Item B: Ordinance on Downtown Public Safety Zone

Home Browse Search

Comments Opposing Continuation of the Ordinance The ordinance limits someone’s right to travel freely in society and this is a fundamental right. There is no way to track how many people were cited in error and chose not to challenge their exclusion either because they didn’t understand the process or believed they had no chance of being given a fair hearing in court. Some people have disabilities and little education and don’t understand the exclusion order. Needs to be more of a fair application of ADA rules. Instead of having an exclusion zone, we should use our current judicial system. The ordinance is vague and abuses officer discretion. Concern was expressed that the Activity Report lacked data on the number of homeless people and concern with class issues. The idea of a sunset on the ordinance isn’t unreasonable but needs to be extended to four years instead of two to really see results. Regular reviews and reports of the ordinance’s impacts should be provided. Too much time and too many resources are being used on the exclusion zone. Questions about alcohol and drug violations mentioned in the activity report. It seemed to this individual that more exclusions were made from drug violations than from alcohol, but alcohol was discussed as one of the two main types of disruptive minor offenses. A belief by a speaker at the forum that many of the descriptions of behavior are overstated; the report says more than 60% of people excluded, reported themselves as homeless but this individual thought it was closer to 80%. Rather than exclude people in one neighborhood, several people and commissioners urged focus on the need for services: public bathrooms, very few garbage facilities, no non-denominational shelters are downtown. Crime happens all over the city and sectioning off one area downtown won’t fix the problem. A speaker at the forum stated that Portland had the same type of exclusion ordinance, but was sued for profiling. (Note: Portland’s two ordinances that were allowed to expire on October 1, 2007 were the Prostitution and Drug-Free Zones.) In addition, the commission urges Council to consider greater support and funding to social service agencies to aid in the overall criminal justice system. Many offenders who are excluded from downtown by the DPSZ ordinance need additional help for alcohol and drug addiction, and that can only be remedied by having more services available to them to improve their way of life. We hope that City Council will find this summary useful in its future discussion of the extension of the Downtown Public Safety Zone. ATTACHMENTS: A. September 1, 2010 Public Forum Minutes B. Downtown Public Safety Zone Ordinance No. 20419 C. Police Commission Draft Minutes, pages 1-8 – September 9, 2010