CCMinutes - 08/09/04 Mtg - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved to table the amended motion to September 29, 2004. Mayor Torrey called for discussion on the amendment. Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Nathanson, moved to amend the motion by chang- ing the date to September 13, 2004. Councilor Kelly believed there was adequate time on September 13 to discuss the issue. Councilor Nathanson supported tabling the amended motion because she believed it demonstrated the councilors were negotiating in good faith, and because Springfield had yet to take action on the issue. She hoped the council had sufficient information and some options to consider when the September 13 discussion occurred. She reiterated her interest in a solution that was acceptable to all the parties involved, and one that gave the community the ability to start the study on the right foot. Councilor Pap6 did not like the delay being proposed but indicated he would support the motion for the reasons stated by Councilor Nathanson. With the reassurance that the council would have a full discussion and the ability to entertain amendments to the main motion on September 13, councilors Bettman and Taylor indicated acceptance of Councilor Kelly's amendment regarding the date as a friendly amendment to the motion to table. Councilor Poling said he would support the motion to table solely for the purpose of being able to offer a motion for reconsideration at the next meeting on August 11, 2004. Mayor Torrey expressed disappointment at the delay being proposed but acknowledged the concerns expressed by Councilor Nathanson. He agreed it would be better if the full council embraced the study and was able to move forward with enthusiasm. However, he was concerned that there was an attempt being made to ~kill" the study. He hoped his concern was misplaced. Mayor Torrey noted that absent Councilor Scott Meisner indicated his support for approving the funding for the study, leading to the potential the motion could be reconsidered on August 11. He did not understand what was so complicated about the issue. Councilor Kelly noted his earlier submission of an alternative motion to the staff-suggested motion, and would have voted to move forward had that language been found acceptable. Speaking to the Mayor's earlier remarks that the community knew how to conduct such a study, Councilor Kelly said if the community knew how to do such a study, the chamber's study would have not %at on a shelf." The base methodology of the study did not provide what many considered to be good data. Councilor Kelly noted the roundtable's support for the study as well as for the completion of the Natural Resources Study and upland wildlife habitat land study. He said that for some members of the roundtable, their support for the commercial/industrial lands support was contingent upon completion of the Natural Resources Study. He asked staff to return to the council on September 13 with a proposal regarding how MINUTES--Eugene City Council August 9, 2004 Page 14 Regular Session