Laserfiche WebLink
Councilor Lee asked if the board was comfortable with proceeding. Mr. Berggren said yes, and that the board <br />understood the degree of uncertainty it faced. <br /> <br />Councilor Rayor asked about the concerns expressed by the board's president about the proposal. Mr. <br />Berggren said that the board president's concerns were generally philosophical; he did not believe EWEB <br />should compete with the private sector and was concerned about the potential provision of content. He noted <br />the board president had joined the rest of the board in approving the resolution calling for the system, but <br />continued to have the same concerns. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey said he opposed "giving away" the charter responsibility each councilor agreed to uphold when <br />they took office. He believed the council was prepared to enter into an MOU with EWEB and he did not <br />oppose that. However, he opposed the use of the charter amendment process because of the rigidity of that <br />process and the difficulty of changing the charter. He asked the council to grant an MOU to EWEB. <br /> <br />Responding to a question from Councilor Taylor, Mr. Berggren reiterated that the board did not think it <br />would have the needed authority to negotiate with a private sector partner without the charter amendment. He <br />did not think the board would proceed if the City Council decided to support an MOU, suggesting that instead <br />the board would consider what other actions it could take. He did not think EWEB would be able to discover <br />the best business relationships if its private sector partners did not think it could do the work that needed to <br />be done. <br /> <br />Councilor Meisner asked Mr. Klein how EWEB would be in a different negotiating stance with an MOU. <br />Mr. Klein said that he thought the authority given EWEB by an MOU would be the same as that granted by a <br />charter amendment, and equally defensible. He recognized, however, that the issue was one over which there <br />could be a legitimate difference of opinion. <br /> <br />Councilor Meisner asked Mr. Berggren if any private party had indicated reluctance to negotiate under the <br />authority of an MOU. Mr. Berggren said he could not state that specifically. He said that EWEB's counsel <br />had a different view than City counsel as it related to the precedential strength of the charter versus the MOU <br />approach. He believed that a private party would view an MOU as having a higher degree of risk because it <br />was granted at the political will of the council. Charter authority would be more clear. He emphasized the <br />board's commitment to a full public process. <br /> <br />Regarding the mayor's concerns about the charter, Councilor Kelly said he would be more concerned if the <br />amendment was longer and more complicated. He believed the provision of telecommunications services was <br />a natural evolution of EWEB's service package. <br /> <br /> Roll call vote; the motion passed, 5:0. <br /> <br />11. ACTION: AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE 2000 HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE TRACKING <br /> INSTRUCTIONS <br /> <br />Glen Potter of the Fire and Emergency Medical Services Department was present to answer questions. <br /> <br />Mr. Wong said the council would consider Council Bill 4723, an Ordinance Adopting the 2000 Hazardous <br />Substance Tracking Instructions. <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 28, 2000 Page 18 <br /> Regular Meeting <br /> <br /> <br />