City Council Oversight Committee Meeting

CITY COUNCIL OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE MINUTES October 10, 2019 The City Council Oversight Committee of the City of Norman, Cleveland County, State of Oklahoma, met at 4:02 p.m. in the City Council Executive Conference Room on the 10th day of October, 2019, and notice and agenda of the meeting were posted in the Municipal Building at 201 West Gray 48 hours prior to the beginning of the meeting. PRESENT: Councilmember Holman and Chairman Bierman TARDY: Councilmember Scott (5:18 p.m.) LEFT: Chairman Bierman (5:39 p.m.) ABSENT: Councilmembers Carter and Petrone OTHER STAFF PRESENT: Mr. Darrel Pyle, City Manager Ms. Sara Kaplan, Retail Marketing Coordinator Ms. Beth Muckala, Assistant City Attorney Ms. Kathryn Walker, City Attorney Ms. Brenda Hall, City Clerk Ms. Rendy Martin, Administrative Tech III Item 1, being: DISCUSSION REGARDING THE CITY OF NORMAN’S BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, AND COMMITTEES. Ms. Brenda Hall, City Clerk, said this would be an opening to a broader discussion about the City’s boards, commissions and committees as far as structure, duties and areas where some may be combined or eliminated. She provided a table of more than thirty (30) City’s boards, commissions and committees including their duties; whether they are advisory or recommendatory; the number of members and how often they meet. She said staff has reviewed and noted some that have common duties, overlapping duties or duplicative duties being done by more than one committee. As an example, the Greenbelt Commission looks at trails and green space, which is also reviewed by the Parks Board and Planning Commission during the development process. She said each committee must be staffed and backup documentation prepared and many of the committees are staffed by the same department. She said the Oversight Committee’s role is to determine whether or not to continue this practice, combine some of the committees that have like duties, or eliminate those that may no longer be needed. Chairman Bierman asked if it was Staff’s recommendation to combine them or did the commissions ask to do that. Ms. Hall said currently Staff is reviewing and discussing possibilities where boards and commissions may be combined to reduce the overall number of committees to staff and eliminate duplication of duties. Another example would be the Children’s Rights Coordination Committee be blended into the Human Rights Commission, which is going on now. The Board of Parks, Tree Board, Greenbelt Commission and Bicycle Advisory Committee all have similar and/or crossover duties. There was some thought about really needing all three of those, can they be consolidated. Chairman Bierman said the one thing she really liked about the Greenbelt Commission is their specific focus on green space and a master trails plan. City Council Oversight Committee Minutes October 10, 2019 Page 2 Ms. Kathryn Walker, City Attorney, said a lot of what the Greenbelt Commission reviews is also handled by the internal Development Review Team who look for trail connections, sidewalks, green space, etc., which is ultimately reported to Planning Commission. Chairman Bierman said she does see a lot of duplication of efforts, but was unsure that rolling them into what we already have established is the answer. She could see a counter point to the Board of Parks Commissioners as the Board of Recreation Commission. She said Greenbelt, Bicycle Advisory, and Tree Board could be almost split between the two. Councilmember Holman thought the different committees exist because there may not be somebody on Planning Commission or City Council that is particularly well versed in trees, bikes, or parks. Ms. Hall said the Parks Board has historically looked at bike trails and when the Bicycle Advisory Committee was formed they went into a much deeper review. However, it is staffed by a member of the Parks Department and a member the Public Works Department. She said any Plans that are development actually go through the Parks Board before it goes to City Council. Councilmember Holman felt if some of the boards were combined, Council would need to look at requiring positions on the Board that specialize in specific areas; e.g., a bicycle representative and a tree representative on the Parks Board so that all interests are represented. Ms. Hall said Council could absolutely do that as we already have specificity on some of the boards and commissions now, i.e., Board of Appeals, Historic District Commission, Economic Development Advisory Board (EDAB), etc. Councilmember Holman said on the boards being combined, existing board members could nominate member(s) to continue service as the representative on the new board. Chairman Bierman agreed some consolidation could be done, she was hesitant to force the merger as some of these boards, commissions and committees have been around for a long time and tend to have their own historic perspective. Ms. Hall said we have a total of 36 boards, commissions and committees including ad hoc committees, which will go away once their projects are complete. She highlighted possible committees to add, which were suggested by Mayor Clark. The new committees are a Committee on Senior Issues; Public Transit Committee; Energy Committee (could be a sub-committee of Environmental Control Advisory Board); and Gender Based Violence Committee (could be a sub-committee of the Human Rights Commission). Mayor Clark said that using the subcommittee mechanism is helpful, but the subcommittees would still have to have staff support. Chairman Bierman asked if Council wanted to consider term limits for service on boards. She suggested three terms, but that would be a long time for committees that have five year terms. The Animal Welfare Oversight Committee currently does not have terms. Mayor Clark asked how many people currently serving have already that limit. Ms. Hall suggested Council allow themselves some flexibility for situations where you are having difficulty filling the position or in cases where there has been a lot of turnover on a board and you need someone with some historical memory to provide continuity. Chairman Bierman suggested three (3) terms and at least one (1) term gap before someone can serve again. City Council Oversight Committee Minutes October 10, 2019 Page 3 Councilmember Holman said he would like there to be some flexibility for the Mayor and Council to extend a term if there was reason to. Chairman Bierman said these would be guidelines not requirements and suggested three plus the flexibility to override it, if needed. Chairman Bierman also suggested changing as many boards and commissions as possible to nine (9) members to have as much ward diversity as possible. Chairman Bierman said EDAB would be an example where adding more members would result in ward parity. Ms. Walker said EDAB has not met very often. She said initially the purpose was to evaluate requests for economic development incentives after the Economic Development Authority was created, but the Authority was never funded. Council gave them some projects initially, which included the parking study and things like that. Chairman Bierman asked if it needed to be dissolved or re-scoped. She said it does not necessarily need to be incentive based and thought there would be helpful having individuals from every ward talk about parts of Norman that are in need of investment and attention whether or not it is from public incentives for private business. She said it could also provide input for NORMAN FORWARD 2, as an example. Ms. Walker said the Economic Development Policy talked about ways the City would address economic development and it was not just incentives. It also talked about the industries that would be targeted and those type of things. Ms. Hall said there is a lot of specificity regarding the requirements to serve on EDAB so that may need to be changed as well. Chairman Bierman suggested standardizing terms, e.g., advisory and oversight so that they mean the same regardless of what that board or commission. Ms. Walker said the only thing that concerns me, is the Public Safety Oversight Committee (PSOC) and the NORMAN FORWARD Oversight Committee (CFOB) were both created by ordinances that adopted those sales taxes so that might be a little challenging to change. The TIF Oversight Committee makes recommendations before money gets spent and that is clear in the project plan and in the agreements. PSOC and CFOB review expenditures after the fact to make sure they are being spent according to the ordinances. She said Staff would pull those ordinances and look at them because they were part of what was voted on although not part of the ballot language. Chairman Bierman said there are some that can be re-scoped more easily than others, like the Animal Welfare Oversight Committee, since it was created by resolution. She said if there is not a way to standardize the boards and commissions, creating definitions going forward would be helpful for future Councils. Ms. Hall said the Public Art Board, is a sub-committee of the Norman Arts Council (NAC), which was established by ordinance. The City has two positions on that board and the rest are appointed by specific organizations. Councilmember Holman said he would not be opposed to fazing that one out. City Council Oversight Committee Minutes October 10, 2019 Page 4 Chairman Bierman said she did not really see the need for the City to police the board but would want to encourage NAC to continue having two lay people on the board and not just those who live, work and breathe art. Chairman Bierman said she feels strongly about adding a Citizens Budget Advisory Committee and a young citizens board that would go hand and hand with the Norman Youth Council. She said the young citizens board would be a standing committee of Norman’s youngest residents who do not get to vote, but have ideas and things that they would like to see happen or change in their community. Chairman Bierman introduced a constituent that brought the Citizens Budget Advisory Committee to her attention. She is a Norman resident who moved here from a small community that is a suburb of Dayton, Ohio, a town with a little over 9,000 people. The Citizens Budget Review Committee was active in advising the City on how taxpayer’s money should be spent. She felt the City of Norman needs citizen input on how taxpayer money is spent. She said she had a financial background and would love to serve on that committee. Chairman Bierman said it would be a great thing to have a budget committee. She did not see a downside to having citizens more involved in the budgeting process. She felt like there should be 18 members; two from every ward and two at-large. Ms. Hall said if Council envisions them voting, an even number could be a problem. Chairman Bierman said maybe two from every ward and one at large or three at large. She said Council will need more feedback and felt there will be a lot of different ideas about how it should be structured. Councilmember Holman asked how often they would meet and would they be talking about things that go on in everyday life they want Council to consider or will they be looking at our exact budget. Chairman Bierman said she sees it as being both; formerly engaged in the budget process and receiving the same updates Council would get the following week. She said in the summer, after Council adopted the budget, the committee review how the year ended and look at sales tax trends every month similar to the Council Finance Committee. Ms. Hall verified Council wants to add six committees and remove one. Chairman Bierman said at minimum, bundle Tree Board and the Bicycle Advisory Committee maybe also Greenbelt into one, which would be a net loss of two as well as re-scoping EDAB. Ms. Hall clarified the Public Art Board would be under the NAC and Children’s Rights would roll in to the Human Rights Commission. Ms. Hall said some of the new committees suggested are broad in scope and asked if Council was planning to create their mission and duties. Chairman Bierman said Public Transit is self-explanatory or should it be Norman Transit Committee. Ms. Hall said Mayor Clark also wanted guidance on the general guidelines that are not in a resolution or ordinance, i.e., notice requirements, etc. Chairman Bierman said she did not realize Council was getting nominations 30 days in advance of the appointments. City Council Oversight Committee Minutes October 10, 2019 Page 5 Ms. Hall said the goal is to try to get nominations to Council 30 days in advance of the agenda and for the most part, we are sticking to that. Chairman Bierman said she just thinks that finding increased opportunities to make sure that the public is aware that those vacancies exist is helpful. Items submitted for the record 1. Summary of Boards, Commissions and Committees 2. Boards/Commissions/Committees Summary 3. Code of Ordinances, Chapter 4 – Boards and Commissions, Article I. General 4. General Guidelines for Board and commission Appointments ***** Item 2, being: CONTINUED DISCUSSION REGARDING E-SCOOTERS. Ms. Sara Kaplan, Retail Marketing Coordinator, said Staff has collected over a year of data on e-scooters. She said there were almost 50,000 scooter riders in Norman and Staff can see the seasonal trends. She said the average ride during the school year is about half a mile or five minutes. In the summer time the average ride is approximately one mile or 10 minutes. She said Bird has some boundaries built in and they can tell where the people are taking the scooters. Ms. Kaplan said the companies do say to stay off sidewalks but cannot really enforce that yet. She said she met with Staff from several departments to get input on issues or areas where restricted zones or slower speeds were warranted. She said the sidewalks are too narrow on Campus Corner so they would be restricted to the streets with a speed of 10 miles an hour or less. There are signs on Campus Corner prohibiting bikes and skateboards on the sidewalk and e-scooters could be added. She said there is no way to use geo fencing to keep them off the sidewalks. She said although Main Street/downtown has wider sidewalks Staff would still prefer them on the streets with slower speeds. She said Staff also areas in specific parks, e.g., the new Bike Skills Park. Ms. Kaplan said people could ride to the Bike Skills Park on a scooter but once they are there, Staff would not want them on the structures. Chairman Bierman asked if there were rules or regulations about motorized equipment at Sutton Wilderness. Ms. Kaplan said on Legacy Trail for example there are signs that say no motorized vehicles. Chairman Bierman suggested GEO fencing the entire park. Ms. Beth Muckala, Assistant City Attorney, said the Committee has previously discussed different structures/guidelines for companies to follow and what is currently in our revocable agreement is a flat permit fee of $300 upon deploying a fleet of 150. She said $300 is right in the median with what she is seeing when looking at other cities. She said some cities across the nation use a per scooter fee. She said Staff has not recommended a structure that would require the City to inspect the scooters. She said if Council wanted a per scooter fee, staff would probably be issuing decals to the scooters for ease of identification. City Council Oversight Committee Minutes October 10, 2019 Page 6 Chairman Bierman said she sees the utility of having a per scooter fee if Council decides to allow them later at night, but felt Staff would need a way to enforce the safety requirements. Ms. Muckala said it would make sense if the City is inspecting the scooters, but she has not seen it used that way. She said it is pretty standard for municipality to adopt standard maintenance requirements and procedures that place the responsibility on the company and that is what she would recommend. Chairman Bierman asked if there were individual fees for taxi cab companies. Ms. Hall said the is a company fee and a per cab fee for pedi-cabs, but taxi cab companies are $25 per cab. She said the drivers also have to get a permit through the Police Department and that fee is $25. Ms. Hall said her only hesitation is the way the scooters are deployed. She said the City’s Fleet Division is already under staffed and if a company dumps an extra 50 she unsure how quickly Fleet could inspect them. Ms. Muckala said we going to be treating them differently than others, there is a distinction to be made between a for hire vehicle where there is going to be a pilot, responsible for the vehicle and taking them around verses deploying unmanned vehicles and that is why I think a lot of municipalities have placed the maintenance and upkeep responsibilities on the companies. Councilmember Holman said he thinks one of the problems of doing a per scooter permit would the scooters may not be the same every day as scooters are moved around the entire metro. Chairman Bierman said she just wants to be cognizant mostly of the potential liability of requiring certain things without an enforcement mechanism to ensure they are actually complying. Ms. Kaplan said the Police Department confirmed that someone riding at night without a light would get pulled over just as they do with bicycles now. Ms. Muckala said as far as liability and indemnification, most of the programs she has been looking at have very strong language in that regard. She said the next potential fee to consider is the infrastructure impact fee, which ties in to the revocable license of fee of $1.00 per scooter per day. She wanted to mention that while the model of one dollar per day per scooter was what the City of Norman established; she has seen a definite shift in how it has been done in cities that have more recently adopted standards and pilot programs to a percentage or a $.05 per ride something like that based on the ride. Chairman Bierman asked if it would it be possible to develop some cost estimates if the fee was increased from a $1.00 per day per scooter to $1.50 per day per scooter, what would that mean in terms of financial impact both to the company and to the City. Ms. Kaplan said revenues that have been collected or estimated for the first quarter were $14,000, second quarter at $16,000 and third quarter was estimated at $12,000 and collected to date for the year is $43,000. She felt that if the City pushes it to high, it will push the companies out of the market and overall, citizens seem to be enjoying themselves. She said what she was hearing from the companies is a per ride fee of $.10 per ride fee, which would equate to approximately one-third of what the City has collected. Chairman Bierman just wanted to make sure the fees were providing enough revenue to address some of the continued concerns. City Council Oversight Committee Minutes October 10, 2019 Page 7 Ms. Kaplan said that right now we potentially have four companies that have been approved to release scooters up to 150 each so potentially we could have 600 scooters deployed. She said there are approximately 200 deployed at this time so having a per scooter per day fee at some point may cap the City’s potential for revenue where a per ride fee, if the ridership continues to be 50,000 a month, has the potential of being much higher. Chairman Bierman said the reason she brings it up is because there was discussion at the last meeting about possible raising the fee by a quarter or fifty cents. Ms. Kaplan said what she has seen is per scooter fee instead of an impact fee, i.e., $300 per scooter per year regardless of whether the entire fleet is deployed every day. She said she has not done the math to see if that is greater or lesser than the current structure, but that is one option to consider which would also make the data tracking process easier. Chairman Bierman said she would be interested in seeing some numbers on an annual fee basis rather than a daily fee basis. Ms. Muckala said a storage fee is needed as well, simply because these devices get updated and phased out and there might be a point where they have no value in picking them up unless a storage fee is charged. She also suggested a tailored cost for parking enforcement responding to incorrectly placed scooters. She has seen a lot of ordinances where notice is given, if compliance is not reached the scooters are moved and a fee assessed. She said there has been a lot of discussion about how to classify scooters and the reasonable interpretation is that we have to assume they are treated like motor vehicles until they are specifically exempted. She said under Oklahoma law it appears the scooters cannot travel more than 25 miles per hour or travel on a roadway posted with a speed limit greater than 25 miles per hour, but she has not gotten any feedback from the state on that yet. She would like to talk with other municipalities that have already passed ordinances to see if they received feedback from the state and/or what their perspectives are on this law within their cities. The current law specifically says that the cities may adopt ordinances governing a very broad interpretation of the operation of these devices, but House Bill 1105 appears to have limiting language to city’s authority so if something does get through the Legislature, we could be looking at some potential preemption issues. Ms. Kaplan said the Committee previously discussed allowing the companies to run after 10:00 p.m. and said some of the companies are basically doing that now. She said Staff spoke with Lt. Pendleton who saw the benefit in having them operate later at night on Campus Corner to disperse the crowds quicker. Lt. Pendleton has reached out to the companies to discuss where the scooters are allowed for safety reasons. She said most of the scooters have headlights and taillights and the newer ones are coming out with those features. Councilmember Holman supported operational hours after 10:00 p.m. and did not see why they should not be allowed anytime. Councilmember Scott agreed and felt the scooters should be able to be ridden at any time of day or night. She supported the annual fee rather over the daily fee and liked the state regulation on the speeds. She said the Committee previously discussed helmets and age limits and asked for an update on that. Ms. Muckala said Tulsa is considering an age limit of 16 but do not have any right now. She said there was some discussion by their Council to include a hardship exception to that such as people who have gotten their licenses earlier are able to drive other vehicles. Councilmember Holman felt if a person is able to drive a car at 16, they should also be able to ride a scooter. City Council Oversight Committee Minutes October 10, 2019 Page 8 Ms. Muckala said she has seen many press releases of Bird and Lime where they are very strongly worded that people less than 18 should not be driving them, that is their own internal policy. Ms. Kaplan said all of their user agreements to sign up say you must be 18, one of them allows guardians of someone under the age of 18 but at least 16 can give them permission to ride. Ms. Muckala said if Council is not really wanting to set any restrictions on the age issue, being silent and leaving it to the scooter companies would probably be the way to go. She asked if the Committee was opposed to a statement that only one person should ride on the scooter. She did not believe that was in the user agreements, but most of the things she has read about accidents is specific to multiple riders. PUBLIC COMMENT: Felt fine should be a lot higher if it will cost more than $5 to pick it up. Also felt the City should work on battery charging stations so the scooters are at certain location at night and not left in the middle of the sidewalks. Ms. Muckala said the $5.00 per day storage fee is after the scooter has been impounded and the way the agreements are worded, if the City’s impounds a scooter for a parking violation they can be subject to fines between $100 and $200. If the City actually hires a third party to impound the scooters, the City can recoup those fees dollar for dollar based on how the agreement is written. She intends to go forward on that structure. Items submitted for the record 1. PowerPoint presentation entitled, “Continued Discussion on E-Scooters” City Council Oversight Committee dated October 10, 2019 ***** ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 5:47 p.m.