Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/06/1994 Work Session . . . City of Springfield Work Session Council Meeting MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD MONDAY, JUNE 6, 1994 The City of Springfield Council met in the Springfield City Hall, Meeting Room 2, 225 N. Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, June 6, 1994, at 6:00 p.m. with Council President Burge presiding. ATTENDANCE ~resent were Council President Burge and Councilors Shaver, Walters, Schanz, Beyer and Maine. Absent was Mayor Morrisette (excused). Also present were City Manager Mike Kelly, Assistant City Manager Gino Grimaldi, City Attorney Joe Leahy and City Recorder Eileen Stein. 1. City Charter Review Process City Recorder Eileen Stein presented the staff report and asked Council for direction on a process and timeline for reviewing the 1989 proposed City Charter in preparation for a Charter amendment for the November General Election. Ms. Stein distributed copies of the existing and 1989 proposed Charter to members of the Council who did not have copies. She directed the Council to Attachment B of the staff report, which outlined the review timeline. Ms. Stein suggested the process be agreed upon and review would commence on June 13 with the review of chapters one through seven. Ms. Stein explained how the changes in the existing Charter were reviewed by the 1989 Charter committee. She suggested reviewing the 1989 Charter versus the existing Charter due to the extensive review that has already taken place. Ms. Stein reminded the Council of their upcoming recess and what future work sessions would be needed to complete the review process to make the November General Election deadline of September 8, 1994. She explained the Council would need to adopt the resolution and ordinance calling for a November Election on September 6, with an emergency clause, in order to meet the September 8 deadline. Councilor Maine asked if the ordinance would have to be complete by September 6, to meet the filing deadline. Ms. Stein said she is seeking that information from the Lane County Election Department. Mr. Leahy said in his opinion, the ordinance must be specific and completed in order to properly write a ballot title. Ms. Stein stated additional review time could be scheduled if the Council so chose, between June 13 and July 12. The additional time would also allow for a public comment period, currently not on the proposed schedule. She said items currently scheduled for work sessions June 20 through July 12, could possibly be re-scheduled or additional work session dates could be added. The other alternative would be to reduce the amount of recess time for Charter review only. . . . City of Springfield Work Session Council Meeting Page two Councilor Burge asked if a public hearing is required to place an item on the ballot. Ms. Stein replied no, although there was a public hearing held in 1989, when the Charter amendments were first proposed. Council discussed timelines and the next possible General Election date of May 1996. Councilor Shaver stated he did not want to rush the adoption of a new Charter ordinance, just to make the September 8 deadline. Councilor Burge asked who was on the 1989 review committee. Ms. Stein replied Mayor Morrisette and Councilors Larson and Barry, and legal counsel provided by past City Attorney Ed Harms. Councilor Shaver stated resolution of 20-08 might be settled by the May 1996 General Election if the city chose to wait and review the Charter at a slower pace. Councilor Walters stated he felt rushed with the proposed timelines and discussed issues facing the Human Rights Commission. Council discussed why the 1989 General Election was not held after Charter revisions were completed. Councilor Burge stated he felt the Council should proceed with the process and see how difficult it is to meet the timelines. Councilor Maine stated she agreed that the accelerated timelines would be difficult to meet, but felt the Council should try to complete the review. Mr. Leahy said there are many items which could be modernized and would not be controversial to the voters. By consensus, the Council agreed to proceed with the proposed timeline for review and begin with chapters one through seven on June 13. After the first review, Council will decide whether to proceed as scheduled or to delay the process. 2. Business from Council a. Committee Reports ~Councilor Shaver spoke about a recent neighborhood meeting regarding the West D Street bike path. He described the bike path and the sewer project, and the public input which supported the sewer project but not the additional traffic from a new bike path. b. Other Business Councilor Shaver discussed the issue of cat control. He stated he has heard many comments from citizens regarding instituting a licensing process which would encourage spading or neutering. Councilor Walters stated he had also received numerous calls regarding cat control. Councilor Walters stated he supported Councilor Shavers idea of licensing video lottery. He suggested the city research the issue and check on the legal authority needed to license video lottery games. He asked for a report with the number of calls and cost analysis of Police Department responses to liquor establishments. Council discussed the aspects of imposing a city license for' video lottery games. . . . city of Springfield Work Session Council Meeting Page three Development Services Directors Susan Daluddung explained how the city's current licensing policies were established and the possibility of a general business license. She explained staff would complete a fee study on business licenses for amusement devices and legal counsel would do research on the topic of video lottery games. The results will be brought back to Council after their summer recess. councilor Walters questioned the routine approval process the Council uses for liquor license renewals. He raised the issue of Houlahan's liquor license being placed on the consent calendar and asked the Police Chief to give the Council a report on any licenses pending approval. Mr. Leahy stated the Oregon Liquor Control Commission (OLCC) has final approval over all licenses and the city has the right to charge more for the review of liquor license applications. Councilor Walters suggested a public comments period be given to citizens who reside adjacent to a liquor establishment. Councilor Burge asked when the Social Gaming ordinance revisions would be placed on the Council's agenda. Mr. Kelly replied on June 20. He also asked when the RFP for the city Bancroft lot analysis and review would be completed. Ms. Daluddung replied the results should be given to the city within one week. Councilor Burge questioned the city's ownership of two single family homes and if the city will be selling the homes. Mr. Kelly replied the homes were added to list of properties to be appraised and will then be marketed. Councilor Burge asked if there is a capital assets summary of the city's property. Mr. Kelly replied yes, for risk management purposes. He said staff will make sure the Council receives the list. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 6:55 p.m. Minutes Recorder - Shari Higgins #4331