|
<br />, 1~
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />. ,-
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />-.-..,..-------
<br />- - -- -._~.~ ~.__ --~'_ ~-- c.- - __ - .
<br />~ .-- -- . .._-
<br />-~ . -. .-
<br />----..-- -- ---
<br />
<br />[,
<br />~'I Council Chambers, Eugene, Oregon
<br />~ June 23, 1942
<br />.. -'.. \ il
<br />I: :: The minutes of the regular meeting held Monday evening, June 22, 1942, at
<br />i! 7:30 P. M. Councilmen present: Bond, Koppe, Stewart, Brownson, Pennington;
<br />. II' absent; Farrington, Barette, and Hawn.
<br />......
<br />;1 Dave Evans addressed the Council stating that he had been asked by the '
<br />:.'1 employees of the Police Department as their spokesman in regard to the recent
<br />!I cancellation of the six-day Sick Leave. He said it seemed to him that there was
<br />11 a great deal of merit in the Police and Fire Department asking that the time off
<br />ii for Sick Leave be restored. He said that the employees in these departments
<br />:11 were not overpaid and that these two departments did not have the holidays off
<br />I that the other City employees have. At this time Councilman Farrington entered
<br />;: the room. Mr. Evans stated that the members of the Police Force had made some
<br />,j investigation of the different businesses in Eugene and that they would like to
<br />I: have the matter of the Sick Leave investigated farther. Councilman Pennington
<br />II Stated that he would like to hear what the Police Committee had found out regard-
<br />1 I) ing other businesses. Mayor Large stated that perhaps the businessmen in Eugene
<br />:, did not understand all that the City was doing for the employees in the way of
<br />i~ carrying insurance and stated he doubted if many of the other ci ties in Oregon
<br />! were carrying insurance to protect their employees. Councilman Bond stated that
<br />H it was not the intention of the Council to impose any hardship on the employees,
<br />il but that the privilege of Sick Leave had been abused. He stated that counting the
<br />'I two weeks vacation with pay, the hCIlidays, and the 6-dayle'ave of absence amounted
<br />l~ to almost an entire month, and that he did not believe the business firms were
<br />I paying their employees a full yeart:s wages for working only eleven months. Council.l
<br />II man Farrington stated that he believed that doing ~way wi th the Sick Leave would
<br />Ii improve the health of the City employees, and stated that it was a fact that
<br />:1 the Sick Leave had been abused. Councilman Stewart said he was .absent when the
<br />11 last resolution had been passed, but that he wanted to go on record as favoring
<br />:i some kind of Sick Leave arrangement for Ci tyEmployees, and th at he believed the
<br />! City would get value received from an arrangement of this kihd. Councilman
<br />,: Brownson stated he thought that this matter should be discussed further if not at
<br />;! this time at some future date. At this time Councilman Barette entered the room.
<br />:\ Mayor Large asked Chief Bergman if it was not a fact that in 1940 a certain police-
<br />I :i man had been off a full month for which he received pay, and that in addition he
<br />; 'i ~ad his two-weeks vacation. Chief Bergman said the~e was such an occurence either
<br />- I 1n 1939 or 1940. Councilman Farrington also aSked 1f it was not the case where
<br />. :; an employee was supposed to be siCk and was seen in Portland. The Mayor stated
<br />:1 that that was a fact. At this time Chief Bergman said he wished to make his
<br />'I answer a little clearer, and'that Officer Dyer was the one that had been off for
<br />:; a month, and that was on account of an appendix operation, and that he did not feel
<br />" that this could be construed as Chiseling. He said that previous to the time that
<br />ii Mr. Dyer was off, there was another officer that was off a: considerable length ""
<br />;1 of time. No action was taken by the Council.
<br />d
<br />"
<br />
<br />!j At this time Mr. Broderson, manager of the Telephone Company, stated that
<br />:, the Telephone Company was asking to make certain paving cuts on Hign Street.
<br />II Engineer Clubb stated that the Telephone Company wished to make the cuts and to
<br />:: repair the paving themselves, whereas ordinarily the City was in the habit of
<br />II repairing the paving after the cuts had been made. He said-the Engineer's,
<br />il Department was perfectly willing to allow the Telephone Company to make the
<br />:! paving repairs providing that the Telephone Company would reimburse the City for
<br />2 ,; the Inspector on the job at the rate of $1.00 an hour. Mr. Broderson said that
<br />! this arrangement would be satisfactory to the Telephone Company. The paving cuts
<br />:l to be made to be as follows: Commencing on High Street at the Alley between 8th
<br />, and Broadway, thence North to 3rd Avenue, thence east on 3rd to Ferry Street, thence
<br />;! north to Ferry Street Bridge. On motion by Barette, seconded by Brownson, and
<br />Ii carried, permission. to make these paving cuts as outlined above was granted.
<br />I
<br />i! At this time Mr. L. C. Culp addressed the Council in behalf of Mr. E. E. Foss
<br />:; who had just in the last day or two taken over the M & M Shingle Company, just
<br />ii outside of the City limits. He stated that Mr. E. E. Foss had alread~ deposited
<br />,! with the Citf. $100.00 to cover fire protection, that under the present circum-
<br />:3 ,I stances the '100.00 would only apply for the balance of the calendar year, and that
<br />i he felt that ~n adjustment should be made on a prorated basis, rather than charge
<br />: Mr. Foss the $100.00 for the remainder of the calendar year. Councilman Pennington
<br />;1 stated tl~t Mr. Foss had contacted him and that it was his opinion that some
<br />1- :,~ adjustment should be made, and Councilman stewart stated that Mr. Foss had also
<br />'; contacted him. The Recorder pointed out that on June 30 the City would have to
<br />i' Change over from a calendar year back to a fiscal year basis, and suggested that
<br />.: this $100.00 payment might be allowed' to run from.July 1, 1942 to June 30, 1943.
<br />I; After some discussion between the Councilmen, a motion was made by Bond, and
<br />:1 second~d by Farrington that this $100.00 payment be allowed to run from
<br />I I: July 1; - 1942 to June 30, 1943, under conditions provided in Resolution No. 280
<br />Ii adopted April 28, 1941, and that Mr. Foss would also hav~ protection for the
<br />~ balance of the month of this June. On vote this motion was carried.
<br />'j
<br />,; The Judiciary Committee had no report.
<br />I!
<br />
<br />Councilman Farrington, reporting for the Finance Committee, said they
<br />
<br />,
<br />
<br />.~
<br />
|