CC Minutes - 11/19/03 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, to amend section 1200 (c) to include a re- quirement for a public hearing for a change in planned projects or a change in the boundary. Mr. Kelly said he would not support the motion as he felt public involvement would be adequate without such a hearing. He questioned the need for a hearing to attain input on a change of $100,000 or less. Ms. Bettman responded that she would entertain a friendly amendment to that effect. Mr. Kelly offered a friendly amendment putting a limit of $100,000 on the mandate for a public hearing in the event of a plan change, such that a cost change or bound- ary change of $100,000 or less would not be subject to public scrutiny. Ms. Bett- man, seconded by Ms. Taylor, accepted the friendly amendment. Mr. Taylor called it a matter of being "nimble" enough to address opportunity in a timely way and yet be respectful to the plan and the public process. He said this would cause a level of review at a lower dollar threshold than other urban renewal districts required. He felt some deference needed to be given to the City's professional staff. He asserted the amendment did not make much difference, but recommended that councilors stay with the language set forth by staff. Mr. Pap~ suggested a limitation on the percent of expansion be written into the plan. Mr. Kupper responded that a limit was already part of the Oregon Revised Statute 457 and it would be redundant to put it in the draft plan, but staff would do so should the council wish them to. In response to a question from Mr. Pap~, Mr. Weinman said there would be approximately eight acres left for future expansion after the amendment. Ms. Taylor commented she preferred deference to the public over deference to the staff. She felt anything that increased the public involvement was a positive development. Ms. Solomon termed the amendment micro-management on the part of the council. She reiterated that the public had multiple opportunities to provide comment and was not being excluded. Ms. Bettman disagreed, stating the issue was "about excluding the public." She thought that, once passed, future councils could choose to alter the district boundaries without any public input whatsoever. She felt it maintained the council's integrity in the face of the public. The motion to amend the proposed amendments failed, 5:3; Ms. Bettman, Ms. Tay- lor, and Mr. Kelly voting in favor. Mr. Kelly, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to extend the time for the item to 1:30 p.m. The vote was a tie, 4:4; Ms. Bettman, Ms. Taylor, Mr. Kelly, and Mr. Meisner voting in favor and Ms. Solomon, Mr. Pap~, Mr. Poling, and Ms. Nathanson voting in opposition. The Mayor voted against the motion and the motion failed. MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 19, 2003 Page 7 Work Session