Item 4: Police Auditor Ordinance Revisions

Home Browse Search

ECC UGENE ITY OUNCIL AIS GENDA TEM UMMARY Action: An Ordinance Concerning the Police Auditor and Amending Sections 2.450, 2.452, 2.454 and 2.456 of the Eugene Code, 1971 Meeting Date: August 10, 2009 Agenda Item Number: 4 Department: Central Services Staff Contact: Sarah Medary www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-6877 ISSUE STATEMENT The City Council is scheduled to take action on proposed amendments to Chapter 2 of the Eugene Code, 1971, concerning the Police Auditor. BACKGROUND On November 17, 2008, the council voted to create a committee to review issues related to the police auditor ordinance. The council directed that the committee (Police Auditor Ordinance Review Committee (PAORC)) report back to the council by March 11, 2009. On March 9, 2009, the PAORC presented a final report of recommendations related to the police auditor ordinance. At that meeting, the council voted to accept the PAORC’s report and move forward with a public hearing on the proposed revisions to the ordinance. The hearing was held on April 20, 2009. On May 20, 2009, the council held a work session to discuss specific ordinance revisions that had been outlined. The council accepted most of the proposed changes. Three items were identified for additional discussion at future work sessions: complaints against the police chief, classification of complaints and timing of overlapping criminal and administrative investigations. On June 22, the council provided direction on ordinance language for re-classification of complaints and for complaints against the Police Chief. With respect to classification and re-classification of complaints, the council’s direction is reflected in section 2.456(1)(d) on page 5 of Attachment B. The council’s direction on complaints against the Police Chief is reflected in subsection (5) on page 4 of Attachment B. As part of that direction, the council requested language that distinguished the Police Chief’s administrative duties from his actions out “on the street” when he is in a position similar to other sworn officers. That was accomplished by adding the term “non-administrative.” With regard to the timing of overlapping criminal and administrative investigations (the “concurrency” issue), the council requested that Police Auditor Mark Gissiner provide a recommendation. Attached as Attachment C is a joint memo from the Police Auditor and Interim Police Chief. They are recommending that the municipal court judge resolve a disagreement between the Auditor and Police Chief concerning the timing/concurrency issue. That recommendation is incorporated into the proposed ordinance in section 2.456(2)(c) on pages 6-7 of Attachment B. Z:\CMO\2009 Council Agendas\M090810\S0908104.doc