My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC Minutes - 10/10/01 Work Session
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Minutes
>
2001
>
CC Minutes - 10/10/01 Work Session
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 10:31:50 AM
Creation date
8/1/2005 1:52:50 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Minutes
Meeting_Type
Work Session
CMO_Meeting_Date
1/1/2001
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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
In response to a question from Mr. Pap8 regarding whether the estimates on purchases were <br />based on fee/title, Mr. Bingham said staff had examined conservation easements versus fee/title. <br />He said conservation easements and fee/title had similar costs and staff could go either way <br />depending on the City's management objective. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap8 stressed the importance of looking at other methods than fee/title, opining that there <br />could be more success with less cost. He also stressed the need to look at the issue from a <br />regional perspective and purchasing stream corridors in rural areas. <br /> <br />Mr. Bingham said staff was working with Lane County in the River Road/Santa Clara area, and as <br />part of the metrowide Natural Resources Study and metrowide Parks and Open Space Study. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Mr. Pap8 regarding whether City money could be used to acquire <br />corridors in rural areas, City Manager Jim Johnson said there would have to be some public <br />purpose shown to the City but acknowledged that it was possible. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap8 expressed his preference for Option l(b) as presented in the meeting packet. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor expressed his favor for Option l(b). <br /> <br />In response to a question from Mr. Meisner regarding how increases in user fees would be <br />implemented, City Manager Johnson said that the council would give direction and then he would <br />implement the increase administratively. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner said he was in favor of Option l(b) but raised concern over raising fees <br />administratively with no opportunity for public hearings. <br /> <br />Ms. Nathanson said she supported Option l(b). <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman said she supported Option l(a) but said she would reluctantly support l(b). <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey shared Mr. Meisner's concern over raising fees with no public hearing. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Mayor Torrey regarding whether the funds could be used to restore <br />Delta Ponds, staff said that it was not necessarily a stream corridor but would research the <br />possibility. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Mr. Meisner regarding whether there was some way to include <br />public involvement if Option l(b) was approved, City Manager Johnson said there was no <br />effective date chosen for the fee increase and said that a number of public information sessions <br />could be scheduled. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner stressed the importance of public involvement in the process. <br /> <br /> Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to adopt Option l(b). <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 10, 2001 Page 4 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.