CC Minutes - 06/14/99 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Rayor suggested that the council provide the program elements identified by staff to the PSCC. He said that Eugene had an electorate that supported public programs. He believed that if the measure had passed, the council would not be having the discussion it was having. Mr. Rayor did not want Eugene to pull out of the PSCC effort; he believed Eugene should address its shortage of police officers, for example, in that context. He did not want to discuss the specifics of the program proposed by staff at this time. Responding to a question from Mr. Kelly, Mr. Torrey acknowledged that the PSCC would have to prepare a measure for both the September and November ballots to assure a November election in the case of a September election failure. He did not think there was support on the part of the PSCC for such an approach. Mr. Kelly indicated his opposition to a property tax base measure if the City were to place a measure on the ballot. Mr. Kelly said he did not wish to discuss a City ballot measure until the PSCC had finalized its recommendations. At that time, the council could discuss it, and wait for the results of the election. He said he would be interested in a discussion of the program options in the context of the council's goals and as complementary to the PSCC's efforts. Mr. Pap6 concurred with Ms. Nathanson's remarks regarding further community output. He wanted to get away from discussion to implementation of community policing, and that would require funds. Mr. Pap6 expressed interest in the results of the PSCC survey, and said he wanted the City to remain involved in the PSCC effort and bring that to a successful conclusion. He agreed with Mr. Johnson that the voters would want to know what the City would use any revenues from a PSCC measure for. Mr. Meisner disagreed that the successful passage of the November 1998 levy would have precluded tonight's discussion. Mr. Johnson concurred. Mr. Meisner said that, for example, the measure did not address funding for additional City police officers. Mr. Meisner pointed out that for any PSCC measure to be successful, it must pass in Eugene. If the County measure without revenue sharing went first and passed, it was unlikely the City would have another chance to pass a successful measure for community policing. Mr. Meisner said for that reason, the City must be proactive in letting the PSCC know what it really needed in terms of programming and funding. Ms. Nathanson said that she would rather start to work on an implementation plan for the Community Policing Program. She thought the document outlining the program elements was a great document, and moved the City closer to program implementation. She suggested that the council might want to assign priorities to the items in the document because it could give the City an opportunity to identify and take advantage of sources of matching funds or grants. Ms. Nathanson believed that the community would be very interested in the document. Mr. Torrey announced that there was space on the June 30 agenda for further discussion of the proposed programming. He reiterated that without further information about how any money would be used, the public would not support a ballot measure. Mr. Kelly suggested that staff presurvey the council on the program items identified by staff to focus the work session. Ms. Nathanson suggested that approach did not allow the councilors to benefit from each other's points of view. Mr. Meisner favored Mr. Kelly's suggestion as it would merely order the discussion, not MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 14, 1999 Page 4 5:30 p.m.