Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 01/12/09 MeetingM I N U T E S Eugene City Council Regular Meeting Council Chamber—Eugene City Hall 777 Pearl Street—Eugene, Oregon January 12, 2009 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Chris Pryor, George Brown, Andrea Ortiz, George Poling, Jennifer Solomon, Mike Clark, Alan Zelenka, Betty Taylor. Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. 1. ACTION: Election of City Council Officers for 2009 Councilor Pryor, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to elect Councilor Zelenka as Pre- sident of the City Council for 2009. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0. (Councilor Solomon had not yet arrived.) Councilor Pryor, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to elect Councilor Clark as Vice President of the City Council for 2009. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 7:0. Councilor Solomon arrived at 7:31 p.m. 2. PUBLIC FORUM Mayor Piercy reviewed the rules of the Public Forum. th Deb Frisch , 3003 West 11 Avenue, recalled 2008. She believed that she should take “partial credit” for the departures of the former police chief and former police auditor. She felt that money for the arena was tantamount to embezzlement. She was pleased to see that the conditional use permit for the planned University of Oregon basketball arena would be appealed. She related her belief that convicted murderer, Diane Downs, had been wrongfully convicted and incarcerated. She added that she was pleased that the City’s former Internal Affairs officer had left the City to work for the University. She called for the resignation of the current Acting in Capacity (AIC) Police Chief, Pete Kerns. She was dismayed at how the bomb threats made to local private schools had been handled. Zachary Vishanoff , Ward 3, averred that Councilor Zelenka and University President, David Frohnmayer, had gotten the arena “stuck in the mud.” He said he had brought homework for the council. He explained that a committee had previously gone through an enormous amount of work and had held a public hearing. He thought the new Police Auditor Ordinance Review Committee (PAORC) should review it. He had felt stonewalled by the former committee. He suggested that the City Manager’s Office provide a binder containing all of this information so that members of the public could peruse it. He believed that the Fairmount Node, which he described as a project that was supposed to happen with the University, the City, and the University Foundation “in collusion with each other,” would not work out. He said he would send MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 12, 2009 Page 1 Regular Meeting the You Tube link so that the council could access six videos he had posted. He welcomed reactions and feedback. He closed by wishing the council a happy new year. Gordon Anslow , 4493 Paddock Drive, asked the council to approve the Multiple-Unit Property Tax Exemption (MUPTE) for the Pearl on Campus project. He said he had been involved in several other projects but this was the first one in which he had ownership. He acknowledged that it was reasonable to question whether a MUPTE made a reasonable difference; would a project get built without the exemption? He stated that the program had been in place for a number of years and was recently modified with refinements made to the qualification process. He believed that the intention was to incentivize the building of multi-family projects which incorporated sufficient desirable characteristics so as to further goals the City Council had identified. He averred that given the time and commitment of resources required to design a complex infill redevelopment project, the investment was sufficiently great that there was a strong potential that a project would not get built or it would be redesigned to reduce costs without the MUPTE. He said in practice the MUPTE functioned as quid pro quo; the City would invite participants to use the program, investors would make the decision to design a project with MUPTE approval in mind, the affected neighborhood group would meet with the applicant and would be asked to vote in favor and the designer then integrated the input garnered from such a meeting, and the applicant, having proceeded in good faith, would come before the council for approval. He underscored his ongoing involvement with the West University Neighbors (WUN). He said they had generally seen their projects approved for the MUPTE and had always received approval from the neighborhood group. He attributed this to their willingness to shape the projects with neighborhood input in mind. He noted that he currently served as co-chair of the Infill Compatibility Standards Task Team and the Multi-Family Subcommittee, on which the president of WUN served as chair. He felt their approach should exemplify how MUPTE could and should work, bringing infill projects to the table with neighbors and providing an incentive which empowered the neighbors to ask for consideration in design of the projects. He believed this would ultimately result in better projects for the benefit of the owner, neighbors, tenants and the City. He provided a copy of his testimony in writing. Kevin Matthews , P.O. Box 1588, stated that he was President of Friends of Eugene. He welcomed the council to a new year. He averred that even though the City of Eugene received “appropriate accolades” for being green, it had a long way to go to “start dealing with our share of the climate change issue.” He thought the City was in a position to provide leadership in the state and in the country. He acknowledged that the City had conducted inventories and had state-established goals, but he believed those would be shown to be too weak in the next couple of years. He advised the council that the City should “get in place” plans that they could simulate and project into the future. He felt they would be “big picture plans” that would help the City understand the kinds of reductions in emissions that were necessary. He declared that the sooner they understood the necessary reductions, the sooner the City could be “out in front” of it. He suggested that the City could use the challenge as the economic opportunity he believed it would be. He asserted that if the City plotted out the vehicle technology adoption rates and looked at the turnover in vehicles and then understood that driving in Eugene comprised half of the carbon emissions the City would come to understand that there needed to be a 50 percent reduction of gross Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). He opined that they needed to “get into a mindset” where all transportation issues such as maintenance and infrastructure planning should consider that there would be “fewer and fewer car miles driven.” Mayor Piercy closed the Public Forum. Councilor Zelenka wished to point out that the City Council had unanimously adopted as a goal for the City that it would be carbon neutral by 2020. MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 12, 2009 Page 2 Regular Meeting 3. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of City Council Minutes - June 25, 2008, Work Session - July 21, 2008, Public Hearing - October 13, 2008, Work Session - October 20, 2008, Public Hearing - October 22, 2008, Work Session - October 27, 2008, Work Session - October 27, 2008, City Council Meeting - October 29, 2008, Work Session - November 10, 2008, Work Session - November 10, 2008, City Council Meeting - November 12, Work Session B. Approval to Tentative Working Agenda C. Adoption of Resolution 4960 Acknowledging Receipt of the City of Eugene, Comprehen- sive Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2008 Councilor Zelenka, seconded by Councilor Clark, moved to approve the items on the Con- sent Calendar. Councilor Taylor offered the following correction to the minutes of the work session held on October 27, 2008: ? Ms. Taylor, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to substitute Sarah Whitney for Position 3. The motion failed, 4:3; Mr. Zelenka, Ms. Taylor, and Ms. Bettman voting no yes. The correction was deemed, without objection, approved. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Mayor Piercy adjourned the meeting of the Eugene City Council and convened the meeting of the Eugene Urban Renewal Agency at 7:46 p.m. 4. ACTION: Adoption of Resolution 1050 Acknowledging Receipt of the Annual Financial Report of the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Eugene, Oregon, for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2008 Councilor Zelenka, seconded by Councilor Clark, moved to adopt Resolution 1050 ac- knowledging receipt of the Annual Financial Report of the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Eugene, Oregon, for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2008. Councilor Pryor said it was important to note when an audit was done and done well and an organization had a “clean” audit letter. He wanted to recognize that this was good work financially and good work in terms of performance. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Mayor Piercy adjourned the meeting of the Eugene Urban Renewal Agency at 7:48 p.m. and reconvened the meeting of the City Council. MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 12, 2009 Page 3 Regular Meeting 5. ACTION: Adoption of Resolution 4961 Approving a Multiple-Unit Property Tax Exemption for Residential thth property Located at 435 East 15 Avenue, Eugene, Oregon (East 15 Townhouses; Newman Family Partnership, Applicant) Councilor Zelenka, seconded by Councilor Clark, moved to adopt Resolution 4961 approv- ing a Multiple-Unit Property Tax Exemption for residential property located at 435 East thth 15 Avenue, Eugene, Oregon (East 15 Townhouses; Newman Family Partnership, appli- cant). Councilor Taylor reiterated her opposition to the Multiple-Unit Property Tax Exemption (MUPTE). She said she could not support any tax exemptions at this time given the current economic conditions and that so many people were losing their jobs and struggling. Councilor Brown echoed Councilor Taylor’s sentiments. He believed the MUPTE to be a good tool to stimulate development. He understood that it was intended to help promote development in undesirable areas. He could not recall the last time the University had built a dormitory. He did not believe the University area needed inducements for development as he felt it would occur regardless of whether projects there were given a tax exemption. He added that he thought Mr. Anslow was a responsible developer and that there should be more developers like him. Councilor Zelenka averred that both of the projects that were requesting a MUPTE were good. His objection lay in that the City was facing an $8 million deficit. He believed that tax exemptions would only make “the hole deeper.” He also believed that the projects would be built in the University neighborhood whether the exemption was granted or not. Councilor Clark stated that the application process asked if the exemption would be necessary for the proposed project to be successful. He appreciated Mr. Anslow’s testimony because he had highlighted that the process that had been created for the exemption included working with neighborhood residents and building a project that conformed to the environment it would be built in. He underscored that, by definition, the project before them would not be built without the MUPTE. He said instead something else would be built, something that the neighbors might not like as much. He agreed with his colleagues that it was important for the council to be cognizant of people who were concerned about their jobs. He pointed out that just one of the proposed projects would generate dozens of jobs. He questioned how they could, in good conscience, not promote providing people with high-paying family-wage jobs doing this type of work in the community. He indicated he would support the motion. Mayor Piercy respected the different points of view that were voiced. She wished to point out that all of the councilors cared very much about the tax needs before the City. She acknowledged that one person saw a loss of tax revenue and another person saw an increase in the work force. She reiterated that the council had supported the continued use of the MUPTE in the University neighborhood only several weeks earlier. She felt the MUPTE would be used to try to have the kind of housing the neighbors wanted in that area and to provide housing for a variety of people and for the students who came to live in the community. She indicated her support, given the staff finding that the projects could not be built without the MUPTE, the City’s other community goals aimed to provide housing so that people could “live, work, and play” in close proximity, and that the proposed project was aligned with City growth management policies. She felt the developers had gone to great efforts to work with the neighbors and had gotten their buy-in. MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 12, 2009 Page 4 Regular Meeting Councilor Solomon wanted to make sure that it was understood that this was not an exemption for the “rest of time,” rather it was a ten-year exemption on the improvements made to the property. She stressed that the owner of the property would continue to pay taxes on the property and then after ten years the property would come back on the tax rolls at the full assessed value. Councilor Taylor clarified that there was no guarantee that someone who followed the guidelines for application would be granted the MUPTE. She opined that there were lots of people who could use the benefit of the MUPTE. Councilor Brown averred that if the City Council would allow the MUPTE to be used in the University area, which he considered to be “pretty privileged,” then it should be allowed for all parts of the City. Roll call vote; the motion passed 5:3; councilors Taylor, Brown, and Zelenka voting in op- position. 6. ACTION: Adoption of Resolution 4962 Approving a Multiple-Unit Property Tax Exemption for Residential th Property Located at 693 East 16 Avenue, 1584 and 1586 Hilyard Street, Eugene, Oregon (The Pearl on Campus, Dean Hansen and Gordon Anslow, Applicants) Councilor Zelenka, seconded by Councilor Clark, moved to adopt Resolution 4962 approv- ing a Multiple-Unit Property Tax Exemption for residential property located at 693 East th 16 Avenue, 1584 and 1586 Hilyard Street, Eugene, Oregon (The Pearl on Campus, Dean Hansen and Gordon Anslow, applicants). Councilor Taylor reiterated her opposition to approving a MUPTE in the University neighborhood. Roll call vote; the motion passed, 5:3; councilors Zelenka, Brown, and Taylor voting in op- position. The meeting adjourned at 8:02 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jon Ruiz City Manager (Recorded by Ruth Atcherson) MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 12, 2009 Page 5 Regular Meeting