My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02/24/1959 Meeting
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Minutes
>
Historic Minutes
>
1959
>
02/24/1959 Meeting
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/27/2007 2:16:03 PM
Creation date
11/2/2006 3:34:28 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Minutes
Meeting_Type
Meeting
CMO_Meeting_Date
2/24/1959
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
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 />e <br /> <br />--~ ----- ------- <br />- ----- - ~~~ <br /> <br />- ----- - ------ - ------ -- -- - --,-.~ <br />-- --=----. ._~~ <br /> <br />2/24/59 <br /> <br />~ <br />453 <br /> <br />-.---- ----------~ ---- ---- - '- .-~------~----..---- --~-_.._---- <br />_._--~ - .- ._. - - - -~ --- --- ---- ----- ..--' ---~-- <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />1 <br />I: <br />I <br />I <br />i <br />I <br />I <br />i <br />I <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Ii <br />'II <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />1 <br />'i <br />l; <br />Ii <br />I, <br />1 <br />1 <br />I <br />! <br />I <br /> <br /> <br />~ <br />I. <br />" <br /> <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />, <br />I <br /> <br />11 <br />,I <br />I: <br />Ii <br />II <br />I <br />I <br />II <br />'j <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br />\ <br />II <br />II <br />II <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />I <br />II <br />I! <br />:/ <br />I: <br />i! <br /> <br />. -:::-:.:...--.:--::-- ------=.-:-----::-.',-=----::.-=-' ---=-:...~'-:~-=----=---'----~~ <br /> <br />No ACTION WAS TAKEN O~ ITEM 6 Of THE REPORT Of THE COMMITTEE SINCE THIS MATTER WAS <br />HANDLED UNDER BID OPENINGS EARLIER IN THE MEETING! <br /> <br />7. CONSIDERATION Of ~EPORT FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY REGARDING CONDITIONAL ANNEXA- <br />TION OF A PORTION OF LAURELWOOD GOLF COURSE - IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT THE <br />COUNCIL HAD RECOMMENDED THAT A PORTION Of LAURELWOOD GOLf COURSE BE ANNEXED <br />SUBJECT TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS. THE CITY ATTORNEY INDICATED THAT IN HIS <br />OPINION AREAS CANNOT BE ANNEXED WITH RESTRICTIONSj THAT SUCH AREAS ARE <br />EITHER ANNEXED OR THEY ARE NOT ANNEXED. <br /> <br />WITH RESPECT TO THIS SOME QUESTIONS WERE RAISED AS TO WHY SEWERS HAD NOT <br />BEEN INSTALLED ON WEST 11TH AVENUE, AND THE QUESTION WAS ALSO RAISED AS TO <br />WHETHER UPON ANNEXATION PEOPLE WERE ENTITLED TO SEWERS. IN ESSENCE' IT WAS <br />INDICATED THAT THESE MATTERS WERE SUBJECT TO POLICY CONSIDERATIONS AND <br />BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS TO BE MADE BY THE COUNCIL. <br /> <br />IT WAS FURTHER EXPLAINED THAT THE PRESENT GOAL OF THE CITY OF EUGENE IS TO <br />ALLEVIATE THE SEWER PROBLEMS AND THAT TO DO TH1S 1T MAY REQUIRE SPECIAL <br />FINANCING OR BOND ISSUES. <br /> <br />FOLLOWING THIS IT WAS INDICATED THAT THE ANNEXING ORDINANCE WOULD BE BROUGHT <br />TO THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING WITHOUT RESTRICTION, AND IT'WAS RECOMMENDED THAT <br />THE CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT BE ACCEPTED. <br /> <br />IT WAS MOVED BY MRS. LAURIS SECONDED BY MR. MOLHOLM THAT ITEM 7 OF THE REPORT OF THE COM- <br />MITTEE REPORT BE APPROVED. MOTION CARRIED. <br /> <br />B., COUNC I LWOMAN LAUR I S' SUGGESTED 'THAT LAURELWOOD GOLF COURSE SHOULD BE SAVED <br />FOR A PARK. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF PARKS &'RECREATION EXPLAINED THAT iN <br />1949 IT HAD BEEN SUGGESTED THAT LAURELWOOD GOLf COURSE BE PURCHASED BUT <br />THAT IT DID NOT SEEM DESIRABLE FOR AN IB-HOLE GOLF COURSE SINCE THE PRO- <br />PERTY IS STEEP AND COULD NOT BE OPERATED ECONOMICALLY. IT WAS, HOWEVER, <br />SUGGESTEDR THAT TIME THAT THE CITY ACQUIRE THE PROPERTY, THAT THEY SUB- <br />DIVIDE A PORTION Of IT AND THAT A SHORTENED COURSE MIGHT BE OPERATED. <br />THE PRESUMED COSTIN THE RECOLLECTION OF THE PARKS & RECREATION SUPERIN- <br />TENDENT FOR THE PROPERTY IN 1949 WAS $150,000. IT WAS SUGGESTED THAT IT <br />STILL MIGHT BE POSSIBLE TO ACQUIRE THE PROPERTY AND'THAT A ~ILLAGE LEVY <br />MIGHT BE PASSED TO ENABLE THE CITY TO PROVIDE FUNDS FOR SUCH ACQUISITION. <br />IT WAS RECOMMENDED THAT AN INVESTIGATION BE MADE AS TO THE POSSIBILITY Of <br />PURCHASING THE LAURELWOOD GOLF COURSE. <br /> <br />IT WAS MOVED BY MRS. LAURIS SECONDED BY MR. MOLHOLM THAT ITEM B Of THE REPORT O~ THE COM- <br />MITTEE BE APPROVED. MOTION CARRIED. <br /> <br />9. CONSIDERATION OF LEGISLATIVE, BILLS BEFORE THE OREGON STATE LEGISLATURE - <br />A. S8 13B - To INCREASE THE SHARE OF NET LIQUOR REVENUES TO CITIES- FROM <br />10% TO 15% - IT WAS INDICATED THIS ITEM WAS TO GO BEFORE A LEGISLATIVE <br />COMMITTEE ON FEBRUARY 24, 1959 AND THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED ENDORSE- <br />MENT OF THIS BILL. <br /> <br />B. H8 138 - To AUTHOR I ZE AND DIRECT PUBLI C EMPLOYE.ES TO ENTER I NTO COL- <br />LECTIVE B'ARGAINING CONTRACTS WIT.., UNIONS' REPRESENTING THEIR EMPLOYEES - <br />THE CITY ATTORNEY I ND I CATED HE HAD I NVEST I GATED -THE LEGAL- BACKGROUND <br />OF SUCH A STATUTE AND INDICATED THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT UNLESS IT IS <br />SPECIFICALLY SET UP BY CHARTER OR STATUTE THAT A CITY BE FORCED TO <br />COLLECTIVE BARGAINING. ,THE COMMITTEE INDICATED THAT T-HIS IS THE ONLY <br />TOOL 'THE EMPLOYEE HAS AND HE SHOULD NOT B~ ENJOINED FROM THE SAME PRO- <br />CESSES AS THOSE OF PRIVATE INDUSTRY. THERE WAS SOME OPPOSITION TO <br />THIS IDEA AND IT WAS INDICATED IT MIGHT BE POSSIBLE IT COULD BE CHANGED <br />TO PERMISSIVE LEGISLATION RATHER THAN MANDATORY -LEGISLATION. <br /> <br />C. HB 379 - WOULD REQUIRE APPORTIONMENT OF'MARKET ROAD fUND LEVIES TO <br />CITIES UPON THE SAME BASIS AS COUNTY GENERAL ROAD FUND LEVIES ARE <br />APPORTIONED - THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED ENDORS~ENT OF T~IS BILL. <br /> <br />D. HB 43 - CONCERNING CIVIL SERVICE FOR f'IREMEN - A RESUME Of' THE LEGIS- <br />LATION WAS GIVEN AND THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION REGARDING RECOMMENDED <br />OPPOSITION. IT WAS SUGGESTED THAT EACH CITY SHOULD RETAIN THE RIGHT <br />TO CONTROL ITS bWN DE~TINY, iHAT T~IS BILL IS A VI6LATION Of TH~ ~OME <br />RULE PROVISION, BUT IT WAS fiNALLY AGREED THAT COPIESCF THE BILL SHOULD <br />BE SECURED AND THAT NO ACTION BE TAKEN." <br /> <br />I T WAS MOVED BY MRS'. LAUR I S 'SECONDED BY MR. MOLHOLM THAT ITEM 9 Of' THE REPORT OF THE <br />COMMITTEE BE APPROVED. MOTION CARRIED. <br /> <br />I: <br />I <br />lj <br />I <br />I <br />, <br />I, <br />I <br />! <br />I <br />l, <br />I' <br />:1 <br />~ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.