CC Minutes - 02/22/99 Mtg - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Meisner supported the amendment. He wanted the master plan to be updated and the council to have a chance to review the plan, recommended changes, and the implications of those changes before the project went forward. The amendment to the motion passed, 5:1; Ms. Nathanson voting no. Returning to the subject of Ms. Nathanson's proposed addition to the CIP, Mr. Reinhard noted that it was not common to include such text without accompanying funding, and suggested that a small amount of the $140,000 set aside by the Budget Committee for traffic calming and street lighting could be dedicated to that purpose. Ms. Nathanson did not support such an approach because it would undermine the intent of the Budget Committee by diluting the funding available for traffic calming. She said that she would give the issue some thought and propose an amendment at a future time. Ms. Nathanson noted she was already on the record with her remarks. Mr. Johnson said that a project did not have to be in the CIP to be funded. Mr. Rayor moved, seconded by Ms. Taylor, to amend the motion by deleting $800,000 in capital improvements to serve the Riverfront Research Park until completion of a planning study to review and consider changes to the Riverfront Research Park development plan and subsequent approval by the Urban Renewal Agency for the proposed improvements. Responding to a question from Mr. Klein, Mr. Rayor indicated it was his intent to delete the funding. He confirmed it would require council action to restore the funding. Mr. Klein suggested that Mr. Rayor reword the motion to indicate the council was simply removing the funding at this time. If he wanted to express the intent to restore the funding, it was more appropriate to so through another motion at a future time. Mr. Rayor withdrew his motion. Ms. Taylor withdrew her second. Mr. Rayor moved, seconded by Ms. Taylor, to amend the motion by deleting $800,000 in capital improvements to serve the Riverfront Research Park. Ms. Nathanson expressed her preference for the initial motion because it explained Mr. Rayor's intent and placed any expenditure on hold until the other conditions were met. She asked if passage of the amendment sent a signal to some who would be less careful about understanding the council's intent and would interpret the funding as "gone for good." Mr. Kelly agreed. He suggested that Mr. Rayor consider constructing his motion to tie the action to a specific staff direction. Mr. Klein concurred, saying it would clarify what would happen in the future. He said that the initial motion had been unclear in that it did not explain what happened upon completion of the planning study: was the money restored when the plan was completed and accepted? Mr. Rayor withdrew his motion. Ms. Taylor withdrew her second. Mr. Rayor moved, seconded by Ms. Taylor, to amend the motion by deleting $800,000 in capital improvements to serve the Riverfront Research Park, and furthermore to direct staff to work with the University of Oregon on developing a process for completing a planning study to review the Riverfront MINUTES-Eugene City Council February 22, 1999 Page 10 7:30 p.m.