01/11/1988 Meeting (3) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e e e Mr. Miller asked whether the area would receive benefits if sewers would not be extended immediately. Mr. Gleason said sewer service was one of about 114 different service systems, not all of which were restricted to the boundary change. He said that resulted in problems when those outside the city received benefits without paying for them. Mr. Gleason said the Zumwalt contract provided a different response standard and a different level of emergency services. He said the only police services now available were through the County and, if annexed, the area would receive library services without outside fees, in addition to other appropriate services. Mr. Gleason said islands commonly received benefits without paying for them. He said plans for eventual service to the area had been included in the.sewer system, and separation of time frames for annexation and payment allowed flexibility. He said he did not agree that the cost of taxation would be without benefit. Ms. Bascom asked whether annexation would allow residents to burn brush and/or to keep a cow. Ms. Brody said burning brush was not allowed inside the city limits, but a cow was allowed under Residential Agricultural zoning. She said the annexation was the only item before the council tonight, and rezoning, which was covered by staff notes, would come before the council separately. Ms. Wooten said she would vote against the request. She said she believed in the City's policy in the River Road/Santa Clara area and would continue to support the concept of annexation, but she thought this request, if it could not be delayed, deserved to fail on its apparent merits. Ms. Schue said she favored approval of the request. She said she understood the concern about higher taxes, but as with prohibitions against burning, she did not think it was fair to subject citizens in one area of the city to policies and restrictions that those outside the geographic boundaries did not have to follow. She said she understood that no solution would be perfect, but she thought it was time for the area to become part of the city. Ms. Schue said the services offered might not be wanted, but she did not think they were services that, overall, were not needed. Mr. Holmer said he thought annexation was premature and unfair, and resulted in part from a policy the council had adopted about one and one-half years ago. He said staff had stated that they would use discretion and restraint in implementing the policy, and instead the council had seen the multiplication of annexations that did not have the consent of residents. He noted that no testimony had been offered in favor of the request. He offered two reasons for his position: 1) extension of services, the reasons given for annexation, would not be immediate and were not needed now, and 2) compatibility with other City MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 11, 1988 Page 9