HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes
ECC
UGENE ITY OUNCIL
AIS
GENDA TEM UMMARY
Approval of Council Minutes
Meeting Date: April 9, 2012 Agenda Item Number: 2A
Department: City Manager’s Office Staff Contact: Kim Young
www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 541-682-5232
ISSUE STATEMENT
This is a routine item to approve City Council minutes.
SUGGESTED MOTION
Move to approve the minutes of the December 12, 2011, Regular Meeting, January 11, 2012, Work
Session, January 18, 2012, Work Session, January 25, 2012, Work Session, February 11, 2012,
Workshop, February 13, 2012, Work Session.
ATTACHMENTS
A. December 12, 2011, Regular Meeting
B. January 11, 2012, Work Session
C. January 18, 2012, Work Session
D. January 25, 2012, Work Session
E. February 11, 2012, Workshop
F. February 13, 2012, Work Session
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Staff Contact: Kim Young
Telephone: 541-682-5232
Staff E-Mail: Kim.A.Young@ci.eugene.or.us
S:\CMO\2012 Council Agendas\M120409\S1204092A.doc
ATTACHMENT A
M I N U T E S
Eugene City Council
Council Chamber—City Hall
777 Pearl Street—Eugene, Oregon
December 12, 2011
7:30 p.m.
COUNCILORS PRESENT: Betty Taylor, George Brown, Andrea Ortiz, George Poling, Mike Clark,
Chris Pryor, Alan Zelenka, Pat Farr.
Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the December 12, 2011, regular meeting of the Eugene City Council
to order.
1. PUBLIC FORUM
Because of the number of people signed up to speak in the Public Forum, Mayor Piercy limited the forum
to one hour to ensure the council had sufficient time to address all the action items on the agenda. Each
speaker was given two minutes to speak. Mayor Piercy reviewed the rules of the Public Forum and
opened the forum.
Vincent Faini
, Ward 1, asked the council to extend the camping ban for Occupy Eugene. He reminded
the council that Occupy Eugene was also a protest. He was inspired by what he had seen at the camp and
believed that Occupy Eugene had found creative and innovative ways to help the homeless at no cost to
the taxpayer.
James A. Rodman
, no ward given, called for an end to the Occupy Eugene camp because he believed
that matters had gotten out-of-hand and would cost the taxpayers more in the future. Laws had been
broken. He felt for the plight of the homeless but believed Occupy Eugene had become a quagmire. He
recommended that people who wished to demonstrate follow the law. He asked what services would be
reduced so the City could give money to Occupy Eugene. He questioned how wastewater on the site was
being addressed.
R. Jamil Jonna
, Ward 1, Avenue, spoke to contentions that Occupy Eugene participants did not need to
camp. He said Occupy Eugene knew that the homeless would come to the camp and decided to welcome
them. Occupy Eugene had not lost sight of the fact it was a protest. He believed the homeless were
growing in number because of systemic economic problems and that the country was in a depression. He
invited people to visit the camp and experience the collaborative engagement that was occurring.
Gweneth Van Frank
, Ward 3, asked the council to consider Option 4.
Lauren Regan
, Ward 1, discussed Occupy Eugene’s work with the City to ensure the safest possible
camp. She asked the council to extend the exemption until a permanent location for the camp was
planned and constructed. She offered to provide bi-weekly reports about the camp. She also asked the
council to exempt the camp from the City’s ban on open fires.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 12, 2011 Page 1
Regular Meeting
Diane Thurlow
, Ward 3, said any additional expenses created by the Occupy Eugene camp cost should
be borne by the City Councilors who voted to support the camp. She did not want to pay for the camp.
She believed the campers were breaking the law. She said it was the council’s job to take care of the
homeless and she advised the council to “deal with it.”
Becky Lemler
, Elmira, suggested the money spent to police the Occupy Eugene camp could have been
used to feed the homeless. She objected that Occupy Eugene had been allowed to disregard laws and
occupy public property at public expense. She suggested that Occupy Eugene’s original message was lost
when it allowed illegal activity at the camp and harbored minor runaways, felons, and sex offenders. She
understood there were reports that people at the camp were preparing weapons to use to fight the police if
asked to disband. Ms. Lemler feared Eugene would become a magnet for protestors from other
communities that had closed their Occupy camps and called for the camp to be ended before they
converged on the community and caused more problems.
Jonathan Schwartz
, Ward 7, said Occupy Eugene wished to be accountable and work with the City
toward solutions. He did not think that closing the camp was the right thing to do and suggested that the
camp be allowed to continue until the spring. He believed that if the City worked with Occupy Eugene
they would find a mutual solution. He referred the council to his written communication.
Ruth Duemler
, Ward 3, hoped the council extended the exemption as she did not think winter was the
right time to move the camp. She shared her positive experience attending Occupy Eugene rallies, saying
they were attended by a diverse group of people, were well-organized, and the results well-communicated
to other participants. It had been an amazing experience. She hoped all councilors could visit the site.
David Ivan Piccioni
, Ward 1, said Occupy Eugene was a means of expression for the poor and
disenfranchised. He believed it would be undemocratic to prevent those populations from exerting
political power through protest and organizing.
Jerry Smith,
Ward 2, spoke of the work that Occupy Eugene did with the homeless at no cost to the
taxpayer. He spoke of the injustices he perceived in the economic system and said Occupy Eugene was
trying to bring economic and social justice to the country. He asked the council to allow the camp to
continue. He maintained the community supported the camp. Mr. Smith believed it would be tantamount
to terrorism to tear down the tents in the middle of winter.
Thomas Price
, Ward 8, asked the council to extend the camping ban exemption for Occupy Eugene. He
spoke of the economic hardships many residents were experiencing. He had been to the Occupy Eugene
camp and knew it was a good thing.
Shaun Haskins
, Springfield, shared his view of the origins of Occupy Eugene, which he found in
economic inequality, leaving the wealthy the de facto policy makers.
Carol Berg Caldwell
, Ward 3, suggested that if the Occupy Eugene camp was closed the City would
incur costs in other areas. She spoke of the plight and despair of the homeless and suggested that the
costs of the camp were “chump change” when compared with the benefits the homeless were receiving
from the camp. She asked that the council allow a reasonable extension that gave services time to
coalesce around a broader community effort.
Michelle Townsend
, homeless, submitted a petition with 1,700 signatures to the mayor and council in
support of continuing the Occupy Eugene camp.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 12, 2011 Page 2
Regular Meeting
Irene Cardenas
, General Delivery, Eugene, discussed her preference to live outdoors in harmony with
nature.
Jeff Gent
, Ward 7, rejected the EPD’s reports about the Occupy camp. He acknowledged there were
problems but conditions were improving every day. He said kitchen resources could be secured in three
days if the City extended the exemption. He said Occupy Eugene was willing to meet the City more than
half-way and thanked the City and other agencies for their willingness to work with Occupy. Occupy
Eugene did not want to cost the City money. There were many volunteers willing to give resources but
time was needed to develop a real plan for a long-term solution.
Ross Howard
, Ward 7, likened the Occupy movement to the Arab Spring and asserted the camp was
about participants’ constitutional rights to camp at Washington Jefferson Park. He maintained that the
movement had “done a great job” and had succeeded where others had failed. He did not think it was
right to end the camp now and asked the City to work with Occupy. He believed the result would be
fewer homeless people
M. V. Lazar
, Ward 1, identified himself as a small downtown business owner downtown and supporter
of Occupy Eugene.
Gary Cornelius
, Springfield, believed that Occupy Eugene allowed the disenfranchised and marginalized
to hope change might happen. He advocated for the continuance of the camp while a long-term solution
was found. He thought the movement offered people an opportunity for better long-term support not
provided by the government.
Ben Rubaker Chuck Gerard
shared remarks authored by, Ward 1, a White Bird Clinic coordinator, who
commended Occupy Eugene for its work with the homeless. Mr. Gerard acknowledged the current
situation was not perfect and also acknowledged the increased City costs but suggested they were only
incurred because of the additional police presence at protest activities unrelated to the camp. He
acknowledged safety concerns but suggested that any death could not be the fault of the council given that
many homeless died alone each year in Eugene. He suggested that Major Tom Egan might have been
found in time if he had been at such a camp. Mr. Gerard asked the council to continue the exemption
while the movement and City worked to develop the park or an alternative site as a long-term solution.
Mark Callahan
, Ward 4, opposed further extension of the exemption to the camping ban granted to
Occupy Eugene. He said as a member of the 53 percent who paid taxes, he was concerned about the
public funding that had been spent to allow Occupy Eugene to stay in a public park that others could not
then use. He did not believe camping could be equated with speech. Mr. Callahan said the council was
charged to enforce the law for all citizens. He would be required to secure permits and licenses if he
wished to build a structure, cook and serve food, or provide medical care. He had yet to see proof that
similar requirements were made of Occupy Eugene. Mr. Callahan suggested that the City should invoice
Occupy Eugene for the costs incurred to date.
Claire Syrett
, Ward 7, urged the council to allow Occupy Eugene to exist at the current site or move to a
new space. She averred that the camp was a protest site, a refuge, and a public meeting space for people
to come together and share ideas for moving the country toward greater equality. She said current human
services were overwhelmed by demand but had begun to work with the movement to explore ideas for
serving people in immediate need and find a permanent solution. She acknowledged the City struggled to
address homelessness and recommended that the council let Occupy Eugene “take this on” with the
assistance of providers. She believed the least the City could do was provide Occupy Eugene with a
small parcel of publicly owned land.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 12, 2011 Page 3
Regular Meeting
Lotus
, Ward 1, said she was living at Washington-Jefferson Park and attested that freedom of speech was
very important to participants. She wanted to prioritize people above the rules. She called for long-term
solutions that did not marginalize people and services that made them feel welcome.
Teri Ferguson
, Creswell, discussed her positive experience at the Occupy Eugene camp. She discounted
the police reports because she averred they concerned crimes that had occurred nightly and unreported for
years. She suggested the council’s decision would not be difficult if “made from the heart.” She feared
that if the council ended the exemption to the camping ban the movement could not reach its full
potential.
Scotty Perey
, Ward 1, expressed his disagreement with the general direction of government and society.
He suggested that the City was picking on Occupy Eugene even though it was “cleaning up the mess that
was killing us all.” He maintained the camp made the movement possible and was different than anything
that had ever been seen before. He asked the council to “not get in our way” because Occupy Eugene
“was already moving on.” He envisioned a larger and more built-out camp with educational programs
serving all people. He was willing to be arrested if the City ended the camp.
Eugene Wanderer
, Ward 7, quoted Section 1 of the Oregon Constitution as rationale for continuing the
Occupy Eugene encampment and cited State v. Henry as rationale for preferring the State over the federal
constitution in this instance.
Mayor Piercy closed the Public Forum.
2. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of City Council Minutes
- October 24, 2011, Work Session
- October 26, 2011, Work Session
B. Approval of Tentative Working Agenda
The council had approved the Consent Calendar at the 5:30 p.m. work session.
3. PUBLIC HEARING AND ACTION:
Adoption of a Resolution Adopting a Supplemental Budget; Making Appropriations for the
City of Eugene for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 2011, and ending June 30, 2012
Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing.
John Barofsky
, Ward 3, reviewed the appropriations included in the supplemental budget and endorsed
those appropriations as a good use of City funds.
Nancy Woodke
, Ward 2, expressed support for the funding proposed for Laurelwood Golf Course and
suggested that the long-term future of the golf course was a livability issue.
Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Brown, moved to adopt Resolution 5049
adopting a Supplemental Budget; making appropriations for the City of Eugene for the
Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 2011, and ending June 30, 2012. Roll call vote: The
motion passed unanimously, 8:0
MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 12, 2011 Page 4
Regular Meeting
Mayor Piercy adjourned the meeting of the Eugene City Council and convened a meeting of the Urban
Renewal Agency (URA).
4. PUBLIC HEARING AND POSSIBLE ACTION:
Adoption of a Resolution Adopting a Supplemental Budget; Making Appropriations for the
Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Eugene for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 2011,
and ending June 30, 2012
Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing. There being no requests to speak, Mayor Piercy closed the
public hearing.
Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Brown, moved to adopt Resolution 1062
adopting a Supplemental Budget; making appropriations for the Urban Renewal Agency
of the City of Eugene for the Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 2011, and ending June 30,
2012. Roll call vote: The motion passed unanimously, 8:0.
Mayor Piercy adjourned the meeting of the URA and reconvened the meeting of the City Council.
5. ACTION:
An Ordinance Concerning State Traffic Laws; Amending Section 5.005 of the Eugene Code,
1971, and Providing an Effective Date
City Manager Jon Ruiz introduced the item, reporting that the council updated the code annually to ensure
consistency with the State Traffic Code. Since the last update in 2010, the State Legislature had made
changes to the State code requiring amendments to the City Code.
Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Brown, moved to adopt Council Bill 5058, an
ordinance concerning State Traffic Laws, amending Section 5.005 of the Eugene Code,
1971, and providing an effective date. Roll call vote: The motion passed unanimously,
8:0.
6. ACTION:
th
Ordinance Vacating a Portion of Moss Street Located Between East 15 Avenue and East
th
17 Avenue (VRI 10-1)
City Manager Jon Ruiz asked the council to take action on an ordinance that vacated a portion of Moss
thth
Street between East 15 and East 17 avenues. The sole criterion governing the vacation was that the
council must find it in the public interest.
Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Brown, moved to adopt Council Bill 5052, an
th
ordinance vacating the portion of Moss Street located between East 15 Avenue and East
th
17 Avenue.
Councilor Poling acknowledged the letter the council received from Greg Rikhoff, Director of
Community Relations for the University of Oregon (UO) that outlined the University’s extensive
community outreach in regard to the vacation. He thanked the UO for its approach to the vacation.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 12, 2011 Page 5
Regular Meeting
Roll call vote: The motion passed unanimously, 8:0.
7. ACTION:
Exemption to Code on Overnight Camping—Occupy Eugene
Councilor Taylor moved to amend the City Council's November 9 motion exempting
Occupy Eugene from the overnight camping prohibition under section 4.815 of the
Eugene Code by changing the date from December 15 until May 15, 2012.
The motion died for lack of a second.
Councilor Brown, seconded by Councilor Ortiz, moved to adopt modified Option 3
provided by Councilor Zelenka to extend the camping exemption and provide transition
services until the completion of the community task force’s work.
1) Mayor would immediately form a community task force to report back to the council
within 90 days to identify strategies on homeless ness for council consideration. The
task force could include council members, OE representatives, nonprofit agency
representatives, and other community members.
2) Hire a nonprofit agency to lead an effort to mobilize and coordinate transitional
human services for homeless campers, and consult with OE about the security and
management of the OE camp. These transition human services will not replicate the
OE camp experience; however, they could provide opportunities for OE homeless
campers to continue to receive basic services, such as: a legal place to camp/stay
(see 3c and 3d below), food, clothing, and medical services; while the task force
develops recommendations for a more sustainable and effective provision of services.
3) Temporarily increase the funding for the car camping program, and expand the
programs scope to include legal tent camping on sites when appropriate. Currently,
three vehicles are allowed under certain conditions in parking lots of religious
institutions, business or public entities.
4) Create a short-term site, like an Egan warming center, for the rest of the winter
specifically for chronic homeless with behavioral and addiction issues; essentially, a
secure temporary wet housing pilot program. The facility would be open seven days
per week, but with hours restricted to 5 p.m. to 8 a.m. and staffed by nonprofit
agencies and trained community volunteers.
5) Extend the camping exemption for 45 days to allow full implementation of transition
services.
6) Occupy Eugene, nonprofit agencies, and City staff are continuing to meet to discuss
these possibilities. The cost for transition services, such as these is likely to exceed
$100,000. The City Manager will provide funding options at your Wednesday,
December 14, 2011, work session.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 12, 2011 Page 6
Regular Meeting
Councilor Ortiz suggested that City Manager Ruiz meet with the leadership of Occupy Eugene to
determine if it was in agreement with the elements of the motion and report back to the council on
December 14.
Councilor Zelenka concurred with Councilor Ortiz. He also wanted to hear Occupy Eugene’s response to
the proposal.
Councilor Zelenka, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to direct the City Manager to
bring back a final motion on Wednesday after discussing the modified Option 3 motion
with Occupy Eugene representatives.
Councilor Clark requested a cursory estimate of the cost of the modified motion. City Manager Ruiz
estimated a cost of $50,000 to $150,000 for transition services. He was unsure of the policing costs but
believed they would be more than was being spent currently. Councilor Clark suggested the costs could
go as high as $250,000. City Manager Ruiz acknowledged that was possible.
Councilor Clark wanted any transition to be as peaceful as possible and to be conducted in such a manner
that allowed people to be heard and treated them with dignity. However, he was concerned that the City
was treating Occupy Eugene differently from other citizens when it came to accountability. He wanted to
know who spoke for the group and who the City was entering into an agreement with given the nature of
Occupy Eugene. City Manager Ruiz anticipated the City would meet for representatives of Occupy
Eugene although he expected that they would offer the disclaimer they did not speak for the entire group.
He said the City had worked with the group and worked through most of the issues it identified. He
expected a similar model.
Councilor Clark asked what the point of the City’s action would be if a subset of Occupy Eugene decided
to resist.
Councilor Taylor had offered a motion for more time because of the requests the council heard and had
believed May 15 would be a good date because the weather would be better and it would give the
community time to think about the issues. She wanted to give Occupy Eugene more time to figure out its
future and collect donations.
Councilor Farr did not support the motion. He continued to have major concerns regarding sanitation and
disease at the camp and those concerns had not been satisfied. The City had worked hard through a
variety of initiatives to help the homeless and but only a small percentage of homeless people were
staying at the camp. He did not think that wastewater was being handled appropriately and feared the
City was creating the conditions for an outbreak of disease.
Councilor Ortiz wanted Occupy Eugene to respond to the City Council’s offer to work together. She
acknowledged the many homeless people in the community and said that while people learned to survive,
they were not living in optimal conditions. She did not expect Occupy Eugene to end homelessness but
any step toward that end would make her happy.
Councilor Pryor suggested the question was how much time it would take to move toward a different
solution. While he was unsure anyone liked the 45-day deadline, it was a middle point people could agree
on. Councilor Pryor supported the motion to postpone action as a way to give Occupy Eugene time to
consider the proposal. He also liked the idea of involving the service providers.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 12, 2011 Page 7
Regular Meeting
Councilor Clark asked staff to prepare an estimate of costs in time for the December 14 discussion. He
also wanted an estimate of the number of people who would cooperate with the deadline and how many
would not.
Councilor Clark was challenged to support the motion because it gave tacit approval to the camp site. He
was interested in hearing further discussion on December 14 but continued to be concerned the City was
subsidizing a protest. He defended Occupy Eugene’s right to protest but did not want to spend tax dollars
to further a protest that was not supported by all residents.
City Manager Ruiz pointed out the motion did not call for the termination of the camp in 45 days.
Councilor Poling indicated tentative support for the motion. He questioned the source of funding and
how it affected other services. He recommended the funding come from Council Contingency Funds.
Councilor Poling was concerned about extending the exemption for 45 days. He preferred to retain the
December 15 date and let staff determine how to close the camp down as soon as practical. He objected
to continued extension of the exemption. The camp was not needed to realize the other elements of the
motion, which he supported as common sense steps. He anticipated further discussion of that date.
Councilor Zelenka said each Occupy movement was different and in Eugene it had focused on
homelessness. He believed that Occupy Eugene captured people’s imaginations and at least their
attention. He believed that Occupy Eugene represented an opportunity for meaningful change in
regarding to homelessness. The intention of his motion was that the camp would close at the end of 45
days. Transition services would be in place to move the campers into more stable conditions with better
services. Regarding costs, Councilor Zelenka anticipated the manager would provide the council with
funding options at the December 14 meeting and further anticipated the manager would provide ranges of
cost.
Councilor Farr was glad for the delay because he hoped it would provide more answers. He continued to
be concerned about safety and planned to visit the camp. He had serious concerns about sanitation and
questioned where the gray water was going but would keep an open mind and would see if his concerns
could be alleviated.
Councilor Brown questioned whether 45 days was sufficient time to transition the event. He suggested
the council might need to revisit that decision given the complexity of the tasks that lay ahead. He agreed
with the remarks of Councilor Zelenka.
Speaking to the issue of money, Councilor Brown suggested that the revenue from the Moss Street
vacation could be one funding source.
Mayor Piercy recalled that the bulk of police-related expenses came from the protests that occurred at the
beginning of the camp. She acknowledged that more expenses had been accrued over time. She
acknowledged that Occupy Eugene was a political movement that was shining a big light on the problem
of the homeless. She thanked the 70 people who signed up to speak and said she tried to treat all fairly
whether she agreed or disagreed with their views. She had wanted to ensure the council got to its decision
point on the issue. Mayor Piercy believed inequity was a big problem. She thanked those present for
caring.
The motion passed, 7:1; Councilor Clark voting no.
Mayor Piercy adjourned the meeting at 9:23 p.m.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 12, 2011 Page 8
Regular Meeting
Respectfully submitted,
Beth Forrest
City Recorder
(Recorded by Kimberly Young)
MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 12, 2011 Page 9
Regular Meeting
ATTACHMENT B
M I N U T E S
Eugene City Council
McNutt Room—City Hall
777 Pearl Street—Eugene, Oregon
January 11, 2012
5:30 p.m.
COUNCILORS PRESENT: George Brown, Pat Farr, Betty Taylor, Andrea Ortiz, George Poling,
Mike Clark, Chris Pryor, Alan Zelenka.
Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the January 11, 2012, work session of the Eugene City Council to
order.
A. COMMITTEE REPORTS
Mr. Brown had attended the last Civilian Review Board meeting and observed a case review. He
commended the thoroughness of the board’s review. He had also participated in some recent clean-up
parties at Civic Stadium and commended the work of Ed Peara, a long-time volunteer.
Mr. Clark commended the recent State of County event. He reported the Joint Elected Officials
Ambulance Transport Task Force continued to work diligently and anticipated it would forward its
recommendations to the council in four to five months. He recommended that councilors view the video
Ambulance Service: Matching Resources to Needs on the City’s web site for a better sense of the issues
involved.
Mr. Poling said that Travel Lane County’s newly formed Issues Committee would discuss the proposed
closure of the Gateway Postal Distribution Center. He reported that Harlow Serves, a partnership
involving the neighborhood organization, 4J School District, Holt Elementary School parents,
Willakenzie Evangelical Church, and North Park Community Church held a successful food drive. He
commended Harlow Serves as a great example of what neighborhood partnerships could accomplish. He
thanked Trader Joes for providing bags as well as all those who involved in the drive.
Ms. Taylor commended Mr. Peara as a model volunteer. She noted the e-mails the council had received
about a tree being cut to protect a sidewalk. She had also been contacted by a constituent regarding the
removal of a tree near the Campbell Center and suggested that there should be a process in place that
made it more difficult to remove trees because of their multiple values. Ms. Taylor had also been
th
contacted by residents concerned about the intrusion of commercial parking at the development at 17
Avenue and Pearl Street into the street. She believed if the City granted the developer permission to
block the sidewalk, the permission should be withdrawn.
Ms. Taylor had attended a meeting of the Board of Directors of the National League of Cities and
reported the board agreed to focus on things that affected cities of all sizes, such as unfunded mandates
and secure Community Development Block Grant funding. The board also agreed it was important to
keep immigration reform in front of Congress.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 11, 2012 Page 1
Work Session
Mr. Zelenka reported on the recent University Area Neighborhood Livability Summit, saying the impact
from the University of Oregon (UO) was a unique issue for the neighborhoods surrounding the UO. He
had called together the affected neighborhood organizations to discuss those impacts and possible
solutions. He said residents agreed that uniform solutions did not work for all parts of the community
and discussed the concept of establishing a UO overlay zone with regulations specific to the area. He said
another meeting would occur soon. Mr. Brown asked to be informed of the next meeting date. Mr.
Zelenka agreed, and said he would also provide the council with the notes of the meeting.
Mr. Zelenka reported the City’s Sustainability Commission had new members and he anticipated they
would do very well. He said the commission had been implementing its newly approved and modified
work plan, and was focusing on the Envision Eugene process, West Eugene EmX, and the Coordinated
Land Use and Transportation Advisory Committee. Mr. Zelenka commended the work of commissioner
chair Josh Skov and Sustainability Liaison Babe O’Sullivan.
Mr. Pryor reported on the most recent meeting of the Lane Council of Governments (LCOG) Board of
Directors, saying the work plan for the Sustainable Cities grant was in place. He commended the work of
Stephanie Jennings of the Planning and Development Department for leading that effort and recognized
that she was doing two jobs. The search for a new executive director to replace retired LCOG director
George Kloeppel was underway and a committee that included City Manager Jon Ruiz had been formed
to oversee that process. The board would make the final selection.
Ms. Ortiz reported on a meeting that involved herself, Mayor Piercy, Intergovernmental Relations
Director Brenda Wilson, representatives of Beyond Toxics, and representatives of Union Pacific Railroad
regarding local concerns about the impact of diesel emissions from idled trains. She learned that the
railroad had policies in places governing the practice and did not idle trains when the weather was over 40
degrees because it wasted diesel fuels. She and the representative of Beyond Toxics would contact other
railroad companies about their practices. Mayor Piercy added that the railroad reported that 75 percent of
its trains were equipped with emissions control devices and that it paid for the devices without
government assistance because it helped with fuel costs and because the railroad wanted to do the right
thing and respond to community concerns. She said the railroad planned to equip all its trains with the
devices.
Ms. Ortiz thanked the Eugene Police Department for arresting the two gang leaders who had been
impacting her neighborhood. She reminded the council of the upcoming Martin Luther King, Jr., march
and called attention to an immigrant rights meeting scheduled for January 24 at First Methodist Church
sponsored by CAUSA.
Ms. Ortiz, seconded by Mr. Zelenka, moved to have staff draft a letter in support of
keeping the Gateway Postal Distribution Center open. The motion passed unanimously,
8:0.
Ms. Ortiz reported the Human Services Commission (HRC) planned to hold a Hate Crimes Conference
and a planning group was overseeing that effort.
Mr. Farr noted his son had been married the previous Monday and he and his new wife were going to
Brazil for a year so she could study there under a Fulbright scholarship. He congratulated Alicia Hayes of
Lane County Health and Human Services for her appointment to oversee the newly reorganized
department. Mr. Farr said the HRC appreciated the recognition it received for its Listening Project at the
State of the City address. He recognized the time spent on the project by Chair Toni Gyatso and Vice
Chair Ken Neubeck and thanked Mayor Piercy for honoring the commission.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 11, 2012 Page 2
Work Session
Mr. Farr recognized the extensive volunteer work of Mr. Poling and his wife Glenda.
Mayor Piercy thanked City staff for its effort in the State of the City address. She said the event went
very smoothly.
Mayor Piercy reported that the Metropolitan Planning Committee passed the Regional Transportation
Plan with minor amendments. She acknowledged there was little funding for the projects in the plan but
it was important to have such plans in place so the community was prepared when money was available.
The MPC continued to work on greenhouse gas planning and on scoping projects for land and
transportation scenarios.
Mayor Piercy said she also attended a meeting of the Regional Solutions Committee, which discussed the
role of Goshen in satisfying the industrial land needs of Eugene.
Mayor Piercy commended the redevelopment of the Taco Time Building at Broadway and Willamette
Street.
City Manager Ruiz announced several upcoming community events, including the Martin Luther King,
Jr. Day march, the Martin Luther King, Jr. Community Celebration at the Hult Center, and a presentation
by Dr. Joseph White at the UO.
B. WORK SESSION:
Boards and Commissions
City Manager’s Office Division Manager Keli Osborn and Council Coordinator Beth Forrest joined the
council for the item. Ms. Forrest solicited council feedback on the boards and commission selection
process.
Mr. Clark, Mr. Farr, Ms. Ortiz, and Mr. Poling expressed specific concern about the geographic diversity
of City boards and commissions. Mr. Clark was particularly concerned about geographic diversity as it
regarded the Budget Committee and advocated for ways to enhance the recruiting process so the council
had a diverse range of opinions on that committee. Mr. Farr believed that wards 4, 5, 6, and 8 in specific
were underrepresented on City boards and commissions. Ms. Ortiz acknowledged the challenge of
volunteerism for many residents and encouraged the viewing audience to apply. Mr. Poling advocated for
better outreach.
Mr. Zelenka believed there were many complicated reasons, including demographics, which resulted in
some wards being unrepresented.
Ms. Taylor did not think geographic diversity mattered. Mr. Brown concurred
Ms. Osborn emphasized the challenge of getting people to apply. She suggested councilors think of
additional roles they could play in publicizing openings in their wards, such as providing people with
applications, and invited suggestions.
Mr. Pryor pointed out that when asked how they heard about a commission opening, the majority of
respondents indicated it was word of mouth. He suggested the City would not know why certain wards
were more represented than others unless it asked. He believed geographic representation should be a
MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 11, 2012 Page 3
Work Session
factor in appointments. He said that he had made random calls to residents of his ward encouraging them
to apply with little success. He suggested that people became involved in civic affairs because they were
very dissatisfied or very satisfied with City government.
Mr. Brown agreed with Mr. Pryor. He thought it would be useful to know where all applicants came
from. He acknowledged that for whatever reason, the City received more applications from residents of
wards 1, 2, and 3. He looked for the best applicant when reviewing applications and tried to avoid
looking at ward numbers. He did not know how to address the lack of geographic diversity.
Mayor Piercy agreed that geographic diversity was important but so were other types of diversity. She
noted growing participation from the Cal Young and Trainsong neighborhoods and said the City should
keep working on the issue without getting bogged down.
Mr. Clark pointed out that geographic diversity was mandated by City policy. He wanted the City to do
more to effectively achieve such diversity. He said the issue was not a shortage of applicants from other
wards but the council’s decision-making process. When the council had a chance to choose a qualified
applicant from Ward 4 it selected a qualified candidate from Ward 3. Mr. Clark wanted to find new ways
to find residents to participate and suggested that the City employ the newsletters of the school districts
and local community agencies to announce vacancies. He thought the councilors could do more as
individuals. He asked staff to communicate with the council regarding the deadlines for applications.
Mayor Piercy observed that information provided by staff indicated that the lowest levels of participation
were in the downtown, Trainsong, Far West, Jefferson-Westside, West University, and Laurel Hill
neighborhoods. Ms. Osborn pointed out the discussion was complicated by the fact that neighborhood
organizations were different sizes.
Ms. Ortiz expressed general satisfaction with the current process and thanked staff for its work. She
suggested that the City could explore the approach used in Salem, where a subcommittee of the council
rather than the full council interviewed candidates.
Mr. Zelenka believed the City needed to get more gender diversity on the Planning Commission and
noted the lack of younger and older applicants as well as applicants of color. He did not want to “trump”
those things for geographic diversity. He did not want to see geographic diversity “quotas.”
Mr. Zelenka also supported the current process and recommended that candidates should receive coaching
on their opening statements. He did not think the format the City currently used extracted the most
relevant information about life experiences.
Mr. Poling pointed out that one-third of applicants did not respond to the question regarding ethnic
background, which skewed the numbers. He supported Mr. Zelenka’s suggestion that applicants be
coached in preparing for their interviews.
Mr. Clark posited the idea of an ordinance change that provided for individual councilors to appoint
individual Budget Committee members.
Ms. Taylor did not dislike Mr. Clark’s idea. She did not want to limit councilors’ appointments to
residents of their wards, however. She suggested that after the applicant’s opening statement, the
councilors ask questions based on the statement.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 11, 2012 Page 4
Work Session
Ms. Ortiz recommended that the City hold more open houses to inform residents of board and
commissions vacancies and share information about the duties and responsibilities of the positions
involved. She believed it was the council’s role to get people not normally involved in government to
apply for such vacancies. She further suggested the City’s current process was “too process-oriented” for
some as well as a little threatening.
Mr. Brown was generally satisfied with the process. He recommended that staff prepare an informational
packet for applicants that included an estimate of the time commitment involved. He welcomed more
suggestion of Mr. Clark’s idea but pointed out it had been tried before. He believed that all wards were
equally represented on the Budget Committee because of the presence of the council. Mr. Brown liked
the idea of interviewing from a wide pool and selecting the best candidates.
Speaking to Ms. Taylor’s concern, Mr. Pryor believed the council needed consistency in the questions it
asked of applicants for the purposes of comparison but suggested the potential of an open question and
answer session following the prepared questions. He noted that currently, there were no job descriptions
for positions and recommended that the council consider establishing the minimum qualifications for
service on City boards and commissions. He thought geography as an element of diversity should be
considered. Mr. Pryor wanted to look at mechanisms for engaging ordinary residents who were not
motivated by concern about a City decision or position.
Ms. Taylor regretted the demise of the Citizen Involvement Committee, which had fostered citizen
involvement through use of a random voter pool for applicants. She suggested something similar to the
Citizen Police Academy be established for City boards and commissions.
Mr. Clark said that while residents of a geographic area would not have uniform positions, he believed
that geographic diversity ensured that everyone would be heard.
Mr. Zelenka suggested that all interviews be scheduled for one week with follow-up interviews the next
week for applicants unable to attend interviews the previous week. Ms. Forrest noted that tentatively, two
interview dates were scheduled.
Mayor Piercy adjourned the meeting at 1:28 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Beth Forrest
City Recorder
(Recorded by Kimberly Young)
MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 11, 2012 Page 5
Work Session
ATTACHMENT C
M I N U T E S
Eugene City Council
McNutt Room—City Hall
777 Pearl Street—Eugene, Oregon
January 18, 2012
5:30 p.m.
COUNCILORS PRESENT: George Brown, Pat Farr, Betty Taylor, Andrea Ortiz, George Poling,
Mike Clark, Chris Pryor, Alan Zelenka.
In the absence of Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy, Council President George Brown called the January 18,
2012, work session of the Eugene City Council to order.
A. WORK SESSION:
Envision Eugene—Economic Development
The council was joined by Community Development Manager Mike Sullivan and Associate Planner
Jason Dedrick, who led the council through a PowerPoint presentation regarding the community’s land
need as it related to the employment growth rate and industrial demand. Councilors asked questions
clarifying the details of the presentation.
Mr. Clark suggested that the aspiration goals in the Regional Prosperity Plan (RPP) indicated the region
would need to create 25,000 to 26,000 new jobs over ten years and he questioned what growth rate would
be required to achieve that given the recent job losses experienced in the community. Mr. Dedrick could
not say but reminded Mr. Clark that commercial jobs were also included in the plan forecast. He
anticipated the region would grow three times as many commercial as industrial jobs, and a growth rate of
1.6 percent would result in 8,000 industrial jobs and 25,000 commercial jobs. Mr. Clark hoped to see an
updated growth rate percentage analysis before the council discussed additional land needs. City
Manager Jon Ruiz emphasized the RPP was a regional plan. He also emphasized the goal of increasing
the average median income, which often required more industrial type jobs and could cause the City to
shift anticipated growth from commercial to industrial jobs, which would increase the overall total
percentage of industrial jobs.
Mr. Clark expressed concern that Springfield proposed to add 600 industrial acres to its land base while
Eugene was balking at adding that number. He believed the City should be thinking about a much larger
number. He said the City wanted to increase jobs in the targeted clusters but it was losing jobs in each of
the clusters. He wanted to see wholesale shifts in the numbers.
Mr. Pryor believed the job mix assumptions were a key factor because some jobs paid better than others.
He asked if the commercial category included a traded sector component. Mr. Sullivan said the targeted
industries were a mix of commercial and traded sector jobs. Mr. Pryor suggested that mix could result in
better quality jobs higher wages and wanted to know what traction the City could achieve in the
commercial sector toward the creation of such jobs. He believed the issue could be considered from both
a property tax standpoint and a payroll standpoint. In terms of payroll, Mr. Pryor wanted as many high
MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 18, 2012 Page 1
Work Session
quality jobs as possible for their multiplier effect and suggested that meant it did not matter if the job was
in Eugene or Springfield.
Ms. Ortiz agreed with Mr. Pryor, saying she was interested in the overall health of the community. While
she wanted to increase the tax base, she also wanted family-wage jobs with benefits. She asked if the
business community was considering others approaches to benefits, such as a “tri-share” approach to
health insurance.
Mr. Zelenka agreed with Mr. Pryor and Ms. Ortiz. He thought the council should be talking about
family-wage jobs and benefits and it mattered less where they were than that they helped to build the
regional economy. He suggested that Springfield’s actions had an impact on Eugene that needed to be
taken into account and should be considered on a regional basis, such as the development potential that
existed in Glenwood.
Mr. Zelenka questioned basing long-term land use decisions on aspirational goals, such as those included
in the RPP.
Mr. Zelenka requested a list of the names of the members of the economic development subcommittee.
Mr. Farr said Eugene needed to create incentives to retain local companies and attract new ones. He
referred to the information presented by staff regarding parcel sizes associated with large clean tech
facility announcements and observed that Eugene had no parcels approaching the sizes listed. He
believed Eugene had created disincentives for businesses to remain in, much less come to, Eugene. In
recent years, Eugene had lost Grain Millers, Glory Bee Foods, and Rexius Forest Products, and he
questioned how they could be replaced.
Speaking to Mr. Pryor’s comments, Mr. Farr was unsure that Springfield residents were going to spend
the proceeds from their new jobs in Eugene.
Mr. Farr endorsed the focus on foods as a job cluster and regretted the lack of local food processing
facilities.
Ms. Taylor pointed out that Rexius remained in the Eugene-Springfield area. She did not think it
mattered where a company located if that location was suitable. She also supported foods and food
processing as a job cluster and believed it was important to protect farmland to facilitate food production.
She did not think that such lands should be wasted on industrial uses.
Mr. Brown believed it was unrealistic to assume a 1.6 percent growth rate and suggested the lower figure
of .9 made more sense.
Mr. Clark did not think that 18 percent of the community’s jobs were industrial given the loss of
manufacturing jobs that occurred over the last few years. He wanted the industrial job base to be in
Eugene for the sake of jobs and the addition to the tax base that would help stabilize the City’s ability to
deliver the services it wanted to and called on Eugene to lead in providing its residents with the best jobs
with the best benefits. He believed those were found in the manufacturing, industrial, and traded sectors.
Mr. Clark wanted the council to set aside appropriate amounts of land that will help it become a regional
leader in the type of jobs that made sense for the community.
Ms. Ortiz pointed out that Eugene incentivized businesses to remain through the West Eugene Enterprise
Zone. She believed that Eugene was doing what it could with limited resources.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 18, 2012 Page 2
Work Session
Ms. Ortiz advocated for a focus on underutilized areas as Four Corners. She said if Eugene put as much
effort into that area as it did in downtown it would change the landscape in an area that served as an entry
to the community. Mr. Dedrick said that staff would return with a discussion of commercial
redevelopment soon, which could address some of Ms. Ortiz’s concerns.
Mr. Zelenka agreed with Ms. Taylor’s remarks about Rexius. He did not think Eugene was accurately
characterized as anti-growth or anti-businesses and recalled that Forbes had ranked Eugene as the fifth
best community in the country for businesses to relocate to. He believed the local business environment
was very good in spite of Mr. Clark’s “rhetoric.” He thought the entire council wanted to see more and
better family-wage jobs, and he believed that was what the task before the council was all about. Mr.
Zelenka anticipated that Eugene would continue to be the job center for the region.
Mr. Farr believed the major disincentive for businesses to remain in Eugene or come to Eugene continued
to be a lack of available land.
Mr. Brown said people must realize there were limits to growth. The community could not build on
wetlands, steep slopes, or farmland. He did not think Eugene had many suitable factory sites and said that
the council could not pretend Springfield did not exist. .
Mr. Brown requested a breakdown of the private and public investments for the projects reviewed by
staff. He also requested the final report of the Green Jobs Task Force if available.
Speaking to Mr. Zelenka’s remarks, Mr. Clark suggested that rhetoric was also saying one thing and
doing another. He said if the council stated it wanted to increase the community’s job base it needed to
remove the constraints that kept that from happening. He pointed out that Rexius moved to Springfield
because it could not find a suitable site in Eugene. Mr. Clark pointed out the City was facing $6 million
in budget reductions but none of the councilors wanted to cut services. If the council’s rhetoric was that it
cared about economic growth, wanted to see more jobs, and wanted to fund the desired service levels, it
needed to increase the value of land inside the UGB.
Mr. Pryor advocated for the council to depend on actual information to the degree possible and not take
things on faith. He believed the community needed to accommodate industrial growth but the issue was
to what degree. He said that government could only create an environment for job growth. He suggested
that Eugene’s anti-business reputation was based on people’s perception that it was overly restrictive in
its regulations. He believed regulation was necessary but must make sense. Mr. Pryor recommended the
council discuss changes in that area to ensure the City was providing a logical, reasonable regulatory
environment without “giving away the farm.”
Mr. Brown suggested the loss of Rexius was mitigated by the redevelopment that would occur on its
former site.
Mr. Brown adjourned the meeting at 1:19 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Beth Forrest
City Recorder
MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 18, 2012 Page 3
Work Session
(Recorded by Kimberly Young)
MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 18, 2012 Page 4
Work Session
ATTACHMENT D
M I N U T E S
Eugene City Council
McNutt Room—City Hall
777 Pearl Street—Eugene, Oregon
January 25, 2012
Noon
COUNCILORS PRESENT: George Brown, Pat Farr, Betty Taylor, Andrea Ortiz, George Poling,
Mike Clark, Chris Pryor, Alan Zelenka.
Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the January 25, 2012, work session of the Eugene City Council to
order.
A. WORK SESSION
An Ordinance Concerning Downtown Public Safety Zone; Amending Section 4.74 of the
Eugene Code, 1971; and Providing a Sunset Date
Lieutenant Sam Kamkar led the council through a PowerPoint presentation on the Downtown Public
Safety Zone (DPSZ) that included a review of all exclusion dispositions from October 2008 through
November 2011 and demographic information about people receiving exclusion orders. Police Chief Pete
Kerns and Prosecutor Dan Barkovic were also present for the item.
Lt. Kamkar recommended that the word “shall” in Section 4.875 be changed to “may,” and that the sunset
in the ordinance be eliminated.
Councilors asked questions clarifying the details of the presentation.
Mr. Clark, seconded by Mr. Farr, moved to have the manager bring back the ordinance
appropriately changed to reflect the staff recommendation.
Mr. Clark believed the zone had improved downtown safety conditions. He noted the Police Auditor had
received no complaints about the City’s enforcement of the ordinance in the three years of the zone’s
existence. He also noted that the Police Commission held a public forum to solicit public input on the
zone and subsequently recommended that the council extend the ordinance and remove the sunset.
Ms. Taylor suggested that the City suspend the zone for one year so it could determine how the addition
of more downtown officers affected crime rates. She wanted to know where those excluded from
downtown went and if they were arrested in some other place. She questioned whether those excluded
from downtown had sufficient faith in the system or even enough knowledge of it to pursue their options
under the law.
Mr. Poling believed the exclusion zone was working as planned and indicated support for the motion.
Mr. Farr asked for a list of other municipalities with similar zones.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 25, 2012 Page 1
Work Session
Responding to a question from Mr. Pryor about the increase in crimes after the establishment of the zone,
Lt. Kamkar attributed the increase to having more officers available to respond to calls and the fact that
downtown businesses were more apt to contact the police and report a crime knowing they would receive
a prompt response. Mr. Pryor concluded that reporting rather than crime had gone up and anticipated
over time the actual number of citations would decrease if the zone was working. Lt. Kamkar agreed.
Responding to a question from Mr. Pryor, Lt. Kamkar confirmed that the exclusion zone was not being
used to target individuals but rather to target criminal behavior.
Mr. Brown did not think the motion was necessary at this time, noting the public process to follow. He
questioned the effectiveness of the zone given the data provided by staff and suggested the zone
represented an unnecessary layer to the existing policing system. Like Ms. Taylor, Mr. Brown also
wanted to know what happened to those who were excluded. He noted that the Mid-Town Merchants
Association reported a large spike in incidents in that area, which was immediately adjacent to downtown.
Mr. Brown supported the word change recommended by staff.
Mr. Zelenka believed it was hard to definitely state that zone worked and he continued to have due
process concerns. He questioned why one in five challenged exclusions was denied by a judge. Mr.
Barkovic said that in some instances cases were dismissed when the court discovered the crime
underlying the exclusion was not eligible for a 90-day exclusion order, although the crime might be
eligible for one-year exclusions in the event of a conviction. Mr. Zelenka asked for more detail about
those cases.
Ms. Ortiz requested additional information about how Latinos were identified in the demographics.
Ms. Ortiz believed downtown crime had leeched into nearby neighborhoods as a result of the zone,
decreasing those residents’ quality of life. She had considered the zone a stopgap measure pending the
assignment of more police officers, which she anticipated would have a greater impact than the zone. She
agreed the motion was premature and did not support it.
Mayor Piercy believed the intention was that the City would have less need for the zone as other public
safety initiatives moved forward. She suggested to Mr. Zelenka that the number of dismissed cases
argued that the zone was working. She pointed out the community continued to lack sufficient jail beds
and she did not know when that would change. Mayor Piercy acknowledged that focusing on crime in
one location frequently shifted it to another location.
Mayor Piercy supported retention of the sunset and a future reexamination; however, she questioned if the
time was right to end the zone given the City’s goals for downtown.
Mr. Clark agreed with Mayor Piercy. He believed the zone had been effective in removing the worst
offenders from downtown and held them accountable at a time the City lacked jail beds to contain them.
He recommended those in disagreement contact downtown business owners like Tom Kamis and Betty
Snowden to ask them if they thought the zone made a difference.
Mr. Poling agreed with Mr. Clark and Mayor Piercy. He considered the zone a tool to mitigate the loss of
County jail beds. He anticipated that Lane County will make even more reductions to public safety. He
thanked Sgt. Terry Fitzpatrick and Lt. Kamkar for their administration of the ordinance.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 25, 2012 Page 2
Work Session
Responding to a question from Mr. Farr, Chief Kerns said studies suggested that focused patrols would
disperse concentrations of crime and when they occurred elsewhere they were in smaller concentrations.
As the concentration dispersed, the police followed it. The loss of jail beds undermined the police effort.
Mr. Farr expressed interest in knowing if the dispersed crime was at the same level as the downtown
crime level.
Mr. Zelenka also supported retaining the sunset. He wanted to see more statistics about crime in adjacent
areas and wanted more information about the advocacy program. Lt. Kamkar acknowledged the
advocacy program had not been used and believed it was because people found the information
complicated. He thought changes could be made to make the program clearer and more effective and
suggested judges could also remind defendants about the program.
Mr. Zelenka also considered the motion premature.
Mr. Pryor supported the intent behind the motion but wanted to give the manager time to process the
concepts raised by the council and the public in a thoughtful way. He was unprepared to address the issue
of the sunset without more discussion of its relationship to other public safety tools the City was
deploying in downtown.
Ms. Taylor wanted to hear from people who had been excluded. She believed that those who were unable
to understand the process or who lacked knowledge about the system would fail to appear and would be
unable to fight the exclusion. She also questioned where the City would jail people who violated an
exclusion order in the absence of sufficient jail beds.
With the consent of his second, Mr. Farr, Mr. Clark withdrew his motion.
B. WORK SESSION
Envision Eugene: Low-Density Residential Re-Designation
Associate Planner Heather O’Donnell led the council through a PowerPoint presentation regarding the
community’s low-density residential land need. Planning Director Lisa Gardner and Metropolitan
Community Section Manager Carolyn Weiss were also present for the item. The presentation included
maps showing the areas proposed for possible resignation. Ms. O’Donnell reported that the Planning
Commission supported the staff recommendation for North Eugene and Option C for West Eugene.
Councilors asked questions clarifying the details of the presentation.
Ms. Weiss reviewed the project timeline, indicating staff would return with a draft recommendation in
March, which would be followed by community forums, a public hearing, and council action in May.
Mayor Piercy adjourned the meeting at 1:19 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Beth Forrest
City Recorder
MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 25, 2012 Page 3
Work Session
(Recorded by Kimberly Young)
MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 25, 2012 Page 4
Work Session
ATTACHMENT E
M I N U T E S
Eugene City Council/Eugene Budget Committee
McNutt Room—City Hall
777 Pearl Street—Eugene, Oregon
February 11, 2012
9 a.m.
COUNCILORS PRESENT: George Brown, Pat Farr, Betty Taylor, Andrea Ortiz, George Poling,
Chris Pryor, Alan Zelenka.
COUNCILORS ABSENT: Mike Clark.
Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the February 11, 2012, annual workshop and meeting with the
Eugene Budget Committee to order. The council was joined by Budget Committee lay members John
Barofsky, Ken Beeson, Chelsea Clinton, Shanda Miller, Mark Rust, Doug Smith, and Claire Syrett. City
Manager Jon Ruiz and members of the City’s Executive Team, Assistant City Manager/Planning and
Development Director Sarah Medary, Fire and Emergency Medical Services Chief Randy Groves, Police
Chief Pete Kerns, Library, Recreation, and Cultural Services Director Renee Grube, and Public Works
Director Kent Corey.
The council first considered a motion related to the location of the proposed Veterans Administration
(VA) hospital.
Mr. Brown, seconded by Mr. Farr, moved that because the City Council strongly
supported veterans and locating the new Veterans Administration (VA) Clinic in Eugene,
and because the council was committed to ensuring that Eugene sites were competitive
and was working proactively with the VA, land owner, and developer of the project to
ensure its success, the council directed the city manager to bring back to the council as
quickly as feasible a range of options for facilitating the development of a VA Clinic in
Eugene as well as possible mechanisms for funding those options. The motion passed
unanimously, 7:0.
A. WORKSHOP
Ms. Miller and Ms. Cutsogeorge then led the council and lay committee members through a PowerPoint
presentation entitled City of Eugene General Fund Forecast, which highlighted General Fund trends,
described causes of the structural budget imbalance, and underscored recent budget accomplishments.
The presentation included both a General Fund forecast and reserve review that included trend data about
property tax revenues, Eugene Water & Electric Board’s Contribution-in-Lieu of Taxes (CILT), and
inflation, and highlighted the impact of additional PERS costs over the forecast period.
Councilors and lay committee members asked questions clarifying the details of the presentation.
Mayor Piercy called for a brief break.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council/ February 11, 2012 Page 1
Budget Committee Workshop
City Manager Ruiz then discussed the strategy he proposed for reducing the City’s anticipated $7 million
budget shortfall over two years by reducing the organizational footprint through position eliminations and
recapturing recession revenues through the City’s investments in the Joint Elected Officials Regional
Prosperity Plan, business assistance loans, and downtown development efforts. He acknowledged staff
had proposed little by way of new revenue increases and attributed that to recognition of the fact that
taxpayers were facing a similar gap. City Manager Ruiz anticipated that some employees would be laid
off. He indicated he would present his full recommendation to the committee on February 22.
Councilors and lay committee members asked questions clarifying the details of the manager’s strategy.
Mr. Poling suggested the City would be deeper in the hole after two years if the projections were not
realized and the gap grew even more. City Manager Ruiz believed the two-year period gave the City time
to make course corrections without creating financial instability. He pointed out that the more revenue
the City captured in the first years, the less it would have to capture in the out years; if the City was able
to capture more than half of the shortfall in the first year it would reduce the risk in out-years.
Ms. Taylor requested information about the ten-year tax exemptions granted by the City.
Responding to a question from Mayor Piercy about steps the organization had taken to reduce health care
expenses, Ms. Hammitt said that Risk Services Manager Myrnie Daut had evaluated an on-site clinic but
it did not appear to be a cost-saving strategy when investigated. Ms. Daut focused on prevention and
wellness to lower the City’s overall health expenditures. Ms. Hammitt promised to provide additional
information. Ms. Ortiz suggested the City could direct staff to the County’s community health centers for
regular care and buy catastrophic insurance for other issues. Ms. Hammitt said the City continued to look
for opportunities to reduce costs through cooperation with other regional agencies. She reminded the
committee that employee benefits were bargained for through the contract process.
Ms. Hammitt led the council and lay committee members though a PowerPoint presentation entitled
Sustainable Funding for City Services that highlighted the City’s progress toward achieving a stable
budget. Councilors and committee lay members asked questions clarifying the details of the presentation.
Ms. Ortiz determined from City Manager Ruiz that when he talked about employee layoffs he was also
talking about service reductions. Ms. Ortiz acknowledged that several employees were doing several
jobs. She hoped that the organization moved forward in a way that was true to the council’s goals and the
community’s values.
Mr. Poling asked if Eugene was aware of service reductions contemplated by the other local jurisdictions
that involved services delivered through intergovernmental agreements. If that was the case and if
Eugene could no longer fill the funding gap, he questioned whether those functions could continue and if
it was worth it to go forward on such a diminished basis. City Manager Ruiz noted his frequent meetings
with the chief executive officers of those jurisdictions and said they attempted to keep those issues in
mind while also being aware that the elected officials had their own priorities. He said it was a balancing
act.
The council and committee lay members discussed the proposed process. Concerns included the
truncated process associated with the official budget message scheduled on April 18, uncertainty
surrounding the budgets of other jurisdictions, inadequate time for the committee to provide the input
necessary to achieve a service mix that was in accord with community goals and available funding, and a
desire to do more than meet the minimum legal requirements. Those supporting the process found it more
MINUTES—Eugene City Council/ February 11, 2012 Page 2
Budget Committee Workshop
strategic than past budget reviews, believed there was adequate time for public input built into the
process, and thought it accommodated potential changes resulting from other jurisdictions’ budget
decisions.
City Manager Ruiz previewed the February 22 meeting, reminding the council and lay committee
members they would receive his recommended reductions on that date and all Budget Committee
meetings scheduled in February and March would include public input opportunities. There would be
time for members to provide input and offer motions prior to the official budget presentation.
Responding to a question from Mr. Poling, Ms. Hammitt confirmed that the committee could meet if any
of its partner jurisdictions took an unexpected budget action that affected the City’s budget. She assured
the committee that staff continued to track the discussions that were occurring around the involved
services.
Mr. Zelenka expressed interest in a document showing what had changed in the non-General Fund portion
of the budget from the previous year. He also advocated for a “big picture” discussion of revenues that
included information about initiatives planned by other local jurisdictions. Ms. Miller and Mr. Barofsky
shared Mr. Zelenka’s interest in a “big picture” discussion. City Manager Ruiz welcomed such a
conversation.
The committee agreed to move forward with the process proposed by City Manager Ruiz.
Mayor Piercy adjourned the meeting at 11:52 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Beth Forrest
City Recorder
(Recorded by Kimberly Young)
MINUTES—Eugene City Council/ February 11, 2012 Page 3
Budget Committee Workshop
ATTACHMENT F
M I N U T E S
Eugene City Council
McNutt Room—City Hall
777 Pearl Street—Eugene, Oregon
February 13, 2012
5:30 p.m.
COUNCILORS PRESENT: George Brown, Pat Farr, Betty Taylor, Andrea Ortiz, George Poling,
Mike Clark, Chris Pryor.
COUNCILORS ABSENT: Alan Zelenka.
Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the February 13, 2012, work session of the Eugene City Council to
order.
A. ACTION:
Motion to Accept New Evidence (Upcoming Joint Elected Officials Hearing on Springfield
Metro Plan Boundary)
Planner Alissa Hansen joined the council and requested council action on a motion to accept new
evidence for a Springfield proposal to expand the Springfield Metropolitan Plan Boundary. She reported
that Lane Board of County Commissioners approved a similar motion the previous week and the
Springfield City Council would consider such a motion the following week.
Mr. Brown, seconded by Mr. Farr, moved that, in accordance with Eugene Code
9.7750(1), the March 13 public hearing of the Joint Elected Officials regarding the
boundary changes of the Metro Plan allow new testimony and not be limited to the record
of the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously, 7:0.
B. COMMITTEE REPORTS
Ms. Ortiz said she had asked City Manager Jon Ruiz to schedule a work session to discuss the Lane
Regional Air Protection Agency (LRAPA) budget because Lane County and Springfield had again
notified LRAPA they would not be able to pay their dues for fiscal year 2013. She hoped the council
could discuss that issue before the City’s own budget review. She noted that LRAPA’s budget review
began in March. She had appointed Tom Musselwhite to LRAPA’s Budget Committee and anticipated
he would be a good fit. Ms. Ortiz also reported that LRAPA’s home wood heating and wood stove
change-out programs were going well in Oakridge and Cottage Grove, that LRAPA would host a week-
long motor vehicle testing project in Eugene as part of Earth Month, that LRAPA staff sent informational
packages about asbestos abatement to Lane County residents who received building permits for
remodeling projects, and that LRAPA had formed a Revenue Resource Committee and a Personnel Policy
Committee.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council February 13, 2012 Page 1
Work Session
Mr. Pryor said the Housing Policy Board (HPB) held special meetings to discuss anticipated reductions in
federal HOME and Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding, which were used locally for
construction, operation, and administration construction of low-income housing. The reductions would
have an impact on the City’s budget. The HPB also discussed coordination between the jurisdictions and
how they used those moneys; in Eugene HOME money was used to build multi-family low-income
housing and Springfield used much of the funding it received to assist first-time home buyers. He
believed the two programs complimented each other. Mr. Pryor said the HPB recognized that its work
was related to Envision Eugene and members were interested in the outcome of that process. He noted
that the HPB would debrief the Bascom Village Request for Proposals experience at its next meeting.
Mr. Pryor observed that the City had one remaining landbank site and it was important to develop it
correctly.
Ms. Taylor reported that the Lane Workforce Partnership had received a grant from the American
Association for Retired People to fund job training for residents older than 50.
Mr. Poling reported the Harlow Neighbors would meet on February 16 at the North Park Community
Church. He had attended the first meeting of the newly formed Northeast Neighbors and presented
information about the City’s draft Bicycle Pedestrian Master Plan and the Bascom Village project
process.
Mr. Brown reported that the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) had reviewed
the projects completed in 2011, all of which were built under budget, allowing funding to be carried over.
The MWMC previewed the upcoming budget, which the council would be asked to approve in May. Mr.
Brown reported on MWMC’s contract with Fresh Water Trout for riparian restoration that would generate
shading credits for lowering the river temperature, saying MWMC encountered a road black because the
federal Department of Environmental Quality determined only the project’s capital costs, not monitoring
costs, could be reimbursed. The MWMC was working on how to pay the costs of monitoring.
Mr. Brown reported that in spite of the excessive rain that fell in the last few days of December, the
wastewater plant performed well under capacity and met all regulatory requirements.
Mayor Piercy suggested that the council talk about what LRAPA meant to the Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality.
Responding to a question from Mayor Piercy, Mr. Pryor said he would find out if the remaining landbank
site could be used for community gardens.
Mayor Piercy reviewed some of the Sustainability Commission’s recommendations regarding the draft
Bicycle Pedestrian Master Plan, highlighting the commission’s recommendation that any proposed street
repair bond include funding for bicycle and pedestrian facilities and a sidewalk infill program.
B. WORK SESSION:
West Eugene EmX Extension Update
The council was joined by Transportation Planner Kurt Yeiter and Lane Transit District (LTD) General
Manager Ron Kilcoyne, LTD Director of Planning and Development Tom Schwetz, and LTD Director of
Service Planning, Accessibility, and Marketing Andy Vobora. Rick Duncan of the appraisal firm Duncan
Brown was also present. Mr. Yeiter introduced the item, an update on the West Eugene EmX extension,
and recalled that nearly a year previous the council and LTD board had narrowed nearly 50 alternatives to
MINUTES—Eugene City Council February 13, 2012 Page 2
Work Session
ththth
a single locally preferred alternative (LPA) along West 6/7 avenues and West 11 Avenue. LTD staff
had been studying the impacts of the alternative and would present its findings. No action was requested
of the council.
General Manager Kilcoyne reported that LTD submitted a draft environmental analysis for the LPA to the
Federal Transit Administration (FTA) in September 2011. He anticipated the FTA would determine
whether to certify the analysis in March, which would trigger a 45-day public comment period. After the
FTA reviewed the comments General Manager Kilcoyne anticipated the agency would issue a Finding of
No Significant Impact (FONSI); otherwise, LTD would have to return the federal funds it received for
planning to the FTA. He said Mr. Duncan would present his real estate analysis, which was part of the
environmental analysis.
General Manager Kilcoyne noted that President Barack Obama’s budget, released earlier that day,
included $19 million for project development.
Mr. Duncan led the council through a PowerPoint presentation entitled LTD EmX Property Impacts
Analysis Proposed West Eugene EmX Extension. The presentation included a series of maps showing the
impact of the LPA on properties along the LPA route and potential acquisitions. Mr. Duncan offered the
caveat that no actual appraisals had yet occurred. He noted his assigned scope of work, which was to
provide a general property description of each affected property; review acquisition maps; identify
potential land use or code issues, existing property constraints, or potential direct property effects
resulting from the project; identify any direct or indirect potential business/property effects; and
recommend mitigation strategies to minimize those effects where possible.
Mr. Duncan noted the most potentially impacted properties (Adult Shop and King’s Asian Market). He
described the impact of the project on parking along the route and shared examples of possible parking
th
mitigation approaches. He shared an example of a building impact on 6 Avenue. Mr. Duncan noted
potential land use and code compliance issues as they related to legal non-conforming uses and legal non-
conforming situations. He noted the possibility that sidewalks might require narrowing in some areas
along the route.
Mr. Duncan reported that 118 properties, or 24.3 of the properties along the route, would be impacted by
the project; of those properties, less than 2 percent of the total site area of those properties was proposed
for acquisition. He noted the percentage range of impact on the affected properties. Mr. Duncan
provided a general summary of the proposed acquisition areas, reporting that 14 percent of affected
properties required no acquisition; LTD proposed to acquire less than 100 square feet on 13 properties,
proposed to acquire between 100 and 1,000 square feet on 55 properties, and proposed to acquire over
1,000 square feet on 36 properties; 6 of those properties required more than 3,000 square feet.
Mr. Duncan shared a property impact summary of the major property impacts and the number of
impacted properties.
Councilors asked questions clarifying the information presented.
Mr. Brown requested information about the number of on-street metered parking spaces that would be
lost along downtown streets as a result of the project. He also requested that LTD provide the council
with copies of Mr. Duncan’s complete analysis once it was available.
The council then considered the Consent Calendar, scheduled for action at the regular meeting scheduled
at 7:30 p.m.
MINUTES—Eugene City Council February 13, 2012 Page 3
Work Session
2. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of City Council Minutes
- November 21, 2011, Regular Meeting
- November 23, 2011, Work Session
- November 28, 2011, Regular Meeting
- January 30, 2012, Boards and Commissions Interviews
B. Approval of Tentative Working Agenda
C. Ratification of Intergovernmental Relations Committee Minutes of February 1,
2012
D. Interim Appointment to Toxics Board
Mr. Brown, seconded by Mr. Farr, moved to approve the items on the Consent Calendar.
Ms. Taylor pulled item C.
Roll call vote: The Consent Calendar, with the exception of item B, passed unanimously,
7:0.
Ms. Taylor said she pulled the item because she had made a motion at the Council Committee on
Intergovernmental Relations to change the City’s position on the bill from Support to Oppose but failed to
receive a second to the motion. She recommended that the City Council oppose the bill.
Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Brown, moved to change the City’s position on House Bill
4017 to Oppose.
Ms. Taylor believed a person who was convicted of driving under the influence was already punished
enough through embarrassment and remorse and did not need an interlock device in their automobiles for
further punishment.
Councilors expressed an interest in receiving more information about the bill.
Mr. Pryor, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to table the motion until the regular meeting.
The motion passed unanimously, 7:0.
Ms. Ortiz congratulated Richard Nichol for his appointment to the Toxics Board and thanked Mr. Nichol
for applying.
Mayor Piercy adjourned the meeting at 6:40 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Beth Forrest
City Recorder
(Recorded by Kimberly Young)
MINUTES—Eugene City Council February 13, 2012 Page 4
Work Session