Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
Ms. Bettman observed that questions about a bond measure only referenced a city hall and did not include a <br />patrol facility. Mr. Pack replied that while that was not shown in his presentation, the bond measure <br />questions asked of the public always referred to both facilities. <br /> <br />Mr. Clark asked what level of confidence was needed for a ballot measure to pass. Mr. Pack said that sixty <br />percent or more was realistic, but cautioned that the poll did not represent an in depth analysis of the issue. <br /> <br />Mr. Pack concluded his presentation by noting that voters' trust had eroded and the perception of the council <br />continued to be an obstacle to passing a bond measure, downtown revitalization and street maintenance were <br />top priorities although voters were not certain how to address them, location of a patrol facility was not a <br />concern as long as there was a police presence in City Hall, and efficiency, safety and fiscal responsibility <br />remained important. <br /> <br />Mr. Pryor remarked that research represented a perception, not reality, but should not be dismissed because <br />people voted based on their perceptions. He said the data brought up as many questions as it answered and <br />the council needed a better understanding of the lack of voter confidence in its performance. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman thought the survey should have asked if it make a difference to voters whether a proposal had <br />unanimous council support and why people thought the last three patrol facility bond measures had failed. <br /> <br />Mr. Zelenka agreed there was a concern about lack of confidence in the council and while that had some <br />basis in the council's performance, it also was related to decades of relentless government bashing across the <br />country that created an environment of general distrust. <br /> <br />Mr. Pack felt the council had an opportunity to change the public's opinion because it shared top priorities— <br />downtown revitalization and street maintenance and preservation—with the community and finding solutions <br />to those problems would gain community support. <br /> <br />Mr. Clark said the council had an opportunity to gain the community's trust by identifying smaller scale <br />problems that it could demonstrably solve before referring a larger solution to the transportation funding <br />problem. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy remarked that the poll results confirmed the wisdom of extending the planning horizon and <br />providing the community with more information about the proposal. She agreed there was a perception that <br />the council could not work together, but pointed out that the council had successfully passed earlier bond <br />measures related to parks and the library. She said there were a number of short-term actions that could be <br />taken to improve the downtown area to illustrate the council's ongoing commitment. <br /> <br />Mr. Penwell said that delaying the bond measure until 2010 effectively extended the planning horizon but <br />there were some issues that could not be delayed, including the deterioration of the current City Hall <br />structure and lack of space. He said staff and the design team would return in March 2008 with recommen- <br />dations for completing the planning process and intermediate steps over the next two years. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy expressed her appreciation for the community involvement process and the information that <br />had been collected. She felt that information would be valuable in other council endeavors and help to <br />inform the council's decision-making. She said it would be a challenge to determine how much repair and <br />renovation should be done to current buildings while waiting to put forth a bond measure. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 12, 2007 Page 7 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />