CCMInutes - 06/28/04 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Papd wanted to see more flexibility in the Metro Plan. Because of the difficulty of revising the Metro Plan, Mr. Papd thought different approaches to service delivery needed to be considered. He pointed to the Tualatin Fire District as an example of regional service delivery he would like the local community to be able to replicate. At this time, the Metro Plan did not allow for that, and the community was further constrained by the financial limits imposed by past ballot measure such as Ballot Measure 5 and Ballot Measures 47/50. Mayor Torrey suggested a subcommittee of the local elected officials be brought together to discuss the topic. He did not want to break up the local land use compact if that could be avoided, but thought Springfield had legitimate concerns that needed to be addressed. He did not think it was necessary for the amendment process to take so long. Mr. Kelly, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to direct the City Manager not to expend City funds or staff time and resources for an LCOG study of the use of special districts to pro- vide urban services or for processing a Metro Plan amendment initiated by the City of Springfield or Lane County regarding special districts. This motion would not prohibit rea- sonable use of staff time to review and consult with staff of Lane County and Springfield on these matters. Furthermore, any proposed amendments should be specific to Springfield. Mr. Kelly said that while his motion spoke to the staff resources expended by Eugene staff, it did not preclude Springfield staff from picking up the telephone and asking Eugene staff a question. Mr. Kelly acknowledged Mr. Papd's long-time interest in the formation of a fire district but pointed out a council majority did not share that interest. Mr. Kelly also acknowledged that the DLCD intended to review Senate Bill 100 and consider possible changes, but that was a two- to three-year process. He thought it was premature to make amendments to the Metro Plan in anticipation of the outcome of that process. Mr. Kelly and Ms. Taylor accepted a friendly amendment from Mr. Meisner to change the word %hould" to %hall" in the last sentence of the motion. Mr. Meisner questioned whether the motion should be revised to provide either Springfield or Lane County with the authority to initiate a site-specific amendment. Responding to a question from City Manager Taylor regarding the intent of the motion, Ms. Bettman said the intent of the motion was to narrow the City's scope of involvement in the study to be conducted by LCOG and initiated by Springfield. Ms. Bettman welcomed Commissioner Bobby Green to the meeting. Mr. Pap~ expressed concern that the motion was restrictive and unfriendly to Eugene's partners in the land use compact. He continued to advocate for sufficient flexibility in the Metro Plan that ensured most urban services were provided by cities but did not foreclose the possibility of other approaches. Ms. Nathanson expressed concern that, through the motion, the council would be sending a message that did not reflect its intent. She said if it was council's intent that it did not want to pursue such changes for Eugene, she wished to state it differently. Ms. Nathanson suggested a motion directing the manager not to MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 28, 2004 Page 6 Work Session