Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Torrey suggested that each councilor nominate two members for appointment to the <br />commission. He believed that would speed the process. Mr. Kelly concurred. He suggested that <br />the council also consider one single broader outreach mechanism, such as a newspaper ad <br />soliciting input. Mr. Meisner said that the commission could conduct a forum. Mr. Kelly agreed. <br /> <br />Mr. Fart endorsed the mayor's suggestion because he believed it would help to get broader <br />geographic representation on the commission. <br /> <br />Responding to a question from Mr. Torrey, councilors agreed that the persons they nominated did <br />not have to live in their wards. <br /> <br />Responding to a question from Mr. Torrey, the council agreed that the commission would initially <br />focus on council and mayor compensation. Mr. Kelly said that commission members should be <br />notified that they may be asked to take on the additional task of discussing the City's charter. Mr. <br />Pap~ said he would like to see the same members continue on the commission so that people <br />with knowledge and background can move on to the more complex issues. Mr. Lee, Mr. Farr, and <br />Ms. Taylor concurred. <br />Mr. Meisner said he did not object to keeping the same commission, but the council may want to <br />change the composition of the group or increase the number of members. <br /> <br /> Ms. Nathanson moved, seconded by Mr. Meisner, that a subcommittee of <br /> two councilors develop a recommendations regarding the composition of the <br /> Charter Review Commission in a manner similar to the ways the Mayor's <br /> Parks and Open Space Committee and Mayor's Library Advisory Committee <br /> were formed. The composition of the membership of the commission would <br /> be reviewed and approved by the council. Subsequently, the mayor would <br /> solicit names from the councilors and proposed a commission for the <br /> council's approval. <br /> <br />Mr. Torrey recommend that Mr. Meisner and Ms. Nathanson as council officers serve as the <br />subcommittee. The council concurred. <br /> <br /> The motion passed unanimously, 7:0 <br /> <br />Because there was additional time available, the council returned to the subject of community <br />policing. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner said that unless the council was clear about attitude and what it wanted to <br />accomplish through community policing, the effort would be meaningless. He did not want <br />community policing programs to create a drawdown on other services and he believed it had in his <br />neighborhood, where the enforcement officer took on area coordinator status and had less time <br />for enforcement. The neighborhood felt the lack. Mr. Meisner said that three substations have <br />such different focuses that he was unsure the City was being clear about what it wanted to <br />accomplish with them. He said that community policing would not be effective if the police officer <br />was aloof and uninvolved in the neighborhoods they traveled through. He said that it did not <br />matter if an officer was on a bicycle if they made no contacts. He emphasized that clarity of <br />purpose and change of attitude were essential to the successful implementation of community <br />policing. <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 26, 1999 Page 9 <br /> 5:30 p.m. <br /> <br /> <br />