Laserfiche WebLink
influence voters there not to support the public safety district, as they would perceive their jail needs as <br />having been met. <br /> <br />Sheriff Clements supported general purpose governments, but recognized that property tax measures had <br />caused an inequity between expenditures and revenues. He predicted a variety of benefits would accrue <br />from the formation of such a district, and that the EPD would still have authority in the areas it wished to <br />have authority in such as the Interagency Narcotics Enforcement Team (INET). <br /> <br />Commissioner Green voiced his support for general purpose governments over single purpose governments. <br />He said the Board of County Commissioners tried to be all things for all of the County residents as a general <br />purpose government. He stated that, with full funding, this would not be a problem. Demands, however, <br />had exceeded revenue. <br /> <br />City Manager Taylor raised the problem of compression. He noted that the City of Cottage Grove had <br />already reached compression. He asked what the role of the Public Safety Coordinating Council (PSCC) <br />was and how its work plan to look at system gaps and needs was being utilized. <br /> <br />Commissioner Green said compression was a reality that the commissioners would have to address. He <br />thought a public safety district would not put the local jurisdictions into compression. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor related that she had heard that the State had taken back responsibility for the parole and <br />probation departments in some cases. Sheriff Clements replied that the State had taken it from some <br />counties, but was not likely to assume the responsibility in the case of Lane County. He noted that, when <br />the State did so, those counties lost the revenue for those services. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor asked if the County would eliminate the fees for park usage if there was more money for public <br />safety through such a district. Mr. Green said it was a consideration. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman expressed concern that a public safety district would only increase taxes. She opined that <br />separate jurisdictions increased the ~layers of bureaucracy." She suggested that the current budget be <br />reprioritized and that other revenue sources be explored. She asked why the commissioners would not seek <br />an advisory vote prior to seeking an amendment to the Metro Plan and presenting it before the Lane County <br />Local Government Boundary Commission. Commissioner Green called this a good suggestion. He felt that <br />past history indicated a situation so dire, he felt fairly certain what the vote would be. He predicted that <br />asking the people if they wanted public safety would net a ~yes" vote and asking them if they want to pay <br />for it would net a ~no" vote. <br /> <br /> Mr. Kelly, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to extend the discussion by <br /> five minutes. The motion failed, 4:2; Ms. Bettman and Mr. Kelly voting in <br /> favor. <br /> <br /> Mr. Meisner, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to extend the discussion by <br /> ten minutes. The motion passed, 4:2; Ms. Taylor and Mr. Kelly voting in <br /> opposition. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly opined that something fundamentally different needed to happen in how services were provided. <br />He noted that prevention and treatment were the best long-term usage of public safety dollars. He <br />recommended a significant increase in those components of public safety be incorporated into the district. <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 15, 2004 Page 4 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />