02/22/1988 Meeting (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e call a meeting in an area parking lot to explain the rules of "The Gut," as had been done in 1986. Mr. Ellis said the ordinance was not workable, and patrols would not be increased during the evening hours when needed. He said that last summer, only two or three officers had been assigned to the area, and they had not been in the area at all times. He said the same amount of enforcement would be needed to enforce the ordinance. Mr. Ellis also said he had worked nights for the past three years, and he had noticed that since cruising on South Willamette this winter had ceased, the activity normally associated with that area already had been dispersed throughout the city, notably to Hendricks Park and to businesses on Coburg Road, West 11th, and in Santa Clara. He said he and some other members of the department felt that passage of the ordinance would be a mi stake. David Eddington, 3480 Chaucer Way, spoke in opposition. He said he thought the council needed to look at the image that the ordinance would portray to the state and the country, and what it would say was that Eugene was a community that was not responsible to its young people. He said problems affecting teens today, such as use of alcohol and other drugs, would not be solved, but displaced. e Mr. Eddington said he was concerned about the impact of the ordinance on liberty and on the right to free access to public facilities created for use by ALL citizens. He said the ordinance would infringe on those rights and would make Eugene appear regressive, rather than progressive. He said he wanted Eugene to be a friendly place, where people would not be hassled by police for driving back and forth twice in a two-hour period, adding that prohibiting six or seven passes might be a little more realistic. David Fidanque, 1679 Willamette Street, spoke on behalf of the Lane County Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, and he noted that a memo had been distributed in packets. Mr. Fidanque said the group's primary concern was the issue of discriminatory enforcement, and he had heard nothing tonight to lessen his concern. He said that even if lap computers were used at first, citations and enforcement eventually would occur on a random and haphazard basis. He said a number of examples of unintentional violations had been mentioned by previous speakers, and he offered another, in which a vehicle might be loaned to someone who was unaware of the routes previously driven by a different driver. He said the ordinance would apply to the car, not to the same driver, and it did not require mental culpability, so ignorance was not a defense. Mr. Fidanque said he believed the important point for the City Council to recognize was that the solution lay in using practices that had worked in the past on liThe Gut," namely assigning officers who wanted to be there working with young people and who were willing to walk along the street to prevent violations of open container or other laws. He said creative solutions had worked in the past and could work again. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 22, 1988 Page 10