HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/28/1998 Work Session
.
.
.
MINUTES
Metropolitan Area Elected Officials
Meeting Room l--Lane County Fairgrounds
796 West 13th Avenue, Eugene, Oregon
PRESENT:
Lane County Board of Commissioners:
Steve Cornacchia, Chair
Ellie Dumdi
Bobby Green
Peter Sorenson
Cindy Weeldreyer
Bill Van V actor, Lane County Administrator
Lane Transit District:
Pat Hocken, President
Rob Bennett
Eugene City Council:
Pat Farr, President
Tim Laue
Bobby Lee
Scott Meisner
Laurie Swanson Gribskov
Betty Taylor
Ken Tollenaar
Jim Torrey, Mayor
Jim Johnson, City Manager Pro Tern
Springfield City Council: Greg Shaver, President
Anne Ballew
Terry Beyer
Stu Burge
Norm Dahlquist
Maureen Maine
Bill Morrisette, Mayor
Mike Kelly, City Manager
Bethel School District #52: Kent Hunsaker, Superintendent
Eugene School District #4J: Chris Pryor, Board President
Dave Piercy, Superintendent representative
Springfield School District #19:
Alan Petersen, Board President
Jamon Kent, Superintendent
Lane County Assessor Jim Gangle
Lane County Sheriff Jan Clements
Circuit Court Judge Kip Leonard (Dave Factor, representative)
District Attorney F. Douglass Harc1eroad
MINUTES--Metropolitan Joint Elected Officials
April 28, 1998
April 28, 1998
5:30 p.m.
Page 1
.
.
.
City of Springfield Mayor Bill Morrisette called to order the joint meeting of the Metropolitan Area
Elected Officials at 5:45 p.m. He invited those who were present to introduce themselves.
I. ANIMAL REGULATION
Lane County Commissioner Cindy Weeldreyer reported on her work to develop a proposal for re-
designing animal control services in Lane County. She described her visit to animal welfare and
service provider organizations and her request for reports on countywide animal regulation systems in
other areas. She said she had gathered information, submitted it to jurisdictional staffs for evaluation,
and was preparing options for consideration by a stakeholders group whose membership had been
identified but never met.
II. GLENWOOD
Springfield City Manager Mike Kelly referred to his memorandum distributed with the agenda of the
meeting, regarding issues of whether the planning and urban services jurisdiction of the Glenwood area
should be changed from the City of Eugene to the City of Springfield. He described the origination of
consideration of the change, the work program to deal with the issues involved approved by the
Metropolitan Policy Committee, the "due diligence" study undertaken, the influence on the work
program of Measures 47 and 50, and the initial results of cost analyses of the change.
Eugene City Councilor Laurie Swanson Gribskov said she supported consideration of the change and
asked if considerations included differences between the Eugene Water & Electric Board and the
Springfield Utility Board regarding underground utility infrastructure.MLKelly replied that
representatives of the two utility providers had met and made a commitment to reach an amicable
resolution of all issues involved, if a change was made.
Eugene City Councilor Ken Tollenaar stated that he was concerned that public information regarding
the proposed change implied that areas of Glenwood already annexed to the City of Eugene would
automatically revert to the City of Springfield. He said he was not sure of which statutory provision
provide for such a change.
III. PUBLIC SAFETY COORDINATING COUNCIL REPORT
Lane County Commissioner Steve Cornacchia reminded participants that the October 1997joint
meeting of Metropolitan Area Elected Officials had charged the Public Safety.Coordinating Council
(PSCC) with preparing a recommendation of a coordinated regional strategy and funding for the Lane
County public safety/judicial system. He described processes which had led to recommendation of a
Lane County Public Safety Local Option Levy proposal. He referred to documents entitled "PSCC
Goals, Outcomes, Strategies, and Benchmarks" and "Public Safety Coordinating Council Proposed
Levy Items" distributed with the agenda of the meeting.
Mr. Cornacchia reviewed a prioritized ranking of programs proposed for inclusion in the recommended
levy described in a draft spreadsheet dated April 28, 1998, distributed at the beginning of the meeting.
He explained the process followed to develop the recommendation.
MINUTES--Metropolitan Joint Elected Officials
April 28, 1998
Page 2
.
Mr. Cornacchia said that he believed "threshold questions" which needed to be answered before he
could support a proposed levy included: (1) Would there be unanimous support from jurisdictions for a
levy? (2) Would there be other revenue measures proposed on the same ballot by other taxing bodies?
Mr. Cornacchia requested other elected officials who were members of the PSCC to express their
views.
Mr. Tollenaar said that he did not believe developing a levy proposal completed the work of the PSCC
because it should continue to serve as a planning organization, seeking increased effectiveness and
efficiency in the public safety system. He suggested that the programs proposed to be supported by a
public safety levy were a good prioritization of the needs of the system. He said he did not believe
revenue ballot measures to support a new library and parkland acquisition under consideration by the
City of Eugene would compete with a public safety levy. /
Springfield City Councilor Stu Burge said being part of the PSCC had been an enlightening experience.
He said he believed all of the programs proposed for support by a levy had merit, but that they should
be broken into segments acceptable to voters. He said he believed capacity programs needed to be
included in a levy for it to be approved by voters.
Eugene City Councilor Laurie Swanson Gribskov said she believed the prioritized list of programs
proposed for a levy were a "work in progress" and that some could be/phased in to reduce costs. She
said she was pleased with the attempt of the PSCC to balance proposals between those providing system
efficiencies, prevention, and capacity.
.
Springfield City Councilor Maureen Maine said she was concerned that the need and purpose of
programs proposed to be included in the levy be clearly conveyed to voters. She said the highest
priority of the levy should be capacity because while prevention/intervention programs can be funded
through private, nonprofit organizations, jail capacity cannot.
Lane County Commissioner Bobby Green said that the intergovernmental agency cooperation on the
PSCC was unique throughout the State. He said he believed prevention programs needed to be
adequately supported by a public safety levy and that the total tax being requested needed to be clearly
understood. He said the Board'of County Commissioners could not support a public safety levy alone.
Lane County Sheriff Jan Clements said he believed the.total amount of a proposed levy was critical;
that outcomes of programs to be supported by itneeded to be clearly identified; that additional work to
determine the interdependent nature of proposed programs needed to. be completed;. that if the. measure
did not pass, it was possible that "double majority" votes would be required for any proposalsforthe
following two years; that prevention programs were not effective without adequate jail capacity; that
support of treatment programs was essential to a complete public safety system; and that the jail
capacity need projected in program proposals was based on a population profile study performed by the
Lane Council of Governments.
.
District Attorney Douglass Harcleroad pointed out how public systems such as schools could not
operate with the 80 percent failure-to-appear rate faced by the judicial system. He said programs
proposed to be included in a public safety levy would provide capacity, prevention, and cooperation
between local governments. He said he believed the annual cost of a levy should be emphasized, not
its total cost.
MINUTES--Metropolitan Joint Elected Officials
April 28, 1998
Page 3
.
Mr. Cornacchia invited non-elected official members of the PSCC present to express their views.
Springfield School District #19 Superintendent Jamon Kent said that school districts believed that a
public safety levy should provide support for a complete system, that it should be placed on the ballot
at a judiciously chosen time, and that its outcomes should be carefully defined. He recommended that
a survey of public opinion regarding support of a public safety levy be made.
) Springfield Police Chief Bill DeForrest said that the lack of adequate jail capacity was the most critical
need which should be addressed in a public safety levy. He said that area police chiefs also supported
including conversion of the Area Information Records System (AIRS) and early intervention programs
in a levy proposal.
Lane County Children and Family Department Manager Patricia Rogers said the proposed levy was an
opportunity to provide balanced support for all elements of the public safety system. She said she was
pleased that support for early intervention for high risk juvenile offenders was included among
programs given the highest priority among those proposed to be included in a levy.
PSCC Citizen Member J an Gund stated that she believed the council was providing the best opportunity
available for a coordinated examination of the public safety needs of Lane County. She said the PSCC
should continue its work after a levy was passed.
.
Mr. Cornacchia invited elected officials who were not members of the PSCC present to express their
views.
Eugene City Councilor Pat Farr said that he did not believe most citizens realized the scope and
coordination of public safety services. He said he supported the importance of including jail capacity
in a public safety levy because it "made the system work," but was a strong advocate of prevention
programs as a way to reduce needs for capacity. He thanked the PSCC for its work.
Lane County Commissioner Elli Dumdi expressed appreciation for the work of the PSCC. She said
she was concerned that it would be difficult to convince the voting public of the importance of the
proposed programs, despite their high cost. She said she believed prevention was the most important
element of a public safety system.
Lane County Commissioner Peter Sorenson reviewed establishment of Public Safety Councils by State
legislation. He suggested that failure of voters to approve public safety levy proposals in .1996 and.
1997 indicated dissatisfaction with such proposals. He said it was important for all jurisdictions,
including school districts, to support the legislation. He said his concerns about using 'a Local Option,
Levy to support public safety included: (1) the proposal did not provide a comprehensive or
continuing solution to problems; (2) a five-year levy would delay an attempt to address an under
emphasis on prevention; (3) the support of all jurisdictions was not guaranteed; and (4) a survey of
public perception of the problem and acceptance of the levy was not included in the proposal.
.
Eugene School District 4J Board President Chris Pryor expressed appreciation for the inclusion of
school district officials in the meeting of elected officials. He said he believed the public needed to be
educated on the needs for public safety system improvements. He warned that omnibus ballot revenue
measures were dangerous because they did not allow voters to express choices regarding elements
included. He suggested that the total cost of the proposed levy was too high and would be difficult to
MINUTES--Metropolitan Joint Elected Officials
April 28, 1998
Page 4
.
explain to voters and that there might be an advantage in presenting its programs to voters in smaller
elements.
Springfield City Councilor Greg Shaver reported that the public safety levy had been discussed by the
Springfield City Council and that there was unanimous support for all programs identified in Tier 1
proposals. He said the council had agreed it would not propose a revenue measure to enable full,
support to be given to a public safety levy. He said he believed capacity was a key to the success of
prevention programs and that tax-payers were individually paying for the cost of weaknesses in the
public safety system.
"
City of Eugene Mayor Jim Torrey stated that the Eugene City Council had never faiied to support a
Lane County ballot revenue measure. He said he believed a gap in programs proposed for inclusion in
a public safety levy was an emphasis on the importance of keeping juveniles in school. He said he did
not believe there were adequate prevention programs proposed in Tier 1 of the levy proposal. He
encouraged including a "court school" and support for programs for homeless youth in a levy proposal.
He said he would support potential Eugene revenue measures for a library and park-land acquisition
and a Lane County public safety levy in the fall election.
Eugene City Councilor Tim Laue said he believed voters would be able to understand the importance of
programs proposed to be included in a public safety levy and that if 90 percent of its support was
directed toward capacity expansion, it would not be approved. He suggested that a significant .portion' .
of programs proposed in Tier 2 would need to be included for a levy to be approved.
.
Eugene City Councilor Scott Meisner said he believed previous public safety measures had not been
approved by voters because they did not deal with the need to address the perception~of safety. He said
he agreed that capacity needed to be included in any levy proposal and that he believed that offering a
"menu approach" to voters was unwise because the public safety system was comprehensive and its
parts inseparable. He recommended that prevention proposals be cautiously made because of the
difficulty in substantiating their success. He said he expected to support a public safety levy.
Mr. Tollenaar said he believed a park-land acquisition revenue measure could be considered a public
safety prevention proposal. He said he did not believe percentage of the total cost of program
proposals was a good measure of their balance because prevention was comparatively lesscexpensive ..
and that some portion of capacity could be considered prevention.
Ms. Weeldreyer said it was her experience that the lack of coordination in the public safety system was.
best illustrated in rural areas of Lane County. She suggested that the system was . like . a house in need
of repair and that improvements should be strategically planned."'
Ms. Maine said that she supported a public safety levy proposal and that she believed a significant
difference could be made through programs supported with a $1/$1,000 of assessed value.
Mr. Cornacchia said he believed "market research" regarding voter response to a levy proposal was
important and that it should seek opinions from a large segment of the voting population.
.
Bethel School District 52 Superintendent Kent Hunsaker expressed appreciation for being able to
participate in deliberations of the elected officials and the work of the PSCC. He said safety was the
highest priority of schools and of Lane County. He said he did not believe a five-year Local Option
MINUTES--Metropolitan Joint Elected Officials
April 28, 1998
Page 5
.
Levy was an appropriate revenue source to support public safety programs. He suggested unused tax
bases and issuing bonds could be more advantageous. He said parks and public safety issues had a
natural affinity and should be presented to voters in a common package.
Mr. Burge said he was frustrated because he did not believe the total levy proposal could solve public
safety system problems. He suggested that diminished social and family values, and the misuse of
drugs and alcohol were core reasons the success of proposed programs would be limited.
Mr. Harcleroad proposed that the elected officials instruct city and county chief administrative officers
to work with PSCC staff to prepare a public safety levy proposal based on the work of the council and
discussion of the officials.' He said he had discerned the following themes in the discussion: (1) the
critical nature of capacity proposals; (2) the importance of increasing the proportion of prevention
proposals; (3) the value of a voter survey/market research; and (4) the concern that more permanent
funding sources be explored.
Eugene City Councilor Betty Taylor said that she was attracted by the comments about the proposal
made by representatives of the school districts. She said she believed that voters wanted to have a
choice in determining how public safety revenue was spent; that cities and counties had unique roles in
providing for public safety; that more attention should be given to homeless issues; and that educational
bodies should develop prevention program proposals.
Eugene City Councilor Bobby Lee said he believed that there were more juveniles that ever. before; that.
homeless issues were a significant driving force in public safety spending; that prevention programs
would reduce future capacity needs; and that the public wants elected officials to be visionary.
. Mr. Laue said he believed voter survey/market research had wide support among elected officials and
should be considered in preparing a public safety levy proposal. He said he supported using a broadly
based survey/research, inclusion of "push" questions, evaluation of support for issuing of bonds for
capital elements of the proposals, using the PSCC Policy group as a sounding board for a proposal, and
purging election roles of ineligible voters.
Ms. Swanson Gribskov moved, seconded by Mr. Torrey, that the joint meeting of
Metropolitan Area Elected Officials request (1) that the Eugene City Manager,
Lane County Administrator, Springfield City Manager, and a representative of
area school district superintendents work with staff of the Public Safety
Coordinating Council to prepare a recommendation to. be evaluated by the Eugene
and Springfield city councils and the Board of County Commissioners for a Lane
County Public Safety Local Option Levy based on the work of the council and its
task groups; (2) that the levy proposal consider issues raised by officials such as
the mixture of capacity and prevention programs, the phasing in of programs,
issuing bonds for capital expenditures, the interaction of programs, using voter
surveys and market research, and the potential of other area jurisdictions
proposing revenue ballot measures in the same election; and (3) that the Public
Safety Coordinating Council Policy Group provide initial evaluation of a levy
recommendation.
.
Lane Council of Governments (LCOG) Local Government Services Director Jim Carlson reviewed
+ information provided to officials regarding revenue produced by a levy adopted by voters in September
and a levy adopted in November. He also pointed out that if Measure 53 removing requirements for
MINUTES--Metropolitan Joint Elected Officials
April 28, 1998
Page 6
.
.
.
"double majority" votes on ballot revenue measures and related matters from the State Constitution is
not approved by voters in May 1998, there would be an advantage to proposing a four-year Local
Option Levy to enable placing of a follow-up measure on the ballot of a general election in an even
numbered year.
Mr. Kelly suggested that consideration of the requested levy proposal would likely be possible by
elected officials in June.
The motion was adopted unanimously, 26:0, with Mr. Bennett and Ms. Hocken
not participating.
In response to a question from Mr. Burge, Lane County Assessor Jim Gangle explained that published
figures reporting the assessed value of an average house included only calculations related to single
family units.
Mr. Morrisette declared a five-minute recess in the meeting.
IV. TRANSPLAN FINANCE STRATEGY
Mr.Carlson referred to his memorandum dated April 28, 1998, regarding proposed TransPlan finance
solutions distributed at the beginning of the meeting. He described the role of elected, officials in
approval of strategies to address the shortfall of revenues to meet transportation needs projected in the
plan. He reviewed descriptions of the strategies proposed for consideration included in the '.
memorandum.
Mr. Sorenson asked what was the projected change in the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) in Lane
County. Mr. Carlson said TransPlan projected that the VMT would continue to rise over the next
decade, largely because most residential development would likely occur on vacant land at the edges of
urban growth boundaries and result in longer trip lengths.
Lane Transit District Board of Directors President Pat Hocken explained that transit program funding
was provided independently from that used for street and highway projects identified in TransPlan. She
said it seemed likely funding would continue to be available for its programs, including its long-range
bus rapid transit system. She said the district experienced revenue shortfalls in being able to provide
regular bus service in the increasing number of areas requesting it.
I
Mr.' Carlson said elected officials would need to make decisions regarding policies and revenue
strategies for street and highway modernization projects. He said TransPlan projected increased
vehicular traffic congestion and that decisions would need to be made about how much was acceptable.
In response to a question from Mr. Tollenaar, Mr. Carlson explained that local gas tax or vehicle
registration fees were not considered in revenue strategies because elected officials had previously
appeared to reject such potential revenue sources.
In response to questions from Mr. Green regarding the shortfall of revenue to meet proposed expansion
of the bicycle trail system, Mr. Carlson explained that a Transportation Utility Fee could be used to
deal with such a shortfall and that no bicycle-related local revenue source was being considered because
Federal funding of streets and highways often included provision for creation of bicycle systems.
MINUTES--Metropolitan Joint Elected Officials
April 28, 1998
Page 7
. In response to a question from Ms. Taylor, Mr. Carlson explained that approval of TransPlan did not
eliminate the need for later approval of funding for individual projects such as the West Eugene
Parkway.
In response to another question from Ms. Taylor, Mr. Carlson explained that reasons that a
Transportation Utility Fee was proposed for consideration was that it provided locally controlled
revenue, could be adopted without voter approval, and was more possible to control locally than a
vehicle registration fee or gasoline tax.
In response to a question from Ms. Weeldreyer, Mr. Carlson explained that LCOG monitored all
legislation and regulation proposals regarding gasoline taxes. He reviewed State proposals currently
under consideration.
Mr. Morrisette stated that he believed the meeting had been valuable.
The meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m.
(Recorded by Dan Lindstrom)
R:I1998\Adm Services I C1SIJEO Veo980428. wpd
ADOPTED BY SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL JUNE 15,1998.
.
{~~~
Mayor
ATTEST:
l..
~~J SL~
City Recorder
.
MINUTES--Metropolitan Joint Elected Officials
April 28, 1998
Page 8