Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCMinutes - 01/12/04 WS MINUTES Eugene City Council Work Session McNutt Room--City Hall January 12, 2004 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Gary Pap6, President; Nancy Nathanson, Vice President; 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 MAYOR, COUNCIL, AND CITY MANAGER Ms. Bettman wished everyone a healthy and prosperous New Year and thanked all City employees who worked above and beyond the call of duty through various recent weather challenges. Ms. Bettman spoke to the issue of hospital siting. She agreed with recent comments made by the mayor that the council wanted the hospital in the city, but she emphasized her highest priority was to have two hospitals and then to have the broadest possible access for Eugene citizens to emergency services. That might not mean a site in the city. She thought it more vital to have a hospital in Glenwood, for example, than in the Valley River area due to the greater access for residents living south of the river. She regretted that Eugene had surrendered its jurisdiction over Glenwood to Springfield. Ms. Bettman voiced her support for Ballot Measure 30. She noted the increase in the vehicle registration fee, which raised more than $3 billion for bridge repair and new projects. The fee increase was an economic stimulus because it created jobs. She said similarly, Measure 30 would also create jobs as well as provide services that were provided solely by government. Ms. Taylor noted her vote in opposition to surrendering the City's jurisdiction over Glenwood in large part because of the industrial land it contained and its other potential opportunities. Ms. Taylor said she enjoyed the recent National League of Cities conference in Nashville, Tennessee, and admired how the community of Nashville made the most of its assets, such as its music industry and its role in the history of the civil rights movement. She said that Eugene should emphasize its assets similarly. She cited Farmers Market, Saturday Market, and the bicycle system as local assets. She noted the many assets that Nashville had, in particular those emphasizing its history and what made it different from other places. Ms. Taylor asked the City Manager to provide an update on funding for hazardous materials training. Ms. Taylor referred to the recent State of the City event and suggested it could be improved by allowing MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 12, 2004 Page 1 Work Session councilors to speak to their goals and notifying them in advance of what the mayor intended to say. She referred to the mayor's proposed committee on economic development and said she hoped the council, rather than the mayor, would appoint the membership of such a committee if one was to be formed. She thought that the City should build on what it already had, and the mayor should first speak to all the neighborhood organizations about their positions on the subject. Then the mayor could return to the council with his findings. Ms. Solomon arrived. Mr. Poling commended City employees and citizens for their response to the recent ice storm. He said that the storm had brought people out of their houses and created a good opportunity for residents to simply get out and look at their neighborhoods. Mr. Poling also endorsed Ballot Measure 30. Mr. Poling expressed pleasure in being back at work as a council, and expressed his thanks to the outgoing council president and vice president, Mr. Pap~ and Ms. Nathanson, for their service to the council. Mr. Pap~ also endorsed the passage of Ballot Measure 30. He thanked Representative Pat Farr for his work in reaching the compromise that produced the measure. Mr. Pap~ thanked City staff members, particularly those in Public Works, for their efforts during the recent ice storm. Mr. Pap~ encouraged councilors to attend the swearing in of new Police Chief Bob Lehner, scheduled to occur on January 16 in the Council Chamber. He congratulated City Manager Dennis Taylor on Chief Lehner's hiring. Mr. Pap~ expressed appreciation for the January 5 memorandum provided to the council by Peter Ruffler of the Wastewater Division regarding recent overflows at two City pump stations as a result of heavy rains. He expressed hope that the City had a long-term plan to address the problem, which he acknowledged would be difficult to solve. Mr. Pap~ asked that the Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations (CCIGR) consider taking up the issue of rail safety quiet zones. Ms. Nathanson had no items. Mr. Meisner also thanked Public Works Department staff for its work during the recent ice storm and voiced his support for Ballot Measure 30. Mr. Meisner agreed with Ms. Taylor that the City made a mistake when it gave up jurisdiction over Glenwood to Springfield. Mr. Meisner said the rail safety quiet zone Mr. Pap~ spoke of was a possibility. He suggested High Street to Van Buren Street would be a logical candidate for a quiet zone. He acknowledged the safety implications MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 12, 2004 Page 2 Work Session of having trains pass over City streets in residential neighborhoods without signals, and suggested that careful analysis was required. Ms. Solomon wished the council a Happy New Year and indicated she had no items. Mr. Kelly noted the move of Fiesta Latina from Eugene to Springfield and the rationale behind the move, which seemed reasonable given the limitations of the existing Eugene venues. He said Eugene had many tremendous outdoor assets such as those mentioned by City Manager Taylor. He suggested that the City take the opportunity presented by the move of Fiesta Latina to consider how it could better support such events. He suggested that the manager examine the work done by the Parks Blocks Placemaking Commit- tee. He said that it was in the community's interest that such events prospered. Mr. Kelly said he did not have the opportunity to review the administrative rules associated with the downtown ordinance, and requested a memorandum explaining what the rules do and do not do. A quick perusal had raised more questions than answers for him. Mr. Kelly reported he attended the Citizens State of the City and thanked the organizers for bringing together diverse points of view. He had been disappointed that, unlike the prior two years, he had seen no City staff in attendance, which he found unfortunate. Mr. Kelly endorsed Ballot Measure 30 and said it was a bipartisan bill that the voters should support. Ms. Taylor also supported Ballot Measure 30. Mr. Meisner said he would be unable to attend the regular meeting later in the evening and indicated he had asked City Manager Taylor to seek counsel from the City Attorney and the incoming police chief about the new administrative rules associated with the downtown ordinance. City Manager Taylor indicated his belief that the concerns that had been raised about the ordinance could be addressed, and said staff had been working on the issue since the ordinance's passage. He stressed the interim nature of the administrative rules. He asked the council to give staff some time to work through the issues. City Manager Taylor indicated he received a letter from Roy Orr of McKenzie-Willamette/Triad indicating that the site at 2nd Avenue and Chambers Street was not of interest to the hospital, and thanking the City for its offer of assistance. City Manager Taylor expressed appreciation to City employees for their effort during the recent bad weather. He shared a story about an employee who had walked two miles to reach work at 5 a.m. each morning in order to clear the sidewalks for his fellow employees and facility patrons. Mayor Torrey commended the recent anniversary celebration at the library, held January 10. Mayor Torrey endorsed Ballot Measure 30, saying it was essential to give the legislature time to deal with the State funding picture. Mayor Torrey reported he had asked City Manager Taylor to come up with a proposal for his economic development committee to present to the council. He asked Ms. Taylor to consider the proposed make-up of MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 12, 2004 Page 3 Work Session the group before she reached a decision about its membership. Mayor Torrey said that his suggestion for a committee to consider City facility needs was based on the comments he heard from the council about the need to plan for new facilities. He doubted any money was needed to support the committee. He said that it was a vision that followed up on the work done by the Planning Commission Plus Three Councilors. Mayor Torrey noted that the Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations (CCIGR) would consider the United Front agenda at its meeting the next day. He reported there was considerable community support for the concept of off-ramps at 1-5 and Franklin Boulevard to serve Eugene and Springfield. Speaking to Ms. Taylor's earlier comments, Mayor Torrey said that the Eugene Charter stated that the mayor was to provide a State of the City address and to challenge the City. Mayor Torrey also wished the council a Happy New Year. He commended the work done by City staff on the State of the City event. B. WORK SESSION: Lane County Animal Regulation Advisory Task Team Report Finance and Court Operations Executive Manager Cindi Hamm introduced Scott Bartlett, Chair of the Lane County Animal Regulation Advisory Task Force, Bill Fleener, the Vice Chair of the task force, and Carol Pomes, purchasing manager responsible for managing the City's contract with the Lane County Animal Regulation Authority (LCARA), and the City's liaison to the task force. She noted that LCARA Manager Mike Wellington and David Sucart of Lane County were also present. Mr. Bartlett reviewed the contents of the task force's final report, entitled Lane County's Animal Regulation Advisory Task Force Findings and Recommendations. He provided a PowerPoint presentation summariz- ing the report's findings and recommendations in six areas: 1) licensing; 2) spay and neutering; 3) legal issues; 4) public education; 5) facilities and staffing; and 6) funding. Mr. Bartlett invited questions. Ms. Nathanson asked to what extent the task force research indicated that other communities' ordinances took into consideration whether an animal was kept indoors all the time or outdoors. Mr. Bartlett said that many people kept cats in the house all the time for safety considerations. He agreed that was a considera- tion. He was persuaded that within reason, the City should relax its animal limit laws and allow two more dogs if they were rescued dogs and sterilized. He said that the task force was approached by breeders who were operating illegally and felt it was unfair. He said that breeders supported loosening the limitation and preferred that nuisance laws govern the issue. Mr. Bartlett said he was recommending that the County double its limit. Ms. Nathanson indicated interest in the targeted spay and neuter voucher program. She expressed appreciation that the task force recognized the public safety implications of the issues involved. She recalled the Budget Committee's priority-setting exercise in 2003, and said she ranked the service highly at that time because of its public safety implications. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 12, 2004 Page 4 Work Session Mr. Meisner said that the Budget Committee had not identified the service as a budget priority, but it was an important service. He said that the City had to consider its own roles and limitations as they related to the County and the services funded through LCARA. He looked forward to the staff analysis of that. He said that the City could not take responsibility for the County's services, and the council must be sensitive to that issue. Mr. Meisner said the community comparisons offered by the task force were not helpful because it did not include information about the size of the communities involved, their budgets, or their tax bases. Mr. Meisner asked if LCARA could handle the increased license load with existing resources. Mr. Bartlett indicated that some additional support staff would be required, but those costs would be paid for by fees. Mr. Meisner spoke to the issue of numerical limits on the number of pets and said he often heard from City residents that the limits should not be increased. He thought urban areas differed from rural areas in that sense. He said that without enforcement, nothing could be done to address problems from increased numbers of pets. Mr. Pap~ thanked the task force for its work and commended the report as one of the best he had seen. He appreciated the scope of the information that had been gathered, and found the measures to be interesting. Mr. Pap~ asked what Springfield was doing in terms of animal control and why it dropped out of the tri- agency pact that existed many years ago. Mr. Wellington responded that Springfield hired an animal control officer and Lane County contracted for the housing of those animals. Responding to a follow-up question from Mr. Pap~, Mr. Wellington said Lane County and Springfield were currently in negotiations regarding the housing of cats from Springfield. Mr. Bartlett noted that Springfield had far fewer dogs than Eugene and thus was less concerned about the issue. Mr. Pap~ asked how the Board of County Commissioners had responded to the report. Mr. Bartlett believed a majority of the commissioners would vote to support a majority of the task force's recommendations, although not all of them. He acknowledged that the pet food tax proposal was controversial. Mr. Pap~ asked if more thorough licensing efforts could address the funding issue. Mr. Bartlett said that it could. The rabies policy itself had the byproduct of increasing licensing revenue, but that would require a coordinated City-County effort and possibly an increase in the annual licensing fee. Ms. Pomes noted that the City received about $80,000 in licensing fees now, and a three-fold increase would not replace the revenue that was needed. Mr. Kelly complimented the task force on a thorough job and expressed appreciation for the research the task force had done. He hoped the task force's recommendations would be well-publicized. Mr. Kelly asked staff to provide the council with a memorandum regarding the fact the vast majority of the recommendations were exclusive to the County or required it to take the lead on implementing the recommendation. He asked how the City's efforts were related to those of the County. Mr. Kelly said the low license and compliance rate were a %ad state of affairs" for both animal and MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 12, 2004 Page 5 Work Session community safety. He agreed that increases in education and enforcement would be useful but again questioned what agency had the lead in that effort. Mr. Meisner, seconded by Mr. Papd, moved to extend the meeting for ten minutes. The motion passed unanimously. Ms. Bettman also thanked members of the advisory task force. She said the City managed its constrained budget by requiring departments to achieve full-cost recovery, and frequently certain populations end up subsidizing services for other populations. Ms. Bettman said the task force's recommendations regarding licensing were key. She asked if the task force had considered reducing the cost of a license or offering free low-income licenses and making up the difference with a higher pet food surtax. Mr. Bartlett termed the proposed surtax a "Hail Mary." He said in a perfect world there would be no license fee. He said that long- term public acceptance of that surtax would be needed until the license fee could be dropped. Responding to a follow-up question from Ms. Bettman, Mr. Bartlett said that many people believe such a surtax could be successfully implemented, but currently LCARA delivered an excellent product and the community had public safety requirements LCARA must meet. He suggested that, to get above the point of "treading water," LCARA needs to increase its license revenue. He noted that currently, the Spay-Neuter Program paid for itself. Ms. Bettman asked if tripling the licensing fee would provide adequate funding and constitute full-cost recovery. Mr. Bartlett said that such increased revenues would help enormously. He pointed out that what was missing in terms of what Eugene residents cared about was the euthanasia program and how to afford additional space. Ms. Pomes noted that the Lane County budget for LCARA was approximately $1.1 million. Mr. Poling appreciated the work done by the task force. He thought the report was well-written. He also appreciated the research the task force had done into the practices of other communities. He asked if the information was being shared with the other city councils in Lane County. Mr. Bartlett said that the Eugene City Council was the first council to hear the report. He anticipated similar presentations would be made to other Lane County communities. He said that a uniform database would benefit all communities in the county, and termed the lack of one ~ridiculous." Mr. Poling said that the council needed to keep in mind the service involved was a County service. He said that the City could make adjustments if the County acted. He said the City should continue to fund animal control officers to keep animals off the streets. Mr. Bartlett said the City could consider addressing the limit law for sterilized dogs and instituting a juvenile license. It would also help if all City parks included signage reminding citizens that their dogs should be licensed. He said it was logical that citizens could access the license system through their veterinarians. Ms. Taylor asked why the code allowed for a reduced license fee for seniors for unneutered dogs. Mr. Bartlett speculated it was intended to accommodate the needs of low-income seniors on fixed incomes and demonstrate community respect for age. Ms. Taylor said she did not object to free licenses for neutered dogs but was disturbed by the lower fees for unneutered dogs. Mr. Bartlett said Ms. Taylor had a good point. Ms. Taylor questioned how people could be required to secure a juvenile license if they were unaware of the requirement before they went to the vet for their dog's rabies shot. She asked if the City's laws were more MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 12, 2004 Page 6 Work Session rigid than the County's in terms of barking dogs and licensing. Mr. Wellington said that the laws of the two jurisdictions were comparable. Ms. Taylor thought spaying and neutering the most important service to consider. Mr. Bartlett invited the council to contact him for more information or with questions, and indicated willingness to meet further. Ms. Nathanson observed that license compliance rates varied from community to community. It was discouraging to see that Cottage Grove and Creswell had such high noncompliance rates. Mr. Bartlett noted that Florence had similar high rates, and suggested that it demonstrated the need for coordination and cooperation among cities. Ms. Nathanson expressed concern about the issue of pet overpopulation. She said it was not only bad for animals but could be a problem for neighbors in maintaining cordial relationships. She wanted to continue to address that issue. While she acknowledged it was not part of the task force's charge, she thought the report was missing information about how LCARA's mission might be reconfigured in the context of other agencies and volunteer organizations, such as Greenhill. She perceived some overlap in their missions, and said she would like more information about the topic. Mr. Bartlett reported that there was not a great deal of redundancy between Greenhill and LCARA; Greenhill received animals from property owners, and LCARA was picked up stray animals. Mayor Torrey thanked the task force for its report. C. WORK SESSION AND ACTION: Resolution 4784 Concerning Ice and Snow Removal Policies and Amending Resolution 4278 City Manager Taylor introduced Jeff Lankston, Public Works Maintenance Manager. Mr. Lankston reported that the City's existing ice and snow removal policy was instituted by resolution in 1991 and governed the City's snow removal activities. He reviewed the City's priorities for snow removal and noted that snow and ice removal was reactive. The City did not have a bare pavement policy, and lacked the equipment to do so. The City was plowing snow and using sand and was prohibited from using deicing chemicals by the 1991 resolution. Mr. Lankston said the issues surrounding the current policy included the fact that ice bonded to the pavement and the City had no way to remove it. The City sanded major arterials numerous times to keep them operational. The City also spent considerable money after such events removing sand to reduce its environmental impact. During icy conditions, pavement conditions change as one enters the city, from deiced County roads to icy City streets. Mr. Lankston asked the council to amend the policy to allow the City to use chemical deicers and take a more aggressive approach to snow and ice, keeping it from bonding to the pavement and making removal easier. He noted that Salem indicated it reduced the use of sand by about seven percent because of increased use of deicers. He thought the use of deicers would enhance public safety and would create continuous conditions between County and City roads. He reviewed a list of other Oregon communities employing MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 12, 2004 Page 7 Work Session deicers, and noted the negative impact of sand on the streets and waterways. Mr. Lankston reported that the chemicals being considered for use by the City had been studied by the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), and the study showed no measurable effect from the application of the deicer. The chemicals in question were also approved by the National Marine Fisheries Services and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency. Mayor Torrey solicited council questions and comments. Mr. Kelly asked what motivated adoption of the 1991 resolution. Mr. Lankston reported that staff's concerns at that time were focused on trying to restrict the effort the City put into snow and ice removal. He said that there had been changes in the manner of chemical application that would actually save the City money. Mr. Kelly commended the work done by staff during the recent bad weather conditions. Mr. Kelly determined from Mr. Lankston that staff had done the research referred to in the agenda item summary (ALS) regarding those chemicals it chose to employ. He said that chemicals and techniques change constantly, and staff did not expect that the council could keep up with that changing information. Mr. Kelly concurred, adding that he did not want the council to be in the position of endorsing a particular chemical agent. Mr. Kelly asked if there was any dramatic negative impact to staff spending another month compiling the research that had been done and providing it to staff. He said he got ~nervous" when staff cited ODOT as an authority. He would be more comfortable with an Environmental Protection Agency or Department of Environmental Quality study. Mr. Lankston said that staff had done considerable research. He noted the ODOT study was done in cooperation with the United States Geological Services. Mr. Kelly regretted the lack of additional information. Mr. Meisner agreed with Mr. Kelly about the relative lack of information. He said that the AlS had been very summary and merely stated conclusions. He had looked for additional information but had been unable to find any in the packet. Mr. Meisner thought a revision to the policy was warranted, but questioned the omission of information. He could not determine the savings to be realized from the information before the council. Mr. Poling said that while sanding worked well, it made a mess that must be addressed later by both the City and its residents. He said that deicing chemicals had become more environmentally friendly over time. He asked if it was possible for the City to coordinate its ice and snow removal activities with the County. Mr. Lankston said that coordination occurred now, and he further confirmed that the County used deicers on portions of City roads such as 30th Avenue. Mr. Poling indicated support for the resolution. Ms. Taylor was not ready to support the staff proposal without an opportunity for public comment. She wanted to hold a public hearing to hear from scientists in the community. She reported that she had heard about someone who threatened to sue the City if it chose to move forward with the proposal. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 12, 2004 Page 8 Work Session Mr. Pap~ pointed out both the State and County used deicers on City streets now. He suggested if the City began to use such products, it could influence the choice of agents used by those jurisdictions. Mr. Pap6 suggested the resolution be modified by the addition of a Section 6 stipulating that such chemicals would only be used after extensive research regarding environmental safety and cost, and only be applied on City streets with the written permission of the City Manager. City Manager Taylor requested council support for the staff proposal so that staff could employ the deicing agents this winter when they might do some good. Mr. Pap~ indicated willingness to lift the prohibition for a trial period due to his concerns about public safety. Ms. Nathanson questioned how frequently Eugene would actually have to use deicers, suggesting that it was likely to be only once or twice yearly. She also questioned whether City staff had consulted with staff of Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) regarding the impact of such chemicals on water entering the river system. Speaking to Ms. Nathanson's first question, Mr. Lankston said that Eugene had not had a significant snow or ice event since 1995. He noted the County's use of deicers was rare, perhaps three or four times yearly, and in ice fogs where temperatures dropped below freezing. Speaking to Ms. Nathan- son's second question, Mr. Lankston said that City staff had not consulted with EWEB. Ms. Solomon said she would support the suggested motion without amendments. She said advances in the technology had occurred, and it was time to give deicers a chance. She appreciated the comments made by City Manager Taylor about giving staff the flexibility to use the technology immediately. Ms. Bettman said the issue was a matter of balancing short-term public safety with long-term public health and safety. She said she could have been persuaded by more information, but did not find enough in the AlS to make a decision. Ms. Bettman understood that calcium magnesium acetate was the most expensive deicer available, and she wanted to see a comparison between sand and deicers in terms of cost and environmental friendliness. However, she also wanted to give staff the flexibility to use and investigate the utility of deicers. Responding to a question from Mr. Kelly regarding the appropriate way to proceed, City Attorney Glenn Klein recommended that the council amend the resolution by making it effective to a date certain. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to adopt Resolution 4784 concerning ice and snow removal policies and amending Resolution 4278, and adding to Section 3 of the resolution the phrase ~and shall be effective only until April 1, 2005, at which time Resolution 4278 shall go back into effect as originally adopted." Ms. Bettman accepted Mr. Papa's suggestion for a new Section 6 as a friendly amendment to the motion. That section would read ~An anti-icer or deicer shall not be used unless specifically approved by the City Manager and only after the City Manager has received research that demonstrates its was environmentally safe and cost-effective." MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 12, 2004 Page 9 Work Session Ms. Bettman confirmed with City Manager Taylor that it was the council's legislative imem that staff would return with the resolution. The motion passed, 7:1; Ms. Taylor voting no. The meeting adjourned at 7:19 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dennis M. Taylor City Manager (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 12, 2004 Page 10 Work Session