Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Ms. Bettman asked if the Council Chamber could be isolated from the rest of the building. She thought if <br />it could be separated it could be put to a bid, sold, and possibly moved. <br /> <br />Ms. Cooper presented the public involvement process. She stressed the importance of meaningful and <br />appropriate involvement at each phase. She listed the public participation core values, as follows: <br /> <br />. To seek a public voice in things that affect lives. <br />. It includes the possibility to influence the outcome. <br />· Everyone has a voice, including thc decision-makers. <br />· It facilitates involvemcnt of those atlected by the outcome. <br />. The public needs to decide how they will participate. <br />· The public is provided information on which to base decisions. <br />· The public needs to know how they intluenced the outcome. <br /> <br />Ms. Cooper provided an overview of Public Participation Spectntm and Tools, an attachment included in <br />the council packet. She next reviewed the Public Involvement Draft Plan Phase 2 .... Development. She <br />underscored the teanl's desire to initiate the process as soon as possible. Regarding Component 1, she <br />said the first step would seek to develop a list of 40 to 50 people in the community to engage in a <br />stakeholder process, providing them with an overview of the issues and hoping to gauge their level of <br />interest in the existing building or moving to a new structure. She indicated that Component 2 - <br />Community Forum was the primary way to exchange information and vet the resulting decision. She <br />reviewed the Community FonuJl Model. She notcd that money had to be part of the equation. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly thought the recruitment criteria spoke against having an "average" person at the forum. Ms. <br />Cooper replied that it was important to select names carefully. She noted that a person did not have to <br />meet all of the criteria, rather the criteria served to identify thc areas of high interest. <br /> <br />Ms. Kennedy underscored that this was to give direction to what would be fleshed out in November 2006. <br />She asked if the ideas that had been presented were things the council would like to see developed for <br />future consideration. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy expressed concern about the parts of Eugene that remained disengaged. She said it would <br />be important to figure out how to engage and move the people. She noted that the Bethel area was a <br />sizable block that would vote against any money issue. <br /> <br />Ms. Cooper indicated that there was a wide range of levels of public relations. She likened the public <br />outreach to cars and said they could provide the "Lambergini" of campaigns should the elected officials <br />desire it. Mayor Piercy responded that she would not want the cheapest model for a campaign but wanted <br />to ensure the model that was being rolled out was sustainable. <br /> <br />Ms. Cooper commented that the team would look at how well this process tied into the Neighborhood <br />Initiati ve. She wanted to ensure this process helped to build know ledge of how to work with the City. <br /> <br />Mr. Pryor remarked that the greatest complaint on public processes was that they lacked sincerity and that <br />the decision looked like it had already been made. He wished to stress to the public that the decision had <br />not been made at this point. <br /> <br />Ms. Cooper commented that some decisions would likely have to be made initially. <br /> <br />MINUTES-Eugene City Council <br />Workshop <br /> <br />October 19, 2005 <br /> <br />Page 9 <br />