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

Home Browse Search

Public hearing was opened. ~ Speaking in favor of the ordinance: Mariam Russell, 1185 West 13th Avenue, said that since the last public hearing she had heard a number of criticisms but appreciated what was being done. As a senior citizen she wanted the council to know that elderly citizens were affected by poor weatherization and the issue of energy conservation was not just a "young person's cause". Kevin McGraw, 778 Elm Drive, residential building contractor, said the main reason to support the ordinance was economics. Voluntary conservation measures were not working fast enough. Concerning air pollution, many people have wood heaters for which the need would be less if their houses were adequately weather- ized. Renters in particular would be beneficiaries of the ordinance, as they have no control of the energy-efficiency of their homes. John Craig, 2042 Washington, represented the Eugene Mayor's Senior Citizen Advisory Committee who had given consideration to and were in favor of the proposed ordinance. Cost-effectiveness was imperative in terms of producing new energy if a conservation program was not entered into. The mandatory provisions were not punitive and not applicable to many senior citizens who lived in their own homes. During the next four years the committee would interpret, educate, and advocate for weatherization on a voluntary basis. e Dan Goldrich, 2262 Birch Lane, appreciated the opportunity to support such an ordinance instead of waiting for the worst of the fuel crisis. The Federal government and energy corporations are committed to an inflationary, highly centralized energy provision. Inflation of the necessities tends to run 40 to 50 percent higher than overall inflation. The ordinance is a first step towards deflation. A long lead time in hardship cases and low-interest loans will be a good deal. Alan Evans, 2449 Riverview, real estate agent, said one of the arguments against the ordinance was that the cost of weatherization would not be paid back at the time of sale. New buyers of existing houses were now taking a good look at weatherization improvements. The costs would not only be paid back in energy savings but also in the resale of the house. John VanLandingham, 2207 Harris, a lawyer for low-income tenants, said he knew a number of tenants who had run into high electrical bills. The argument that tenants will not rent houses that are not energy-efficient is not true, espe- cially if they cannot afford to move. Federal assistance exists for energy bills but is often used up during the first two months of winter. The ordinance does not go far enough for tenants, as it only covers four units or less. The weatherization ordinance would not be enforceable through the State Landlord- Tenant Act. Council should work with EWEB to make sure that financing packages were sensitive to all lower-income elderly owners and tenants. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 9, 1981 Page 4