Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

? committee projects – ongoing policy work related to the mentally ill, crowd control, missing per- sons, and child abuse; new work on limited English proficiency, hearing-impaired/disabled and pol- icy work on medical marijuana; and ? work sessions and information items. Mr. Alsup remarked that there had been a number of public relations concerns during the past year and the commission was interested in trying to bridge communication gaps in the community and confusion or misunderstanding about the police department. He said the work plan also included intended goals and outcomes. He said the turnover in commission membership and staff meant a significant loss of institutional memory, but competent and knowledgeable individuals had filled those positions. Ms. Piercy expressed her appreciated for the commission’s significant public outreach efforts. She said the crisis intervention work was very important to many people in the community. She asked if the Taser policy recommendation included when and under what circumstances Tasers could be used. Ms. Miller said the policy was very detailed about when it was appropriate to use a Taser and when Taser use was not recommended, such as against the elderly and very young, pregnant women, people who were disabled or medically fragile, or when there was risk of injury from the physical environment. Ms. Piercy asked if the policy specified the Taser was to be used in lieu of a weapon. Mr. Alsup said the intent was to give the police another tool that was short of deadly force. He described several incidents since the policy was implemented where the subjects were armed and deadly force would have been justified if Tasers had not been available. Ms. Ortiz thanked the commission for its work. She agreed that the public forum format used for the Taser issue was innovative and effective. She asked to see data on Taser use when it became available. She encouraged the commission to continue to include experts on the topics that would be under review during the coming year. Mr. Clark also commended the commission for its work and said it served the community well. He appreciated the opportunity to participate in the police academy; it helped him to better understand the job of a police officer. Mr. Zelenka thanked the commission for its work. He asked when Taser use information would be available. Ms. Miller said that the pilot project would be reviewed at six months and that information would be available in August 2008. She said a full year of data would be compiled and reviewed in January 2009. Mr. Zelenka asked if there would be sufficient data at six months to review the project and perhaps recommend changes. Chief Lehner said the six-month information would be limited to data that described the circumstances under which Tasers were used, the capacity of officers and subjects involved and the success rate. He said there might be some earlier indicators of injuries, but it was important to wait for the annual report because the purpose of the Taser was to add a tool to the police department arsenal that would allow it to take subjects into custody who resisted with various levels of violence and minimize the risk of injury to officers and subjects. He said the body of data would be too small at six months to base evaluative conclusions on because of the limited number of deadly force incidents. Mr. Zelenka remarked that Tasers had also been used on unarmed individuals and wanted to review the policy aspects at the six-month point. He asked for an explanation of the new committee work that was being proposed in the work plan. Mr. Alsup replied that policy language in the POM was outdated and the commission was involved in a multi-year approach to reviewing components and determining if they MINUTES—Eugene City Council July 28, 2008 Page 4 Work Session