Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Bettman conveyed her support for the motion. She appreciated the receptiveness of the Police <br />Commission and the community organizations. She felt the assessment of police oversight needed to be <br />accelerated as proposed in the work plan. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap6 supported the motion. He asked if the Police Commission was involved in helping to formulate the <br />recommendation for a new police services facility. Mr. Laue replied that it had not been involved with its <br />latest iteration. He recalled that the commission had helped to determine the need for it four years earlier <br />and noted that one of its members served on the Mayor's Civic Center Visioning Committee. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap~ opined that the Police Commission should have a role in the look and the function of the proposed <br />facility. He suggested the commission's work plan should be amended to include it. Mr. Laue commented <br />that the City Council "had not been shy" about adding to the work plan in the past. <br /> <br />Mr. Taylor thanked the Police Commission for the work it had done over the last year. He called the agenda <br />"ambitious." He wished to be on record as supporting the contingency request. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly noted that the work plan included a September work session to discuss the issue of off-campus <br />parties. He recommended that, should it result in a request for action, the student body be allowed to <br />provide input. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly applauded the undertaking of a thorough review of the complaint process. He conveyed his <br />support for the motion. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner remarked that the City Council did assign the Police Commission work with no qualms and the <br />Police Commission, in turn, had no qualms about taking on issues as they arose. He noted that the Police <br />Commission was the only citizen body that had a full-time staff person and was now asking for a .5 FTE <br />staff person and to contract out some work. He asked if the work plan the Police Commission was <br />undertaking was too large for a citizen volunteer body. Mr. Laue responded that the commission met to <br />discuss the workload and the likely increase in meetings, and the commission had indicated a unanimous <br />commitment to the work. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner said he would support the work plan. He encouraged the commissioners to come before the <br />council to amend the work plan should it prove to be too great. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor supported the motion. She felt the community had strongly indicated the need for such a review. <br />She would not, however, support the second motion. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey expressed his support for the motion. He said the community expected this analysis to be <br />conducted. He was concerned that the community could not wait as long as it would take the commission to <br />complete the civilian review and asked the City Manager and Chief Lehner to bring something before the <br />council with regard to how some changes in the department could be accomplished quickly. <br /> <br />Mr. Taylor responded that staff would work to review and change administrative policy and was hoping <br />bring this review before the council within the next three to six months. <br /> <br /> Mayor Torrey called for the vote. The motion passed unanimously, 6:0. <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 28, 2004 Page 4 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />