Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Mr. Long stated that because Oregon1s population information had not yet <br />been published by the Bureau of Census, the City would have an additional <br />30 days after publication to submit its consortium application. The ~ <br />discussion this week would focus on the City Option Three of the February .., <br />21, 1980, memo (distributed). Mr. Long said he was available to answer <br />ally quest ions. <br /> <br />Mr. Delay asked if the previously announced March 3 deadline was still in <br />effect and Mr. Long responded that that was the Federal deadline but an <br />extension will be given because the Oregon population data has not yet been <br />p~b1ished by the Bureau of Census. Mr. Delay stated he found the information <br />in the memorandum to be inadequate for his understanding to even be able to <br />d'scuss the matter. He stated he feels this is an important decision and <br />would like to have more input from the City and the County about what is <br />being negotiated. He could not follow it from the memo. <br /> <br />Mr. Long stated this is a $10- to $14-mi11ion program representing approxi- <br />mately half the City budget. He further stated he could provide any and <br />all information needed. <br /> <br />Mr. Delay asked if this was a filing for "intent" only. He asked if we <br />could file and still keep our options open. Mr. Long responded that it is <br />not just an intent, but would include some basic ingredients as to how the <br />consortium would operate. March 1 is when they would need to decide how <br />they will proceed. He further stated that April 1 to 15 would be critical <br />since they are already looking at the phasing of responsibilities and to <br />the consortium. Mr. Delay stated he feels he would like to hear from the <br />City and the County on where they stand and how they see the issues as ~ <br />well as hearing from some of the user groups. Ms. Miller stated she .., <br />agreed with Mr. Delay; she would like to see information presented to the <br />council as suggested. She stated she has some understanding of what the <br />City wants and what the County wants and minimal understanding of what the <br />user groups want and cannot see why the problems at this point seem to be <br />insoluble. <br /> <br />Mr. Long stated he does not feel the problems are insolvable. His hope is <br />, the briefing memo will provide a basis for questions. He further stated <br />they might want to develop some way of receiving user input. Ms. Smith <br />stated that the Advisory Committee had met February 26, and the City <br />is concerned as to what the best program for all user groups wi 11 be. She <br />stated she would be happy to talk with any councilors regarding details of <br />the proposal and the proposal itself. She is concerned that Eugene be a <br />partner and be involved in decision-making and staffing issues. <br /> <br />Mayor Keller stated that the councilors' points are well made and he would <br />like to schedule a meeting between Gary Long and the councilors. <br /> <br />V. CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVE BUDGET CUT PROPOSALS <br /> <br />Mr. Henry referred to two memos distributed~ one memo from the librarian <br />regarding restoration of Sunday hours, the other from the Parks and <br />Recreation director regarding alternative budget cut proposals, especially <br />in regard to swimming pools and ball fields. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />2/27/80--10 <br />