|
<br />Regarding the Police Auditor, Councilor Poling said that the misstep in communication cited by one of the
<br />speakers was the fault of the council, which rushed to get the position established without considering some
<br />of the unintended consequences. He said there was no policy or procedure in place to handle a complaint
<br />from a City employee against the City Manager, a municipal judge or the Police Auditor. He said there was
<br />nothing in place to address the exception circumstances the chief cited with respect to the withheld file. He
<br />stressed his support for the Police Auditor position and thanked Ms. Beamud for her work establishing the
<br />program. He was willing to withhold judgment regarding the withheld complaint until all information was
<br />available and commended Chief Lehner for his management of the department.
<br />
<br />Councilor Bettman said it was not the details of a complaint that put people in jeopardy; it was the
<br />publication of those details, and the Police Auditor was required by ordinance to maintain confidentiality.
<br />She said there was no reason the auditor should not have immediately received a redacted file or one
<br />specifying why it needed to remain confidential. She said the problem was continuing resistance from the
<br />City administration to oversight of complaints involving police employees. She said the ordinance was put
<br />in place as a result of the Police Commission’s survey of the community, which revealed that people were
<br />afraid to make complaints. She stressed that under the City’s ordinance the Police Chief adjudicates
<br />complaints and imposes discipline; the auditor only provides oversight.
<br />
<br />Mayor Piercy pointed out that on September 15 the council would consider the issue of complaints against
<br />council employees.
<br />
<br />Councilor Zelenka agreed that the Police Auditor ordinance was clear that all complaints should be
<br />forwarded to the auditor and there were no exceptions. He said if the chief deemed it necessary, information
<br />could have been redacted.
<br />
<br />Councilor Clark said he saw many people who were victimized downtown and who experienced offensive
<br />behavior. He thanked Betty and Cassandra Snowden for speaking up.
<br />
<br />Councilor Bettman said development of the police auditor model took 18 months and went through multiple
<br />subcommittees and public forums, resulting in a comprehensive process consistent with community values.
<br />
<br />2. CONSENT CALENDAR
<br />A. Approval of City Council Minutes of the June 9, 2008, Work Session; June 11, 2008,
<br />Work Session; June 18, 2008, Work Session; June 23, 2008, Work Session
<br />B. Approval of Tentative Working Agenda
<br />C. Ratification of Intergovernmental Relations Committee Actions of June 18, 2008
<br />D. Appointment to Toxics Board
<br />
<br />Mr. Pryor, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to approve the items on the consent
<br />calendar. The motion passed; 8:0.
<br />
<br />3. ACTION:
<br />Minor Code Amendments
<br />Ordinance A: An Ordinance Concerning Land Use Regulations; Amending Sections 9.0020,
<br />9.0500, 9.2160, 9.2450, 9,2630, 9.2683, 9.2740, 9.2741, 9.2751, 9.2760, 9.2761, 9.2775, 9.3310,
<br />9.3810, 9.3910, 9.5500, 9.6790, 9.6791, 9.7010, 9.7055, 9.7105, 9.7205, 9.7230, 9.8320, 9.8430,
<br />9.8555, and 4.330 of the Eugene Code, 1971; Adding a New Section 9.7007 to that Code; and
<br />Providing an Effective Date
<br />and
<br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council August 11, 2008 Page 3
<br />
<br />Regular Meeting
<br />
<br />
|