City of Eugene
7/23/2007 10:02:48 PM
11/2/2006 4:38:55 PM
City Council Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
All rights reserved.
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View plain text
<br />j <br /> M I NUT E S <br />e Eugene City Council <br /> City Council Chamber <br /> November 17, 1982 <br /> 11:45 a.m. <br /> COUNCILORS PRESENT: John Ball, D. W. Hamel, Mark Lindberg, Gretchen Miller, <br /> Emily Schue, Betty Smith, Cynthia Wooten (commencement to <br /> 1:10 p.m.). <br /> COUNCILOR ABSENT: Sr i an Ob i e . <br /> Adjourned meeting of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was called <br /> to order by His Honor Mayor Gus Keller. <br /> I. ITEMS FROM MAYOR & COUNCIL, APPOINTMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS, AGENDA ADJUSTMENTS <br /> A. Petition Regarding Naming of the Hult Center for the Performing Arts <br /> Mayor Keller referred to a petition received by the council at its November 10, <br /> 1982, meeting regarding the naming of the Hult Center for the Performing Arts. <br />e He noted that a lawsuit had been filed on the matter and asked Tim Sercombe of <br /> the City Attorney's Office to review the suit and discuss the alternatives for <br /> action available to the council. <br /> Mr. Sercombe said that a complaint had been filed in Lane County Circuit Court <br /> on November 8 regarding alleged violations of the Oregon Open Meetings Law at <br /> the council's meeting of September 23, 1982. He said that the allegations were <br /> 1) that the meeting was not open to the public, since the meeting was held at a <br /> banquet with a charge of $10 per person; 2) that the required 24 hours' notice <br /> was not provided in a manner reasonably calculated to reach the public; and <br /> 3) that the notice was not specific enough as to the subject(s) to be covered at <br /> the meeting. Mr. Sercombe said that the intent of the suit was to void the <br /> council's action and to recover attorney's fees and court costs for the complainant. <br /> Mr. Sercombe said that it was the opinion of the City Attorney's Office that the <br /> case lacked merit and could be decided in a summary manner. Regarding the first <br /> allegation, Mr. Sercombe said that the defense was factual: employees at the <br /> doors to the room where the meeting was held had been instructed to allow <br /> interested people to attend. Regarding the second charge, he said that the <br /> defense was also factual: notice of the meeting was provided to local radio and <br /> television stations and the local newspaper more than 24 hours before the <br /> September 23 meeting, and the September 23 meeting was announced at the council's <br /> Wednesday noon meeting on September 22. Mr. Sercombe said that the defense to <br /> the third allegation was both factual and legal. He referred to Section 192.640 <br /> of Oregon Revised Statutes, which requires that the principle agenda items be <br />e listed in advance on notices only for regular meetings and not for special <br /> meetings, such as the September 23 special meeting. Mr. Sercombe said that even <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 17, 1982 Page 1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.