Laserfiche WebLink
· Final reports about incidents should not be delayed beyond a reasonable length of <br /> time. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner said that he was pleased to learn that police and City administrators were <br />distinguishing between legal correctness and "doing the right thing." He said he hoped the final <br />report to the City Council was not an end to seeking lessons which from the June 1 incident. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner asked if policy changes resulting from International Association of Chiefs of Police <br />recommendations regarding chemical agents would be reviewed by the public. Mr. Hill replied <br />that the policy proposals were to be reviewed by the Police Forum. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Mr. Meisner, Mr. Hill said that the relationship of community <br />values and police values would be considered by the Council Committee on Public Safety. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor said that she did not agree with Mr. Johnson, if he had meant that public projects <br />should be planned to be undertaken before the public became aware of the potential of cutting <br />trees. She asked how the City would proceed differently in a situation similar to the one which <br />led to the June 1 incident. Mr. Johnson replied that he believed it was unlikely the City would <br />proceed with a project similar to the one in question without increased public involvement. He <br />said police action had been engendered by inaccurate information that there would be significant <br />financial loss from a delay of the project and that re-checking with policy makers would be <br />essential in a future similar incident. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor said that she had been informed by a retired police officer that Pepper Spray was <br />never used by Eugene Police in the past. Mr. Hill replied that the report was true because the <br />technology was not available years previously, but that a great deal of tear gas had been used <br />frequently in operations dealing with unruly crowds. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor said that she had observed the use of tear gas during the June 1 incident and that <br />she believed it had precipitated violence by the public. She asked for an explanation. Mr. Brown <br />replied that the Use of Force Review Board had studied ten video tapes of the June 1 incident <br />and had determined that each of six incidents of the use of tear gas by police had been in <br />response to actions by the crowd appropriately judged to be non-compliance with specific orders <br />to disperse. <br /> <br />Mr. Lee stated that he believed tension in the community between police and protestors was <br />growing and could lead to unintended negative consequences. He said he believed City <br />Councilors were responsible for being on the scene of confrontations between police and <br />protestors and that police should facilitate their involvement. <br /> <br />Mr. Johnson said that it was evident that violent acts of some protestors had increased in recent <br />years. He suggested that questions of how police were to respond to law breaking involved in <br />protests were more complicated than they were in the past. <br /> <br />Mr. Lee said that intentional law breaking was part of the protest of some demonstrators. He <br />said he believed the council could deal with policies which led to some law breaking. <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council August 3, 1998 Page 6 <br />5:30 p.m. <br /> <br /> <br />