Laserfiche WebLink
<br />e M I NUT E S <br /> Eugene City Council <br /> Council Chamber--City Hall <br /> November 18, 1991 <br /> Noon <br /> COUNCILORS PRESENT: Roger Rutan, Shawn Boles, Kaye Robinette, Paul Nicholson, <br /> Bobby Green, Ruth Bascom. <br /> COUNCILORS ABSENT: Debra Ehrman, Randy MacDonald, Mayor Jeff Miller. <br /> The special meeting of the Eugene City Council of November 18, 1991, was <br /> called to order by Council President Roger Rutan. <br /> 1. APPEAL OF BALLOT TITLE, MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT <br /> There was no objection to Mr. Rutan's suggested procedure for conducting the <br /> appeal of the ballot title as follows: 1) statement from the appellant; <br /> 2) response from City Attorney and staff; 3) council discussion commenced <br /> upon a motion. <br />e A. Statement from the Appellant <br /> Dave Sweet, 75 East 39th Pl~ce, representing Oregonians for a New Eugene <br /> (ONE), quoted Mahatma Ghandi, "A leader should never waste an atom of energy <br /> in resentment." Mr. Sweet said he believed that the citizens of Eugene do <br /> not hold resentment for the current form of Eugene's municipal government. <br /> He said he held the council accountable for allowing the City Manager "to be <br /> oppressing the citizens of Eugene," and believed that the citizens of Eugene <br /> deserved a better administration by electing their chief administrator. He <br /> said that the ballot title prepared by the City Attorney was biased and un- <br /> representative of the initiative he filed. He accused the City Attorney of <br /> being a "shyster" and having a conflict of interest. He noted that he con- <br /> tacted the Secretary of State's Office regarding the City Attorney's poten- <br /> tial conflict of interest. He questioned how a fair process could occur if <br /> the City Attorney's Office, which he claimed was recently added as a defen- <br /> dant in a lawsuit filed against the City, prepares a ballot title for a rep- <br /> resentative of the plaintiffs of that lawsuit. He said that he filed a new, <br /> revised initiative November 14 and gave a copy of the revised initiative to <br /> the Public Service Officer. He tore up a copy of the first initiative and <br /> indicated that signatures would not be collected for that initiative. He <br /> said that the revised initiative addresses the City Attorney's concerns re- <br /> garding the first initiative's potential unconstitutionality. He suggested <br /> that the City obtain a different attorney. <br />e MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 18, 1991 Page 1 <br />