Item 3A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Ms. Taylor agreed that the jury room for the Municipal Court was not suitable for the needs of the Court. Judge Allen, responding to a question from Ms. Taylor, confirmed that he was highly invested in maintaining fairness and judicial objectivity with respect to Municipal Court defendants and prosecutors. He briefly discussed his perceptions of how such matters had been addressed during his tenure. He commented that he and the Court staff were very serious about maintaining the burden of proof in Municipal Court cases. Ms. Taylor appreciated the overdue fine amnesty program that had been implemented. Judge Allen responded to Ms. Taylor's comment and noted that while Court fine increases were part of State laws, it was within his power to suspend a portion of the assessed fines on the condition that the fines were paid in a timely manner. Judge Allen briefly discussed how he had encouraged the use of road crews and other community service hours as a manner in which people could satisfy their fines with the Municipal Court. Judge Allen, responding to a question from Ms. Taylor, stated he often observed other judges in their courtrooms. Judge Allen, responding to a question from Ms. Taylor, briefly discussed how Municipal Court cases involving animal control issues had been addressed. Mr. Poling referred to earlier comments made regarding associate judges and appreciated that Judge Allen had vetted many of the applicants with members of the community. Judge Allen, responding to a question from Mr. Poling, stated that the Municipal Court currently employed five associate judges, each with extensive education and legal experience in trial work and criminal law, who were compensated at a rate of $100 per hour. He stated that the compensation for the associate judges came from the City's General Fund. Mr. Pryor appreciated the work of Judge Allen and believed that it would be difficult to replace him once he chose to retire. He further appreciated that Judge Allen had chosen not to definitively state his beliefs regarding the effectiveness of the DPSZ. He stated than an examination of the statistical information regarding downtown public safety would be a much more reliable measurement than an opinion from Judge Allen. Mr. Pryor and Judge Allen discussed how exclusion cases in the DPSZ had impacted the overall public safety of the community. Judge Allen commented that rather than being a "blank check" to sanitize the downtown area, the DPSZ had been an attempt on the part of the Courts and the Eugene Police Department to interpret the collective will of the Eugene city Council with regard to effective public safety in the community. Judge Allen, responding to a question from Mr. Brown briefly discussed the manner in which hearings for exclusions and pre-hearing requests for exclusions from the DPSZ had been conducted. Judge Allen, responding to a question from Mr. Brown, briefly discussed the Court's facility needs for the immediate future. He hoped that the Court might be able to expand into the City's Human Resources offices in order to better meeting the expanding needs of the Municipal Court. MINUTES—Eugene City Council July 28, 2010 Page 6 Work Session