Laserfiche WebLink
interested in mitigating risk related to the Roosevelt project and that was why the process attempted to define <br />some of the uncertainties at an early stage and clarify those to the greatest extent. He said the spirit of the <br />process was to be sensitive to its quasi-judicial nature but push towards its limits to achieve collaboration <br />with the City that would have mutually agreeable results. <br /> <br />Commissioner Lanning asserted that if the parties did not move forward and address some of the issues at <br />the beginning of the process it could take years to complete. He heard repeatedly from the community that a <br />lengthy process was not desired. He urged that staff be trusted to do their excellent work to move EWEB <br />and the City forward in a timely way. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman stated that City staff did not have the authority to make policy decisions or even to inform the <br />EWEB board or staff on policy issues unless it received direction from the council. She understood that the <br />council was being asked to participate so that EWEB could bring forward a master plan that was most likely <br />to achieve council approval, but that was not something that could be done. She said there was policy on the <br />books with respect to the council’s priorities for mixed use development and that should guide the process. <br /> <br />Mr. Zelenka appreciated the proposed process elements of an advisory team, facilitator, and public <br />involvement and understood EWEB’s need for sufficient revenue to move its facilities to the Roosevelt site, <br />protection of the public’s interest and the need to move ahead in a timely manner. He said the City’s role in <br />the process was very limited as currently defined and did not meet his definition of collaboration. He wanted <br />the council to have greater involvement in establishing the process, but not the content, to avoid the <br />perception of bias. He suggested that the council and EWEB board jointly select the advisory team and the <br />consultant. He also suggested eliminating policy issues in the MOU and just simply defining the process <br />and responsibilities with respect to resources. <br /> <br />Commissioner Farmer remarked that the discussion was ironic as the EWEB board initially wanted to <br />proceed with master planning but was attempting to respond to the council’s request to be involved in the <br />process with the proposal for a collaborative process. He said EWEB attempted to design a collaborative <br />process but doubted that any commissioner would object to removing any parts the council did not want <br />included. He said that EWEB had a major concern about timing and wanted an approach that enhanced its <br />changes for approval instead of being stalled in a lengthy process. He indicated that EWEB would use the <br />Downtown Plan for guidance in developing a master plan for the site. <br /> <br />Mr. Pryor recognized the delicate balance between partnership and legal propriety and observed that success <br />was often based not on what was done but how it was done. He concurred with Mr. Zelenka’s comments <br />regarding the council’s involvement in establishing the process but not the content and choosing an advisory <br />team and consultant. He agreed it would be helpful to EWEB to understand what the council would like to <br />see to avoid spending months on something that would not meet with approval. He felt the City and EWEB <br />could work together to identify some of the parameters and characteristics that the council would be <br />considering. <br /> <br />Commissioner Farmer asked if the criteria would be different from that in the Downtown Plan. Mr. Pryor <br />replied that part of the ongoing discussion could be visioning within the guidelines of existing plans. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor agreed that the council had expressed an interest in being involved in the process, but if the <br />council could not legally be involved than City staff should not be involved as staff could not speak for the <br />council. She questioned why staff would be involved. City Manager Taylor explained that staff had <br />expertise in technical aspects of the planning process, the City’s land use code, and the concepts and <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council May 30, 2007 Page 4 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />