My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Admin Order 56-06-02-F w/o exhibit
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Administrative Orders
>
2006
>
Admin Order 56-06-02-F w/o exhibit
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/10/2010 10:47:48 AM
Creation date
11/2/2006 11:36:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Recorder
CMO_Document_Type
Admin Orders
Document_Date
10/31/2006
Document_Number
56-06-02-F
CMO_Effective_Date
10/31/2006
Author
Dennis M. Taylor
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 56-06-02-F <br />of the <br />City Manager <br />City of Eugene, Oregon <br /> <br />ADOPTING USED MERCHANDISE DEALER <br />ADMINISTRATIVE RULE R-4.989. <br /> <br />The City Manager of the City of Eugene finds that: <br /> <br />A. Section 2.019 of the Eugene Code, 1971 ("EC"), authorizes the City Manager to <br />adopt rules for implementation of any provisions of that Code. In addition to that authority, EC <br />4.989, which was adopted by Ordinance No. 20361 on February 15, 2006, specifically authorizes <br />the City Manager to adopt rules regarding the implementation of an electronic reporting system <br />for used merchandise dealers. <br /> <br />B. Following the procedures set forth therein, on October 3, 2006 I issued <br />Administrative Order No. 56-06-02 proposing the adoption of Used Merchandise Dealer <br />Administrative Rule R-4.989 as set forth therein. <br /> <br />C. Notice of the proposed adoption was given by making copies available to any <br />person who had requested such notice and by publication thereof in the Register Guard, a <br />newspaper of general circulation within the City for five consecutive days, to wit: October 9, 10, <br />11, 12, 13, 2006. The Notice provided that written comments would be received thereon for a <br />period of 15 days from the date of the first publication. Only one comment was received within <br />the time or in the manner provided in the notice, to which I make the following findings: <br /> <br />Comment: Lance Barkley submitted a letter requesting consideration of six separate <br />questions prior to implementation of the administrative rule. However, only question (1), <br />which asked why they were being required to keep paper records if they were required to <br />pay the City for the services of Business Watch International for the automated <br />transmission of second-hand dealer transactions, and an unnumbered comment <br />questioning being threatened with jail, relate to the subject matter of the administrative <br />rule, to which I make the following response: <br /> <br />Findin2: Question (1): The requirement to maintain paper records is imposed by <br />ordinance as codified in Section 4.989 of the Eugene Code, 1971. The reference in the <br />administrative rule is to that Code requirement, which cannot be waived or altered by <br />administrative rule. With respect to being threatened with jail, the only reference in the <br />administrative rule to enforcement is contained in R-4.989-A.3, which provides failure to <br />fully and accurately complete a reporting form shall constitute a violation as set out in EC <br />4.989(10). The penalty for such a violation is a fine of not more than $360 and/or <br />proceedings seeking injunctive relief. No provision is made for imposing a jail sentence. <br />No changes have been made to the administrative rule as a result of these comments. <br /> <br />Administrative Order - 1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.