Item 3A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Ms. Taylor asked where the people who had been excluded from the downtown area were going. Chief Kerns responded that they could only track the behavior and not the people. He said some crimes, if they were aggressive in enforcing them, did not repeat anywhere else. He explained that those crimes required certain environmental conditions to happen in a certain place, but behavioral crimes were not subject to environmental conditions because there were so many opportunities to engage in them in the downtown area. He averred that to be effective in reducing behavior crimes, they had to have enough officers to fluidly move where the behavior was happening. Ms. Taylor asked if any of the jail beds would be used for people who were not dangerous. Chief Kerns responded that there were so few jail beds that almost all of them had high risk offenders in them. He said the jail beds that the City leased were for defendants convicted of violent crimes. He added that there were no jail beds for non-violent offenders currently, though this could change with the opening of the Springfield jail. Ms. Taylor thought the idea of “wet beds” would be attractive to some people. She asked if this was a punishment. Chief Kerns replied that it was an alternative to the emergency room and other more expensive services. He said only a unique, discreet group of people would qualify for it. Mayor Piercy echoed this, noting that there were significant savings for services in case-managed apartments directed at people with substance abuse issues. Mr. Poling agreed that “wet beds” were a good idea. He felt it would provide a safe out and would allow the funds to be invested in rehabilitation services that could help a person to get out of that type of situation. Regarding adding jail beds, he asked if the $420,000 that they were estimated to cost had come from the County. Chief Kerns affirmed that this was the County’s cost estimate. Mr. Poling asked if the chief had entered into preliminary conversations with the City of Springfield regarding jail beds. Chief Kerns responded that the Municipal Court had discussed this with Springfield and it was not yet known whether the beds there would represent any significant savings. Mr. Poling noted that the Lane County Sheriff’s Office used to keep a record of its calls for 90 days and asked if the EPD did this type of thing. Chief Kerns replied that they did not. He added that some crimes were not even recorded. Mr. Poling asked the chief to elaborate regarding the City’s interaction with the OLCC. Chief Kerns said the City could not regulate the sales of alcohol; only OLCC had that authority. He explained that the OLCC would write an administrative rule that would enable Eugene to have an ordinance to prohibit the sale of certain types of beverages in certain areas of town. In response to follow-up questions from Mr. Poling, the chief explained that staff was currently discussing possible changes with OLCC. He noted that the City of Portland had been granted an administrative rule and it was considered a “success story.” Mr. Poling remarked that the Downtown Exclusion Ordinance was going to sunset soon. Chief Kerns confirmed this. He said he would report back to the council on its effectiveness in the fall. Continuing, Mr. Poling commented that CAHOOTS did a great deal for the community and was an organization that did not receive enough recognition for the job that it did. He wondered whether CAHOOTS had a way of breaking down the amount of activity or crime they responded to in the downtown area currently. He requested this information, if it was available. MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 27, 2010 Page 4 Work Session