Laserfiche WebLink
Responding to a question from Mr. Lee, Mr. Johnson said that the City's budgetary contribution <br />to the foundation was $30,000 annually and the contribution was included in the base budget. <br /> <br />Mr. Lee thanked Ms. Geil-Walker for her work and said he was pleased that the foundation had <br />been able to hire a local resident. He believed that at some point a full-time staff person was <br />needed. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey said he would continue to push for a Mexican sister city. He was not asking the <br />council for money. He added that he had been amazed by the number of people who had come <br />forward in support of the proposal. Ms. Taylor advocated for scheduling a discussion on the <br />topic. There was council concurrence. <br /> <br />C. TransPlan <br /> <br />Planning Division Manager Jan Childs introduced the item. <br /> <br />Tom Schwetz of Lane County of Governments reviewed a memorandum in the packet entitled Review and <br />Recommendations: TransP/an Provisions for Transportation Demand Management. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly first objected to the short amount of time scheduled for the item. He believed transportation <br />demand measures (TDM) needed to occur at the metropolitan level for them to work. If Eugene adopted a <br />policy that Springfield did not, it could put one city at a competitive disadvantage with the other. He said that <br />the policies included words like "could," "may," and "might," and he did not find that satisfactory. He liked <br />the concept on page 2 of the memorandum regarding bench marking, and endorsed that approach. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner agreed with Mr. Kelly that the time for discussion was inadequate. He was dissatisfied with the <br />recommendations. He agreed that the most effective TDM was community wide, but he acknowledged that <br />may not be possible, and had asked staff to develop Eugene-only options. He endorsed the Option 3 change <br />to establish benchmarks, saying the language in the policy was too vague. He wanted to retain the option of <br />mandatory TDM, noting that some of the pricing strategies had been discussed in other venues, such as the <br />Budget Committee, and they were not new. He said that in a 20-year plan, the community will need to do <br />more. Regarding education, Mr. Meisner said that the staff recommendations were focused on school, and he <br />wanted to educate the driving public about options other than the single passenger car. He asked that the <br />section be broadened. <br /> <br />Mr. Lee agreed with Mr. Kelly regarding the need for bench marking TDM and asked for more clarification. <br />Mr. Schwetz anticipated some sort of performance measures would be developed, such as mode shares, <br />congestion, etc., and over time set a benchmark for reductions in congestion and increases in transit ridership. <br />Mr. Lee asked where the baseline data would come from. Mr. Schwetz said that staff had that information. <br /> <br />Mr. Fart appreciated the staff recommendations. He said that the most important element of the education <br />program was to focus on the next drivers, the teenagers now in schools. He also agreed with Mr. Meisner <br />that there were many in the driving public that did not understand the options available to them; in addition, <br />some neighborhoods did not have those options available to them. Mr. Fart said that education was the key to <br />overcoming resistence. <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council March 8, 2000 Page 4 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />