CC Minutes - 10/24/07 Work Session

Home Browse Search

Ms. Taylor said she was “suspicious” and “it was dangerous” to accept, but not approve, the Planning Commission FY08 work program. Mr. Clark stated he was willing to approve the Planning Commission FY08 work program today. The Planning Commission had a great deal of work to do and the City Council should let it get going. Responding to Ms. Taylor’s comment, he said the Eugene City Council had been very clear that it did not want to work with the City of Springfield. The Springfield City Council had been clear in asking the Eugene City Council to work with it. HB Bill 3337 was not imposed on the City of Eugene by the City of Springfield but rather by the Oregon State Legislature in a nearly unanimous vote in both houses, because of the City of Eugene’s reluctance to do what the spirit of the law suggested. Responding to a question from Mr. Clark about whether HB 3337 required the City of Eugene to do a comprehensive plan adjustment with the City of Springfield, Ms. Jerome said a number of policies needed to be addressed, not the least of which was the text that assumed a single UGB. A number of the policies in the residential lands section implicitly assumed a shared UGB. The necessary amount of text changes was a large project. Additionally, setting the UGB was on the Metro Plan diagram would require a significant amount of work. While some of the amendments required approval by more than one jurisdiction, the bill indicated that others did not. Thus, some of the changes would require collaboration with Lane County and the City of Springfield. There was no date neither imposed by other jurisdictions nor required by the legislation. Mr. Clark understood that the Springfield City Council developed language for the proposed Metro Plan changes, and had asked the Eugene City Council to work with them. He further understood that the Springfield City Council decided that it would disengage if the Eugene City Council was not willing to work cooperatively. He asked if the Eugene City Council was willing to work with the Springfield City Council. He was hopeful that the Eugene City Council would not defer the process but rather work collaboratively. Ms. Ortiz did not consider a bill presented at the State legislature an indication of a willingness to work together. She recalled no invitation to talk with the other jurisdictions nor was there an indication a problem existed around Metro Plan issues. She believed the Planning Commission’s work would move forward if the work program was not approved. She was concerned that commissioners felt they would not be able to do as charged by the City Council without approval of the FY08 work program. Mr. Carroll stated the Commercial Lands Study was outdated. He added that lack of direction on HB 3337 prohibited the Planning Commission from addressing planning comprehensively. Responding to a question from Ms. Ortiz, Ms. Jones said the City of Springfield contacted the City of Eugene asking what position the Eugene City Council had taken on the HB 3337 issue. Today’s meeting would be the first opportunity to discuss HB 3337. Planning and Development Executive Manager Susan Muir said the City of Springfield sent information to the City of Eugene Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations (CCIGR) during the 2007 Legislative Session. Since the bill passed, the City of Springfield had notified the City of Eugene about where it was in the process. Ms. Ortiz preferred to have good “family” relations with the City of Springfield. She would not support putting the motion forward without removal of the recommendation regarding HB 3337. Ms. Gardner suggested that the City Council accept the City Manager-suggested motion to amend the work program and give direction to the City Manager related to specific work program items. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 24, 2007 Page 6 Work Session