Laserfiche WebLink
· Option A: Allows the City to build a new Community Safety facility that would meet current <br /> needs with internal financial resources. Some of these resources were still subject to final liti- <br /> gation. <br /> · Option B: Takes Option A and adds elements taken from the civic visioning exercise, both the <br /> charette and the Mayor's Civic Center Visioning Committee, and would include additional <br /> space for private non-profit victim service providers in the Community Safety building, allow <br /> for expansion of the downtown park blocks, and provide some streetscape improvements along <br /> 8th Avenue. This would require asking the voters for a $12.6 million general obligation (GO) <br /> bond in November. <br /> · Option C: Shows what a 20-year community safety facility would look like including Civic <br /> Center amenities, considered the ideal Community Safety Center with full consolidation and <br /> room for expansion and accompanied by two financial strategies, C 1 and C2. <br /> · Option D: Shows the cost of replacing all of the functions that currently exist in City Hall as <br /> well as consolidating the other City office function located in the downtown area. This option <br /> included two new buildings to be constructed on current City-owned land. Some additional in- <br /> ternal funding was possible in this scenario based on some ongoing contributions to the facility <br /> reserve over time. <br /> <br />Mr. Carlson commented that, while Option D was optimal in resolving all of the downtown space needs, <br />staff was recommending the more modest incremental step outlined in Option B. He added that all of the <br />options were within the debt policy limits passed by the Budget Committee, but Option D would leave the <br />City without very much capacity for additional bonded debt in the short-term He noted the July 21 work <br />session would focus on the potential bond measure. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey called for a motion on the issue. <br /> <br /> Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Poling, moved that the council adopt the <br /> ~major policy principles" proposed by the Mayor's Committee, as revised. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey solicited council comments. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner anticipated that he would support the motion. He thought the wording %onsolidate civic <br />functions" was unclear. He wished it to clearly state that one of the goals was to combine City offices. He <br />remarked that he had not heard unanimity regarding the placement of other government partners in the <br />building, but he had heard unanimity regarding the consolidation of City functions. <br /> <br /> Mr. Meisner offered a friendly amendment to change the language, as fol- <br /> lows: <br /> ~Consolidate civic City functions in and around the future Civic Cen- <br /> ter...'' <br /> The maker and second of the motion accepted the friendly amendment. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner was uncertain whether the inclusion of housing opportunities needed to be a stand-alone policy <br />principle. He questioned whether it was appropriate to situate housing next to the courthouse or the police <br />station. He wondered if this was the intent of the policy principle. <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 14, 2004 Page 2 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />