Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 09/08/08 Work SessionM I N U T E S Eugene City Council Work Session McNutt Room – City Hall 777 Pearl Street—Eugene, Oregon September 8, 2008 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Andrea Ortiz, Chris Pryor, Betty Taylor, George Poling, Mike Clark, Jennifer Solomon, Bonny Bettman (via telephone), Alan Zelenka (via tele- phone). Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order A. Committee Reports and Items of Interest from Mayor, City Council and City Manager Ms. Piercy announced the openings of the Mayor’s Art Show and the Teen Art Show. She said the Eugene Celebration would be September 12-14. She said she and Ms. Ortiz met with business owners regarding the problem of metal theft. She said that Columbus, Ohio had developed ordinances to address metal theft and hoped Eugene could do something similar. Ms. Ortiz said she had attended farewell parties for former City employees Angel Jones and Chris Beamud. She attended neighborhood meetings in River Road/Santa Clara and downtown. She reminded the public that the recruitment of citizens for boards and commissions was still open and encouraged people from wards 6, 7 and 8 to apply. Mr. Clark echoed Ms. Ortiz’s comments regarding boards and commissions and encouraged people from Ward 5 to apply. He attended the Human Rights Commission picnic and various neighborhood meetings. He also attended the Lane Workforce Partnership lunch and the grand opening of Kendall Toyota’s new sustainable facility. He said they were hoping for a gold LEED certification or possibly platinum. He asked the City Manager to provide a written response to his question about who had authorized advertising to fill the deputy police auditor position. Ms. Taylor attended Crest Drive and Southeast neighborhood gatherings. She also attended a meeting regarding field burning. She said a universal number where people could call with concerns was needed, particularly on weekends and evenings. She asked if people who had been convicted of some type of vandalism could be sentenced to a certain number of hours of cleaning downtown streets and sidewalks. Mr. Poling congratulated the City on completion of Willakenzie Park. He said the Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations (CCIGR) had considered a list of legislative concepts submitted by the League of Oregon Cities. He said the CCIGR identified four concepts as priorities for the City, one of those being measures to address metal theft. Mr. Pryor reviewed the number of openings on various boards and commissions. He encouraged people to apply. He assisted with patching potholes and emphasized that in addition to the bond measure to help with street repairs, the City was already actively spending almost $10 million annually on streets. Ms. Bettman announced that the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission public hearing was postponed to September 26. She also assisted with patching potholes and enjoyed the experience. Regarding Item C on the agenda, she said she lived on the north end of Friendly Street and asked if that presented a conflict of interest. City Attorney Jerome Lidz replied that if she lived on a portion of the street not subject to road improvements there was no conflict. Mr. Ruiz invited councilors to stop by the Human Rights Center’s information table during the Eugene Celebration and participate in the United Way Community breakfast. B. WORK SESSION: West Eugene EmX Extension Update Lane Transit District (LTD) board member Greg Evans provided an overview of the West Eugene EmX project. He said for the past 18 months the City and LTD had been following the process established by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) in order to qualify the project for federal funds. He said the West Eugene project was more complex than the process for the Emerald EmX line and the Gateway EmX line. He said a preferred alternative had not yet been selected and public input on options was still being collected. He noted that a preferred alternative had to be agreed upon by the council, the LTD board and the Metropolitan Policy Committee (MPC). He said LTD was asking for the council’s support of the district’s requests for state and federal funding for the local match portion of the project. LTD director of planning and development Tom Schwetz stated that EmX was the region’s adopted high- th capacity transit option. He said following the council’s recommendation of the West 11 Avenue corridor for the next EmX line the LTD board concurred and the project was initiated in early 2007 with a notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS). He reviewed the elements and timeline of the environmental process, which incorporated extensive public outreach and involvement and would culminate in selection of a locally preferred alternative. Mr. Schwetz said the West Eugene EmX Extension Corridor Committee had been formed to bring decision- makers together with stakeholders along the corridor to provide advice throughout the process. He said community design workshops to consider options for each alternative were currently in progress and would be concluded on October 20. He listed the points of coordination between LTD and the City, including the th corridor committee, a project management group, the City’s West 11 Corridor Study, the West Eugene Collaborative and the Metro Waterways Study. He briefly reviewed the Amazon alignment and fixed design elements such as preservation of multi-use path, separation of multi-use path from EmX, incorporation of Metro Waterways goals and objectives, enhancement of the channel and location of stations at cross streets. He said public outreach was conducted in a number of ways, using newsletters, email, community workshops, speakers, neighborhood presentations, websites and one-on-one meetings. He emphasized that the environmental process was intended to support complex decisions by the council, the LTD board and the MPC. In response to a question from Ms. Bettman, Mr. Schwetz said LTD was not requesting funds from Eugene for the local match. Ms. Bettman asked if the environmental process would vet all alternatives to the same level of thoroughness, even ones that the council would not support. Mr. Schwetz explained that the process was established by federal regulation, which envisioned a decision-making process whereby people made a decision at the point where the fullest amount of information was available. Ms. Bettman opined that the Amazon alignment had fatal flaws and the Amazon channel was an amenity to the community that should not be diminished. She said the transit corridor should access the area but not thth infringe upon it; her preferred alternative was the 6/7 avenues alignment because it linked workers with their employment. Mr. Zelenka asked why the Amazon alignment was still being considered. Mr. Schwetz said that alternative arose during the scoping process and LTD felt that there could be some potential funding opportunities. He said there were examples in the Portland area of transit running along similar waterways. He reiterated that the environmental process was intended to scrutinize all alternatives. Mr. Evans added that the only th alternative removed from consideration was the residential portion of West 11 Avenue, which the LTD board felt was not feasible for the district, the neighborhood or the community. Mr. Clark asked if there were representatives of the 3RT group on the stakeholder committee. Mr. Schwetz said there was one 3RT representative on the committee. Mr. Clark asked what impact LTD’s funding challenges would have on its ongoing planning activities and eventual implementation. Mr. Evans said the EmX planning process would not be affected, but federal funding would be required for the eventual construction of the project. Mr. Clark asked if LTD anticipated a need for increased operational funding. Mr. Evans said LTD was already faced with the need for additional operating funds because of increased ridership and increased fuel prices and there would be some restructuring of the system to address that problem. He stressed that funding for operations was separate from planning and construction activities. Mr. Schwetz added that State funding would be sought for the match portion of the capital project. He said the operational efficiencies that were realized through EmX actually helped the district’s operational needs. Mr. Pryor said he appreciated participating in the process. He said the corridor was divided into three segments and the middle segment—Garfield Street to Bailey Hill Road—essentially defined the project. He said the Amazon alignment was included in the process because each option had to be considered until it was no longer viable. He found the discussion of alternatives to be very informative and helpful. Ms. Taylor commented that it was a waste of time and money to look at the Amazon channel if it was not supported by most people. Mr. Schwetz said that an alternative could not be eliminated until all of the information was available. Ms. Taylor asked if the council could determine that an alternative should not be pursued. Mr. Schwetz said it was more effective to wait until all the information had been obtained. Ms. Ortiz commended the community design workshops. She did not feel that any option should be eliminated at this point in the process. She pointed out that there were many businesses that were located right next to the Amazon channel in that area. She doubted that all of them were in compliance with current City codes regarding stormwater and she was not certain that the community would refuse to support an Amazon alignment. Mr. Poling thanked LTD staff for the public involvement process and agreed with Ms. Ortiz that the more options that were considered the better the outcome of the process would be. He would not be willing to eliminate an alternative until he had all of the information from the process. Ms. Bettman asked what the federal regulations required in terms of considering options. She asked if it thth would be permissible under the federal process to express a preference for the 6/7 avenues alignment and then focus on alternatives related to that alignment. City Attorney Jerome Lidz said he would need to research that question, but it was clear that the process needed to proceed with all the options. Ms. Bettman said it was a poor use of taxpayer money to consider options that did not have council or thth community support. She favored only considering options related to the 6/7 avenues alignment. She asked if each alternative would be subjected to all of the environmental disciplines listed in Attachment F in the agenda packet. Mr. Schwetz said detailed descriptions of each of the environmental disciplines would be used to conduct an impact analysis of each alternative alignment and a report summarizing those findings would be provided to the council. Leon Skiles, consultant, asserted that Attachment F defined the content of the EIS and each area would be addressed in the EIS for all of the alternatives. He said additionally the LTD adopted goals and objectives that would lead to evaluation criteria and measures that would be a subset of the information in the EIS. Ms. Piercy remarked that LTD was in charge of the process of vetting the range of alternatives and no one would know the outcome until the process was completed and could inform the final decision. She thought the public was very concerned with preserving bus services and also liked EmX, but worried that EmX might impact the other services LTD provided. She said the City was willing to help LTD find resources to provide regular and paratransit services along with EmX. Mr. Ruiz said the council’s October 13 work session would include a discussion of LTD funding and service issues. Ms. Bettman repeated her request for a legal memorandum regarding what was required to meet the federal requirements for analyzing alternative options. C. WORK SESSION: Funding Alternatives for City’s Share of Road Improvements for Crest Drive, Storey Boulevard and Friendly Street Mark Schoening, City engineer, presented alternatives for funding the City’s share of the implementation of the approved design for Crest Drive, Storey Boulevard and Friendly Street. He said the council had approved the recommended design in April 2008, with an estimated cost of $5.75 million, and in June 2008, adopted the FY09 budget, which included $2.6 million in the Special Assessment Capital Projects Fund to provide the interim financing for the assessable share of the project. He said the council also approved over $1 million in stormwater funds, which combined with the budget appropriation would cover the $1.5 million in non-assessable stormwater costs. Not included in the budget, he said, was the City’s share of road improvements at $1.65 million. Mr. Schoening reviewed the various options for funding the City’s share and said the recommended strategy was to use $700,000 from the Delayed Assessment Fund and $950,000 from the $4.5 million in Lane County Road Fund dollars the City received in exchange for General Fund dollars. He said the Lane County Road Fund was earmarked for pavement preservation and the Crest, Friendly and Storey improvements were upgrading those streets to urban standards and the project has a significant pavement preservation component. Mr. Ruiz said the intent of the road fund dollars was pavement preservation and a good portion of the project was pavement preservation. Ms. Taylor congratulated the City Manager on finding a way to fund the project. She hoped that potholes could still be filled in the interim and the City could find a way to help people who could not afford their assessments. Mr. Pryor acknowledged the hard work of the neighborhood on the project and congratulated the City Manager and staff on finding the funds to implement the project without crippling something else in the budget. Ms. Bettman concurred with Mr. Pryor’s comments. She was pleased the project was moving forward and maintaining the momentum of the collaboration between the neighborhood and the City. She agreed with the funding recommendation. She asked if moving forward with final design and construction of the project would preclude pursuing a classification change of the street. Mr. Schoening said those actions could move forward independently. Ms. Solomon objected to filling potholes on streets prior to construction because the project would use 25 percent of the Lane County Road Fund exchange dollars, and limited resources for potholes should be used elsewhere. She said the project would permanently resolve those problems and she preferred to see resources invested in pothole repairs on other streets that were in equally bad condition. She did not support the funding strategy because it would use 25 percent of the exchange funds for one project. Mr. Clark said he wanted to see the project completed, but had the same concerns as Ms. Solomon about using 25 percent of the funds for one project. He commended staff for a creative strategy. He asked if using the funds for this project would displace other projects that were slated for funding. Mr. Schoening said there was a $170 million preservation backlog, but specific projects had not been targeted with the funds. Mr. Clark asked if the Crest/Friendly/Storey project rose to the level of priority that warranted using 25 percent of the county road fund exchange money. Mr. Schoening said that it did. Mr. Clark asked if using money from the Delayed Assessment Fund would jeopardize helping owners with local assessments of developed property. Mr. Schoening said the ability to help should not be affected. Mr. Clark asked for a list of the priority street preservation projects. Ms. Ortiz thanked staff for their creativity in developing the funding strategy recommendation. She acknowledged that there was a large backlog of roads that needed to be repaired, but the neighbors had been working for a long time on the project and it was time to move forward. She hoped that staff would be as creative with ideas for the Elmira/Maple Road project. She would support the recommendation, but did not want to see pothole repairs done on those streets before construction began. Mr. Schoening said it would be difficult to screen out certain streets in the pothole repair program; the goal was to construct the project in the summer of 2009. Ms. Ortiz urged staff to minimize the amount of repairs in that area. Mr. Pryor, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to proceed with the final design and construction with a combination of $700,000 from the Delayed Assessment Fund and $950,000 from the Lane County Road Fund exchange, and include the Delayed Assessment Fund share as part of Supplemental Budget #1 in FY09. Mr. Ruiz commended Public Works staff for their outstanding work and creativity. Ms. Piercy said the council would take up the Consent Calendar from the regular meeting agenda. D. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of City Council Minutes of the June 23, 2008, City Council Meeting; June 24, 2008, Joint Elected Officials Meeting; July 28, 2008, Work Session B. Approval of Tentative Working Agenda C. Authorization to Execute Employment Agreement with Interim Police Auditor Mr. Pryor, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to approve the items on the Consent Calendar. Ms. Ortiz pulled Item C. The Consent Calendar, with the exception of Item C, was approved, 8:0. Mr. Pryor and Ms. Bettman accepted a friendly amendment from Ms. Ortiz to add provisions regarding a car allowance and Ms. Reynolds’ right to return to the position of deputy police auditor to the employment agreement. Ms. Solomon questioned how Ms. Reynolds would be able to return to her previous position when the City was advertising for a deputy police auditor. Mr. Ruiz commented that the police auditor was autonomous and reported to the council; she had to ability to hire and manage staff in accordance with the City charter. Alana Holmes, Human Resources (HR), said that Ms. Reynolds was working with HR staff to hire interim help to backfill the deputy position while she was acting as the interim police auditor. She said the hiring would be for a finite period until a decision was made on hiring a police auditor. She would follow-up to determine if that was clear in the advertisement. Ms. Solomon felt it would be more efficient for someone else in the City organization to be loaned to the police auditor’s office, instead of hiring someone new and then potentially letting them go. Ms. Holmes said Ms. Reynolds had been hired fairly recently and the pool of applicants from that recruitment would be surveyed to determine interest in a short-term temporary position. Mr. Clark said he was troubled that the council was not notified that the deputy auditor position was being filled on an interim basis. He felt that filling the deputy position could signal other potential applicants that the person in the interim auditor position was likely to become the permanent auditor. He felt the council should have had that discussion. He was also concerned about hiring a short-term, temporary auditor because of the confidentiality issues that had recently been raised. Mr. Lidz said Ms. Reynolds would be available at the regular meeting to respond to questions. Mr. Poling commented that there were two separate issues: one related to approving the contract verbally offered to Ms. Reynolds for the interim police auditor position and the other related to her authority to advertise for a deputy auditor without consulting the council and was that acceptable to the council. He felt the latter issue should be addressed at a different time and the council should take action to formalize the contract. He said as long as the advertisement was clear that the position was temporary he was satisfied, but the council did need to have that discussion. Mr. Pryor agreed with Mr. Poling’s remarks. He said the subject of the police auditor’s authority was an ideal topic for a process session as it could be complicated for eight people to provide direct supervision to an employee. Ms. Ortiz agreed with Mr. Poling and Mr. Pryor. She noted that Ms. Reynolds had no previous experience with being supervised by the council. The amended motion passed 6:2; Mr. Clark and Ms. Solomon voting no. The meeting was adjourned at 7 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jon Ruiz City Manager (Recorded by Lynn Taylor)