Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Oregon had expressed concern with the structure of voting members and responsibility for decisions about the citizen members of the ACT. She said 1000 Friends was recommending that ACT membership be proportional to population and that the Board of Commissioners had authority over the private citizen member appointments. Ms. Piercy said the goal of the FACT-LC was to achieve a high level of consensus on issues. In response to a question from Mr. Clark, Ms. Wilson said the council would have an opportunity to vote on the ACT proposal before the Board of Commissioners forwarded its recommendation to the OTC. Mr. Clark asked how dispute resolution among jurisdictions would be addressed. Mr. Zako replied that one of the elements required by the legislature was a conflict resolution process the ACT would use to produce equitable outcomes. He said that limited resources were available to implement the ACT and the initial goal was to have a functioning ACT that met the spirit of legislative intent. Establishing operational details, including conflict resolution, would be part of the ACT’s work plan. He said the ideal for resolving disputes was to make decisions by consensus, but recognized that might not always be possible and the FACT-LC would discuss a resolution process at its next meeting. He said that the Lane County legislative delegation, OTC leadership and neighboring ACTs were being kept informed of the progress with the expectation that the FACT-LC would be informed if its direction was inconsistent with legislative intent. Mr. Clark stressed the importance of an explicit process that allowed for expeditious conflict resolution. Ms. Piercy said FACT-LC members were united in their desire to achieve agreement and avoid disputes. Mr. Zako added that the ACT was an advisory body, unlike the MPC, which was a decision-making body. Ms. Solomon asked for clarification of Highway 126 East membership on the ACT. She also asked why there was no rail representative. Ms. Wilson said the purpose was to provide representation for an unincorporated area that would not have a natural representative, such as a city, on the ACT. She said some members could have rail interests. She said the FACT-LC did not want to limit membership to specific targets or issue areas for ex officio members because interests and issues could shift over time and the ACT’s membership should have the flexibility to reflect current conditions. Mr. Zako said the legislature also wanted ACT membership to be primarily elected officials who represented people; the six citizen members were intended to be drawn from different modes and other interests affected by the transportation system. The ACT would decide from among applicants for those positions who would best fill those gaps. Mr. Brown asked why the ACT would be an improvement over the current process if it was only an advisory body. Mr. Zako said the intent was to establish a process that was more inclusive, particularly of small cities and transportation interest groups. It would not fundamentally change the current process, but rather make it broader. Ms. Wilson said the County competed with other ACTs in the State for funding and an ACT would make Lane County more competitive by reflecting a broad range of interests that determined regional priorities. In response to a question from Mr. Brown, Mr. Zako said the ACT planning process was being funded by the County and ACT operations would be funded by ODOT. Ms. Taylor felt that there should be a rail representative on the ACT. She asked who would appoint the citizen members. Ms. Wilson said appointment authority had not yet been determined, although the proposal was likely to be for the ACT to select citizen members. MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 12, 2010 Page 5 Work Session