12/07/1987 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ms. Bascom said she found the qual ifications for the boa rd useful for increasing the chance of implementing the ordinance as its supporters had e hoped. She said she thought some of the difficulties experienced by the task force had occurred because some members had not been supportive enough of the original concepts in the ordinance. Ms. Bascom said she thought an appointed board would be effective in carrying out the ordinance, and she urged the council to adopt that provision, which she thought was supported by task force discussion. Ms. Bascom said she knew it was frustrating for the council and the task force to continue waiting for resolution and implementation. She added that she hoped citizens would recognize that concerns represented honest disagreements by people who were not IIwar-mongers.1I Ms. Schue asked about the process the council wanted to use. She said she did not think the council would adopt Proposal A without some modifications. She asked whether the council favored referring one or two choices to voters or simply adopting a version. Mr. Miller said he shared the frustration over a lack of compromise. He said he leaned toward supporting Proposal B because although he hoped to rid the world of the threat of nuclear holocaust, he believed disarmament would have to include all nations and not be unilateral. He said he thought Proposal B sent a message in favor of finding some way to put an end to the madness, while working together and allowing some research that was needed until we could face the reality that we had to find another path of resolving our disputes. Mr. Miller said he favored more discussion about whether to begin implementing one version of the ordinance or whether to refer one or two versions to e voters. He noted that a voters' pamphlet might be available soon, and he reminded the council of the time and effort already contributed by the task force. Mr. Holmer said he strongly believed in the initiative and referendum process. He noted that he and Councilor Ehrman had voted in favor of implementing the original ordinance. He said he thought the task force had been created for good reasons and in order to improve the ordinance. He said the report offered two alternatives, and he favored continuing the initiative process by referring both proposals to voters and adopting whichever version was adopted or favored by the greatest majority. He said the people had created the ordinance, and he favored placing the decision back in their hands. Ms. Ehrman said she agreed with Mr. Holmer that regardless of the council's decision, the issue should go back to the voters. She asked whether, if both new proposals were defeated, the original ordinance would remain in effect. Ms. Ehrman said she did not want to delay implementation of the ordinance. She said she favored making some minor changes, such as the provisions regarding the board and the fines, and then referring the proposal to voters. She also said it should be made clear that the original initiative would be repealed and that the new version would be a replacement. Ms. Ehrman added that if forced to choose, she now favored Proposal A. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council work session December 7, 1987 Page 7