Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Councilor Clark, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to amend the Resolution 4912 to al- locate up to $170,000 to complete the buildable lands inventories specified in the Lane Council of Governments scope of work, specifically the commercial/industrial demand study and the residential supply and demand studies. This amount would be offset by the Reserve for Revenue Shortfall. Councilor Clark believed this work needed to be done in order to provide the council with better information and to provide the ground work for better planning. He said while the City may be in technical compliance with the law, it was not in compliance with the spirit of periodic review. He opined that it may hurt the City and likely had already done so. He was bringing forward the motion at this time because the Oregon Legislature had now voted to ask the City of Eugene to conduct this review. He underscored that the bill had been backed by the Land Conservation and Development Commission, The Register-Guard, and 1000 Friends of Oregon, among others. Mayor Piercy said she supported passing the budget as it was presented. She averred that the City had always intended to do the buildable lands study as required. She stated that the City would comply if and when the legislation was signed into being. Councilor Bettman opposed the amendment. She said she would not support the budget if the amendment passed. She estimated the cost of the bill to be more than $1 million. She did not think the allocation suggested in the amendment would accommodate the cost. Councilor Bettman registered her objection to “politicizing” the budget. She averred that the legislation had been submitted on behalf of the Lane County Home Builders Association and that the association had lobbied for the bill. She believed that the home builders association opposed densifying businesses but supported densifying residences. She alleged that the association was after an unlimited supply of “raw land.” Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Ortiz, moved to table the amendment to a date certain. Roll call vote; the motion failed, 4:3; councilors Bettman, Ortiz, and Zelenka vot- ing in favor. Councilor Ortiz indicated she would oppose the amendment. She felt very frustrated by the bill in the legislature. She had, in particular, taken umbrage to comments made on the House floor referring to the Eugene City Council as a “4:4 split.” She stressed that she tried to represent her constituency in all votes. Councilor Zelenka observed that the legislation had not been signed into being. He understood that the City Attorney was preparing a memorandum on the ramifications of the legislation. He averred that it was important to consider the information prior to moving forward with a motion for a land supply study. He commented that he would support the amendment in order to bring a motion to reconsider it at the next meeting. He believed that bringing such an amendment before the council when the majority had shifted, given that Councilor Taylor was not present, was an inappropriate way to move something controversial forward. Councilor Pryor said he intended to vote against the amendment for procedural reasons. He stated that he supported conducting a land supply study. He did not want the council to engage in “malicious obedience,” in which the council would delay action for as long as legally possible. He said if the law passed and was legally binding the City would have to abide by it in a way that was timely and respected that it had been signed into law. MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 11, 2007 Page 8 Regular Meeting