07/09/1984 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Councilor Obie said he had spent considerable time at the conference. He felt e that not to adopt the recommendations from the conference delegates would demean the process. He felt that the council had a responsibility to the delegates to work with the document and to develop a consensus. He suggested that the council schedule a work session to discuss those items agreed upon by at least six councilors. He said the period for public testimony would be held open until September 10 unless the council directed otherwise. Councilor Schue agreed with Mr. Obie that the record should be held open for written testimony. She said the council had a debt to the conference delegates to adopt the finished document but only to receive the suggested actions. She felt that reaching consensus on suggested actions would involve a great deal of time. She also agreed that a work session to address the document issues was appro- priate. She said she was pleased with the general direction of the document. Councilor Hansen said he did not feel as strongly as Ms. Schue that the council had to adopt the document. He agreed with Mr. Saul that many plans had been adopted over the years; he said he was interested in knowing what duplication existed between the proposed and existing policies. While he recognized that the document warranted consideration, he did not feel that adoption was mandatory based solely on the work of the delegates. Councilor Ball said he was ready to adopt the document and to receive the suggested actions. He said his only concerns were those which may surface in the LCDC process. He agreed that a work session should be scheduled to address those concerns. Councilor Wooten, stating that she was a member of the Community Goals Committee, e agreed that the document should not be adopted simply because of the work involved in its development but that adoption should be based on the compromise developed by the delegates for the future of the community. She said she looked forward to reviewing the items raised by the councilors. Councilor Ehrman stated that she had not participated in the conference but had reviewed the material presented to the council. She did not see the role of the council as rewriting the document because the document was the work of the citizens. She suggested that the suggested changes and revisions be incorporated into one document for ease of review. Councilor Holmer said he was unsure of the usefulness of a work session, stating that the conference delegates had developed a strong statement for the community. While he recognized that strong efforts were made to represent the entire community at the conference, he did not feel that the conference contained sufficient representation. He felt that it would be better for the council to accept the document rather than to revise and then adopt it. He said he could recognize some of the suggested actions but could not adopt the entire document. Councilor Smith felt that past Community Goals documents had been helpful in providing guidance to the City Council and the Planning Commission. She did not feel the council was ready to adopt the document that evening; she suggested - MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 9, 1984 Page 6