Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Mr. Finigan noted that in the Looking Forward portion of the report, the committee recommended forming an annexation plan, to be created through a collaborative effort between the City and the residents of the area. He felt this would provide the transparency needed to dispel the mistrust of the residents and would engage the City Council not already participating in this process. He predicted that without this, the current problems and animosity would continue as the City staff attempted to meet the annexation goals of the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan General Area Plan (Metro Plan). Mr. Handy extended his thanks to the City for conducting this process. He felt the result, the Heritage Framework document, was a key to the next steps. He appreciated that the discussion had remained “annexation neutral.” He averred that the next steps in the Transition Plan would involve a work plan from the River Road Community Organization. He hoped that amendments to the refinement plan would arise from the work plan and that the amendments would lead to code changes that would make some of the “themes and ideas a reality” in the community. Mr. Handy encouraged the City to take time to vet the ideas in the Transition Plan with community organizations. He felt the City Council should work on a policy that would guide the River Road/Santa Clara area through its transition. He asserted that minus a policy, area residents were not able to relate to what the City was attempting to do and this fostered their mistrust. He asked that the council step back from the recommendation in the report that suggested the creation of an annexation plan. He believed this to be dangerously premature. He asserted that in order for residents to move forward and “heal and plan for the future” it would be very helpful to put this to a vote. Mr. Handy read the following from an essay written by Mr. Finigan: “Domination will never result in cooperation. Involve the citizens of Santa Clara and River Road in Eugene processes and they may one day feel a part of it.” Mr. Pryor thanked Mr. Reed, Mr. Finigan, and Mr. Handy for their “incredible work.” He extrapolated from the presentation that the community organizations had a desire for good faith efforts in terms of the annexation issue. He commented that ultimately it was not a matter of ‘if,’ it was a matter of ‘when.’ Mr. Finigan called annexation the “elephant in the room.” He said ignoring it would muddle all of the other elements of the plan. Mr. Kelly thanked the Transition Team. He said ultimately one of the places that the work would be reflected would be in revisions to the refinement plan. He averred that this was a key way to accomplish initiatives and it had worked in other areas of the City. He found the report to contain a lot of creative ideas and said they now needed to be sorted out in more detail, vetted out to the broader community and, at a later point, raised with the City Council. Mr. Kelly noted that the end of the report called for a statistically valid public opinion survey. He understood the hesitation about doing it too soon. He thought a neutral information piece should precede the survey. Mr. Kelly recalled that the council allocated $60,000 for neighborhood planning and implementation efforts. He thought it would be inappropriate to release those resources to the neighborhood associations until there was some council approval based traditionally on some sort of work plan. He asked Mr. Carlson if he foresaw an expeditious process that would pull something together that “council could say go forth and do good” about. Mr. Carlson responded that he, Mr. Handy, and Executive Director for the Planning and MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 21, 2006 Page 5 Work Session