Laserfiche WebLink
The motion passed unanimously, and became Ordinance No. 20250. <br /> <br />City Manager Carlson asked the council to consider Council Bill 4787, an ordinance concerning land use <br />regulations; amending Sections 9.8320 and 9.8440 of the Eugene Code, 1971; providing a severability <br />clause; and providing an effective date. <br /> <br /> Mr. Kelly, seconded by Mr. Pap6, moved that the bill, including the amendments <br /> contained in Attachment F, with unanimous consent of the council, be read the second <br /> time by council bill number only and that enactment be considered at that time. The <br /> motion passed unanimously. <br /> <br />City Manager Carlson asked the council to consider Council Bill 4787 by number only. <br /> <br /> Mr. Kelly, seconded by Mr. Pap6, moved that the bill be approved and given final <br /> passage. The motion passed unanimously, and became Ordinance No. 20251. <br /> <br />B.WORK SESSION: Discussion of Animal Control Issues <br /> <br />Mary Walston of the City Manager's Office introduced other staff present for the work session: City staff Dee <br />Ann Hardt, Trudy Salerno, Carol Pomes, and Cindi Hamm, and Mike Wellington of the Lane County Animal <br />Control Authority. <br /> <br />Ms. Walston said the topic was a complicated one but she hoped to leave the meeting with council direction <br />on five items outlined in the agenda item summary. She outlined the five items: <br /> <br /> · Change the word "owner", which was currently in the code, to "guardian" <br /> · How to handle complaints about urban wildlife <br /> · City of Eugene and Lane County definitions of"dangerous dogs" <br /> · Whether the council wished to consider a cat licensing program <br /> · An update on the report on the committee formed by Lane County Commissioner Bill <br /> Dwyer to look at animal issues <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner said the item was not a high-priority issue. He said there were no real defined issues. He said he <br />had no interest in changing "owner" to "guardian," saying that changing terms would not make a bit of <br />difference. He said he also had no interest in a cat licensing program. He stressed the need for proactive <br />enforcement of existing dog leash and barking laws. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly expressed a desire to see similar code language defining "dangerous dogs" for both the City and the <br />County. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Mr. Kelly regarding the term "guardian" and whether that word could be <br />defined specifically in the code dealing with pets, City Attorney Glenn Klein said the council could define <br />terms in the code to be specific to the Eugene Code. He said the use of "guardian" would cause confusion. <br />He recommended not making the change from "owner." <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 8, 2002 Page 4 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />