New Search
process would be different from the norm in that all along the way the process would be transparent. He <br />hoped that the people and his staff could see the transition from the initial material taken for analysis to the. <br />fmal result. He reiterated that all input would be accepted through the entire process. <br />City Manager Taylor declared that this plan would not be left on any shelf. Chief Lehner added that the <br />plan would use traditional planning language but sought to be able to fit directly into the budget document. <br />Ms. Ortiz reiterated the need for transparency in the process and the resulting plan. <br />In response to Ms. Rygas, Chief Lehner said there would always be competition between divisions for <br />General Fund dollars. He said the difficult decisions lay in the difference between response and <br />prevention. He stated that the EPD did two things: helped people by responding to calls and it tried to <br />prevent crime. He thought the crime prevention part was the critical piece involving the community and <br />posed the question of how much of this prevention fell upon the shoulders of the police. He noted that the <br />school resource program, which he called a critical public service, was one form of crime prevention. He <br />added that generally speaking one dollar spent today on crime prevention saved five to seven dollars down <br />the road. <br />Ms. Rygas suggested that any program that could be linked to cost. savings in public safety. should clearly <br />be linked. She said this would provide some programs with more tenacity when in competition for limited <br />resources. <br />City Manager Taylor agreed, adding that was what he hoped the plan would do. <br />.Chief Lehner remarked that some cities' police departments were engaging in recreation-style crime <br />prevention programs. He thought a better approach was to leave such a program under the purview of the <br />division in charge of recreation. <br />Mr. Peters commented that the federal budget seemed to hold a potentially devastating impact on <br />community policing. He wondered if there were things that the committee members and private <br />individuals could do to lobby against it. Chief Lehner responded that it was too late. He said the primary <br />shift of federal funds occurred when the current administration took office which was followed by the <br />tragic events of September 11, 2001, which then channeled even more of that funding into "Homeland <br />Security." He stated that almost all of the remaining funding for crime prevention, anti-drug, and <br />community policing programs had been cut and shifted to Homeland Security programs. He explained that <br />police chiefs nation=wide were very vocal in their opposition. He added that there were still modest federal <br />funding potentially available for partnerships that worked on crime-prevention and skill-building, but they <br />paid a penny on the dollar. <br />The committee adjourned at 9:01 p.m. <br />(Recorded by Ruth Atcherson) <br />M.•120051Central Services DepartmentlBudget Committeelbc050222.doc <br />MINUTES-Eugene Budget Committee February 22, 2005 Page 19 <br />