Laserfiche WebLink
believed those individuals were working in the best interest of the whole county. Councilor Solomon said <br />Springfield and Eugene had the same need to identify the amount of available land. She said Eugene was <br />one member of a partnership. She believed the study represented the way local government should work <br />together. <br /> <br />Councilor Nathanson said she tended not to support the amendment because she thought it very important <br />the study have public respect and confidence. The lack of confidence expressed by councilors suggested to <br />her the process was starting out wrong; that attitude would call into question all the conversations about the <br />study's results. However, she was concerned that postponing action would lead to the council attempted to <br />micromanage the study. She said that the Eugene council would be substituting its judgment for that of the <br />professional managers and writing into the document the council's own needs and not considering the needs <br />of its partner jurisdictions. Councilor Nathanson asked City Manager Taylor for input, and how the process <br />could move forward if the council insisted on developing the study's criteria. <br /> <br />City Manager Taylor said the council could postpone its decision and reschedule it for September. The <br />council could review the relevant materials via e-mail before that time and take action, avoiding the need for <br />a work session. If the council wanted to schedule a work session, it had time available on several dates. <br /> <br />City Manager Taylor advised the council to pass the motion and work with the partnership on the details, or <br />schedule the item for final action on September 13. <br /> <br />Councilor Nathanson indicated she did not want a council work session and as she wished to avoid getting <br />~deeper in the swamp" about the study scope, criteria, methodology, objectives, and desired outcomes, <br />particularly in the absence of partner input. However, she wanted to find a solution that satisfied all the <br />concerns expressed by councilors Bettman, Pap~, and Kelly. <br /> <br />Councilor Taylor indicated her opposition to the motion. She agreed with Councilor Bettman that there was <br />no emergency, and wanted the study to be done right. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman suggested a work session would address the last question asked by Councilor Nathanson, <br />that of how to address the concerns expressed by councilors. <br /> <br />Councilor Pap~ said that, like Councilor Nathanson, he did not want to micromanage the study. He asked <br />Mr. Roberts about the role of EcoNorthwest and why the firm was not mentioned in the materials before the <br />council. Mr. Coyle indicated the firm was a noted one that did such work, but the firm had not been granted <br />the contract. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap~ thought the stipulation in the amendment for an RFP and board review satisfied the concerns <br />expressed by councilors and would also serve to keep the issue in the public eye. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman clarified that the information regarding EcoNorthwest was provided by Mr. Roberts to <br />the Board of County Commissioners. Mr. Roberts had recommended to the board that the firm be hired. <br /> <br />At the suggestion of Councilor Kelly, Mr. Coyle invited Mr. Roberts to address the council regarding the <br />topic. Mr. Roberts indicated the rationale for his recommendation that EcoNorthwest be hired was to ensure <br />there was no community perception that the partnership had conducted the study. He thought the study <br />produced by Mr. Duncan was perceived as biased by some because of the chamber's sponsorship. He did <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council August 9, 2004 Page 12 <br /> Regular Session <br /> <br /> <br />