04/11/1988 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e Mr. Miller suggested that the council find out about its authority to determine election format and timing and whether researching the issue was worth the time, Mr, Gleason agreed to check with City Attorneys. Ms, Wooten noted that when the council referred to voters issues of diverse opinions, the council became the proponents for purposes of the voter's pamphlet. She said she believed that when community members had strong feelings on the issue, they, rather than the council, should be involved as proponents, and she might request that as a legislative change, Ms. Schue said she and Mr. Holmer had found themselves the proponents of the nuclear free zone measure, and when they had realized the omission of supporters, they had added one representative as a "good faith gesture,lI But, she added, she did not find the procedure very rational. Ms. Wooten requested that the City Attorney review the matter with the voter pamphlet committee, because she would like to see the procedure changed to be and appear more fair. Ms, Bellamy said the procedure was based on the State model. e Mr, Holmer said he believed that if the council referred the issue to voters, it was the proponent and should be identified as such, He said he believed the apparent unfairness had occurred in identifying opponents, and because the committee required five members, the councilors and other members had been very willing to find an opponent representing the other point of view, He said that as long as five members were included, he thought an argument would result, and he noted the further protection of a public hearing on the description, which was a neutral explanation provided by the committee, If the committee did not agree, the statement reverted to the City Attorneys first draft of the description, which he found fair. Ms. Wooten said she found the process appropriate for some issues but inappropriate for others that were more controversial. She said she still favored consideration of an amendment or legislative change, Mr. Miller suggested amending the procedure to define proponents as the council "or their designees." Ms. Ehrman said a one-year review of the ordinance was planned, Ms, Schue suggested an informal agreement with the mayor that the members of the council appointed to the committees personally agree with the point of view of which they were asked to be a proponent. She said, for example, that she had voted for referring the street opening to voters, but she did not want to be a proponent of opening the street. Mayor Obie said that was what he looked for in the Nuclear Free Zone, Ms. Ehrman asked when the council would take a position on opening the street, Mayor Obie said he favored placing the issue on the ballot and taking a council position at a later meeting. Responding to Ms. Wooten1s question, councilors said they did not agree on formation of a committee or on elaboration of the Miles documents or information pertaining to a design concept. Mayor Obie said the only elaboration would come from those who served on the voter's pamphlet committee and must conform to the motion that was passed, e MINUTES--Eugene City Council Dinner/Work Session April 11, 1988 Page 5