CC Minutes - 10/04/07 Workshop - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Clark observed that 1,200 new houses were being built in Veneta and if each house had one or two cars, he questioned how that would be accommodated while trying to minimize trips. He hoped that the process would result in solutions that were practical and widely supported. Mr. Zako read the WEC purpose statement. He recognized that problems in West Eugene were very difficult and it would be disingenuous to suggest the collaborative would come up with a solution to all of them. He said the advantage of the WEC was that people were not fighting each other; they were all on the same side of the table to try to solve the problems. He expected that the process would result in a package of solutions that was more comprehensive than any one agency or jurisdiction could produce. Mr. Pryor emphasized that the collaborative was trying to remove the adversarial aspect from the transpor- tation and land use planning processes. He agreed that the work plan and specific products were not clearly defined at this point and information the council required in order to consider the funding request could be provided. He stressed the importance of having a plan and system in place in to achieve the WEC goals. He described the collaborative's transition from a self-selected, grassroots initiative to an official organization; at that time membership was discussed and the group decided that members should reflect a broad range of interests and be appointed by the bodies they represented. Ms. Solomon commended WEC for its willingness to undertake the mission. She appreciated being apprised of the collaborative’s activities by email. She indicated she was willing to allocate $40,000 to the effort, but was somewhat nervous about formalizing an agreement between the WEC and the City of Eugene for fear of jeopardizing the collaborative effort. She urged that any agreement be broadly written and not proscriptive in terms of defining the process and outcomes. Ms. Bettman stated that the WEC was requesting $40,000 and a “mantle of authorization” from the council and that concerned her as there was no work program or information on what was being authorized, expectations, objectives and products. She did not feel that all interests had been involved in the WEC as rail was not represented in the process and that meant that all the solutions were not being considered. She questioned the WEC’s decision-making process and said she saw only six members who could be catego- rized as environmental or progressive. She asserted that only 100 percent consensus was acceptable to avoid marginalizing those people. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 4, 2007 Page 6 Work Session