Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Hate-Related Harassment <br />The Human Rights Commission had a preliminary interest session last year, followed by a scoping <br />session in early April 2008, to discuss the possibility of enhancing protections for individuals from hate- <br />related harassment. A number of problem behaviors that are illegal in other states are lawful in Oregon <br />and Eugene, adding considerable tension to an already challenging problem. New city ordinance(s) are <br />possible that balance free speech rights with the rights of individuals to be free from such harassment. <br />Some crime-related laws carry enhanced penalties for commission within certain areas. For example, <br />drug sales within proximity to schools are often escalated in severity. Similarly, other cities have <br />created “drug-free,” “prostitution-free,” or other types of zones targeting particular problem behaviors. <br />These are not exclusionary zones but enhanced enforcement zones, generally effective if adequately <br />posted and enforced. <br /> <br />Exclusionary Zones <br />Exclusionary zones are another enforcement tool that has been utilized in the past by the City of Eugene, <br />with varied levels of success and controversy. The Prostitution Exclusion Zone ordinance applied to the <br />West Jefferson and Whiteaker neighborhoods some years ago virtually eradicated street level <br />prostitution in those neighborhoods without transferring it to another area in Eugene. Parks exclusions <br />are used as an effective tool to temporarily forbid certain offenders from remaining or returning to all <br />City parks. Parks exclusions have been fairly uncontroversial while providing officers with an <br />alternative to incarceration that displaces chronic violators, creating a greater sense of safety in local <br />parks and playgrounds. <br /> <br />When the downtown core was a pedestrian mall, an exclusion ordinance allowed officers to prohibit <br />repeat offenders from returning to the limited geographical area known as the downtown mall for brief <br />periods. Officers considered the ordinance to be an effective method for reducing crime. Both the <br />Prostitution Exclusion ordinance and the downtown Mall Exclusion Ordinance were applied in some <br />measure to members of vulnerable populations who accessed social services located within the <br />exclusion zones. Allowing subjects excluded by ordinance into the zone for important services was <br />occasionally challenging. The City received complaints that exclusions were not consistently applied, <br />leading to some perception of disparate enforcement. <br /> <br />Other cities have had similar experiences with exclusion zones intended to address prostitution, drug <br />sales and possession, and behavior crimes. The critical component of an effective exclusion zone is a <br />consistent police presence. Some recent news articles describing the use of these zones are included as <br />Attachment A. <br /> <br /> <br />RELATED CITY POLICIES <br />This topic relates to the Safe Community Vision: A community where people feel safe, valued, and <br />welcome. In addition, the topic also relates to several of the council’s 10 goals: the Homeless, <br />Sustainability, Downtown and Police initiatives. Absent a significant change in the service expectations <br />of the community, the mid and long-term solution to these issues remains the addition of officer capacity <br />by the addition of sworn staff and their associated support requirements. The Mayor and City Council <br />have identified this need via the designation of this subject as one of the City Council’s 10 priority goal <br />issues. <br /> <br /> <br /> F:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080414\S090414C.doc <br /> <br />