CC Minutes - 11/17/99 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The council discussed Ms. Taylor's request that it adopt a resolution regarding the WT©. Mr. Johnson reminded the council that three councilors could place an item on the agenda anytime, but the issue was considered time-sensitive given the upcoming WT© conference in Seattle, Washington. Mr. Torrey reminded the council that in the past, rather than adopting a resolution for an item outside the normal purview of the council, sympathetic councilors had agreed to sign a letter about the issue in question. He expressed concern about the amount of time processing a resolution such as that proposed by Ms. Taylor would take. Ms. Nathanson expressed a preference for past practice, which was not to adopt resolutions that were largely symbolic in that they were largely outside the purview of the City of Eugene or City Council. She said that given limited agenda time and the council's responsibilities, the council was not generally familiar with such issues and should have time to hear about and discuss an issue so councilors could cast a knowledgeable vote. Ms. Nathanson suggested that how the council spent its time at meetings should be related to achieving its most urgent City goals. Mr. Meisner said he was not opposed to considering a resolution but the issue was a huge one and he was being barraged with information from many sources, and he was unsure what to believe. He said such a resolution could easily require a two-hour presentation and discussion, and he would have to oppose action on a resolution without substantial education and information. He did not want to add two hours to the Monday meeting. Mr. Meisner's preference was that each councilor be given the choice to sign a letter. Mr. Kelly did not think the council discussion needed to be lengthy. He said that the Portland resolution was fairly focused. He understood, however, the reluctance of other councilors to act without more information, and agreed that the council did not have two hours to spend on the topic. Responding to Ms. Nathanson's comments, Mr. Kelly suggested that the issue could impact the City's goals. As an example, he offered a hypothetical City decision to use certified lumber, which could be prohibited by the WT© as a restraint of trade. Ms. Taylor said that a decision to require diversity could be prohibited by the WT©. She thought that most people were familiar with the issue, and suggested that the council could adopt a resolution that stated it opposed international trade agreements that had the effect of eroding human rights, environmental protection, or fair labor standards. She did not think it would require a lot of discussion. Mr. Meisner reiterated his concern that the issue would require considerable council education. Mr. Lee noted that Portland and Salem had adopted similar resolutions. He suggested that all councilors become as informed as possible on their own. He did not think that the council needed to adopt a resolution right away, and said it could be placed on an agenda when there was time. Mr. Pap~ concurred with Ms. Nathanson's remarks. He was concerned that if the council adopted such a resolution it would set a precedent. Mr. Pap~ did not think the council had the time and energy to consider such resolutions in addition to all else it needed to do to carry out the business MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 17, 1999 Page 3 5:30 p.m.