My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2010
>
CC Agenda - 05/24/10 Meeting
>
Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 12:30:13 PM
Creation date
5/21/2010 12:33:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
5/24/2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
42
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />Responding to a question from Ms. Solomon, Ms. Weiss indicated that the process proposed by staff reflected some <br />of the elements of the Cheyenne model mentioned in the packet materials; however, the principles and outcomes were <br />generated by staff with a focus on Eugene. She said staff provided the Cheyenne example because it had been <br />inspired by some aspects of it and wanted to share it with the council. It was not a traditional planning document. It <br />was very user friendly and not just to those interested in land use but to the entire community. Ms. Weiss said the <br />Cheyenne model addressed both vision and implementation. While she thought the City’s existing plans had great <br />goals and good policies, Eugene did not have a lot of clarity around its vision. She noted that Cheyenne had also <br />spent considerable time on the implementation element of its plan. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy noted the council had received a link to the Cheyenne plan, which she found interesting. <br /> <br />Mr. Pryor liked the idea of employing the elements of the Cheyenne model that worked best. He also recommended <br />staff to employ those elements of the Eugene Decisions process that had worked. He cautioned against giving people <br />the false sense that their suggestions would be automatically implemented and wanted staff to be clear the City was <br />asking for input as opposed to a decision. He said the goal of improved understanding of common goals and <br />community vision would require multiple steps over a significant amount of time. Mr. Pryor was interested in seeing <br />how staff connected the dots in the final planning document. <br /> <br />Mr. Poling liked many of the ideas from the Cheyenne model and encouraged staff to glean what it could from it. He <br />expressed concern that the process had the potential of taking on a life of its own. He was also concerned that the <br />council tended to see the same people offering public input, and while he appreciated their input, he wanted to see <br />some new faces. He approved of the draft principles and outcomes as a starting point. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy urged staff to be clear about what the City was trying to accomplish and what the necessary steps <br />were, and to say it in enough ways that it would be heard by as many as possible. Speaking to the nature of citizen <br />participation, Mayor Piercy suggested that some people were just more involved than others and people participated <br />in different ways, leading to multiple tools to facilitate that participation. She encouraged staff to consider using <br />media opportunities to extend an invitation to citizens to participate. <br /> <br />Ms. Ortiz expressed appreciation for the citizens the council heard from on a regular basis, but wanted to challenge <br />the “usual suspects” to bring someone new with them to an ECLA forum. She suggested that the templates for each <br />neighborhood might be different depending on the level of citizen input. She asked if citizens could suggest code <br />revisions. Ms. Gardner anticipated that such suggestions could come through the Infill Compatibility Standards <br />project as well as the Strategic Neighborhood Action Plans. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor asked questions clarifying the steps remaining to be completed in the ECLA. She did not want the <br />process to preclude citizens from offering viable options to the City. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy did not want the public conversation to be too broad or too narrow. She said that the Eugene <br />Decisions process had been a broad one but it was conducted several years ago and it was time to check back in with <br />the public on the policies it wanted guiding the community. She wanted ECLA to inform the decision-making <br />process rather than drive it. Mayor Piercy thought the council’s policies needed to be the lens through which the <br />council addressed the supply questions that came from ECLA, rather than vice-versa. She said if the council chose to <br />adjust those policies that required another discussion. She suggested the real question was how the council wanted <br />the community to look, and how it could address the community’s’ needs within that policy context. Mayor Piercy <br />said the council needed to have some agreement about that policy lens before it went to the citizens to ask their <br />opinion. If the council had disparate ideas about what it was trying to accomplish, she anticipated a problem. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—City Council October 12, 2009 Page 4 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.