06/10/1981 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e e e Mr. Obie asked if the County could subcontract with other agencies to provide services. Mr. Whitlow stated that now they do not plan to subcontract the service but there is a gO-day withdraw period if the City is not pleased with the services. Mr. Obie asked if that would be put in the contract. Mr. Whitlow responded that he did not know if the subcontracting issue could be addressed in the agreement. Mark Pangborn, Lane County Management Analyst, stated that the County had not envisioned subcontracting the services at this time, although they had con- sidered that at one time. If in the future they change their minds, the County will come back to the City of Eugene and discuss it first. Mr. Obie asked if that could be part of the agreement. Mr. Pangborn responded that it could. Mr. Hamel stated that he has received calls from concerned citizens regarding the reliability of service by contracting with the County. Some citizens feel that a 90-day termination agreement would not be sufficient. Mr. Gleason stated that the City Manager's Office would monitor the goals and the performance contract. If the performance goals are not met, then staff will meet with the County to discuss any problems. The contract could be breached if neces- sary. Then, the City would be in the enforcement business, which is something the City is capable of doing. This agreement allows the City to set its own standards and provides for the easiest way to deal with the situation--from admini strator to admini strator. Ms. Smith asked, in regard to enforcement, how the number of employees compares to the current situation. Mr. Whitlow stated this would be equivalent to what the City has now--four employees who would be working just for the City of Eugene. Mr. Whitlow stated that currently officers have been issuing 20 to 25 citations per month. Mr. Lindberg stated that the City has just taken over the ambulance business and had wisely developed a contingency plan which proved to be necessary. He asked what would happen if after evaluation, inadequate service was occurring for animal control. He is concerned that administrative, financial, and political problems could occur and asked what contingency plans have been developed if the City had to resume provision of the service. Mr. Whitlow responded that some plans have been developed. The City could take over enforcement on very short notice. In regard to the shelter, however, each of the three jurisdic- tions owns a portion of the facility. He would like to consider this in more depth and bring back a report. Mr. Gleason stated that Mr. Whitlow is correct that having the City resume the service would be difficult, but that does not mean it could not be done. The City has the budget and program setup which could be used if necessary. To implement the program, the City would need to use a number of resources. That is why this alternative was recommended. The City could enforce its own poli- cies and goals and then work out the details of the structures, which would be more complex and may make the goals harder to achieve. Ms. Miller stated that another related issue is a concern from the Management Board of Tri-Agency in regard to gift (abandoned) animals, which are given to a shelter in hopes that they will be adopted. The City and the task force want MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 10, 1981 Page 7