HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/08/2001 Work Session
.
MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION
OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL
HELD ON MONDAY, OCTOBER 8, 2001
The Springfield City Council met in Work Session on Monday, October 8, 2001 at Springfield
City Hall, 225 Fifth Street, Jesse Maine Meeting Room, at 5:30 p.m., with Mayor Leiken
presiding.
ATIENDANCE
Present were Mayor Leiken, and Councilors Ballew, Fitch, Hatfield, Lundberg, Ralston and
Simmons. Also present were Assistant City Manager Gino Grimaldi, City Attorney Joe Leahy,
City Recorder Kim Krebs, and members of staff.
GUESTS: Clair Van Bloem, Lane Council of Governments (LCOG).
I. Council Ward Redistricting.
Assistant City Manager Gino Grimaldi, and City Recorder Kim Krebs were present for the staff
report. Ms. Krebs said at the work session meeting on July 23,2001, council authorized staff to
work with LCOG in preparing three scenarios to adjust the ward boundary lines. She said
Councilor's Ballew, Fitch and Lundberg each met with Ms Van Bloem from LCOG along with
Mr. Grimaldi in creating the three options, and Ms. Van Bloem was present to highlight the three
scenarios, and respond to any questions that the council might have.
.
Ms. Van Bloem said at the direction of council the three scenarios were prepared with input from
the three members of the City Council, as well as help from city staff. She said the three
scenanos are:
. Scenario I - Least Scenario
. Scenario 2 - Middle Scenario
. Scenario 3 - Growth Scenario
Ms. Van Bloem provided a description of each ofthe scenarios, and described the differences in
the boundary lines. She said in developing the Growth Scenario (Scenario 3), she met with staff
from the Development Services Department in order to understarid better where the future growth
might occur in the city. She said there will be more growth and annexations will likely occur in
the next ten years. She said with that in mind, council might want to keep in mind where they
wish future annexations to occur. She said she spoke to Annette Newingham at Lane County
Elections, and based on precinct and political districts she will be able to accommodate these
changes in boundaries at the City Council's direction.
Mayor Leiken thanked Ms. Van Bloem and Councilor's Ballew, Fitch and Lundberg for there
work in preparing the three scenarios, and said anyone of the three options appear to be
acceptable.
The Council discussed the differences in the three scenarios, and discussed where future
annexations might occur.
Councilor Ralston said he would recommend the Growth Scenario.
.
Springfield City Council
Work Session - October 8, 2001
Page - 2
.
Councilor Hatfield said he would prefer to have future annexations from the Mountain Gate
Development in his Ward, and would recommend Jasper Natron annexations are taken by
Councilor Simmons in Ward 5.
Councilor Lundberg said there was so little variation in each of the scenarios, that she would be
comfortable with the Growth Scenario.
Councilor Fitch said by selecting the Growth Scenario, which would allow Councilor Ballew to
retain the entire Historic - Washburne District.
After further discussion, City Council consensus was to proceed with Scenario 3 - Growth
Scenario, and agreed to identify a Ward designation for annexations during the annexation
process.
2. Youth Access Ordinance.
Assistant City Manager Gino Grimaldi was present for the staff report. He provided Council with
a Federal update that took place that impacts the advertising prohibition. He said currently there
is a section in the draft ordinance that you cannot advertise below 48 inches, and that section
would have to be removed, as that is an area that we cannot get into at this point in time.
.
Councilor Lundberg said this is a result of Federal Legislation that states you cannot dictate
where the advertising is placed. She said this came as part of an agreement that a warning is
placed on the tobacco product itself.
Mr. Grimaldi said several questions were raised during the last discussion of this item, and said
City Attorney Joe Leahy was present to respond to those questions.
Mr. Leahy said he met with Dave Logan, City Prosecutor in order to discuss the proposed
ordinance with him. He said Mr. Logan said as with any ordinance, as time goes by, there may
be some changes that would need to be made, but appears to be a very workable ordinance.
Mr. Leahy said these would be treated as a civil matter, there is no jury, no crime, and no jail.
The burden of proof is 51 percent. This would be treated in the nature of an infraction or a
violation. He said there is nothing unconstitutional about that. He said most of the traffic
violations as well as hunting violations in this state would not be entitled to a jury trial. He said
in a civil matter where you are suing someone, you are not entitled to a jury if the amount in
question is less than $750.00 in Small Claims Court. He said each incident is treated as a separate
violation. He said there is also the right of appeal, and that is done through the Lane County
Circuit Court, and a defendant has that right and opportunity, but again treated as a civil matter,
and a non-jury trial.
Mr. Leahy said if a fine is imposed, and in the event the fine is not paid, the normal process
according to Finance Director Bob Duey is to bill the defendant for a period of five to six months,
at that time it would then be turned over to a collection agency, which has had a higher rate of
return, then placing liens on property. He said there is also added language in the ordinance to
suspend the operating license; however that decision would be made by the City Council on a
case by case basis.
.
Springfield City Council
Work Session - October 8, 2001
Page - 3
.
Councilor Simmons read wording in the Springfield Municipal Code Section 2.350, which relates
to a defendant being entitled to a jury trial. He said there is also an error in the naming of Section
5.118 "pre-existing" , is the section on Public Safety for Firearms. And Article 4 Section 32 of
the Springfield Charter states all civil and criminal proceedings in the Municipal Court for .
violation... the person may under these circumstances, pay a fee and request a trial by jury.
Mr. Leahy said that he has not looked at any of the items mention as they were not brought to his
attention prior to the meeting, however he will look at the issues raised. He said there are many
things in the Springfield Charter that are no longer applicable.
Councilor Simmons said his purpose in raising these issues is if an ordinance is passed, what we
want to do is accomplish the goal in reducing teen access to tobacco, and reducing their health
care costs, and prolonging there lives. He said the little components about addressing the rights
of the accused are a component of that process. He said it seems if you look at the Municipal
Code, that there is quite a lengthy process in the civil issues. He said he is supportive of the
ordinance, and the intent, however he wants to make sure that the rights of the accused are
protected.
Mr. Leahy said there are number of ways to accomplish a civil or nuisance violation. He said he
believes it is important to look at each of the sections that Councilor Simmons cited tonight, and
said he in order to better prepare the response, he would like the opportunity to address each one
of those questions, in turn better prepare the ordinance.
.
Mayor Leiken said at this time it is important to focus on the questions that were provided to Mr.
Leahy ahead of time, and allow him to respond to those questions and issues. He said it is
important to make sure everything is reviewed, responded to, and correct prior to proceeding with
the reading of this ordinance.
Mr. Leahy asked for clarification of questions he needs to respond to?
Councilor Simmons said he has issues with the following:
. Municipal Code Section 2.350 - Right to a Jury
. Section 5.118 - Firearms duplication
. Springfield Charter - Article 4 Section 32 - Trial by Jury
. License Section -7.000 & 7.006 related to standardized licensing
Councilor Lundberg requested clarification with the following:
. Clarification in how filings.are handled in the Municipal Court
. Determine revocation process, and add that information to the Agreement with Lane
County, to monitor the revocation period
. Time frame to begin enforcement, delay to March 2002, instead of January 2002
.
Councilor Fitch said she appreciates the part of delaying the date for enforcement to begin, as that
would allow Mr. Leahy an opportunity to respond to the new questions of council but would also
allow time for further' education. She questioned the need to include statistical language and
whether it is necessary in the ordinance; if so, we need to add a notation of who andwhere the
statistics came from.
Springfield City Council
Work Session - October 8, 200 I
Page - 4
.
There was discussion regarding excluding tobacco retail stores from the ordinance.
There was discussion regarding who would pay for the enforcement costs.
Mr. Leahy said there are a number of ways that enforcement can be done, however Public Health
is responsible for the enforcement.
After further discussion, Council consensus was to have Mr. Leahy prepare a memorandum that
would respond to the many questions that have raised tonight. Once that memorandum is
provided, council may see a need to conduct another work session to further discuss the
responses. Based on this, it will be necessary to continue the second reading of this ordinance.
3. Draft 04-07 STIP Priorities.
Mayor Leiken said he attended the 1-5 Beltline Decision Team meeting with Councilor Lundberg
earlier, and received some information related to a couple of issues. He said based on
information received at that meeting he asked Traffic Manager Nick Arnis to brief the council in
preparation for the MPC meeting on October 11 tho
.
Mr. Arnis circulated a handout "Transportation Planning Committee (TPC) Recommendations for
FY 2004-2007 STIP Highway Project Funding'. He highlighted the handout and provided
background information about each of the different projects listed, in their ranking order large,
medium, and small.
Dan Brown, Public Works Director responding to funding questions.
Mr. Arnis responded to various question of the council.
Councilor Hatfield asked Mr. Amis ifhe knew when Eugene was going to begin requesting
funding for the Federal Courthouse, and street improvements along 6th and 7th Streets?
Mr. Arnis said he did not know where they were in the planning process, but said if and when he
receives any information he will be sure and inform the City Council.
Mr. Arnis said a couple other items that came up today in the 1-5 Beltline Decision Team meeting
were HB 2142 Project, PeaceHealth and the traffic study that needs to be tied in with the
interchange process. And also access to driveways, and what proposals are coming out of
ODOT's right of way impacts based on access. He said there would be strategy session
discussion held at the MPC level.
Development Services Director Cynthia Pappas said she had a brief discussion with Mark
Radabaugh, DLCD Regional Coordinator. She said in that discussion he indicated in the near
future there would be a meeting scheduled with Mayor Leiken and Mayor Torrey along with the
heads of ODOT and DLCD to discuss traffic issues related to the proposed PeaceHealth
development. She said it appears that ODOT is very interested in the development project in our
community. She said it might be important to strategize as staff along with the City Council
leadership how to best address these issues.
.
Springfield City Council
Work Session - October 8, 2001
Page - 5
.
Mr. Brown said the 1-5 Beltline interchange project has always been city driven, he said ODOT
was a reluctant partner in the beginning, and Lane County was not involved either. He said he
believes that this project remains to be city driven, and ODOT has conflicts within it's own
organization. He said he also believes ifthe project is ever going to be built, the city must stay
right behind it. He said engineers are used to adjusting and staging projects to fit a flow of money
as it becomes available. City staff needs to keep pushing, and not be naIve that we are not going
to face obstacles in the process. He said the traffic modeling isn't done yet, but the staff instinct
related to the hospital development is that peak hour impact on traffic may be less than the
medium density residential, and remains optimistic.
Councilor Lundberg said as follow-up to what Mr. Brown, and Mr. Arnis has said regarding the
meeting held earlier today. She said she wants to be able to reassure others that we as a city feel
this project is important and are strong and unified about the project going forward.
Council consensus was to proceed with the funding issue, and by proceeding with this issue we
will not be destroying the businesses, and they do not have to be linked in seeking the funding.
Work out the right of way and access management issues separately, and fairly.
Mayor Leiken thanked Mr. Arnis for providing this update to the City Council.
.
Mayor Leiken said he met with Bob Noble, Airport Manager, along with Bob Zagorian and Dave
Hauser regarding issues at the Eugene Airport. He said information relayed to him was that they
are hopeful that Horizon Airlines will not be discontinuing its flights to Log Angeles. He said
this is not firm information, but again they are hopeful they will not discontinue those flights.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m.
Minutes Recorder - Kim Krebs
r
.