My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 7: Ratification of Intergovernmental Relations Committee Actions
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2007
>
CC Agenda - 03/12/07 Meeting
>
Item 7: Ratification of Intergovernmental Relations Committee Actions
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 12:55:38 PM
Creation date
3/8/2007 2:46:15 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
3/12/2007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />? <br /> SB 293 – Relating to use of mobile communication device while driving. <br />Recommended Priority 3 Oppose <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman said she had asked to review the bill because she wanted to run it by the committee and the <br />Council, as it was a big policy issue, despite cell phones being the third most dangerous driving hazard after <br />food and children. Her inclination was to support the bill with the amendments as articulated by public <br />safety, i.e., with exemptions for certain law enforcement personnel. Because of her own feelings and <br />constituent requests, she felt the issue should be addressed statewide. <br /> <br />Mr. Cushman said that to avoid specifying “cell phones,” the legislative text was expanded to include <br />personal digital assistants, anything with text messaging capability, and two-way radios. The ban on two- <br />way radio usage affected police, fire, emergency vehicles, public works, EWEB and some private entities. <br />He said if that category of devices could be excluded from the bill, it would not adversely affect safety. He <br />noted that the bill was focused on cell phones, as opposed to other things that constituted “distracted <br />driving.” Mr. Cushman said that this bill and a similar one, HB 2482, were fairly innocuous except as they <br />applied to two-way radios. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman moved to change the recommendation to Priority 2 Support with amendments <br />as articulated by Mr. Cushman. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy and Mr. Pryor suggested that the position should be “oppose unless amended.” Ms. <br />Bettman’s understanding was that if the committee supported something with an amendment, it meant they <br />actively sought the amendment. Ms. Wilson confirmed this. <br /> <br />Mr. Pryor said he could not support the bill and wondered why there were no bills to ban the number one <br />and two dangers – food and children. He suggested that the way to address the problem was to go after <br />“distracted driving.” <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor said the problem with cell phones was that someone could call a person, and even though the <br />person chose not to make calls, that person might be tempted to answer. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor seconded the motion. The motion passed, 2:1; Mr. Pryor voting in opposition. <br /> <br />? <br /> HB 2370 – Relating to Oregon security. <br />Recommended Priority 3 Support <br /> <br />Ms. Wilde reported that the bill had been introduced by the Governor and proposed moving the Office of <br />Emergency Management (OEM) from the Oregon State Police to the Oregon military. She noted that it was <br />seen as a positive by the OEM staff and would provide more resource support in the form of grants tied to <br />homeland security and natural disaster. She added that there had been discussion of an amendment that had <br />to do with who could confiscate firearms during a catastrophe and how they would be recovered afterward, <br />an issue the City would want to watch carefully. <br /> <br />Mr. Pryor said that, politics aside, the Department of Homeland Security had many good things in it, and <br />that placing them in closer proximity would be beneficial. Ms. Wilde pointed out that this would give <br />Oregon the same structure for disaster preparedness and homeland security as Washington, Idaho, Alaska <br />and Montana, states Oregon worked with, as well as 23 other states nationwide, making it easy to connect in <br />many ways. She emphasized that the employees would not be military employees or have a military budget. <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Council Committee on Intergovernmental February 6, 2007 Page 4 <br /> Relations <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.