Laserfiche WebLink
MEASURE NO, 20-88 MEASURE NO. 20-88 <br /> ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION TO REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION <br /> BALLOT MEASURE 20-88 TO BALLOT MEASURE 20-88 <br /> <br />Before voting on th~s $6,790,000 bond measure you should ask: V~ctims of violence can't wait for he~p. To put the design of a new C~ty <br /> Hall before their needs is dangerous. <br />Is this the best and highest use of limited tax dollars at this t~me? <br /> <br />Can the city do a better job of leveragmg limited funds to replace Measure 20-88 is about addressing a major crime problem: domestic <br />deteriorated and outdated civic facilities? violence and abuse. We may not be able to stop the hurt, but with Measure <br /> 20-88 we can help with the healing. <br />Two years ago Council approved construction of a new building to move <br />police and forensics staff from sub-standard conditions in the City Hall Measure 20-88 creates a Crime V~ctims' Resource Center that puts local <br />basement at a cost of $4.1 million. That was an emergency and we agencies in one location--providing safe access to advocates, treatment <br />addressed it. <br /> programs and support. <br />There is almost unanimous agreement on Council that City Hall needs <br />replacing, but it is not an emergency-- we have time to plan and budget Measure 20-88 is NOT a vote for a new police station or a City Hall <br />prudently. <br /> Measure 20-88 is about making Eugene a better place, not just for victims <br />Replacing City Hall will be expensive. The most responsible approach is of crime, but for our whole community. It ~ncludes improvements to our <br />to save as much money as we can for a down payment from internal city downtown Park Blocks that host Farmers' Market, Saturday Market, and <br />funds, to minimize the impact on property taxes, celebrations - all part of our Civic Visioning Plan. <br />The proposed bond measure is fiscally irresponsible It jeopardizes future <br />attempts to replace City Hall by completely depleting available internal By voting "yes" on 20-88, you choose how we handle the ~mpact of violent <br />city funds ($29,000,000) to build only a police station. Other c~ty services crimes, beginning where it counts most' by helping those who need it <br />and staff will remain in the outdated and deteriorating City Hall. That most. <br />$29,000,000 would be more wisely spent as a down payment on a new <br />Civic Center complex. A new Civic Center should provide buildings for Domestic violence and abuse destroy lives. Victims cannot wait. Measure <br />all the city services presently housed in City Hall (including the police 20-88 ~s a vote to help wcbms of violence and to make Eugene better. <br />department), space for on-site wct~m's services,as well as consolidating Vote YES on Measure 20-88~ <br />services currently scattered ~n rented space. <br /> Prepared by Voters' Pamphlet Committee <br />This bond ~s shortsighted because it provides police space needs for in Support of Measure 20-88 <br />only 10 years, and almost $2,000,000 will be spent on projects that do Eugene Mayor J~m Torrey <br />not contribute to replacing City Hall, such as street modifications. Eugene City Councilor George Poling <br />Replacing City Hall should be our highest capital pnonty. Cheryl O'Neill <br />A more responsible solubon to replace our detenorating civic infrastructure <br />is to defeat this measure and return to the voters in 2006 with one bond <br />measure that provides a fully articulated bluepnnt to house all downtown <br />c~ty services, including police and vlcbm's services, and offers a generous <br />down payment from the c~ty's internal funds to reduce the burden on the <br />taxpayers. We encourage you to vote no on this measure. <br /> <br /> Prepared by Voters' Pamphlet Committee <br /> in Opposition to Measure 20-88 <br /> Eugene City Councilor Bonny Bettman <br /> Eugene City Councilor David Kelly <br /> Cary Thompson <br /> <br /> (This space provided ~n accordance with EC 2 994(1)(b) ) (This space provided in accordance with EC 2 994(1)(b) ) <br /> <br /> The pnntmg of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by the The pnnbng of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by the <br /> C~ty of Eugene, nor does the City of Eugene warrant the accuracy or truth of City of Eugene, nor does the City of Eugene warrant the accuracy or truth of <br /> any statements made any statements made <br /> <br /> 12 <br /> <br /> <br />