Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 09/14/98 Work Session MINUTES Eugene City Council McNutt Room--City Hall September 14, 1998 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Pat Farr, Tim Laue, Bobby Lee, Scott Meisner, Nancy Nathanson, Laurie Swanson Gribskov, Betty Taylor Betty Taylor, Ken Tollenaar. I. CALL TO ORDER The September 14, 1998, Eugene City Council meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m.; His Honor Mayor James D. Torrey presiding. II. PRESENTATION ON WILLAMETTE VALLEY LIVABILITY FORUM Mr. Tollenaar introduced Peter Watt, Manager of the Willamette Valley Livability Forum. Mr. Watt called attention to material in the meeting packet, particularly a questionnaire for the council to complete, which would reflect its vision for the valley. He said that the purpose of the Governor's Forum was to present choices to the people of the Willamette Valley. Mr. Watt said the forum was composed of 88 citizens; half of whom were ordinary citizens and half representing the private sector and nonprofit organizations. He noted that the forum was in a process of soliciting input from a variety of people such as Rotary Clubs and environmental groups. He presented a slide show that gave background information and described the forum's "Working Vision." The report defined a "core vision" and its "guiding principles for the future" in the following six areas: land use, transportation, water/environment, community, decision making, and economy. Mr. Meisner asked how the forum planned to "get valleywide decision-making and implementation that is consistent." He wondered if addressing the interests of such a diverse forum, the result might not be "pablum." Mr. Watt said the vision reflected a "qualitative" target and the next step would be to develop recommended actions that all could agree on to realize the vision. Mr. Meisner recalled that "Project Foresight," carried out about 25 years ago, included mandates but its specific impact was not clear as evidenced by the local jurisdictions with three vastly different set of community values as represented by council and board actions. Mr. Watt said the study did mobilize some public attention, which was translated through the political discussion in Salem and in part produced the Land Use Act. He said he believed there was a real interest among communities, including those in outlying areas, to work in a broader, regional level. Mr. Meisner ascertained that officials from the outlying communities were included in the forum. Mr. Watt suggested the work of the forum might become the legislative agenda by the governor or maybe the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) or the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) would amend their rules to encourage those kinds of framework plans in the major urban areas. MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 14, 1998 Page 1 5:30 p.m. In response to a question from Mr. Meisner, Mr. Watt said another rising initiative focuses on watershed/water environment issues, i.e., a spinoff of the Clean Water Act and the Oregon Plan on Endangered Species. Mr. Lee said the forum was an important exercise for the valley, calling it crucial for understanding by both officials and the public the context in which these decisions are being made. He asked Mr. Watt to elaborate on the "choices" mentioned in the report. Mr. Watt said, in the shod term, it describes what "could be." He added that the "would be" was being developed jointly by Oregon State University (©SU) and the University of Oregon (U©) with substantial funding from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Mr. Lee noted that this would afford the community an opportunity to make a conscious decision about what future it wants for the Willamette Valley. Mr. Watt said it also informs an action. Ms. Nathanson asked people to stop using the phrase "nonpoint source pollution," saying that this is generalized pollution that the entire population is responsible for. She questioned the phrase "to work close to where we live" used in the core vision for land use, noting that it may be irrelevant or unrealistic-someone may live far away from work but use public rapid transit. Mr. Watt said the vision was to provide choices and the concept would be refined as the work progressed. Mr. Fart recalled a recent study that named Eugene as the second most expensive place, second only to San Francisco, for housing and wondered if that had been addressed. He said he believed it contributed to urban sprawl as people are forced to move to smaller communities where housing is more affordable. Mr. Watt said there was a statewide discussion on the topic, adding that it was also a type of growth, e.g., higher density. He added that that was why it was important to have a regional collaborative effort. Mr. Fart said it was imperative to acknowledge how the individual growth policies impacted surrounding communities. Addressing a question from Ms. Taylor, Mr. Watt said the forum had secured funding through March 1999, and after that the forum will need to decide whether to find additional resources to continue the work. In response to a follow-up question, he said the changing membership had not impeded the forum's work because it has only met three times in two years; most of the work is done in task forces. Ms. Swanson Gribskov said the challenge is to understand what it means via the action plans, adding it would be helpful to use examples of likely choices to give meaning to the vision. Mayor Torrey said the League of Oregon Cities members' most critical concern was infrastructure and asked how the State could be convinced to work with local governments to deal with these types of problems. He said it was unproductive to develop visions such as this and then not to provide support for realizing those. Mayor Torrey encouraged collaboration among communities on the "hard issues" such as economic development. Mr. Watt said the governor, through his Community Development Boards, planned to get communities working/cooperating with each other to address issues such as adequate infrastructure. Mr. Tollenaar appreciated Ms. Swanson Gribskov's comments about the generality of the vision, saying it needs to be reduced to a practical level locally. He wondered if the forum might want to, MINUTES-Eugene City Council September 14, 1998 Page 2 5:30 p.m. as the next step, develop model ordinances that would show how some of these issues might be addressed at the local level. III. APPROVAL: EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT WITH CITY MANAGER Mr. Farr introduced the topic, noting that there were some areas of disagreement among councilors and the City Manager regarding the employment contract attached to the agenda. In response to a question from Ms. Taylor, Mr. Farr said that paying vacation accrual hours in cash was a common way of handling accrued vacation. Ms. Taylor said she believed the total remuneration package should be less, given the City's financial state. Ms. Swanson Gribskov asked for clarification of the "step" and cost of living (COL) increases. Mr. Farr explained that the "step" increases are based on merit and are not exclusive to the manager's position. City Manager Jim Johnson explained that prior placing the manager on a salary range, there was a salary negotiated, with increases negotiated at the time of the performance evaluation. He added that the council may wish to handle the position differently than the rest of the employees. Mr. Johnson said the COL was also consistent with how other employees are treated. Ms. Swanson Gribskov said she was a surprised with the section (4.3) making the salary retroactive to April 13, 1998, when Mr. Johnson was appointed as City Manager Pro Tern. She also asked for clarification on the evaluation periods in Section 5. Mr. Farr defended the retroactivity, saying the manager has been doing the job since he was appointed as pro tern. Mr. Johnson clarified that the first evaluation period (six months) would begin effective July 29, 1998, with annual evaluations occurring on that anniversary date. Mr. Meisner expressed concern with "step creep" in general. He received confirmation that vacation time was awarded based on hours worked per pay period. Mr. Meisner asked for an explanation of the transportation allowance. Mr. Johnson said he drives his personal vehicle on City business at his own expense and the allowance is meant to reimburse him, although he pays taxes on that amount. Mr. Meisner said that he was uncomfortable with the allowance given the council's goal on transportation, adding that it was a policy that the council may wish to reexamine. He said he was pleased with the section on "subsequent employment" but wondered if the fixed amount was intended. Mr. Johnson clarified that it should read "$10,000 or more." Mr. Meisner also expressed concern with the retroactive pay clause, but added that it was not a major objection. Mr. Tollenaar said he was pleased that a specific term of years for the appointment was excluded, meaning that Mr. Johnson's appointment was at the council's pleasure. He said the salary range was justified and comparable to similar positions and the manager's experience. Mr. Tollenaar said he was also concerned with the retroactive pay, adding that he was also concerned about the City picking up the six percent Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) amount in the case of a six months- termination settlement. Mr. Johnson said PERS payments are based on the amount paid to employees so the six percent would be applied to that six months-salary payment. Payroll Supervisor Terry Grondona added that State law required the six percent payment on salary, including severance pay. Mr. Johnson made it clear that he really wants the council to use the contract, specifically the termination clause if "things are not going well between the manager and the council," i.e., he MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 14, 1998 Page 3 5:30 p.m. does not want the council to not feel that the termination of the City Manager is so traumatic that it does not want to use it. He encouraged both parties to use the clause if things were not going well, adding he wanted to avoid a situation similar to what happened six months ago. Mr. Farr emphasized that Mr. Johnson had made it quite clear that that was his intention. With regard to the request for retroactive pay, Mr. Johnson explained that he was due for a merit increase in June 1996. Acting City Manager Linda Norris failed to act on it and then new City Manager Vicki Elmer did not feel comfortable in immediately granting a step increase, which lasted for the entire year. He said the result was that he had not received an increase in over two years and the request was in partial payment for that period. Mr. Farr noted that two other executives received step increases "ahead of Jim" during that period. Ms. Nathanson said she found it very awkward to fill out evaluations for previous City Managers because she was not fully aware of their daily activities outside of council meetings. She asked Mr. Johnson to think about developing a regular simple oral or written report to the council. Mr. Johnson said he would add such a report in discussion later of performance evaluations, noting that he will suggest anonymous evaluations from the City's executives. Ms. Taylor agreed that regular reports from the City Manager would be very useful, suggesting that the reports be made monthly. Ms. Swanson Gribskov said it should be clear if the six-month review included a compensation review, suggesting that if the retroactive pay was approved, salary negotiations be postponed to annual evaluation periods. Mr. Johnson said that was his intention. Mr. Tollenaar said even given Mr. Johnson's explanation for the retroactive pay request, he still believes it should not be approved. Mr. Farr summarized the discussion, saying the only point of contention was that of retroactive pay. Mr. Tollenaar said he reluctantly concluded that Mr. Johnson's explanation makes no difference in the question of retroactive pay. Mr. Meisner agreed, which is not to say, he added, that he would not consider it if it were to come up in a different request. Mr. Johnson withdrew his request for retroactive pay and said he would strike that section of the contract. Mr. Laue asked for the wage/salary figure for the lowest paid employee, excluding temporary and part time employees. Ms. Grondona said she was not prepared to respond but would provide the information to the entire council via e-mail. Mr. Farr asked her to fax the council the entire pay matrix. Mr. Johnson suggested that Section 4.2 should be changed to reflect August 1, 1998, as the effective date of the contract. City Attorney Glenn Klein reviewed the suggested changes: paragraph 4.2--delete the first sentence; Paragraph 5, third line--substitute "January or February of 1999" for "after six months MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 14, 1998 Page 4 5:30 p.m. of service," and in the fourth line--strike "annually, generally"; paragraph 6.1.2. and 6.2.2--add "or more" after "10,000." Mr. Farr moved, seconded by Mr. Tollenaar, that the employment agreement with James R. Johnson as City Manager be approved, with the following changes: Section 4.2--delete the first sentence and substitute August 1 for July 29; Section 5--delete "after six months of service" and replace them with "January or February of 1999" and delete "annually, generally", adding "or August of each year" after the word "July"; Sections 6.1.2. and 6.2.2.--add the words "or more" after $10,000. Ms. Taylor moved to amend the motion by making the beginning salary that of the previous City Manager. The motion died for lack of a second. Mr. Lee explained that he did not second the motion because he firmly believed that Mr. Johnson was a superior candidate and the salary figure in the contract was justified. The main motion passed unanimously, 8:0. IV. WORK SESSION: ZONING AND NUISANCE LIENS Mayor Torrey indicated that he had raised the issue given the City's recent experience and he asked the council to reaffirm the policy on zoning and nuisance liens. Dick Gassman, Planning and Development Department, provided the staff presentation, which reviewed the usual process for normal complaints and those that are "abnormal." He described the latter as those instances where liens against property are imposed and ultimately the City forecloses on the property. These situations occur when all other efforts have failed to gain compliance. Mr. Johnson said the intent tonight was not to discuss specific cases but rather to confirm what the code already says. He noted that the City had foreclosed on 713 properties, primarily in the 1980s when Bancroft bond payments were not being made. Addressing a question from Mr. Lee, Mr. Johnson said the City wants to make it clear to the community that it has the ability to do this. Mayor Torrey said it was an opportunity for the council to decide if this was something it really wanted to do and to ensure public awareness, a public hearing be held. Mr. Johnson provided a worst case scenario demonstrating how it is possible that the City could be placed in the position of creating homelessness. Mr. Meisner said the code addressed conduct, i.e., repeated violations, and said he wished to retain this enforcement tool when there is a pattern of noncompliance. MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 14, 1998 Page 5 5:30 p.m. Ms. Nathanson said it would be helpful to make sure everyone understands the lengths to which the City will go through to get compliance. She said that often the City's delay in enforcing the code has angered other citizens who are deprived of a healthful, aesthetic environment because of violators. Ms. Nathanson raised the issue of abatement due to suspected criminal activity or structural problems and wondered how it related to this section of the code. She said that if these types of problems are not fixed, the City contributes to the loss of entire blocks or neighborhoods to deterioration in terms of quality of life. She asked how the City handled the problem before this section went into effect in 1991. Mr. Gassman said the City sued people in Municipal Court, and termed it a very inefficient process. Ms. Nathanson suggested a combination of this and a judicial process. Mr. Klein clarified that the City did not repeal the judicial process when it adopted the administrative/civil penalties process, but the penalty options open to the Municipal Court are limited for civil violation; criminal violations may result in a jail sentence but given the jail's capacity dilemma, violators can be expected to matrixed out in less than 24 hours. Addressing a question from Ms. Taylor, Mr. Gassman said some situations requires immediate action (refrigerator outside) but most are given 30 days or more. Penalties can be from $30 to $500 per day depending on the circumstances. In response to a follow-up question, Mr. Gassman said the City has the ability to negotiate settlements or arrange a payment plan. He clarified that in order to place a lien on property, the owner has to be the violator; in the case of renters, staff might pursue action in Small Claims Courts or some other method of collection. Mayor Torrey said if the City refuses to foreclose, the council must change the code. Ms. Taylor said the City must address the stray cat problem, which was also a nuisance. She expressed concern with the City's contributing to homelessness. Ms. Swanson Gribskov noted that the people in this category are one or two percent of the total population. She suggested that prior to foreclosure, a session with the council detailing the action pending be held to avoid negative public backlash, adding she wished to retain foreclosure as the ultimate sanction. Mr. Gassman addressed the concern with the length of time it takes staff to get to the ultimate sanction, saying staff prefers compliance because voluntary compliance promotes understanding and there is less of a chance that there will be repeat violations. Mr. Farr agreed that foreclosure should be retained as the ultimate sanction. He asked what happens in foreclosure with the amount above and beyond the amount of the lien. Mr. Klein responded that the balance goes to the property owner. Addressing a question from Mr. Tollenaar, Mr. Klein said that even after the property transfers hands, there is a one-year redemption period during which the owner may redeem the property by paying the penalties. Ms. Taylor said a public hearing is a good idea that will educate people about the process and create awareness. Ms. Taylor moved, seconded by Mr. Lee, to hold a public hearing on the zoning and nuisance liens process. Several councilors expressed concern that the hearing might cause more confusion. MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 14, 1998 Page 6 5:30 p.m. The motion failed, 3:5; with councilors Laue, Lee, and Taylor voting in favor. Mr. Fart moved, seconded by Mr. Tollenaar, to reconfirm that staff may use foreclosure as a method of collecting liens from zoning and nuisance code violations. Ms. Swanson Gribskov asked staff to consider her suggestion to add a step in the process and hold an open meeting of some sort prior to foreclosure. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. The meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, James R. Johnson City Manager (Recorded by Yolanda Paule) MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 14, 1998 Page 7 5:30 p.m.