HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCMinutes - 01/26/04 WS MINUTES
Eugene City Council
Work Session
McNutt Room--Eugene Public Library
January 26, 2004
5:30 p.m.
COUNCILORS PRESENT: Gary Pap6, Nancy Nathanson, Scott Meisner, David Kelly, Betty Taylor,
Bonny Bettman, George Poling, Jennifer Solomon.
Mayor James D. Torrey called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order.
A. Items from the Mayor, City Council, and City Manager
Ms. Taylor congratulated Kate O'Donnell and the Lane Library League for their progress in providing
library services to Cottage Grove.
Ms. Taylor reported that she attended the charette regarding a downtown civic center at the Atrium Building
on January 22. She had been impressed by the caliber of the attendees and the work they had done. While
she thought the City should have addressed the Land Use Board of Appeals remands first, she really liked
the planning that was being done and the depth of knowledge being contributed.
Mr. Pap6 had no items.
Mr. Meisner reported that he, the City Manager, Planning Director Susan Muir, Planning staff, and several
Planning Commissioners had attended the Smart Growth Conference in Portland the previous week, and he
would provide the council with a written report.
Mr. Meisner said he and the mayor attended the kick off for Readin' in the Rain that morning, and
encouraged residents to participate in reading Ursula LaGuin's Lathe of Heaven.
Mr. Poling had no items.
Ms. Bettman asked about the progress of her inquiry regarding the progress made on the Parks Blocks
Placemaking Study in terms of support for the Farmers Market and Saturday Market, and what remained to
be done to foster those community assets in downtown. She also inquired about her request for information
about the formation of local improvement districts to underwrite the costs of traffic calming. She wanted
information on how such districts were formed and administered to be provided to the neighborhoods.
Ms. Bettman commended those who organized the Martin Luther King Jr. March. She said there were
approximately 500 people in attendance, about five times the number of those who marched the previous
year. In company with City Manager Dennis Taylor and his wife, Joan, she had participated in the march
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 26, 2004 Page 1
Work Session
and found it an uplifting experience. She believed the community debate that occurred earlier in the year
contributed to the overwhelmingly successful celebration.
Ms. Solomon arrived.
Mr. Kelly also commended the Martin Luther King, Jr. March and noted that a North Eugene High School
student had read a very powerful poem. He also attended the ceremony that evening at the Hult Center, and
thanked those who organized it.
Ms. Solomon reported that Ms. Taylor was recently elected the chair of the Human Services Commission.
Ms. Solomon reported that the grand opening of the new Bethel Safety Substation would take place the next
day.
City Manager Taylor thanked Ms. Nathanson and Mr. Kelly for their assistance in promoting the Hult
Center with their performances in anticipation of the January 28 event.
City Manager Taylor called attention to a flier regarding a briefing opportunity that was occurring the next
day with County and City officials on a tentative settlement of the lawsuit between local governments and
the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS). He recognized Assistant City Manager Jim Carlson for
his work in bringing the matter to a resolution.
Mr. Poling encouraged all residents to vote on Ballot Measure 30 by the time ballots were due.
Mayor Torrey said that he had been very impressed by the downtown charrette and the in-depth planning
that had been done. Some great concepts had been brought up. He encouraged the council to read the
report when it was available.
Mayor Torrey also encouraged residents to participate in Readin' in the Rain.
At the request of Mayor Torrey, Ms. Bettman assumed the chair. Mayor Torrey briefly left the meeting.
B. WORK SESSION: Proposed Revisions to Traffic Ordinances
City Manager Taylor introduced Judge Wayne Allen and Court Administrator Marilyn Nelson, who were
present to discuss proposed changes to the City's traffic violations and criminal offenses ordinances. City
Prosecutor Dan Barkovic, Traffic Enforcement Sergeant Derel Shulz, and Katheryn Brotherton of the City
Attorney's Office were also present for the item.
Ms. Nelson reviewed the proposed changes, noting that several were made to mirror changes in State law.
Mayor Torrey reentered the meeting.
Judge Allen discussed recent State law changes establishing higher mandatory minimum fines, which
Eugene did not propose to adopt. He said that often those assessed with high fines were unable to pay them,
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 26, 2004 Page 2
Work Session
and predicted that such fines would be difficult for the police, defendants, and counter staff. In the end, such
fines would result in more people driving without insurance and be more costly for the community.
Mayor Torrey solicited a first round of council questions and comments.
Mr. Meisner acknowledged the State's need for revenue. However, he was not interested in a State law that
merely raised the fines and removed a judge's authority to consider individual circumstances and needs. He
commended the staff proposal and said he looked forward to the public hearing. He supported the
suggestions offered by Judge Allen. He confirmed with Judge Allen that the City had the authority to
deviate from State law.
Mayor Torrey returned to the meeting and assumed the chair.
Mr. Poling was pleased with the added language regarding trespassing. He said that the City must keep up
with the times in terms of advancing technology. He thought the recommendations were moving the City in
the right direction. He recalled that when the State had previously raised bail amounts, people were
extremely angry, and were not hearing when they were cited that the bail schedule was determined by State
law rather than the local jurisdiction. He hoped residents would keep in mind that the bail was the starting
point, and not get upset at the officer issuing a citation. Given an understanding judge and the proper
circumstances, Mr. Poling said, the bail would be reduced. He too looked forward to the public hearing.
Ms. Nathanson believed the proposals before the council were ready to be considered by the public. She
said the State's objective was increasing revenue, but the City's objective was to improve safety for the
citizens. She thought Judge Allen had developed creative approaches to increasing education in the
community, and thought the proposals showed good sense as well as sensitivity.
Mr. Pap~ concurred with the remarks of Ms. Nathanson about the City's goal of increasing safety on the
streets. He asked Judge Allen to consider what could be done to stop repeat red light runners. Judge Allen
acknowledged the problem and said he did not know the answer. However, he recommended that the traffic
team be at full strength at all times and commended the leadership of Sergeant Derel Schulz. He thought the
increased fines discourage people. He noted that there were few repeat red light runners, while there were
many people who repeatedly receive speeding tickets.
Mr. Pap~ thought ~inappropriate behavior" at a sporting event seemed a little broad for a criminal offense.
Ms. Nelson referred Mr. Pap~ to the first page of the ordinance, which was specific about the types of
behaviors involved. Ms. Brotherton indicated that the language in question was taken directly from State
law. Mr. Barkovic pointed out the subsections already described conduct that were separate crimes under
State and City law, such as harassment and disorderly conduct. He believed the rationale was to take
existing prohibitions and add the authority of a sports official to enforce those laws without the need for a
separate victim to come forward. The definitions were useful in defining the conduct. Only sub (b) was
somewhat new to Eugene; he believed that there were rules to define that conduct.
Mayor Torrey asked about fines levied against those incapable of paying the entire fine, and if the City
would be responsible for making up the difference. Ms. Nelson indicated the City paid the State portion and
then bore the burden of the uncollectible fine. Mayor Torrey asked Ms. Nelson to contact the Gold Beach
City Administrator about potential legislative changes as he did not think the City should suffer the financial
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 26, 2004 Page 3
Work Session
consequences.
Ms. Taylor asked if there were already laws covering sporting events. She also questioned the use of the
phrase ~inappropriate behavior," as she considered it vague. She wanted to know what constituted ~lewd
gestures."
Ms. Bettman agreed with Judge Allen about the need to ensure the traffic team was at full strength. She
noted the Police Commission's support for that priority following its community survey, which indicated
strong community concern about the topic of traffic safety. She agreed with the need for judicial discretion.
Ms. Bettman was also interested in the subject raised by the mayor, and confirmed with Ms. Nelson that the
State had raised the unitary assessment amount. Ms. Bettman asked if the City's decision to adopt a higher
fee schedule would result in more uncollectible fines. She wanted to know more about that before the
hearing, as well as the budgetary impact of the proposals.
Ms. Bettman asked if any other Oregon communities decided not to adopt the new State minimums. Ms.
Nelson said not to her knowledge. Judge Allen said that the issue was a source of frustration for all Oregon
judges. At an Oregon Municipal Judges convention, the judges had been briefed on the legislative action.
None of them favored the legislation, which did not make sense to them. However, all the judges assumed
that they had no choice, which was why it had taken Eugene so long to suggest that there was another
approach. He said that if Eugene took the recommended approach, he would consider writing to other
Oregon municipal judges and let them know that they had a choice.
Ms. Bettman suggested that if a large number of municipalities decided against adopting the mandatory
minimums, the only effect of the legislation was to increase the fees the State received from municipalities.
Ms. Bettman asked under what authority the City could refuse to adopt the mandatory minimums. She
assumed the issue was governed by the State. Ms. Brotherton indicated the issue was governed by OCT
2.477, regarding the City's delegation of authority to a municipal court judge to establish bails, fines, and
penalties, as long as they were within the maximums set by State law. She said the statute stipulated the
mandatory minimums, or base penalties, could not be reduced more than 25 percent. The statutes contained
an explicit provision that allowed cities to adopt their own base penalties, and thus they would not be subject
to the statute. Ms. Brotherton believed legal counsel reached a reasonable interpretation of a somewhat
clear law. Ms. Bettman asked if the City could be challenged by the State on the issue. Judge Allen said it
was possible, but he did not think it mattered to the State as long as it continued to receive its assessment.
Mr. Kelly expressed appreciation that staff brought the item to the council. He found the explanation clear
and thorough and commended staff and Judge Allen for recognizing the importance of judicial flexibility.
Even more than the dollar amount, he would regret the loss of the City's alternative service programs.
City Manager Taylor indicated the public hearing and possible action was scheduled for February 9, 2004.
C. WORK SESSION: Hospital Property Update
City Manager Taylor introduced Planning and Development Department Director Tom Coyle. Mr. Coyle
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 26, 2004 Page 4
Work Session
provided the staff presentation, first briefly reviewing the history of the item before the council. He called
the council's attention to correspondence between Roy Orr of McKenzie-Willamette/Triad and City staff,
and concluded from that correspondence that there were no hospital development opportunities in the
preferred geographic area. He invited questions.
Mayor Torrey asked what staff wished the council and mayor to do. Mr. Coyle said that staff would need
direction from the council about any further incentives it wished to discuss.
Mr. Kelly believed the council had done a good job in expressing its interest in having McKenzie-
Willamette/Triad in the community and had set aside funding for incentives as well as modified the Land
Use Code to permit a hospital to locate in more zones than any other uses he could think of. He said the
welcome mat had been rolled out. He hoped that McKenzie-Willamette/Triad would respond to the City,
and he believed it would be useful if the hospital could be clearer about what it wanted.
Mr. Kelly noted the letter from Mr. Orr did not indicate why the 2nd Avenue and Chambers Street site would
not work as a hospital location. Mr. Coyle said that the hospital's criteria were the size of property, timing
to market, and access. Mr. Kelly maintained the 2nd and Chambers site met those criteria. He believed it
was sufficiently large, could come to market relatively quickly, and had excellent access.
Mr. Kelly asked if the City had continued to use the consultant it hired to assist in the hospital siting process
since the production of his final report. Mr. Coyle said no. He noted that the consultant had identified three
sites, one outside the preferred area. He believed the sites that had been identified all had barriers associated
with them.
Mr. Meisner thanked City Manager Taylor and staff for the letter of December 18 to McKenzie-
Willamette/Triad regarding the City's willingness to help McKenzie-Willamette/Triad. He too believed the
2nd Avenue and Chambers Street site met the criteria cited by Mr. Coyle to a much greater degree than the
site preferred by McKenzie-Willamette/Triad. Mr. Meisner said he understood anecdotally that doctors
were not interested in the 2nd and Chambers site, but that did not match what he heard from doctors and
medical groups. Those parties indicated the site worked for them. Mr. Meisner suggested the potential that
a tax increment district could be formed at the 2nd and Chambers site, offering redevelopment potential for
doctors and medical groups.
Speaking to Mr. Kelly's concerns, Mr. Meisner suggested that if the hospital was not looking for a site that
met the council's criteria, the consultant had no role, which he found unfortunate. He wanted a new hospital
to locate in Eugene but did not know how that would happen.
Mr. Meisner acknowledged that McKenzie-Willamette/Triad might want assistance with its preferred site,
but it was outside the scope of the resolution.
City Manager Taylor reported that he had spoken to Roy Orr of McKenzie-Willamette/Triad about the
City's support for the 2nd and Chambers site and had clarified the range of incentives available to
McKenzie-Willamette/Triad. Subsequent conversations with Mr. Orr indicated that McKenzie-
Willamette/Triad preferred a site not in the area preferred by the council. City Manager Taylor asked the
council if it wanted to confine hospital siting to the incentive area, or would staff be exceeding council
direction to talk with McKenzie-Willamette/Triad about incentives for other sites. Mr. Meisner reiterated
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 26, 2004 Page 5
Work Session
that if the site was outside the preferred area, it was outside the scope of council's resolution offering
incentives.
Mr. Pap6 asked the council to keep in mind that there was no longer a McKenzie-Willamette Hospital. It
was no longer a nonprofit community hospital, but rather a for-profit hospital.
Mr. Pap6 asked if the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) remand of Springfield's PeaceHealth decision
affected hospital siting in Eugene, and if so, how. Mr. Klein said he reviewed the decision in question, and
did not think it affected the City's ordinance. It might affect how, at a later stage, LUBA could consider an
appeal of a specific land use action. Once the hospital decided where it wanted to locate, it must demon-
strate consistency with the transportation planning rule. He said that many factors were involved, and noted
that Springfield was appealing the decision to the Court of Appeals, who could reverse the ruling before it
became an issue for Eugene.
Mr. Pap6 asked about the status of the Certificate of Need. City Manager Taylor said the City was working
with the State to clarify those rules. No decision had yet been made at the State level. Mayor Torrey
indicated that the Cottage Grove hospital had been grandfathered and had no impact on McKenzie-
Willamette/Triad. City Manager Taylor said that staff did not know what will be required for McKenzie-
Willamette/Triad to locate in Eugene.
Mr. Pap6 said that he had also heard anecdotal information that doctors favored the 2nd and Chambers site.
He asked if the City had defined the minimum number of acres needed. City Manager Taylor indicated that
the hospital wanted 25 to 35 acres. The fairgrounds were too large, too expensive, its acquisition would be
too time-consuming, and access was an issue. He said that staff had been unable to find a site in the
preferred area to match the criteria established by McKenzie-Willamette/Triad. Mr. Pap6 asked if the
acreage could be reduced in size by structured parking, for example. Mr. Coyle said that the issue for the
hospital was that the cost of multi-story parking was higher than the underlying cost of the real estate. He
said that the hospital had been flexible and he thought it would consider such approaches. He suggested,
however, that it was critical that the hospital have room to expand on the site it selected. Mr. Pap6
suggested a hospital overlay zone could be established. City Manager Taylor responded that could occur
only in the preferred area, based on the council direction in place.
Ms. Bettman agreed with Mr. Pap6. She maintained that the medical community had said it would love the
2nd and Chambers site. She said that the message she received on the tour with Triad representatives was
that the City needed to offer the hospital a proposal and the hospital would consider it. In the absence of
that proposal, from the beginning the hospital had favored the Delta site for reasons she did not understand.
She suggested that the City needed a ;;Plan B" for 2nd and Chambers site to counter McKenzie-
Willamette/Triad's ;;Plan A." She said the City should be in direct contact with the directors at McKenzie-
Willamette/Triad.
Ms. Nathanson said that many had discussed the accommodation of other accessory uses, and there seemed
to be considerable potential for that in the 2nd and Chambers area. She asked if Mr. Coyle thought there was
enough opportunity in the area for that to happen. Mr. Coyle said with redevelopment, the answer was yes.
There were some vacant pieces of property in the area, but challenges as well. The area in question was
predominantly industrial and it was close to the railroad. While the City could suggest to the hospital the
circulation issues were addressed, that was not yet supported by a traffic impact analysis, which would be
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 26, 2004 Page 6
Work Session
required of the development. He recalled little discussion of the industrial zones as they related to the
hospital when the council made zone changes needed to accommodate the hospital. He said the redevelop-
ment opportunity presented by a hospital would be significant. The City would be asking a quasi-residential
medical use to be a pioneer in a major redevelopment project in an industrial area.
Ms. Nathanson was enthusiastic about the 2nd and Chambers site but thought the council needed to keep in
mind the need to site other medical uses nearby, which would consume considerable industrial land that was
proximate to other industrial activities. When she considered the fairgrounds, she thought of the loss of the
community, convention, and meeting facilities, some of which might be replaced and some of which might
stay. She had hoped to have more discussion of that with the Lane Board of County Commissioners and the
Lane County Fair Board. It was not mysterious to her why a hospital would be looking at the Delta site
because of the proximity of clinics and doctors who could partner with the hospital. She encouraged the
staff to continue discussions with the hospital.
Mayor Torrey concurred with Ms. Nathanson. He said the incentives were in the preferred area. He said
that the hospital was looking for a location and it was driving the decision. The council wanted it to go one
place, and the hospital did not want to. He suggested the potential that the hospital could go to Glenwood as
Springfield was buying options on property in that area, and Glenwood is in Springfield. He said a hospital
in Glenwood would not be a Eugene hospital. He thought the community wanted a hospital with a full
emergency facility. Mayor Torrey said that if the answer from McKenzie-Willamette/Triad was that it could
not find a site in the preferred area, so be it. He thought more could be done to make the fairgrounds work,
although he acknowledged the neighbors would object. However, he believed the neighbors would object no
matter where the hospital located.
Mayor Torrey spoke to those who asked, ;;Why not 2nd and cnamvers. He suggested the answer to some
degree was in the uncertainty of being the first development in such an area. He reiterated the site was what
the City wanted, not what McKenzie-Willamette/Triad wanted.
Mayor Torrey called for a second round of comments from the council.
Noting the council was scheduled to go into executive session, Mr. Kelly did not think anything that had
been said prevented the council from discussing the issues involved in open session.
Mr. Kelly shared Ms. Nathanson's concerns about the potential loss of industrial land but pointed out that
the industrial vacancy rate was currently not high. He said the Metro Partnership was not enthusiastic about
the development potential of the land in question, and he did not think the City would be losing out on other
industrial development opportunities if the site was occupied by a hospital.
Speaking to comments that McKenzie-Willamette/Triad was considering a Glenwood location, Mr. Kelly
pointed out that Glenwood was also largely zoned industrial and if the hospital found the industrial nature of
the 2nd and Chambers undesirable it should find Glenwood undesirable as well.
Mr. Kelly liked Ms. Bettman's suggestion for a ;;Plan B." He said the council should flesh out such a
proposal and begin to develop the actual boundaries for a tax increment district, for example.
Mr. Kelly pointed out the hospital could proceed with its development plans tomorrow if it wished to locate
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 26, 2004 Page 7
Work Session
outside the incentive area.
Mr. Meisner believed LUBA's decision regarding the PeaceHealth plan amendments had relevance for the
hospital's preferred site. The intersections in the vicinity were also near capacity and constituted major
transportation barriers to the development.
Mr. Meisner said that while a smaller site might increase the costs for structured parking, when he compared
the land costs in the Delta site versus willing land prices in the 2nd and Chambers area, he concluded it was
probably ;;a wash."
Speaking to the mayor's comments about the uncertainty of being the first development in the area, Mr.
Meisner said he recently spent a day in the Pearl District in Portland, a former industrial center than had
undergone extensive renovation and redevelopment in recent years.
Mr. Meisner was also interested in having staff prepare a ;;Plan B." He was interested in knowing what
revenues or bonding authority could exist in such a district and what the council could do with that.
Mr. Meisner said that neighborhood response was an issue for every site. He thought that McKenzie-
Willamette/Triad would be foolish to discount what he anticipated would be powerful opposition from
neighbors of the Delta site.
Ms. Bettman thought the neighborhood issue an important one. She noted the neighborhoods in the vicinity
of the 2nd and Chambers site were considering or had passed resolutions in support of hospital locating at the
2nd and Chambers site. She said if a site had no opposition and lots of support, the development was
ultimately doable, and the City could expedite it so it could be up very soon.
Ms. Bettman briefly noted the benefits she attributed to the 2nd and Chambers site, which included price,
location, and a minimal number of property owners and willing sellers. She said the City already made a
commitment to the area through its investments in the fire station. She thought the location would work for
the hospital and the community, as the community would be able to secure a full range of emergency
services without the need to cross a bridge. She believed the Delta site had serious access issues, and faced
neighborhood opposition.
Ms. Bettman said that McKenzie-Willamette/Triad was looking to do business. She thought it wanted to
know what the City could give it.
Ms. Nathanson agreed with Ms. Bettman about the benefits of the Chambers and 2nd site, but said the
council could not force McKenzie-Willamette/Triad to locate at the site. It could encourage McKenzie-
Willamette/Triad to do so. She wanted staff to keep trying to persuade the hospital about the merits of the
location, but her bottom line was a hospital in Eugene. She hoped staff continued to assist anyone who had
questions about their development proposals.
Ms. Taylor did not want to give up on the 2nd and Chambers site. She did not want to offer the hospital
incentives if the site it choose was outside the preferred area, and wanted to make that clear to McKenzie-
Willamette/Triad.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 26, 2004 Page 8
Work Session
Ms. Taylor thought neighborhood acceptance should be a major factor in the location of the hospital.
Mr. Pap6 agreed with Ms. Nathanson that the City could not force the hospital to locate at 2nd and
Chambers. He agreed with Ms. Bettman that a "Plan B" was needed, and said if more work was to done at
2nd and Chambers, more work needed to be done on other sites, such as the fairgrounds and the West
Broadway site.
Mr. Pap6 moved, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, that the council go into an
executive session.
The council discussed the motion.
Ms. Bettman thought the motion premature as she did not think the council was finished with the discussion
yet. She said that the hospital was asking for incentives for a site it had already selected, and she questioned
why, in that case, an executive session was needed.
Mr. Meisner asked the manager to tell the council what direction he had received from the council that lead
to the need for an executive session. City Manager Taylor said he had heard the council's comments about
confining incentives to the preferred area. He received a specific request from Willamette-McKenzie/Triad
that he wanted to bring before the council; if it chose not to do so, that was the purview of the council. The
subject of the executive session was a real estate transaction that it would be inappropriate to discuss in
open forum. Mr. Meisner supported the motion.
Ms. Taylor said she would support a brief executive session.
Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to limit the executive session to
five-minutes.
The council briefly discussed the merits of limiting the executive session.
The vote on the amendment to the motion was a 4:4 tie, Mr. Kelly, Ms.
Taylor, Ms. Bettman, and Mr. Pap~ voting yes, and Ms. Nathanson, Mr.
Meisner, Mr. Poling, and Ms. Solomon voting no. Mayor Torrey cast a
vote against the motion, which failed on a final vote of 5:4.
The vote to enter into executive session passed, 5:3; Mr. Kelly, Ms. Bett-
man, and Ms. Taylor voting no.
D. EXECUTIVE SESSION
Pursuant to ORS 192.660(1)(e), the Eugene City Council entered into executive session.
The meeting adjourned at 7:25 p.m.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 26, 2004 Page 9
Work Session
Respectfully submitted,
Dennis M. Taylor
City Manager
(Recorded by Kimberly Young)
MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 26, 2004 Page 10
Work Session