|
<br />,....
<br />
<br />+59
<br />
<br />e
<br />
<br />1/25/71
<br />
<br />I
<br />
<br />and cannot be used for, ,other than "p'u1;>].ic:,services .
<br />
<br />There was Council, discussion. ,how. such ,astruc.ture ,WOl.1-J..d..sB.E..v-e,",the, pubLic.,;~a'nd what type
<br />services would be accommodated.
<br />
<br />Ii
<br />\1
<br />,I
<br />"
<br />,I
<br />::
<br />
<br />I
<br />
<br />Mayor Anderson asked' if other, locations~~hadbeen considered, for. such. a ,buildiIlg.
<br />
<br />Mr. Hunt explianed that this"wouldbe,.:the most::cent,ral-..'location."but, there were other
<br />si tes which could be considered'.': v.They":were more ~interested.-in _an, expression of .Council
<br />feeling regarding the concept', of' the proposal.
<br />
<br />Councilman williams was concerned' wi th -locati'ng buildings in the Mall proper. He fe1 t
<br />it should be left open. Mr. McDonald and Mrs. Beal expressed similar concerns.
<br />
<br />Mayor Anderson said he shared this concern, but felt the concept..was ,essentially good.
<br />He felt perhaps the facility could be located in another area of the mall.
<br />
<br />e
<br />
<br />After further discussion of location of the facility, Mr. McDonald moved seconded by
<br />Mrs. Campbell to authorize the Eugene Renewal Agency to proceed with plans for construction
<br />of a community services building in the Eugene Mall. Motion carried. approve
<br />
<br />J.
<br />1/20/71
<br />
<br />Legislation, Request forCoun6il Attitude - Mr. Jordan outlined proposals for legislation
<br />to be proposed to the State Legislature as follows:
<br />
<br />1. OLCC Statute Changes - Mr. Jordan outlined several proposed changes in this statute
<br />and said the bill had not been written, but provisions have been decided upon.
<br />
<br />I
<br />
<br />Councilwoman Beal was concerned that the changes still did, not , resolve problems
<br />met by the city of Eugene. She felt the 'burden QE proof should not be put upon
<br />the City, and that a criteria for granting a license should be approval of the
<br />governing body in the ci ty in which the liquor outlet is loca ted. Councilman
<br />Mohr agreed, and felt the City should have authority to grant or deny a license,
<br />if a public hearing was held on that license.
<br />
<br />Mayor Anderson felt there were certain provisions in this proposed bill which
<br />were good, and that there were advantages to having statewide standards. What
<br />the Council had asked for was actually in the bill, and he felt the Council
<br />should support the bill.
<br />
<br />The City Manager pointed out that, if the OLCC was- the appelate body, the City
<br />would have to take responsibility for many things which are now the responsibility of
<br />the OLCC.
<br />
<br />Councilwoman Beal did not feel the City wanted to be in the licensing business,
<br />but that it wanted some attention paid to its recommendations. She felt the
<br />Council should endorse the idea of additional conditions and procedures, but
<br />should make it clear'that they wished some technical amendments. Mr. Mohr
<br />suggested a Council committee be formed to prepare an analysis of the bill and
<br />make appearances at the legislature when it comes up for hearing.
<br />
<br />I
<br />
<br />Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Mohr to endorse modifications in the proposed
<br />legislation, which give more weight to the City's point of view. Motion carried.
<br />
<br />II
<br />ji
<br />endorsed
<br />II
<br />
<br />2. Municipal Jury Trials - Mr. Jordan outlined a bill now prepared which would'
<br />provide that requests for municipal jury trials would automatically cause the
<br />case to be ~eferred to the Circuit Court.
<br />
<br />-
<br />
<br />In response to Council concerns, City Attorney said there wO,uld'be no conflict
<br />with circuit court, as most of these cases now go there for a trial de novo
<br />anyway.
<br />
<br />Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Mohr to endorse this suggestion. Motion carried. endorsei
<br />
<br />3.
<br />
<br />Litter Package - The problem with these
<br />made of monies which will be received.
<br />the Council could support the concept.
<br />
<br />bills is that no allocation has been
<br />They will presumably be amended, but
<br />
<br />Councilman williams expressed concern that certain industries were being
<br />singled out, and felt these bills should include all bottles and cartons. Mr.
<br />Jordan explained that the bills were aimed at those bottles and cartons most
<br />often found to be littering the highways and recreation areas.
<br />
<br />Mrs. Campbell moved seconded by Mrs. Bealto endorse the litter bill package.
<br />Motion carried.
<br />
<br />endori:Te-~ -~_ '
<br />-,---~- ,-~
<br />rf"'--
<br />,I
<br />
<br />I
<br />
<br />Councilman Mohr asked for a report on 1geislation concerning extended
<br />unemployment benefits, andhow,it effects the cities.
<br />
<br />.~- - ~ _-c- '"'-_--~~~ -" --'.~= -~"-_':"?-";;.-_:. .:,;.'
<br />_ ___ '-.".;..-.:::;__........~ --.~..._-1__
<br />
<br />:/
<br />I'
<br />
<br />e
<br />
<br />1/25/71 - 6
<br />
<br />~
<br />
|