Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Kelly, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to change the word "use" in <br /> Criterion 4 to "consider." <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor said there may be occasions where natural boundaries such as the river needed to be <br />crossed. He felt the flexibility provided in the amendment was good because he questioned <br />whether the population on the north side of the river was sufficient for two wards. He thought <br />there would be a ward spanning the river "no matter what." <br /> <br />Ms. Nathanson referred to the City Club report on the topic, which suggested two important <br />principles were to set ward boundaries consistent with important topographic features and in a <br />way that helped citizens identify their electoral ward. She thought people had mental maps of <br />where they live in the city, and it was important to keep that in mind. She indicated support for the <br />change in wording, with the clarification that the criterion was not last in priority. Mayor Torrey <br />determined from Mr. Kelly that he was not proposing to place the criterion below the other criteria <br />in importance. <br /> <br />Mr. Fart indicated acceptance of the reworded amendment. He added that the current ward <br />structure led to the current Planning Commission; he had tried for many years without success to <br />get someone from other than the southern part of Eugene to serve on the commission. <br /> <br /> The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap~ wanted to have both mathematical fairness and the appearance of fairness. He agreed <br />with Ms. Nathanson that people had a picture of their neighborhoods in mind. He thought the <br />1990 council erred in its redistricting effort by making decisions that created the current anomaly, <br />and the current council had to make drastic changes to bring things back into balance. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pap~, seconded by Mr. Fart, moved to amend the motion by deleting the <br /> following phrase from Criterion 5: "...make incremental changes and <br /> attempt to respect existing ward boundaries and configurations to the extent <br /> possible" and replacing it with: "...be prepared to make drastic changes in <br /> setting ward boundaries." <br /> <br />Mr. Fart supported the motion. He thought the community needed to be prepared to make some <br />drastic changes to correct the imbalances that existed. <br /> <br />City Manager Jim Johnson pointed out to the council that the criteria were ranked in priority order <br />and the last criterion would have less priority than the criteria that proceeded it. Thus, making <br />incremental changes had a Iow priority in terms of the remainder of the criteria. He thought, given <br />the population changes in the community and the criteria above Criterion 5, it would be difficult to <br />make just simple, incremental changes. <br /> <br />Mr. Fart acknowledged Mr. Johnson's comments, but said that he feared the criterion would be <br />used at the council table as an argument for incremental changes. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman said the council wanted fair redistricting and equal populations in the wards. She <br />thought it implicit that staff would have to make whatever changes were needed to achieve equity. <br />She did not think the community at large was interested in drastic or radical changes, and cited <br />the Oregon State Legislature's criteria regarding the use of existing political boundaries where <br />practical as a criterion for redistricting. She did not support the amendment. <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 13, 2001 Page 6 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />