CC Minutes - 07/23/03 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

during the budget process but opined that the City was not "good at setting aside rainy day funds." He averred that, should the City Council not opt to tackle this project in a timely fashion, it would regret it. He agreed that this was an optimal time for construction contracts as there were many people looking for work. Mayor Torrey remarked that moving the houses did not seem to be an endeavor that would make the City money, but it would provide an opportunity for Iow-income housing. Continuing, Mayor Torrey said that the area this particular fire station was going to provide services to was an area that had a growing population of senior citizens. He stressed that this area had the fastest growing population in the City, with the exception of the Bethel area. Mayor Torrey solicited a second round of questions and comments from councilors. Mr. Kelly concurred that Fire Station 11 was needed. He wondered if there was any value in waiting until the risk analysis was completed prior to making a final decision on the placement of the station. Chief Tallon replied that Santa Clara, the urban growth boundary, Lane Rural, and Highway 99 had a critical transition of annexed properties and this required an urban level of services for the area. He explained that a temporary risk analysis, made and then validated by a consultant, said that adding this substation represented an improvement of fire coverage. He added that an ongoing issue was whether there still existed a vacuum of services in the northern part of the City. He predicted that the risk analysis would lead to a recommendation that more stations needed to be constructed in this area to meet the needs of its burgeoning population. In response to further questions from Mr. Kelly, Chief Tallon explained that the Lane Council of Government (LCOG) fire station site review had been used when placing this station. He stressed that, even with Fire Station 11, the River Road area was underserved, but the site that had been chosen had been shown, nonetheless, to provide the best coverage possible for the areas it served. Mr. Kelly voiced reluctant support for the station. He reiterated that he had felt "left in the dark" with regard to the available funding. Ms. Bettman registered her opposition to Option B. She felt that Option A, the GO bond, should be "step one," and that the public could be made to understand the need for Fire Station 11. She expressed a preference that the fire contract savings be applied to staffing the facilities. She suggested that furnishings could be purchased with General Capital Project funds. She added that moneys from the aforementioned fund could also be used to bring down the amount of the proposed GO bond. She stressed that, looking at the multi-year financial plan, the City was facing more budgetary shortfalls for Fire and Emergency Medical Services. Mr. Meisner commented that it was a misnomer to think that the Lane County Home Builders Association was the sole lobbying force against SDCs in the State Legislature. He noted that the democratic representative from this area was opposed to SDCs. Regarding Option A, Mr. Meisner stated that he would support a GO bond if he believed that the public at large would vote for a bond to build a localized fire substation. As it was not likely, he MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 23, 2003 Page 4 Work Session