06/15/1971 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

""11II e (;11 6/15/71 H-T .~ -- -- -'- II I reiterated her concern about the wishes of the groups who asked that the peti tion be J " referred to the voters. She agreed with the Mayor's feeling that they should not be II I: involved in the Council decision, and suggested that they could go to Washington on , their own, if that was their wish. I! I: , :1 Mr. Gribskov moved seconded by Mr. McDonald that a resolution be prepared which " i would reflect the results of the election and any other background information which :1 might be helpful to the President and congressional delegation. Motion carried I' I' unanimously. approve. i: :1 Mrs. Beal had understood the resolution would be forwarded to the congressional delegation :i before this time. She suggested that a wire should be sent. i: " " I, Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Mohr that the Senate delegation, Rep. Dellenback and President II of the United States be advised of the May 20 vote on the referendum and that a wire be sent " on June 15. e : :' Mayor Anderson pointed out that the resolution spelled out what should be contained in the wire. Mrs. Beal withdrew her motion. It was called to Mrs. Beal's attention that Western Union was on strike so there was dis cussion of a telephone call. Mr. Williams qbjected to the e'xpense, since the results of the election I' I, I were certainlyco~~~n knowledge to the Oregon Delegation. I, I, After further discussion, Councilman Mohr offered to personally telephone the delegation at " 'I his own expense. Mrs. Beal said that would be acceptable to her. :! jl I, F. Bicycle Committee, Interim Report - Manager explained that this report had been 5/26/71 compiled by a bicycle study comndttee- composed of lay and staff people. " I " Al Williams , Traffic Engineer, outlined proposed ~outes on a wall map, and explained " the long and short range plans. " Ernie Drapela,(Parks Department, said they were requesting Council support of the report and authorization to present additional route requests as they were deemed necessary. Mrs. Campbell moved seconded by M G McDonald that the Council endorse the goals " outlined in the interim report. i' Councilman Williams was concerned about ci ty liabi li ty whi ch could be incurred if I riding on sidewalks was encouraged. There was discussion about state law concerning use of sidewalks, and whether there might be some areas where they could be designated for use of bicycles. Manager pointed out that the state motor vehicle law classified bicycles as being no different I from motor vehicles. Mr. Williams requested the comndttee to find out if other states classified bicycles as .vehicles and whether bicycle riding is permi tted on sidewalks and what problems have developed. I, In answer to Mr. Mohr, Mr. Drapela said the committee is proposing a network of routes throughout the community. They would ask for designation of further routes which " would be compatible with the network on a piecemeal basis as financing becomes available. 'I " e " I' Mr. Belmut Plant said he was a member of the bifJciflc1e comnd ttee and explained that there 'I were obstacles and difficulties to implementing the goals. He felt a policy statement should be issued and that a resolution should be passed to stabilize the number of I, pri vate motori zed vehi cles. 'I !I " : Mr. Williams was concerned with the requirement for mandatory ?ppearance of an I additional member of the family when a child is cited. The City Attorney said the " intent was to work on parental interest in the child. It may be necessary to imp1.ement " this with an orqinan~e. Mayor Anderson said much would depend on community cooperation. The comndttee was " trying to ~ring the bicycle into the community and make it compatible with other forms " :1 of transportation. , I, I' :! " Mr. Williams was still concerned, and moved, seconded by Mr. that under Item :' I Teague, 5-b Page 6, the last word "mandatory" be deleted and the word "encouraged" be added. Mrs. Campbell said she would not be in favor of this motion, and felt it should be I' " II possible to make parental appearance mandatory. Mr. Mohr supported the concept of drafting a resolution. He felt policy could be 'I made in terms which could not be drafted into ordinance language. ,'I e Mr. Hershner said if the requirement of an addi.tional family member could legally be 6/15/71 - 6 ....