Item 2C - Ratif.of IGR Comm.Min - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

would consult with current Planning Manager Susan Muir. On the Jacqua decision, Mr. Pap6 said his understanding was that LOC was worried not about the process of state law, but what impact the decision would have if it set precedent across the board for development decisions. Mr. Kelly said that concern now seemed to be segueing into a likelihood of LOC advocacy in the next legislative session for changes to the transportation planning review. Mr. Meisner observed he thought it should be made clear that Eugene's agenda was not the same as LOC's, citing the League's lack of support in the last two legislative sessions for Eugene's transportation agenda on rail. He said it would be dangerous to assume LOC would take care of Eugene's issues, and he hoped the City Council would remember it is not enough to support rail; it would take advocacy. Mr. Kelly and Mr. Pap6 agreed. Mr. Meisner suggested scheduling a CCIGR meeting shortly after the November election and said he would work with IGR staff to look at dates. Mr. Heuser said before the election LOC is planning to do a City Day for candidates to come to City Hall for a roundtable discussion and questions about local government issues. He said he would provide more information about the event as soon as the League makes it available. Answering a question from Mr. Meisner, Mr. Heuser said staff are tracking deficiencies in state law mentioned in City Council meetings. Mr. Kelly and Mr. Meisner flagged local enterprise zone criteria and local regulation of pesticides as issues in this category where state law precludes local action or makes it more difficult. Mr. Pap6 said he liked the legislative policy document as it was, but wondered if, with two new city councilors and a new mayor, a work session on it ought to be scheduled. Mr. Kelly agreed he would like Ms. Ortiz and Mr. Pryor to have an opportunity to review the document after the November election. Mr. Pap6 suggested sending the existing document now to the new councilors and mayor and asking them for any comments or suggested changes. The group then agreed to schedule a CCIGR review of the legislative policy document immediately after the November election and a full council review later in November. At Mr. Kelly's and Mr. Meisner's suggestion, Mr. Heuser said he would review the legislative policy document with the three new elected officials together during their scheduled IGR orientation and would also invite all three to the post-election CCIGR meeting as observers. 5. IGR Process Check-in All three councilors praised Mr. Heuser's work and the process used for the last legislative session. Specific benefits mentioned were: · Smooth, coordinated, easy-to-follow paperwork · Timely updates · Helpful triage · Set, scheduled, short meetings · Specific requests to CCIGR members for action · IGR staff take direction well · Staff from other departments can leave when not needed Mr. Heuser thanked the councilors for their clarity and focused direction on the will of the City Council. He said he planned to use the same structure and process for the coming legislative session, with perhaps some fine tuning. MINUTES--Council Committee on August 31, 2004 Page 4 INtergovernmental Relations