My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 3A: Approval of City Council Minutes
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2010
>
CC Agenda - 09/08/10 Work Session
>
Item 3A: Approval of City Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/2/2010 11:25:01 AM
Creation date
9/1/2010 3:47:22 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
9/8/2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
68
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />Mayor Piercy expressed concern that outside of the fact there was a purview question, a motion could tie the hands of <br />the organization when it came to making changes to the policy. She suggested that rather than approve or adopt the <br />policy, the council could accept it. <br /> <br />Mr. Zelenka noted his own use of the word “accept,” which applied council acceptance of reports that were subject to <br />change, as opposed to documents or policies that the council adopted. <br /> <br />Mr. Poling indicated he could not accept the policy due to his concerns about Section 309.4(1). <br /> <br />Mr. Poling indicated support for leaving the policy within the purview of the Manager and Police Chief. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor believed that the policy was the public’s business and the public was very interested in the policy. She <br />again called for a public hearing. She reiterated her belief that the policy was within the purview of the council. <br /> <br />Ms. Ortiz believed the council had given the subject a lot of time because the community asked it to. She thought the <br />council had fulfilled its role by directing the commission to examine the policy, and she recognized the amount of <br />public input that occurred. She did not object to holding another public hearing, but thought the commission, <br />council, and staff had already given the subject considerable time and energy. <br /> <br />Mr. Clark emphasized the time the commission had put into the issue. While he was willing to offer the council a <br />motion related to the policy, he personally felt that approach was inappropriate because he considered the policy to <br />be like any other policy recommendation put forth by the commission to the chief. However, he did not object to <br />endorsing the policy. <br /> <br />Mr. Clark, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to accept the Police Commission’s draft policy and <br />endorse to the chief. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor indicated she seconded the motion as a matter of form but would not vote for the motion. <br /> <br />Mr. Pryor thought if the council endorsed the policy, it placed a stamp of approval that sent a message to the <br />community that the council had heard it and endorsed the work that been done, but was not trying to control it. He <br />wanted to be supportive, and thought endorsing the policy sent the right message of support. He emphasized the <br />element of the motion related to endorsement of the policy. <br /> <br />The motion passed, 6:2; Ms. Taylor and Mr. Poling voting no. <br /> <br />C. WORK SESSION: <br /> Envision Eugene—Project Approach <br /> <br />Due to a lack of time, this item was not addressed. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy adjourned the work session at 7:25 p.m. <br /> <br />Respectfully submitted, <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—City Council June 14, 2010 Page 8 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.