CC Minutes - 09/21/05 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

of everything on the site; one did not get to factor in the pond, stream, or wetland itself in the 33 percent. He added that staff found only a couple of sites where the 33 percent would apply. In those cases, staff found the regulations could allow a reduction in the setback and rerouting of the waterway while enhancing the waterway's functions. The situation arose in only the small lots, rather than the large parcels. Mr. Kelly suggested rephrasing might help with better understanding and asked for a diagram illustrating Mr. Bjorklund's remarks. He also suggested a GIS run of real world examples would also be useful. Ms. Bettman suggested that staff could address the density issue in a memorandum but she would bring it up at the public hearing. She asked what happened if the Board of County Commissioners refused to take action. Mr. Bjorklund said there was no guarantee of adoption, but if the County did not adopt something, it would have failed to have met its periodic review obligations. The board could decide to adopt something different. Staff would initiate the board adoption process following council action. B. VOTERS PAMPHLET Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, for the purpose of alerting and informing the public that the Eugene City Council has placed Measure 21-06 on the ballot, what the measure is, when the election is, where and how to vote, and important dates and deadlines; moved to direct the City Manager to expedite a neutral informational mailing in a format consistent with previous City informational mailings describing City measures, to be mailed no later than October 5. The information shall include the question and summary of the ballot measure, and a copy of the charter amendment. The information shall also include election timelines and logistics, including the dates that ballots and Voter's Pamphlets are mailed, and a Web address, and other points of access to review the Police Commission's report of July 25. This motion also allocates up to $20,000 to complete the mailing from the Council Contingency Fund. Ms. Bettman said a precedent existed in past City mailings regarding past ballot measures. She believed that the date of October 5 could be achieved. She said she would not object if the mailing occurred a few days either before or after that date. Ms. Walston suggested the potential of an insert in The Register-Guard and the Eugene Weekly. Ms. Bettman believed that would reduce the number of people who received the information. Ms. Ortiz supported the motion because it represented what had been done in the past. The council was not asking for anything special. Ms. Solomon asked what the existing City policy was, and how the motion differed from policy. She asked why the council was discussing the issue if it was the case that such information was provided in the past. Ms. Walston recalled that the issue was discussed on August 8 when the resolution to place the measure on the ballot was adopted. However, there was no motion to go forward at that time. Staff believed, on the advice of the attorney, that it would be difficult to produce a neutral piece because of the fact the election involved a charter amendment and staff could not point to facts such as what would be purchased, as occurred with a bond measure, for example. City Attorney Glenn Klein clarified there was no existing policy about such mailings, but there was past practice. In most cases, the City prepared some sort of pamphlet or brochure. He had advised on August 8 MINUTES-Eugene City Council Work Session September 21,2005 Page 6