Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes ECC UGENE ITY OUNCIL AIS GENDA TEM UMMARY Approval of City Council Minutes Meeting Date: January 26, 2009 Agenda Item Number: 2A Department: City Manager’s Office Staff Contact: Beth Forrest www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-5882 ISSUE STATEMENT This is a routine item to approve City Council meeting minutes. SUGGESTED MOTION Move to approve the minutes of the November 19, 2008, Work Session, December 8, 2008, Work Session, and December 8, 2008, City Council Meeting. ATTACHMENTS A. November 19, 2008, Work Session B. December 8, 2008, Work Session C.December 8, 2008, City Council Meeting FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Beth Forrest Telephone: 682-5882 Staff E-Mail: beth.l.forrest@ci.eugene.or.us Z:\CMO\2009 Council Agendas\M090126\S0901262A.doc ATTACHMENT A M I N U T E S Eugene City Council Joint Work Session with EWEB Board of Commissioners Eugene City Hall—McNutt Room 777 Pearl Street—Eugene, Oregon November 19, 2008 Noon COUNCILORS PRESENT: Andrea Ortiz, Chris Pryor, Betty Taylor, Bonny Bettman, Jennifer Solomon, Mike Clark, Alan Zelenka. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: John Simpson, Jon Brown, Bob Cassidy, John Brown, Ron Farmer. COUNCILORS ABSENT: George Poling Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the joint work session of the Eugene City Council and the Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) commissioners to order at 12:00 p.m. President Simpson introduced commissioners-elect Joann Ernst and Rich Cunningham. Mr. Simpson noted that Ms. Ernst would be taking his place on the EWEB board in January. Ms. Piercy acknowledged the efforts of Mr. Simpson and thanked him for his years of service to the community in various capacities. Mr. Simpson acknowledged the efforts of outgoing City Councilor Bonny Bettman and thanked her for her years of service to the community. Ms. Piercy expressed her appreciation for the opportunity for further discussion with EWEB and said the council understood the importance to the community of the riverfront site. A. WORK SESSION: Joint Work Session with EWEB Board of Commissioners 1. Riverfront Master Planning Process-Status report and update on the public engagement process. Associate Planner Mark Oberle presented an update of the Riverfront Master Plan (RMP) project, noting that the Community Advisory Team (CAT) created by the council and the EWEB Board to study the RMP had met for the first time on July 10, 2008 and that regular meetings of the CAT had taken place since that time. Mr. Oberle noted that staff was nearing completion of the Request for Qualifications (RFQ) documentation necessary to proceed with the next steps of the RMP. He noted that the closing date for bids in response to the RFQ would be November 26, 2008. He noted that two site tours had already been conducted for about 50 different consultants to familiarize them with the area. Mr. Oberle commented that while staff had attempted to discover what other firms had done in the past with similar sites, they were highly focused on defining the nature of the RMP within the scope of the significant community MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 19, 2008 Page 1 Work Session involvement expected for the project rather than allowing a pre-conceived project to be brought in by a consultant or developer. CAT member Pat Johnston informed the board and council that the CAT’s largest disagreement in its dealings with staff was that the CAT was committed to moving forward with the RMP on a consensus model. Ms. Johnston briefly noted, for the benefit of the board and council, the CAT’s expectations of any consultants that might be hired to address the RMP. CAT member Dave Hauser commented that the CAT was a high-functioning group and was taking the job that it had been charged with by the board and council very seriously. He noted that the CAT had been working with City representatives such as Carolyn Weiss and Tom Larson to gather input on the millrace and local transportation issues. He added that the CAT was becoming fully equipped to provide thoughtful suggestions and background information to EWEB and the City of Eugene. Ms. Johnston noted that the CAT had also been collaborating with University of Oregon students and faculty to determine the best course of action regarding the RMP. She added that collaborations with, and solicitations for, input from members of the community would be initiated once the CAT had chosen its consultants. Mr. Oberle distributed a copy of the RFQ schedule, noting that public hearings regarding the RMP would be scheduled once the CAT had hired consultants to help them design the public input process. Ms. Piercy noted that, on advice from City Attorney Glen Klein, both the board and the council would be somewhat limited as to how detailed a discussion they could conduct regarding the RMP as any such discussion would most likely involve future land use issues and concerns. Mr. Klein added that the council, the board and the CAT members were welcome to discuss the process of the RMP but that they should not discuss any matters of specific substance. Mr. Klein, responding to a question from Mr. Clark, commented that a discussion of substance would involve any specific references to what the RMP would actually look like. He noted that such substantive discussions would most likely affect any Metro Plan amendment that might come before the council and, as such, would not be appropriate for the joint work session between the City and EWEB. Mr. Clark thanked the EWEB Board, staff and the CAT members for their efforts regarding the RMP. Mr. Clark asked for an update on EWEB’s long-term plans for its current administration building with respect to its new Roosevelt Operations Center currently under construction. EWEB General Manager Randy Berggren responded that there was still no specific schedule for moving EWEB’s administrative operations from its current location. Mr. Berggren added that it was currently uncertain how EWEB’s present headquarters might be retrofitted once construction of the Roosevelt Operations Center had been completed. He added that EWEB was beginning the process of working with its consultant partners to determine the best way to proceed regarding the current administration facility. Mr. Clark noted that he had at one time suggested that the current EWEB building be retrofitted into a new city hall facility for the City of Eugene, but that there had not been a great deal of support for the idea from the rest of the council. He asked if EWEB might have any interest in continuing a discussion along those lines. Mr. Berggren felt it would be inappropriate for him to comment directly on any positions EWEB might have regarding turning the building into a new city hall, but noted that the EWEB board would most likely be willing to continue the discussion. MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 19, 2008 Page 2 Work Session Mr. Simpson commented that the RMP and the inter-agency collaboration between EWEB and the City represented a unique opportunity for cultural and economic growth in the community. Mr. Oberle, responding to a question from Mr. Zelenka, noted that the steam plant would continue to be dedicated to EWEB use for the foreseeable future. He added that the determination regarding EWEB’s continued use of the steam plant might be revised in the long term. 2. Legislative Issues Metal Theft Mr. Simpson noted that metal theft had increasingly become an issue of concern over the last several years to both the City and EWEB. He noted that the EWEB board of commissioners had visited the State Legislature in Salem to lobby for revised legislation regarding the issue. He briefed the board and the council on recent strategies that EWEB had undertaken to prevent metal theft. Intergovernmental Relations Manager Brenda Wilson briefly described the impacts and history of metal theft in the community. In describing the impacts of metal theft on both City and EWEB resources, Ms. Wilson elaborated how metal theft impacted the financial health of the community and the personal safety of its citizens. Ms. Wilson noted that wire theft was a widespread community issue and that the ease and availability with which metal theft was committed perpetuated substance abuse throughout the region. Ms. Wilson commented that the State legislature had recently adopted revised legislation to combat the problem of metal theft. She noted that some of the revised legislation had helped the problem, but some of the legislation had actually proved to be an encumbrance to local law enforcement agencies in their efforts to curtail metal theft. EWEB Legislative Representative Jason Heuser reported that metal theft had increasingly become a problem both nationally and locally due to the fact that it continued to be a very easy crime to commit and also that commodity metal supplies were generally on the decline everywhere. Mr. Heuser went on to describe how and why metal theft had become an issue of increasing concern in the community. Mr. Heuser noted that while the State legislature had recently adopted a consensus bill in 2007 to address the metal theft problem which included provisions for metal and recycling yards to strengthen their reporting procedures, the bill was seen as having limited effectiveness in that it only provided for metal theft strategies that were revenue neutral. He noted that with the generally unfavorable current economic climate, any newly adopted legislation regarding metal theft would need to be revenue neutral as well. Mr. Heuser noted that several strategies were being considered to address the metal theft problem including a ban on cash transactions for metal recycling, a ban on burnt or similarly altered materials, and required commercial accounts and business licenses for certain forms of metal recycling. Mr. Heuser commented that, with respect to the legislative initiatives being considered by stakeholders such as EWEB and the City of Eugene, a four-part approach had been formed consisting of efforts to 1) reduce the ease and opportunity of metal theft; 2) strengthen public and/or private assets that might become metal theft targets; 3) strengthen law enforcement efforts to curtail metal theft, and 4) improve drug abuse treatment efforts for those who might use metal theft as a means to finance substance addictions. Mr. Cassidy asked Mr. Heuser and Ms. Wilson to elaborate on their earlier statement that the State legislature’s efforts to curtail metal theft had hindered local efforts to do the same. Ms. Wilson answered that the State’s legislative efforts had restricted local government entities from imposing stricter criminal penalties on metal theft and MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 19, 2008 Page 3 Work Session had also prevented local efforts to prohibit or restrict the buying and selling of metal in certain communities. Ms. Wilson indicated that California and Washington’s state laws regarding metal theft had proved to be much stronger than Oregon’s. Mr. Heuser, responding to a question from Ms. Taylor, indicated that legitimate metal collectors and resellers included private property owners and local businesses such as EWEB. Mr. Pryor indicated that his previous employers had been victims of significant metal theft and hoped that state and local strategies could be improved to address the problem as lucrative and pervasive as metal theft. Ms. Piercy maintained that metal theft had a significant negative impact on non-profit entities in the community such as Kidsports and Food for Lane County. Mr. Simpson noted that the ratio of the street value of stolen metal to the amount necessary to repair or replace metal theft incidents was enormous and that an amount of stolen metal that would net about fifteen dollars might cost as much as $20,000 for the City or EWEB to repair. Mr. Zelenka hoped that the City and EWEB could work with their intergovernmental partners to come up with an alternate plan in the event that the State legislative efforts ultimately proved insufficient. Ms. Piercy noted that the metal theft issue had recently been discussed at the City of Eugene’s City Hall Day. Ms. Wilson commented that it would not be easy to balance the state and local legislative issues and hoped that the discussion would continue in a productive manner. Western Climate Initiative Mr. Heuser provided an “Overview of the Western Climate Initiative (WCI),” with the assistance of a slide presentation and demonstrated how the WCI had been formed to examine strategies for reducing carbon emissions and addressing other global warming concerns. Mr. Heuser noted that the WCI had been formed as a collective of the western United States and Canadian climate control initiatives in response to the general lack of federal action to address global warming and its chief causes. Mr. Heuser noted that due to significant differences in the legislative and decision-making processes between the western United States and Canadian provinces that were participating in the WCI, it would be necessary to create a model carbon cap and trade proposal on which to proceed. Mr. Heuser briefly listed the WCI partners for the benefit of the board and council. Mr. Heuser briefly described the primary adopted goal of the WCI as a 15% reduction in the amount of six recognized green house gases from 2005 levels by no later than 2020. Mr. Heuser provided an overview of the definition and various market-based implementation strategies of the carbon cap and trade model that would need to be created in order for the WCI to meet its goal. Mr. Heuser proceeded to describe in greater detail how carbon credits, and allowances and offsets would be utilized under the cap and trade model in order to encourage public and private entities to reduce harmful emissions. Mr. Heuser presented a slide detailing the specific architecture of the carbon cap and trade model for the benefit of the board and council. MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 19, 2008 Page 4 Work Session Mr. Heuser noted there was an ongoing discussion within and without the WCI as to whether the cap and trade model he was illustrating was truly a market-based mechanism for affecting climate change and provided an example of how a business such as an industrial firm might utilize the cap and trade model. Mr. Heuser briefly discussed the advantages and disadvantages of the carbon cap and trade model, noting that while it created a quantifiable market incentive for businesses to reduce emissions, it also might require the creation of an administrative infrastructure that could prove challenging to maintain and enforce. Mr. Heuser noted that the direct benefits to EWEB from the WCI were currently indeterminate, but it appeared that the WCI would allow EWEB to further its commitment to conservation, efficiency and renewable energy resources. Mr. Simpson thanked Mr. Heuser and Ms. Wilson for the presentations and opened the meeting to further general discussions. Mr. Clark asked how EWEB’s efforts to secure the safety and quality of local water sources were progressing. He noted that he had heard comments from community members about fuel and septic tanks along the McKenzie River that had given him cause for concern. Mr. Berggren responded that EWEB’s watershed management program had been very active addressing not only the concerns that Mr. Clark had raised, but also the issue of removing pesticides and other harmful chemicals from the local watershed along the McKenzie River. Mr. Berggren added that EWEB had recently begun discussions with its board about significantly expanding the efforts of their watershed management program. Mr. Brown noted that, as a longtime advocate of clean water in the region, he was aware of the fuel and septic tank concerns along the McKenzie River and noted that EWEB was engaged in several proactive efforts to address those problems. Mr. Farmer noted a concern for the fact that the Eugene/Springfield area was one of the few communities of its size that did not have a backup water source. He noted that while EWEB had historically been willing to accept the risk of having no backup water source, EWEB had also begun to incorporate plans to address that risk as part of its ten- year financial plan. Mr. Berggren added that the matter for a backup water source for the Eugene/Springfield area was not only problematic for financial reasons, but for reasons of availability as well in that no new water rights had been assigned in the region for many years. Ms. Piercy adjourned the joint work session meeting at 1:27 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jon Ruiz City Manager (Recorded by Wade Hicks) MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 19, 2008 Page 5 Work Session ATTACHMENT B M I N U T E S Eugene City Council McNutt Room—City Hall—777 Pearl Street Eugene, Oregon December 8, 2008 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Chris Pryor, Betty Taylor, Bonny Bettman, Jennifer Solomon, Mike Clark, Alan Zelenka, George Poling. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Andrea Ortiz. Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the work session of the Eugene City Council to order. A. Committee Reports and Items of Interest from Mayor, City Council, and City Manager Ms. Piercy issued a reminder that December 10 was International Human Rights Day and there would be a celebration at Cesar Chavez Elementary School. She said the State of the City address was scheduled for thth January 7, 2009, at 5:30 p.m. She spoke to 6 and 7 grade students at Kelly Middle School on Diversity Day. She said the First Friday event in downtown last week was very successful. She noted that many people had complained about leaves being piled in bike lanes and the hazard that posed to bicyclists. Ms. Bettman pointed out it was her last Monday evening council meeting. She said it had been an honor to serve her constituents and welcomed incoming councilor George Brown, who would fill her position. Mr. Zelenka said he received a summary of conflict of interest issues at a recent Lane Workforce Partner- ship meeting. He found it very helpful and would provide copies to other councilors. He had attended a Laurel Hill Valley neighborhood meeting at which there was a lively discussion of roads. He noted the groundbreaking for the new University of Oregon basketball arena. He asked the council to consider whether its January 2009 retreat would be televised. He indicated he would be putting forward a proposal for a work session that included a panel discussion of the City’s role in promoting economic development. Mr. Clark supported Mr. Zelenka’s idea for a panel discussion and suggested including a regional perspective. He said he attended the First Friday event and was very pleased with the large number of people downtown. He attended the December 2 meeting on the Lane County coordinated population forecast and would attend a meeting of the Police Commission on December 10. Ms. Taylor said she also had received many complaints regarding leaves in bike lanes. She said the City should consider giving people two compost bins instead of picking up the leaves. She had been downtown for First Friday and said the Farmers Market had expressed a desire to be located downtown on a year- round basis. She referred to an editorial in the Register Guard about police oversight. She said people had asked her why the process was delayed by referring it to a committee. She asked if the council could reconsider its action. MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 8, 2008 Page 1 Work Session Mr. Poling commented that he had attended an open house at Lane Council of Government’s (LCOG) new facility and commended LCOG on its new office. Mr. Pryor said the West Eugene Collaborative (WEC) was having its last meeting on December 9. He said there was an initial draft of the WEC’s final report and it would be issued fairly soon. He noted that all members of the WEC were still participating. He supported Mr. Zelenka’s idea for a workshop to discuss the City’s role in economic development. Ms. Piercy concurred with holding a workshop on economic development and the City’s role and that the community wanted a response from the City during this period of economic crisis. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to direct the City Manager to con- tract on behalf of the Eugene City Council (as soon as is practicable but before the convening of the Mayor’s Committee on Police Auditor Ordinance issues) with Beery, Elsner, Hammond LLP. The contract shall be for the purposes of providing to the council a comprehensive legal analysis of the actions required to ensure the full enactment of the Eugene Charter Section 15A as amended, and any ordinance provisions or revisions necessary to secure the full and maximum authority vested in the Police Auditor’s Office and the Civilian Review Board, by the Charter. The analysis of the Charter and Ordinance language provided shall be used as the legal framework for the Mayor’s Committee on Police Auditor Ordinance issues. Ms. Bettman said her earlier request to the City Manager and City Attorney to provide a legal framework before provisions were offered was declined and that was for the best because an independent opinion was needed. She said Beery Elsner only worked for governing bodies and did considerable charter work, including for the League of Oregon Cities; the firm did not have a conflict of interest. She believed that Harrang Long, the firm that was currently under contract to the City, had many conflicts of interest because they were involved in risk claims with the police department, discipline issues and lawsuits. She said it was also a part of the administrative branch of City government, while the Police Auditor was under the legislative branch. Ms. Taylor indicated she would support the motion and objected to formation of the committee, the delay it represented and its composition. Mr. Pryor asked if the City had a legal opinion on whether there was a conflict with the City Charter. City Manager Ruiz said he had provided information to the council based on his understanding of the Charter and Code regarding a potential conflict, but he did not have a legal opinion on the matter. Mr. Pryor asked if there was a concern that contracting with Beery Elsner would violate the City’s current contract with Harrang Long and whether obtaining a second legal opinion was prohibited. Mr. Ruiz said that was a potential concern as the contract stated that the City Attorney would be the sole legal authority, with exceptions related to workers compensation, bond counsel, prosecution and a few other issues. He said there was no specific prohibition on a second opinion, but the contract did state Harrang Long would be the sole provider of legal services. Mr. Pryor remarked that he was not opposed to obtaining a second opinion, but he did not want to violate the contract or Charter and was concerned with making the opinion from Beery Elsner the only legal opinion the committee could follow, as stated in the last sentence of the motion. He wanted to retain flexibility and if a second opinion was obtained it should inform and not regulate the committee’s process. MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 8, 2008 Page 2 Work Session Mr. Ruiz said if the council passed the motion he wanted to investigate its implications from a legal perspective and understand the intended role of the second opinion. Mr. Clark did not object to having more opinions available to better inform the council’s decisions, but shared Mr. Pryor’s concern that the role of any additional opinions be appropriately defined so they were not substituted for the City Attorney’s opinion. He questioned why the council would want to obtain another opinion, given the current fiscal environment. He asked Mr. Ruiz to address Ms. Bettman’s assertion that the City’s current legal counsel had a conflict of interest. Mr. Ruiz felt it was important to at least obtain an opinion from the City Attorney before obtaining another opinion. He said the contract with Harrang Long did address conflicts of interest as defined by the Oregon Code of Professional Responsibility. Mr. Clark noted that Ms. Bettman had emailed her discussion and rationale for her proposed motion to other councilors and suggested that conducting council business via email should be discussed at a future process session. He asked if the conflict of interest Ms. Bettman referred to was perceived or actual. Ms. Bettman noted that her motion was distributed on Friday morning and felt that provided ample time for attorneys to respond to the council’s questions. She said that councilors were raising questions that could not be answered in order to deflect support for her proposal. She said the independence of the opinion was important and Beery Elsner had a statewide reputation and was not connected to the City. She cited several instances that she felt demonstrated the current law firm’s conflict of interest, including a refusal to respond th to her questions at a November 17 council meeting. She said a contract provision that prohibited obtaining another legal opinion was dictating public policy. Mr. Pryor reiterated that he did not object to a second opinion, but would want to know the cost and whether obtaining one would present problems with either the Charter or current contract. He would not support the motion because those questions had not been answered and the motion would make the opinion from Beery Elsner the only opinion available to the committee. Mr. Clark concurred with Mr. Pryor’s remarks. He did not perceive there to be problems with the current firm and had not heard specific conflicts of interest identified that would preclude them from rendering an opinion, only the appearance of a conflict and implications of how people spoke at meetings. Ms. Bettman reiterated that the Charter amendment was specific about the fact the Police Auditor oversight should be independent of the City Manager chain of command. She said the City Manager executed and implemented the contract with the City Attorney and she believed that an interpretation of the Charter amendment should be obtained from an independent firm, instead of the existing firm. She recalled that there was a penalty that the firm charged the City under its contract, but thought that fee might be waived in the best interests of the public. She said Harrang Long was able to represent clients who were in adversarial roles to the City through waivers from the City Manager and the City likewise should be able to rely on the firm’s cooperation to obtain another opinion. She opined that the City Manager’s reliance on Harrang Long’s interpretation of the Charter to prevent the council from contracting for another legal opinion was a blatant conflict of interest. With respect to the formation of a committee, Mr. Zelenka said being thoughtful, careful and inclusive was very different from delaying and obfuscating. He said his intent in serving on the committee was to have a truly independent and effective police oversight system. He did not object to second opinions or outside legal advice as additional input to his decision-making process as a councilor. He said the Charter did not specifically prohibit that and by Home Rule it was permissible. He was troubled that a contract signed by the City Manager could prevent the council from doing something it felt was in the best interests of the City. MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 8, 2008 Page 3 Work Session Mr. Zelenka said the Charter amendment on the ballot changed the ability of the City Council to use its discretion about whether or not there was a Police Auditor and Civilian Review Board oversight function; it made that function mandatory. He said there were no changes required in the ordinance to fulfill that Charter amendment, as the current language was consistent with that. He said the 12 changes proposed by Ms. Bettman did not address that issue; they were issues that the council had discussed and he supported, but they had not been presented to the voters. He preferred to stay with the current process. Mr. Ruiz clarified that he was not arguing for or against obtaining a second legal opinion. He felt it was his responsibility to identify issues that he felt the council should be made aware of, such as contract language, and that could present potential problems. Mr. Clark agreed with Mr. Zelenka about what the voters had approved and the 12 changes proposed by Ms. Bettman. He there were there varying opinions about the constraints imposed on the council by the Charter and suggested that the issue be clarified at some point in the future. Ms. Bettman cited Section 16 of the Charter that the City Manager shall make all purchases. She said the council could direct that a particular contract be entered into; it was not prohibited. She disagreed with Mr. Zelenka’s comment that the voters changed the police oversight function from discretionary to mandatory. She said the council chose to change all of the language from “may” to “shall,” including mandating authorities as they were listed in the Charter. She asserted that the current ordinance language was inconsistent with the Charter as amended and an independent legal analysis of how to proceed was needed. Ms. Piercy reminded the council that the motion to form a committee authorized it to review the issues raised by Ms. Bettman on November 10 and 17, 2008, and report back to the council on March 11, 2009, with recommendations on amendments to the Police Auditor ordinance. The motion failed 5:2; Ms. Bettman and Ms. Taylor voting yes. B. WORK SESSION: Opportunity Siting Update Mr. Ruiz introduced Patricia Thomas and Teri Harding, of the Planning Division, to present the update on opportunity siting. Ms. Thomas used a slide presentation to provide background on the project, activities to-date and next steps. She said council direction to staff included incorporating opportunity siting as a primary strategy for achieving density targets in mixed use centers. She said formation of a Planning Committee subcommittee, neighborhood tours, online surveys and sounding boards, eventually resulted in the formation of an Opportunity Siting (OS) Task Team of a dozen members. She described the composition of the team and said it was charged with studying the issues, developing a neighborhood process, identifying hypothetical test sites, studying market demand and feasibility and implementation. Ms. Thomas reviewed the issues considered during the task team’s study of market demand, compatibility and feasibility. She said the task team developed a methodology for working with neighborhoods and the Jefferson Westside Neighbors volunteered to test the methodology in neighborhood workshops. As a result of the test exercise, she said it was apparent that there were three important elements to identifying sites: neighborhood character, development impacts and matching development type to the site. She explained how hypothetical sites in the neighborhood were used for economic study of market demand and feasibility. She said the task team anticipated forwarding recommendations to the Planning Commission in mid-2009 and the next steps in the process were: MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 8, 2008 Page 4 Work Session 1. Develop implementation strategies and tools 2. Engage development community 3. Further investigation of neighborhood siting process 4. Formulate recommendations for implementation. Ms. Piercy underscored the importance of retaining inner-City neighborhoods with a mix of income levels and housing and richness of character. She asked if the process would identify those things in the community that should not be changed. Ms. Thomas said that issue had been raised and would be more fully developed by the Infill Compatibility Standards (ICS) Task Team. Mr. Clark said he had spent time touring a neighborhood that recently went through an infill compatibility process and had a much better understanding of the impacts of infill and opportunity siting. He asked if the project would study the impact of development, particularly opportunity siting, on infrastructure. Ms. Thomas said she would bring that issue to the technical advisory team of staff that was working with the project. Ms. Harding added that infrastructure impact varied by type and location of infill. She said infrastructure impact could be a factor in the site analysis process. Mr. Pryor said the challenge was to balance conflicting issues and figure out a way to develop infill policies that recognized neighborhood character and yet fulfilled the need to achieve greater density. He said the recommendations that emerge from the OS/ICS project would help the council chart a course through difficult territory. Mr. Poling pointed out that the naval reserve test site was only a hypothetical and did not represent any plans for the property. He was pleased that the model being developed could be used throughout the community. Ms. Solomon said she sat on the Housing Policy Board; one of its members participated on the OS task team and provided the board with regular updates, which were very helpful and informative. Mr. Zelenka said infill compatibility was the most important issue facing neighborhoods over the next few years. He noted that engaging the development community was identified as a next step, but he did not see the same emphasis on engaging neighborhoods. Ms. Thomas explained that the process to-date had been heavily weighted toward engaging neighborhoods, not the development community. She said the task team had several decisions to make as they moved forward, including how to reach out and involve other neighborhoods in the testing process. Ms. Harding said that focus groups with a cross-section of neighbor- hoods could be a part of the process. Ms. Taylor remarked that she had seen many examples of incompatible development in South Eugene. She commended the Jefferson Westside Neighbors for their work on the process. She asked why tax exemption or incentives would be required. Ms. Thomas said that a financial study had shown a considerable financial gap in affordability because people were unable to pay the amount of rent needed to cover the cost of that type of development. She said tax abatement was included for that reason and added that heavier investment by developers than was typical would be necessary as well. Ms. Harding said the study also addressed why development was not happening in places where zoning already allowed it and the City was promoting it by policy. She said the financial viability gap was a major factor and that would be studied in the next steps. Ms. Taylor said there appeared to be few neighbors on the task team. She asked about the difference between opportunity siting and infill compatibility. Ms. Harding said one way of describing the difference was that the infill compatibility project had mostly focused on preventing bad infill from happening; the MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 8, 2008 Page 5 Work Session focus of opportunity siting was trying to find ways to encourage development that was good for neighbor- hoods and neighbors would welcome. Ms. Taylor asked if there was currently any way to prevent incompatible development. Ms. Harding replied that it could be limited only to the extent allowed by current zoning regulations. Ms. Bettman stated that bifurcating the process into infill compatibility and opportunity siting meant it was no longer consistent with the original objective to absorb more housing units within the urban growth boundary without destroying existing neighborhoods. She said the result would be density that was no longer compatible. She said one of the problems with lack of higher density development was that they were originally intended to occur in mixed use centers where appropriate services were available; there was a disincentive to develop away from those services. She said allowing indiscriminate density everywhere eliminated the effectiveness of leverage such as incentives. She stressed the importance of a firm urban growth boundary to maintaining the value of land. In response to a question from Mr. Clark, Ms. Harding said one of the criteria for identifying an opportunity site was active property owner participation. She said the task team felt it was critical to work with a willing owner of property, whether the owner was the developer or not. Ms. Piercy asked if neighbors had discussed what they wanted their neighborhood to look like in 20 years. She encouraged that discussion as a part of the process. Ms. Thomas said there was a workshop exercise that did look at current neighborhood character and what needed to be protected, but not necessarily at a long-range vision of the neighborhood. She said that conversation could be included in the future. C. WORK SESSION City Council Goal Update – Neighborhood Empowerment Renee Grube, Library, Recreation and Cultural Services, said the council’s neighborhood empowerment goal focused on two things: building strong leadership in neighborhoods and working collaboratively with residents to deliver City services and achieve neighborhood priorities. She said a joint committee of neighborhood leaders and City staff had been meeting monthly for the past year to work through the 23 action items identified in the Neighborhood Empowerment Action Plan. She recognized a number of committee members in the audience. She introduced Carolyn Weiss, project lead, to discuss the committee’s progress to date. Ms. Weiss said the committee had focused its efforts on the following action items that were identified as high priorities for the neighborhoods at the 2007 neighborhood summit: 1. Shift involvement of neighborhood associations to be earlier in the land use process. 2. Infill compatibility standards and opportunity siting. 3. Increase ongoing support for neighborhood associations. 4. Integrate neighborhood priorities identified in the City’s operating budget and capital improvement program and the council’s goals. Ms. Weiss said progress on those items included hiring a neighborhood planner to assist neighborhoods to be more informed about and effective in the land use process. She listed a number of steps taken to improve communications with neighborhoods and said the City had provided 14 scholarships to the Oregon Planning Institute conference to interested neighborhoods. She said an assessment of the neighborhood services program had just been completed to identify ways to improve support for neighborhoods. She announced that another neighborhood summit was planned for March 7, 2009, with a focus on identifying methods to MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 8, 2008 Page 6 Work Session improve and expand collaboration between neighborhood associations and the City. An additional neighborhood planner was hired to develop neighborhood- based plans. Mr. Clark commented that he heard frequently from neighborhoods about land use planning. He asked if the neighborhood planner would be measuring the priorities and goals of a broad section of a particular neighborhood, not just those who participated in the association. Ms. Weiss responded that staff had been discussing an equitable system for developing neighborhood plans that did not begin with one neighborhood, leaving the others behind. She said the system would allow neighborhoods to take the initiative to move forward with their plans and there would be readiness components that required involvement of a broad cross-section of the neighborhood, particularly during the early phases of issue identification. The tools for that were still being developed. Mr. Clark said many constituents had remarked that neighborhood groups who spoke on behalf of the neighborhood actually had differing levels of participation in the organization. He was interested in the true representative nature of the voices that were being heard and assuring that services being delivered were truly desired by a large cross-section of the neighborhoods. Mr. Zelenka saw the goal as twofold: strengthen and support neighborhood associations and involve neighborhoods earlier and more effectively in the land use process to preserve and protect their livability. He hoped the initiative would continue to pursue those two goals. Ms. Piercy hoped neighborhood residents felt that the last neighborhood summit drove actions and priorities. Mr. Zelenka agreed that the summit should result in actions by the City. He asked if the neighborhood plans were considered refinement plans and carried any legal weight. Ms. Weiss said that issue was being grappled with and while a refinement plan might be one of the tools that was needed to implement neighborhood priorities, the planning process might identify other venues for implementing priorities. Mr. Zelenka noted that refinement plans were expensive and time-consuming, but a plan without any legal teeth did not have much value in terms of protecting the livability of a neighborhood. He hoped staff would investigate what resources would be required to develop refinement plans for neighborhood associations and bring that information back to the council. Ms. Bettman stated that the City had been discussing the issue for some time. She said an early suggestion was to ask neighborhoods to identify problem areas and develop smaller refinement plans that targeted those areas instead of doing a refinement plan for the entire neighborhood. She said it was a good idea to bring neighborhoods into the land use process at an earlier point but not all neighborhoods would be able to participate. She said the City should have policies in place to protect people’s homes and neighborhoods. She pointed out the cost of appealing a land use decision and said that should be waived for neighborhood associations so that money was not an obstacle. Ms. Piercy said while the City tried to reach out to the broader neighborhood, it was important to recognize those people who did put their time and energy into neighborhood activities. She commended neighborhoods for modeling and sharing new ideas with each other and encouraged them to also seek things that were shared by all neighborhoods. The meeting adjourned at 7:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 8, 2008 Page 7 Work Session Jon Ruiz City Manager (Recorded by Lynn Taylor) MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 8, 2008 Page 8 Work Session ATTACHMENT C M I N U T E S Eugene City Council Regular Meeting Council Chamber—Eugene City Hall 777 Pearl Street—Eugene, Oregon December 8, 2008 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Chris Pryor, Bonny Bettman, George Poling, Jennifer Solomon, Mike Clark, Alan Zelenka, Betty Taylor. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Andrea Ortiz Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. 1. CEREMONIAL MATTERS Mayor Piercy read a proclamation certifying the November 4, 2008, Election Results into the record. She thanked the voters for supporting the two citywide ballot measures. 2. PUBLIC FORUM Mayor Piercy reviewed the rules of the Public Forum. Zachary Vishanoff , Ward 3, handed out copies of articles from the New York Times. He said people should Google “New York Times Ohio arena district” to see the article. He asked that copies be passed out so that he could walk the councilors through the article. He believed the planning had been “fractured” in the Fairmount neighborhood. He was concerned that the University of Oregon would try to seize Hirons’ Drugstore and PC Market of Choice on Franklin Boulevard using eminent domain. He felt the article would help the council see the “big picture” in which “government had gone wild” and pursued privatization for a sports entertainment district. Drix thanked the council for their time. He reiterated his love for the City of Eugene. He averred that the world was changing and being flexible to change was healthy. He related that a friend who worked in advertising had shared with him that the most powerful words to use were ‘you,’ ‘new,’ and ‘now.’ He wanted to share his visions in honor of the upcoming holidays and recalled “Eugene past,” the days when the Eugene Hotel was in operation and there was a shoeshine business in front of it and the men of the day wore fedoras and smoked cigars. He pointed out that people no longer shined shoes or smoked cigars and now people wore baseball caps instead of fedoras. He wanted to figure out what the community wanted and then figure out how to get it. He related his new words: “canopy thinking” in which one rose above the trees and saw the bigger picture and “yaya,” the meaning of which he was not sure of but he had heard people saying it a lot. Mark Rabinowitz , P.O. Box 51222, Eugene, thanked Councilor Bettman for her years of public service. He especially appreciated her “leadership on many transportation and land use and democracy issues” in the community. He had suggestions about the economic crash. He averred that “close to a quarter billion dollars in public debt” was being spent on the University of Oregon arena. He opined that this money could MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 8, 2008 Page 1 Regular Meeting have been used to provide free tuition for all of the University students. He guessed that having the “world’s most expensive college arena for the Ducks” was more important than educating people. He alleged that the City and County were asking the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) for “$100 million of our money” to rebuild Franklin Boulevard to “help subsidize the arena.” He hoped they would find a better use for that money. He asserted that the State and Federal governments were pushing for a “bailout” for the highway construction industry. He believed that traffic levels on the nation’s highways had peaked. He averred that Amtrak could go 124 miles per hour, but had to slow to 30 miles per hour to cross a bridge in Junction City because the bridge was “decrepit and should be condemned.” He preferred to spend money on “inner-city rail” than to spend it on “widening Interstate 5 between Canada and Mexico.” He felt Portland’s model of government was a more democratic form of government. He added that the Hood River prohibition on “big box stores” was more important now because it was important to fund local businesses. Pauline Hutson , 1025 Taylor Street, said she was speaking on behalf of herself and not as a member of 3RT. She wished to address the issue of eminent domain in regard to the expansion of the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), the threat of which she believed to cause a devastating psychological impact. She asserted that a senior official of Lane Transit District (LTD) had brought up eminent domain as one solution to dealing with people who did not want to sell their property. She felt the senior staff had a “cavalier” attitude about it. She did not think there would be a need to utilize eminent domain to take land because there were ththth several alternative routes, such as the combination of 6 and 7 Avenues and 7 Place. She thought the passing of the expanded boundary for the Multiple Unit Property Tax Exemption (MUPTE) redevelopment could coincide with LTD’s stated goal of expanding the BRT routes in connection with economic develop- thth ment. She believed that a proposal to use West 11 and West 13 Avenues as a route would be “the most destructive, disruptive, astronomically expensive” choices with numerous complications. She thanked Councilor Bettman for giving her time to the community. Jozef Siekiel-Zdzienicki , 1025 Taylor Street, thanked the councilors for their service to the community and Councilor Bettman in particular. rd Josh Schlossberg , 1765 East 43 Avenue, did not think the City of Eugene had a fully empowered and functional police auditor at this time and that it should as soon as possible in order to follow the democratic principles of government. He averred that a city “plagued by rapist cops, racist cops, and cops who had repeatedly violated constitutional rights” could not have the luxury of making any compromises to its police oversight. He said he had spent “half of [his] waking hours” for the past five years in efforts to create what he believed to be “positive change in the world.” He asserted that his trust in elected officials at “every level of government” had eroded. Nonetheless, he continued to try to encourage members of the public to communicate their opinions on issues to the “powers that be.” He opined that the will of the “vast number” of the public was ignored. He felt it would be “delusional” to “keep pretending” that most elected officials valued and considered input from the public. He declared that a “few shining lights in the gloom” had kept him from giving up on grassroots advocacy to encourage elected officials to create change and one of those “shining lights” had been Councilor Bettman. He spoke glowingly about Councilor Bettman’s work and thanked her. Carol Berg-Caldwell , 2510 Augusta Street, had been disappointed in the council vote against a motion submitted by Councilor Bettman to hire a law firm outside of Eugene with “expertise in municipal law” to guide the committee on external police review. She opined that the current firm that provided legal services to the City had its “fingers in many pies.” She supported the establishment of inhouse legal services. She asserted that the legal review provided by the City Attorney had made the external police review vulnerable to attempts to undermine it. She declared that police misconduct trials at which the City Attorney had represented the City, had cost the City “virtually millions” in settlements and legal fees. MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 8, 2008 Page 2 Regular Meeting She felt the Police Auditor’s Office was not being allowed to fully function. She averred that as soon as it was allowed to fully function there would be fewer such trials and the “cash cow milked by” the City Attorney’s Office would “dry up.” She believed the continued relationship with the current legal services had “worked against the voters’ interests.” She considered it “politically charged legal malfeasance plain and simple.” She asked the council to reconsider its decision not to hire the firm listed in the motion from its work session. She stressed her support for establishment of inhouse legal services, “whose sole focus and task would be to serve the City needs and not the agendas of a good old boy’s club and the law firm’s bank account.” She asserted that it had been in the interests of the current provider of legal services to maintain dysfunction “to the bitter end.” She added her thanks to Councilor Bettman for her service, saying that the work session had given her “just a hint of the swamp that [she had] slogged through” for their benefit. She welcomed anyone’s ideas on how the City could get inhouse legal services. Aaron Nelson , 1670 Alder Street, recalled that he had spoken out against the Downtown Exclusion Zone. He related that on November 29, the Eugene Police had served a search warrant at the Campbell Club, a student co-op at which he lived. He alleged that a lot of property had been damaged and among the nearly 30 residents of the co-op approximately $12,000 in fines had been levied. He also alleged that one officer told the residents that if they had allowed the police in when the police had first been called to the party and not demanded that the police get a search warrant, the police officers would have “been nicer” to the residents. He noted that the house had issued a press release. He said he would feel more comfortable about the incident if there was an “empowered Police Auditor” in Eugene. He encouraged the councilors to do what they could to create a “meaningful police auditor position” in the City. He added that he had decided to apply to serve on the committee. th Majeska Seese-Green , 5 Avenue and Van Buren Street, believed it was important to get outside legal information for the committee on external police review. She also felt there was a great need for transpar- ency “about what’s going to happen in that committee.” She urged the council to make sure that it happened. She was pleased to see that there was some interest on the part of the councilors to get additional legal opinions. She hoped that they would find a way to do that as soon as possible. She averred that if the conflict of interest situation, whether it was perceived or actual, was not resolved, it would be the “kiss of death” for Eugene to believe it had an independent police review system. She thought a lot of her neighbors felt that putting time into something like external police review was a waste. She added that she was thankful for Councilor Bettman’s service, calling her a “fantastic role model” for herself and her daughter. th Rene Kane , 254 West 14 Avenue, wished to thank Councilor Bettman for her many years of service and for being “thoughtful, tireless, and tenacious.” Mike Quillin , 2735 Kismet Way, expressed gratitude to Councilor Bettman for her years of service to the community. He felt she would be sorely missed. He also wished to express his dismay that the council had not voted to seek different legal counsel in the matter of the police auditor. He sensed a “high level of resistance to independent review.” He wondered why anyone opposed to it was afraid of independent legal review if they had nothing to hide. He cited Eugene City Code 2.470 regarding City Attorney appointment and duties. He also read from the Oregon Rules of Professional Conduct, regarding the level of diligence a lawyer should demonstrate and communication between a lawyer and client. He asserted that the current provider of City Attorney services was neglecting its duty to the City. th Brian Michaels , 259 East 5 Avenue, said he was an attorney working in Eugene. He related that an email from Councilor Bettman had been forwarded to him concerning her response and correction of previously written ordinances recommending an independent legal counsel. He had been pleased to read it and also displeased that the council had not supported it. He remarked that everyone had been raised in a society of criminal justice that was “dependent entirely on deterrents.” He opined that the Police Department was functionally without deterrents. He averred that when a police department failed to deter its own police MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 8, 2008 Page 3 Regular Meeting force or investigate its own, everyone “failed.” He preferred to live in a City where police were “friendly, cooperative, and well-managed by themselves” but he believed that he lived in a city where the police were disrespectful of the Police Auditor. He felt they should strengthen the office of auditor in order to “inflict upon the Police Department” that they wanted the department to “behave better.” He felt that lawsuits against the department would be prevented if there were proper deterrents within the department to correct behavior “before it got out of hand.” He postulated that there would have been fewer victims in the Magaña/Lara scandal had there been external police oversight at the time. He felt that hiring another legal firm was the “best bet” to ensure that language written into the code would have consequences. th Samantha Chirillo , 157 East 27 Avenue, Apt. 3, expressed admiration for Councilor Bettman. She said she would not have come to the meetings she had attended if not for Councilor Bettman. She agreed with Ms. Berg-Caldwell’s disappointment that Councilor Bettman’s motion to hire another law firm to help with the committee on external police review had not been approved. She believed that having an inhouse legal service would save money. She stated that she was testifying in the capacity of her service on the steering committee for the Citizens for Public Accountability (CPA). She wished to convey the recommendation that Mr. Nelson, who had testified earlier, be appointed to the newly formed ordinance review committee. She felt he represented Eugene’s youth and its activist community, both sectors she thought had “bad experi- ences” with the law enforcement community. She said he had been an extremely reliable and conscientious volunteer for a variety of environmental and civil liberties causes. She averred that he had the experience to build “necessary bridges” and he had, as a member of the Campbell Club student co-op, also participated in consensus decision-making. Marina Hajek , 3703 Westleigh Street, along with Josefina Hajek, Andrea Corbin, and Olivia Jennings presented $160 they had raised to help with the Bailey Hill Road improvements. Ms. J. Hajek presented the money to the Mayor in order to prevent Bailey Hill Road from “any future accidents.” Ms. Corbin said she had helped Ms. J. Hajek raise the money. Ms. Jennings added that she was happy to have helped raise this money to help fix some of the problems with the road. Ms. M. Hajek stated that she was here with her daughter and her two friends in order to present the money they had raised by selling lemonade and Christmas cookies to help improve the safety on Bailey Hill Road. She related that her daughter had been concerned when she read that it would cost a lot of money to fix the roads and had suggested that she give the City her savings. She had advised her daughter that they could organize something more efficient than that and she could keep her savings. Her daughter and friends had come up with the idea for the lemonade stand and the Christmas cookie sales. She remarked that she was very thankful to her daughter’s friends for their help raising the money. She said the children had been very concerned about the safety of all children around Bailey Hill Road. She related that they kept seeing the problems and they did not understand why it took so much time to make changes. She had told the children that if they spoke out the elected officials might listen. She said she would be very “cheerful” the day they saw the changes start to be implemented so that they would prevent any more casualties from happening there such as the accident that had taken the life of her son, Vaclav. She looked forward to seeing that job done in the next summer. Ms. M. Hajek said since they had seen that their voices had been heard, they also wished to address the issue of further education for young people to become safe drivers. She did not want to see 16-year-old drivers on the road. She likened it to giving weapons to children. She related that since her son’s death she had paid more attention to the news about how many teenagers were involved in accidents. She noted that a few weeks earlier a 16-year-old girl had been in an accident and two people in her car had died. She did not believe 16-year-old drivers were mentally mature enough to take the responsibility and to measure the risks and consequences of their actions. MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 8, 2008 Page 4 Regular Meeting Additionally, Ms. M. Hajek expressed unhappiness with the judicial system. She related that the young man who killed her son was being treated as a victim. She felt he was suffering the consequences of his action, noting that he had tried to commit suicide. She underscored that her son’s life had been taken away on the day he died, but the child who killed him still had a life to live. She averred that by not giving him the proper punishment for making the wrong decision to accelerate on a city street to a speed of 65 miles per hour at a place where children frequently crossed, he had not been able to learn from it. She did not believe he had paid his debt to society and she thought the judicial system should work on this. She said the young man had served four weekends in jail and was prohibited from driving for eight years. She thought he should do more community work that would put him in contact with people. Mayor Piercy closed the Public Forum. She thanked the young girls for making the effort to help pay for road repairs to Bailey Hill Road. She commended them for their work. Councilor Pryor expressed appreciation to the girls for coming. He called their efforts a “wonderful gesture from the heart.” He noted that he had bought some of the beverages and eaten their cookies and thought it had been very nice. He was committed to making improvements to Bailey Hill Road so something like the tragedy that had occurred would not happen again. He said the City’s Intergovernmental Committee (CCIGR) might want to bring something forward to Salem to try to make driving regulations a little better. He said the Hajeks had been an inspiration in their effort to be positive and productive in the face of the tragedy that had occurred to them. He thanked them for being an example for what could be good in the community. Councilor Bettman thanked everyone for coming, and especially the young girls. She called it a caring and resourceful action on their part. She added that she had always considered the Public Forum to be the “richest part” of the council meetings. She appreciated all of the people who took the time to come before their elected representatives. She also thanked the people who had given her their support during her terms. Councilor Clark remarked that his son was nearly 9-years-old and he had a little daughter as well. He said he could not imagine what the Hajeks had gone through. He echoed Councilor Pryor’s admiration for the Hajek’s strength to turn the tragedy they had experienced into something that would help others. He said he tried to teach his children how powerful they could be. He told the girls that they had just shown everyone that someone could make a difference to the world if they tried. Councilor Zelenka thanked everyone for coming to the meeting. He thanked the three young girls for coming and for the work they had done. He encouraged them to keep it up and told them what they had started would “come to fruition.” He also wished to add his gratitude for Councilor Bettman’s service. Councilor Poling said he would break council rules and led everyone in a round of applause for the girls for their efforts. Everyone applauded. Councilor Taylor thanked everyone for coming. She said they would make sure something happened to improve Bailey Hill Road. She agreed that the Public Forum was the best part of the meeting. She added her appreciation for Councilor Bettman. Mayor Piercy thanked Councilor Bettman for her service. She observed that eight years was a long time. She said Councilor Bettman was very resourceful and dedicated. Councilor Bettman received a round of applause. Mayor Piercy announced that the following people would be appointed to the Police Auditor Ordinance Review Committee: herself, councilors Pryor and Zelenka, current Police Auditor Dawn Reynolds, Police Chief Pete Kerns, Eugene Police Employees Association (EPEA) representatives Erik Humphrey and Willy MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 8, 2008 Page 5 Regular Meeting Edewaard, Citizen Review Board (CRB) representatives Norton Cabell and Rick Brissenden, Police Commission representatives John Ahlen and Joe Alsup, Citizens United for Better Policing representatives Ron Chase and Angie Sifuentez, and representing citizens-at-large would be Claire Syrett and Tim Laue. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of City Council Minutes - August 11, 2008, City Council Meeting - October 13, 2008, City Council Meeting - October 15, 2008, Process Session B. Approval to Tentative Working Agenda C. Resolution 4958 Authorizing the Sale of General Obligation Bonds to Fix Streets and Off- Street Paths D. Appointment to Historic Review Board E. Sale of Property to Oregon Department of Transportation Councilor Pryor, seconded by Councilor Bettman, moved to approve the items on the Con- sent Calendar. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0. 4. PUBLIC HEARING and ACTION: Resolution 4959 Adopting a Supplemental Budget; Making Appropriations for the City of Eugene for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 2008, and Ending June 30, 2009 Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing. John Barofsky , 2010 Hubbard Lane, thanked staff for presenting the Supplemental Budget to the citizen members of the Budget Committee. He had found it helpful in understanding what was being presented to the council for approval. He said as the council knew there was a policy that dedicated the first $900,000 of the marginal beginning working capital to the capital budget for preservation and maintenance. He stated that the present year’s transfer would be short by $533,685. He was troubled by this because the City was already on the low side of funding this need. He thought the City Manager and staff should find a way to put this important obligation into the regular budget. He averred that the City’s capital preservation and maintenance should not be allowed to “go the way of our roads.” He declared that capital preservation was a core service that must be recognized in budget form. Councilor Bettman asked if the transfer he was referring to was in addition to allocated capital funding. Budget Manager for the Finance Division, Kitty Murdoch, confirmed that it was in addition to the existing capital budget. Councilor Bettman averred that a big portion of the backlog of maintenance lay in the current City Hall. She said there was $30 million in a reserve fund to build a new City Hall that included police services. She recalled that when the council decided not to move forward there had been a decision to utilize the vast portion of it to upgrade and maintain the existing facility. She was uncertain what would happen in the next budget cycle in that regard. Mayor Piercy asked when they planned to hold the City Hall discussion. City Manager Jon Ruiz replied that it would occur in the spring. Councilor Pryor, seconded by Councilor Bettman, moved to adopt Resolution 4959 adopt- ing a Supplemental Budget; making appropriations for the City of Eugene for the Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 2008, and ending June 30, 2009. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0. MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 8, 2008 Page 6 Regular Meeting Mayor Piercy adjourned the meeting of the Eugene City Council at 8:30 p.m. and convened a meeting of the Eugene Urban Renewal Agency. 5. PUBLIC HEARING and ACTION: Resolution 1049 Adopting a Supplemental Budget; Making Appropriations for the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Eugene for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 2008, and Ending June 30, 2009 Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing. Zachary Vishanoff averred that the University of Oregon arena project had hidden urban renewal costs. He felt that urban renewal was an unmitigated disaster. He suggested that the City have a “backlog clock” located somewhere in the public’s view to track the mounting costs of the backlog of street repairs. He added that he thought former Mayor Jim Torrey had done a good job of getting the word out about the pothole issue during his recent campaign for mayor. Continuing, he asserted that the urban renewal budget could be diverted into historic preservation. He believed that they would not have had the “political train wreck” in the Fairmount neighborhood if there had been discussion of preserving the Joe Romania building. He wanted to disarm the urban renewal process for the next couple of years and put the money into historic preservation and potholes. He asked that form-based codes and the possibility of a future multi-lane boulevard on Franklin Boulevard be put to a public hearing. John Barofsky , 2010 Hubbard Lane, supported adoption of the budget as proposed. He expressed concern regarding the WG Development taking place in the Urban Renewal Agency (URA). He alleged that City staff and URA funds for legal services were being used to find ways for a developer to avoid state law that would require the developer to pay prevailing wages if a threshold of public/private partnership was met. He said if the council felt this requirement was unnecessary, there should be a focus on changing the state statute through the CCIGR rather than on finding ways to circumvent “the letter of the law.” He had heard the Mayor and councilors advocating for a living wage but he felt that when it stood in the way of filling a pit they would look the other way. He suggested that if this was the course they would take, they should let WG Development pay the City the actual value of the property rather than letting the City subsidize it. He averred that this would take the public/private partnership out of the mix. He noted that WG had indicated that paying prevailing wage would increase costs by 30 percent. He thought paying the City the full price would only increase costs by one to two percent. He thought if WG was having trouble gaining tenants the City could be involved as a guaranteed tenant. Mayor Piercy closed the public hearing. Councilor Bettman agreed with Mr. Barofsky. She objected to urban renewal and indicated she would oppose the motion. Councilor Pryor, seconded by Councilor Bettman, moved to adopt Resolution 1049 adopt- ing a Supplemental Budget; making appropriations for the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Eugene for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 2008, and ending June 30, 2009. Councilor Taylor reiterated her opposition to urban renewal. Roll call vote; the motion passed 5:2; councilors Taylor and Bettman voting in opposition. Mayor Piercy adjourned the Eugene Urban Renewal Agency at 8:38 p.m. and reconvened the Eugene City Council. MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 8, 2008 Page 7 Regular Meeting 6. ACTION: Approval of Minutes, Findings and Recommendations from the Hearings official and Adopting of an Ordinance Levying Assessments for Concrete Alley Paving and Constructing Wastewater and th Stormwater systems on 6 Alley between Tyler Street and Polk Street; and Providing an Immedi- ate Effective Date (Contract 2008-28)(Job #4527) Councilor Pryor, seconded by Councilor Bettman, moved that the council adopt Council th Bill 4993, an ordinance levying assessments for improvements on 6 Alley and providing an immediate effective date. Councilor Bettman ascertained from City Engineer, Mark Schoening, that only one of the affected property owners had provided comments. Councilor Bettman asked if the petition had been supported by 100 percent of the neighbors. Mr. Schoening responded that the area residents had all understood the petition but it had not been initiated by 100 percent of them. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0. The meeting adjourned at 8:39 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jon Ruiz City Manager (Recorded by Ruth Atcherson) MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 8, 2008 Page 8 Regular Meeting