CCMinutes - 01/12/04 Mtg - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

livability. He related that the City of Eugene had disbanded the local housing standards in 1983. Since that time, the issue of reestablishing such standards had arisen but to no avail. He asserted that people were living in unacceptable conditions with faulty plumbing, nonexistent weatherization, and dangerous wiring. He emphasized that these conditions needed to be addressed. John Saemann, 1775 Adkins Street, agreed that the downtown area needed to be a safe place for the public. He felt the requirement for a permit for a gathering of 25 or more people included in Ordinance 20303, while well-intentioned, would not prevent "undesirable" persons from harassing people. He opined that the expansion of the existing "exclusionary zone" to most of the downtown area could be misused by local authorities to stifle legal protests and spontaneous gatherings. He added that the office that issued the permits was not open seven days a week. He urged repeal of this ordinance language. David Duemler, 820 East 36th Avenue, stated that he visited the Soviet Union years ago and witnessed what it was like for people to live without certain basic freedoms. He commented that democracy was not an "absolute" and that the country could either more closely approach democratic ideals or it could fall further away. He opined that it was important to maintain high standards for freedom of speech and freedom of assembly, and important that nothing be done to place an undue burden on these freedoms. He thought there could be a range of reasons that 25 or more people could gather and, in certain cases, obtaining a permit was just not feasible. Dawn Peebles, 2715 Jefferson Street, expressed outrage at the section of Ordinance 20303 that would require a permit for a gathering of 25 or more people. She felt it would give the power to grant a permit to a not-for-profit coalition of downtown merchants and this was in violation of First Amendment rights. She thought the council had been well-intentioned when passing the ordinance, but felt it should be reviewed to ensure the people had the rights they were granted under the Constitution. Lorraine Still, 83076 North Bradford Road, Creswell, stated that she had appeared before the Lane County Board of Commissioners in June. She related that the LCARA Task Force held unadvertised meetings. She asserted that this was in violation of the public meetings law. She requested that the outcome of the report be thrown out as a result of this alleged violation. Robert Still, 83076 North Bradford Road, Creswell, said that he and his wife helped start the Eugene Kennel Club in 1948. He noted that he had provided packets of information for the council. He asked that they read the attached disposition of dogs taken to LCARA. He felt the council should ask why more kennel runs were needed when, allegedly, adoptions were going up and the number of impounded and euthanized dogs were going down. He maintained that the number of dogs that were reported to be euthanized was inflated. He advocated for repealing the law that limited animals and getting rid of the differential in licensing costs for intact animals and animals that were spayed or neutered. Flo Brewer, PO Box 186, Junction City, opined that "66 new codes" were a lot of changes. She explained that she and three others had conducted a private audit of the LCARA budget. She alleged that LCARA purchased four computers per year in the last three years. She maintained that money was carried over to the new year's budget. She felt this was in contrast with the claim that money was '~tight." She stated that during the Eugene 2002 budget review, there were requests for financial records from LCARA that, to her knowledge, had not been provided. She strongly recommended that these records be obtained and an independent audit be conducted. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 12, 2004 Page 4 Regular Meeting