Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 09/28/09 Work Session M I N U T E S Eugene City Council Work Session McNutt Room – City Hall 777 Pearl Street—Eugene, Oregon September 28, 2009 12:00 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Chris Pryor, Mike Clark, George Poling, George Brown, Andrea Ortiz, Alan Zelenka, Betty Taylor, Jennifer Solomon Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. A. WORK SESSION: Committee Reports and Items of Interest from Mayor, City Council and City Manager Ms. Piercy recognized recent discussions concerning the manufacturing plant formerly occupied by Hynix and was hopeful that plans to bring in a solar panel manufacturing company would proceed smoothly. She noted that there had been no confirmation to date regarding the plant site and remained cautiously optimistic regarding the matter. Ms. Piercy reported she had visited the new track named in honor of Olympic gold medalist and Eugene resident Margaret Johnson Bailes at the Arts & Technology Academy at Jefferson on September 25. She encouraged the other council members to visit the track and was pleased at Ms. Bailes’ comments that the track would benefit the entire community rather than a select group of people. Ms. Piercy noted that she and other council members planned to meet with University of Oregon representatives on September 29 to conduct a meet-and-greet event for new and returning university students. Ms. Piercy thanked Judge Wayne Allen for his recent updates to the council and his investigations into certain cost-saving strategies. Ms. Piercy noted a recent visit from Oregon Attorney General John Kroger to discuss public safety issues in Eugene and surrounding areas. Ms. Piercy recognized recent fundraising efforts by students at Eugene's Village School to provide water filters to people in Kenya. She noted the students there had raised approximately $9,000 in that regard. Ms. Piercy commented on a recent letter sent to her and the other council members from Eugene Ballet Company (EBC) representatives requesting a moratorium on user fees and a rescinding of recent rate increases. She reminded the council members that the EBC was "a business too." Mr. Clark thanked Planning and Development Executive Director Susan Muir for her help addressing the recent concerns of one of his local business constituents. He noted that Ms. Muir and her colleagues AIC Division Manager Stuart Ramsing, Code Enforcement Supervisor Rachelle Nicholas, and Business License Coordinator Jimi Parker addressed the time-sensitive matter in a very timely and professional manner. MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 28, 2009 Page 1 Work Session Mr. Clark noted he and Mr. Zelenka continued to meet regularly with Police Auditor Mark Gissiner regarding a number of issues. Mr. Clark reported he and Mayor Piercy had given testimony to the Oregon Transportation Commission on September 15 regarding Eugene's transportation priorities. Mr. Clark stated he had attended a meeting of the Lane Metro Partnership Operating Board on September 17 where he had spoken with regard to regional economic development. He noted that recent planning efforts of the Joint Elected Officials (JEO) had also been discussed at that meeting. Mr. Clark reported that he, Mr. Pryor, Ms. Taylor and Ms. Ortiz had attended the September 24 meeting of the Downtown Parking Subcommittee (DPS) to discuss the matter of free downtown parking. He further reported from that meeting that the question of whether or not free downtown parking would be an ultimate goal of the DPS was indeterminate. He noted that, alternative to free downtown parking strategies, the DPS was also considering the goals of making downtown parking more customer-friendly and easier to use. He hoped City staff and the council would be able to help the DPS re-guide its efforts in that regard. Mr. Clark noted he had attended a community meeting of Bond Lane Park representatives with Parks and Open Space Landscape Architect Emily Proudfoot on September 24 to discuss renovations to the park and the impact of the renovations on the neighborhood. Mr. Clark acknowledged emails had recently been circulating among council and City staff regarding downtown public safety and hoped that members of the community would understand that their concerns were being addressed. Mr. Pryor noted that City staff was participating in discussions with St. Vincent de Paul and other social service organizations regarding the availability of warming shelters for homeless and other disadvantaged persons in the area for the upcoming cold weather season. Mr. Pryor commented on the September 22 meeting of the JEO where they had discussed three initiatives. He felt that the JEO had made good progress regarding certain outcomes. Mr. Pryor expressed from his participation in the September 24 DPS meeting that some redirection or refocusing of that group's goals might be a good idea. Mr. Pryor reported he had attended the recent special strategic planning meeting of the Lane Council of Governments (LCOG) to discuss the group's overall strategies and desired outcomes. He further reported from that meeting that he had been elected LCOG Board Chair and would begin his term in that position beginning in December. Mr. Pryor noted that the City's Fire &EMS division would be participating in a "Smoke Detector Distribution and Checking Day" event in the Trainsong neighborhood on October 4, where Fire &EMS staff, in conjunction with local Red Cross staff, would be canvassing that area to ensure that people had smoke detectors in their homes that were functioning properly. Mr. Pryor thanked City staff for providing their time and expertise to the event. Ms. Taylor believed the moratorium fees for the EBC should be waived as they had requested and that the City should endeavor to assist the EBC and similar arts organizations and their patrons whenever possible. Ms. Taylor agreed that the DPS needed to coordinate with the council regarding its effort to refocus its goals, priorities and strategies. She indicated her continued support for free parking strategies in the downtown area. MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 28, 2009 Page 2 Work Session Ms. Taylor noted she had recently visited Washington, D.C. on a lobbying trip with the National League of Cities' Human Development Committee on which she served as vice-chair. She noted that she had conferred with Senator Ron Wyden, Congressman Peter DeFazio and several other elected representatives on a variety of matters including health care and transportation. Ms. Ortiz thanked Mr. Pryor for his comments and his participation in the Trainsong neighborhood's upcoming Smoke Detector event on October 4. Ms. Ortiz noted the Lane Regional Air Pollution Authority (LRAPA) committee on which she served had not met since the previous council meeting. She noted that the City's Intergovernmental Relations (IGR) committee on which she served would be meeting in November with representatives from Smith Dawson to discuss legislative priorities. She called attention to upcoming community meetings regarding local ambulance services and encouraged the other council members to attend. Ms. Ortiz noted that a community impact case meeting would be held at 6:00 p.m. on October 1 in the Bascom- Tykeson Room of the Eugene Public Library to discuss the City's taser policies and recent developments regarding the taser incident from the summer of 2008. She noted that Police Auditor Mark Gissiner was expected to speak and provide his opinion regarding the matter and encouraged the other councilors to attend. Mr. Brown noted he had attended a recent meeting of the Jefferson Westside Neighbors where EWEB representatives had spoken regarding various home energy conservation practices. Mr. Brown stated he had attended a recent meeting of the Downtown Neighborhood Association where Parking Services Manager Jeff Petrie had presented an update on the free downtown parking pilot program. Mr. Brown noted he had given a presentation at that meeting regarding an alternate view of the downtown urban renewal district where a lively and interesting discussion had followed. Mr. Brown expressed he had recently completed his review of archival materials concerning the downtown renewal district and hoped that he would have a memorandum regarding his analysis of the same completed for the council's consideration in the near future. Ms. Solomon reported she had attended a recent Human Services Commission (HSC) meeting with Ms. Taylor and that the group was slowly working to re-score their priorities of how the HSC intended to fund various groups and projects. Ms. Solomon commented she had attended a recent meeting of the Public Safety Coordinating Council (PSCC) where a representative from the Oregon Justice Commission had been the guest speaker. Mr. Poling commented on an email sent to council by Jozef Siekiel-Zdzicnicki of the Residents for Responsible Rapid Transit (3RT) group which indicated his belief that Lane Transit District's (LTD) EmX expansion projects were expected to experience significant delays due to problems with the project's draft environmental impact statement. Mr. Poling further commented he had recently met with LTD representatives regarding the matter and they had concurred with Mr. Siekiel-Zdzicnicki's assessment. Mr. Poling believed that the stakeholder groups which Mr. Siekiel-Zdzicnicki in his email had requested be formed during any EmX delays were the purview of LTD and not the Eugene City Council. Mr. Poling noted he had responded to Mr. Siekiel-Zdzicnicki's email to let him know that his concerns were being taken into consideration. MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 28, 2009 Page 3 Work Session Mr. Poling noted he had received an email from one of his constituents regarding the status of the new police facility which he had forwarded on to City Manager Jon Ruiz. Mr. Poling reported on a September 16 meeting of the Harlow Neighbors Association meeting he had attended where representatives of the Metro Affordable Housing group had presented information regarding the Willakenzie Crossing Project. Mr. Poling commented on recent roadwork along Beltline Highway and Coburg road and believed it would benefit the area immensely. He urged everyone to be cautious and extremely safety-conscious towards those working and traveling near the construction areas. Mr. Zelenka noted he had attended the aforementioned JEO meeting and felt that a great deal had been accomplished. He expressed that he, Ms. Piercy, Mr. Ruiz and Eugene Police Chief Pete Kerns would be participating in the University of Oregon/Eugene Community Welcome and Intervention event on September 29. He reported that the participants would be traversing the west and south university neighborhoods from 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. that evening with a one-on-one continuation of the event with University President Richard Lariviere happening from 7:00 to 8:00 p.m. at the Central Presbyterian Church on 15th Avenue that evening. Mr. Zelenka noted he had attended the recent kickoff event for the Community Climate and Energy Action Plan (CCEAP) with Ms. Piercy and further noted that additional monthly follow-up meetings regarding the CCEAP had been scheduled. Mr. Zelenka reported that, in his capacity as a member of the Metro Planning Commission (MPC) of the Central Lane Metro Policy Organization (MPO), he had recently been appointed by Governor Kulongoski to serve on the Greenhouse Gas Task Force on Transportation and Land Use Planning as the Lane County metro area representative. He noted that meetings for that group would be taking place through December to discuss various greenhouse gas emission reduction strategies. Mr. Zelenka noted an upcoming meeting of the West University Neighborhood Association at 7:00 p.m. on October 1. Mr. Zelenka stated he continued to meet regularly with Mr. Clark and Mr. Gissiner regarding issues related to effective police oversight in the community. Mr. Zelenka thanked CAC member Paul Conte for his thoughtful comments regarding the Eugene Comprehensive Lands Assessment that had been submitted with their packet materials for the work session meeting. Mr. Zelenka looked forward to continuing previous process session discussions regarding more efficient means for the council to report on their respective committee assignments. Mr. Poling congratulated the coaches and members of the Sheldon High School’s football team on their recent win that had been nationally televised. He stated that the coaches and team members had represented their school and their community admirably. Mr. Clark understood that the community impact case meeting on October 1 at the Eugene Public Library would not include opportunities for public testimony. Ms. Piercy thanked Mr. Clark for his clarification. Mr. Ruiz stated that the next community meeting regarding the CCEAP would take place on October 6 from 6:00 to 9:00 p.m. at the EWEB offices and would address buildings and energy use. MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 28, 2009 Page 4 Work Session Mr. Ruiz noted he would be attending a meeting of the League of Oregon Cities in Portland on October 1 and 2. He commented that a community workshop regarding the Eugene Counts initiative would take place on October 14 in the Eugene City Hall Council Chamber. Mr. Ruiz added that a staff update regarding the Eugene Counts initiative was expected to be presented to the council at their October 26 work session meeting. Mr. Ruiz noted that the City executive team and staff expected to have a very busy agenda through the fall and winter on a variety of topics and urged the council to feel free to contact staff regarding any matters of concern. Ms. Piercy noted that the City had received letters and petitions from local merchants regarding downtown public safety and urged the council to review the suggestions and feedback presented therein. WORK SESSION: B. Eugene Comprehensive Lands Assessment (ECLA) Planning Director Lisa Gardner noted that while the July and August council work sessions to consider ECLA data were associated with determining the demand facets of the ECLA, the current presentation would be devoted to the supply side and the City's buildable land inventory. She further recognized that the council had raised questions during the July and August work sessions regarding the next steps of the ECLA process with particular emphasis on how public outreach and community dialogue issues would be addressed. Associate Planner Jason Dedrick presented data and statistics from the ECLA process to the council and noted that the data was intended to prepare and inform the council for their October work session where the next steps of the ECLA process should be discussed. Mr. Dedrick presented information regarding the buildable lands inventory and briefly described the various components of the ECLA process overall. He further provided a brief overview of the community advisory committee (CAC) process used to develop the various methodologies involved in determining the buildable lands inventory. He noted that expert opinions had been used to develop the buildable lands inventory in addition to the CAC processes. Mr. Dedrick briefly described the differences between the committed, protected, developed and vacant classifications used in the buildable lands inventory for the benefit of the council and further described how those classifications had been determined. Mr. Dedrick, referring to graphs from his presentation, demonstrated the percentage breakdowns of the current land base in Eugene and noted that Eugene's urban growth boundary contained 34,446 acres. Mr. Dedrick summarized that, when subtracted from all currently non-available land areas within the UGB, the City's current available vacant buildable lands inventory contained 2,774 acres or approximately 8% of the land in the UGB. He then proceeded to describe the residential, industrial and commercial breakdown of the buildable lands inventory. Mr. Dedrick stated that land in the buildable lands inventory contained tax lots with improvement value less than $1,000, not committed or protected under any established parameters, and deemed developable within the next 20 years. He noted that the majority of the lands in the buildable land inventory were located on the periphery of the UGB and that any re-development of lands not part of the current buildable lands inventory would be addressed in a separate part of the ECLA process. MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 28, 2009 Page 5 Work Session Mr. Dedrick provided a brief summary of the partial constraints that characterized certain portions of the lands in the buildable lands inventory. He further noted that after taking into account those available lands with partial constraints and in conjunction with the respective land demands for employment, housing and public use, there was actually a surplus of available industrial land and a deficit of available commercial land. He summarized that detailed analysis regarding the precise amount of available land was ongoing and that more accurate figures regarding the same would be provided at the council's October work session. Mr. Dedrick briefly listed the next steps involved in the ECLA process for the benefit of the council and further described the City staff plan for the final ECLA product which would assume the form of a motion presented to the council affirming that the City of Eugene had met the requirements of House Bill 3337. Mr. Clark thanked Mr. Dedrick for his presentation and noted he would need further clarification regarding the City's obligations under HB 3337, specifically with regard to what portions of the ECLA process were required to be completed by the end of 2009. Mr. Clark commented he had heard from individuals who questioned the reliability of the data used in the ECLA process. He further noted that if adoption of the ECLA findings was not required by December 31, 2009, then a specific timetable for how the ECLA process would affect City policy would be required for him to support any acceptance of the staff report. Mr. Clark indicated his understanding that the CAC had ultimately advocated for the removal of all wetlands within the UGB from the buildable lands inventory regardless of their current development status or partial constraints. He noted that he agreed with the determination of the CAC and agreed that the wetlands should be completely protected and not categorized to be any part of any available or vacant lands. Ms. Piercy asked for further clarification regarding the classification of known wetlands within the UGB. Mr. Dedrick noted that the three classes of wetlands within the UGB were: 1) the West Eugene Wetlands Plan Wetlands, 2) the Goal 5 wetlands; and 3) the local wetland inventory wetlands that had been inventoried as part of the Goal 5 process but had been excluded from the Goal 5 protections. He noted that it was completely within the purview of the City of Eugene to determine if the wetlands should be removed from consideration under the ECLA process, but that there was no definitive current City policy that exclusively prohibited development on all wetland areas within the UGB. Mr. Dedrick, responding to a question from Ms. Piercy, stated the local wetland inventory predated Goal 5 policies and that while certain wetlands were not specifically protected under Goal 5, those lands remained classified as wetlands and subject to State protections regarding the same. Deputy City Attorney Emily Jerome, responding to a request for clarification from Ms. Piercy regarding language contained in staff's agenda item summary materials, noted that the City of McMinville had similarly struggled with issues relating to available land classifications and protections. She further noted that should the City choose to adopt a plan to use land not within the current UGB, the City would correspondingly be prohibited from adopting said plan as it violated State statutes and goals that mandated a sufficient supply of buildable lands within the UGB. Ms. Jerome summarized her remarks and noted, "You mustn’t adopt a plan that says you have demand that's not met." MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 28, 2009 Page 6 Work Session Mr. Pryor recognized the deadline specified by HB 3337 and hoped that the ECLA product generated by staff would be an accurate representation of the City's actual available land. He hoped the various voices, opinions, and input from all parties concerned with land use issues in the region would be acknowledged or applied in a manner that would quickly generate the most accurate report possible. He suggested to the City Manager that the City might have to devote an increased level of resources in order to complete the City's ECLA process as quickly and as accurately as possible, particularly since the ECLA process was likely to influence a significant level of subsequent City policies. Mr. Dedrick, responding to a question from Ms. Solomon, commented that recent protections adopted by the council concerning local waterways dictated that such areas were included as part of the protected lands not subject to development. Ms. Solomon asked how railroad lands were classified under the ECLA process. Mr. Dedrick replied that railroad right of way areas were removed from the buildable lands inventory and that it was indeterminate whether other railroad lands would be subject to potential development within the 20-year time frame considered as part of the ECLA process. Mr. Dedrick, responding to a question from Ms. Solomon, noted that all state, federal and county land parcels within the UGB were excluded from the buildable lands inventory. Mr. Zelenka maintained that the deadlines prescribed by HB 3337 prohibited the City from moving on land use issues in a manner that would allow the City to form coherent public policy decisions in conjunction with those land use issues. Mr. Zelenka commented he had not agreed with many of the baseline assumptions of the ECLA process that had been discussed in previous work sessions and felt they were not conducive to providing sufficient details regarding the City's land needs. Mr. Dedrick, responding to questions from Mr. Zelenka regarding the next steps for the City's ECLA process, noted that the revisions of the baseline assumptions to be discussed in October, along with the considerations of alternatives of those baseline assumptions, were intended to enhance the quality and usefulness of the data that had been collected since those baseline assumptions were first presented during the July and August council work sessions. Mr. Dedrick recognized there had been discussions regarding the establishment of scenarios based on policy decisions on the ECLA process earlier on but expressed that, as the lands assessment had progressed, the timelines involved dictated it would not be feasible to incorporate scenarios into the ECLA process before the deadlines specified by HB 3337. Mr. Zelenka noted he looked forward to conversations regarding various policy decision scenarios that might be incorporated after the end of year deadlines. Mr. Zelenka wondered how the baseline assumptions of the ECLA process would allow for unforeseen variables and statistical anomalies that might develop both as the assessment was completed and also as policy decisions based on the assessment were enacted. Mr. Dedrick commented that the provisions of HB 3337 did not generally allow for multiple determinations or conditional interpretations of land use data. Mr. Zelenka asked if the City was specifically prohibited from doing so under HB 3337, and Ms. Jerome responded that the City would ultimately need to be able to definitively demonstrate that it could meet its own land use demand. MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 28, 2009 Page 7 Work Session Ms. Jerome expressed that while it was unfortunate that the provisions of HB 3337 did not appear to allow for various policy decision scenarios to be incorporated as part of the ECLA product, it might be possible to apply scenarios in the future. Mr. Brown stated he had reviewed a letter from two CAC members who were concerned with the data and methodologies used in the ECLA process and further stated that he shared those concerns. Mr. Brown believed that the data and methodologies used were unreliable and believed that their continued use could ultimately result in lawsuits directed toward the City's land use policies. Mr. Brown, seconded by Mr. Clark, moved to direct the City Manager to provide a thorough, detailed response to the concerns raised in the letter and email to council by two CAC members regarding ECLA's methodology and data. Ms. Piercy asked for staff responses to the concerns of the CAC members. Mr. Dedrick affirmed that those concerns had regarded the treatment of areas designated as mixed-use with residential development in commercial zones. Mr. Dedrick commented that the data regarding those areas was still being collected and that a full analysis had not yet been completed or presented to the council. Mr. Dedrick further commented that the State guidelines regarding mixed-use areas were not entirely clear but that staff was working to determine the most prudent course of action. Mr. Dedrick maintained that it was sometimes difficult to maintain certain levels of precision with respect to the data being collected on mixed-use land areas, but that he had the utmost confidence in the abilities of the staff and consultant teams charged with collecting and analyzing the data. Mr. Dedrick believed staff could indeed respond to the concerns raised in the CAC letter as referenced in Mr. Brown's motion but suggested it would need to be made expressly clear what land areas and what data elements were being called into question. Ms. Piercy asked Mr. Brown which land areas and what data elements his motion and the CAC letters were referring to. Mr. Brown answered that those elements had been described in CAC member Paul Conte's letter to the council. He stated that there were most likely similar concerns from other CAC members but could not speak specifically to any such concerns. Mr. Clark noted a memorandum from CAC member Bill Kloos had also been circulated that had raised general questions regarding the reliability of the data and methodologies used in the ECLA process. Mr. Clark added he wanted to hear staff's responses to Mr. Kloos' concerns as well and asked Mr. Brown to accept a friendly amendment to his previously stated motion that would allow Mr. Kloos' concerns to be addressed. Mr. Clark offered a friendly amendment to Mr. Brown's previously stated motion and asked that the word "two" be removed from said motion. Mr. Brown accepted the friendly amendment with the consent of the second. Mr. Clark offered a friendly amendment to the previously stated and amended motion to additionally direct staff to return to the council in October 2009, with a specific timeline for adoption of the ECLA findings. Mr. Brown did not accept Mr. Clark's friendly amendment. Mr. Brown stated that although he agreed that a timeline needed to be formalized regarding adoption of the ECLA findings he would not accept Mr. Clark's friendly amendment regarding the same. MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 28, 2009 Page 8 Work Session Mr. Clark, seconded by Mr. Poling, moved to add to the previously stated motion as an amendment that council direct staff to return in October 2009, with a specific timeline for adoption of the ECLA findings. Mr. Ruiz believed that staff should respond to the various concerns of the CAC but cautioned that such responses might, if not handled judiciously, lead to a level of superfluous communications that could impede the progress of the assessment. Mr. Ruiz stated it would be important for staff to carefully balance the concerns of the CAC and the general public against the data and methodologies being used by staff in the ECLA process. Mr. Clark maintained that the conversations surrounding the timelines and data analysis practices used in a land needs assessment process such as ECLA needed to be undertaken of the City's own accord and not as part of any directives handed down by the State legislature. Mr. Poling agreed that the concerns of the CAC needed to be addressed but cautioned against any unnecessary delays of the ECLA process that might violate the deadlines listed in HB 3337. Mr. Poling stated he had also received an email from an individual with concerns regarding the ECLA process which he intended to forward to the other council members. Mr. Poling could not recall seeing the letter from Mr. Kloos listing his concerns regarding the ECLA process. Mr. Zelenka maintained that the ECLA deadlines prescribed by HB 3337 represented a constrained process where it might be difficult to weigh all relevant issues equally. He further commented he did not agree with Mr. Clark's motion to add to Mr. Brown's motion but would support any reasonable timeline that would allow for a full hearing of all pertinent land use issues related to the assessment. Mr. Zelenka found the staff ECLA timeline included in the agenda item summary materials as Attachment C agreeable to him. Ms. Ortiz expressed she had been responsive to staff's requests to the council regarding the ECLA data. She recognized that while it was important to adequately address the concerns of the CAC and the general public, it was also important to ensure that the discussion and review of the ECLA data did not continue in perpetuity. She noted she would not support either Mr. Brown or Mr. Clark's motion. Mr. Clark commented he would be willing to accept a friendly amendment to his motion that called for one additional week for the CAC to submit any further concerns regarding the ECLA process. Ms. Ortiz offered a friendly amendment to Mr. Clark's previously stated motion to call for five additional business days for the CAC to submit any further concerns regarding the ECLA process. Mr. Clark, with the consent of Mr. Poling as the second, accepted the friendly amendment. Mr. Ruiz attempted to clarify the motions under discussion and confirmed that those motions would call for staff to provide a detailed response to the CAC concerns for the council who would then act in accordance with that staff response. Ms. Jerome attempted to clarify the motions under discussion and understood that they were intended "to give the CAC five days to give their comments to staff, staff to write a staff report, essentially, that responds to those comments for council's October meeting and to come back with set timelines" for the rest of the adoption process. MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 28, 2009 Page 9 Work Session Mr. Pryor requested clarification regarding the nature of what the City would be required to adopt with regard to the ECLA process and the deadlines listed under HB 3337. Ms. Jerome responded that, according to State court interpretations of HB 3337, the City of Eugene could not adopt the assessment without first determining how it would address the land use demands described in the assessment. Mr. Pryor asked if the City would be in conformity with HB 3337 if it accepted the report by December 31, 2009 with the expectation that, on a timeline to be set, the City would come up with a final process for adoption. Ms. Jerome responded that Mr. Pryor's statement was correct. Ms. Jerome stated that HB 3337 did not call for a timeline for adoption of the ECLA process but rather that it prescribed the initial steps necessary for the City to adopt the findings of the ECLA report. Mr. Pryor noted that this seemed to allow the City to conduct a more thorough review of any community concerns regarding the ECLA process. Mr. Pryor expressed that the staff should be directed to respond only to the CAC's questions and not those of the public at-large. Mr. Pryor believed that agreeing on a timeline would give the City a better idea of how the ECLA process would play out after December 31, 2009. He also believed that such a timeline would help prevent the City from making any bad policy decisions as a result of the assessment. Ms. Jerome, responding to a question from Ms. Taylor, noted that the City could possibly be sued in Circuit Court to accept the ECLA report if it did not already do so by December 31, 2009, as described in HB 3337. Ms. Jerome further stated that there were no sanctions the City might be subject to under any such lawsuit. Ms. Taylor advocated against rushing the ECLA process and believed it was important for the City to solicit and collect reports and input from the minority interests related to the assessment. Ms. Taylor asked if Mr. Clark's previously stated motion constituted a substitute motion or an amendment to Mr. Brown's previously stated motion. Mr. Brown responded that it was an amendment. Ms. Piercy believed that any timeline agreed upon by the council regarding the ECLA process would need to be flexible. Mr. Zelenka responded to comments previously made by Ms. Jerome indicating that the City could be subject to a lawsuit if the provisions of HB 3337 were not met. Ms. Jerome clarified her earlier comments and noted that the HB 3337 guidelines would allow the City to locally set and control a timeline for the completion of the next steps of the ECLA process beyond December 31, 2009. Mr. Zelenka noted he would not support the amendment to Mr. Brown's motion and believed that the City should hold to the timeline included as Attachment C in the agenda item summary materials. He maintained it was too early in the ECLA process to generate a timeline that would go beyond the end of 2009. Mr. Clark reminded Mr. Zelenka that the staff timeline included as Attachment C did not include any specific mention of the final adoption of the ECLA process. Ms. Jerome confirmed that the "Final Products" listed in that timeline did not describe the final adoption of the ECLA process. Mr. Clark commented he was not interested in stalling the adoption of the ECLA process. MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 28, 2009 Page 10 Work Session Mr. Dedrick commented that staff had not spent a great deal of time on what might be done after the ECLA report had been accepted because the true and actual land needs of the City had not yet been established. He further commented that staff was getting closer to definitively determining the City's land needs which would in turn help determine how the City would adopt the ECLA findings in the future. Ms. Piercy wanted to make sure Mr. Clark's motion would not presume in its language that the City would be required to incorporate an expansion of the ECLA process. Mr. Clark confirmed that it would not. Ms. Piercy called for a vote on Mr. Clark's previously stated motion. The motion passed, 5:4 (Mr. Brown, Mr. Zelenka, Ms. Taylor and Ms. Ortiz voting in opposition). Ms. Piercy called for a vote on Mr. Brown's previously stated motion as amended. The motion passed, 6:2 (Ms. Taylor and Mr. Brown voting in opposition). Mr. Brown, seconded by Ms. Taylor moved to direct the City Manager to engage one or more independent, qualified people to review ECLA work to date, as well as comments from CAC members and provide an assessment to the City Council. Mr. Brown believed the concerns of the CAC members were serious enough to warrant further investigation and hoped that any such investigation would be carried out sooner rather than later. Ms. Ortiz asked Mr. Brown which outside agencies or individuals he would recommend to perform a review of the ECLA work to date. Ms. Gardner stated that the EcoNorthwest consulting firm and its sub-consulting partners currently involved in the ECLA process were considered eminently qualified, both regionally and nationally, to conduct peer reviews in the manner indicated by Mr. Brown's motion. Ms. Gardner stated there might also be other firms qualified to conduct such a review but suggested that it might be premature to engage any such firms or individuals until the assessment report had been completed. Mr. Dedrick commented that, with the assistance of the EcoNorthwest consulting firm, the ECLA process was already subject to a peer review process by qualified experts. Mr. Dedrick further commented that the EcoNorthwest consulting agreement included two additional sub-consulting firms to help ensure that the current review process was as thorough and objective as possible. Mr. Dedrick reminded the council that the ECLA process also included a review by the DLCD to help provide an additional level of expert opinion with respect to both the assessment report and the implementation of policies recommended therein. Mr. Dedrick had a great deal of faith in the current ECLA review strategies and stated the manner in which the consulting teams had been set up provided for "multiple arms" of expert reviews that could evaluate the ECLA process both on its own merits and in relation to similar processes in other cities. Mr. Dedrick commented that the CAC had been designed as a panel of local experts with stakeholders who could bring a broad understanding of local land use issues to the work of that committee. He noted that the involvement of the CAC had significantly improved the quality of the ECLA process and its products. He further noted that the ECLA consultants had commented to staff that the level of rigor in the input provided to them by the CAC had been "beyond anything that they had ever received in the community." Mr. Dedrick noted that the CAC's input had "raised the bar" for the ECLA process well beyond what had been called for by State statutes. MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 28, 2009 Page 11 Work Session Mr. Zelenka noted he would feel more comfortable supporting Mr. Brown's motion if it had described precisely who would perform an ECLA review as well how such a review would be conducted, when it would be completed, and how much it would cost the City. He noted that without such information he was inclined to agree with Mr. Dedrick's estimation of current ECLA peer review strategies. Ms. Piercy added it seemed necessary to consider the staff responses to the various concerns of the CAC before considering if additional peer review strategies were called for. Mr. Brown agreed that Mr. Dedrick, Mr. Zelenka and Ms. Piercy's comments were valid and admitted he would need to bring more detailed information regarding additional peer review strategies to the council. Mr. Brown, with the consent of the second, withdrew his previously stated motion. Ms. Taylor wanted to hear input from any dissenting members of the CAC who might have disagreed with the majority opinions and recommendations of that group. Mr. Clark wanted more detailed information on how the recent adoption of the Stormwater Manual into the City Code would affect how drainage ways and similar lands were designated within the ECLA process. He further requested similar detailed information regarding lands that currently had no definitive Metro Plan designation. Mr. Dedrick responded that the Metro Plan designations were not tax lot specific in certain instances where a boundary was located between tax lots and further commented that, if all lots with an indeterminate land designation were removed from the assessment, approximately one-third of all land within the UGB would be removed. Mr. Dedrick noted that the determination of Metro Plan designations for tax lots within the UGB was not within the realm of the ECLA process. Mr. Clark responded that he looked forward to more information regarding the matter. C. WORK SESSION: Street Assessment Policy Ms. Piercy noted that, in the interest of time, the Street Assessment Policy discussion listed on the council's work session agenda would be postponed to a later work session and apologized to those staff members who were present to discuss that topic. Ms. Piercy noted that the ECLA process was an extremely serious matter for the community and that further meetings might be necessary to adequately address the matter. Ms. Piercy adjourned the meeting at 7:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jon Ruiz City Manager (Recorded by Wade Hicks) MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 28, 2009 Page 12 Work Session