City of Eugene
7/23/2007 11:38:39 PM
11/2/2006 5:30:28 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 /> M I NUT E S <br />e EUGENE CITY COUNCIL <br /> September 20, 1978 <br /> Adjourned meeting from September 11, 1978, of the City Council of the City <br /> of Eugene, Oregon, was called to order by Council President D. W. Hamel with the <br /> following Councilors present: Ray Bradley (arrived late), Tom Williams (arrived <br /> late), Eric Haws (arrived late), Jack Delay, Scott Lieuallen, Brian Obie, and <br /> Betty Smi th. Mayor Gus Keller was absent. <br /> 1. ITEMS FROM MAYOR AND COUNCIL <br /> A. Cable TV Franchise Hearing--Manager announced the hearing scheduled <br /> Monday, September 25, would be postponed to Monday, October 9. The <br /> City Charter provides there must be a three-week consecutive adver- <br /> tising period. Final reading would be scheduled October 23. <br /> B. Lane County Request For Discussion on L-COG--Letter distributed invi- <br /> ting City Councilors to a meeting Wednesday, September 27, 7:30 p.m., <br /> to discuss the role of L-COG and its future functions. Manager <br /> noted the City has taken a position on that matter and may not be <br /> interested in having the County sponsor such a discussion, as it might <br /> be more appropriate for such a discussion to be held within the <br /> framework of the L-COG board and interested jurisdictions. <br />e After Mr. Haws arrived at the meeting, further discussion was held. <br /> Mr. Ooie said that Lane County knows the City's position and he <br /> felt there was no need for any more meetings. Ms. Smith felt it <br /> important to have the Council representative (Eric Haws) attend the <br /> meeting to restate the City.s position. Mr. Delay felt the City <br /> should not be a party to lending credibility to the County, that there <br /> is a basic change that needs to be made in L-COG. He felt it inappro- <br /> priate for the City to take any formal response and would oppose <br /> having Mr. Haws, the L-COG representative, attend. <br /> Mr. Haws said in past experience, Lane County proposals had often <br /> taken a great length of time to understand them. He felt the L-COG <br /> board members want to keep it functioning, and he knew of only <br /> one person on the board who may want to consider the matter. He <br /> further felt it was not worth the effort. <br /> In response to a question from Mr. Lieuallen, Mr. Haws said other <br /> jurisdictions generally do support the activities of the COG, and <br /> he did not feel they wanted to change. Mr. Lieuallen then suggested <br /> the past positions of the City to be once again sent to the County, <br /> and let the County proceed as it wishes. <br /> Mr. Bradley opposed the City taking a hard line, and felt a represen- <br /> tative should be there, perhaps as an observer. He felt it important <br />e <br /> 9/20/78--1 <br /> t13 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.