Item 2A: Approval of Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

six different security companies. He said there were no laws prohibiting security officers from looking like EPD officers, nor were there any rules governing the use of the word 'police' on such uniforms. He reported that State Senator Floyd Prozanski sponsored a bill that sought to address this issue. It had passed the State Senate and was now before the State House of Representatives. Mr. Brown listed three reasons there should be an ordinance governing standards for police uniforms: 1) Uniforms could be misleading and confusing to the public and members of the public may ap- proach the wrong personnel in an emergency situation; 2) If someone mistook a security officer for a police officer, it could present a safety issue for the security officer; 3) The ordinance would be complaint-driven and would seek voluntary compliance before any penalties would be put into effect. Mr. Brown conveyed the Police Commission recommendation that the effective date be delayed so that it would not create a financial burden on private security. Continuing, Mr. Brown encouraged the council to move ahead with a public hearing. He hoped that it would be scheduled before the end of the school year so that University of Oregon students could participate. Mr. Brown affirmed for Mr. Poling that there had been an incident in which a security person was mistaken for an EPD officer. He explained that the security officer was attempting to handle a disturbance at a University dormitory that the SWAT Team had been called to and was unreachable via EPD radio frequencies. Mr. Poling indicated his support for the ordinance. He commented that the public was likely to confuse uniforms when in a crisis situation. He felt the UO-DPS uniform should be distinctive from the EPD uniform. Mr. Kelly thanked the Police Commission for its work. He favored moving the issue to a public hearing. He observed that he was not able to discern a UO-DPS officer from an officer of the EPD. Mr. Pap6 asked if the EPD could issue a complaint, given that the ordinance would be complaint-driven. Mr. Brown thought that anyone could file such a complaint. Ms. Ortiz welcomed the proposed ordinance. She said members of the community had complained to her that they were unable to tell the difference between private and public officers. Mayor Piercy asked if City staff was making the extra effort to make people affected by the ordinance aware of the public hearing. Mr. Brown replied that the stakeholders had been contacted. Mr. Pap6 asked what official authority the UO-DPS officers held. EPD Chief Bob Lehner responded that the authority came from the State. Director of the Department of Public Safety for the University of Oregon Tom Hicks explained that the authority of the DPS officers came from a State statute. The statute allowed officers to make arrests for probable cause and to stop and detain someone suspected of a crime. He noted that the City had recently MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 11, 2005 Page 5 Work Session