02/09/1981 Meeting (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. e e Ms. Schue said that at the last hearing she announced publicly that she was ready to vote. However, she was glad of the hearing in order to continue the public discussion and education process so that the people of Eugene understands the advantages of the program. It would take four years to complete the educa- tional process and it is hoped that most of the weatherization would have been done. CB 2234--An ordinance relating to housing; establishing mandatory weatheri- zation standards for existing single-family to four-plex resi- dential structures which were constructed with building permits issued prior to July 1, 1974; amending Section 8.270 and 8.305 of the Eugene Code, 1971; and declaring an effective date of January 1, 1985. Ms. Miller moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Roll call vote. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Obie said that it was not practical for all weatherization appeals to come before the council and preferred to have staff deal with the appeals process soon. He asked for an explanation of the rental owner's concerns relative to non-compliance status. Mr. Long asked that non-compliance status begins after January 1, 1985. That does not speak to the process in the Housing Code as to how enforcement or inspection occurs. Mr. Obie said that the Rental Owners Association were requiring a 90-day grace period. Mr. Long responded that this was already available within the Housing Code. Mr. Hamel said he was in favor of weatherization but not mandatory weatheri- zation. The financing was not available. He recommended postponing the ordi- nance for nine months until some direction came out of the Northwest Power Bill. He appreciated the work being done but mandatory was hard to live with. He will vote in favor of a second reading but against the ordinance. Ms. Smith said she would support the ordinance but also was concerned about the mandatory part. She encouraged the community to look at the first three years on a voluntary basis. The cost factors and high degree of need overcame her negative feelings. Ms. Wooten said she was concerned about the testimony of one elderly people being vulnerable to unscrupulous salespeople. passage of the ordinance would not be a cue to such people. that citizens contact EWEB before weatherizing. Mr. Lindberg added that regulation had been a concern at both national and local levels. He wanted to encourage projects that would assess through survey research the impact of regulation. Only part of the EWEB district would be subject to mandatory weatherization and it would be interesting to compare the districts and see to what extent the ordinance made a difference. witness concerning She hoped the She recommended MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 9, 1981 Page 13