Item 3A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Ms. Ortiz appreciated all the work that the committee had done. She noted that they had been a diverse group of people. She agreed that CAHOOTS did a lot of work. She believed that if CAHOOTS had more resources, it could provide more services. She recalled that the Whiteaker Neighborhood had experienced issues related to the sales of malt liquor during the previous summer and the EPD had engaged in a pilot project with the markets there and the markets had discontinued the sale of these fortified alcohol products. Chief Kerns responded that there was no data on this yet. Ms. Ortiz suggested that they may want to pursue such an ordinance for the Highway 99 corridor, because it was also afflicted with issues related to such sales. She indicated her support for all of the recommendations. She added that she supported the “wet bed” idea. She averred that it would be valuable to the community to have this type of shelter with wrap-around services in the area. Mr. Brown asked if the suggested expansion of the other security services would include giving them citation authority. Chief Kerns responded that it would not do that; rather it would encourage them to collect information and report crimes and, where appropriate, they could interrupt crimes. Mr. Brown agreed that fortified wine was a detriment. He said grocery stores throughout the area sold such products, but they also sold other wines and microbrews with a higher alcohol content. While he was sympathetic to the idea, he felt it would be “a little tricky.” Mr. Zelenka thanked everyone who had worked on the item, and especially the task team members and the chief. He supported the short-term actions. He asked if there could be a citywide ban on fortified wine and malt liquors. Chief Kerns did not yet know what OLCC could permit. Mr. Zelenka did not want to push problems into areas where the fortified wines were not banned. Mr. Zelenka asked Chief Kerns to elaborate on the short-term item that included closed-circuit cameras. Chief Kerns said the City of Eugene already had some cameras in parks to monitor places where crime occurred. He explained that this would allow businesses and police to install cameras in places where crime was happening. He added that the presence of cameras served to deter crime and other communities had found it to be one of the most successful components in crime reduction. Mr. Zelenka asked if the estimated $100,000 was intended for cameras. Chief Kerns replied that the money would add cameras and a way for staff to monitor them. Mr. Zelenka asked how many cameras this would add. Chief Kerns said this would pay for a few initially, though they might be able to apply for grants and businesses could potentially supply some. Mr. Zelenka remarked that this item gave him pause. He also was not comfortable with the idea of assessing fees to vacant buildings. In response to a question from Mr. Zelenka, Ms. Muir explained that the item regarding DEI was intended to state that there was a partnership in the district boundary and that they anticipated DEI continuing to be a “big player at the table.” She said they wanted to ensure they were using the money that came in from the district in the best way. She noted, in response to a follow-up question, that the district took in approximately $250,000 per year. Mr. Zelenka asked what portion of that came from the City and Ms. Muir indicated that she did not have that information with her but would get it. She noted that not all City facilities paid the fees; only a few did. MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 27, 2010 Page 5 Work Session