Laserfiche WebLink
late to have an impact on the budget for fiscal year 2005. Mr. Carlson indicated he would give the <br />issue some thought. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman said that any work the City did with the University should focus on reducing the Citys <br />= <br />costs, particularly in the realm of public safety. <br /> <br />Referring to the objective related to addressing the needs of the communitys most vulnerable, <br />= <br />Ms. Bettman clarified that her intent was that the council would reprioritize allocation of all of the <br />Citys resources to fill funding gaps in light of the failure of Ballot Measure 28, the economic <br />= <br />downturn, as well as threat of war and the costs of addressing protests, bias crimes, etc. She <br />said that how the City would meet increased needs in human services was not mentioned. Those <br />items that were reflected in the materials were not even raised by the council. For example, <br />continuing the youth levy was not mentioned; her comments had been focused on the needs of <br />low-income seniors and low-income youth. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman said that the priority related to a delivery of library services to nonresidents was a <br />regional issue and should be categorized as such. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman said that the action priority related a review of existing City resources allocated to <br />human services needs included a milestone that had already been accomplished by the Human <br />Services Commission. She did not want to redo that work. She reiterated that she was not <br />talking about refocusing the existing allocation. Her focus was on all City resources. <br /> <br />é <br />Mr. Poling agreed with Mr. Paps comments about holding another half-day session involving the <br />= <br />new City Manager. He thought it would give Mr. Taylor a good sense of the councils goals and <br />= <br />how councilors worked together. <br /> <br />Ms. Solomon requested clarification on what the work plan would become in light of todays <br />= <br />conversation. Mr. Carlson said that he perceived no consensus on those four objectives or <br />consensus on how to address them. Staff had not included every bit of input that was put on the <br />charts or discussed by individuals, but rather came back with priorities that might be achievable <br />and that fit in the context of the four objectives on which the council reached tentative agreement. <br /> Today staff was receiving more input on how to proceed. He stressed that the input was from <br />individual councilors, and at some point the council would need to move past that to consensus or <br />a majority vote on what it wanted to achieve in the coming two years. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey said that he considered the councils goals to be the councils equivalent to the <br />== <br />Mayors State of the City address. He recommended that the council officers get together to <br />= <br />determine how they wanted to structure the next session, and when it should be. He agreed there <br />was no consensus on any of the objectives that were discussed. He believed that the council <br />could get to consensus if it was willing to work together outside the meeting setting. As an <br />example, he recommended that Ms. Solomon describe what she would like to see the City <br />achieve and talk to her fellow councilors about it. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey solicited a second round of council comments. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner agreed that consensus was not reached on any of the items, but he believed that <br />generally staff had missed the point in its summary, which made it difficult to see where <br />A@ <br />agreement was reached. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTESEugene City Council March 12, 2003 Page 10 <br />C <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />