02/09/1976 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Williams' own perception is that individuals apply for a board or comndssion position because they believe in their community and would like to serve - if willing to serve again, itHaneans they feel they have made a contribution in that period of time. Assuming that to be true, said Mr. Williams, "to not: reappoint would be a pretty good slap in the face for someone's community service." e' ~. Haws suggested looking at different reappointment criteria for different boards. Mayor Anderson thought reappointment should be based on a set of established criteria. He feels activities of an incumbent, if judged satisfactory, should warrant reappointment. It would preclude putting outside applicants in competition with someone already serving. He concluded: Simply determine to which boards or commissions the criteria could apply, decide if the incumbent meets the criteria and, if not, open up the application process. Comm 1/28/76 File It was understood the matter would be further dicussed at a later convenient time. P. Consens-us-Pr'CiPv;:,cd~ on ESATS Altern-atives - Mayors of Eugene and Springfield and Chairman of Lane County Board Proposed: 15% mass transit - Eugene; 10% mass transit - Springfield. . Council has received notes and chart from January 21 meetin9 of officials from Eugene, Lane County, Springfield and LCOG. Hr. Bill Guenzler, LCOG, stated the chart illustrates a wide variation in modal splits depending on origination point and destination point. For instance, for areawide 10% transit, a n'rwement to the Central Busines.s District from the South Hills would be more accurately outlined at 19%. To reflect 19%, 27% of the work trips and 30% of the shopping trips would be transit. Hr. Guenzler further noted that, with a compromise of 15% for Eugene and 10% for Springfield, the areawide figure would be 14%. e' In answer to a question from Mr. Hurray, Hr. Guenzler said that bike and pedestrian trips could be more geographically pinpointed due to trip shortness. An average transit or paratransit trip frequently spans jurisdictional botmdaries; thus they are figured on a more areawide basis. Mr. Hurray wondered if the final plan would reflect the 15-5-5-5% splits Council had recommended. Hr. Guenzler replied that, from a personal perspective, it might be something best treated as a Eugene detailed refinement to the areawide plan. Mrs. Shirey wondered about the timing of a refinement plan in relation to the riagional plan. Mr. Murray felt there should be some assurance that refinements to the, plan would include Eugene's concerns and that: they would be completed at an early time. "It is not satisfactory to be told that some day Eugenia's concerns will be made a part of the plan", he said. Traffic Engineer felt that, if Council directs staff to see that their concerns are addressed in the plan, through staff's representation on the Transportation Planning Comndttee those concerns and goals will not be overlooked. While some concerns may not be able to be implemented regionally, he said, certainly they should be included as goals to be addressed by the agency directly affected. He concluded it would be difficult to expect a detailed plan for every segment _ because of related problems to be worked out such as sidewalks for the pedestrian WI' mode. 2/9/76 - 24 810