[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6582954,"mediaKeyId","3143338-c7c0b9fe0abfc54ec1948dfd89a342a4","parentId",3143338,"title","Public commenters urge action on Bethel safety and restoration of CAHOOTS amid budget debate","audioSeconds",2159,"startMs",2032000,"endMs",4191000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3143338-c7c0b9fe0abfc54ec1948dfd89a342a4&start=2032&end=4191","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3143338-c7c0b9fe0abfc54ec1948dfd89a342a4/thumbnail_2032000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6582954/Eugene/Lane-County/Oregon/Public-commenters-urge-action-on-Bethel-safety-and-restoration-of-CAHOOTS-amid-budget-debate","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6582954-c01710e9f5d23c177015883efeb7690d/orig.mp4?Expires=1771000514&Signature=T8XVhfe7pkA6Cmj5cp0AsNgcPztaWgelAfNdtoGgFAmD7X~6iSGs4ggP-czhVLISmXF83MZewh1HL8PLH3JLdEV6nH9U4wz-hE0yFPCsPPwtr2a39O09~997doil7SRm2nYkrzPrjm5KO7i4I1vL36UBf~TNwxlj~DADMYmGI-uPh5H2~-via78GQX5OZejpe2y8W3TV38FQmQ3iFxn8fII9T4McCuu-KWoGK1VnhTKFCkOFkHPatrmZRPXnAcv205o~HDD0OvrQ6FcKcmzoh3hutzzPUx7WNJsDfiDS9B~V9mf14F7PdjvJJJcuysHUDoJFIrqP75rfORL0iHQAvw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City Council of Eugene, OR","date","2025-04-29T04:01:50.84Z","article","Seventeen people spoke during the public comment period at the April 28 Eugene City Council meeting, urging the council to address sanitation and safety near the Lindholm Service Center in the Bethel area, to restore alternative‑response services known as CAHOOTS, and to preserve community services as the council works through budget choices.

Lynn Woodrich, co‑chair of the Active Bethel Community, told councilors that overcrowding at the Lindholm Center is producing “severe sanitation hazards and escalating dangers,” and urged immediate actions including a police substation in Bethel, dedicated cleanup crews, 24/7 enforcement and trauma‑informed outreach teams. “Our community deserves solutions that uphold both the dignity of those experiencing homelessness and the rights of residents and businesses bearing the brunt of this crisis,” Woodrich said.

Several speakers urged restoring CAHOOTS (an alternative emergency response program operated by White Bird Clinic) or ensuring alternative‑response funding in the city budget. Alex Chamberlain and Jacob True urged the council to allocate payroll‑tax revenues to bring CAHOOTS back; Chamberlain said the city’s community safety payroll tax was expected to raise “$5,067,000,000” and asked that “maybe 8,000,000” be allocated to CAHOOTS, a figure he presented orally. Jacob True said public data suggested CAHOOTS could be returned to service “for well under $10,000,000.”

Councilor Kaczynski (first named as Kaczynski in council comments) said CAHOOTS funding was originally included under the fire department’s materials and services line in the initial contract but that the amended contract circulated on Friday did not include that funding. “That is in part because between the time when the initial one was written and the time when the amendment came out, Whitebird indicated that they were no longer gonna be providing that service,” Kaczynski said.

Councilor Groves, who said he met with CAHOOTS staff, told the council during comments that CAHOOTS had “$500,000 on the table that could have been used in the final 2 and a half months of service,” and urged further discussion on how the city might restore or replace the service.

Business and civic voices raised complementary budget concerns. Tiffany Edwards of the Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce said she and the business community “strongly urge you to keep the option on the table that an alternative path forward includes thoughtful cost reductions alongside any temporary fee,” urging a temporary fee that would preserve key services while the council works toward long‑term budget solutions. Rich Locke of the Eugene Business Alliance expressed opposition to what he called another fee and urged the council to consider alternative cost controls.

Other public commenters raised housing affordability and planning issues, dark‑sky protections for migratory birds, historical preservation, emergency notification systems and downtown parking. Several speakers expressed frustration that some services and protections for people experiencing homelessness appear to have been reduced or discontinued.

In response, councilors acknowledged the public comments and provided context for the budget and contract status. Kaczynski described where CAHOOTS funding had been recorded in prior budget materials; Groves confirmed he had met with CAHOOTS staff and said the organization wanted to continue serving but that options for timing and structure remained unresolved. Mayor Knudson thanked commenters and noted that council had conducted a work session earlier that evening on budget gaps and that the council is seeking ways to avoid service reductions where possible.

Clarifying details from the meeting

- Number of public speakers: 17 (announced by staff).
- Organizations referenced: Saint Vincent de Paul (Lindholm Service Center), Shiles Resource Center, White Bird Clinic (CAHOOTS), Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce, Equitable Access Eugene.
- Budget/contract notes: Councilor Kaczynski said CAHOOTS funding appeared in the initial fire department contract under materials and services; the amendment released the prior Friday did not include that funding because White Bird Clinic indicated it would not provide the service.
- Public claims about cost: One commenter said the community safety payroll tax would raise “$5,067,000,000” and asked for “maybe 8,000,000” for CAHOOTS; another estimated restoring CAHOOTS would cost “well under $10,000,000.” These figures were presented by public speakers and are recorded here as their claims, not as verified budget figures.

What councilors said

Councilor Kaczynski explained where CAHOOTS had been budgeted and why the recent amendment lacked funding; Councilor Groves confirmed he had met with CAHOOTS staff and said options remain for restoring alternative response. Mayor Knudson reiterated the council’s desire to avoid service cuts and thanked those who urged cooperation during the upcoming budget deliberations.

The council did not take a funding vote on CAHOOTS or on specific homelessness interventions during the meeting; those items remained part of the ongoing budget process and contract discussions.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","City Council Meeting: April 28, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Seventeen speakers told the Eugene City Council on April 28 that sanitation, safety and service gaps near Lindholm and in Bethel need immediate attention; multiple speakers and councilors raised concerns about the status and funding of CAHOOTS/alternative response as the council reviews its budget and the proposed fire fee.","taxTitle","Eugene , Lane County, Oregon","taxId",2848,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6582958,"Eugene City Council adopts hazardous substance user fees, votes 8–0",132,1822000,1954000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3143338-c7c0b9fe0abfc54ec1948dfd89a342a4&start=1822&end=1954","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3143338-c7c0b9fe0abfc54ec1948dfd89a342a4/thumbnail_1822000.jpg","/articles/6582958/Eugene/Lane-County/Oregon/Eugene-City-Council-adopts-hazardous-substance-user-fees-votes-80","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6582958-21296422b6233d53cb783d2a64818d57/orig.mp4?Expires=1771000514&Signature=dthtkPFWjK44gyYbnzRehhTeu-gBQirMG4o6nSZq~Ml7acNijnMHm5JAjAgf0-tMlkDJXpj-KkGXfDktDNZJ3ZNKV4wMvRoVS3tm8uZ22HU-obOKA9qvjzMzqgnXGrbBkhXW02Gpy9b4josghBSy4zfKDQpHEzM6uBwPf1sB~EtAQxbEvCYguMVgIisn9RTMKWtXAXuug~tVjw3lOTdgImCLvZbvNDfhf1gt~7fAz7dE7O7nF2hi2nLp-IH74jBtLKLuGVQmlAQjbM6Q10XC-RtFWRx4SHuyd75QNf~O8z3V03ZCCpTvfW~HYMC4WFIc4ElFRcgz1d7pmlKU3YUudA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Eugene City Council voted unanimously, 8–0, on April 28 to adopt an ordinance establishing hazardous substance user fees as described in the meeting materials.

The ordinance (referred to in council materials as “attachment 1”) was moved and put to a vote by the council president; councilors recorded no dissenting votes.

In advance of the vote, a councilor asked whether city staff could work with the state to allow businesses to enter hazardous‑substance reporting information once for both state and city requirements. The Fire Chief responded that the city had already contacted the State Fire Marshal’s office and that the state expressed willingness to collaborate to streamline reporting. “I did speak with the state fire marshal's office, and they said that we could work together to form, formulate a plan to make that a little more easier for users to report,” the chief said. “So, I'm in discussions with the State Fire Marshal now. She's really in favor of it. So, we just have to work out some details.”

Councilors subsequently moved to adopt the ordinance as provided in the meeting packet and voted to approve it, 8–0.

The ordinance establishes user fees for hazardous substance reporting and related regulatory activity; the meeting packet referred to an attachment with fee schedules and implementation detail. Councilors asked staff to continue coordination with the State Fire Marshal to reduce duplication of business reporting where feasible.

Votes and formal actions

Action: Ordinance adopting hazardous substance user fees (attachment 1).
Mover: Council President (not specified in transcript).
Second: not specified.
Vote: 8 yes, 0 no. Outcome: approved.

Implementation notes: City staff said they are in active discussions with the State Fire Marshal’s office about developing a joint or streamlined reporting approach so businesses would not have to enter the same data twice; timeline and technical details were not specified in the meeting transcript.","The Eugene City Council unanimously adopted an ordinance establishing hazardous substance user fees; staff said they are coordinating with the State Fire Marshal to simplify reporting for regulated businesses.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6582963,"Council rejects motion to schedule public hearing on ‘unlawful transfer’ right-of-way ordinance",482,873000,1355000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3143338-c7c0b9fe0abfc54ec1948dfd89a342a4&start=873&end=1355","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3143338-c7c0b9fe0abfc54ec1948dfd89a342a4/thumbnail_873000.jpg","/articles/6582963/Eugene/Lane-County/Oregon/Council-rejects-motion-to-schedule-public-hearing-on-unlawful-transfer-right-of-way-ordinance","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6582963-925a44f4eedfeeac1d9b37b560f9f643/orig.mp4?Expires=1771000514&Signature=Z5H9c5v0-vER3mFY241LvytNkf1vinDB3COTRBk-37451zousU~mqX2w1PQSvAoXsYAzrEDG2r~cVb-vY~pjamDWGV4bA5rCbkhmJrZyqxRc76votHNE~QO7xkZcO77HyoOSfCN5X51ig8-o4szNdl5VY0huC9fQL8KYhnWGYH0g82Wpc9f2uO1s80~n0iDakYcIvNt7JlO2vKWAjlFFBg4sy9m6YrjW1nrWv644DsDyXKWKHC91SQ~Sx6lefgg6EyiOOnmL~ZSiqGBAagkfnxhfrKLL3tLmh97X0s2Lf~SbcOc8Wn5iEnp4TxX-Tq-fxtSeDSDeue1jbkMmzDo8Tg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A motion to direct the city manager to schedule a public hearing on an ordinance prohibiting the passing of goods or money from vehicles in travel lanes failed at the April 28 Eugene City Council meeting, with the vote counted at 3 in favor and 5 opposed.

Councilor Clark moved the procedural motion to send the ordinance to a public hearing. Councilor Clark said the public hearing would be the “next logical step before we have a final discussion about it” and that taking the hearing first would save a later work session.

The debate centered on whether the ordinance — described by some councilors as aimed at unsafe conduct in travel lanes and by others as a repackaged anti‑panhandling law — is a proper use of council time and whether it would survive constitutional review.

Councilor Zelenka opposed the motion, saying the measure would be unconstitutional. “The reason I opposed this before, and said that was unconstitutional, is because it's well established Oregon law that anti panhandling laws are unconstitutional in Oregon,” Zelenka said. He argued the draft ordinance was “clearly targeted at homeless people panhandling” and that similar laws had been struck down in court.

Councilor Groves, speaking in support of pursuing the ordinance, cited data he said from Portland and emphasized pedestrian fatalities involving people experiencing homelessness: “Portland's actually collected data on the number of, homeless people involved in vehicle pedestrian accidents. … We have a high percentage of vehicle fatalities with pedestrians, and they're almost all in corridors where we have larger populations of unhoused people.”

Councilor Kyshynsky expressed skepticism that the activity targeted by the ordinance had led to serious injury crashes in Eugene and suggested other traffic‑safety priorities such as speeding and red‑light running might warrant more attention. Councilor Keating said he was likely to support the ordinance but opposed bypassing parts of the normal process, noting several councilors had not participated in prior work sessions on the topic.

When the council voted, the motion failed, 3–5, meaning the council did not direct staff to immediately schedule a public hearing on the proposed “unlawful transfer on vehicular portions of the right of way” ordinance.

Council members did not take final action on the ordinance itself during the meeting; the motion before the council was procedural (to schedule a hearing). The transcript does not record a later hearing date or an adoption vote for that ordinance.

Given the constitutional concerns and the disagreement among councilors about the scope and priority of the proposal, the ordinance’s future depends on whether supporters return with a revised draft or pursue further study and additional work sessions before bringing it back to the council.

Votes and formal actions

Motion: Direct the city manager to schedule a public hearing on an unlawful transfer on vehicular portions of the right-of-way ordinance.
Mover: Councilor Clark.
Second: not specified in the transcript.
Vote: 3 yes, 5 no. Outcome: failed.","A City Council motion to direct the city manager to schedule a public hearing on an ordinance that would ban passing goods or money to people from vehicles in travel lanes failed after councilors debated constitutional concerns and traffic-safety evidence.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Public commenters urge action on Bethel safety and restoration of CAHOOTS amid budget debate

Eugene City Council adopts hazardous substance user fees, votes 8–0

Council rejects motion to schedule public hearing on ‘unlawful transfer’ right-of-way ordinance