My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC Minutes - 04/28/98 JEO
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Minutes
>
1998
>
CC Minutes - 04/28/98 JEO
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 10:28:25 AM
Creation date
8/16/2005 9:53:46 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Minutes
Meeting_Type
Joint Elected Officials
CMO_Meeting_Date
1/1/1998
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
documents entitled "PSCC Goals, Outcomes, Strategies, and Benchmarks" and "Public Safety <br />Coordinating Council Proposed Levy Items" distributed with the agenda of the meeting. <br /> <br />Mr. Cornacchia reviewed a prioritized ranking of programs proposed for inclusion in the <br />recommended levy described in a draft spreadsheet dated April 28, 1998, distributed at the <br />beginning of the meeting. He explained the process followed to develop the recommendation. <br /> <br />Mr. Cornacchia said that he believed "threshold questions" which needed to be answered before <br />he could support a proposed levy included: (1) Would there be unanimous support from <br />jurisdictions for a levy? (2) Would there be other revenue measures proposed on the same <br />ballot by other taxing bodies? <br /> <br />Mr. Cornacchia requested other elected officials who were members of the PSCC to express <br />their views. <br /> <br />Mr. Tollenaar said that he did not believe developing a levy proposal completed the work of the <br />PSCC because it should continue to serve as a planning organization, seeking increased <br />effectiveness and efficiency in the public safety system. He suggested that the programs <br />proposed to be supported by a public safety levy were a good prioritization of the needs of the <br />system. He said he did not believe revenue ballot measures to support a new library and <br />parkland acquisition under consideration by the City of Eugene would compete with a public <br />safety levy. <br /> <br />Springfield City Councilor Stu Burge said being part of the PSCC had been an enlightening <br />experience. He said he believed all of the programs proposed for support by a levy had merit, <br />but that they should be broken into segments acceptable to voters. He said he believed capacity <br />programs needed to be included in a levy for it to be approved by voters. <br /> <br />Eugene City Councilor Laurie Swanson Gribskov said she believed the prioritized list of programs <br />proposed for a levy were a "work in progress" and that some could be phased in to reduce costs. <br />She said she was pleased with the attempt of the PSCC to balance proposals between those <br />providing system efficiencies, prevention, and capacity. <br /> <br />Springfield City Councilor Maureen Maine said she was concerned that the need and purpose of <br />programs proposed to be included in the levy be clearly conveyed to voters. She said the <br />highest priority of the levy should be capacity because while prevention/intervention programs <br />can be funded through private, nonprofit organizations, jail capacity cannot. <br /> <br />Lane County Commissioner Bobby Green said that the intergovernmental agency cooperation on <br />the PSCC was unique throughout the State. He said he believed prevention programs needed to <br />be adequately supported by a public safety levy and that the total tax being requested needed to <br />be clearly understood. He said the Board of County Commissioners could not support a public <br />safety levy alone. <br /> <br />Lane County Sheriff Jan Clements said he believed the total amount of a proposed levy was <br />critical; that outcomes of programs to be supported by it needed to be clearly identified; that <br />additional work to determine the interdependent nature of proposed programs needed to be <br />completed; that if the measure did not pass, it was possible that "double majority" votes would be <br />required for any proposals for the following two years; that prevention programs were not <br />effective without adequate jail capacity; that support of treatment programs was essential to a <br /> <br />MINUTES--Metropolitan Joint Elected Officials April 28, 1998 Page 3 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.