CC MInutes - 10/22/01 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Jan Wostman, 2645 Riverview Street, commented that at least one ward had to cross the river. He said he supported the Violet scenario because it had the best distribution of future dwelling units. He urged that the incumbency of councilors should not count in the redistricting process but urged the council to look at how many citizens would be displaced into new wards. David Monk, 3720 Emerald Street, stressed the importance of incremental change to current ward boundaries. He supported the Violet scenario and spoke against using the river as a ward boundary. Scott Bartlett, 1445 East 21st Avenue, urged conservative and prudent action on the part of the council. He said that the council should take its time and not allow itself to be pushed into action by the press or political groups. He commented that the river could be a unifier rather than a divider of communities of interest. He said that the Violet scenario was the most conservative scenario and was therefore the one he supported. Dave Hauser, 2168 Elkhorn Drive, supported the Indigo scenario. He said that wards should cross the river where there were existing transportation corridors. He urged the council not to do any last minute "tweaking" to the scenarios, commenting that last-minute decisions were rarely the best ones to make. There being no further requests to speak, Mayor Torrey closed the public hearing. In response to a question from Councilor Farr regarding what it would take to adjust the boundaries of wards 4 and 5, City Manager Johnson said that staff already had a plan for that contingency. Councilor Pap~ stressed that council had set up five criteria for staff to work with. He said that staff had planned the maps and that the council had not taken part in the planning and had no particular agendas regarding redistricting. Councilor Kelly noted that it was a legal requirement for equal representation of citizens. He noted that some had called for radical changes in wards because of large population shifts but noted that in previous ward planning incremental changes had been achieved with the roughly the same kind of population growth. Councilor Nathanson observed that the river was being used as a political argument for a ward boundary. She said natural features and major highways were often used to define neighborhood boundaries. In response to a question from Councilor Bettman regarding the testimony of Mr. Harris and whether any of the council defined criteria for the redistricting process were illegal, Mr. Lidz noted that Mr. Harris said Criterion #5 was "internally inconsistent" and said there was not a legal problem with that criterion. Councilor Rayor said that all of the wards would have diverse internal differences and stressed the council's will to represent all wards. Councilor Taylor commented that wards were bigger than neighborhoods. She stressed that it was good that they contained a variety of people. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 22, 2001 Page 6 Regular Meeting