Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Poling, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, moved to amend <br /> Section A of the resolution as follows: ~The council welcomes <br /> and supports the siting of a major hospital anywhere within the <br /> city of Eugene as outlined within Ordinance No. 4849. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner pointed out that the council had not yet passed the ordinance referred to in the <br />motion. <br /> <br />Ms. Nathanson indicated she seconded the motion for the sake of discussion. <br /> <br />Mr. Poling acknowledged the council had not passed the ordinance. He believed that the hospital <br />should determine where it should locate. If the hospital chose to locate in the incentive area, it <br />could take advantage of the incentives. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner believed that the amendment was unnecessary. He said that the general statement at <br />the beginning of Section A and the text in Section B stated everything that Mr. Poling wished to <br />say. He suggesting that tying the resolution to an ordinance yet to be adopted was problematic. <br />While he acknowledged Mr. Poling's intent, he believed the amendment was redundant and did <br />not add clarity. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly, Ms. Taylor, and Ms. Bettman concurred with the remarks of Mr. Meisner. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap6 suggested that the amendment be reworded to refer to ;;anywhere zoned for such a <br />facility" rather than to the ordinance. <br /> <br />Mr. Klein concurred with Mr. Meisner that the amendment was not necessary. He suggested that <br />one option was for the council to add ;;anywhere" right before the phrase ;;the city of Eugene." <br />Mr. Poling and Ms. Nathanson accepted Mr. Klein's suggestion as a friendly amendment. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly said he could not vote for the amendment because he believed it did not add anything, <br />and he questioned whether Mr. Poling would actually welcome a hospital within 500 feet of his <br />home. <br /> <br /> The vote on the amendment to the motion was a 4:4 tie; Ms. <br /> Nathanson, Mr. Pap~, Ms. Solomon, and Mr. Poling voted yes, <br /> and Mr. Meisner, Mr. Kelly, Ms. Taylor, and Ms. Bettman voted <br /> no. Mayor Torrey cast a vote in support of the amendment, and <br /> it passed on a final vote of 5:4. <br /> <br /> Ms. Nathanson, seconded by Mr. Pap~, moved to extend time for <br /> the item by five minutes. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. <br /> <br />Ms. Nathanson said that she supported signaling to the providers that the City was serious about <br />assisting them. However, she was concerned that the resolution was vague, making the future <br />cost of the incentives unknown. The council did not know what financial burdens it was placing <br />on the City in the future. Regarding Finding C, Ms. Nathanson said that the finding could be <br />interpreted as meaning that the City had not been working with the hospitals, which was not the <br />case. Staff had carried out the council's direction to be responsive to the hospitals. She thanked <br />staff for its efforts. While she believed that such a resolution might have some policy problems, <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 24, 2003 Page 8 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />