02/10/1975 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Councilman Haws expressed concern about allowing nonresident property owners voting rights in neighborhood organizations. He compared that provision to allowing voting rights in Oregon elections to out-of-state residents owning property in Oregon. Also, a person could have voting rights in several different neighborhood organizations. He felt that the policy should be reviewed in, that regard. He was also concerned _ ~bout the listing of a person's name on a membership role in order for that person ~ to vote in the organization. He had no objection to maintaining the list but felt it should be controlled so as not to exclude neighborhood residents from participation. Councilman Murray noted the thorough discussion of neighborhood policy upon its adoption, the considerable disagreement, and the resolution that the voting criteria could be determin'ed by the group itself. He suggested that it might be helpful, in view of the experience gained in operation of the policy, for a Council subcommittee in co-operation with people from neighborhood groups and appropriate staff to review the neighborhood pOlicy to determine whether it did need refining. Randi Reinhard, planning staff, explained that anyone indicating an interest or aSking to be inciuded on the mailing list of an organization was entitled to vote, there were no voting restrictions so far as one's name being on the membership list. The reason for maintaining that list, she said, was to give the Council some idea of representa- tion in a neighborhood on issues coming to the Council. Manager said that since the primary function of the neighborhood groups was in an advisory capacity to the Council on the planning process in development of an area and city services provided to the area, the general approach was that each group should decide its own membership and voting process. If the groups were involved with making decisions on committing services. and funds or making legislative decisions, he said, then there would be reason for concern about the flexibility in requirements for participation. He expressed some concern about the provision for membership on the Amazon steering committee which could result in a complete turnover in a relatively short period of time breaking into the continuity of anyon-going planning process in that area. Councilman Bradley noted the difference between the two charters with regard to age requirements for voting - the Amazon charter calling for 18 years and older, the Wi11a- kenzie, 16 years and older. He wondered if there should be consistency in the various charters in view of recent legislation covering legal age limits. Elizabeth Heath, president of the Wi11akenzie group, explained that their group felt anyone at the age of 16 interested enough to become involved in neighborhood activities should be per- mitted to vote. Also, that they had high school students involved who at the age of 18 usually were out of school and away from the neighborhood. Councilwoman Shirey wondered if c~nditiona1 approval should be given the Amazon charter in the event the method of Choosing steering committee members didn't work out. She didn't ~ee it as a particular problem, saying that normally people willing to work on a steer~~g committee usually continued in that capacity. Manager said he wasn't recom- mending against approval. His comments were made because of his interest in seeing whether the method would work. Vote was taken on the motion to approve the charters. Motion carried unanimously. f. 701 Planning Funds - Council was requested to consider whether to contact the congres- sional delegation and ask reconsideration of President Ford's action deferr~ng half of the 1975 planning funds and proposing no 701 ~unds for 1976. Manager explained that these funds were a possible source of money for a growth study and that in the past these funds had been used extensively for special planning projects and staffing of long-range planning functions. Failure to receive 701 funds could curtail planning that should be done. Mr. Murray moved seconded by Mr. Keller to authorize the Mayor on behalf of the eounci1 to contact the congressional delegation with regard to reconsidera- tion,of the action taken on 701 funds. Councilman Bradley suggested contact with the entire Oregon delegation rather than just those from Lane County, to which the Mayor replied that contacts an the Federal level are usually made with both senators and all four congressmen from Oregon. . Vote was taken on the motion as stated. Motion carried unanimously. 2/10/75 - 14 5b e Comrn 2/5/75 Approve .