Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 10/12/98 Meeting MINUTES Eugene City Council Council Chamber--City Hall October 12, 1998 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Pat Farr, Tim Laue, Bobby Lee, Scott Meisner, Nancy Nathanson, Laurie Swanson Gribskov, Betty Taylor, Ken Tollenaar. Mayor Jim Torrey called the October 12, 1998, meeting of the Eugene City Council to order at 7:35 p.m. He welcomed members of Cub Scout Pack 24, Den 4, sponsored by Meadowlark School. 1. PUBLIC FORUM Mayor Torrey described the purpose and guidelines for the Public Forum. Mayor Torrey determined there were no requests to speak in the Public Forum. 2. CEREMONIAL MATTERS Mayor Torrey introduced Steve Kohn, Jan Lubbock, and Laura Diederich, who he said were representatives of Pearl Buck Center Incorporated. He read a proclamation in which it was noted that the center was celebrating 45 years of service to persons with developmental disabilities in Eugene and that October 1998 had been designated as National Disability Employment Awareness Month by the US President's Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities. He proclaimed October 29, 1998, as Pearl Buck Center Day in the City of Eugene and called upon citizens to observe the day with appropriate programs and activities. Mayor Torrey introduced Ronda Hatafee and Diana Hafemann from Oregonians for Gambling Awareness. He read a proclamation in which it was noted that Oregonians for Gambling Awareness worked to educate the public on concerns related to problem gambling; that the headquarters of the organization was located in Eugene; and that Oregon Governor John Kitzhaber had declared September 29, 1998, as Problem Gamblers Awareness Day. He recognized and applauded the efforts of the organization. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 12, 1998 Page 1 7:30 p.m. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of Council Minutes: September 14, 1998, Council Work session September 14, 1998, Council Meeting September 23, 1998, Council Work Session September 28, 1998, Council Meeting B. Approval of Minutes, Findings and Recommendations of Hearings Official and Adoption of a Resolution Forming a Local Improvement District for Paving, Curbs, Gutters, Sidewalks, Street Lights, Street Trees, Wastewater and Drainage Systems on Terry Street from Royal Avenue to Morely Loop (Job #3599) C. Resolution No. 4576 Concerning Reserve for Capital Projects D. Resolution No. 4577 Concerning Reserve for Encumbrance Mr. Farr moved, seconded by Mr. Tollenaar, to approve the items on the Consent Calendar of the October 12, 1998, meeting. Ms. Nathanson requested that sentence 1 of paragraph 4 on page 4 of the minutes of the September 14, 1998, Council Work Session be changed, as follows: Ms. Nathanson said she found it very awkward to fill out evaluations for the previous twe~th~ City mManagers because she ,4 ..... + .~.~,,.. ~. ........ ~...+ ..~. ma~ was not fully aware of their daily activities outside of council meetings. Mayor Torrey determined there was no objection to the request and ordered the minutes to be revised. Mr. Tollenaar requested that sentence 3 of paragraph 3 on page 5 of the minutes of the September 23, 1998, Council Work Session be changed, as follows: He noted that in all the surveys conducted +h,,,~,~ .......... ,,~, ~ ~,~,' ..... ,,,~jv,,,~;'--;+,, favoring ~,,~'--;'-"¢;~",4,, ,~,,~,, jurisdiction transfer of planning jurisdiction to Springfield was the most favored option. Mayor Torrey determined there was no objection to the request and ordered the minutes to be revised. Mr. Tollenaar requested that sentence 7 of paragraph 4 on page 6 of the minutes of the September 23, 1998, Council Work Session be changed, as follows: Mr. Tollenaar concluded that ;¢ ~',~11~',+~- c,+~-~+ +k,-~+ c.k~, ,I,4 k~ .~'~'.~ ~.~,°"~,4 they ~.o~'"'.v..~",4 .""+.~. ~'~' charged ~. ...... .~.. the City should assess only those properties that take actual direct access from an improved arterial or MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 12, 1998 Page 2 7:30 p.m. collector street, and that the non-assessable costs should be paid from the Systems Development Charge Fund. Mayor Torrey determined there was no objection to the request and ordered the minutes to be revised. Mr. Lee requested that paragraph 1 on page 3 of the minutes of the September 23, 1998, Council Work Session be changed, as follows: Mr. Lee said the Human Rights Commission was in the process of,,'-'~'-+~"'- Accessibility Repo,,1 c,-,d developing an annual report card to ~ analyze social inequity in the community ~. Mayor Torrey determined there was no objection to the request and ordered the minutes to be revised. The motion to approve the Consent Calendar was adopted unanimously, 8:0. Mayor Torrey adjourned the meeting of the City Council and convened a meeting of the Urban Rnewal Agency. 4. URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY RESOLUTION CONCERNING RESERVE FOR CAPITAL PROJECTS City Manager Jim Johnson announced that the council would consider Resolution Number 997, authorizing the transfer of funds from the Reserve for Capital Projects. He said the action was requested in order to "roll over" unspent funds from the previous fiscal year, allowing the expenditures to be made after a report is received from a committee appointed by University of Oregon President Dave Frohnmayer to review the Riverfront Research Park project. Mr. Fart moved, seconded by Mr. Tollenaar, that Resolution 997, a resolution of the Urban Renewal Agency authorizing the transfer of funds from the Reserve for Capital Projects, be approved. The motion was adopted unanimously, 8:0. Mayor Torrey adjourned the meeting of the Urban Renewal Agency and reconvened the meeting of the City Council. 5. PUBLIC HEARING: A & K DEVELOPMENT, SV 98-3, WEST 3RD PLACE AND SV 98-4, WEST 4TM AVENUE Land Use Permit Planner Kent Kullby announced that the council had been requested by A & K Development to hold a public hearing and consider the vacation of an alley and street. He explained that if the council approved the vacations, it would require separate actions by the council to adopt two separate ordinances which were contained in the council's packet. He reviewed options available to the council and the results of each. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 12, 1998 Page 3 7:30 p.m. Mr. Kullby reported that staff and Councilor Scott Meisner had attended recent meetings of area residents and the applicant/developer. He also reported that additional public testimony had been received and that copies had been distributed to councilors at the beginning of the meeting. He referred to maps on pages 251 and 252 entitled "Conceptual Local Truck Access Control" and "Traffic Plan" included in the packet of information distributed with the agenda of the meeting. Mr. Kullby requested that if the council decided to postpone a decision about the application, direction be provided regarding findings to be prepared by staff. Mr. Kullby introduced Traffic Engineering Operations Supervisor Gary McNeel and said he was available to answer questions from councilors. Ms. Nathanson said she did not believe signs were adequate to prevent the use of neighborhood streets by trucks. She asked if it was possible to design streets to prevent such use. Mr. Kullby replied that there were no plans for street design improvements with the applicant's request. He noted that Public Works Department administers a program for constructing traffic calming devices in public streets and that approximately 150 street improvements for traffic calming devices were on the current project list. Mr. McNeel said that the council could direct that a traffic diverter be constructed without consideration of a "waiting list" for traffic calming devices. He said that traffic diverters could prevent penetration of neighborhood streets by trucks. He noted that the area under consideration was well patrolled and that police enforcement of street use prohibitions was likely. Ms. Swanson Gribskov requested that a summary of concerns regarding the development be prepared for the council. She said she was impressed with the seeming desire of the owner to create a "win-win" situation for his project and the neighborhood. She asked if immediate action on the vacation requests was required. Mayor Torrey replied that he understood there would be a motion presented to postpone action and keep the record of the public hearing open. Mr. Tollenaar asked how assessments for the proposed vacations had been determined. Mr. Kullby reviewed City procedures for recommending assessments. He explained that the use of comparable property sales for similar properties formed the basis of the proposed assessment. Mayor Torrey determined there were no other questions from councilors. Mr. Meisner moved, seconded by Mr. Tollenaar, (1) that the City Council hold the scheduled public hearing on the A & K development; (2) that the record for the hearing remain open until 5 p.m. October 26, 1998; and (3) that a council work session for discussion and possible action on the vacation applications be set for a time after the public record had closed. The motion was adopted unanimously, 8:0. Mayor Torrey opened the public hearing. Kitty Piercy, 1371 West 4th Avenue, stated that she lived in the neighborhood of the proposed vacations and supported the decision of the council to postpone action on the applications and keep open the public record. She described her neighborhood as an historic, working class neighborhood that is located close to the urban center of the city, and a buffer on the edge of an MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 12, 1998 Page 4 7:30 p.m. industrialized zone. She said she did not have any real objections to the vacation requests, but she said she was concerned that along with the development of A & K and the vacations, a large number of trucks would use neighborhood streets and would reduce the quality of life in the neighborhood. She said it was important that the City prove to the residents that infill development can occur in a positive way that maintains the quality of life of neighborhood residents. She said she believed it would be possible for residents to work with the applicant and come to agreement about barriers to truck use of neighborhood streets. Ms. Piercy said she was also concerned about the adequacy of the public notice given regarding the vacation applications. She said posted notices in the neighborhood were deficient and that those living a block away from the affected areas were not notified by mail. Larry Thorp, 644 "A" Street, Springfield, stated that he represented the applicant, Ron Anderson. He pointed out that A & K Development had completed constructed of a 71,000- square-foot manufacturing facility which would generate the truck traffic of concern to neighborhood residents. He said the vacations were intended to facilitate new construction of an office building and parking lot element of the development. The office and parking lot development was not related to the traffic issues described by the neighborhood residents. He said the areas for which the vacations were requested were an un-constructed street and alley. He stated that the owner was willing to work with the City to provide solutions to the concerns of area residents. He urged the council not to "hold hostage" the vacation requests because the requests were not related to the truck traffic issues. Ron Anderson, 364 Agate Street, stated that he was the owner of A & K Development and the applicant for the vacations. He said he believed the operation of his business could be made compatible with and even improve the neighborhood. He said he had exerted considerable effort to reduce the noise, sight, and ecological impacts of his business upon the neighborhood. He said his business would likely generate less traffic than had resulted from the previous business in the same location. He said he supported the use of signs and street barriers to prevent trucks using neighborhood streets. He pointed out that the same trucks would be accessing his business repeatedly and that drivers unfamiliar with its location would be unlikely. He said he wanted to work with residents of the neighborhood to reach a mutually acceptable solution to their concerns. Marjorie Scott, 29290 McTavish Lane, stated that she owned property adjoining that used by A & K Development and that she was concerned that the proposed vacations would make it difficult to develop her property to its fullest potential. She said she appreciated the improvements made to the area by Mr. Anderson and that she would seek to work with him, but she was concerned about the negative impacts on her ability to develop her property. She said the vacation requests should have been made before development of the A & K property. Brian Weaver, 1438 West 4th Avenue, stated that he was concerned that all residents of the neighborhood affected by the proposed development were not notified by mail of the vacation applications. He said that posted notices do not provide adequate notifications. He thought the posters were advertisements for a garage sale. He displayed an enlarged version of a map distributed with the agenda of the meeting on page 252 and described errors and omissions on it--3rd Avenue does not go through Taylor Street, Taylor Street does not go past 2nd Avenue, two companies producing traffic are not identified. He said he was concerned that truck traffic signs proposed by the applicant would not be adequate to prevent trucks from using neighborhood MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 12, 1998 Page 5 7:30 p.m. streets. He said he appreciated that the record for the public hearing was being left open for additional testimony. Roni Simone, 1457 5th Avenue, said that she was concerned that traffic issues would not be solved because of her experience with the length of time it took to get a traffic diverter installed at 5th Avenue and Almaden Street. She said she appreciated the clean-up work done by A & K Development, but was concerned about trucks in her neighborhood because of their danger to children and the potential damage which could be done to the streets by the trucks. She stated that notification of the vacation requests was not done adequately enough to notify residents of the potential impacts. J.D. Brown, Post Office Box 2570, stated that he appreciated that the record of the public hearing would be left open for additional submissions. He said he understood that the vacation applications were separate from neighborhood concerns about truck traffic, but he suggested that resolution of the two issues should be tied together. He asked if it would be possible to consider having truck traffic exit and enter onto Chambers Street from West 3rd Avenue instead of using West 3rd Avenue and Taylor Street route to get to Chambers Street. Margaret Backenheimer, Post Office Box 2570, stated that she was a 14-year resident of the affected neighborhood. She referred to her letter to Mr. Meisner dated September 21, 1998, distributed with the agenda of the meeting. She expressed her concern that the proposed traffic plan for the development would not stop truck traffic from entering the neighborhood and said that the council should not facilitate the vacation requests. She made three specific recommendations: 1) that traffic ingress and egress be permitted only on Chambers Street and rd Filmore Street and that the West 3 Place should be an exit only and not allow for two-way traffic; 2) that truck traffic be permitted only during the day; and 3) that two traffic calming th improvements be made, a traffic diverter at West 4 Avenue and Amaden Street and a round- about be built at West 4th Avenue and Taylor Street. She said that the owner of A & K Development had expressed a willingness to help pay for such alterations. Ronald Wold, 1409 West 5th Avenue, said that the vacation requests should be linked to resolution of traffic issues raised by area residents. He said he had no objection to the vacations, but was concerned about the impact of truck traffic to and from the Almaden Street entrance and exit to the A & K property. He said he appreciated the willingness of the owner to resolve the problems. He said that although the traffic flow plan looked good, there were many factors beyond the owner's control. He said the truck drivers involved would not be Mr. Anderson's employees, and that a solution needs to be reached which ensured that a future change in ownership could not bring negative results. He expressed concern that a fire "crash ,, th gate proposed for the intersection of 4 Avenue and Almaden would not be permanent. He asked if it would be possible to require that it never be used as a regular access point for any business located on the A & K property. He supported the idea of a traffic diverter at 4th Avenue and Almaden Street and a round-about at 4th Avenue and Taylor Street. Brandi Kominck, 1440 West 4th Avenue, stated that she was concerned about the notification process for the vacation applications. She said that the posted notices had been difficult to understand and had the wrong streets identified. She described her negative experience in seeking information about the applications by calling the City and being transferred many times without reaching the appropriate staff person. She said she did not believe signs would deter truck traffic from using residential streets and pointed out that existing businesses near 3rd Avenue and Taylor Street already created street congestion that would encourage truck traffic to MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 12, 1998 Page 6 7:30 p.m. use less congested residential streets. She said she hoped alternate entrances and exits to the business would be considered. Ms. Kominck said that she also spoke for Darrell Judd, 1440 West 4th Avenue, who was concerned about traffic impacts on the safety of children. She said Mr. Judd believed that the signs would not prevent truck traffic from entering the neighborhood and disrupting the peace and quiet of the neighborhood. She said he believed that enforcement of the truck traffic route would be difficult and would not be effective. She said he hoped that concerned citizens would be given ample opportunity to communicate their concerns. Bruce Stockton, 439 Almaden, stated that he had concerns about increased automobile traffic generated by A & K Development's employees, in addition to the concerns expressed by others about truck traffic. He described traffic issues created by already existing businesses and expressed a concern about the possibility of A & K Development adding evening and midnight working shifts at some time in the future. He said he was upset that the issues raised by neighbors had not been addressed before building permits for the business were issued. He said he appreciated that the time provided by the council had been extended for the submission of additional testimony regarding the vacation requests. Mayor Torrey determined that there were no additional persons wishing to testify and closed the public hearing. Ms. Swanson Gribskov said she hoped staff would address public notice requirements and concerns expressed in the hearing about other ways notice would be appropriate. Mr. Johnson pointed out that the Agenda Item Summary provided a record of the public notice requirements and how they had been fulfilled. Mr. Fart said that he agreed with the request of Ms. Swanson Gribskov for information about improving public notice practices. Ms. Nathanson stated that she had previously presented information about public notice requirements in other cities. She described the use of large display signs put up at the expense of the property owner which effectively presents development proposals under consideration. She encouraged discussion of such requirements in Eugene. Ms. Nathanson said that she was concerned about testimony from citizens who had experienced difficulty accessing information about the applications through telephone calls to City Hall. She suggested that those who receive inquiries be trained to proactively undertake finding out information for callers. Ms. Nathanson asked that information be provided about whether streets in the area of the proposed vacations were built to industrial use standards. Ms. Nathanson asked whether a guarantee could be provided regarding future use of the proposed "crash gate." Ms. Nathanson asked that information be provided about the extent of traffic restrictions that exist near the proposed vacations by the use of other businesses along Taylor Street. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 12, 1998 Page 7 7:30 p.m. Ms. Nathanson said that there seemed to be the possibility of a win-win situation, where the re- development and expansion of industrial uses can occur while preserving the residential livability of the neighborhood. She said she wanted solutions to be identified. Mr. Meisner said that he agreed it would be helpful to receive an impact analysis. He posed the question: who pays for the industrial impacts upon residents? Mr. Meisner said that he did not believe simply meeting the legal requirements for public notice was adequate, and that the City should provide notice above and beyond the legal requirements. Mr. Meisner said that he would like information about: 1) the use of Chambers Street for the sole entrance and exit of the property without using Almaden Street; 2) about the effectiveness of signs in preventing trucks from using neighborhood streets; 3) about the possibilities of traffic calming improvements like, diverters or protruding curbs and corners at 4th Avenue and Almaden Street, 4th Avenue at Taylor Street, and 3rd Place and 3rd Street; 4) about whether traffic requirements are transferred onto any subsequent owners of the A & K property; 5) about the list of requests for traffic devices throughout the City; and 6) whether or not the money to be received from A & K Development for the assessed value of the rights-of-way to be vacated could go toward constructing traffic calming devices. Mr. Lee expressed appreciation to the applicant and concerned neighborhood residents for their "civilized" presentations. He said he believed issues related to public notice were complicated by requirements of State law. He asked that information be provided about whether the City could exceed the notification procedures required by State law. Mr. Lee said that he was concerned about how a person with speech or hearing disabilities could be provided information from the City over the telephone. Mr. Lee supported the idea of the council discussing possible solutions to the traffic problems as part of its deliberations about the vacation requests. He said he would like to see a single solution document be agreed upon by the councilors. Mr. Fart commended the applicant and neighborhood residents for seeking to find a mutually acceptable solution to the issues surrounding the vacation requests and the development that was occurring. He said he believed A & K Development was an ideal business for the location it was to occupy-it purchased supplies locally, it employed 130 persons, it produced products which were exported from the area, it produced "clean" products, and its owner lived in Eugene. Mr. Farr asked that information be provided about the number of truck trips the business anticipated generating each day; about the type of trucks that would be used; about whether it was necessary for Almaden Street to be used by trucks serving the business; and about the cost of diverters and other potential design elements which could prevent trucks from entering neighborhood streets. He said he would also appreciate receiving a clearer aerial photograph of the area in question. Mr. Tollenaar asked if an application for a vacation was a land use decision. Mr. Kullby replied that such decisions were guided by non-land use sections of State law. Mr. Tollenaar asked if there was a legal reason why the council could not consider traffic issues in conjunction with the vacation applications. City Attorney Glenn Klein replied that he would MINUTES-Eugene City Council October 12, 1998 Page 8 7:30 p.m. need to discuss with legal counsel for the applicant about why he suggested they were separate issues. He added that Oregon Revised Statutes gave councils broad (but not unfettered) discretion in dealing with vacations. He said he would check to see if there were court cases that limit what a council could require before vacating a right-of-way. Ms. Taylor said that she appreciated that the council had determined that additional time would be devoted to consideration of the applications. She said she hoped the deliberations would generate additional options about the concerns of neighborhood residents. Ms. Taylor asked if it was true that the applicant was willing to contribute to the construction of traffic control devices for neighborhood streets in the area of the vacations. Mr. Kullby replied that the property owner was willing to do so. Mr. Anderson also confirmed his willingness to do SO. Ms. Taylor said that she believed improvements needed to be made to public notice practices and that City staff needed to coordinate and improve how citizen inquiries were answered. 6. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FROM HEARINGS OFFICIAL AND PASSAGE OF AN ORDINANCE LEVYING ASSESSMENTS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF SIDEWALKS AND ACCESS RAMPS IN 24 VARIOUS LOCATIONS (CONTRACT #97-18) (JOB #3411) AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY Mr. Johnson announced that the council would consider Council Bill 4665, relating to an ordinance levying assessments for construction of sidewalks and access ramps in 24 various locations. Mr. Fart moved, seconded by Mr. Tollenaar, that Council Bill 4665, with unanimous consent of the council, be read the second time by council bill number only and that enactment be considered at this time. Ms. Taylor asked why the ordinance was considered an emergency. City Engineer Les Lyle replied that assessments included in the ordinance had been calculated to the date of its proposed adoption by the council and that a 30-day delay would require recalculation, which would result in increased assessments for the effected properties. The motion was adopted unanimously, 8:0. Mr. Johnson announced that the council would consider Council Bill 4665 by number only. Mr. Fart moved, seconded by Mr. Tollenaar, that Council Bill 4665 be approved and given final passage. The motion was adopted unanimously, 8:0. 7. WORK SESSION:CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION REGARDING BALLOT MEASURE 65. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 12, 1998 Page 9 7:30 p.m. Mayor Torrey announced that the council would engage in an work session regarding a ballot measure, which had been postponed from the 5:30 p.m. Dinner Work Session earlier. He stated that staff was prohibited from participating in the discussion by State law. Ms. Taylor requested that consideration be given to a resolution she had prepared regarding Ballot Measure 65. She read the resolution, as follows: The City Council of Eugene finds that: Ballot Measure 65 is a threat to State land use planning. That it allows anyone who can gather approximately 24,000 signatures (two percent of voter turnout in the previous election for governor) to force the Legislature to review any administrative rules listed in the petition. That, if the Legislature fails to act, the administrative rules are automatically eliminated. Thus one committee chair could eliminate a rule by refusing to schedule a hearing. That, under this measure, all of our 18 statewide land use planning goals could be easily abolished by a minority of voters and legislators. That we know through our Growth Management Study that Eugene citizens support land use planning. Now, therefore, Be it Resolved by the City Council of the City of Eugene, a Municipal Corporation of the State of Oregon, as follows: We oppose Ballot Measure 65. Ms. Taylor moved, seconded by Mr. Tollenaar, that the resolution stating opposition to Ballot Measure 65 proposed by Ms. Taylor be adopted. Mr. Fart stated that he would likely abstain from voting on the motion. He said he opposed Ballot Measure 65, but for reasons which were different than those stated in the resolution. Ms. Nathanson said she was concerned about the process followed to bring the resolution before the council. She suggested that taking a position on Ballot Measure 65 could imply that other measures on the November 1998 General Election ballot were not of concern to the council. She pointed out that the council normally adopted positions on ballot measures after deliberation on a recommendation by the Intergovernmental Relations Committee. Ms. Nathanson said that the League of Oregon Cities had developed a position in opposition to Ballot Measure 65 and that Eugene normally relied on it to lobby for its interests. Ms. Nathanson said she was unsure of how she should vote on the motion because to support it suggested that the council should also take positions on other ballot measures. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 12, 1998 Page 10 7:30 p.m. Ms. Swanson Gribskov stated that she was inclined to not support the motion because she did not want to set a precedent for considering council positions on ballot measures without a recommendation from the Intergovernmental Relations Committee. She said she would have appreciated having received copies of the ballot measure and arguments in support and opposition to it before being asked to vote on a resolution about it. Mr. Tollenaar said that he would support the motion on the basis of his previous experience which showed the potential dangers of Ballot Measure 65. He said he was concerned that the Intergovernmental Relations Committee had not considered the resolution proposed by Ms. Taylor, but that he recognized the council needed to act expeditiously. He noted that, as registered voters, councilors had received the text of Ballot Measure 65 and official supporting and opposing arguments in volume one of the State Voter's Pamphlet. Mr. Meisner said that he would also support the motion, but that he had additional reasons for doing so than were included in the resolution presented by Ms. Taylor. Mr. Meisner said that he appreciated the concern about process for consideration of issues related to taking positions on ballot measures, but that the motion and resolution had been presented and he did not want it to be recorded that the Eugene City Council refused to state its opposition to Ballot Measure 65. In response to Mr. Fart's statement that he would abstain from voting, Mr. Johnson stated that City Council Ground Rules adopted December 10, 1997, stipulated that council members may not abstain from voting unless a conflict of interest applies. Mr. Lee stated that he would support the motion out of courtesy to Ms. Taylor. He said that he agreed with the comments of councilors regarding the importance of using established procedures to bring resolutions about ballot measures to the council. He suggested that collaboration regarding the resolution could have resulted in better assurance of media coverage of council action. Mr. Laue said that he did not believe that the current motion was the first, nor would it be the last time the City Council had been asked to take a position on a ballot measure without a recommendation from the Intergovernmental Relations Committee. He said taking positions on political issues was a responsibility of the council. Mayor Torrey stated that, if the council's vote on the motion was tied, he would vote in favor of it. He said that he agreed with the concerns expressed about the process followed to present the resolution and said that he believed care should be taken about such matters. He suggested that it would be appropriate for requests for consideration of similar matters be made through the Consent Calendar which would allow any councilor with a concern to ask for it to be removed and considered with a recommendation from the Intergovernmental Relations Committee. Ms. Swanson Gribskov stated that, based on the deliberations of councilors, she had changed her mind and would vote to support the motion. Mr. Johnson stated that, if the motion was adopted, the Council Resolution it approved would be Number 4578. Mr. Fart stated that he would not abstain, but would vote in favor of the motion, but that he did so with a concern about the process followed to bring the issue before the council. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 12, 1998 Page 11 7:30 p.m. The motion to approve the resolution stating opposition to Ballot Measure 65 proposed by Ms. Taylor was adopted unanimously, 8:0. Mayor Torrey determined there was consensus to permit consideration of submission of a Contingency Fund request at the meeting of the council to be held on October 14. The meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, James R. Johnson City Manager (Recorded by Dan Lindstrom) MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 12, 1998 Page 12 7:30 p.m.