Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Taylor believed the council should hold a public hearing on the policy and make a decision on its use. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy said her position had originally been in support of tasers in lieu of lethal weapons, but she had <br />subsequently learned that there were situations where it became desirable for an officer to employ a taser to avoid the <br />need to use a lethal weapon. She acknowledged that was a judgment call on the part of the officer. She pointed out <br />that it was the department’s goal to avoid having to hurt someone. <br /> <br />Mr. Zelenka thanked Ms. Miller and Ms. Nelson for the many hours of work the commission spent on the issue. He <br />suggested the policy was a balance between the need to keep officers out of harm’s way and protection of citizens. <br />He found the minority report very helpful. <br /> <br />Mr. Zelenka suggested the policy before the council, due to the fact it was controversial, was under the purview of <br />the council. <br /> <br />Responding to a question from Mr. Zelenka, Chief Kerns indicated that it was the department’s practice to summon <br />Emergency Medical Services directly after an individual was tasered. That would not change under the revised <br />policy. <br /> <br />Mr. Zelenka noted disagreement among commission members about whether police officers should be tasered in <br />training, and the fact the training did not require tasering. Ms. Miller recalled that there was some liability for the <br />City involved in requiring an officer to be tasered in training. Chief Kerns said that departments varied in that <br />requirement but he had decided against it as unnecessary. He pointed out the department did not require that officers <br />be struck by batons or other less lethal forms of force. <br /> <br />Mr. Poling asked Chief Kerns to share his opinion of the policy. Chief Kerns said he thought the policy was a good <br />one and he was comfortable with the recommended thresholds as being consistent with other departments around the <br />country. The policy allowed the police to treat people humanely while reducing the likelihood of injury and the need <br />to use deadly force. <br /> <br />Referring to Section 309.2 of the policy, Mr. Poling suggested semi-annual testing for tasers in recognition of Eugene <br />weather conditions. <br /> <br />Mr. Poling questioned the deletion of text in Section 309.4(1)(a)(3) that allowed the officer to gain control of a <br />fleeing person with the use of a taser. Ms. Nelson said the commission felt the situation was already covered by <br />Section 309.4(1)(a)(2). Mr. Poling suggested that an officer was likely to be harmed by someone resisting arrest and <br />supported adding back the text. <br /> <br />Mr. Clark shared Mr. Poling’s concerns about the safety of officers and believed the policy would help address that <br />concern. However, he agreed with Ms. Nelson that the language the commission adopted in subsection (2) addressed <br />the concern about fleeing suspects. <br /> <br />Mr. Clark referred to the text in the policy that called for an officer to consider all force options, which he believed <br />was wise in general but which he thought watered down the use of force standard to some degree. He said the <br />commission had a lengthy discussion that the use of force standard was not the least force necessary but rather all <br />necessary force. He pointed out that when a fire broke out, residents did not want the fire department to use the least <br />water necessary. He thought the case was the same when an officer or community member was in danger. Mr. Clark <br />said he had supported removing that text but other commission members did not share his concern. <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 14, 2010 Page 6 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />