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

Home Browse Search

Ms. Bettm'an indicated support for the motion and thanked Ms. Nathanson for rewording the motion. Ms. Solomon indicated she would be unable to support the motion as amended because it precluded the City Council from pursuing other alternative or creative service delivery methods.. Mr. Kelly supported the motion. Speaking to Ms. Solomon's remarks, he said nothing in the motion prevented the council from having a great idea for an urban service delivery alternative and beginning to explore the idea. It merely informed the current process initiated by the City of Springfield. Mr. Kelly thought the amendment being contemplated was premature given the DLCD's review, and that it was dangerous to invite such broad changes to the Metro Plan. He believed that Springfield would want to know what Eugene supported before it proposed an amendment to the other jurisdictions that Eugene could not vote for. The motion made it more likely Springfield would craf~ an amendment that was focused on Springfield's needs and that could be supported by Eugene. Mayor Torrey determined from City Manager Taylor that the motion did not preclude the manager from offering suggestions for process improvements to the council. Mr. Pap6 said if the council wanted an alternative service delivery system, it would have to seek a Metro Plan amendment. He wanted to see the amendment from Springfield go forward, and hoped it was sufficiently broad to allow for flexibility in Eugene in how urban services were delivered. Mr. Meisner did not think Springfield contemplated an amendment that was sufficiently broad to accomplish what Mr. Pap6 had discussed. He suggested that in order for Mr. Pap6 to accomplish his goals, he would need to propose a second amendment and get the council's support. Mr. Meisner said the amendment being proposed was intended to allow Springfield to accomplish the proposal for annexation to the Willakenzie Fire District that had been denied by the Lane County Local Gove.rnment Boundary Commission. Mr. Meisner determined from Mr. Lidz that the State would review any Metro Plan amendments for consistency with statewide goals.' Ms. Bettman said the question before the council was who provided the urban services the City was now providing. In times of tight budgets, service districts allowed for the creation of another layer of government able to levy taxes, so it was another way to increase taxes. She .said that the fact the municiPalities were the provider of urban services was consistent with State land use goals and she believed was the most appropriate way for such services to be provided. Ms. Bettman said if the community'expressed a desire for a regional government or overlapping layers of government, the council should move to institute an inclusive and broad-based public outreach process. She said the Springfield proposal represented a unilateral decision by one jurisdiction which, by virtue of existing laws, would drive other jurisdictions along with it unless the Eugene council made a definitive statement at this time. Ms. Bettman said the City should let Springfield and Lane County know where it stood on the issue. The motion passed, 6:2; Mr. Pap6 and Ms. Solomon voting in opposition. The meeting adjourned at 6:50 p.m.