Laserfiche WebLink
would be a backup plan for the current City Hall site, but would remain supportive of the project as a <br />whole. She agreed with Mayor Piercy that the question was not whether a new city hall should be built, and <br />she reminded the council that it was far more aware of problems with the existing building than the public <br />was. She felt that a bond measure could be in jeopardy if the City did not fix potholes first and hoped that <br />the council would support whatever recommendations the subcommittee dealing with transportation system <br />financing brought forth. <br /> <br />Ms. Ortiz indicated she would support the motion. She said that during the council’s Community <br />Committee on Race meetings, the subject of a cultural center was frequently raised, with communities of <br />color expressing a desire for a place to hold events. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman agreed that the current City Hall needed to be replaced and City services, now scattered in <br />various places, should be consolidated into one building, but that should include police services. She would <br />vote against the motion. <br /> <br />Mr. Zelenka liked the current course and agreed with the need for a new city hall. He commended <br />consultants for a very effective and innovative public involvement process. He said he still preferred to have <br />polling occur earlier in Phase 3A, although that did not mean it would stop at that point; it could better <br />inform and direct activities through the remainder of the phase, including more aggressive public outreach. <br /> <br />Mr. Zelenka offered a friendly amendment to move the focus groups and polling ac- <br />tivities to the beginning of the process with a check back before proceeding with the <br />rest of Phase 3A. <br /> <br />City Manager Taylor said it appeared that Mr. Zelenka was asking for an assessment of the situation at the <br />beginning of the process to establish a baseline, but the design team preferred to develop more refined data <br />about issues that would inform the design concept. He said the more general polling requested by Mr. <br />Zelenka might be in addition to the tasks proposed in the scope of work. <br /> <br />Mr. Cohen said the proposed schedule was intended to be flexible and could accommodate Mr. Zelenka’s <br />amendment. <br /> <br />Mr. Zelenka said his amendment would change the schedule and was substantially different than the focus <br />groups and polling activities originally proposed. He wanted those activities to remain but tasks added to <br />obtain a snapshot of current strengths and weaknesses and political issues at the beginning of the process. <br /> <br />Ms. Ortiz accepted the friendly amendment. Mr. Pryor as second accepted the <br />friendly amendment if the intent was understood to be the addition of supplemental <br />polling activities to the scope of work at the beginning of Phase 3A as preliminary <br />research, not shifting those activities from elsewhere in the phase. Mr. Zelenka <br />agreed that was his intent. <br /> <br />Mr. Clark echoed Ms. Solomon’s remarks. He said it was wise to proceed with good planning, but he could <br />not support any next steps with the City Hall until the backlog of road maintenance had been addressed as a <br />much higher priority item. He agreed with Mr. Zelenka that it was appropriate to consider the larger <br />political spectrum of the County and assess public opinion with regard to the City Hall project. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council February 14, 2007 Page 4 <br /> Work Session <br />