man had no chance to resist. She opined that he had done nothing wrong; he had been performing street theater that sought to make people aware of roadside pesticide use, “asking rhetorically do you want to get poisoned.” She disagreed with the press release the Eugene Police Department (EPD) had issued. She disagreed that traffic had been blocked, believing instead that the young man was motioned over to an unmarked police vehicle just prior to his arrest. She felt that agreeing to the EPD version of events made people complicit with torture. Rick Gorman , 2525 Portland Street, thought Tasers were supposed to be used in lieu of bullets. He said he was a local civil rights lawyer and had not attended the pesticide rally. He noted he had seen video footage of it. He related that he had represented one of the people who had been arrested until his arraignment on June 3. He alleged that this person had “merely asked the officers from a distance to stop torturing the young man being tasered.” He alleged that his client had been violently thrown to the pavement, had lost consciousness temporarily, and had vomited blood while in jail. He felt his client should have been taken to Sacred Heart Hospital. He said he had lived in Eugene since 1994 and had read of “numerous incidents of police brutality against peaceful activists.” He averred that according to Amnesty International, Tasers had been implicated in 290 deaths in the United States. He opined that the EPD was not “emotionally responsible enough” to deploy Tasers. He averred that in this case the subject was face down on the pavement and the police had chosen to inflict pain on him. He hoped the council would take a long look at Taser use and would conclude that Tasers should be banned completely or would come up with stringent rules as to when Tasers could be deployed. Pam Driscoll , 81394 Lost Creek Road, Dexter, thanked the concerned citizens for taking time to exercise their first amendment rights on May 30. She opined that the University students who were involved could have been getting drunk “and doing what a lot of kids their age do” but instead they were practicing democracy. She averred that this was what democracy looked like. She related that she had spoken with witnesses and she trusted those witnesses to tell the truth. She had been asked to support these people who she considered to be young, impressionable students in college who thought they could make a difference in the world. She asserted that the young people had come to the demonstration, had been tasered, thrown to the ground and their “heads smashed to the pavement.” She called Eugene “Taser Town USA.” She wanted there to be a full independent investigation of what she considered to be police brutality. She felt embar- rassed by the behavior. Ian Lamb , 1975 Lawrence Street, said he was a University of Oregon student who had witnessed the incident. He shared the view of a lot of community members that this was a case of police brutality. He MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 9, 2008 Page 3 Regular Meeting asserted that the police acted in a savage manner. He felt he was in the process of recovering from a traumatic situation caused by the actions of EPD officers. th David Parziale , 1475 East 15 Avenue, stated that he had come to Eugene to go to school because he had heard it was a progressive town. He said he had been involved in a couple of actions with the same group of people. He noted that he had participated in an action in March that had included a larger group of people marching in the streets against the Western Oregon Plan Revision (WOPR). He related that the police had helped the group stop traffic and cross the street safely. He averred that the May 30 action was not a protest; it was an event that sought to “spread the word” about pesticide use. He felt it was unfortunate that pesticides were still being used, given that information was out about how bad pesticides were. He also opined that it was inconsistent for the police to help one action stop traffic and then to use an allegation that the protesters stopped traffic to justify arrests at another action. He alleged that the only time traffic had been stopped was when an unmarked police car had stopped to speak to the young man who ultimately was tasered and arrested. Isobel Charolais , 1648 Alder Street, said she had witnessed the events of May 30. She wanted to express the shock, anger, disappointment and fear she felt toward the police officers. She called the incident the “cruelest act of violence” she had witnessed. She thought the event showed a lack of restraint and judgment on the part of the officers. She asked the council to imagine what it would be like to witness a friend being shocked and writhing in pain. She wanted them also to consider what kind of precedent it set to allow “peaceful protesters to be tased on the sidewalk.” th Samantha Chirillo , 157 East 27 Avenue, Apt. 3, supported the Police Auditor and the Civilian Review Board (CRB) “in their relatively new roles.” She felt the handling of the May 30 tasering incident would be challenging for the Mayor and council. She had witnessed the event. She averred that the auditor and CRB were the first step in “bridging the gap” for the community. She was concerned about the investigation procedure as it was currently being undertaken by the EPD. She thought the investigation could only be the first step. She wanted steps to be taken to ensure that the actions that happened on May 30 did not happen again. She expressed appreciation for the police. She acknowledged that their jobs were difficult and stressful. She realized that the police needed to err on the side of caution but she believed that the arrests on May 30 were without probable cause. She opined that the police had compromised the safety of the situation. She felt that the police had singled out the three people who were arrested. She alleged that the participants in the rally were all doing the same thing with spray bottles and it was street theater. She declared that communication skills needed to be integrated into training for both police officers and demonstrators. She had found out that theTasers were being used in a pilot project and asked that the EPD suspend the use of Tasers during the Olympic Trials. She noted that the Lane County Board of Commis- sioners was considering whether or not to continue the “last resort pesticide policy” on June 18. Michael Quillin , 2735 Kismet Way, said he did not oppose Taser use. He agreed that under appropriate circumstances Tasers could work very well in apprehending criminals. He averred that the EPD had gone beyond deployment of the Taser in an appropriate manner, given the May 30 incident and an incident earlier in which a participant in a naked bicycle ride had been threatened with a Taser. He felt the EPD was using the Taser for crowd control. He believed that this could be detrimental to free speech. He noted that Mayor Piercy and the Human Rights Commission (HRC) had proposed the following goals for the Human Rights City project: ? To be proactive in identifying and seeking solutions to human rights problems and issues; ? To address human rights violations, even when the violations could be considered unintentional or inadvertent; MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 9, 2008 Page 4 Regular Meeting ? To establish mechanisms to ensure active public participation in human rights problem identifica- tion and in establishing solutions; ? To be transparent and open about all government decisions bearing on peoples’ human rights; ? To be held publicly accountable for progress in remedying human rights problems by timetables, benchmarks, and appropriate measures; ? To provide education to all people about their human rights and how they can seek redress for rights violations. He wanted to encourage the City to apply those goals when considering the investigation of the May 30 use of force, which he believed to be illegal. th Joel Durr , 602 East 8 Avenue, said he was a student at the University of Oregon. He reiterated the sentiments of his peers. He was proud of two of his friends, one of whom was arrested, for organizing the event on May 30. He stated that they worked very hard to educate people regarding the use of pesticides. He averred that there was something wrong when a peaceful demonstration was contained by the use of force, which he believed to be possibly lethal. He felt his friend had been tasered multiple times and had done nothing wrong to deserve it. He opined that the police had “dropped the ball” by using a possibly lethal tool as a means to gain compliance when it was supposed to be used as an alternative to lethal force. He wished to underscore the need for accountability, adding that the City could choose to use the event as a point to move on and make progress. He hoped that the investigation would be independent and unbiased. Anand Keathley , 389 North Polk Street, said he was a homeowner, a business owner, and a medical professional. He was not at the event on May 30, but he was concerned that the community and the EPD in particular were not ready for the economic stresses coming due to the high gas prices and the economic recession. He stated that medical professionals had pushed for mental health treatment equity. He advocated this equity for the police officers. He felt the stress for EPD officers was such that it was critically important that they were not overworked. He also felt officers needed mental health evaluations frequently so that they could get the rest and help they needed. He averred that officers needed better instructions regarding when Tasers should be allowed to be used. He read a portion of the language regarding Tasers into the record which he considered to be vague. He wanted to know the official definition of pain compliance and how it would differ from torture. He wondered how the world would perceive the recent events, given that the Olympics was bringing the world to Eugene and the City would be “talking about it.” th Shannon Wilson , 3920 East 17 Avenue, said he attended the anti-pesticide rally and had seen the young man who was ultimately tasered while being arrested using a crosswalk at all times “performing theater by spraying water on plants and the sidewalk.” He had seen no evidence of anyone blocking traffic. He alleged that the EPD account was “full of lies.” He declared that this was a “clear case of police brutality.” He felt that police were “striking fear” into citizens who were exercising their rights to freedom of speech and their right to peacefully assemble. He wondered if the EPD was being run by the Office of Homeland Security. He opined that Tasers should be removed from the EPD “weapons arsenal” and the officers involved in the incident should be punished. He believed that the EPD had not demonstrated that officers could handle these weapons. He hoped the auditor would have the tools and power necessary to hold the police department accountable. He predicted that the EPD would “suffer lawsuits” if this did not occur. Zachary Vishanoff , somewhere on Patterson Street, was angry that the focus was on Tasers. He recalled the incident in which he had been hit by a beanbag fired by an EPD officer during a different demonstration. He was unhappy that the shooter had “walked free.” He wanted the council to ask for justice for “all the former victims” of Eugene police. He felt that the Taser was a media-generated problem as it had arisen MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 9, 2008 Page 5 Regular Meeting from the death of a young man in 2006. He related that his experience had changed his life. He commented that he did not blame the police because the community would get the police it asked for. He said the community also got the media they asked for. He blamed the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) because ACLU representatives had participated in the discussion on Tasers. He did not believe there had been a public hearing. Mr. Vishanoff asked the council to google “U of O arena red tape.” He averred that the Chronicle of Higher Education had reported that the arena project would face a year or more in delays. He provided a packet of information for the council. th Fred Metzler , 559 East 16 Avenue, said as near as he could tell the City had “some thugs” in the Police Department. He felt that the least the community could do would be to weed them out of the EPD so that they would not have the full weight of the law behind them. th Mary Stephens , 430 15 Avenue, asked the council to imagine her “horror” as she had witnessed the May 30 event. She related that she had been close to the young man who had been tasered. She said she had asked the officer to stop tasering him and the officer allegedly responded that the Taser was not a gun and had used the Taser two more times. She alleged that the young man was on the ground with an officer’s knee in his back at the time. She also believed that the EPD press release was inaccurate, noting that it had indicated that organizers had wanted to get the attention of law enforcement and this had not been true. She added that she had spoken with a man who indicated he was with Homeland Security at the rally. Jack Radey , 2230 Garfield Street, averred that everyone should recognize that police work was difficult, dangerous, and needed. He said it was necessary for police officers to face dangerous situations and to be able to use their judgment in confidence that they would be supported. He said it was also necessary to have a police force that was armed, supported by the laws, the district attorney and courts, and that was part of the community and respected all of the citizens of the community. He asserted that the EPD had members who had contempt for government and believed that it was part of their job to inflict pain on people who dissent. He felt that the only way to deal with this culture would be to “root it out” and remove the individuals who carry that culture and have contempt for the law. Lisa Ponder , 2780 Potter Street, averred that she was speaking in defense of the constitution and freedom of speech. She believed that the recent actions by police officers had threatened the constitution. She related that she had attended the “pre-Taser” discussions held in the City and on campus. She recalled that Taser use was supposed to be limited. She opined that the abusive use of Tasers had a chilling affect on free speech. She said she was a member of the Daughters of the Revolution and advised the council that it was important to remember the foundation of government. Chuck Roehrich , 2780 Potter Street, stated that he had worked as a City employee for 30 years. He said he sometimes attended demonstrations. He felt he could be mistaken for “lawless riffraff.” He sometimes believed that he would be more likely to be harmed by the police than helped. He had been raised to think that officers were his friends, hired to protect everyone. He was sad because he did not believe this was happening. He thought the police considered the Taser a tool that officers could use how they pleased. He would not support a public safety ballot measure when police officers were “not on [his] side.” He said the City Council should consider this when working on guidelines for Taser use. Mayor Piercy closed the Public Forum. She appreciated the testimony of everyone who attended. She said the council took this incident seriously and that it had raised a lot of questions about the use of Tasers. She MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 9, 2008 Page 6 Regular Meeting felt that everyone needed to let the auditor process and the CRB process proceed. She appreciated the comments about Eugene aspiring to be a human rights city. Councilor Ortiz thanked everyone for coming. She was sorry that the young man was tasered. She encouraged everyone who testified at the council meeting to submit their comments to the Police Commis- sion. She thought, given that the Police Commission reviewed the policies, it would benefit them to discuss revisions to the policy governing Taser use. She supported the Police Auditor and looked forward to her doing her job once the police investigation was completed. Councilor Zelenka had been disturbed by the testimony. He reiterated his support for the Police Auditor. He assumed that complaints would be filed. He added his agreement that the Police Commission would be the venue to discuss Taser use policies. Councilor Taylor thanked everyone for coming. She called it a “sad evening.” She thought the council should discuss the use of Tasers as she was skeptical about the Police Commission as a policy-making body. Councilor Clark appreciated the testimony presented at the meeting. He related that his office was a block away from Kesey Square and he had been there a little after the incident had taken place on May 30. He had also attended the press conference, along with Councilor Taylor. He stated that the Police Auditor had been voted in by the people and he took this seriously. He believed a majority vote on something should be the last word on the subject. He felt that a lot of what was being discussed had to do with issues of trust and the need for trust to be rebuilt. The challenge he had in cases like this was that 17,922 people had voted for the formation of the auditor’s office and for him this was the last word. But he wished to point out that 17,899 people had voted for the West Eugene Parkway. He averred that though this issue was settled and done it went to the same point of trust: that when people speak it should be the last word on the subject. 2. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of City Council Minutes - November 19, 2007, Public Hearing - November 26, 2007, Work Session - November 26, 2007, City Council Meeting - February 25, 2008, City Council Meeting - April 14, 2008, Work Session - May 13, 2008, Joint Elected Officials Meeting B. Approval of Tentative Working Agenda C. Approval of Funding for Housing Projects Affordable to Low-Income Persons D. Adoption of Resolution 4943 Adopting an Inflationary Adjustment of Systems Develop- ment Charge Rates for Regional Wastewater System E. Call for Public Hearing: Alley and Street Right-of-Way Vacations for the University of Oregon (VRI 08-1 & VRI 08-2) Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to approve the items on the Con- sent Calendar. Councilor Zelenka pulled Item E. Roll call vote; the Consent Calendar with the exception of Item E passed unanimously, 6:0. MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 9, 2008 Page 7 Regular Meeting Councilor Zelenka stated that he supported the Fairmount Neighborhood Association (FNA) effort to require a conditional use permit (CUP) and to appeal to the Hearings Official for the Planning Director’s decision to be overturned. He said a CUP would more appropriately address the four concerns raised by the neighbor- hood association: traffic, noise, parking, and litter. He related that the FNA had been successful in their appeal, but it was likely that the University of Oregon would appeal that decision. He asked staff to explain what that meant in terms of the timing regarding the process and the hearing. Lisa Gardner, Planning Director for the Planning and Development Department (PDD), explained that the difference in the process was that before the CUP, if something was an outright permitted use it would have moved forward with a Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) and the only public hearing process would have been for the alley vacation. She stated that the CUP process, which had been put into place when the Hearings Official had overturned the Planning Director’s decision, meant that everything came before the Planning Commission in a public hearing. Councilor Zelenka asked about the timing. Ms. Gardner replied that this was not known because staff had not heard anything from the University in regard to their next steps in filing an application. She said a CUP could take from three to six months to process. Councilor Zelenka noted that the issue was controversial. He believed that the land issues around the proposed arena were one big issue with a “bunch of different parts.” He had been working with the University’s neighbors on an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA). He thought it would be premature for the council to take action at this point. Mayor Piercy asked if this would create a timing issue. Ms. Gardner asked Steve Ochs, Associate Planner, to speak to the timing issue. She noted that there would be two separate public hearings as the alley vacation was a separate process that would proceed independ- ently of the CUP process. She said there was a consideration of the public interest in the council decision on whether or not to approve the alley vacation. Mr. Ochs was not sure if there was a legal timing issue. He thought what might be important was that the alley vacation could be considered when looking at the CUP approval. He clarified that the public hearing on the CUP would go to the Hearings Official first and would go before the Planning Commission on appeal. Mayor Piercy asked if there were any implications to delaying the decision. Ms. Gardner replied that there was not a timing reason why this could not happen. She noted that in setting a public hearing date the council was providing an opportunity for people to give information to the council and by the time that date arrived a lot more could be known about the project. She was not certain there would be any harm in setting the date. Councilor Zelenka did not want to have the public hearing before the discussion of the CUP. Councilor Taylor said this made sense to her. City Attorney Jerry Lidz stated that the decision would be to not schedule the public hearing at this time. He said it would come back before the council when the CUP process was underway. MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 9, 2008 Page 8 Regular Meeting City Manager Jon Ruiz asked what the purpose of delaying the public hearing would be. Councilor Zelenka responded that his interest lay in having the public and the council be informed by the CUP process. Councilor Solomon asked if it was the University’s expectation that this would proceed and whether postponing the hearing would change the “goalposts” for the University. Ms. Gardner replied that the “goalposts” had already been changed by the Hearings Official decision. Councilor Solomon preferred to stay the course. She pointed out that the council did not have to take action after having the public hearing. She was uncomfortable moving in this direction without some information from the University of Oregon. Councilor Poling ascertained that for the public hearing to occur the council would have to vote to hold it and if it did not do so, it would cancel the call for a public hearing and would have to be brought back on another agenda. He asked why the council would not choose to call for a public hearing but with a different date. Councilor Zelenka said he would be willing to make a motion to hold a public hearing on the alley vacation with a date to be determined in the future. Mr. Lidz responded that the statutes specified that a date should be included. Councilor Poling asked if Mayor Piercy and Mr. Ruiz could move the date if the July 21 date remained in the motion. Mr. Lidz replied that the council would have to approve the change. Roll call vote; the vote was a tie, 3:3; councilors Poling, Clark, and Solomon voting in favor and councilors Taylor, Zelenka, and Ortiz voting in opposition. Mayor Piercy cast her vote in opposition and the motion failed. 3. PUBLIC HEARING and ACTION: Resolution 4944 Adopting a Supplemental Budget; Making Appropriations for the City of Eugene for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 2007, and Ending June 30, 2008 Mr. Ruiz stated that staff was available for questions and comments. Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing. Seeing that no one wished to speak on the item, she closed the public hearing. Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to adopt Resolution 4944 adopting a Supplemental Budget; making appropriations for the City of Eugene for the Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 2007, and ending June 30, 2008. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 6:0. 4. PUBLIC HEARING and ACTION: Resolution 4945 Electing to Receive State Revenue Sharing funds Pursuant to Section 221.770 of Oregon Revised Statues; Resolution 4946 Certifying that the City of Eugene Provides the Municipal Services required by Oregon Revised Statues Section 221.760; Resolution 4947 Adopting the Budget, Making Appropriations, Determining, Levying and Cate- gorizing the Annual Ad Valorem Property Tax Levy for the City of Eugene for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 2008, and Ending June 30, 2009 MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 9, 2008 Page 9 Regular Meeting Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing and reviewed the rules for testimony. Laurel Anderson , 953 West Broadway, supported continuation of funding for the police bicycle patrols. She said the neighbors had put a lot of work into making Monroe Park safe and the bicycle patrol had been key in keeping drug use and prostitution out. She felt that living in the downtown area was good, but the area experienced some stress. She urged the council to support continued funding for the patrols. Bill Kievith , 3277 Onyx Place, stated that the American Public Works Association defined potholes as any divot in the road that affected cars or driving. He was interested to learn that $1 million was intended to be spent on filling potholes. He related that the City had spent $39,000 on potholes in 2004, $45,000 in 2005, $89,000 in 2006, and $67,000 in 2007. He wanted to know how the “magic figure” of $1 million had been arrived at as it had not been placed in the budget by the Public Works Director or the City Manager. He said 75 percent of the current potholes were being fixed on unimproved streets. He wondered if they really meant to spend $750,000 on filling potholes on unimproved streets as it did not make sense to him. He thought the money would be better spent on filling the cracks that precede the potholes. He averred that filling the cracks was a better investment in preserving roads. Michael Cresko , 952 Polk Street, member of the Jefferson/Westside Neighbors, supported funding for the police bicycle patrols as they made the parks and neighborhoods safer for families and residents. He felt it was a very effective program as it deterred crime and reduced the costs to police vehicle maintenance as well as the larger picture implications of contributions to global warming. He thought it would also be a “good plus” for police/citizen relations. He said if there was more person-to-person contact between police and citizens it would build positively on the image of the police department. He asked the council to consider expanding the program and making it a permanent part of the budget. Mayor Piercy closed the public hearing. Councilor Clark assured the people who testified in support of the bicycle program that it had been made a part of the ongoing budget and in this budget the program would become year-round. In response to a question from Councilor Ortiz, Budget Manager for the Finance Division, Kitty Murdoch, explained that the council was approving the resolutions that were the appropriations approved by the Budget Committee. She stated that the Budget Committee had made other motions that did not have appropriation changes attached to them, therefore the council was not necessarily approving all of the motions that the Budget Committee recommended at this time. Mr. Ruiz asked Ms. Murdoch to give an example of which resolution did not have a budget impact. Ms. Murdoch responded that there had been a motion that had said there would be a certain amount of money designated in the Facility Reserve for City Hall, but no money was actually appropriated for City Hall. Councilor Ortiz ascertained that it would not be appropriate to pull a motion from the budget development motions at this time. She had been concerned with budget development motion No. 9, which sought to allocate up to $25 million of the Facility Reserve to upgrade, rehabilitate, and maintain City Hall for the purpose of extending its useful life at least 15 years. Mr. Ruiz responded that the amount for that motion had not been appropriated. MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 9, 2008 Page 10 Regular Meeting Councilor Ortiz asked when the appropriate time would be to bring it forward. Mr. Murdoch replied that the City Council would be discussing City Hall in July and would then consider the advice of the Budget Committee. Councilor Zelenka agreed that potholes had become a big issue. He believed it was a customer service issue and that the City needed to have safer streets. th Councilor Clark understood that the maker of the 9 motion had intended it to be an appropriation. He asked what would qualify something as an appropriation. Ms. Murdoch responded that an appropriation was the budget authority to expend funds. In this case she explained that the money had not been moved out of the Facility Reserve and it would not go anywhere without the council’s approval to spend it. She said the Budget Committee had advised the council as to how the money should be moved and spent, but until then it would remain in the reserve. Councilor Clark thanked Mr. Kievith for his testimony. He had been in conversations with the Public Works Director and the City Manager about the appropriate ways to fix the problems. Councilor Solomon thanked Mr. Kievith for coming down. She felt it was a travesty to just assign money to fill potholes. She did not believe the Budget Committee was exercising fiscal prudence in this matter. Councilor Poling appreciated the clarifying conversation regarding what constituted an appropriation. He also agreed with Mr. Kievith. He believed that throwing money into potholes was wasteful and a temporary fix. He reiterated his view that once a pothole was filled the fill would begin to be dispersed from the hole a half an hour later. He had been tempted to vote against the budget resolution because of this allocation of $1 million, which he felt was irresponsible. Councilor Zelenka reiterated that the council needed to do something to address the myriad complaints from the public regarding potholes. While he agreed that $1 million would not fix the roads he disagreed that it was throwing the money into potholes as it would fix people’s streets for the short term. th In response to a question from Councilor Zelenka, Mr. Ruiz clarified that the 9 motion was not a budget issue because it did not provide spending authority; he could not spend $25 million to upgrade City Hall. He said staff would come before the City Council in a work session in July and part of this would allow the council to provide more specific direction in this regard. Councilor Clark wanted to be clear that he agreed that something needed to be done about potholes. He did not believe that filling them every two years was prudent. He said in the next couple of years the City would have to come forward with a bond or the need for a shorter fund to fill potholes and a need for several new types of fees and taxes to do so. He hoped that the City would be willing to reprioritize some General Fund money toward that effort at that time in order to garner the public’s good will. Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to adopt Resolution 4945 electing to receive state revenue sharing funds pursuant to Section 221.770 of Oregon Revised Stat- utes. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 6:0. Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to adopt Resolution 4946 certify- ing that the City of Eugene provides the municipal services required by Oregon Revised Statutes Section 221.760. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 6:0. MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 9, 2008 Page 11 Regular Meeting Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to adopt Resolution 4947 adopting the budget, making appropriations, determining, levying, and categorizing the annual ad valorem property tax levy for the City of Eugene for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2008 and ending June 30, 2009. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 6:0. Mayor Piercy adjourned the meeting of the City Council and convened a meeting of the Eugene Urban Renewal Agency at 9:34 p.m. 5. PUBLIC HEARING and ACTION Resolution 1048 of the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Eugene Adopting the Budget, Mak- ing Appropriations, and Declaring the Amount of Tax to be Certified for the Fiscal Year Begin- ning July 1, 2008, and Ending June 30, 2009 Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing. Seeing that no one wished to speak, she closed the public hearing. Councilor Zelenka ascertained from the City Manager that the budget included work to move the Beam project forward. Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to adopt Resolution 1048 of the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Eugene adopting the budget and making appropria- tions for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2008, and ending June 30, 2009. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 6:0. Mayor Piercy adjourned the meeting of the Eugene Urban Renewal Agency and reconvened the Eugene City Council at 9:35 p.m. 6. ACTION: An Ordinance Concerning the Planning Commission; and Amending Sections 2.013, 2.330, 2.332, 2.335, 2.345, 2.350, and 2.355 of the Eugene Code, 1971 Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved that the City Council adopt Coun- cil Bill 4974, an ordinance concerning the Planning Commission. Councilor Clark ascertained from Steve Nystrom, Principal Planner for the PDD, that the draft ordinance did not include the portion that would increase the number from seven to nine. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 6:0. 7. ACTION: An Ordinance Concerning Extra-Territorial Water and Sewer Extensions Procedures; and Amending Sections 9.7055, 9.7205, 9.7820, and 9.8121 of the Eugene Code, 1971 Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved that the City Council adopt Coun- cil Bill 4976, an ordinance concerning extra-territorial water and sewer extensions proce- dures. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 6:0. The meeting adjourned at 9:38 p.m. MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 9, 2008 Page 12 Regular Meeting Respectfully submitted, Jon Ruiz City Manager (Recorded by Ruth Atcherson) MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 9, 2008 Page 13 Regular Meeting