Scobert Park - Laserfiche WebLink

New Search

HAMMITT Bob From: LYLE Les A To: NORRIS Linda H; HAMMITT Bob; WHITLOW Dave A; HILL Jim R; BRETT Tom A; ANDERSEN Chris F Cc: RIKHOFF Greg S; CHOUINARD Lauren D; MORGAN Dick A Subject: Scobert Park Date: Tuesday, September 10, 1996 1:16PM Except for several fundamental issues being unclear such as why were we here; what is consensus; who made the decision to close the park and was it truly by consensus; who represents the Ikkys group; etc, the meeting went well. Scott Meisner, Dick Morgan, two CSS officers, and I had the pleasure from 7:00 until 9:30 to hear the banter back and fourth between the two sides about where we are at this point and what is going to happen next. We all got pulled into the discussion from time to time but for the most part the discussion was between neighborhood residents. We discussed why a PS solution was not likely under normal enforcement strategies; the relationship of the administrative order to future discussions; that we had use the community organization request to close the park since they represent the neighborhood; there was clearly a division of opinion on how to best address the short and long term issues in the park (a number felt it should be closed because of the drug use while others felt it should be closed because of the damage to the vegetation, while others felt it should be left open because that was becoming the focal point for the civil disobedience and was not allowing constructive discussion to occur). So, to make a long story short, we ended with the following actions: 1. The City will not install the signs for one week to give the group a chance to address as best they can what the options are and if closer is still on the table. 2. I've asked Lauren to see if he can line up a couple of facilitators to assist the process. He has done an excellent job in the last half an hour and we are looking at a couple individuals from the UO or other resources to assist (Greg Rikoff has a couple of names he's pursuing). Mediators to facilitate the discussion. 3. A meeting is currently scheduled for Weds at 6:30 in the community center with the intial goals being to establish ground rules, representation, etc. and then I'm assuming follow -up meetings will occur for the balance of the week allotted to see if they can narrow down the options and decide how closure fits in. 4. We agreed that if no decision is made within the one week period or the process breaks down that we will move foreword with closure. Obviously, if they are making good progress and they request an extension, I'm sure we will be open to that. There was some concern that the City may have an agenda to permanently close the park and I told them as best I could that was not the case and the admin. order was very specific. I said we would be glad to make copies available. Dick, can you send me a copy again so I can get that to the facilitators. I also suggested that we look at non -City facilitators just to avoid any potential feeling our staff had a conflict of interest or hidden agenda. This afternoon, Tom Brett and others will be meeting at 2:00 to discuss how the organization will be addressing park rules, etc during this one week period. Any of you that can attend would be welcome. Earlier in the day yesterday, there was some thought that mediation might be an appropriate strategy and that was discussed at the meeting. Scott indicated at the meeting that process or approach would be too time consuming (4 to 6 wks) and so it was concluded that approach was not viable. Then, I suggested the City could help to get a couple facilitators to assist since it was evident that the person trying to play that role was really struggling. So, that's in part how that came about. Dick, if you have any other recollection, please let the group know. Sorry for the rambling in this note. I've trying to put this together on the fly between phone calls. Oh, by the way, Don Bischoff was at the meeting the entire time. Thanks Les L Page 1