My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11/08/1976 Meeting
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Minutes
>
Historic Minutes
>
1976
>
11/08/1976 Meeting
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2007 10:23:38 PM
Creation date
11/2/2006 5:19:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Minutes
Meeting_Type
Meeting
CMO_Meeting_Date
11/8/1976
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
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 /> In answer to a question from Mr. Haws regarding cost, Ms. Rut ter <br />e answered that, for 1,000 interviews of one hour each, the cost <br /> would be approximately $6,000 to $12,000. <br /> Mr. Brad ley wondered if competitive bidding procedures would be <br /> necessary in selecting the firm to conduct the survey. It was <br /> understood that the city attorney's office would research that <br /> question. <br /> Mr. Murray expressed reservations about what the survey would <br /> actually accomplish. He felt it would be difficult to ask for <br /> opinions on a program-by-program basis. Ms. Rutter felt that <br /> citizens should be asked what programs they would be willing <br /> to give up if the budget were cut. By the same token, they <br /> should be asked what extra programs they would like to have <br /> implemented if possible to do so. The advantage of an interview, <br /> she said, is that the interviewer can use judgment and questions <br /> to facilitate citizen understanding. Manager commented that staff <br /> should proceed with a definite proposal, and he wondered if <br /> Council members would want to participate in the selection of <br /> questions. Mr. Williams felt that Council might want input on <br /> areas in wh ich it wants to get knowledge, but that it should not <br /> have a hand in framing the specific questions. <br /> I. Hearing on minor partition of property south of Crest Drive <br /> and east of Mt. Calvary Cemetary-(Skyline Nine, Inc.)(M 76-50) <br />e Appeal submitted by Mary Frank from Planning Commission decision <br /> to uphold staff approval of a minor partition on Crest Drive. <br /> Manager advised that the advertising deadline for the hearing has <br /> not been met and requests setting the hearing for a later date. <br /> Mrs. Bea1 moved seconded by Mr. Williams to reschedule the Approve <br /> public hearing for November 22. Motion carried unanimously. <br /> J. Shade Oaks Water Extension Litigation--Manager advised that, by <br /> next Monday, discussion could be held on this pending litigation. <br /> He suggested a brief meeting between Council and City Attorney. <br /> Mr. Haws moved seconded by Mr. Williams that the Council meet <br /> in executive session on the matter at 7:00 p.m. on November 8, <br /> before the regularly scheduled Council meeting. Motion Affirm <br /> carried unanimously. <br />II. Liquor License-The Refectory, 2200 Centennial Boulevard (new)(DA) <br /> Saga Enterprises, Inc. <br /> Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Bradley to call a public Public <br /> hearing for November 8, 1976. Motion carried unanimously. Hearing <br />4 <br /> Minutes 11/8/76 -15 <br /> 55/ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.