CC Minutes - 05/13/98 Work Session

Home Browse Search

Ms. Swanson Gribskov said that it would be helpful to have Judge Allen's input on the proposed downtown ordinances next on the agenda. She invited him to participate in that discussion. Responding to a question from Ms. Swanson Gribskov about the three biggest issues he perceived facing the Eugene Municipal Court, Judge Allen said that the council needed to determine what elements of the NCSC report were appropriate for Eugene. Another issue was what direction the court would go. Would the community replace the State District Court with its court? He noted the proposal by District Attorney Doug Harcleroad that all misdemeanor citations issued by the Eugene Police Department be filed in municipal court. That would mean the City would have to adopt the State Criminal Code, add resources to address more complex cases not before addressed by the court, and address the workload created by the addition of 1,000 more cases to the court's docket. Judge Allen said that the proposal offered by the District Attorney did not include an offer of more jail beds to deal with those cases. Instead, the District Attorney was willing to turn to the municipalities to lessen the District Attorney's case load. Judge Allen said that the City must be aware of the implications of the proposal. Ms. Swanson Gribskov asked Ms. Nelson and Judge Allen if the court had a concept of the scope of the impact of the District Attorney's proposal. Ms. Nelson responded that currently the City prosecutor worked on more than 10,000 misdemeanors and the District Attorney's proposal would add approximately 1,600 more. She added that the Council Committee on Public Safety would discuss the topic at its next meeting. Mr. Johnson said that the cases involved were completely different than those already addressed by the court in terms of their severity, complexity, and the individuals involved. He said that much analysis would need to be done before the City agreed to the proposal. Mr. Torrey asked what the implications of refusing to take on the additional misdemeanor case load. Mr. Johnson said that the District Attorney could refuse to prosecute such cases. Ms. Swanson Gribskov questioned whether the issue could be a "bargaining chip" in the jail contract negotiations. Judge Allen said that the negotiations on the contract were progressing well; he anticipated there would be same number of beds the City contracted for during the last ten years, although at a higher cost. He said that number was inadequate. In the past, the City was able to secure more beds because more were available. Judge Allen said that the number of cases had increased over ten years, and the nature of prisoners was different than ten years ago. He said the cases now prosecuted by the District Attorney were tougher and more expensive to prosecute, they had associated security issues, and those involved were more likely to be candidates for jail at a time when space was already inadequate. Ms. Taylor asked Judge Allen what laws the City had in place that he believed were a waste of time. Judge Allen responded that some less serious offenses should be addressed through a fine as opposed to jail time, and reduced from misdemeanor to violation status. He could not think of any laws the City should not have. He said that the camping ordinance did come to mind as it had been an issue for the court for some time. He did not think that camping should be a criminal offense. Ms. Taylor said that she believed that enforcement of some laws added to people's contempt of the court. She cited the skateboard and dog ban on 13th Avenue and dog-at-large violations as examples of her remarks. She asked Judge Allen his opinion about the proposed mall MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 13, 1998 Page 3 11:30 a.m.