Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Bj6rklund noted that the adopted inventory was legal, acknowledged by the State, and had survived <br />several appeals. Passage of the motion meant the council would be amending an adopted and acknowledged <br />inventory. He said the process was not an open process that allowed for corrections along the way. The <br />City must go back and amend the adopted inventory. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pap6 called for the question. Ms. Solomon seconded the motion. <br /> <br />City Manager Taylor suggested the motion was the subject of an important policy discussion and delay <br />would allow for a staff response. Mayor Piercy asked if the delay would allow the council to address the <br />issue in the current process if it chose to. City Manager Taylor believed so. He said the motion arose out of <br />another issue, the Dillard - Nectar Way property, and required another discussion as it had larger <br />implications. <br /> <br /> The motion to call the question passed unanimously. <br /> <br /> The vote on the motion was a 4:4 tie; Ms. Taylor, Mr. Kelly, Ms. Bettman, and Ms. Ortiz <br /> voting yes; Mr. Pap6, Mr. Poling, Ms. Solomon, and Mr. Pryor voting no; Mayor Piercy <br /> cast a vote in support of the motion and it passed on a final vote of 5:4. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor expressed the hope the City would attempt to purchase the property. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly suggested a work session be scheduled soon to ~flesh out the subtleties" of the issue. <br /> <br /> B. Work Session: <br /> Programming of Surface Transportation Program-Urban Funds <br /> <br />City Engineer Mark Schoening was present for the item. He asked the council to approve the list of projects <br />shown as in Attachment A to the Agenda Item Summary so that staff could complete applications and <br />submit them to the metropolitan planning organization (MPO), which would then begin the process of <br />programming available Surface Transportation Program-Urban (STP-U) funds. He reported that the <br />Metropolitan Policy Committee (MPC) programmed only 85 percent of the available funds and now <br />recommended that 100 percent of fiscal year (FY) 2004 and 98 percent of FY05 and FY06 funds be <br />programmed. Those funds, in combination with another MPC action, totaled $1.3 million. <br /> <br />Continuing, Mr. Schoening said that at its May meeting, the MPC passed a motion that divided the funding <br />into three program categories: 1) preservation; 2) modernization and planning and project development; and <br />3) transportation demand management. Staff recommended projects to be funded in the preservation and <br />modernization and planning and project development categories. Mr. Schoening noted the four proposed <br />street and off-street bicycle preservation projects and called the council's attention to the funding split for <br />the proposed modernization and planning and project development project, which was the road improve- <br />ments related to the federal courthouse. <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 8, 2005 Page 7 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />