Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Pap~ said he was convinced that the community wanted to discuss the issue and expressed a <br />desire to put the issue on the ballot. He commented that the political action committee ceased <br />collecting signatures because it had been requested to do so to allow a public discussion on the <br />issue. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly said he had not heard a great deal public support for the idea of citywide elections. He <br />suggested letting the redistricting plan work for a period of time and a discussion of campaign <br />finance reform. He said that a ballot measure was not the way to initiate public discussion, <br />likening it to catapults lobbing things back-and-forth over a wall. He said that public discussion <br />needed to take place outside the context of a campaign. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly stressed the need for the council to work better together. He said the council could have <br />the strong difference of policy opinion at the table that reflected the differences of opinion in the <br />community but needed to make decisions and move on. <br /> <br />Ms. Nathanson said redistricting would address the inequities in ward representation. She urged <br />the council to let that process work. She suggested regular monitoring of ward populations and <br />an automatic trigger for ward redistricting when representation problems occurred due to <br />population. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner reiterated Mr. Kelly's comment that a campaign was not an effective, efficient or <br />reasonable way to foster community discussion/education. He remarked that both sides of the <br />issue were extremely polarized and added his opinion that there were advantages and <br />disadvantages to both ward and citywide elections. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner said he had looked at the Justice Department actions taken and stressed that they <br />had nothing to do with political persuasions of groups but rather to do with ethnic/racial minorities <br />in large numbers, and said that it was a "sham" argument that did not apply to Eugene. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner said he would support Ms. Nathanson's idea of an automatic trigger for redistricting <br />when it came in the form of a motion. He said he was not prepared to support a motion to put <br />citywide elections on the ballot. He stressed the need to have an effective public discussion and <br />not just throw accusations back and forth. <br /> <br />Mr. Fart said he had asked City Manager Jim Johnson to bring the item before the council and <br />supported the idea of letting the voters to solve the issue. He concurred with Mr. Kelly in that an <br />election was probably not the best way to stimulate a public discussion but stressed that it was a <br />way to get a lot of people talking about the issue. <br /> <br />Mr. Fart said that there were compelling argument on both sides of the issue and reiterated Mr. <br />Papa's desire to put the item on the ballot. He said he intended to make a motion to put the issue <br />on the November ballot. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor said there had been too much discussion on the issue already. She believed that <br />citywide elections were less democratic than ward-based elections. She raised a concern that <br />special interest groups would be the only ones that could afford to get their message to the <br />people. She defined a special interest group as people that expected to get an advantage that <br />would lead to a financial gain. <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 13, 2002 Page 4 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />