Laserfiche WebLink
based on that standard. He believed that optimal minimum size was 1,200 housing units. He <br />opposed the motion because he did not think it would be good for either the associations or City <br />staff. <br /> <br /> The motion to amend failed, 4:3; Ms. Nathanson, Mr. Farr, and Mr. Meisner <br /> voting yes. <br /> <br />Responding to a question from Mr. Farr, Mr. Weinman said that it often cost as much staff time <br />to process a small neighborhood newsletter as a large neighborhood newsletter. Mr. Farr <br />confirmed that the associations determined the number of annual meetings they would have. Mr. <br />Weinman agreed. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor wanted more time for the discussion, and more time for input from the neighborhood <br />leaders who were present. She suggested the council continue the discussion at a later date. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner said that his amendment had been very important to him. He reminded the council <br />that it had modified the purpose statement and mission for the program so it was no longer <br />neighborhood-association based. He said that, based on the defeat of his amendment, he would <br />vote against the main motion. He was unhappy with a system where the only way neighbors <br />could organize was to go through an existing neighborhood organization, which could be <br />ineffective, dormant, or hostile. <br /> <br /> The motion passed, 6:1; Mr. Meisner voting no <br /> <br /> Mr. Lee moved, seconded by Ms. Taylor, to direct the City Manager to <br /> implement the purpose/roles for neighborhood newsletters. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly argued for a change to the policy that focused on the shared responsibility of the <br />association and City. He said newsletters were voices of the associations, and the funding came <br />from the City. He was concerned that the recommendations in the meeting packet were at odds <br />with involving the public and soliciting public input. He said the guidelines for newsletters should <br />be sufficiently clear to guide both staff and the association. <br /> <br /> Mr. Kelly moved, seconded by Ms. Taylor, to amend the motion by changing <br /> the bold face on the bottom of page 163 of the meeting packet to read <br /> "Newsletters are publications of the neighborhood associations, financed by <br /> the City. Newsletters must meet guidelines adopted by the NLC and City <br /> staff. The City Publisher may question a part of the newsletter only if it fails <br /> to comply with those adopted guidelines." <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner clarified that "may question" could be interpreted as "may remove." Mr. Kelly <br />concurred. <br /> <br />Ms. Bridges said that Mr. Kelly's motion reflected what staff was trying to convey under "City <br />Publisher" in the chart in the meeting packet entitled "Roles in Neighborhood Newsletters." City <br />Attorney Glenn Klein said that the effect of the motion was quite different. Currently, the City was <br />the legal entity publishing the newsletter, and if there was a problem the City was liable. Mr. <br />Klein believed that Mr. Kelly's motion placed that liability on the neighborhood association as a <br />separate legal entity. <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 23, 2000 Page 7 <br />Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />