Laserfiche WebLink
Councilor Poling supported the ordinance, stating that the sole aim of the ordinance was to make <br />more efficient the use of EPD resources by allowing the University DPS personnel to issue <br />citations for minor violations. He asserted that this had been proven to work, noting that <br />Southern Oregon University and the City of Ashland had successfully made this shift. He <br />reiterated that this would affect anyone in violation of the law, and not just students. He opined <br />that longer periods of detainment contributed to the exacerbation of aggressive behavior. He <br />stressed that approval of this item was fiscally responsible. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman noted that the council was not scheduled to take action on the item at the <br />current City Council meeting. She expressed support for this kind of collaboration of the <br />University and the EPD. She noted that work toward this kind of collaboration had been going <br />on for quite some time and that, at its essence, shifting citations for misdemeanor substance abuse <br />to the DPS was a resource issue. She agreed with Councilor Kelly on the points in need of <br />clarification. She noted that the student testimony in opposition at the present hearing needed <br />more specificity, adding that though there were not as many students attending the University <br />through the summer there was still a substantial population. She recommended that the council <br />follow up on this after a year had passed to determine if any issues that merited redressing had <br />arisen. <br /> <br />Councilor Pap6 expressed support for the ordinance. He opined that this would help students to <br />learn what kinds of responsibilities to the community they were expected to uphold in terms of <br />behavior and lawfulness. He conveyed his concern with the training, noting that he also wanted <br />clarification on the two questions raised by Councilor Kelly. <br /> <br />The council took a ten-minute recess at 8 p.m. <br /> <br />4. PUBLIC HEAR1NG: An Ordinance Concerning Multiple-Unit Housing; and Amending <br /> Section 2.945 of the Eugene Code, 1971 <br /> <br />City Manager Taylor asked Richie Weinman of the City Planning Department to present this item <br />to the council. <br /> <br />Mr. Weinman noted that the council had held a work session on June 11 and that action on this <br />item was scheduled for July 28. He stated that the item before the council was a public hearing <br />about a one-block expansion of the Multi-Unit Property Tax Exemption (MUPTE), as per the <br />request of the City Council, which represented a minimal expansion to accommodate the <br />development of the City parking lot that was currently a development site. He indicated that the <br />expansion was delineated in Attachment B in the Council packet. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman asked about the nature of the notice provided to the residents of the area. Mr. <br />Weinman responded that, as this was not a land use action, no notice had been required, although <br />a postcard had been sent out to a broader area announcing a public information session on <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 14, 2003 Page 14 <br /> Regular Meeting <br /> <br /> <br />