Item 3A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

underlying problem was the lack of resources in the Lane County criminal justice system. He felt the hate crimes ordinance the council was working on would be more effective in addressing racism, intimidation and harassment. He said he was concerned with due process and that drugs were the root of many problems. He noted that exclusions would be made by a judge, not the police, and there were other examples of restricting people’s rights without a conviction, such as a restraining order. Reluctantly he could support Version C. Councilor Ortiz said she would support Version C and agreed with Councilor Clark’s amendment. She said the community had clearly expressed concerns about bad behavior and it was a difficult decision to adopt an exclusion zone, but there was a public safety problem downtown that had to be addressed. She appreciated the inclusion of a sunset clause. Councilor Clark asked if the crime rate was lower downtown. Chief Lehner replied that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) crime reports indicated that Part 1 crimes were down in most of the City, including downtown; however, other types of crimes were actually increasing in the downtown area. The motion to amend passed, 5:3; councilors Taylor, Bettman and Zelenka voting no. The council took a short break. Councilor Clark, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to amend Section 4.874(1) of the ordinance to add the offense listed in Eugene Code Section 4.110(2) (furnish- ing alcohol to a minor). The motion to amend passed, 6:2; councilors Taylor and Bettman voting no. Councilor Clark, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to amend Section 4.874 of the proposed ordinance by moving the following offenses from Subsection (2) to Subsection (1): EC 4.726 (harassment); EC 4.729 (assault); ORS 163.165 (assault in the third degree); ORS 163.175 (assault in the second degree); ORS 163.185 (assault in the first degree); EC 4.730 (menacing); EC 4.731 (intimidation in the second degree); and ORS 166.165 (intimidation in the first degree). The motion to amend passed, 5:3; councilors Taylor, Bettman and Zelenka voting no. Councilor Ortiz, seconded by Councilor Clark, moved to include the following lan- guage as an uncodified section of the Ordinance: “Within two years from the effective date of this Ordinance: 1) The City Manager shall prepare a report of the activity recorded in the Down- town Public Safety Zone and provide that report to the Police Commission, and 2) The Police Commission shall review the report, obtain public input regarding the effectiveness of this Ordinance in reducing targeted incidents in the Down- town Public Safety Zone and provide a recommendation to the council regard- ing continued enforcement of this Ordinance. In response to a question from Councilor Bettman, Mr. Lidz explained that the term “uncodified” meant the language stood as an ordinance but was not in the code as it was a directive to the City Manager and not to the general public. He said a sunset clause was typically an uncodified section also. Councilor Zelenka offered a friendly amendment to require the report after one year. Councilor Ortiz declined to accept the amendment as the report needed to be based on at least a year of data. The motion to amend passed, 6:2; councilors Taylor and Bettman voting no.