CC Minutes - 07/23/08 Work Session

Home Browse Search

The motion to amend failed, 5:3; Ms. Taylor, Ms. Bettman, and Mr. Zelenka voting in fa- vor. The main motion passed, 5:3; Ms. Taylor, Ms. Bettman, and Mr. Zelenka voting in opposi- tion. Ms. Ortiz, seconded by Mr. Pryor, moved to schedule a public hearing on an ordinance concerning the Police Commission. Ms. Bettman observed that the Citizen Review Board had been changed to the Civilian Review Board. She noted that the proposed ordinance contained language that referred to members of the Police Commission as citizens and asked if that was intentional. She asked if they wanted to replace the word ‘citizen’ with ‘civilian.’ She wanted to know whether there was a requirement for members of the Police Commission to be a citizen. Mr. Denner replied that members were required to live within the city limits. Ms. Bettman averred that ‘citizen’ had a legal definition and suggested that inclusion of that word made it a criterion to be a citizen. She thought they needed to find a different word. City Attorney Jerry Lidz said he did not think the word ‘citizen’ in the ordinance would make citizenship a requirement. He noted that the Police Commission had been in existence for eight years and he did not believe anyone had suggested that citizenship was a requirement. He pointed out that if Ms. Bettman wished to change the word ‘citizen’ to ‘civilian’ it would be no trouble to do so. Ms. Bettman indicated that she would like to consider using a word other than ‘citizen.’ She expressed concern that the word ‘citizen’ could deter someone from applying for the Police Commission. Ms. Bettman suggested that the CRB liaison be considered a member of the Police Commission instead of adding another member to it. Ms. Ortiz concurred. Ms. Taylor also agreed and asked if the council should make a motion to that effect. City Manager Taylor recommended waiting. He suggested that staff prepare it as options for the motion in the Agenda Item Summary (AIS) at the time. Ms. Bettman offered a friendly amendment so that the language referring to the Police Auditor making periodic reports to the Police Commission would say “shall” and not “may.” The maker and the second accepted the friendly amendment. Ms. Bettman cited language the indicated that the “member appointed from the Civilian Review Board shall assist in redirecting any complaints received about employees.” It seemed to her that it was the obligation of the City staff and EPD staff to ensure that complaints were officially forwarded to the Police Auditor. She said when she served on the Police Commission, people came to the public forums with complaints and she felt appreciative that commissioners would forward complaints. She thought the language was misleading because it did not reinforce staff’s obligation to forward complaints. Mr. Denner stressed that the intent of the Police Commission in recommending this language was to provide a friendly response to someone who was upset with customer service and not necessarily just a staff response. He said it was not intended to keep staff from redirecting that complaint. MINUTES—Eugene City Council July 23, 2007 Page 9 Work Session