Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Pap~ was enthusiastic about a review of the charter and said that the council should take its <br />time on the effort. He wanted to form an advisory committee that went through a lot of public <br />process, with all issues on the table for review, including the form of government that Eugene <br />had and the manner in which councilors were elected. He agreed with Mr. Meisner that he would <br />leave most issues to the committee and let the committee decide what to do. He encouraged <br />Mr. Kelly to participate in that process, given the number of suggestions he had proffered in the <br />staff poll. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap~ also agreed with Mr. Meisner about the need for reviewing those sections of the charter <br />related to EWEB. He said that the council should ask the community what it wanted EWEB to <br />be, and put that in the charter. <br /> <br />Mr. Lee was not a strong supporter of a comprehensive charter review. He asked that someone <br />explain to him what the problem was with the current charter, or how it had harmed service <br />delivery or stopped the council from doing what it wanted to do. He had heard no complaints <br />from the public about Eugene's form of government. Mr. Lee said that there had always been <br />debates about the city manager/council form of government. He noted that there was a <br />movement afoot in Portland to revise the commissioner form of government. Mr. Lee thought the <br />council had access to the information it needed in the current form of government in Eugene. <br /> <br />Mr. Lee did feel that Mr. Meisner's point about the educational aspect of the process was <br />worthwhile. Most residents did not understand the limits of the council's authority. <br /> <br />Regarding boundaries, Mr. Lee pointed out that redistricting would occur shortly after the census <br />was completed, and suggested that redrawing the ward boundaries at this time would be <br />"jumping the gun." <br /> <br />Given that the only aspect of the review he considered worthwhile was the educational aspect of <br />it, Mr. Lee did not support a charter review or forming an advisory committee and did not want to <br />add to the council's work load with the task. He asked the council if it actually had time for a <br />charter review. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey said he would like the charter to speak to the issue of boundaries for wards. He <br />said that Oregon Law stipulated that wards should be continuous, be of equal population, employ <br />existing geographic boundaries, not divide communities of common interest, and be connected <br />by transportation links. Wards cannot be drawn to favor a particular interest. Mayor Torrey said <br />that issue should be the first dealt with by the advisory committee. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey favored the existing form of government but said that did not mean improvements <br />could not be made. He asked staff to give the council an indication of how long such an <br />examination would take and how much it would cost. <br /> <br />Responding to Mr. Lee, Ms. Taylor thought the council had time for the issue. She had not <br />envisioned, in her response to the council poll, a lengthy review because not all sections of the <br />charter needed to be reviewed. She agreed that there were outdated sections that should be <br />deleted. Ms. Taylor said that the form of government should be discussed by the advisory <br />committee. For example, she thought the committee should discuss whether the manager should <br />have the same powers that the manager now has, or if that power should be diluted. Ms. Taylor <br />said that there were different forms of a council/manager form of government that could be <br />examined. <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 21, 2000 Page 7 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />