Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 03/09/98 Meeting MINUTES Eugene City Council City Council Chamber--City Hall March 9, 1998 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Pat Fart, Tim Laue, Bobby Lee, Scott Meisner, Laurie Swanson Gribskov, Ken Tollenaar. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Nancy Nathanson, Betty Taylor. Mayor Torrey reported that Mr. Farr would join the meeting at 8 p.m. and that the arrival of Mr Laue was anticipated momentarily, but that there was not a quorum present for the council to be in session. He said that the Public Forum on the agenda of the meeting did not require any action by the council and could be heard informally. i. PUBLIC FORUM Mayor Torrey explained guidelines for participating in the Public Forum. Alan Corneil, 1526 Main Street, Springfield, stated that he was confused by recent actions of the council, as reported in The Register-Guard newspaper. He said the United States Constitution gave certain rights and responsibilities to citizens and that a major principle was that laws needed citizen approval, which was given through voting. He said the newspaper report he had referred to had indicated that a law had been established in Eugene without the citizens being given the right to discuss or vote on it. He did not identify the ordinance to which he was referring. Mayor Torrey stated that it was not the practice of the council to reply to statements made during the Public Forum. He requested that Mr. Corneil give details of his concern to a member of the City staff and that a response would be provided. Mr. Laue joined the meeting at 7:40 p.m. Mayor Torrey called the Adjourned March 2, 1998, meeting of the Eugene City Council to order at 7:40 p.m. Minutes--Eugene City Council March 9, 1998 Page 1 7:30 p.m. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Tollenaar moved, seconded by Mr. Laue, to approve the City Council minutes of January 26, 1998, Meeting; January 28, 1998, Lunch Work Session; and February 11, 1998, Lunch Work Session. Mr. Meisner requested that paragraph 3 on page 6 of the minutes of the January 28, 1998, Lunch Work Session be changed, as follows: C~ Mr. Meisner asked that the City Manager provide additional information regarding her statement that elimination of Department of Public Safety administration resulted in new front-line police staffing. Ms. Elmer said that she would get back to the council in response to the request. Mayor Torrey determined there was no objection to the amendment. The motion was adopted unanimously, 5:0. III. PUBLIC HEARING: TOXICS RIGHT-TO-KNOW PROGRAM FEES City Manager Vicki Elmer announced that the council would hold a public hearing on program fees for the Toxics Right-to-Know program and that action on the fee proposals and program budget was scheduled to take place at the March 16 council meeting. A. Public Hearing Fire Marshal's Office Management Analyst Glen Potter reviewed information about the Eugene Toxics Right-to-Know Program contained in the agenda item summary distributed with the agenda of the meeting. He described provisions of the City Charter amendment, how start-up funding for the program had been provided, and the rationale for the fee recommendation of the Toxics Board. He reviewed budget proposals for the program. He stated that the board would finalize its recommendations on March 11. Don Upson stated that he was a member of the Eugene Toxics Board. He reviewed the fee recommendation of the board. Mr. Upson said that the board discussed a guideline that no individual fee would exceed $15,000. He said the board had not fully discussed the reduced budget proposals, but that there had been general agreement that cuts could be made to its original budget without jeopardy to the program. He requested that the council provide feedback on the reduced budget proposal. Mayor Torrey opened the public hearing. Jack Van Orman, 460 North Danebo, stated that he represented Ross Corporation. He said his company supported the Toxics Right-to-Know program, but that he had a concern about the large budget being proposed and that only 45 companies were expected to pay for it. He said he believed there were additional companies which should be included in the tracking program. He Minutes--Eugene City Council March 9, 1998 Page 2 7:30 p.m. recommended that the council consider paying for the program from the General Fund until further information was gathered. Mark Marzullo, 5741 Royal Avenue, stated that he represented Whittier Wood Projects which had two manufacturing plants in Eugene. He said he did not believe it was fair to base Toxics Right-to-Know Program fees on the number of employees. He said that pending legislative rulings and court appeals related to the Charter amendment could change its implementation and that his firm supported paying the first-year cost of the program from the General Fund. Mr. Farrjoined the meeting at 7:55 p.m. Moshe Immerman, 3455 Onyx Place, stated that he was grateful for the growing support of the City Council for the Toxics Right-to-Know Program and that he hoped it would identify Eugene as a world leader in such concerns. He said he believed optimal funding for the program was crucial to ensure the quality of life in Eugene and that any cuts to its proposed budget were premature. He described his personal experience with laboratory testing procedures and toxic materials. He said the privilege of using toxic substances should be accompanied by responsibilities and that he did not believe the proposed fees were onerous. Rhone Lee, 1210 Alfaretta Drive, stated that he represented PSC Scanning (formerly Spectra Physics) corporation. He said his company supported the Toxics Right-to-Know Program, but was concerned about the principle that the program should be self-funded because this did not encourage the behaviors intended. He said his company employed 650 persons and was classified as a "conditionally exempt" generator of toxic substances. He explained that his company had worked for many years to reduce its chemical usage and convert what it did use to beneficial purposes. He said he believed the fee proposal lumped his company together with large quantity toxic substance generators and penalized it for having a large number of employees and doing a good job in its toxics management. He said the fees provided no incentives to reduce chemical use and encouraged reduction in the number of employees. He recommended that first-year fees in the program be off-set by any increased number of companies participating in the future. Ray Wolfe, 1473 Luella, stated that he supported providing an adequate budget for the first year's operation of the Toxics Right-to-Know Program and that any surplus generated should be placed in a trust fund to reduce future costs. Clyde Carson, 618 "D" Street, Springfield, stated that he represented Williams Bakery. He said he believed the proposed costs of the Toxics Right-to-Know program were out-of-line. He said the fee proposed to be charged his company was higher than all other City and State regulatory permit charges. He said such fees gave an unfair advantage to non-Eugene competitor businesses. He reported that a recent court decision had determined that employee-based fees were to be considered a tax and that imposition of new taxes had legal implications in the State of Oregon. Kathy Madison, 1401 Willamette, stated that she represented the Eugene Chamber of Commerce. She said that her organization supported a lower budget for the Toxics Right-to- Know Program because its true costs were unknown. She said she believed the fee structure proposal was troubling because it would unfairly penalize either large or small businesses. She pointed out that the program was imposing start-up costs for computer software, personnel, and Minutes--Eugene City Council March 9, 1998 Page 3 7:30 p.m. training on all regulated companies. She said the Chamber of Commerce supported paying the cost of operating the program from the General Fund until actual costs were determined. Mary O'Brien, 3525 Gilham Road, stated that she was a member of the Toxics Board. She said "optimal funding" for the Toxics Right-to-Know Program had been supported by both industry and public representative members of the board. She reported that there were conflicting opinions about the legality of basing fees for the program on the quantity of chemicals used. She said State law allowed local governments to charge fees for such programs based on quantities only if they were "supplemental" to State Fire Marshal's programs. She stated that if the proposed budget did not allow for adequate support of the program, fees could be increased in future years. Jennifer Gleason, 1031 West 10th Avenue, stated that she had been a co-petitioner for the Toxics Right to Know Charter Amendment Initiative. She thanked the Toxics Board and City Council for its work in developing the program. She pointed out that the amendment provided that industries regulated by the program were to pay for its cost. She said that she believed basing fees on the number of employees was reasonable until additional information was available. She said she supported the recommendation of the Toxics Board. Determining that there were no additional persons wishing to testify, Mayor Torrey closed the public hearing. B. Council Deliberation Mr. Meisner expressed appreciation for testimony dealing with State limitations on charging fees based on quantities of chemicals used. He requested that staff prepare a written report dealing with the topic. Mr. Tollenaar asked what process had been followed to determine which businesses were to be regulated by the Toxics Right-to-Know Charter amendment. Mr. Potter described how approximately 300 businesses had been investigated to determine the current list of approximately 50 to be tracked for regulation. He said that no business was required to identify itself, but that reports required in 1999 would identify those to be regulated. In response to another question from Mr. Tollenaar, Mr. Potter explained that Oregon Revised Statutes prohibited local governments from duplicating fees of the State Fire Marshal. City Attorney Glenn Klein added that one court challenge of the Eugene Toxics Right-to-Know Charter amendment had been that it was pre-empted by State law. He said the case was currently in the appeal process and would not be determined for some time. Ms. Swanson Gribskov stated that she was concerned that all necessary businesses would be identified for regulation in the Toxics Right-to-Know Program. She asked how businesses were informed of the public hearing just completed. Mr. Potter replied that the Toxics Board includes three representatives of business, that the Chamber of Commerce had been notified, and that a formal letter had been sent to all known businesses that would be affected by the program. Ms. Swanson Gribskov stated that she supported a reduced budget for the program, giving it an opportunity to grow in the future. Minutes--Eugene City Council March 9, 1998 Page 4 7:30 p.m. Mr. Laue asked if the proposed legal fees budgeted in the program would be adequate for all potential appeals. Mr. Klein stated that the proposal would not cover expenses of a challenge which went to the Supreme Court, but that such litigation would not likely occur until fiscal year 2000. Mr. Lee asked for an explanation of the logical tie between fees and a company's number of employees. Mr. Potter replied that it was proposed as the basis for first-year fees for the program because it related to ability to pay and was based on data which was available. Mr. Lee said he was concerned that a fee would be established on the basis of ability to pay and not related to toxics issues. He suggested that a loan be provided to the Toxics Right-to-Know Program for its first year of operation which would be repaid from future years' fees. Mr. Farr stated that implementation of the Toxics Right-to-Know Program was mandated by a vote of Eugene citizens. He said companies were obligated to report their use of toxics and pay the cost of the program. He said he was not prepared to vote on the proposed budget until he was convinced it was as streamlined as possible. Ms. Swanson Gribskov asked if it would be possible to divide the cost of supporting the Toxics Right-to-Know Program between fees and the General Fund. Mr. Meisner replied that the amendment to the City Charter required that the program be self-supporting. He added that he would also oppose any suggestion that General Fund revenue be used to support the program because of the numerous other cutbacks in programs supported by it. Mr. Tollenaar called attention to difficulties in implementation of the Toxics Right-to-Know Program created by its nature as a charter amendment. He said he did not support placing legislative matters into charter or constitutional provisions. He said an example of the difficulties created was that it would be possible that a fee to support the program might never be enacted. Mayor Torrey stated that he agreed with Mr. Tollenaar, but that the program was mandated by a Charter amendment adopted by a vote of the citizens. He said he was intrigued by the loan proposal of Mr. Lee and would like to consider its ramifications. He said he believed the lowest possible budget for the program needed to be adopted. Mr. Laue stated that he also supported adopting as Iow a budget for the program as possible. He also said that he agreed with the comments of Mr. Tollenaar about legislative matters in charter provisions, but that it seemed to be a popular trend in the State of Oregon that would not go away. Minutes--Eugene City Council March 9, 1998 Page 5 7:30 p.m. IV. PUBLIC HEARING: ORDINANCE ON TOXIC REPORTING INSTRUCTIONS A. Public Hearing Mr. Potter explained that the Toxics Board had created reporting instructions to implement the Toxics Right-to-Know program that in some instances were not based strictly upon the provisions of the Charter Amendment. He said that it had been recommended by the City Attorney's Office that the City Council be asked to adopt the instructions by ordinance to give them the force of law, in the event they were legally challenged. Mayor Torrey opened the public hearing. Richard Walker, 845 McKinley Street, said he represented a small business, Champion Friction Company. He said he was concerned that implementation of the Toxics Right-to-Know Charter amendment did not provide controls for the two largest creators of pollution in Eugene-the University of Oregon and Sacred Heart Hospital. He suggested that not providing such controls indicated a lack of seriousness about the law and that only small businesses were being targeted. Jack Van Orman, 460 North Danebo, stated that he was concerned about changes which had taken place in the listing and description of toxic materials covered by the program. He said he was also concerned that the format for recording data to be reported in the program had not yet been established. Steve Morgan, 841 West 5th Avenue #3, stated that he was environmental manager for Forrest Paint Company. He said he was concerned that the Eugene Toxics Right-to-Know Program had established the lowest threshold for reporting of toxic substances in the country. He said he had concerns about the program reporting instructions, as follows: (1) the reporting level for contaminants was not the same as set by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA); (2) the reporting level for metals and metal components was not the same as set by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and significantly complicated the issues involved; (3) Characteristic Chemicals reporting processes for ignitability and corrosivity incorrectly identified products as waste material; (4) there were potential "double counting" issues; and (5) some companies are required to report ignitable materials and others are not. Keith Dahle, 175 South Danebo, stated that he was concerned that certain information regarding "public contact persons" should be deleted from the toxic reporting instructions since it was not required by the Charter Amendment. Kathy Madison, 1401 Willamette, stated that she represented the Eugene Chamber of Commerce. She said her organization supported the public's right to know about toxic substances used in manufacturing process, but was opposed to development of local programs to enforce such rights because of the disadvantages they imposed on local businesses. She said she believed the Eugene Toxics Right-to-Know Charter amendment was a "stigma law" seeking to negatively hold up to public scrutiny legitimate company operations. Mary O'Brien, 2535 Gilham Road, stated that she was speaking as an individual. She said she believed Sacred Heart Hospital was exempt from the Eugene Toxics Right-to-Know program because it was not classified as a manufacturing operation. She said the University of Oregon Minutes--Eugene City Council March 9, 1998 Page 6 7:30 p.m. was not covered by the program because local government had no authority to impose restrictions on State agencies. She said that software for reporting of Toxics Right-to-Know program data would be available by June 1 and would not represent any changes from previously announced requirements. She said she supported having a Toxics Right-to-Know Charter amendment because it provided better safeguards for citizens. Moshe Immerman, 3455 Onyx Place, said he believed it was appropriate to include Toxics Right-to-Know provisions in the City Charter because it was a right of citizenship. He described Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) levels and suggested they could become a good base on which to calculate future fees for the program. Determining that there were no additional persons wishing to testify, Mayor Torrey closed the public hearing. B. Council Deliberation Mr. Laue observed that the obstacle of local governments being unable to regulate state agencies was a long-standing problem faced by cities in many different areas. Mr. Lee said that he believed the differentiation between quantity and quality of toxic chemicals was important and should be considered in the establishment of future program fees. Mr. Lee commented that the community had been polarized during the campaign preceding the adoption of the Toxics Right-to-Know Charter amendment, but that the Toxics Board had brought the community together and that Eugene was becoming a leader in the field in Oregon. Ms. Swanson Gribskov asked how thresholds for the reporting of toxic chemicals had been established. Ms. O'Brien replied that thresholds were established at five percent of estimated current emission levels, that input/output accountability made reporting possible, and that a State task force was seeking to eliminate disparate reporting requirements. Mr. Tollenaar said he believed a single line amendment to the City Charter identifying citizen's rights was appropriate, but that he believed the adopted amendment went inappropriately into legislative prescriptions. V. ORDINANCE CONCERNING PUBLIC HEARINGS Ms. Elmer announced that the council would consider Council Bill 4639, an ordinance concerning public hearings; amending Section 2.007 of the Eugene Code, 1971; and declaring an emergency. She reminded councilors of its previously held study session and public hearing on the ordinance. Mr. Fart moved, seconded by Mr. Tollenaar, that Council Bill 4639, with unanimous consent of the council, be read the second time by council bill number only, and that enactment be considered at this time. The motion was adopted unanimously, 6:0. Ms. Elmer announced that the council would consider Council Bill 4639 by number only. Minutes--Eugene City Council March 9, 1998 Page 7 7:30 p.m. Mr. Fart moved, seconded by Mr. Tollenaar, that Council Bill 4639 be approved and given final passage. Mr. Laue asked if the emergency clause of the motion required a three-fourths majority vote of the membership of the council or a three-fourths vote of the members who were present for passage. Mr. Klein replied that it required a three-fourths vote of the membership of the council for passage. The motion was adopted unanimously, 6:0, and became Ordinance 20109. The meeting adjourned at 9 p.m. Respectfully submitted, James R. Johnson City Manager Pro Tem (Recorded by Dan Lindstrom) Minutes--Eugene City Council March 9, 1998 Page 8 7:30 p.m.