Laserfiche WebLink
concerned about arbitrary enforcement and wanted to ensure that enforcement was consistent. <br />LRAPA's inspectors were trained professionals who were also concerned about not being <br />arbitrary. The ordinance gave LRAPA an opportunity to talk to people and educate them on how <br />to burn their stoves more cleanly. That was LRAPA's preferred approach. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman supported the changes being proposed. She appreciated that LRAPA emphasized <br />citizen education, which kept polluting materials out of wood stoves. She hoped the agency did <br />actual outreach, particularly during holiday times when people considered burning paper. She <br />noted that increased particulates in the air and the hazard of asthma. Mr. Jennison said that <br />Public Information Director Kim Metzger did public outreach year-round, and LRAPA did <br />considerable public outreach around the holidays. He agreed about the importance of that <br />outreach. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner indicated support for forwarding the item to a public hearing. He expressed <br />appreciation for the materials provided with the agenda item. He noted that LRAPA was unique to <br />Lane County and that troubled him. He wanted to balance local needs and protections with what <br />others were doing. He said that his sentiments were not a reflection on LRAPA's work, but he <br />thought the community should look at why it needed to be unique in the state with its own <br />bureaucracy, rather than relying on a State bureaucracy that apparently satisfactorily served other <br />communities. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor said LRAPA focused on education rather than penalizing people. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly said he liked the specificity in the ordinance and suggested a line be included that stated <br />petroleum products used to ignite a fireplace were not to be included in the prohibition against <br />petroleum. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap~ referred to page 63 of the agenda packet and said it appeared there could be up to a <br />$500 fine levied in a process outside the court system. Mr. Kelly noted that fines were <br />appealable. Mr. Jennison said that referred to the administrative penalty. He said that if LRAPA <br />got to the point where it had to request a penalty, there would be legal recourse available to those <br />cited. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor said that the fines were appealable, negotiable, and fair. <br /> <br />Mr. Jennison said that the fine could be appealed to a Hearings Officer, to the LRAPA Board, and <br />then to the courts. <br /> <br /> Mr. Kelly, seconded by Mr. PapS, moved to direct the City Manager to hold a <br /> public hearing on June 24, 2002, on an ordinance to revise Section 6.250 of <br /> the Eugene Code. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. <br /> <br />E. WORK SESSION: City Manager Recruitment <br /> <br />Human Resource and Risk Services Director Lauren Chouinard joined the council for the item. <br />He referred the council to the agenda item summary, which outlined the options for proceeding <br />with the city manager recruitment process. Option A would begin the next phase of the <br />recruitment process in July 2002; Option 2 would begin the next phase of the process in late <br />September 2002. Mr. Chouinard requested council direction on the timing of the process. <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 10, 2002 Page 8 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />