01/26/1976 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

on that basis alone. 3) comndttee recommendations; provides for the appointment of a council subcommittee that would review all applications and make recommendations to the full Council. Mr. Murray moved seconded by Mr. Haws that Council adopt the Council interview process for the Housing and Community Development Commission and for the Planning Commission; review of Citizen Forms only for the four Human Rights Comndssions plus the Renewal Agency; and recommendation of Council subcommittee method for MAPAC, Regional Sewer Commission, TV Cable/Translator Commission and Vision 2000-Lane County. In answer to a question from Mrs. Beal on the procedures, Mr. Murray reminded her that an amendment had earlier been adopted to the bylaws saying Council would review appointments and establish one of three procedures. Mrs. Beal requested a chance to speak with the aging and women's groups before voting on the selection methods. 'Mr. Murray suggested voting on the motion but excluding the two commissions Mrs. Beal mentioned as well as the other two human rights commissions, thus treating all four of them on an equal basis. A question was raised as to whether MAPAC's role would be changing and whether voting on a selection method for it should be deferred at this point. Mayor Anderson felt that Council should come to some conclusions on selection procedures as soon as possible and not defer action on any more commissions than is absolutely necessary. Mr. Bradley moved to amend the motion to delete appointment procedures for MAPAC.Motion died for lack of a second. Vote was taken on the motion,as amended to delete appointment procedures for the four human rights commissions, which carried unanimoUSly. D. ESATS Alternatives - Staff Recommendation on Modal Split - Mr. Murray's motion (second - Keller) to accept staff's recommended refinements of Council action on modal split was tabled from the January 7. Committee meeting, and a report on suggested refinement has previously been distributed to Council. Percentages recommended by staff were: 15% mass transit; 5% bikes; 5% pedestrian; 5% paratransit. e Comm 1/14/76 Approve - Comm 1/14/76 Approve Mr. Williams raised the question whether, given Springfield's option on no mass transit increase, Eugene's plan would be workable in combination with Springfield. Manager explained that of COurse specific figures must be arrived at. The staff has proposed to the LCOG Board, who in turn will make a request to each ,junisdiction, that the Mayors and staff meet to work out procedures for arriving at a compromise. Mr. Williams spoke in favor of Mr. Murray's motion, in order to give the Mayor bargaining stock in trying to arrive at a resolution with Springfield. Support is needed across the urban area and it would seem to Mr. Williams that both sides will have to yield somewhat. There is no reason why Eugene should not be able to take as extreme a position as other jurisdictions prior to negotiations. Vote was taken on the motion which carried unanimously. 1/26/76 - 14 40 e