Laserfiche WebLink
In response to Mr. Lee's suggestion for a cap, Mr. Kelly agreed, and suggested that fines be <br />staggered toward that cap. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner agreed with Mr. Kelly's remarks. Regarding Mr. Lee's suggestion for a cap, he <br />concurred, but said he did not presume that all those impacted would be students, even if they <br />lived in the west University neighborhood. He added that all students are not poor, and all the <br />poor are not students. <br /> <br />Mr. Johnson anticipated that by the next work session on the ordinance, staff would have <br />developed a draft informational brochure that would be distributed to students and tavern owners <br />for the council to review. <br /> <br />B. Work Session and Action: Youth Task Force Report on After-School Activities <br /> <br />Library, Recreation, and Cultural Services (LRCS) Department Director Angel Jones and LRCS <br />staff Linda Phelps provided the report from the Youth After-School Task Force. Ms. Phelps called <br />the council's attention to a report distributed by staff entitled Comprehensive After-School <br />Activities for Youth and discussed available programming, the locations where activities were <br />occurring, the agencies involved in providing after-school activities, barriers to participation, and <br />gaps in services provided. Ms. Phelps described some of the task force's proposals to overcome <br />some of the barriers to participation and to fill the service gaps. <br /> <br />Mr. Johnson noted that time for additional work sessions on the issue was available for June 28, <br />July 17, and July 26. The work sessions were timed to give the council an opportunity to place a <br />revenue measure on the November ballot if it chose to do so. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor asked if the number of participants of various age groups in each program could be <br />included in the charts in the report. Ms. Phelps said that would be useful to have, adding that the <br />survey conducted by the task force included data about the program size, but because the <br />information was not reported consistently, staff would follow-up with interviews. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner said that the council had received a packet of information from the League of <br />Women Voters, which was doing a similar mapping process. However, that packet did not <br />mention the work being done by the City of Eugene. He encouraged staff to involve the league in <br />the task force's effort. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner said that the issue of funding after-school activities was not a Eugene-only problem. <br />He said that Lane County had made it clear that it did not have funding for such an effort, but <br />there were more than 40,000 River Road residents not in the city. He advocated for examination <br />of formation of a special youth services district that could provide after-school activities to all <br />children living in the metropolitan area. Mr. Meisner was not interested in placing a measure on <br />the November ballot that did not result in services to everybody. <br />Mr. Fart commended the work done to this point. He asked if the responses from the school <br />districts included after-school athletics. Ms. Phelps clarified that the survey solicited information <br />about programs the schools themselves provided; for example, if KidSports provided after-school <br />athletics at a particular school, that organization would report, rather than the schools. The <br />schools had reported on their athletic activities. <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 12, 2000 Page 3 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />