12/22/1980 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to postpone further . discussion and action on this item until a meeting in January. Mr. Delay recalled the retreat and the initial discussions of the council. He said they did not want to wait to see what the State and Federal government would do, but to see what they could do in a cost-effective way. Something fair to everyone. Something internal to the, community. At that time, they recog- nized that the essential elements of the program would 'be a mandatory program. A non-mandatory program would have the fate of other programs. They do not work. What will happen is that the people who say they are in favor of weather- ization and against mandatory measures will create an environment in which citizens who can afford to and do not want to bother to weatherize force higher costs on those who have volunteered to try to conserve the consumption of energy, penalizing those who are trying to do the best job. They recognized that they would have to involve everyone. A massive lead time of four years enables that to be accomplished. Mr. Delay was totally in favor of the ordinance. The technical details brought up at the public hearing were not new. They had been covered and debated. The City has already done more than usual to get the word out. The ordinance makes sense. He did not feel holding it over would accomplish very much. Ms. Miller was not opposed to waiting a few weeks if it would avoid divisive- ness. She doubted they would learn more or have different points raised in public hearing. If it builds community consensus, it would be all right with her. A lot of' the points heard have answers. She urged that the next meeting have answers available. She was willing to set up a date on that basis. Mr. Lieuallen was ambivalent about the motion. Further hearings would be for . political reasons. They have heard the testimony before. Holding over for a specific purpose, such as review of financing, could be a different matter. There is no doubt about the weatherization being a good thing. Mandatory is the problem. He objected to the testimony against mandating. The council re~ognized the importance of weatherization. He observed there was testimony from people outside the city, who would not be affected in the least by the ordinance. He was willing to support holding the ordinance over although he would not be a part of future discussions. He would support the motion to maintain consensus on a very important issue. Ms. Schue was willing to hold it over, but was uncomfortable with the situation. She would not change her mind. She would vote for the ordinance. She will explain why nothing she would hear from the public would change her point of view. She was not eager to hold more public hearings. Council had heard everything possible on this issue. She did, however, need to explain why she supported the ordinance. Mr. Obie supported Mr. Lieuallen1s comments. The only need was political and educational. He hesitated to have the ordinance tainted. He felt sorry that Mr. Delay1s and Mr. Lieuallen's work would not come to fruition. Their work and assistance has brought the ordinance along this far. Mr. Henry suggested the next meeting on the ordinance be held February 9, 1981. . MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 22, 1980 Page 18