Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Chief Lehner said the relationship between police administrative functions and the remainder of City Hall <br />were stronger and more direct than the administration’s relationship with the line staff. He did not <br />personally direct operations, but rather set the policies carried out by Command staff that affected <br />operations. With regard to a separate building, as long as the administrative function was close to City Hall, <br />it did not matter if it was in a separate building. The one place there were interrelationships between the <br />future precinct model and the options was in terms of sizing. The time frame of the discussion did not affect <br />that issue significantly. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly said his question was somewhat broader; he was also asking the chief’s position on which of the <br />four options he preferred and why. Chief Lehner said any option would work for the department to deliver <br />police services; the most efficient approaches appeared to be options B, C, and D. All three were better than <br />Option A. He believed the best balance between cost, benefit, and relationship on a broad scale was <br />represented by Option B. <br /> <br />Mr. Pryor saw a tradeoff between the public interface and internal access in each of the options; Option C <br />appeared to create the best balance, without creating a negative balance between internal and external <br />access. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé determined from Mr. Cohen that the options had not been weighted and that the consultants saw <br />that as a task for the council. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman asked if the consultants had looked at the cost of travel time for patrol staff to reach the <br />location of police administration. Mr. Wilson said yes; he pointed out that with regard to travel, the patrol <br />officers would be in the field already. There would be some travel required for commanders to meet with the <br />chief, and one of those individuals was already not in the downtown area now. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé determined from Mr. Cohen the consultants assumed the Forensics Unit would remain in its <br />current location. Mr. Papé did not want the fact the unit was housed in its own building now to influence <br />the outcome of the issue. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman recalled that the Forensics Unit was to be housed separately on a temporary basis and then <br />reunited with other police functions once consolidation of those services occurred. She questioned the <br />assumption that the function would stay in the building in which it was currently housed, as the building was <br />built to accommodate other uses once consolidation occurred. Mr. Wilson said at the outset the consultants <br />considered the facility and determined that forensics was a function commonly located away from the police <br />headquarters location. Its relocation could be explored, but it was a function which did not need to be <br />located downtown. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé thought the Forensics Unit should be reflected on the bubble diagram. <br /> <br />Responding to a question from Ms. Bettman about how the options could be narrowed into an option that <br />would be forwarded to the voters in the form of a bond measure, Mr. Cohen hoped to narrow down the <br />options as the public process moved forward. During the summer, the consultants would test a few models <br />with the public and potentially, there might be multiple approaches for the voters to consider. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council March 8, 2006 Page 4 <br /> Work Shop <br /> <br />