02/12/1986 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e e e L. Airport Terminal Expansion Mr. Hansen said Bob Shelby, Director of Aviation at Mahlon Sweet Field, asked several people to go to Phoenix to see a new modular jetway which is less expensive than other jetways. He said the jetway might be used at Mahlon Sweet Field. Several councilors expressed interest in making the trip. M. Proposed Ordinance Concerning Weapons Mr. Miller thanked the staff for clarifying to the general public that the council asked to staff to get additional input about the proposed ordinance which would have regulated the use of weapons. He said some people were misinformed about the council's direction. City Manager Micheal Gleason asked City Attorney John Arnold to discuss the ordinance. Mr. Arnold said the ordinance as drafted probably would not survive judicial scrutiny because on February 4 the Oregon Supreme Court announced a far reaching decision in the City of Portland vs. Dollarhide case. Mr. Arnold said the decision indicates that state statutes preempt or control local criminal ordinances in the same area. As a result, the City staff has identified many sections of the Eugene code that overlap with State statutes. The City Attorney's office is analyzing the sections to determine if modifications to the City code are required. Responding to a question from Mayor Obie, City Attorney Tim Sercombe reviewed the reasons the council had directed that the ordinance be drafted. He said the council had previously rescinded the sections of the code which regulated the use of weapons because they were unconstitutional. The council became concerned about several incidents on the downtown mall in which knives, martial arts weapons, and other weapons were used. The police department indicated that current local and State laws are insufficient for enforcement and that there are enforcement problems in other areas of the city as well. Consequently, the council directed the staff to review the existing ordinances and to propose a new ordinance that would deal with the problems. The proposed ordinance would have applied to the whole city. Answering a question from Mr. Holmer, Mr. Sercombe said the review of current ordinances which the Supreme Court decision may have made unconstitutional will probably take sixty to ninety days. He said as many as 36 sections of the Eugene code may have been affected by the decision. He said the Supreme Court decision is not clear. The Eugene City Attorney will discuss the opinion with other City Attorneys in the state. The City may petition the Supreme Court to reconsider the opinion, but the Supreme Court does not usually reconsider decisions. He said the City Attorney will probably recommend that the City adopt ordinances which are similar to the State statutes. Mr. Hansen asked what would happen if the City approved the ordinance as proposed. Mr. Sercombe responded that there might be liability issues if the City adopted the ordinance, and Mr. Gleason said problems would be created by the council's willful violation of a judicial standard. MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 12, 1986 Page 4