tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5666195730630249633.post2067105615826732904..comments2024-03-25T17:49:41.408-07:00Comments on Salem Breakfast on Bikes: City Council, February 6th - Police Station Work SessionSalem Breakfast on Bikeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15618055627843335993noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5666195730630249633.post-30699079352389150462017-02-04T20:38:08.996-08:002017-02-04T20:38:08.996-08:00I have been asking people what they think about wh...I have been asking people what they think about what it would take for them to vote for a new police bond. These people range from, I really follow this issue, to I know nothing but what I read in the paper, to I have heard and read something about the topic, but not studied it.<br /><br />They all say one thing....this is the part that surprised me....the parking garage is a deal breaker. A garage no matter how big the police building is, is not needed.<br /><br />Second most common comment was that the size is too big. Building for 40 or 50 years is foolish. No one knows what policing or Salem all be like in 20 years, let alone 40 years. Build small now (75,000 sq ft) and then as Salem grows add precincts. No one liked the idea of central location of all services. To them that was asking for problems if there is a quake. One person pointed out that even if the police were in an earthquake proof building, with all the other old buildings around them going to fall down, they would not be able to get to and from that building. There were various suggestions about where they would rather see the police locate. One was with Marion County jail, so there could be a helicopter pad, another on Mission where they would be close to the airport and the National Guard, and the last was on Hawthrone and D St where there is access to the freeway. <br /><br />Other general comment was that unless the entire bond were in the 60s they would assume that there was waste or asking too much.<br /><br />Most were aware that there were other needs in Salem and this bond would take up the taxing ability (unless the rate was increased yet again). They mentioned schools, fire and streets as bonds they were sure would be coming sooner rather than later. Someone feared that taxes would go back up to $2.02 per thousand from the now $1.01 per thousand. <br /><br />My suggestion is that the City Council do some real conversation with regular people in the community before they do more proposing. Having a hearing is necessary, but it does not get to the average voter. <br /><br />The timeline is tight for them to get the bond on the May ballot, but if the councilors and the city were to use some innovative methods they could get a better sense of what people want and will vote for. If they are thinking that they can 'sell' their idea conceived in secrecy and sprung on the public by just spending more on the campaign (yes, this is happening and not just an allegation) then the bond will go down again. We can't afford this. Salem needs a new police station as soon as possible. By not talking with average people (as compared to 'stakeholder') they are running the risk of losing both the bond and the faith of the citizen.<br /><br />The discussion is moving in the right direction with cutting down the size of the police building and by adding some seismic work, but it is not there yet. <br /><br />The matrix that you propose is very clear and would be an excellent way to get movement in the right direction.Susann Kaltwassernoreply@blogger.com