My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02/12/1992 Meeting
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Minutes
>
Historic Minutes
>
1992
>
02/12/1992 Meeting
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/27/2007 5:37:33 PM
Creation date
11/2/2006 5:04:02 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Minutes
Meeting_Type
Meeting
CMO_Meeting_Date
2/12/1992
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />e <br /> <br />4It <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Several councilors questioned the City's involvement in regulation beyond <br />preserving public health and safety and maintaining the public right-of-way. <br /> <br />Responding to questions from Ms. Ehrman, Ms. Utecht said that the proposed <br />fee schedule would be developed and established by administrative order after <br />receiving guidance from the council. <br /> <br />Mr. Green described the real issue as being how to address peddlers in the <br />ordinance. Both Ms. Bascom and Mr. Robinette agreed that peddlers should be <br />dealt with in the revised ordinance, and Mr. Robinette indicated that the <br />proposed ordinance should regulate panhandlers as well. <br /> <br />Responding to Mr. Robinettets concern, City Attorney Bill Gary said that <br />panhandling can be regulated as commercial activity in the same way that the <br />City regulates sidewalk vending. It does, however, raise first amendment <br />issues and those drafting such an ordinance should be sensitive to those <br />issues. Mr. Gary added that the council has broad powers with respect to <br />health, safety, and public welfaret but regulating for the purpose of pro- <br />tecting businesses from competition is prohibited under antitrust legisla- <br />tion. He said the current ordinance has been successfully defended from a <br />constitutional attack at the Circuit Court level because it is based on le- <br />gitimate public welfare concerns raised by the council at the time it dis- <br />cussed the ordinance. Howevert the City is currently arguing the question <br />before the State Court of Appeals as to whether a municipality is authorized <br />to limit the type of merchandise that can be sold. A decision is pending. <br /> <br />Responding to Mr. Boles, Ms. Utecht said current licensed vendors could be <br />given preference under administrative rules for the ordinance. <br /> <br />Mr. Rutan expressed strong opposition to increasing the number of licenses <br />per operating area. He felt peddling should be addressed and that restric- <br />tions on items sold should consider the sale of similar items by surrounding <br />businesses. <br /> <br />Responding to a question from Mayor Gleason, Mr. Gary said nothing discussed <br />or proposed today is beyond the City Council's power. <br /> <br />Mr. Gleason said that assuming Mr. Gary is correct and clarity from the court <br />is received and the ordinance is upheld, one simple solution is to allow <br />staff to modify the section that deals with public health and safety issues <br />and leave the ordinance as is. <br /> <br />Mr. Nicholson said he could not support a policy that was not consistent with <br />the recent Commercial Lands Study. <br /> <br />Mr. Boles moved, seconded by Ms. Ehrman, that the street vend- <br />ing ordinance address peddling. The motion passed; 6:1, Mr. <br />Rutan opposed (Mr. Green briefly left the room and was absent <br />for the vote). <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council <br />lunch Work Session <br /> <br />February 12, 1992 <br /> <br />Page 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.