City Council Work Session 3/8 (Dog and Smoking Ban)

DOGS

Taylor: met most of her friends through dogs??

Clarke: doesn’t know how he’s going to vote. Factors: issue about people, important people have right to bring dogs, but also freedom to not be afraid downtown, persuaded by downtown business people. Wants to address the bigger issues underlying downtown issues. Nibbling around the edges. Willing to think about it knowing that it sunsets in November.

Syrett: likes to walk dog downtown, so personal impact. Not about trying to fix all the social justice issues, but targeting an acute issue downtown. Not just targeting a specific group of people. Concerned that Lane County Dining Room included in the map and wants to exclude from map. Willing to support as a pilot project if Dining Room excluded.

Pryor: Not trying to use dogs as a way to get people he doesn’t like from downtown. Wants to try this downtown because it has worked elsewhere. Agrees on excluding Dining Room.

Poling: On first reading, thought it was a bad idea. Dogs not the problem, blaming dogs when they are product of their owners. Concerned about the large concentration of ‘unruly’ dogs. Willing to support as a pilot project. Not a panacea. Asked for by the EPD, hasn’t voted against anything EPD has asked for.

Semple: Against it. What are the benchmarks? Excludes homeless people because they can’t put their dogs anywhere. If you don’t want people to be there, give them somewhere else to go.

Evans: pass

Vinis: Agree about the dining room. Dogs can be unpredictable – it’s not just the ‘unruly’ dogs

Taylor: Doesn’t know what it means that ‘it worked’ in the university district. Going to feel very unfriendly for visitors to have EPD come up and ask if they live there and if not, dog can’t be there.

Clarke: If justification is safety, then excluding the dining room doesn’t make sense. Believes in the too crowded argument, but not sure it’s really worth it. Also, in summer, people may be more likely to leave dogs in cars. Yikes! Doesn’t want to add something else for EPD to enforce that is difficult to enforce.

Zelenka: Need many tools for downtown. EPD asked for this, so they believe it can be enforced.

Semple: XXX

Syrett: Will be watching for impacts on other neighborhoods due to displacement. Supports dining room exemption.

Taylor: Dogs will just be somewhere else. Also concerned about dogs in cars in the summer. Also businesses that allow dogs.

Evans: pass

VOTE: poling zelenka Pryor syrett Evans Clarke support

taylor semple oppose

SMOKING

Semple: If we make exemption for bars, then it is not about health

Clarke: Absolutely against. Bad for businesses that invested a lot when no one else would. Even if exempted, people will think that you can’t smoke downtown and won’t come. Doesn’t think there is science on secondhand smoke outdoors.

Taylor: Push people out much like the other ordinance. Do not support.

Syrett: Supports it. Helps people quit, smoking leading cause of preventable death in Lane County (?). Smoking in public not constitutionally protected. Doesn’t believe businesses shut down because of indoor ban.

Pryor: Desire to help people versus individual liberties. No clear idea of whether secondhand smoking outdoors.

Zelenka: Believes it a public health issue. Torn about the civil liberties issues and concerned about pushing people to other zones.

City Manager: People outside the zone can opt in to the ban. Can apply to opt out. Have not put together the administrative rules.

Zelenka: Opt-out would take care of businesses

Poling: Opt-in/Opt-out will be very confusing. Not going to support it. Wants to take serious action to address the real behavioral issues downtown.

Vinis: Pilot program, so if end up with checkerboard then we know that it doesn’t work.

Clarke: More nonsense about the indoor smoking ban. THIS HAPPENED 13 YEARS AGO??? Want to get more people to live downtown — smokers will either have to smoke in their houses or not move downtown. Put family members in danger.

Semple: What will the benchmarks be? Drinking, cars more dangerous. Cigarette tax goes to the state and city gets money back.

Evans: Public health issue. Sensitive to bar/restaurant owners. Short term, pilot project. In favor of opt-out.

City manager: there are outdoor smoking studies.

VOTE: zelenka evans syrett SUPPORT

Clarke Taylor Pryor Semple Poling OPPOSE

Thanks to Cait for the notes!

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s