Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Mr. Poling was very supportive of the proposal and agreed with Mr. Clark about how to use the money the City received for the building. He believed the council needed to demonstrate to the taxpayers it was trying to offset the costs of a new city hall. Mr. Poling asked if the City would have room for negotiation in regard to potential mitigation costs related to hazardous substances found on the site. Mr. Braud said yes, and indicated staff had discussed the topic with the buyer. The City had not yet committed to anything. Mr. Clark, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to authorize the City Manager to enter into a purchase and sale agreement with Master Development for the disposition of the 858 Pearl Street property consistent with the terms and conditions included in Attachment A. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. A. ACTION: Adoption of an Ordinance Concerning Downtown Public Safety Zone; Amending Section 4.874 of the Eugene Code, 1971; and Providing a Sunset Date The council was joined by Police Chief Pete Kerns, who reviewed the changes made to the Downtown Public Safety Zone (DPSZ) ordinance since the public hearing the council held on the topic. City Attorney Glenn Klein and Police Analyst Linda Phelps were also present to answer council questions. Mayor Piercy acknowledged her own concerns about zones such as the DPSZ but appreciated the revisions related to due process and the provision of advocacy services, which addressed some of those concerns. Mr. Clark believed the ordinance as currently written was legally defensible from a due process standpoint. He had been satisfied with the ordinance as it existed, but acknowledged community concerns about the issue of due process as it related to Section 4.876, and was willing to support deletion of that section. He was pleased the revisions made it possible for the council to move forward with a greater degree of unanimity. Mr. Pryor agreed with Mr. Clark that making the ordinance more broadly acceptable to the community was one of the tradeoffs the council faced. He had asked Municipal Court Judge Wayne Allen for input regarding the deletion of the temporary exclusion, and the judge’s response made Mr. Pryor feel comfortable that the core of the ordinance was still in place, particularly with the addition of more offenses. He suggested the ordinance could be amended in the future if it did not work. Mr. Pryor spoke to the provision of advocacy services. He emphasized the importance of ensuring accessibility to the legal system. He believed that many of those impacted by the ordinance would not be familiar with the law, and while he did not want to assume the liability of giving them legal advice, he believed they should be given assistance navigating the system. He thought the cost was reasonable. Ms. Ortiz determined from Chief Kerns that staff proposed the ordinance expire in 18 months because he believed that was when new downtown officer team would be deployed. Responding to a question from Ms. Ortiz, Chief Kerns indicated that Municipal Court would manage the contract for advocacy services. Responding to a follow-up question from Mr. Poling, Chief Kerns anticipated that advocacy services would be provided by an organization such as Whitebird or St. Vincent de Paul or by volunteers. The City would not add new staff or add to the duties of existing staff to provide MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 8, 2010 Page 3 Work Session