Laserfiche WebLink
Mayor Torrey referred to the minutes of February 8, 1999, and said that Mr. Kelly <br />requested the following correction (italicized text added): "He asked that information be <br />provided on whether Urban Renewal District capital funds could be used..." Mayor <br />Torrey determined there was no objection to the correction offered by Mr. Kelly. <br /> <br />Mr. Lee offered the following correction to paragraph 6 on page 3 of the January 13 <br />minutes (italicized text added, struck text deleted): "Mr. Lee said that race identity was <br />~ .......~ *~ .... '~ .... ~'~ *'-"-'~' it ......... ~ .... ~,, is a personal identity issue for many <br /> I'"''''''''''''''-~' ~'"''~ '-~'"'~ I'"'"'"'1'"""' ~"'""~ v,.,,.~ <br /> <br />and people take this issue very seriously. Mayor Torrey determined there was no <br />objection to the correction. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor asked that item B be pulled from the Consent Calendar. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor asked that item C be pulled from the Consent Calendar. <br /> <br />The minutes were unanimously approved as revised. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner moved, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, to approve the actions of the <br />Intergovernmental Relations Committee as set forth in the minutes of February 23, <br />1999 <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor objected to the committee's decision to give House Bill 2393 and House Bill <br />2508 a status of Priority 1, Support. She said that there was no council policy <br />governing the City's position, and she believed that existing penalties for assaulting a <br />police officer were sufficient. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor moved, seconded by Mr. Rayor, to amend the motion by deleting the Priority <br />1, Support status for House Bill 2393 and House Bill 2508. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor believed that the bill had a chilling potential for borderline cases. He said <br />that a person could lose their livelihood and freedom for crossing what he deemed to <br />be a very fine line between another misdemeanor such as threatening an officer or <br />resisting arrest. He suggested that the legislature be allowed to consider the issue <br />without a recommendation from Eugene. <br /> <br />Ms. Nathanson noted her support for the committee recommendation. She said that <br />Representative Floyd Prozanski had introduced the bill. Ms. Nathanson pointed out <br />that it was currently a felony to assault a bus driver in operation of a transit vehicle or <br />an emergency medical technician while performing official duties. She believed that it <br />was appropriate to raise the penalty for assaulting a police officer to the same level. <br />Ms. Nathanson said that the committee asked staff if a person grabbing an officer or <br />pushing an officer would constitute an act of assault, and staff indicated it did not. <br /> <br />Mr. Farr concurred with Ms. Nathanson, saying that the council should provide officers <br />with a deterrent from assault, which he believed would protect them more thoroughly <br />than they are now. He opposed the amendment to the motion. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly asked about the legal definition of assault, and the penalty for assault on a <br />citizen. Intergovernmental Relations staff Tim Black indicated he would refer that <br />question to police staff. He noted that the frequency and violence of acts against police <br />have increased in recent years. Without consequences, staff believed that such <br />incidents would continue to occur. <br /> <br /> <br />