Item 3A-Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

problem but the citizens had not supported its actions. He thought the County could still see some relief before July 1 but it did not mean they would not plan for it. He believed that they could do multiple things including land use planning in spite of the potential shortfall. Commissioner Stewart summarized what had been said thus far: ? There was support for looking at the Metro Plan, with general support for looking at the immediate problems facing the Metro Plan and the people who were affected, as a result of HB 3337. ? There was interest in reviewing the Metro Plan to look at the general housekeeping issues and the urban transitional agreements and special districts. ? There was a strong interest in public safety and concerns expressed about financing fire and police services and how to keep funding for them going. ? There was strong interest in the TransPlan, potential interest in an ACT, and how to fund road repairs. ? Some interest was expressed in forming a resolution body between the three jurisdictions. ? Some interest was also expressed in pursuing solutions to homelessness. Commissioner Stewart observed that there was strong interest in meeting on a quarterly basis. Councilor Bettman wanted to take the topics that had been raised back to the individual bodies in order to make the decisions there. She explained that the Eugene City Council could review the Metro Plan and determine where it should be fixed. She felt that using the “opportunity” of HB 3337 to address a “whole Christmas wish list” of other items was not efficient. She averred that those were policy decisions that must be made by the elected body. Mayor Piercy noted that the majority of the Eugene City Council had voted to do only the “minimum planning.” Councilor Pishioneri said he preferred having the hired experts look at the problems and offer up multiple options for the elected officials to consider based on “their educated points of view.” He underscored that they were paid to be a resource and should serve as such. Commissioner Green said he had observed each body’s process. He asked how the Joint Elected Officials would “get to yes” after the individual elected bodies had met and considered the issues. He asked what mechanism would drive the three jurisdictions to move forward; what voting procedure would it use? He averred that it would be helpful at some point in time if the three groups could have a discussion on developing a mechanism that they could agree upon to “get to yes.” He stressed that the three jurisdictions still had to figure out how to agree regardless of which issues they decided to take on. Councilor Pishioneri concurred. He supported working with their counterparts to reach the same options to move forward with. He thought they could make progress on some issues in this way. Councilor Ortiz asked for input from the two respective city managers and the county administrator. pro tem Eugene City Manager Angel Jones commented that the jurisdictions were all “part of the same puzzle.” She said part of the joint meeting was intended to determine how to move forward while recogniz- ing that the three jurisdictions did not always agree. She felt the starting point should be where there was agreement and then to move into strategizing on how to find agreement on the points on which they did not agree. She remarked that from a staff perspective, those issues were discussed all of the time and it seemed the jurisdictions were not that far apart when looking at the “big picture.” She agreed that staff should take a MINUTES—Joint Elected Officials— February 12, 2008 Page 8 Lane Board of County Commissioners and Eugene and Springfield City Councils