CC Minutes - 05/27/08 Work Session

Home Browse Search

charter language in Section 15.a, External Review of Police, so that in Sec- tion 1, the words “is authorized to” and the word “may” is replaced with the word “shall.” In subparagraph 2, the words “is authorized to” and the word “may” is replaced with the word “shall.” If approved by voters, this amendment of charter language shall do nothing more than edit the above words thus ensuring the ongoing and consistent functioning of the inde- pendent Police Auditor’s Office, and the Civilian Review Board (CRB). In the event it fails to pass, the current language of charter Section 15.a shall stand as written. Ms. Bettman expressed concerns over the language and implications that having a Police Auditor’s Office was an option. As political winds changed having that implication could undermine the function of the auditor’s office. Mayor Piercy appreciated the effort to tighten the language in the charter, noting that “shall” was directional and reflected what people voted for, and she would support the motion. Ms. Ortiz supported the motion on the assumption that this would go to the voters in November 2008, thus not requiring a special election that would incur additional costs. Mr. Clark noted 67 percent of the voters had spoken and it was a closed question. He would support the motion to the extent that the proposal would provide more effective language for the ordinance. He wanted to know when the resolution came back to the council if the language change substantively altered anything or if there were any caveats as to what the proposed change could imply. Mr. Zelenka saw this as a housekeeping issue, noting that prior to joining the council he assumed the Police Auditor and CRB were permanent parts of the charter rather than discretionary. He would support the motion. Mr. Poling was concerned about the cost and thought the November election would reduce any costs. He inquired about timeline and process for placing the proposal on the November 2008 ballot. City Attorney Jerry Lidz responded that August 6, 2008, would be the last day for the City Council to adopt a resolution to put a measure on the ballot, after which the City Attorney had five days to prepare a ballot title. An appeal process was available if someone wished to challenge the ballot title after which the measure would move forward to the November election. Mr. Poling asked if this would open up the process to other changes in the charter by interested parties in this specific section of the charter. Mr. Lidz responded the appropriate time to propose additional changes would be when the resolution went before the council to call the election and set out the language proposed by Ms. Bettman. Council members could propose more changes prior to the resolution returning to the council. MINUTES—Eugene City Council May 27, 2008 Page 3 Work Session