Laserfiche WebLink
council could repeal the ordinance. She said the predatory nature of some of the people on the <br />mall combined with the presence of youth made her believe the City needed a special tool. <br /> <br />Ms. Nathanson asked staff to comment on why a larger area was being contemplated. Lt. <br />Roberts responded by describing illegal activity that occurred in concealed and obscured places <br />on the mall, and said staff hoped to eliminate those activities by establishing a defined geographic <br />area from which people could be excluded for criminal offenses. There were many businesses <br />along 10th Avenue that were affected by such activities. <br /> <br />At the request of Ms. Nathanson, Lt. Roberts drew a blue line on the map of downtown to show <br />the parameters of Ms. Bettman's proposal as compared to the staff proposal. <br /> <br />Responding to a question from Mr. Meisner, Mr. Lidz indicated that there was a discrepancy <br />between the map and ordinance, and staff had prepared a revised version of the ordinance. <br /> <br />Mr. Fart shared Mr. Kelly's general concerns about exclusion ordinances, but he thought there <br />were overriding issues in the area that supplanted those concerns. He pointed out the area <br />around the Overpark on the map and suggested it was also quite problematic and should be <br />addressed. Lt. Roberts responded that there was a considerable degree of activity occurring in <br />the area and officer response to issues in the area. Mr. Fart wondered if it would become more of <br />a problem if the exclusion area was expanded to include that area. <br /> <br /> Mr. Fart, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, moved to amend the amendment to <br /> extend the southern boundary to include the south margin of East 11th <br /> Avenue. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner pointed out that the motion reflected Version A of the ordinance. <br /> <br /> Mr. Fart, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, rephrased the motion as moving to <br /> adopt Version A. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman thought that, given time, the Eugene Police Department could point out a lot of <br />problem areas in the community. She had attempted to strike a balance that addressed the <br />unique problem downtown without creating a situation where people were being excluded from <br />the entirety of downtown. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner understood the concern expressed by Mr. Fart but preferred Ms. Bettman's <br />amendment at this time. He believed the staff recommendation supported the motion offered by <br />Ms. Bettman. He said that Ms. Bettman's amendment addressed the documented problems that <br />do exist, and the ordinance could be amended later to address new problem areas. He wanted <br />staff to monitor the situation before any further areas were added. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly determined from Mr. Lidz that the phrase exclusive of those portions of the street that <br />are open to vehicular traffic meant that those excluded from the area could drive or ride a bicycle <br />down the road, but not walk down the sidewalk. Mr. Kelly pointed out that redrawing the <br />expanded area as a block had the result of adding six additional blocks to exclusion area. <br /> <br />Mr. Fart reiterated his concerns about the area around the Overpark. <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 20, 2001 Page 3 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />