Laserfiche WebLink
wanted to see a smaller, more cost-effective proposal. Mr. Rayor believed it would be a mistake <br />to locate a police facility anywhere other than on a half-block near City Hall. <br /> <br />Mr. Farr agreed with Mr. Rayor's remarks. He supported going back to the voters in November <br />with another ballot while the City had some momentum on the issue, and to provide the voters <br />with more precise information on where the stations might be and what they might look like. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner suggested that rather than focusing on a election date, the council focus on the need <br />and on a plan. He wanted to offer the public a careful and deliberative process that informed <br />residents about the need and how the costs were determined. Mr. Meisner said that November <br />might be the best date for a ballot measure but feared it was too soon, and the results would <br />mirror the May results. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner supported going to the voters with a bond for a police headquarters first, adding it <br />was not because it was more important but because City Hall could be remodeled to <br />accommodate the Fire Department if the Police Department was moved out. He also supported <br />identification of a specific site, thinking the appearance of the structure was less important to <br />voters than the site. He said that use of a City-owned site, for example, would cut the cost, and <br />let residents know the council was serious about building in a cost-efficient manner. He <br />suggested that use of a nearby site could reduce parking needs in the shod-term and costs. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner agreed with Mr. Rayor about the need for a comprehensive examination of City <br />space needs downtown. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly said that the survey had been interesting but no dominant reason for the measure's <br />failure stood out to him. He thought the measure offered to the public had been reasonable and <br />did not want to go back to the voters with a scaled-down measure as it was not supportive of the <br />extensive work done by the Police and Fire Stations Task Force, staff, and the consultants, and it <br />would cost the council credibility with the voters. He said that a smaller facility would be <br />inadequate almost immediately. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly said that the City should steer away from any communication with the public that <br />advocated rather than informed. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly said that he would rather "do it right than do it fast" and suggested that the council <br />could overcome the turnout limitations created by Ballot Measure 50 if it decided to postpone <br />placing a measure on the ballot past November. He liked Mr. Meisner's idea of a police-only <br />approach, including the costs of retrofitting City Hall to accommodate the Fire Department's <br />space needs. He said he was most interested in options that addressed space needs and <br />efficiency. If the options included seismic retrofitting, he needed information on how that was <br />financed and how staff prioritized the seismic retrofit in terms of other capital needs. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly said that he would also be interested in more information about an option that involved <br />a fire-only measure with a seismic upgrade to City Hall and police expansion into the existing Fire <br />Department space. He acknowledged that option would not give the police the space the <br />department needed. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap~ believed that if the council did not deal with the space needs of the fire and police <br />departments soon, it was not meeting its responsibility as a council. He believed the last <br />measure failed because of a lack of time for a public information campaign, competition with <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 7, 2000 Page 4 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />