Agenda - 04/19/05 JEO Mtg. - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

district, if it moves forward. However, they were concemed over control of the services the district would provide. They concluded with a unanimous recommendation to the elected officials to approve the proposed Metro Plan amendment with some revisions to address the single district concerns and the concern of limiting such a district to the proposed list of services provided. Springfield Planning Commission Action The Springfield Planning Commission deliberated on March 1, 2005, and also voted unanimously to forward a recommendation to the elected officials to approve the proposed Metro Plan amendment with revisions to address the single district concerns. Further discussion after their vote regarding the scope of the public safety district resulted in a suggestion for the elected officials to consider a single district within the county, rather than a single countywide district. The concern was that adopted language for the amendment should not preclude a single-benefit district being created within the county even if one or more jurisdictions do not want to participate in the district to be created by this action. There was no vote taken on the language suggested. However, the alternative language was considered a way to facilitate formation of the public safety district if not all jurisdictions ultimately choose to participate and is worth consideration by the elected officials in their deliberations. Lane County Planning Commission Action The Lane County Planning Commission deliberated on March 15, 2005. The revised language suggested by the Eugene and Springfield planning commissions was discussed. However, the Lane County Planning Commission did not recommend revised language for adoption by the elected officials. They did support the rationale of the revised language, and suggested the elected officials should be the ones to wordsmith any revisions to the proposal that was presented to the Planning Commissions. Therefore, they recommended adoption of the amendment as put forth by County staff to the Planning Commissions at the hearing. That recommendation has been incorporated into Ordinance No. PA 1221. C. Alternatives/Options 1. Adopt Ordinance No. PA 1221 to amend Metro Plan Chapter II Growth Management Policy 15 to add Section f. and provide greater clarity and flexibility for public safety service delivery within the Eugene-Springfield Metro Plan Boundary. 2. Modify Ordinance No. PA 1221 as directed to amend Metro Plan Chapter II Growth Management Policy 15 to add Section f. and provide greater flexibility for public safety service delivery within the Eugene-Springfield Metro Plan Boundary. 3. Do not adopt Ordinance No. PA 1221 to amend Metro Plan Chapter II Growth Management Policy 15 to add Section f. I:hMETRO~PUB SAFEDISTJEOApril 19Hearing.doc Page 3