Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 10/08/08 Work SessionM I N U T E S Eugene City Council McNutt Room—City Hall—777 Pearl Street Eugene, Oregon October 8, 2008 Noon COUNCILORS PRESENT: Betty Taylor, Jennifer Solomon, George Poling, Andrea Ortiz, Mike Clark, Bonny Bettman, Alan Zelenka. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Chris Pryor. Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the work session of the Eugene City Council to order at 11:58 a.m. She noted that Councilor Chris Pryor was on a visit to Eugene’s Sister City Kakegawa, Japan. A. WORK SESSION: Sustainability Commission Recommendations City Manager Jon Ruiz shared his excitement about sustainability. He said this would be the first set of recommen- dations to come before the City Council from the Sustainability Commission. He noted that the commission had made three recommendations, but the third was more administrative in nature and staff was moving forward with it. He explained that the third piece was more of a triple bottom line framework from which to evaluate policies and strategies as they were brought before the council in the future. He felt this tied into the council goals regarding sustainability. He asked Sustainability Manager, Felicity Fahy, to come to the table. Ms. Fahy introduced Sustainability Commission Chair, Will Shaver, and chair of the subcommittee, Josh Bruce. Mr. Shaver explained that the commission had created a subcommittee consisting of five members to review the recommendations in the Sustainable Business Initiative (SBI) and those from the Portland Peak Oil Task Force report. He said the subcommittee had arrived at a number of recommendations as a result of this review, two of which were currently before the council. Mr. Bruce thanked the Mayor and the City Council for its support. He also acknowledged the work of Ms. Fahy and other staff people. He called the work the commission had done “exciting and rewarding.” Ms. Ortiz arrived. Mr. Bruce stated that the work of the SBI had included much community involvement and the subcommittee had drawn heavily from it. He said the subcommittee had been challenged by the breadth of what it could bring to the council and decided to focus on the policy-related items. He related that the first recommendation was to have all city-owned facilities and operations carbon-neutral by the year 2020; if that was not possible the focus should then be on local carbon offsets. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 8, 2008 Page 1 Work Session Mr. Bruce said the second recommendation recognized that the City could only do so much on this issue and sought to set up a mechanism for the City to engage as a leader in developing partnerships in order to formulate a commu- nity climate action plan that would allow them to collectively move forward on reducing carbon emissions in Eugene. Mayor Piercy asked them to discuss the carbon emissions work and inventories that had been done for the City and for the community as a whole. Ms. Fahy responded that a couple of years earlier the facilities division developed a partnership group that conducted an inventory of community greenhouse gas emissions. They gathered the informa- tion from a variety of sources and were able to collate emissions from 2005 and then the levels from 1999 in order to analyze how they had changed and to provide a baseline. She related that this year the facilities staff had conducted a greenhouse gas inventory for City operations, and the final report was being written up. She noted that the summary of the internal City greenhouse gas report was contained in the council agenda packets. Ms. Ortiz thanked the commissioners for the work they had done. She appreciated the work that City staff had done on this as well. Mr. Clark also thanked everyone who served on the Sustainability Commission and the staff who worked on the inventory and materials. He agreed with the goal of moving the City’s operations to a more sustainable way of doing business. He noted that the first motion indicated that all of the City-owned facilities and vehicles were to be carbon- neutral by 2020. He asked if any cost analysis of this had been conducted. He wanted to know the cost of the procedural in-house staff changes necessary for the City to get closer to carbon-neutrality and what the cost of offsetting credits would be. Mr. Bruce replied that “a lot of the answer depends.” He averred that it was important to understand that the approach they took would be instrumental in terms of what they would face in cost implica- tions over time. Mr. Clark pointed out that they were talking about ten City budget years. He said in that amount of time there would be “some very heavy lifting” in the budget. He preferred to have a stronger sense of cost prior to making such a firm commitment. Ms. Fahy stated that an internal team had been formed to develop a plan to achieve carbon neutrality by 2020. The priority would be to further reduce emissions first. She said the energy management work undertaken had saved approximately $1.7 million and had decreased emissions. She thought there would be some actions, which would cost more up front but would save money later. She noted that it would cost approximately $300,000 annually to offset current emissions if the City did nothing else to change its behavior and decrease emissions. Mr. Clark asked if she could provide a little more data in regard to the specifics of that number and what it was based on. Ms. Fahy replied that it was based on buying offsets from a quality offset provider. She said they planned to work with a reputable dealer with measurable results, which would cost approximately $25 to $30 per ton of carbon to offset. Glen Svendsen, division manager for the Facility Management Division, stated that currently the City’s emissions in Scope 1, comprised of emissions directly put into the environment, and Scope 2, which while used by the City directly, came from elsewhere (e.g. electricity), added up to 8,940 metric tons per year. He said staff used the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) environmental fund, which was a seller of offsets, as a benchmark for costs. Mr. Clark asked if the funds that would be utilized to purchase local offsets had been identified. Mr. Bruce replied that they had not been specifically identified. He thought adopting the goal first would help to establish the “playing field for how we will get there.” MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 8, 2008 Page 2 Work Session Mr. Clark said he could back the idea in general terms but it gave him pause to say that the City “shall do so” without the details such as from where it would be funded. Ms. Taylor thanked the commission. She opined that the council had done a good job of selecting its members and that the Mayor’s leadership on sustainability should be commended. She recalled that she had suggested sustainabil- ity as a possible goal 12 years ago and people “thought it was a weird idea.” She averred that if the City achieved sustainable principles it would be priceless and cost would not be relevant. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to direct the City Manager to formally adopt the goal of making all City-owned facilities and City operations carbon neutral by 2020. Ms. Bettman did not think 2020 set an aggressive timeline. She declared that Portland had been successful in its sustainability movement and had marketed it as an economic development tool. She said she would support the motion. Mayor Piercy averred that it was the right thing to do and a practical solution. She said Eugene would be aiming for the practical and sensible things to pursue, not unlike the solar panel array that Industrial Finishes had installed and the Eugene Water & Electric Board’s (EWEB) investment in wind power. Ms. Solomon agreed that there should be an analysis of the costs. She felt that the council should be analyzing the recommendation through the same filter it used to analyze everything. She said part of economic development was job creation and this should be part of the analysis. She asked if the commission was tracking job creation through the Sustainability Commission. Ms. Fahy responded that the commission had discussed job creation but it had been discussed in a broader context and was not currently being tracked. Mr. Bruce stated that the task the subcommittee had taken on was to look at what was already there. He encouraged the councilors to review the SBI report. He underscored that it was their intent to present a broader framework for a long-term direction. He thought this would give staff the ability to come back and present options. Ms. Solomon ascertained from Mr. Bruce that the commission’s intent was to provide the first step and then the next step would be an analysis of what it would mean socially, environmentally, and economically. In response to a follow-up question from Ms. Solomon, Ms. Fahy confirmed that the $300,000 estimated cost would be annual if the City did nothing to further reduce carbon emissions. Ms. Solomon responded that the City was not doing anything. She underscored that she was not saying that she would not support it; but she wanted to see some clearer data. Mr. Clark remarked that he did not think the actions would change the “entire world,” but the City could get behind the ideals of sustainability. He said they needed to be operating in a more sustainable fashion both publicly and privately. He commented that his challenge was that this was a specific City goal, but there were competing priorities and budgetary concerns. He felt the recommendations were a little open-ended in terms of what they could cost and what some of the details were for implementation. He thought the motion could be adjusted to say that with the idea in mind of moving toward carbon neutrality by the year 2020, the City would like to know the full implementation costs or to hear back from the staff and the committee what some of the “potential roads to travel would be.” He stressed that he agreed with the ideals behind the recommendations. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 8, 2008 Page 3 Work Session In response to a question from Mayor Piercy, Ms. Fahy clarified that the initials ‘i.e.’ in the motion were akin to “that means.” Mayor Piercy asked how specific the motion was to the deadline of 2020 to offset the remaining emissions. She supported moving in this direction but she wanted to leave some room in case a financial situation arose that would require different sets of decisions. Mr. Bruce stated that the subcommittee’s intent was for the City of Eugene to be carbon neutral by 2020. He said the City could continue to choose to purchase hybrid vehicles for its fleet, as an example, in order to meet that deadline and could make other choices along those lines. Mr. Clark, seconded by Ms. Solomon, moved to amend the motion to say that all City-owned facili- ties and City operations shall move towards the goal of carbon neutrality by the year 2020 and that the commission and staff shall inform the council of the cost for doing so prior to implementation. Ms. Bettman questioned the amendment. She felt that it could lead to the council micromanaging “every single tiny decision.” She commented that the council had a goal to adequately staff the police department and then worked through it during each budget process to determine the staffing that could be implemented. Mr. Clark clarified that his amendment was not intended to micromanage, it was an attempt to place a “point of pause” in the recommendation in order to analyze the costs and budget implications and make the budgetary decisions. Mr. Poling thought it was a mistake to call out a $300,000 to $350,000 annual cost. He felt the public would only see a big price tag coming from the City’s general fund. He said they should have an analysis of the overall costs. He indicated he would support Mr. Clark’s amendment. Mr. Ruiz remarked that it would be more difficult to conduct a full financial analysis prior to making decisions as directed by the policy. He felt the recommendation would put into place a policy that would be used as a filtering process to determine how a purchase or activity would impact the particular policy. Mayor Piercy averred that it was a shared goal that all operations and facilities of the City “shall be” carbon neutral by 2020 and that the City would put processes and policies in place to try to get there. She asked if there was appropriate language that would allow them to move forward with a unanimous voice. Mr. Clark reiterated that it was not his desire to micromanage the staff’s operations. He understood the City Manager to say that this was a somewhat fundamental shift in policy and would drive choices that would have economic impacts. Mr. Ruiz responded that their choices were being driven by sustainability goals that the council had already set. He said they had many people who were working on purchasing plans and vehicle procurement, among others, that were already being guided by the sustainability goals. He averred that the recommendation would place a tighter framework on how those decisions would be made. Mr. Clark reiterated that he liked the idea of the goal, but there was a difference between saying firmly that the City would accomplish this one way or the other no matter the cost and saying that the goal was worthy but it would be good to have a firm grasp on the costs, impacts, and tradeoffs. In this way, he averred, they could make an intelligent decision. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 8, 2008 Page 4 Work Session Ms. Bettman declared that the council had passed “many goals” without specifics. She said a goal without specific language attached to it would be brought back before the council by staff on a regular basis. She suggested that the language could be changed to include that staff would check back in with the council at major policy or financial impact decision points. She indicated that she would revise her motion to reflect that if Mr. Clark would agree to withdraw his amendment. Mr. Ruiz suggested that staff could bring back an annual work plan for the council to evaluate. He thought this could potentially be part of the budget process. Mr. Clark withdrew his motion to amend. Ms. Solomon withdrew her second. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, revised her motion to include language that would require City staff to present for council approval an annual work plan including analysis of implementation strategies and costs. The motion passed unanimously, 6:0. (Mr. Zelenka had yet to arrive.) Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to direct the City Manager to develop a community climate action plan within 18 months, that would (1) set a carbon emissions reduction goal and es- tablish targets for achieving that goal, (2) identify strategies to achieve those targets, (3) identify necessary adaptations, (4) develop measures for tracking success, (5) include periodic progress re- ports back to the community with annual reports of progress to the Sustainability Commission, and (6) include its financial impacts. Mr. Clark observed that this affected the whole community. He liked that the motion was more analysis- based and would inform the City how a climate action plan could be developed and implemented. He said he would like to know what the financial impacts would be on the private sector, should any of the suggestions become regulatory in nature. He thought the City should provide remedies which were incentive-based. Mr. Clark offered a friendly amendment to include an analysis of the financial impacts for imple- mentation of any regulatory measures. Ms. Bettman declined the friendly amendment. She averred that those issues would be vetted before they came before the City Council as there were business representatives on the Sustainability Commission. Mr. Clark commented that he could “live with” the motion with the understanding that the council should take note of any disincentive for job creation that could arise as a by-product of this. The motion passed unanimously, 6:0. Ms. Solomon left the meeting. B. WORK SESSION: Police Auditor Recruitment Process Alana Holmes, Director of the Human Resources Division, introduced Eric Middleton, a recruiter with Alliance Resource Consulting. She noted that most of the councilors had met with him and the rest would be meeting with him later in the day. She stated that the purpose of the work session was to discuss the brochure and the timeline for the recruitment process. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 8, 2008 Page 5 Work Session Mr. Middleton reported that he had met with 16 contacts and had picked up an additional 19 contacts he would have to make. He hoped to have an additional week to make those contacts. He said the planned timeline originally indicated that he would return the completed work to the council in one week. He wanted to complete the phone calls by October 17 and return the draft of the recruitment profile the following week. He intended to return it to the Mayor and City Council for them to review and comment on. He thought that if the councilors and Mayor could return it by October 27, the recruitment process could be opened after that. He projected that recruitment would run through November and into the first couple of weeks in December. Mr. Zelenka arrived at 12:58 p.m. Mr. Clark had been under the impression that a job description had been created. Ms. Holmes responded that the subcommittee had written a job description for the first Police Auditor hiring process. She circulated copies of that description. Ms. Bettman was confused as to why Mr. Middleton’s further contacts would “put off the process.” She agreed that the brochure needed to be updated but thought a three-week delay was unnecessary. She added that she would prefer to tweak the actual qualifications to make holding a Juris Doctorate (JD) a requirement. Mr. Clark agreed that holding a law degree would be beneficial, but he was not certain that making it mandatory was advisable. He did not want to disqualify someone who had other good qualifications but no JD. Ms. Ortiz recalled that it seemed that in the last pool of applicants there had been a division between those who held doctorates and who did not. She likened it to the “cream rising to the top.” She was amenable to making a JD a mandatory requirement. Mr. Clark suggested that the language indicate that possession of a JD was very desirable. Ms. Taylor agreed that having a JD should be a mandatory requirement. Mr. Zelenka averred that the laws greatly impacted the position. He felt a person with a JD would have a greater understanding of law and constitutional law. Mr. Poling remarked that he had known some people with law degrees who were not smart at all. He pointed out that one of the two finalists in the last hiring process did not have a law degree. He could not support making a law degree a mandatory requirement, though he would agree to include language strongly recommending it. Ms. Bettman felt the National Association of Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement (NACOLE) conference would present a good opportunity for recruiting. She wanted to reach agreement at the present meeting in order to provide Ms. Ortiz with the complete information for the conference. She reiterated that the auditor position was to help the City save money from litigation and settlement expenses. She believed that a person with a legal degree would have a greater understanding of the risk assessment and confidentiality involved in the position. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to approve the revisions to the Police Auditor bro- chure and to include an update of the brochure’s information and a requirement that the candidate hold a law degree. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 8, 2008 Page 6 Work Session Mr. Poling wanted to ensure that part of the update to the brochure would be in regard to compensation and benefits. Ms. Holmes responded that the Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) for non-represented employees had been included in the salary schedule for the position. In response to a question from City Attorney Glenn Klein, Ms. Bettman clarified that it was her intent for the individual councilors to review the job description and brochure and to bring up any problems they might have with it at the meeting on October 13. Mr. Clark noted that they had just received the job description. He wanted the opportunity to review this prior to approving the motion. He also did not want to limit the scope of applicants by including the requirement for a JD and intended to oppose the motion. Ms. Bettman did not think the job description was necessary for recruitment, given that the brochure would be completed. Mr. Zelenka did not have any problems with the brochure. He reiterated his support for requiring a law degree. He thought the job description should be reviewed and approved but he did not foresee that it would take much work. Mr. Zelenka offered a friendly amendment that would direct the councilors to modify the brochure for final approval on October 13; then in the meanwhile the councilors should look at the job de- scription and suggest any modifications they felt needed to be made in order to give final approval on October 13. Ms. Bettman indicated that she would accept the first portion of the friendly amendment, but not the portion related to the job description. Ms. Holmes stated that a requirement for a JD would prevent the council from reviewing applications from anyone that did not hold such a degree. Mr. Clark asked Mr. Middleton what he thought about looking at only those applicants who held law degrees. Mr. Middleton replied that it was limiting. He averred that there were some very good auditors that did not have a JD. Mr. Middleton recommended that the job description be included in the brochure/profile. The motion passed, 4:2; Mr. Poling and Mr. Clark voting in opposition. Mr. Zelenka, seconded by Mr. Clark, moved to bring the police auditor job description for final ap- proval, with councilors submitted changes to staff “in a timely fashion,” on October 13 in order to provide the complete profile to Ms. Ortiz for the NACOLE conference. Mr. Klein pointed out that the deadline for items to be submitted for the October 13 agenda packet was 5:00 p.m. At Mayor Piercy’s request, Mr. Zelenka restated his motion. Mr. Klein noted that Mr. Middleton would not be available for the October 13 meeting. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 8, 2008 Page 7 Work Session Mr. Clark observed that one thing they had discussed at length was the level of understanding of national trends the auditor should have. He thought Mr. Middleton’s understanding of what was done in other places would be helpful to the job description. Mr. Poling felt the council was rushing to get this done and was leaving out some steps. Mr. Poling, seconded by Mr. Clark, moved to amend the motion to schedule final approval for Octo- ber 22. Ms. Bettman disputed the necessity of Mr. Middleton’s participation. She felt the brochure described the role in terms of what the council had adopted in the ordinance and was “cut and dried.” She did not want to use the police auditor’s job description as a way to take away the authority of the police auditor position. She agreed that there were other communities that had police auditors but she opined that Eugene did not base its ordinance on the ordinances of other cities. Mr. Poling did not want to change the ordinance; he wanted more time to review the job description. He felt that Ms. Bettman was saying they should staple it to the brochure now and “send it on out.” He asked if time would be taken to review it, given that she had called it “cut and dried.” Mayor Piercy suggested that they add the decision on the brochure and job description to the agenda for October 20. Mr. Poling revised his motion to make it a friendly amendment to move the decision point to October 20. Mr. Zelenka accepted the friendly amendment, as did the second, Mr. Clark. Mr. Clark called Ms. Bettman’s comments that characterized a desire to make sure the job description was right as some manner of attempt to reduce the authority of the police auditor “unfortunate.” He stressed that “nothing of the kind” was going on. He opined that there were legitimate questions to ask and legitimate points that were not clear. He felt that if it was all clear and simple there would be no disagreements about it. The motion passed unanimously, 6:0. The meeting adjourned at 1:37 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jon Ruiz City Manager (Recorded by Ruth Atcherson) MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 8, 2008 Page 8 Work Session