Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Nathanson said the issue for her was not so much the difficulty of constituent services, but <br />rather whether the voters feel like they belong in the ward they were in. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman said Ms. Nathanson's point well-taken. She thought it important to have Ward 3 be a <br />downtown ward that was still connected to the neighborhoods that support downtown and were <br />affected by activities there. Ms. Bettman was surprised not to see a scenario that extended Ward <br />1 to the west as opposed to the north as it was in some of the scenarios. She thought that <br />extension would be more logical in terms of communities of commonality, and wanted to see a <br />scenario that extended Ward 1 to the west rather than the north. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman thought it would be more appropriate to extend Ward 4 across the river than Ward 5 <br />because it had traditionally crossed the river. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman suggested that transportation corridors could create as big a barrier as the river. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman agreed with Mr. Kelly's remarks regarding the Indigo scenario. She also thought <br />more options that reflected the council's comments should be developed for public review. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor thought the Violet scenario the most feasible and hoped the Indigo scenario would be <br />eliminated. She also shared Ms. Bettman's interest in extending Ward 1 to the west. She thought <br />that the wards should be drawn so that all councilors retained their current seats. She believed <br />that people who once voted for a councilor had the right to continue to be represented by that <br />councilor. <br /> <br />Speaking to Ms. Bettman's comments regarding downtown, Mr. Meisner observed that downtown <br />was often referred to as everyone's neighborhood. Regarding the Indigo scenario, he agreed it <br />represented the most change, but he was interested in how Ward 7 appeared in that scenario as <br />it assigned most of the downtown to that ward. He said that Whiteaker was very affected by <br />downtown issues. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner was unsure he could support eliminating an option at this time. He preferred to bring <br />a broad range of options to the public even if the council did not like them. He doubted the <br />council would end up with any of the scenarios in their present form. <br /> <br />Mr. Fart thought the location of existing councilors' residences should be the last thing the council <br />considered in creating new ward boundaries given the long-term nature of the impact of <br />redistricting. He pointed out that the existing councilors could run for seats in their new wards. <br />Mr. Pap~ agreed with Mr. Meisner; he was not interested in voting to eliminate any of the <br />scenarios at this time. He also found some elements of the Indigo scenario worthwhile. He <br />pointed out that the criterion related to incumbency was last on the list of criteria, which suggested <br />it had less weight than the other criteria. <br /> <br /> Ms. Taylor, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to delete the Indigo scenario <br /> from consideration. <br /> <br />Ms. Nathanson wanted to retain the scenario at this point. She said that it largely respected the <br />Willamette River as a boundary, which was of interest to her. She said that the area north of the <br />river was split north-south rather than east-west, which appeared to be radical, but might make <br />sense given communities of interest, the neighborhood associations, and development patterns in <br />that area. <br /> <br /> MINUTE--Eugene City Council September 10, 2001 Page 7 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />