01/10/1977 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

of the total voters voting for mayor in the last election. Ms. Reltran has requested the issue be resubmitted to all voters in the ElmR service district, saying only Eugene voters cast ballots in the . first election and that the wording of the measure was misleading on the ballot. Mr. Raws felt that Council's decision should not be based on the merits of fluoridation but, rather, whether to place it on the ballot. Mr. Lieuallen felt it was a county matter, since the city cannot conduct an election outside of city boundaries. Finance nirector noted that a special election would cost about $6,000. Mr. Williams said that, since EWEB is owned by the people of Eugene, they should have the legal right to make decisions on water quality. Mr. Norm Stone, EWEB, indicated that EtmB does serve customers who never have the opportunity to vote on matters affecting EWEB, Mr. Obie felt a public hearing should be held January 10 to decide whether to put the issue on the ballot. Mr. Haws is opposed to a special election because of the cost to the city. Mr. tieuallen suggested that the opponents of fluoridation perhaps should seek to effect a change allowing service district elections. Mr. Bradley moved seconded by tk. Williams to deny putting Comm the fluoridation issue on the ballot. Motion carried, Approve Council members Obie, Williams, Haws, Bradley, Smith, and 1/5/77 Delay voting yes and Councilman Lieua1len voting no. It was understood that the matter would be placed on the consent calendar of the January 10 Council meeting at which . time public testimony may be taken. Staff will set a time limit. II-A-3 Public hearing was opened for the public testimony to be taken on the request of the Citizens' Council Against Fluoridation. Manager explained that since there was such intense interest by the community on this issue, even though the Council had voted to deny putting this issue in a ballot, a pubic hearing would be held with the time allotted set by the Mayor for thirty minutes. Mayor Keller reminded the audience that those testifying were not to discuss the merits of having or not having fluoride, but to address the issue of whether fluoridation of water should be back on the ballot. Robert Graham, 2922 Quiet Lane, speaking against the issue. Mr. Graham indicated that he would like to see another ballot taken on the fluoride issue because he felt the old one was unfair, as the old one to him was stated in a very unclear manner. He wondered whether anyone had the right to force anyone else to have fluoride in the water. He feels that this is not a issue that lends itself to vote. He said that he felt it was a personal matter whether a person takes it or not. He indicated that the last vote took the right away from him to drink pure water. He wondered about whether the election was legal or not and indicated that he wanted another election on the issue. - Jack Wilbur, 2525 Kincaid, speaking against fluoridation. He f e 1 t that the people were misled by the wording of the measure on the '2.7 1/10/77 - 21