It sure looks like downtown Lawrence is set to lose about 300 jobs, and City Hall is about to get a new twist when it comes to the debate over how and where to build a new police headquarters building.

The ownership group of the former Riverfront Mall has confirmed that The Results Companies has provided notice that it will not renew its lease for a call center that it operates in the building. The last information we had is that the call center employed about 300 people.

A spokesman for Florida-based The Results Companies declined to comment on the call center’s future, but did confirm the lease for the space expires at the end of August. My understanding is that a “for lease” sign will go up on the building today.

Full disclosure: The ownership group of the former mall is led by members of the Simons family, which owns the Journal-World and LJWorld.com.

“Our first thought is for the employees and the loss of jobs,” said Dan Simons, who leads the ownership group of the building. “This is a huge impact on those families, Lawrence and downtown Lawrence businesses. We will obviously try and find new tenants.”

But Simons said the loss of the call center will cause his group to put forward another proposal for the city to renovate the former Riverfront Mall into a police headquarters facility. With the pending loss of the call center, the western end of the former mall building now has 66,000 square feet of space available for purchase. The last report from a city-hired consulting firm estimated the police needed about 62,000 square feet of space.

Simons said the building is listed for sale at $5 million. Certainly, the city would have to spend several million dollars more on renovating the space, which is spread out over three floors. But, the latest cost estimate for a custom-built police headquarters is $26 million. That estimate includes covered parking for police vehicles. The Riverfront site is adjacent to a city-owned parking garage that could provide covered parking for police vehicles, if the city chose to designate the spots for that use. The land that the Riverfront building is located on already is owned by the city and is leased back to the building’s owners.

It will be interesting to see what the views of the new commission are regarding renovating an existing facility versus building new. The previous commission was inclined to follow their consultant’s recommendation that a new, custom-built facility would be most efficient for the police department. But two major factors have changed since then: Three of the five city commissioners are new to the debate, and voters rejected a sales tax proposal to fund a new police headquarters.

At the moment, I don’t see three votes on the current commission to put forward another sales tax plan. Are commissioners willing to raise property taxes enough to cover $26 million in construction? Legally, they could do so without putting the matter to a public vote, but would they? The answer to those questions are unclear. The other scenario being talked about is finding a way to restructure the city budget to pay for the $26 million project without a tax increase. But I’m hearing from some commissioners that they are concerned $26 million worth of restructuring will affect too many departments and too many city functions.

Commissioners are scheduled at their Tuesday meeting to discuss whether to create an ad hoc committee that would study the police headquarters issue and provide some recommendations by mid-November.

In other news and notes from around town:

• As previously reported, city commissioners are expected to have a debate about fire code requirements for businesses that house pets and other animals. As just so happens, commissioners at their Tuesday evening meeting are scheduled to receive a separate report that serves as a reminder that pets aren’t the only city occupants facing fire hazards these days.

Commissioners are set to receive an update on the city’s rental licensing and inspection program. As has been the case in past reports, the No. 1 code violation city inspectors are finding in rental properties is either a lack of smoke detectors, inoperable smoke detectors or smoke detectors not in the proper places.

In January and February, city officials inspected 82 rental units. During that period, they found 53 smoke alarm violations. Other major violations found included:

• Lack of GFCI electrical outlets: 40

• Lack of electrical outlet covers: 15

• Ventilation problems: 14

• Mechanical appliance problems: 11

• Electrical system hazards: 10

Thus far, city officials report that landlords are getting violations corrected in fairly quick order. During the first two months of 2015, the city found that 70 percent of violations had been corrected within 30 days and about 98 percent of violations had been corrected within 60 days.

The city also is finding that most units they are inspecting have a relatively few number of violations. About 88 percent of units inspected have five or fewer violations. Units with five or fewer violations qualify for a city incentive that will allow their properties to be inspected every six years instead of every three years.

We’ll see whether those numbers remain steady as the summer progresses. July is a big month for the rental inspection program. That’s when the city begins inspecting a whole new crop of rental units. Currently, the primary focus has been inspecting rental units in single-family zoned areas. So, think of a house that is serving as a rental. But in July, multifamily units will become a bigger part of the city’s inspections process. Think of multi-unit apartment complexes, and some of the converted houses that exist in the Oread neighborhood and other areas around the university.

It also will be an interesting few months to watch the reaction of city commissioners to the rental licensing and inspection program. Two of the three new city commissioners — Commissioners Stuart Boley and Matthew Herbert — both made statements during the campaign indicating they had some uncertainties about how well the program would work. Commissioner Mike Amyx didn’t vote for the inspection program in the first place. So, we’ll see whether the new commission shows a long-term commitment to the licensing and inspection program.