CC Minutes - 09/08/03 Mtg - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

and E. Mayor Torrey, seeing no objection, deemed her corrections approved. Councilor Taylor noted that Milton Park had been misspelled on page 2, paragraph 3, of the minutes from the work session held on July 28. Councilor Poling said he had submitted corrections to the minutes electronically. Mayor Torrey, noting no objections, deemed the corrections approved. Roll call vote; the motion to approve the Consent Calendar, excepting items D and E, passed unanimously, 8:0. Regarding Item D, having to do with the adoption of Resolution 4775, authorizing the financing of Fire Station # 11, Councilor Bettman noted that she was very supportive of the fire station, but had not voted for the motion because she objected to the diversion of money from funds used to pay the wages of firefighters. She asserted that the City Council had determined what funding sources to use and that these sources were not apparent in the resolution. She questioned how much the resolution would tie the organization to the sources of funds that had been previously identified. Sue Cutsogeorge, financial analysis manager, responded that the financing plan approved by the council had identified several funding sources and that the resolution before the council in the Consent Calendar only dealt with one part of the financing package. She said that the remainder of the funding package would be included in the Supplemental Budget # 1 (SB 1) when it came before the council in December. Mayor Torrey called for the vote on Item D. Roll call vote; the motion to approve Item D on the Consent Calendar passed unani- mously, 8:0. Councilor Bettman stated, regarding Item E, that it was an approval of concurrent processing of Land Use Code changes with citizen-initiated amendments to the Willakenzie Plan. She noted that the idea was intended to streamline the process. Teresa Bishow, Senior Planner for the Planning and Development Department, affirmed this to be so. Councilor Bettman registered her objection to the concurrent processing of the two changes, stating that this would presuppose that both would pass, when it would be possible that only one would pass. She felt it would give the message to the public that they need not participate in this process as the outcome was a foregone conclusion. Councilor Kelly asked for clarification as to whether it would be possible for the two independent changes to have opposite outcomes. Ms. Bishow responded that, legally, it would be possible, but it would not be the %est course of action." She explained the Willakenzie Plan policy prohibiting clinics had been the first privately initiated change. She stressed that the City wanted its Land Use Code to always be consistent with adopted plans. She said that the Land Use Code needed to be changed because it specifically prohibited clinics. She noted that both processes would require the Planning Commission to forward a recommendation to the council. In response to a comment from Councilor Bettman, Ms. Bishow stated that the amendments would bring a high degree of efficiency to the process. Councilor Bettman asserted that it would be a non-efficiency MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 8, 2003 Page 5 Regular Meeting