Laserfiche WebLink
<br />e <br /> <br />~O <br /> <br />"ll <br /> <br />,.3/23/70 <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />-- <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br />The City Manager asked to read the letter to the Council, saying it stated clearly his feeling about <br />the proposal. <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Mayor Anderson said he felt a motion to establish, a sub-commmttee would be in order, and since the li,i <br />document in support of formation of the sub-committee is the brief by ACLU, any comments on that brief <br />should be considered. i, <br />Ii <br />II <br />Ii <br />Ii <br />Ii <br />II <br />Ii <br />II <br />II <br />Ii <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />Ii <br />Ii <br />I <br /> <br />Councilman Mohr felt this letter should become a part of the hearing record of the subcommittee, <br />rather than a pertinent part of discussion whether or not to establish a sub-committee. <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />II <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Mr. Mohr did not agree with the Mayor's ruling, and felt the material should be studied by the sub- <br />committee before presentation to the Council. <br /> <br />Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Hayward that the Council establish a sub-committee with appropriate <br />guidelines from the Council for the conduct of its inquiry on the matter of establishment of a <br />police advisory board for the city of Eugene, with representation from the Council, Human Rights <br />Commission and other interested citizens. <br /> <br />Dr. Purdy said he would like to hear the staff report on advisability of sub-committee formation, <br />and the letter from Mr. Brown. <br /> <br />The Manager sa~d the letter questioned whether this was the appropriate time for formation of a sub- <br />committee, and whether the proposal from ACLU was the appropriate proposal to be considered by the <br />sub-committee. The staff would recommend that this was not the appropriate time, nor the appropriate <br />proposaL <br /> <br />~he Mayor moved the letter admissable, and the Manager read the letter in which Mr. Brown defined , <br />I' "Police Review Board" and "Police Advisory Board", and said that his reaction was that the author of Ii <br />the brief had confused the two concepts. Mr. Brown did not feel Police Review Boards should be I <br />established for the sole purpose of reviewing police conduct, and recommended that adequate procedures II <br />I for full and fair processing of citizen grievances and complaints should be provided through an i <br />I office of "Citizen's Appeals." This should be appointed by the City Manager to receive, record and I <br />I evaluate all complaints. Such an office would (1) not single out police; and (2) pla~e ultimate ! <br />I' responsiblity in the hands of the chief governmental administrator. <br /> <br />II <br />II <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />The City Manager said Mr. Brown would be willing to appear in support of his <br />the brief had confused the two questions, and recommended that the matter be <br />Chief of Police is appointed and has an opportunity to review the Department <br />an advisory board. <br /> <br />position. He agreed that <br />tafuled until a permanent <br />and maNe a decrusion on <br /> <br />Mr. Bert Pinkerton, 1972 Emera14 urged the Council to delay action on this matter, saying a review <br />board could be a dangerous thing. He felt the Police Department needed encouragement. <br /> <br />Mr. Miller could <br />be all-inclusive. <br />waiting. <br /> <br />see no reason for delay, especially since it had suggested an advisory board should <br />He reiterated that several months could be lost, and he could see no reason for <br /> <br />this is <br />should be <br />during <br /> <br />The City Manager suggested a new Police Chief might wish to move on his own to establish a Police <br />Advisory Board, and this would preclude a need for a committee. <br /> <br />Dr. Purdy moved seconded by Mr. Gribskov to table this item. <br />Motion carried. <br /> <br />Mr. Mohr and Mrs. Hayward voted no~. <br /> <br />Meeting held March 18, 1970: <br /> <br />"Present: <br /> <br />Councilmen Purdy, Hayward, Beal, Gribskov and Mohr; City Manager and staff; and <br />others. <br /> <br />1. <br /> <br />Items from Mayor and Council <br />a. Lans.downe Property Report - Dr. Purdy requested a report on the Lansdowne property. <br />The Director of Public Works said appraisals are in, and the matter will be presented <br />to the Council in the near future. <br /> <br />i <br />Ii <br />II <br />I: <br />, <br />I <br /> <br />b. <br /> <br />Noise Pollution - Mrs. Beal commented on a magazine article concerning noise pol- <br />lution in Connecticut, and asked the staff to investigate and report on the <br />possibility of adoption of similar equipment for city use. <br /> <br />Mr. Teague moved seconded by Mrs. Hayward tba:bed::emve and file Items la and lb of the Committee <br />report. Motion carried. <br /> <br />c. <br /> <br />Air Pollution Meeting - Councilwoman Beal requested ~buncil affirmation 'of Community <br />Goals regarding air pollution, and suggested some formal action to inform the <br />Authori ty of ci'ty action as far as out-door burning is concerned. Mrs. Hayward <br /> <br />I <br />1 <br />I <br />t'~ <br /> <br />3/23/70 - 6 <br />