HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 02/10/10 Work SessionMINUTES
Eugene City Council
McNutt Room City Hall 777 Pearl Street
Eugene, Oregon
February 10, 2010
Noon
COUNCILORS PRESENT: Alan Zelenka, Mike Clark, Andrea Ortiz, Jennifer Solomon, Chris Pryor,
George Poling, George Brown, Betty Taylor.
Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the work session of the Eugene City Council to order. She
announced that Committee Reports and Items of Interest would occur at the end of the meeting, time
permitting, as Mr. Poling would need to leave the meeting early and wished to be present for as much of
the downtown projects discussion as possible. She expressed her appreciation to City Manager Jon Ruiz
and staff for their responsiveness to the council's direction and providing a holistic approach to public
safety and development in downtown.
A. WORK SESSION:
Downtown Projects — Tools
Mr. Ruiz stated that the suggested motion provided to the council had been revised to incorporate issues
raised by Mr. Zelenka relating to purchasing cameras and providing an analysis of general obligation
bonds and a local option levy. He used a slide presentation to provide an overview of strategies to foster a
vibrant downtown and boost the local economy. He noted that parking would be discussed in a separate
work session. He summarized the projects and funding mechanisms reflected in the suggested motion.
Mr. Ruiz explained that the funding proposal would not affect the City's base allocation to the Human
Services Commission (HSQ and would include an additional $500,000 allocation for downtown safety
net services. He emphasized that use of urban renewal funds would be limited to safety, the Lane
Community College (LCC) project, the Farmers' Market and Veterans' Affairs clinic. The Urban
Renewal Agency Board would approve each project, expenditures would be reviewed annually by a
community panel and the urban renewal district would end after projects were completed. He reviewed
the future work sessions scheduled to address specific strategies and projects and stressed that the
council's action on the suggested motion would direct staff to prepare materials for a future work session
on the urban renewal district; it would not initiate action on the district.
Mr. Clark, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to direct the City Manager to:
1. Regarding the Downtown Safety Initiative:
a. Use $100,000 of one -time existing urban renewal dollars to purchase and
install additional lighting downtown and $100,000 of one -time dollars
(half from telecomm and half from existing urban renewal) to purchase
automated behavior crime reporting software and cameras, but only after
the council approves the manager's plan for number, location, use and on-
going costs of the cameras, after considering the cameras' expected effec-
tiveness in deterring crime;
MINUTES Eugene City Council February 10, 2010 Page 1
Work Session
b. Pursue use of Springfield jail beds in exchange for Springfield's use of
Eugene's Fire Training Center;
c. Include in the manager's proposed FYI I budget $500,000 of one --time
dollars for the Human Services Commission, and re- purpose $500,000 of
the City's HSC contribution for partial funding of the downtown safety
initiative, including additional services like Cahoots;
d. Present to the Urban Renewal Agency Board for its review a proposed
amendment to the downtown urban renewal plan that would 1) restrict the
use of tax increment funds and increase the spending limit to pay for (i)
the Broadway Place Garage debt, thereby freeing up funds for additional
police officers downtown, and (ii) three other projects specified in this
motion below, and 2) terminate the downtown urban renewal district as
soon as the projects are paid for or sufficient funds are collected to fund
those projects;
e. Bring back to the council this spring a proposed ordinance requiring va-
cant properties to pay Downtown Service District fees; and
f, work with Downtown Eugene, Inc. and the Chamber of Commerce on
partnerships and other funding strategies with a goal of achieving
$350,000 in revenue.
2. Include for the proposed downtown Lane Community College development at
10"' and Charnelton $8 million as part of a proposed urban renewal plan
amendment.
3. Include as part of a proposed urban plan amendment an additional $500,000
for improvements to the Park Blocks to enhance that area for the Farmer's
Market.
4. If the VA pursues PeaceHealth's Willamette Street site for a new VA Clinic,
include the VA Clinic as part of a proposed urban renewal plan amendment.
5. Pursue additional grant opportunities for steam conversion and electric ve-
hicle charging stations.
6. Present to the council, at the same time that the manager brings forward a
draft amendment to the urban renewal plan, an analysis of both a local option
levy and a general obligations bond, instead of tax increment financing, to
fund the specified projects.
Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Brown, moved to make Items La through 1.f sepa-
rate motions. The vote on the motion to separate was a 4:4 tie; councilors Taylor,
Brown, Ortiz and Zelenka voting yes, and councilors Solomon, Poling, Pryor and
Clark voting no. Ms. Piercy cast a vote in favor of the motion and it passed on a
final vote of 5:4.
Tfi-m 1 n
Ms. Taylor indicated she would support the motion with postponement of the camera acquisition.
MINUTES Eugene City Council February 10, 2010 Page 2
Work Session
Mr. Brown said he would support the motion but had serious concerns about surveillance cameras and
would need specific information about their locations and targets.
Mr. Clark said he was willing to support the motion, but concurred with Mr. Brown that additional
information was needed before installation of cameras was approved.
Mr. Zelenka also expressed concerns with the installation of cameras, which was the reason he proposed
the additional language requiring council approval of the manager's implementation plan.
Ms. Solomon asked if the motion would allow the police chief to proceed with purchasing the automated
behavior crime reporting software prior to the council's final approval of a plan for camera installation.
Mr. Ruiz said that the motion would not prevent acquision of the software.
Item La was unanimously approved, 8:0.
Ttpm 1 h
Ms. Ortiz asked if the agreement with Springfield would include a sunset provision to provide periodic
review of the arrangement to assure it remained consistent with the council's intent and met the City's
needs. Mr. Ruiz replied that the intent was to provide an ongoing jail bed capacity and if another means
for doing that arose in the future the arrangement with Springfield could be revisited.
Mr. Poling expressed some concern about making the language so restrictive that jail beds could be
obtained only through an exchange with Springfield for use of the Fire Training Center.
Mr. Poling offered a friendly amendment to add the words "to include" as fol-
lows: "Pursue use of Springfield jail beds to include in exchange for Spring-
field's use of Eugene's Fire Training Center;" Mr. Clark accepted the amend-
ment.
Mr. Zelenka asked the City Manager to clarify what the word "pursue" meant and whether that included
presenting the agreement with Springfield to the council for approval. Mr. Ruiz replied that he understood
pursue to mean coordinate and negotiate with Springfield an arrangement that would exchange Spring- -
field's use of the training facility for Eugene's use of Springfield jail beds through an intergovernmental
agreement (IGA).
Mr. Zelenka said the term "pursue" meant to him that the manager would investigate and negotiate an
IGA, but not execute one. City Attorney Glenn Klein said if the council did not wish the manager to be
able to execute an IGA without returning to the council for approval the motion would need to be
amended to indicate that intent.
Mr. Zelenka said he supported the concept, but wanted to see any agreement with Springfield before it
was executed.
Mr. Zelenka offered a friendly amendment to revise the language to direct the
manager to explore an arrangement with Springfield and bring the information
back to the council. Mr. Clark declined to accept the amendment.
MINUTES Eugene City Council February 10, 2010 Page 3
Work Session
Mr. Zelenka, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to amend the motion to require the
manager to bring an agreement with Springfield for the use of jail beds back to
the council for approval.
Mr. Pryor asked if the amendment would impinge on the manager's usual and typical authority to enter
into contracts or IGAs. Mr. Klein explained that the City Manager or his designee was authorized to
negotiate and execute contracts consistent with the appropriation of funds without approval of the council.
He said IGAs that came before the council were typically those involving the sale of real estate or
governmental powers.
Mr. Pryor said his interest was in knowing what terms and conditions were in the IGA once it was
executed, rather than approving the IGA prior to execution. Mr. Ruiz affirmed that the council would be
informed about any arrangements that were made with Springfield.
Mr. Brown stated that the council should approve any arrangements with Springfield before they were
finalized. Mr. Ruiz pointed out that other jurisdictions already used the training facility and the City had
many such arrangements in place. It could become very burdensome for the City to do business if the
council wanted to approve every contract and IGA in advance.
Mr. Brown perceived the arrangement with Springfield as very different from other IGAs and contracts.
Mr. Clark pointed out that the municipal court administrator and a judge recently revised the City's
agreement with Lane County for jail beds, as they had that authority. He saw the IGA with Springfield as
a comparable arrangement.
Ms. Ortiz said she would be satisfied with a memorandum explaining the terms and conditions of the IGA
once it was executed.
Mr. Brown objected to including Item Lb in the motion if the council was not able to approve it. Mr. Ruiz
explained that the item was part of the comprehensive package of strategies and staff recommendations for
financing those strategies. If the council did not wish to use Springfield jail beds this was the opportunity
to make that known; otherwise, the motion would indicate the council's interest in pursuing that strategy
and authorize staff to make that happen operationally.
Mr. Pryor said the item was in the motion so the council could make a decision at the policy level about
whether an arrangement with Springfield was an appropriate strategy and funding mechanism to pursue.
He said the details of the arrangement were operational and he did not want to be involved in those, only
informed once they were in place.
In response to a question from Mr. Zelenka, Mr. Ruiz said if Springfield declined to enter into an
arrangement staff would have to explore other options for jail beds and return to the council with other
proposals. He said the intent was to negotiate with Springfield for use of jail beds through an exchange of
services instead of an exchange of funds.
Mr. Zelenka said his concern was that the cost of the jail beds was unknown. Mr. Ruiz pointed out that
the cost was included in the price for the complete package of downtown safety strategies.
Ms. Taylor, objected to making a hasty policy decision without further discussion.
MINUTES Eugene City Council February 10, 2010 Page 4
Work Session
The motion to amend failed 5 :3; Ms. Taylor, Mr. Zelenka and Mr. Brown voting
yes.
Item Lb was approved 5:3; Ms. Taylor, Mr. Zelenka and Mr. Brown voting no.
Mr. Zelenka commented that there should be a motion at the end of the approval process that addressed
the overall cost of the package of strategies.
Tt Pm 1 r.
In response to a question from Mr. Zelenka, Mr. Ruiz explained that the current allocation to HSC was
$1.8 million; an additional $500,000 would be added to that amount in FYI I and in FYI 2 and beyond the
allocation would remain $1.8 million, with the option to allocate additional dollars.
Item Lc passed unanimously, 8:0.
Ttem 1 d
Mr. Mein clarified that approving Item I .d did not automatically approve including the Lane Community
College, Veterans' Affairs clinic or Park Blocks projects; those would be approved separately in items 2,
3 and 4. He suggested adding Item 6 to the end of Item I .d.
Ms. Piercy determined there were no objections to including Item 6 in Item I .d.
Mr. Clark said he wanted to understand the specific impacts on other districts, agencies and jurisdictions.
He asked if the language related to future disposition of the urban renewal district represented obligating a
future city council. Mr. Klein said if the motion passed the council would be presented with a draft urban
renewal plan amendment that would include language limiting the expenditure of funds to certain projects
and once funds were accumulated to pay for those projects tax increment funding would cease. He said a
future council would have the legal authority to amend the plan, as had been done in the past, although it
would be difficult if the proposed language was included in the plan because a major amendment would
be required.
Mr. Brown said there was no such thing as "supposed immutability" of an urban renewal plan and the
current plan had been changed many times. He said future councils, advised by future staff, would be free
to amend the plan and there was no legal mechanism to prevent it. He said the plan had been in existence
for 42 years and could go on forever. He had concerns with the projects identified in items 2, 3 and 4. He
pointed out that several communities were competing for the clinic and the Veterans' Affairs would be
leasing, not buying a facility. He said the City had many ways to facilitate a clinic, but urban renewal
should not be one of them.
Ms. Taylor commented that previous councils had voted to terminate urban renewal and it was easy for a
future council to change that decision and expand the district, increase the debt limit and change the
purpose. She did not think urban renewal was the right way to fund projects and the council should first
decide if it wanted to support the items in the package, and then decide how to fund them. She urged that
the urban renewal district be terminated now so the City could take advantage of the benefits of increased
property values.
MINUTES Eugene City Council February 10, 2010 Page 5
Work Session
Mr. Zelenka agreed that future councils could change urban renewal plans at will and the council's action
was only stating intent, but would not have certainty. He liked the idea of a community review panel. He
felt the major public safety issue in Eugene was property crime and wondered if that could be addressed
along with downtown safety. He felt that dedicating nine police officers to downtown was too much
without directing any of that effort to property crime.
Mr. Zelenka moved to amend Item 1.d as follows: "... (i) Broadway Place Garage
debt, thereby freeing up funds for additional police officers downtown and half
forproperty crime, and..." The motion died for lack of a second.
Ms. Solomon determined from staff that the urban renewal district was scheduled to sunset in 2024, but a
proposal to amend the plan could result in an earlier termination date.
Ms. Solomon, seconded by Mr. Brown, called for the question. The motion failed
for lack of a two- thirds majority, 5:3; Mr. Zelenka, Mr. Brown and Ms. Taylor
voting no.
Mr. Poling, seconded by Ms. Solomon, moved to postpone discussion and action
on items Ld through 5 until the February 22, 2010, council work session. The
motion passed, 6:2; Mr. Brown and Ms. Taylor voting no.
Mr. Poling left the meeting at 1:06 p.m.
Mr. Brown objected to postponing the discussion. He felt the deadline for placing something on the May
ballot would be missed and was concerned that the issue of urban renewal would result in an acrimonious
disagreement with Lane Community College caught in the middle. He felt there were other tools for
financing downtown revitalization and regretted that he was unable to discuss them until February 22.
Ms. Taylor concurred with Mr. Brown.
Ms. Ortiz observed that there was a lot of work yet to be done and cautioned against creating divisiveness
in the community with inflammatory remarks.
Mr. Pryor applauded staff's efforts to present a comprehensive package that included terminating the
urban renewal district within a reasonable timeframe. He could not worry about what a future council
might do and wanted discussions to focus on the issues at -hand without becoming acrimonious and
divisive. He agreed the urban renewal district should come to an end; the question was when and how to
do that. He looked forward to a productive discussion at the next work session.
Ms. Piercy said the question was whether the council wished to pursue projects that the community had
identified as important. She pointed out that the package of strategies reflected what the community
wanted and how those could be funded. She hoped to see a productive discussion of outcomes and the
tools to achieve them. She urged the council to seek ways to come to agreement on how to meet the
community's expectations.
Mr. Zelenka commended the proposed projects as good for the community and downtown. He hoped the
council would not pursue a funding mechanism that caused disagreements, which was why he had
proposed an analysis of other funding mechanisms that might be more widely supported on the council.
He suggested adding a motion to address a cap on the overall cost of the downtown safety initiative. He
MINUTES Eugene City Council February 10, 2010 Page 6
Work Session
noted that projects related to a pocket park and downtown public safety station were not included in the
strategies and he would work with staff to incorporate those before the next work session.
B. COMMITTEE REPORTS AND ITEMS OF INTEREST FROM MAYOR, CITY
COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER
Ms. Taylor congratulated Mr. Ruiz on his decision that the Farmers' Market and Saturday Market no
longer were required to pay for the use of space downtown. She received an orientation and tour of the
Workforce Partnership facility and was impressed with the services offered. She expressed concern with
the fees charged neighborhoods to appeal land use decisions and felt there should be no cost for filing an
appeal. She requested information -on why the fees were being charged.
Ms. Ortiz reported that an air - monitoring station had been installed in the vicinity of Petersen Barn and
commended the City for its partnership with Lane Regional Air Protection Agency (LRAPA). She said
LRAPA board members had agreed to a board retreat to enhance collaboration among members.
Mr. Zelenka announced that a walnut Station meeting was scheduled on February 10, at the Laurelwood
Golf Course meeting room, and the Laurel Hill Valley Citizens would hold a potluck on February 18. He
attended a joint meeting of the Sustainability and Planning commissions. He said there was an excellent
discussion and more joint meetings were being planned.
Mr. Brown reported on the Citizen Review Board (CRB) meeting at which the tasing of a Chinese student
was discussed. He said the CRB was unanimous in its disagreement with Police Chief Pete Kerns'
disposition of the case. He thanked everyone in the community who was involved in creating the CRB
and the police auditor's office. He announced that the Police Commission would hold its next meeting at
the Sheldon Community Center on February 11.
Mr. Clark attended a Cal Young Neighborhood Association meeting and congratulated the new officers
who were elected. He also attended the Chamber of Commerce economic forecast and found it very
informative. He extended condolences to the family of Ed Ragozzino and noted his many contributions to
the community, particularly his advocacy for construction of the Hult Center. He felt that some portion of
the Hult Center should be named in his honor.
Ms. Piercy said she had sent a letter of condolence to the Ragozzino family on the council's behalf
expressing appreciation for his contributions and sympathy over his death. She also attended the CRB
meeting and was pleased with their thoughtful deliberations, which fulfilled the community's intent for
police oversight. She reported that she and Mr. Ruiz would attend a national salute to veterans in
Roseburg on February 12.
The meeting adjourned at 1:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Jon Ruiz
City Manager
(Recorded by .Lynn Taylor)
MINUTES Eugene City Council February 10, 2010 Page 7
Work Session