CC Minutes - 07/23/08 Work Session

Metadata

Thumbnails

Annotations

In response to a question from Ms. Ortiz, Mr. Alsup affirmed that the MHCRC had made a flow chart that delineated the options a person in crisis would have. Ms. Ortiz remarked that different people had different ways of addressing things and there was no set standard for what worked best for anyone. Ms. Ortiz lauded CAHOOTS, saying that it was “obvious” it was a good program. She recalled that CAHOOTS had applied to put a second van in Springfield, but the City of Springfield opted not to support it. She commented that if it was “already clogged” in Eugene with one van, where would the people go with two vans? She felt the problem needed to be addressed systemically. Mr. Alsup said often the CAHOOTS team could solve the initial problem and keep people from going into incarceration. Ms. Bettman echoed the previously expressed gratitude for the four departing commissioners. She appreciated the detail on both the Use of Force Policies and for the work of the MHCRC. Regarding the taser policy, she had heard from a constituent that indicated that departments were utilizing tasers with video cameras on them. She thought this would aid the perception of transparency in the process for the community. Mr. Alsup affirmed that some tasers had video and audio capacity. Mr. Denner said they would have a trial with four that had video capacity and four that did not. He stated that tasers with video capacity added to the bulk and weight on police utility belts. He explained that the video was only active once the taser was out of the utility belt and was activated. Ms. Bettman asked if the subcommittee looked at having video capacity included on all tasers. Mr. Alsup replied that this was why the trial was set up to compare the two types of tasers. He underscored that they were trying to ascertain the benefits of the video option. He was uncertain whether the downside of that bulk and the finite time it would be recording would be outweighed by the benefits. Ms. Bettman asked where the police siting options were in relation to the City Council’s timeline regarding a new city hall. Police Chief Bob Lehner recalled that when the most recent discussion regarding a new city hall had been held, part of the materials included an element of assistance of a consultant to look at and evaluate different sites. He related that the Police Commission was asked if it would take on an advisory role and a facilitation role in terms of increased public input into the process. In response to a question from Ms. Bettman, Chief Lehner clarified that the Police Commission had been asked to assist by the council and this was an add-on to the process. Ms. Bettman asked if the committee’s work would transpire prior to the council’s consideration of site options. City Manager Taylor affirmed that it would. He said there would be workshop on September 26, after the council break, and this process would provide assistance through the consultants to follow on the adoption of the work from the last council work session on this item. He felt it would provide additional information consistent with the concept that was explained to the council at the last workshop. Ms. Bettman asked if the council had ever definitively, by a motion or action, defined the sites for a patrol facility as within downtown. City Manager Taylor replied that the council had not. He thought the position now was to look for a site outside of the City Hall complex. Ms. Bettman said she knew it was thought to be outside of City Hall but she had not realized that sites outside of the downtown area were being considered. MINUTES—Eugene City Council July 23, 2007 Page 6 Work Session