Item 4A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Ms. Taylor asked if site R was investigated. Mr. Penwell reviewed the positive and negative aspects of the site as discussed at the previous meeting. Mr. Cohen added that the proximity of the railroad and volume of rail traffic could present access problems to the site, particularly if there was a rail accident near the site. He noted that 8th Avenue was identified as a "great street" and a patrol facility might not be a compatible use. In response to a question from Ms. Piercy, Mr. Penwell said that site R was not considered one of the top sites because the City owned the site and there could be potential loss of revenue from a future sale, the concept for a "courthouse district" did not include a police facility and the site was farther away from those areas that generated the most police trips. He said the Police Commission had discussed at length the issue of whether oversight required the patrol facility to be in or close to downtown and concluded that was not necessary. He referred to the police patrol facility site selection criteria set forth in agenda item summary Attachment A. Ms. Ortiz commented that she supported a separate patrol facility and preferred that it was located in an area of the community with a higher crime rate. Mr. Clark said he was inclined to support site E, although he thought the facility should be located in downtown to better address public safety problems in the downtown area. He hoped that eventually a precinct model would be adopted and site E could represent a step in that direction. He wanted to see a substation north of the river at some point in the next few years. He supported site E because it was the police chief's recommendation and appeared to be the most financially prudent choice. Mr. Pryor said he would favor a site the City already owned, such as site R, but the need for a patrol presence in downtown could be met by a precinct facility; a patrol facility had a more logistical use and it made sense to locate it on site E near support services. He thought that site R, which was near the river, could be put to better use than a police patrol facility. Ms. Piercy pointed out that there was a police substation at the downtown LTD station. Mr. Penwell added that the new city hall was planned to include a substation as well. Mr. Cohen noted that patrol represented about a third of police functions; the remaining two-thirds would remain in City Hall. Ms. Taylor stated that the police chief should be in the same facility as patrol. She did not feel the patrol facility needed to be close to the City's fuel and maintenance facility. She did not understand why the Police Commission was providing advice on the matter and wanted the council to discuss during the next budget cycle whether the commission was still necessary. Ms. Bettman asked what would happen to the two-thirds of the police department located in City Hall when the bond measure failed and there was no new City Hall. Mr. Penwell said it would be up to the council; the patrol facility and City Hall had been considered together in a single project and any new direction would be a policy decision of the council. Ms. Bettman objected to removing the patrol presence from downtown. She said that any type of develop- ment in downtown, including a patrol facility, would be more expensive. She encouraged consideration of MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 17, 2007 Page 6 Work Session