CC Minutes - 07/12/99 Mtg - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

III. PUBLIC HEARING: ORDINANCE CONCERNING THEFT-RELATED OFFENSES; AND AN ORDINANCE CONCERNING ALCOHOL-RELATED OFFENSES Mayor Torrey opened the public hearing. Cindy Noblitt, PO Box 12225, spoke against the proposed ordinance. She said that the City was already making thousands of dollars in citations of alcohol-related offenses. She urged the council to reflect on the values of all the people and not just a few City officials. Mayor Torrey closed the public hearing. Councilor Kelly raised concerns over the financial penalties that would be the result of the proposed ordinance. He called for a distinction in code between first time and repeat offenders. Councilor Rayor was disturbed by the amounts of the fines. He asked for clarification on whether people who could not afford to pay could make other arrangements. Councilor Taylor stated that she thought the penalties were excessive and that the ordinance was ill-timed because the people that it would be primarily aimed at, college students, were not currently in the community. She asked what result was hoped for by passing this ordinance. She stated that the current laws were sufficient. Councilor Pap~ disagreed with Councilor Taylor. He said that alcohol-related offenses increased with better weather over the entire city. He said that the high fines were only a part of the options a judge had to choose at his/her discretion. He suggested that probation or community service might be an option for certain individuals. Councilor Lee raised concerns with students paying fines with their financial aid checks. He noted that students contributed tremendously to the local economy and that he did not believe in stiffening penalties for them that they could not afford to pay. Councilor Nathanson concurred with Councilor Pap~ and stated her support for the proposed ordinance. Councilor Taylor stated that laws should protect people from authority figures as well as protecting them from criminals. She went on to say that there needed to be strong limits on people in positions of power and that a society could not retain its freedom and prevent everything that was dangerous. She observed that the council kept passing new ordinances when the City did not have the ability to enforce the ones already in place. She said that there were other ways to address problems related to alcohol. Councilor Lee clarified that there were no new laws being proposed. The ordinance would only bring City Code to the same level of State law. He questioned the need for this since the State laws were already in place. Councilor Nathanson suggested penalties of community service rather than monetary fines. Councilor Kelly was supportive of bringing the ordinance into Municipal Court because it had a smaller group of judges that knew the local situation much better. He went on to say that the law MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 12, 1999 Page 3 7:30 p.m.