CC Minutes - 01/13/99 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Responding to a question from Mr. PapS, Mr. Johnson confirmed that the incident started with a security guard's report to the police, which police officers followed up on. Mr. Pap8 asked if the Eugene Police Department behaved in an appropriate manner. Mr. Johnson said yes, and offered to provide the council with the reports prepared by the officers who responded to the report. Mr. Pap8 asked if the security officers acted appropriately, and if they were licensed. Mr. Johnson said that the appropriateness of the security officer's reaction was an issue for communities of color. Security at Valley River Center believed it spotted a robbery suspect on the bus; the police responded to the call. Mr. Johnson said the initial misidentification was made by Valley River Center security staff. Valley River security staff believed an unfortunate mistake was made. He said it was difficult to tell private security guards not to make a police report if they believed they saw a wanted suspect. He did not believe that was a message the City wanted to send. Mr. Johnson said it was a judgment call as to how close Mr. Gainer's description fit the composite description seen by the security guards, and how much judgment was exercised by the guards in making the identification. Mr. Kelly said that although the letter was directed to Mr. Gainer and he believed the apology it contained was deserved, his purpose in helping to draft the letter was to help frame the larger issue for the community. Each time such a situation occurred there seemed to be a logical explanation, but the preponderance and universality of such incidents indicated Eugene as well as the larger society had a continuing problem that required continuing attention. He indicated his agreement with Mr. Lee's remarks and said the letter was a beginning rather than an end, as well as a reminder that leaders must do everything they can to gradually transform the community. Mr. Kelly hoped that Eugene's communities of color would help by giving the council specific suggestions about how the City could improve the community environment. Ms. Taylor did not perceive the incident as a racial incident, and said it would be too bad if police felt they could not legitimately question a person of color. She termed the incident unfortunate, humiliating, and upsetting, but suggested sometimes such situations could not be avoided. Ms. Taylor asked if the council intended to apologize to everyone questioned or even greatly inconvenienced and humiliated by the police. She expressed regret that citizens had not approved of forming a citizen review board because that seemed like the right venue for those who believed they were wronged by the police. Ms. Taylor did not think the council should immediately assume the police acted incorrectly. Ms. Nathanson suggested that the recently approved Police Commission could discuss policies related to the incident and their application. Mr. Johnson concurred, noting mention of that was included in the letter to Mr. Gainer. Mr. Meisner said that when viewed in isolation, each incident was explainable, defensible, and consistent with policy and practice. However, the recurring pattern of incidents, or the "big picture" to which Mr. Lee referred, was a problem for him. Mr. Meisner said that Eugene had an unsavory racial history and an active history of racial discrimination. He looked forward to a "big picture" discussion, and hoped the incident "startles us into acting" as councilors and individuals. Mr. Meisner added that he did not doubt the good faith of the Eugene police officers involved, but they lived in the same culture as all others in the community and needed to do better. He said that the council's goal should be to make the system work better for everyone. Mr. Johnson reiterated that he believed the police behaved in an appropriate manner. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 13, 1999 Page 4 11:30 a.m.