CC Minutes - 10/26/05 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ms. Solomon conveyed her continued support for the WEP. She expressed concern that taking the WEP off the table would increase the acrimony, given that more than half of Eugene voters had voted in favor of it twice. She said the council should not dismiss the will of the voters. She also did not think it should be taken off the table. She indicated her willingness to work with an entity such as the Oregon Consensus Group in order to pursue other options but not at the expense of what had already been invested in the WEP. She did not believe the present vote would preclude inclusion of some kind of amendment to the WEP that might be the result of such a process. Mr. Kelly agreed that there were transportation problems in west Eugene and he also agreed that the WEP was not the solution to those problems. Regarding Ms. Solomon’s suggestion that the collaborative process could be worked on in parallel, he asserted that staff and technical resources were not available. He remarked that he would prefer to apply staff and technical resources to a project that might be built in his lifetimes. Mr. Kelly requested that the aerial photos supplied in Mr. Stiles’ presentation be enlarged to facilitate reading them. He also asked that the maps be posted on the ODOT Web site. Continuing, Mr. Kelly said he did not take the will of the voters lightly. He opined that the project before the council was not the project the voters had approved. He noted that a portion of the WEP was slated to be maintained by the City of Eugene and this had also not been approved by voters. Mr. Poling supported the WEP because the voters had supported it, 50.9 percent voting in favor. He noted that over 60 percent had voted not to consider any more alternatives. He averred that elected officials were obligated to respect the will of the voters. He did not think the City had the staff or resources to look into other alternatives. Mr. Poling pointed out that in the City of Veneta alone there had been over 900 housing starts approved recently and 120 of them were under construction. He averred that most of the people who lived out there moved from the Eugene/Springfield area because of high housing prices but still worked in this area. He th underscored that West 11 Avenue was not the most desirable way to get into town. Mr. Pryor called it an interesting collision between principles and practical consideration. He reiterated that it had been voted on twice. He averred that many elections were close and it did not matter that the vote was only a 50.9 percent majority. He felt he would be abrogating his responsibility as a councilor if he did not recognize the will of the voters, “by ever how slim a margin” the election had been won. He acknowledged that the WEP could be tied up for “years and years.” He said no one should kid themselves that voting the WEP down at this point would kill the project. He insisted, as representative of the ward for which the WEP would mitigate transportation problems, that these transportation problems must be addressed and solved. Mr. Papé concurred with Mr. Poling, Mr. Pryor, and Ms. Solomon that the council should respect the will of the voters. Regarding the integrity and value of the WEWP, he understood there to be two very different qualities of wetlands and the wetlands that were north of the railroad tracks were of a lesser quality. He asked staff to speak to this. Mr. Corey deferred to Mr. Stiles. Mr. Stiles stated that in 1997 there was a qualitative difference in wetlands and there was a greater net takings of wetlands north of the railroad tracks but they were of a lower quality. He related that his firm MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 26, 2005 Page 8 Work Session