Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

City Manager Ruiz thought the recent newspaper article on the work of Parks and Open Space staff demonstrated how employees at all levels of the organization worked to make a difference. Mayor Piercy said that Mary Lee Woodrow had asked her to convey her thanks for the council’s flowers, as they were the first she received and it meant a lot to her to hear from Eugene. Mayor Piercy said Eugene was getting wonderful cooperation from Springfield and Lane County on its economic development efforts. She expressed appreciation to those jurisdictions. Mayor Piercy noted the upcoming forum on the recommendations of the West Eugene Collaborative, scheduled to occur at the Eugene Library the following day. Mayor Piercy said the council was heading into a series of important decisions regarding the independent police auditor system. She suggested this was a good time for the council to gain some clarity around its expectations for the police auditor system so that could be shared with the public, the council, the chief, the Police Commission and the CRB. She believed the purpose of the system could be clarified, and she thought that the council needed to give direction in that regard. She recognized Mr. Zelenka for a motion. Mr. Zelenka, seconded by Mr. Clark, moved to direct the City Manager to schedule a work session for Monday, May 18, 2009, from 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. on expectations and roles of the police au- ditor, the Civilian Review Board, and the City Council in the police oversight system. Included in the packet should be information about the original information in the police oversight system. Mr. Clark looked forward to having a new beginning with the police auditor’s office and its function. He referred to the op-ed piece mentioned earlier by Mr. Poling, written by CRB member Kate Wilkinson. He had been surprised to read a member of the CRB suggest that the council’s support for the system was waning. He stated that he had been in favor of transparent, open, civilian oversight of the Police Department from the beginning of the discussion. While the opposite had been printed, it was not true. He was interested in having the most efficient and effective system possible. Ms. Solomon determined from Mr. Zelenka that the motion did not come to the council in advance of the meeting and reminded the council officers of the council’s agreement in that regard. She noted that the item was already scheduled for council discussion later in the month. Mr. Zelenka distinguished between the work session already scheduled on May 20, which was concerned with the recommendations of the Police Auditor Ordinance Review Committee (POARC), and the work session proposed, which would set out expectations for the roles of the police auditor, City Council, and CRB. Ms. Solomon determined from Mr. Zelenka that it was his intent with the motion that the council get ahead of the new police auditor’s hiring as he thought it possible the City Council could be hiring a new auditor as early as the next day and that individual could be on board by June. Mr. Zelenka noted his own long-term support for the police auditor system and his support for the changes recently processed by the POARC to make the system stronger. He also wanted to get the best candidate for the police auditor possible to ensure the office was strong and had a forceful role in police oversight. He was eager for the day when a new police auditor was in place, the CRB was at full strength, and police oversight was “business as usual.” Mr. Pryor appreciated Mr. Zelenka’s desire to provide more clarity about the roles of the various parties. He said it was important the council be clear about its intentions and what it wanted to have happen. He said every employee deserved good supervision and he thought the proposed work session would accomplish that. Mr. Pryor recalled that he had supported placing the auditor on the ballot and had worked to get the measure passed. MINUTES—City Council May 11, 2009 Page 4 Work Session