Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/21/1994 Regular 4IIt 4IIt 4IIt City of Springfield Regular Council Meeting MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD MONDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 1994 The city of Springfield Council met in Regular Session in the Springfield City Council Chamber, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, February 21, 1994, at 7:00 p.m., with Mayor Morrisette presiding. ATTENDANCE Present were Mayor Morrisette, Councilors Beyer, Shaver, Walters, Burge and Schanz. Councilor Maine was absent (excused). Also present were City Manager Michael Kelly, Assistant City Manager Gino Grimaldi, City Attorney Joe Leahy, City Recorder Eileen Stein and members of the staff. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Morrisette. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Rev. Eldon Walter, Seventh Day Adventist Church. SPRINGFIELD UPBEAT 1. Mayor Morrisette proclaimed February 21 - 26, 1994 as National patriotism Week. 2. Mayor Morrisette recognized Mike Moskovitz for completing the Council goals display board located in the Council Chamber Room. CONSENT CALENDAR IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WALTERS, WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR BURGE, TO ADOPT THE CONSENT CALENDAR. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST. 1. Claims None. 2. Minutes a. February 7, 1994 - Work Session b. February 7, 1994 - Regular Session c. February 14, 1994 - Work Session 3. Resolutions RESOLUTION NO. 94-7 - A RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT PROJECT 1-797: HANDICAP RAMP IMPROVEMENTS FOR 4TH, 7TH, 8TH, 9TH, 10TH, AND 14TH STREETS, B TO G Minutes - February 21, 1994 Page 2 4IIt STREETS, AND VICINITY, FROM H & J CONSTRUCTION, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $64,218.40. RESOLUTION NO. 94-8 - A RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT PROJECT 1-837: EAST SPRINGFIELD SEWER INTERCEPTOR SYSTEM, PHASE 2, FROM KENNETH R. BOSTICK CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,162,430.60. 4. Ordinances ORDINANCE NO. 5723 - AN ORDINANCE WITHDRAWING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN WEST SPRINGFIELD NORTH OF WEST "D" STREET, EAST OF I-5; (17S R03W S34 MAP 23 PART OF PARCEL 900); HERETOFORE ANNEXED TO THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD FROM THE RAINBOW WATER DISTRICT (SECOND READING) . ORDINANCE NO. 5724 - AN ORDINANCE WITHDRAWING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN WEST SPRINGFIELD SOUTH OF CENTENNIAL BLVD. AND WEST OF ASPEN STREET; (17S R03W S34 MAP 23 PARCEL 500); HERETOFORE ANNEXED TO THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD FROM THE RAINBOW WATER DISTRICT (SECOND READING) . ORDINANCE NO. 5725 - AN ORDINANCE WITHDRAWING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN NORTHWEST SPRINGFIELD SOUTH OF MAPLE ISLAND SLOUGH AND NORTH OF BELTLINE ROAD; (17S R03W S15 PORTION OF PARCEL 3400); HERETOFORE ANNEXED TO THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD FROM THE RAINBOW WATER DISTRICT (SECOND READING) . ORDINANCE NO. 5726 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE II, SECTIONS 2-11-1 "DEFINITIONS" AND 2-11-9 "CREDITS" OF THE SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CHARGE ORDINANCE, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. 4IIt 5. Other Routine Matters None. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. 1994-99 Capital Improvement Program (CIP). City Engineer Al Peroutka presented a staff report on this issue. The draft CIP has been reviewed by Council and the Planning Commission. Council is requested to conduct a public hearing for consideration of the 1994-99 five year CIP. Mayor Morrisette opened the public hearing. a. Phillip Farrinqton, Willamalane Park and Recreation District Planner, supported the proposed 1994-99 CIP. He specifically voiced support for the Southwest Sewer Connector project and the Millrace Park project. Mayor Morrisette closed the public hearing. 4IIt 4IIt 4IIt 4IIt Minutes - February 21, 1994 Page 3 Councilor Shaver recommended removing the West M Street project from the CIP and forwarding it to the Community Development Advisory Committee (CDAC) for inclusion of funding with other Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) projects. Mr. Peroutka explained that staff planned to present the West M Street project to the CDAC as a proposal. He clarified that funding for the project was not included in the CIP. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR BURGE, WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR WALTERS, TO ADOPT THE 1994-99 CIP AS SUBMITTED. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST. BUSINESS FROM THE AUDIENCE None. COUNCIL RESPONSE None. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS 1. Correspondence from R. M. Farrell, Chairperson, Springfield Bicycle Advisory Committee (SBAC), in Support of the Pioneer Parkway Bicycle/Pedestrian Project. Mr. Farrell addressed the Council and expressed his personal support and the Bicycle Committee's support for the pioneer Parkway Bicycle/Pedestrian project. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR SHAVER, WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR BURGE, TO ACCEPT AND FILE THE CORRESPONDENCE. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST. BIDS None. ORDINANCES None. BUSINESS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL 1. Other Business. a. Human Rights Commission (HRC) By-Law Revisions. Assistant City Manager Gino Grimaldi presented a staff report on this issue. The Human Rights Commission has revised its current by-laws. Minutes - February 21, 1994 Page 4 4IIt The proposed changes are as follows: 1) membership to consist of 15 members (13 adults and 2 students); 2) One student shall be a student from Springfield High School or from Thurston High School. The other student member shall be a resident of Springfield and a student from any public or private high school in the Springfield/Eugene area. Terms for student members shall expire on December 31st of their senior year; 3) Commission members shall ,own property or live within the Urban Growth Boundary of the city of Springfield; 4) allow applications of candidates who previously applied to be brought forward to a current recruitment at the request of the applicant; 5) vacancies which occur before December 31 in any year need not be filled until the City Council fills those vacancies which occur as a result of the expiration of terms on December 31 of that year; 6) membership of the Commission shall be reduced by the number of such vacancies; 7) a quorum shall consist of a majority of the voting members of the Commission or seven voting members, whichever number is greater; 8) other minor changes were housekeeping in nature. Mr. Grimaldi stated that both Melody Kelsay, Human Rights Commission Chair and Tonya Johnson, Human Rights Commission member were in the audience and available to answer questions of Council. 4IIt Councilor Walters stated that there has been discussion about reducing the number of members on the Commission. Councilor Walters asked Ms. Kelsay what her opinion was regarding the membership reduction. Ms. Kelsay replied that the Commission would like the membership to consist of 15 members. Ms. Kelsay discussed poor meeting attendance and stated that the lack of a quorum has become an on-going problem. Councilor Beyer asked if the current membership composition was necessary to accommodate the work plans. Ms. Kelsay responded that the Commission has three subcommittee groups. The subcommittees are Public Relations, Protected Classes and Youth and Education. Councilor Walters stated Ms. Kelsay that if it was her opinion that the number of Commission members should be reduced, then why did the Commission recommend to the Council that the membership should consist of fifteen members and not a lesser number. Ms. Kelsay replied that when the Commission made the bylaws recommendations, there were seven openings and eight applications and it appeared all the positions could be filled. She said that a Commission that had less than eleven members on it would not be able to accomplish anything. She felt it was the responsibility of the Council to find a good balanced number for membership. She explained that the Commission was looking to the Council for guidance and leadership on this matter. She also explained that the Commission discussed membership and retained the proposed number at fifteen to stay within the Council's original framework. Ms. Kelsay referenced applicants for the current vacancies. She stated that if these citizens were appointed to the Commission, it was possible that the composition of the Commission would be liberal. She explained that Council had previously given 4IIt 4IIt 4IIt 4IIt Minutes - February 21, 1994 Page 5 direction to the Commission not to bring forward "the liberal gay and lesbian agenda", that the Council had fought it enough. She stated that if the entire Human Rights Commission is liberal, then there was a risk of the community facing such divisive measures as was ocurred with Ballot Measure 20-08 two years ago. She felt the Commission needed to provide direction on this matter. Ms. Kelsay provided additional information regarding the subcommittee groups. She stated that the Protected Class subcommittee was chaired by John DeWenter and one of the subcommittee goals was to identify all the protected classes located in Springfield. She also stated that the group created a list of human rights that all Springfield residents should have. The first human right is that all Springfield residents should have the right to nutritious food. She further explained the group planned to include something related to housing. Councilor Walters asked what the Youth and Education subcommittee charge was. Ms. Kelsay explained that Darrell Neet chaired this group. The focus was on gang problems in the community and the process related to community education of that problem. Councilor Burge asked what the charge of the Human Rights Commission was. Assistant City Manager Gino Grimaldi responded that the Commission had two broad goals. The first was was to identify and meet the human rights needs in the community and the second was to promote educational and cultural activities. City Attorney Joe Leahy explained that the Springfield City Code, Section 7-10-1, contained specific language identifying the purpose and charge of the Commission. Councilor Burge proposed that a revision be made to the by-laws in Article II, Purposes and Objectives, and that the language contained in Springfield City Code, Section 7-10-1, "Declaration of Policy and Creation of Human Rights Commission", would be substituted and items 1, 2 and 3 in Article II would be deleted. Councilor Shaver provided Council with a handout proposing four additional amendments to the by-laws as follows: 1. Membership: Nine adult members and two student members. 2. Adult member eligibility: Registered voter with a physical address within a 97477 or 97478 zip code area that has not served two complete terms on the Springfield Human Rights Commission. Student member eligibility: An 11th or 12th grade student attending a Springfield School District 19 high-school, or an 11th or 12th grade student with a physical address within a 97477 or 97478 zip code area. Minutes - February 21, 1994 Page 6 4IIt 3. Vote required to take action: A "super majority" of at least 60% of members in attendance of a meeting with a quorum. That shall be interpreted to be the following: 11 members present - 7 votes 10 members present - 6 votes 9 members present - 6 votes 8 members present - 5 votes 7 members present - 5 votes 6 members present - 4 votes 5 members present - 3 votes 4 members present - 3 votes 4. Quorum: A simple majority of the currently appointed members of the Springfield Human Rights Committee. Councilor Shaver clarified that the eligibility requirements for both adult and student members should probably be: Registered voter with a residential physical address within a 97477 or 97478 zip code area that has not served two complete terms on the Springfield Human Rights Commission. 4IIt Councilor Schanz raised concerns regarding the four amendments as follows: 1) the Commission felt that there was a need for a fifteen member Commission because of the many projects they were involved in and that a larger membership provided more diversity; 2) he did not feel there was a need to extend eligibility boundaries; 3) if the Commission consisted of the proposed eleven members, a quorum would consist of six members. Councilor Shaver stated that in the event that current membership consisted of seven members, four members would be a quorum. Councilor Schanz replied that a minimum of six members would be required for an eleven member Commission. Councilor Walters questioned why Councilor Shaver felt an eleven-member Commission was better than a fifteen-member Commission. He also asked whether it would be wiser to meet with the Human Rights Commission once in place with the existing applicants to get input from the Commission and hear more about their subcommittees and what the requirements are for making those subcommittees work. Councilor Shaver replied to comments made by Councilor Schanz and Walters. He explained that it has been a continual problem to find enough interested and qualified applicants to fill board, committee and commission vacancies. Councilor Shaver reminded Council that on behalf of the Commission, Ms. Kelsay stated that the Commission was requesting leadership direction from the Council and perhaps a reduced membership was necessary. Councilor Shaver felt it was best to reduce the membership prior to the appointments being made, not after. He also explained that he was not asking for anyone's application to be dropped but was asking for staff to reopen the application process to allow people in the newly included areas to be given the opportunity to apply for membership on the Commission. 4IIt 4IIt 4IIt 4IIt Minutes - February 21, 1994 Page 7 Councilor Burge agreed with comments made by Councilor Shaver. He felt that if membership size was to be discussed that this was the appropriate time to do so. Councilor Beyer stated she was not certain what the membership composition should be. She questioned if the problem was that the Commission was too large or whether absenteeism was the real problem. Councilor Schanz explained that positions would be filled at the beginning of the year, therefore, seniors high school students would not be able to be appointed to the student vacancies. Ms. Kelsay responded that the current student members recommended that juniors be appointed to the student positions. They felt that this would allow the student to serve from January to January and would would free up personal time during the last half of their senior year for other activities. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR SHAVER, WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR BURGE, TO ADOPT BY-LAWS AMENDMENTS 1 THROUGH 4 AS FOLLOWS: 1. Membership: Nine adult members and two student members. 2. Adult member eligibility: Registered voter with a residential physical address within a 97477 or 97478 zip code area that has not served two complete terms on the Springfield Human Rights Commission. Student member eligibility: An 11th or 12th grade student attending a Springfield School District 19 high-school, or an 11th or 12th grade student with a residential physical address within a 97477 or 97478 zip code area. 3. Vote required to take action: A "super majority" of at least 60% of members in attendance of a meeting with a quorum. That shall be interpreted to be the following: 11 members present - 7 votes 10 members present - 6 votes 9 members present - 6 votes 8 members present - 5 votes 7 members present - 5 votes 6 members present - 4 votes 4. Quorum: A simple majority of the currently appointed members of the Springfield Human Rights Committee but no less than 6 members. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 3 FOR AND 2 AGAINST (SCHANZ AND WALTERS) . 4IIt 4IIt 4IIt Minutes - February 21, 1994 Page 8 IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR SHAVER, WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR BURGE, TO OPEN THE APPLICATION PERIOD FOR AN ADDITIONAL TWO WEEKS TO ALLOW THOSE THAT ARE OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS BUT HAVE A RESIDENCE WITH A 97477 OR 97478 ZIP CODE TO APPLY FOR THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 4 FOR AND 1 AGAINST (WALTERS). IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR SHAVER, WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR BURGE, THAT THE FOUR PROPOSED AND ADOPTED BY-LAW AMENDMENTS (NOTED ABOVE) BE INCORPORATED INTO THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION BY-LAWS AS PROPOSED BY THE COMMISSION AND THAT THE BYLAWS AS PROPOSED AND AMENDED BY APPROVED. IT WAS ALSO CLARIFIED THAT AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, THE LANGUAGE CONTAINED IN THE SPRINGFIELD CITY CODE, 7-10-1, DECLARATION OF POLICY AND CREATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION, BE INCLUDED IN ARTICLE II OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION BY-LAWS AND CURRENT ITEM NUMBERS 1, 2 AND 3 WOULD BE DELETED. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR SCHANZ, WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR BURGE, THAT IN ADDITION TO OPENING UP THE APPLICATION PROCESS TO PEOPLE WHO LIVE OUTSIDE THE URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY, TO INCLUDE A CITY WIDE RECRUITMENT AND INTERVIEW ONLY FOR NEW APPLICANTS. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST. City Attorney Joe Leahy recommended that the Council meet with the Commission to provide further direction to it. It was agreed that the Council and Commission would hold a joint meeting to discuss the Commission's work plan. Council did not adjourn into work session to discuss the Periodic Review and Charter Update Process. The periodic Review item was removed from the agenda and the Charter Update Process would be discussed at this time. b. Review of Draft Periodic Review Evaluation Document. City Manager Mike Kelly explained that discussion of this item has been postponed and would be rescheduled. c. Charter Update Process. City Recorder Eileen Stein presented a staff report on this issue. In June, 1993, the Council directed that the 1989 proposed new Charter be reviewed by the whole Council, rather than a specified Council subcommittee. Ms. Stein discussed the election schedule for 1994. She explained that March 17, 1994 was the deadline for filing a Notice of Measure Election with Lane County for the May 17, 1994 primary election. She stated that the city is not required to pay for participating in the primary and general elections in even numbered years. Because so, direction was sought regarding the Council's preferences to place the revised Charter on the ballot in 1994. She pointed out that beside the Charter revision, there were other Charter issues that had been raised over the past year, and direction on these issues, relative to the Charter amendment was also sought. 4IIt 4IIt 4IIt Minutes - February 21, 1994 Page 9 Mayor Morrisette suggested that Council deal only with the primary election rather than the others and not complete a comprehensive Charter amendment until there was time to meet and discuss issues. Councilor Shaver stated that a major change proposed was the primary election. He understood this to mean the primary election would stand as the final election unless there was a plurality in which case there would be a run-off election between the top two vote getters during the general election in November. He stated that if Council acted on this now and asked for it to be incorporated, it would not take effect to affect this election year. He said the Council could act on this in November, or the following year in May, and it would still be in place before the 1996 election year. He asked why the Council should target May if there are several other items needing to be addressed in the Charter. Mayor Morrisette discussed the benefits of having a single issues on the ballot in which people could vote on the individual merits of the issue. He felt that when several items were combined the likelihood of defeat was greater. Councilor Burge supported proceeding with the election on the primary election item. Councilor Walters did not agree with comments made. He did not feel that items should be dealt with one at a time. He felt all these items were closely related and it was easy to incorporate all the issues into a discussion about the way the community views it's elections, the way the Mayor is viewed (as a volunteer), whether Councilors should have access to health care similar to other public agencies in the community, and how this was linked to primary and ward elections. He stated that the only way he would support a primary election for Council races was if only the residents of that ward voted for the candidate from that ward. He stated that candidates can go door-to-door in their and meet the voters. He felt a city-wide election was more expensive. He also stated that a ward election held the candidate more accountable to the ward voters. Councilor Burge stated that in looking back at this issue he was not convinced that a city-wide election would cost more. He stated that he was opposed to ward elections. He discussed the primary election and the run-off in the general election. If a single candidate did not receive a majority in the primary election, he felt it would be proper to have a run-off in November. He felt the community should make the final decision of who serves them. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR BURGE, WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR BEYER, TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE CALLING FOR THE ELECTION AND IN DOING SO THE CITY ATTORNEY WOULD PREPARE THE LANGUAGE TO ACCURATELY REFLECT COUNCIL DIRECTION TO ADOPT A PRIMARY ELECTION PROCESS FOR CITY COUNCIL AND MAYOR POSITIONS WITH A GENERAL ELECTION RUN-OFF IF NO CANDIDATE RECEIVES A MAJORITY VOTE IN THE PRIMARY. 4IIt 4IIt 4IIt Minutes - February 21, 1994 Page 10 City Recorder Eileen Stein explained that if Council was in favor of this motion, there would be an ordinance on the March 7 Council agenda calling for the election. This would be the official action by which Council would notify the Election's Division that there was a proposed measure. Councilor Schanz reminded Council that only recommendations were being made to be placed on the ballot and the citizens would decide. In the same spirit, he felt that ward elections should be placed on the ballot. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR SCHANZ, WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR WALTERS, THAT COUNCIL PLACE WARD ELECTIONS ON THE BALLOT FOR THE SAME REASON, TO LET THE VOTERS DECIDE HOW TO SELECT THEIR REPRESENTATIVES. THE MOTION FAILED WITH A VOTE OF 2 FOR AND 3 AGAINST (BURGE, BEYER AND SHAVER) . Councilor Walters left the meeting at 8:30 p.m. Councilor Shaver said he wanted to discuss stipend for the Mayor's position and health insurance benefits. He asked if the stipend for Mayor was placed on the ballot, would the salary be established by the Councilor would a salary be set in the Charter itself. Mayor Morrisette was not in favor of discussing this while he was holding the office of Mayor but would do so as it applied to the next Mayoral election period. He also stated that the city of Beverton had a strong Mayor form of government and that the Mayor's salary is attached to a Judge's salary. He recommended that the salary be in the $20,000 range, not a full salary and that the salary be attach it to another position. This way the salary would not be under constant review and the salary could be indexed along with the position it is attached to. Councilor Burge did not support a stipend for the Mayor's position. He stated that a volunteer Mayor's position has worked well in the past. He also noted that historically the Mayor's position has been a part time position. He explained that Mayor Morrisette places a lot of time and energy into his position and has done a good job as the city's Mayor. He also noted that the city of springfield had a very capable City Manager. Councilor Schanz felt that people had the right to decide on this issue. Ms. Stein explained that she had information regarding the city of Tigard which provides medical benefits to their Council members. The Council members are on payroll and receive $150 per month stipend. This originally developed as a reimbursement for expenses. This was provided for in the City Code and not the Charter. If Springfield 4IIt 4IIt 4IIt Minutes - February 21, 1994 Page 11 . considered something like this, the Charter provision related to compensation for Mayor and Council members would still need to be deleted. Ms. Stein discussed the city of Springfield's medical benefits provider, League of Oregon Cities Trust. She explained that two of the requirements that the city would have to meet in order to join the League Trust would be that 75% of the Council members would have to participate and the city would have to pay 50% of the premium. The 50% premium would conflict with the Charter provision which prohibits compensation because this opportunity would be considered compensation. Councilor Beyer reminded Council that there were many part-time employees who did not have the ability to buy into the city's health insurance and did not think it was right for Council to be able to do this if employees were not allowed. City Attorney Joe Leahy reminded Council of the Charter clause which prohibits Council compensation. Councilor Shaver wanted Council to review the issue of insurance between now and November. Councilor Burge reiterated his opposition to any elected official at the city level receiving any compensation or benefits for serving in their position. He stated people were aware, that the position(s) were volunteer when initially applied for the position. He felt things were working well. Ms. Stein questioned if there was consensus or discussion regarding the 1989 Charter itself. Mayor Morrisette stated that this should be reviewed during a work session. He stated that during the time, there were three side issues that were going to be placed on the ballot at the same time, and the Council decided to pull the Charter off the ballot rather than take the risk of the entire proposal failing. He hoped that if the simple housekeeping change from an enumerated Charter to a general purpose Charter done independently without any side issues. Mayor Morrisette requested that this item be scheduled for a work session meeting and that no other items be scheduled for review during the same meeting. Council requested that they be provided with the existing and revised Charter at least two weeks prior to the scheduled Council meeting. Councilor Schanz stated he felt the ward elections and primary elections are intertwined philosophically and Council made a mistake by not allowing the people to decide on both issues. Mayor Morrisette wanted to see the items separated so one issue would not drag the other one down. 4IIt 4IIt 4IIt Minutes - February 21, 1994 Page 12 Councilor Shaver discussed ward elections. He explained that the more he was involved with, the more he realized that Springfield still had the luxury of city-wide elections in contrast with groups that break into wards. He was impressed with how well people are served by being provided with the opportunity to vote on every candidate, even though it may not be the most economical thing for the candidate. He was now convinced that as long as the city is small enough to handle city-wide elections he would support it. Councilor Schanz felt the people should be allowed to vote on this. Councilor Beyer agreed with comments made by Councilor Shaver. She said she felt very strongly about this issue. 2. Committee Appointments. a. Human Rights Commission. This item was delayed based on discussion regarding bylaws. BUSINESS FROM THE CITY MANAGER 1. Budget Transfer Resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 94-9 - A RESOLUTION REDUCING APPROPRIATIONS IN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND, AND RECOGNIZING AND APPROPRIATING SPECIAL REVENUE FUND AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS FUND GRANTS AND CASH CARRY-OVERS, AND TRANSFERRING AND RE-APPROPRIATING FUNDS IN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, SDC PROJECTS AND DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENTS FUNDS. Finance Director Bob Duey presented a staff report on this issue. Several times throughout the fiscal year the Council is requested to make adjustments to the budget to reflect needed changes in planned activities, to recognize new revenues such as grants or to make other required adjustments. Mr. Duey reviewed the Cascade Drive Street, sanitary and storm sewer improvement project ($80;000). He explained that the passage of the resolution would only adjust the budget document to allow this type of financing and project to occur. At a later date the Council would receive a presentation from Public Works for actual approval of the project itself. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR BURGE, WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR SHAVER, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 94-9. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 4 FOR AND 0 AGAINST. 2. Other Business. a. Councilor Burge discussed the Metro Plan process. He stated that the word "agreement" was reoccurring between the three jurisdictions. He stated that he has not personally seen that agreement and would like 4IIt 4IIt . Minutes - February 21, 1994 Page 13 ~ to see it. If there was not an agreement, he requested that he be provided with copies of the adopting ordinances by the three jurisdictions enabling that process. He also requested copies of the associated minutes. ADJOURNMENT BUSINESS FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 8:52 P.M. Minutes Recorder - Julie Wilson ATTEST: f6h/uJ;~ Mayor ~~k~ City Record~r