CC Minutes - 10/10/00 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ms. Shively said that ASUO had taken the writing of its own ordinance very seriously and addressed the unfair aspects of the proposed police ordinance and expressed a desire to meet with each of the councilors to discuss the differences between the two proposed ordinances. Danial Valle, 2140 West 15th Avenue, spoke against the ordinance. He acknowledged that there were problem parties that drained police resources, but raised concern that the ordinance did not focus on frequent and significant parties. He commented that the ordinance proposed by the Eugene Police was too vague and too broad. He stated that 10 people did not constitute a significant amount of people and that two gatherings within 90 days did not constitute frequent parties. Mr. Valle stressed that the ordinance needed to be specific and clearly address the problem of significant gatherings. Marian Fowler, 1671 Pearl Street, raised concern that the ordinance targeted students. She said that the ordinance proposed by the ASUO was formulated by a competent informed group of students, EPD officials, and Legal Aid. She urged the council to look at both ordinances critically and find what was best for the entire community. Brian Tanner, 290 West 19th Avenue, spoke as the Coordinator of State Affairs for the ASUO. He commented that the proposed ordinance was financially punitive and reactive rather than proactive in nature. He commented that the proposed ordinance ignored due process because of the City Manager's final decision in matters regarding the special response fee. He raised concern over the ability of the City Manager to remain impartial in decisions regarding the Eugene Police. Mr. Tanner commented that the proposed was worded too loosely and urged the council not to vote for an ordinance where the student voice was neglected. Norton Cabell, 1822 Princeton Drive, spoke in support of the ordinance. He believed that the interests and needs of the community were met by the proposed ordinance. Ilona Koleszar, 871 West 11th Avenue, urged a no vote for the proposed ordinance. She spoke as the director of the ASUO Legal Services. She said that the proposed ordinance was too broad in its reach. She commented that two events in 90 days did not constitute a frequent event. She noted that the City of Corvallis had implemented a 48-hour definition for frequent events. Ms. Koleszar said that the proposed ordinance was prone to unequal enforcement and lacked any due process. She commented that there was no language in the ordinance on the definition of reasonable response or how the level of response would be determined. Ms. Koleszar said that the ordinance would penalize nominal offenses with fines greatly in excess of the maximum penalties for those nominal offenses. As an example, she cited the Minor in Possession (MIP) offense. Ms. Koleszar said that the ordinance also encouraged police entry into residences to cite and document a first incident for future response fee purposes. She noted that there were already MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 10, 2000 Page 6 Regular Meeting