Laserfiche WebLink
Roll call vote; the vote on whether to support the recommendation of the Council Committee on <br />Intergovernmental Relations to take a Priority 1 Oppose stance on SB 335 was a tie, 4:4; coun- <br />cilors Ortiz, Zelenka, Bettman, and Taylor voting in support and councilors Clark, Poling, <br />Solomon, and Pryor voting in opposition. Mayor Piercy voted in favor and the motion passed. <br /> <br />SB 476 <br /> <br />Councilor Pryor explained that the bill was related to mass transit districts and would require election of five <br />members and appointment of two members of boards of directors for the districts in metro areas with a <br />population of 400,000 or fewer. He said the position of staff was to support the bill. He voted against that <br />position and wanted to bring it to the council for further discussion. <br /> <br />Councilor Solomon asked if this bill would retain the districts that currently made up the Lane Transit <br />District (LTD) board of directors. She noted that in the past LTD had found it difficult to find representa- <br />tives for all of the districts. Ms. Wilson replied that it redefined the districts by stipulating that the districts <br />must be nearly equal in population and it added two appointed board members. <br /> <br />Councilor Solomon asked if the new districts would have the same requirements for ridership. She added <br />that LTD just recently went through a lengthy process to find someone to represent the district in which she <br />resided. Ms. Wilson replied that in the form the bill had been introduced it did not require candidates to be <br />riders. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Mayor Piercy, Ms. Wilson stated that the current position of the CCIGR was <br />a Priority 2 Support. <br /> <br />Councilor Solomon asked what the benefit of having an elected board would be. Mayor Piercy responded <br />that it related to council policy. <br /> <br />Councilor Pryor explained that his reason for pulling the bill was because he did not know if LTD <br />governance was something the City of Eugene should take a position on. He questioned the necessity of <br />“wading into the fight” if it was not necessary. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman averred that the City had a stake in the governance of LTD. <br /> <br />Roll call vote; the vote on whether to support the recommendation of the Council Committee on <br />Intergovernmental Relations to take a position of Priority 2 Support on SB 476 passed, 5:3; <br />councilors Solomon, Pryor, and Poling voting in opposition. <br /> <br />HB 2465 <br /> <br />Councilor Pryor explained that staff recommended that the CCIGR take a Drop position on the bill as it only <br />applied to schools in Hood River County and, therefore, did not affect the City of Eugene. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy stated her opposition to this bill because she believed allowing the Hood River school district <br />to establish a school on land within three miles of a UGB without adopting an exception to the State land use <br />planning goal would not be good for Eugene’s land use policy. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council March 12, 2007 Page 10 <br /> Regular Meeting <br /> <br />