12/27/1943 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r--164 - =-~ _~_:~_ __ ::...._~_ ___ _.:::._~~ ~ =-_ - .__ __ - ...,___-= __ _~~_____-=__~__~=___.--::._--:- "':___ - ~~ __~_~_ _,~ _. - ____ __ - - __ _~.::-=:-__~--::::-.-_.=-:-__-:-:-;---::;::;:_~ ::_.~_-;- :;,:-..:;:-_-_,~~ _: ~._":" ___~_- :__ - un --:- _~ _----;- ~ _.. .~_ ~_~.___.~ _._ ._.__ __-:::. _ __~.______ _=- _-=;_-==_ _c_~~_ ~ _,__ _ _ __~-::--=----=.c----=-~----c-~~_ ~~--=--~~~~~ _~~_~=~__-----'----__~~~_=~C,=====- Sealed bids had been called for, for the gasoline to be used by the City, for the year 1944 were opened at this time. The bid of the Gilmore Oil 1 .~ Company for Ethel gas was 18~ ~ per gallon, for Gilmore Red Lion 16~~ per :~ gaililon. The'bid of the General Petroleum Corporation for Mobilgas Special ~ was 18~~ and for Mobilgas was 16~~. A letter from Standard .Oil Company stated 22 that owing to the gas shortage they were unable to bid for the 1944 gas but that they hoped they would be permitted to bid on the future requirement of the City. As the bids of the Gilmore Oil and the General Petroleum Corporation were identical, a motion was made, seconded and carried that the gas for 1944 be divided between the two companies. Sealed bids for 40 ton of asphalt had been advertised for an were opened at this time, The bid of the Union Oil Compan~ for 4 hooped wooden 23 barrells was $21\90 per ton-in steel fibre barrells, $20.15 per ton f.o.b. Oleum California. The bids of the Shell Oil Company in single head domestic wood barrells was $23.40 per ton, f.o.b. Martinez, California. The Standard Oil Company in steel fibre barrells'was at the' post price at the time of shipment, price at this time is $20.15 per ton, f.o.b. Richmond, California. The street Committee requested that they be'allowed until the next meeting before deciding on acceptance of these bids, and this request was granted. At this time the discussion in regard to the change in City Government ! was taken up. Mayor Large stated that the Council as a whole had not discussed i this and that he thought in fairness to the Council they should be given the first chance on this discussion. Councilman Hawn stated that he was not present I at the last meeting when the matter came up but that it was his understanding : that the Committee was to make a study o~ the different forms, that they could ; report on one or more forms as they thought best, but that in their report they had recommended only one form, that of the City Superintendant as they termed it. Councilman Crumbaker stated that was tru and that after a thorough study i they had considered this form much the better for a city the size of Eugene. I Councilman Davis stated that he was not against the City Manager but that he did not feel the Council should dictate to the voters what form they should have but that he felt that other forms than the manager system should be presented . for the voters to choose from. Councilman Farrington stated that the Committee i felt that the City Manager form was the only sy,stem suitable for the City of 1- 24 : Eugene but that if they were wrong other forms might. be added. Councilman Hawn stated that so far there had been no other suggestions from the people as to what form should be put on the ballot and that he favored the manager form. A suggestion was made that as manyas four forms might be put on the ballot and Councilman Crumbaker stated that a multiplicity of forms would onlu confuse the voters and that at least a couple would be sufficient for the voters to make a choice from. Councilman Barrette stated he did not beleive the Council was giving the matter the required study and tha~ they should be slow in adopting i another proposal. Councilman Baker said he did not think the Council had been i elected to state what form of government should be adopted. , , I Councilman Staewart stated that he ddtd not think the Council should be too ,hasty, that he favored the Committee recommendation of the Superintendant in place of the Manager. Tha t he favored the appointment of the COIJ1.1ni ttee to . make the necessary changes in the charter but that he did not feel it should 25 be put on the May primary ballot but delayed to the fall election. Councilman Crwnbaker explained that when Mr. Brownson recoffiITlended that the amendment be put on the May primaries it was supposed there would have to he a change in the election of the Council, that that ~ince it had been determined that there need be no change in either Mayor or Council elections, that the necessity for puttin the amendments on the IvIay primary was pari tally removed. Mayor Large sta ted' i that at this time they would be glad to hear from anyone in the Council room. I i ,Mr. Tugman addressed the Council and stated that efter the committee had I reported back to the Council, the Council would put the amendment on the ballot .: and it would be up to the voters to decide the result. Mr. Tugman stated that the present charter provided for the initiative" and that he thought it was a 26 tribute to the good government that no initiative had been 'submitted up to this ~ time and that he hoped the change could be worked out, without the initiative. .: Mr. Tugman stated he wished every citizen of Eugene could see the two charts , on the wall of the Council room that showed the bonded debt of the city. That in the past it had been necessary to concentrate on clearing up this debt ~ut that it was in much better shape now and that he felt the changing times called for a new and more simple charter and 8 change to the City Manager form of '" 1 I government. . R. P. Dixon said that he felt the recommendation the cOMnittee had made 27 should be followed. He stated that he preferred a Superintendant or Manager form as that was the way the successful businesses were run and that he felt i anyone of the Councilmen could handle the City better than all eight together ! could. i , i ,\ I t ~ I