Laserfiche WebLink
<br />placing thi~ resolution l'fn the baHoL He ::;aid if the voters did not fed there was a crisis, th{;y tvo~lld rv.)t <br />vote to SUPtxrrt the measun;, <br />Councilor Pryor observ'Cd that th>::~ h:nguage indicat<...>d the new body would be prepared to report on <br />complaints and trends and police practices in gew::~raL The latter made him wonder if this was the <br />beginning of a move toward f:[ g;:mcral city mlditor, which he d.id not. support. He sensed that the Police <br />Commission sought to adjudicate complaints about the EPD and not general police practices. Wb.le he <br />~;n.pported this; he indicated he would watch closely to ::;ee w'h(~te this was going. <br />Councilor Taylor supported the motion. Regarding the idea of splitting the two issues, she said t.he <br />council could e~tablish a civitkm review board without a vote. She thought there wen:~ very good reawni; <br />that both the audit.or and t.hc dvil.ian revkw board would report to the council. <br />(\mucilor Ort.iz maintain.ed that this r~~sol1l1ion was not hpersonal," but rather was abzmt a change in <br />process that sought to reestablish comnmnit.y trust She cmnmended the peopk: \vh(! wcn~ "doing the job <br />so well for us" at t.his point in time, <br />Mayor Fiercy ::;upportcd the resolution. She thought it was nel;:essary tOr the l~.(}fnnmnity and for EFf). <br />Sh~ w;;inted assurance that the City was not s.hortchanging its effort::; t.o 1wmnt :1 winnahle call1paign by <br />placing the charter an1endment on the Novelllhcr ballot, <br />Councilor Pape expressed similar conccrn about of the timing of th(~pr;.)pose.d baUot measure. I.h;:. asked <br />Poli<:;l;~ CornmissioHl;T TimL<lU<.:': to speak tn the cmnw.ission's recommendation. <br />Mr. Laue reiterated tlutt the highest res;;Ol.nmenrtatkm of the Police Commi:.,sion vms w ha\le both the <br />external audihlf and the civilian revie\v board report to tll!;: City (;)unciL He said the l~.o1rmljssion."s <br />intention W~!:.; that it could work either way, though there wa::; no di:"cussion about splitting the two n.n.d <br />making one l.m.der the auspices of the City M.a:n;;igeL He av<;rred that placing them separatdy on the ballot <br />codd result in only the i.ll..1dihJr pas~.;ing, which would not he a vrorkahle scenario. Regarding Councilor <br />Pryor'::; concern about the language rd~"rring to general police pmctki::s, he ~t;;ited that this W<l$ int<;~ndeli <br />f~lrthe servke improvement component for polke services. He s.aid. it had <dways been the comw.ii;sit,n's <br />intt:ntion that the auditor w<.t:.; m)t ju:4 there to ferret out complaint::; and identify things that were not <br />working well. He stated t.hat the comm!~sion was i:n no way advo;;;ating for a gcne.fal auditor h)r the entire <br />City organization. <br />1\.{r. Laue- shared cnncerni; expressed regarding the po:"sibility of failure on the balbt and the shmt time <br />frame prior to the vote, but wa~ cont1ctent that it would w(!rk l;:ither way, <br />CO\Hldlor Bl::ttman asserted that a civilian review hoard without <m audikn' would not have any pm.veL <br />She felt this would lx:~ a h:re-ach of trust with thc cWl,ens ofthe eommuni.ty. Regarding t.h~~ date ofthe <br />dcctitm, she pointed out that the wrn:munity had been prnmised action more than a year ago, She opposed <br />m.oving the election to May 2H06. <br />Coundkn' Pap.S voked his SUPPO!t for the moti.on.. Hi.)Wt:ver, heiw:tk:<'l.kd that that h~~ was not in f;wor of <br />having the auditor report tu the City Council. <br />RoE caE vote; the motion pa::;sed, 6:2; councilor::; Poling and Solomon voting in <br />oPPOSitkH1. <br />MrNUTES--.---Bugene City Council AugU:4 8, 20n.5 Page 12 <br />Regular Session <br />