04/27/1987 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e e e Mr. Gleason noted that the City Council's actions as Urban Renewal Agency were regulated by a provision of the Oregon Constitution, which was separate from the statute regulating actions as City Council. Ms. Wooten said she was delighted with the proposal to meet as Urban Renewal board. She asked how its role and goal-setting could be distinguished from the Downtown Plan, given the different boundaries. Mr. Farkas said the Downtown Plan was a general guide for potential development in a larger boundary area, and the Urban Renewal Agency would guide more specific implementation of projects and programs within the Urban Renewal boundaries, including suggestions about finances, timing, and site plans. Ms. Wooten said some Urban Renewal update items had been presented last November, and she asked staff to make that information available again. Ms. Stewart said that was scheduled for a May 27 dinner/work session and would follow the joint meeting of the Downtown Commission and the Planning Commission. Ms. Wooten said she thought a council decision about boundary expansion and about the opening of Willamette Street should come after the council had met as an Urban Renewal board in an attempt to identify goals and priorities. Mr. Farkas agreed. Mr. Holmer said he liked seven of the 11 recommendations. He said he had reservations about a councilor serving as an ex-officio member; he did not think the council needed to approve a formal work program once it had set the goals; he did not favor the monthly lunch; and he thought receiving the Downtown Commission's agendas and minutes, without more additions to the council newsletter, would be sufficient communication, unless an item was critical. Ms. Ehrman said she liked the idea of including short items in the newsletter to the council. She also said she still thought it was a good idea to include a councilor on the Downtown Commission, and she favored making the position a vot i ng member. Ms. Schue said she thought the process used with the Community Development Committee was working well. She asked for Ms. Wooten's opinion about the Citizen Involvement Committee process. Ms. Wooten said she thought the council's participation was more valuable to the committee than it was to the council. She added that the CIC pos it ion provi ded a good bri dge for communication, but that because of the level of the Downtown Commission, she thought a voting member on that would be inappropriate and favored an ex- officio position. Mr. Holmer asked whether the same structure could be applied to the Planning Commission. Ms. Schue said she thought the Planning Commission was a special case because it had certain functions under State law, such as appeal authority. Ms. Ehrman added that the Downtown Commission was responsible for allocating a large amount of money, although the council ultimately voted on the recommendations. Mayor Obi e sa i d he thought an ex-offi ci 0 position woul d add a lot to communication. He said he also was concerned that heavy council involvement in initial planning stages might hinder the creative energy and commitment of MINUTES--City Council Dinner/Work Session Apri 1 27, 1987 Page 5