Item 2A - Minutes Approval - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

question was one of the last pieces of undomesticated woodland available within the City limits. She advised the City not to let it slip away. Joseph D. Bradford, 1459 City View Drive, concurred with previous speakers on racial profiling. He commented that racial profiling was nothing new. He shared that it had been called DWB, driving while black, and WWB, walking while black, when he was growing up. He understood, from personal experience, what Mr. Johnson had gone through. He acknowledged that some people felt intimidated by it, but averred that he did not because he was a commander in the United States Army. He supported the formation of an external review board. He stated that harassment of people of color had to stop and recommended that City Manager Taylor and Police Chief Lehner give public statements in opposition to such harassment. He believed that if the system was truly just, these things would happen. Mr. Bradford remarked that some people alleged that African-Americans were "playing the race card." He underscored that the Emancipation Proclamation had been signed in 1865 and, though he had been born in 1964, his family was still suffering from the repercussions of slavery. Majeska Seese-Green, 549 Van Buren Street, welcomed the new councilors and the mayor. She recalled the position taken by the Whiteaker Community Council nearly one year ago in support of the strongest possible police review. She commented that at that time it seemed the Whiteaker neighborhood had been the only voice speaking in support of this, but now due to several unfortunate incidents, more voices had joined the call for this type of review. She reiterated the neighborhood's support for a review and expressed appreciation to the NAACP, CUBP, and the Police Commission for joining in the work to support it as well. She urged the City Council, Mayor, and City Manager to take the steps necessary to move the process forward. David Hinkley, 1350 Lawrence Street, Apartment #1, said in most cases a Consent Calendar was intended to quickly process routine, non-controversial housekeeping matters. However, he did not feel Item C, the resolution to repeal the Housing Dispersal Policy, was routine in the least. He thought the policy had served the community very well. He opined that if it was to be revoked, it needed to be done properly with public notice and a public hearing. He remarked that a lack of a social service dispersal policy had turned several of the central city neighborhoods into "social service ghettos." He predicted that revoking the housing dispersal policy would turn those areas into "outright ghettos." He preferred to "tweak" the existing language rather than to revoke the entire policy. Kevin Matthews, 1192 Lawrence Street, president of the Friends of Eugene, remarked that it was "unspeakably sad" that one could be singled out because of one's physical characteristics in Eugene. Mr. Matthews averred, regarding the property on Nectar Way, that had the City been able to move forward with an evidence-based Goal 5 natural resource evaluation and protection process, this habitat would already be protected. He noted that the Jobs and Land Use Round Table had asked for the council to move forward with an upland habitat study that would seek to conduct "fact-based natural resource analysis." He said this process had been suspended. Mr. Matthews presented a transcript of the Citizens State of the City address to the Mayor and City Council, a document written collaboratively by half a dozen different local non-profit entities. Jean A. Stacey, 5150 Nectar Way, said she and her partner had traveled for four years looking for a new place to live prior to moving to Eugene. She related that they enjoyed living here very much. She MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 10, 2005 Page 6 Regular Session