Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 02/16/98 Meeting MINUTES Eugene City Council City Council Chamber--City Hall February 16, 1998 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Pat Farr, Tim Laue, Bobby Lee, Laurie Swanson Gribskov, Scott Meisner, Nancy Nathanson, Betty Taylor, Ken Tollenaar. The adjourned February 11, 1998, Eugene City Council meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m.; Mayor James D. Torrey presiding. i. PUBLIC FORUM Mayor Torrey reviewed the guidelines for participation in the Public Forum. Bradley R. Meyers, 2490 Lincoln Street, stated that he was opposed to a daytime curfew for school age children as proposed in the State of the City address of Mayor Torrey. He said he did not believe the proposal was logical and reported that legal precedent indicated such laws were unconstitutional. He suggested that evaluation of the concept be provided by school district officials. He described experiences of his own children with legitimate daytime off-campus activities. Caryle Tylerkays, Post Office Box 22912, stated that she was the parent of a child enrolled in the YMCA Downtown Children's Center, which had recently announced it would be closing. She said she and other parents were working to resolve funding issues for the center and asked the City Council and mayor to provide assistance in resolving what she characterized as "safety issues" related to the Downtown Mall location of the center. She read a letter from the operator of a business in the area which expressed concern about loitering, aggressive panhandling, and illegal drug use and sales. She said she believed the solution to such problems was a permanent walking police patrol officer on the mall. She expressed concern that continued growth in the use of downtown was being threatened by conditions in the area. George Boehnke, 2040 Willamette Street, stated that he was a life-long resident of Eugene and that he had participated in the organization of the first Eugene Celebration. He said it had been promised that the event would be financially self-supporting, but that it continued to require taxpayer support. He said he believed that in the face of service cuts forced by revenue reduction, it was time to either end City sponsorship of the event, charge entrance fees which would provide the needed support, or scale back its scope to reduce its cost. Alan Wagner, 2650 Chuckanut Street, stated that he had sent an electronic mail message to members of the council expressing his support for the privatization of the Eugene Celebration. He said a nonprofit organization with experience running public events would be able to solve its financial problems. He suggested that candidates for such an organization were the groups Minutes--Eugene City Council February 16, 1998 Page 1 7:30 p.m. which managed the Oregon Country Fair, Saturday/Holiday Market, or the Active 20/30 service club. He recommended that nonprofit organizations provide food services, that school carnival operators provide entertainment, that the event be relocated to the Lane County Fairgrounds, and that the negative image of the downtown area be avoided. Bob Roundey, 476 East Broadway, said he believed bonds should be issued by the City to purchase land on which public events could be held. He expressed concern about vandalism in City parking lots, lack of investment in City infrastructure, and the "depression" engulfing the City. Martin Champion, 1430 Willamette Street #597, encouraged the council to act quickly on the recommendations of the External Review Advisory Committee so that its proposed city charter amendment would be able to be placed on the November 1998 general election ballot. At the same time, he urged councilors to thoroughly consider all of the issues involved in the recommendations of the committee. He said he had attended all of the meetings of the committee and was impressed at the unanimity reached by its wide diversity of members. ii. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of City Council Minutes of December 1, 1997, Joint Meeting with Lane County Board of Commissioners; January 14, 1998, Lunch Work Session; and January 26, 1998, Dinner Work Session. B. Appointments to East Alton Baker Park Advisory Committee Mr. Fart moved, seconded by Mr. Tollenaar, to approve the City Council Consent Calendar for February 16, 1998. Mr. Fart requested that sentence 4 of paragraph 3 on page 2 of the minutes of the December 1, 1997, Joint Meeting withe the Lane County Board of Commissioners be changed, as follows: Mr. Fart believed that using the average County wage would ~ inadequately reflect an entry level position. Mayor Torrey determined there was no objection to the amendment proposed by Mr. Fart. The motion, as amended, was adopted unanimously, 8:0. iii. PUBLIC HEARING: RESOLUTION CONCERNING CITY OF EUGENE SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET NUMBER TWO City Manager Vicki Elmer reminded members that changes included in Supplemental Budget Number Two had been reviewed and recommended in Council Work Sessions. She said the action requested was formalization of previous decisions. Ms. Swanson Gribskov asked if Federal Emergency Management Agency or other grants had been investigated as a resource for capital expenditures involved in creation of a new 9-1-1 Call Minutes--Eugene City Council February 16, 1998 Page 2 7:30 p.m. Taking and Dispatch Center. Administrative Services Department Director Warren Wong replied that staff investigation had shown that the availability of such grants was unlikely. He said that if a grant was secured, it would be used and available one-time resources would be replenished. Ms. Nathanson asked what percentage of the proposed cost of the 9-1-1 Call Taking and Dispatch Center was for building construction. Mr. Wong replied that the building to be constructed would accommodate existing services and possibly the dispatch operations of the Lane County Sheriff's Office and City of Springfield emergency services, and would cost approximately $3 million. He said provision was also being made to accommodate the construction of a second building of approximately the same size. He said the cost of replacement communication equipment had been previously estimated at $1.7 million, but would likely be higher. He explained that the current equipment had exceeded its useful life, but would be installed in a backup center created at a future date. Mr. Laue referred to a memorandum from the City Manager dated December 4, 1997, regarding allocation of a grant from School District 4J, distributed with the agenda of the meeting. He asked for an explanation of proposals in the memorandum. Library, Recreation, and Cultural Services Executive Manager Jim Johnson stated that the proposals contained in the memorandum of the City Manager were intended to serve as "place holders" for as yet undetermined expenditures related to youth. He said it was likely some specific support for summer activities would be proposed and that the Council Committee on Homelessness and Youth was engaged in developing a comprehensive youth strategy recommendation. Mr. Tollenaar asked if the comprehensive youth strategy would be related to efforts in the same area also currently underway by the Public Safety Coordinating Council, Department of Public Works and Police Department. Ms. Elmer replied that there would be coordination between all such developments and that Mr. Johnson was designated as lead staff relating to them. Mr. Lee stated that he had the same concern as Mr. Tollenaar and was also concerned that the memorandum of the City Manager was dated December 4, but that he did not believe he had previously seen it. He said he supported having a comprehensive strategy for youth before seeking its implementation. Ms. Elmer stated that the Council Committee on Homelessness and Youth "had the lead" in preparing a youth strategy recommendation. Mr. Meisner asked for an explanation of $50,000 identified as a one-time allocation for Neighborhood Program Transition on page 75 of the Agenda Item Summary for the Supplemental Budget. Ms. Elmer stated that the allocation had been recommended by executive managers as a "place holder" for costs associated with re-design of the program. Budget Manager Hillary Kittleson added that the allocation was giving specificity to a general allocation for Transition Costs previously approved by the council. Mr. Meisner asked for an explanation of how the $50,000 allocation related to a previously approved allocation of $40,000 for the Neighborhood Program. Ms. Elmer said that the previously approved allocation had been designated for temporary continued operation of the existing program. Minutes--Eugene City Council February 16, 1998 Page 3 7:30 p.m. Mr. Meisner asked for an explanation of $35,000 identified as a one-time allocation for Municipal Court Operations Review on page 75 of the Agenda Item Summary for the Supplemental Budget. Ms. Elmer explained that the review would be performed by the National Center for State Courts and was intended to assist in complying with instructions of the council to seek equalization of its revenue and expenditures. Mr. Wong added that the review was part of on going efforts to improve services and that the draft report included approximately 50 recommendations for changes. He said the final report would be available within a month. Mayor Torrey determined councilors had no further questions of staff regarding the resolution and opened the public hearing. Mayor Torrey determined there was no one present wishing to testify regarding Supplemental Budget #2 and closed the public hearing. Ms. Elmer announced that the council would act on Resolution 4556--a resolution adopting a Supplemental Budget; making appropriations for the City of Eugene for the Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 1997, and ending June 30, 1998. Mr. Farr moved, seconded by Mr. Tollenaar, that Resolution 4556 be adopted. Ms. Taylor said she hoped councilors would be provided understandable explanations for the expenditure of unallocated Transition Cost and other budget items designated as "up to" amounts. Ms. Kittleson said that employee related transition costs for employees to be terminated between January 15 and June 30 would not be able to be accurately determined until a later date. She said no other unallocated costs had been identified to date and that police over-hire expenses were to be included in the FY99 budget proposal. The motion was adopted unanimously, 8:0. Mayor Torrey adjourned the meeting in the Council Chamber and reconvened the meeting in the McNutt Room at 8:15 p.m. IV. WORK SESSION: EUGENE CELEBRATION (CONTINUED) The council resumed its review of the status of the Eugene Celebration as a program of the City begun at the 5:30 p.m. Dinner Work Session. Ms. Swanson Gribskov asked if it would be possible to significantly increase revenue for the Eugene Celebration through business sponsorships. Mr. Johnson replied that significantly increasing such revenue was not likely to happen because of the large number of nonprofit organizations also seeking such sponsorships. He said the lack of a "cause" for the Celebration put it at a disadvantage. Ms. Swanson Gribskov stated that she was leaning toward spinning off the Celebration from City sponsorship. She said she believed the $300,000 revenue stream generated by the event Minutes--Eugene City Council February 16, 1998 Page 4 7:30 p.m. should be ample for a nonprofit organization to produce a similar event, especially if the City would continue to provide in-kind support. Carole Goddard stated that she was co-chair of the 1996 Eugene Celebration. She said a nonprofit organization could operate less expensively because of lower salaries, contracting of services, and elimination of public contract law requirements. She said approximately $250,000 in start-up funds were needed in advance of each celebration. She said she believed Celebration organizers had fully explored revenue enhancement possibilities. Mr. Fart said that, in addition to the factors identified by Ms. Goddard, non-public businesses were able to operate more efficiently because of the elimination of bureaucratic functions required of government programs. He said he supported investigation of turning over operation of the Celebration to a nonprofit organization. Mr. Meisner said that he believed a nonprofit organization could successfully operate the Celebration. Ms. Nathanson said she did not believe the City should pay for a party when it could not pay for essential services. She said she needed assurance that all possible cost reduction measures had been investigated. In response to a question from Mr. Laue regarding why pin income had not met anticipated levels in 1997, Mr. Johnson said he believed it was likely a factor of the location of pin sales booths and that a great deal of the event could be accessed without a pin. Mr. Laue said he was confused by revenue and expense support material provided for the various options. He said it appeared that transition costs were proposed as a continuing annual City expense. He said that special care should be given to crafting a Request for Proposals for an organization to operate the Celebration to ensure that it retained its unique character. Ms. Taylor said she was concerned that the City could support paying of lower salaries if it transferred management of the Celebration to a nonprofit organization. She determined that all booth sponsors, food vendors, and parade entrants paid participation fees; but that nonprofit organizations paid flat fees, rather than fees based on sales profits. She said she was also concerned that privatization of the event would change its character and that she preferred that the City continue as its sponsor. Mr. Tollenaar asked if it was possible for the City to loan funds to private entities. City Attorney Glenn Klein said the only restriction on such loans were that proceeds from bond sales could not be loaned to private entities. Ms. Swanson Gribskov said that she appreciated the enthusiasm and commitment of those involved in planning the Eugene Celebration. She said she felt the City should trust that its nature would not be changed through privatization. Mr. Lee said he could accept the importance of "doing" the Eugene Celebration differently, but that he was troubled by the shortness of time available to make significant changes. Mr. Minutes--Eugene City Council February 16, 1998 Page 5 7:30 p.m. Johnson replied that funding proposals, staffing, the steering committee, and consultant's report had uniformly recommended evolution, not elimination of the event. Mr. Farr moved, seconded by Mr. Tollenaar, to direct the Eugene Celebration staff and Steering Committee to explore privatization of the event either by developing a relationship with an existing nonprofit organization with goals that support the ongoing production of the event, or by forming a new nonprofit organization; and to direct the staff and committee to return to the City Council during the month of May with a specific request for one-time transition dollars for the event. Mayor Torrey pointed out that one possible scenario which could evolve was that the council could determine in May that the request of staff and the committee for funds could not be granted. Mr. Johnson said that his best guess of the outcome of such a situation was that the Celebration would not be held. Mayor Torrey said he believed it was significant for all concerned to be aware of such a possibility. Ms. Nathanson said that she felt the Celebration should be self-supporting or eliminated as a City event. She said she supported continuing the Celebration, even if it was not a City-sponsored event. Ms. Goddard stated that all issues discussed by the council had been considered by the Celebration Planning Committee. She said that dwindling space resources in the downtown area was a concern about the success for the event because location was its most significant success factor. She said she believed that if the City sponsored the event, it should provide full financial support. She also said that the shortness of time available to plan the event was complicating the possibility of being successful. Mr. Farr pointed out that the Eugene Celebration had grown in scope over the years and that additional revenue producing efforts should be possible. Mr. Meisner said he believed reductions in costs through greater utilization of local talent and increasing revenue by requiring pins for entry to all locations could bring income and expenses for the Celebration more closely aligned. Ms. Taylor said that she believed downtown merchants should subsidize the Celebration. Ms. Goddard said that the downtown merchant associations already contribute significantly to the event. Ms. Swanson Gribskov said that she believed "empowerment" described as desirable by members of the Eugene Celebration Planning Committee was the status of a nonprofit corporation board of directors. In response to a question of Mr. Meisner, Mr. Johnson said that commercial sponsorship of particular venues or programs was needed more than general sponsorship of the Celebration. Mr. Tollenaar said that he was struck by the implication that adopting the motion under consideration would morally obligate the council to subsidize the 1998 Eugene Celebration. He Minutes--Eugene City Council February 16, 1998 Page 6 7:30 p.m. noted that if the problem of site for the Celebration was insurmountable and it was required to be located at the Lane County Fairgrounds, sponsorship by downtown merchants would be lost and it would change the nature of the event. He said he would vote against the motion, because he believed a too large financial contribution to the Celebration would be required. Ms. Taylor said she would like to hear what the leaders of the Celebration Planning Committee would like the council to do. Ms. Goddard said she believed members of the committee would prefer that the council either "cut loose" the celebration or provide a financial commitment to its continuation. Mr. Meisner said that he would like to see the Celebration become self-supporting because he did not believe it was possible to provide it a continuing subsidy. In response to questions from Mr. Farr, Mr. Johnson explained that carry-over funds from the 1997 Eugene Celebration had already been used for staff and program expenses since the event. He reviewed estimated start-up costs required for a 1998 Celebration. Mayor Torrey asked if it would be possible for the Celebration Planning Committee to identify a specific amount which would be required to plan a 1998 Celebration. Ms. Taylor moved to amend the motion by adding the words "and to guarantee funding for the 1998 Eugene Celebration in the amount of $78,OOO." Mayor Torrey determined there was no councilor willing to second the motion of Ms. Taylor and declared that it was not under consideration. Mr. Laue said he was not convinced that the motion under consideration was any different from a decision which was made in 1997. He said he believed the Steering Committee should be directed to propose a specific amount of support it would need for 1998. Mr. Laue moved, seconded by Mr. Farr, that further consideration of the motion be postponed until the City Council meeting scheduled for 7:30 p.m. on February 23, 1998. The motion was adopted unanimously, 8:0. V. WORK SESSION: REVISIONS TO TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE Mayor Torrey determined that there was consensus to indefinitely postpone its work session on a revised draft of the Tree Preservation Code. Ms. Elmer stated that re-scheduling of the work session would not likely be possible until sometime in the spring of 1998 because of heavy council meeting agenda commitments. VI. WORK SESSION: PROPOSED CITY MANAGER EVALUATION PROCESS Minutes--Eugene City Council February 16, 1998 Page 7 7:30 p.m. Mr. Tollenaar distributed copies of documents entitled "Proposed City Manager Evaluation Process" and "Questions for Department Heads and Collective Bargaining Unit Representatives." He reviewed each of nine statements in the first document, explaining that the word "will" in statement 8 should be replaced with the word "may." He emphasized that the proposal was submitted by officers of the council and was subject to changes agreed on by the council. Mr. Klein explained that strict confidentiality for all input in the evaluation process would be maintained until March 16. He said that media and other requests based on public information laws would be denied and that it was likely appeals of the denial would take longer than the date when the information would be fully released. Ms. Elmer determined that her self-evaluation and a summary report of progress on agreed on goals would become part of the process on March 16. In response to a question from Mr. Meisner, Mayor Torrey explained that a summary report of evaluations of Department Heads and Union representatives would be made available to councilors at the end of the March 16 meeting to avoid distraction caused by its being available during the meeting. Mr. Laue said he believed a self-evaluation by the City Manager should be included in the deliberations of the council. Mayor Torrey said that the proposed process permitted the manager to submit any amount of material to the council. Ms. Taylor said that she was concerned that opinions of the evaluation facilitator would be influential in council deliberations. Ms. Elmer said she felt comfortable with the proposed evaluation process as it had been explained. Mayor Torrey said the proposal from the officers was adamant that any action resulting from presentation and discussion on March 16 would be postponed until March 18. Ms. Swanson Gribskov expressed appreciation for the work of the council officers in developing the proposed evaluation process, but stated that she believed constraints placed on the process from the schedule of the process facilitator were restrictive. She said she had hoped for more deliberative time. Mr. Lee stated that he had met with concerned citizens and he had been asked to propose that more than department managers be included in the evaluation process. He said that a specific individual had suggested that time be provided in the process for dialogue between the City Manager and citizens. Mr. Lee said that he had been dismayed to learn that the previous evaluation process had included verbal feedback to the City Manager by the facilitator of comments made by staff and councilors. Ms. Elmer replied that she believed she had reported the feedback to the council. Mr. Lee stated he believed it was necessary to create a fair evaluation process. Minutes--Eugene City Council February 16, 1998 Page 8 7:30 p.m. Mr. Meisner asked if the "aggregate document" produced by the consultant and the "consultant's final summary report" were the same thing. He said he was concerned about the shod notice which was provided for scheduling of councilor interviews and that less than a day was provided for completion of written councilor evaluation forms. Mr. Fart stated that any councilor wishing to have additional time to complete forms could do so by planning to hand-carry the completed forms to their scheduled interview. Mr. Meisner stated that he was disappointed that no division managers or line staff were to be asked for input in the evaluation, as had been agreed to by the council. Mr. Tollenaar stated there were three reasons for not including such input--validity, reliability, and cost effectiveness. Mayor Torrey added that any changes the council could agree to make to the proposal would be enacted. Ms. Swanson Gribskov said she believed input from division managers was wisely eliminated because of the limited time available to receive and process such input. Mr. Meisner said he hoped the final cost of the consultant facilitating the process would be reduced from the maximum amount proposed because the initial proposal had included processing input from Division Managers. Mr. Fart moved, seconded by Mr. Tollenaar, that the process for evaluating the City Manager proposed by council officers be accepted, with the change of the word "will" in Statement 8 to "may." Mayor Torrey announced that any councilor wishing to amend the proposal could do so. Mr. Laue commented that the evaluation of the City Manager was the responsibility of the City Council, not employees. Ms. Taylor said that if employees were to be involved in the evaluation of the City Manager, the opinions of professional staff as well as union representatives and department heads should be included. Ms. Nathanson said she believed the recommendation of the officers should be accepted because the council had empowered them to make such a recommendation, and because the council would incorporate the many inputs it regularly receives in performing its evaluation of the manager. The motion was adopted unanimously, 8:0. The meeting adjourned at 10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, James R. Johnson City Manager Pro Tem Minutes--Eugene City Council February 16, 1998 Page 9 7:30 p.m. (Recorded by Dan Lindstrom) Minutes--Eugene City Council February 16, 1998 Page 10 7:30 p.m.