CC Minutes - 06/14/10 Work Session

Home Browse Search

Mayor Piercy said that some citizens did not want the City to use tasers at all but she believed there were legitimate uses for tasers and that the City would use them in a way that satisfied community standards. Mr. Zelenka reiterated his belief that the policy represented a rare situation where the council should take purview. He thought otherwise, the policy would remain controversial. He indicated he was willing to accept the policy as written. He thanked the commission for its hard work and for proposing the well- thought-out revisions. He called for a council vote on the policy. Mayor Piercy expressed concern that outside of the fact there was a purview question, a motion could tie the hands of the organization when it came to making changes to the policy. She suggested that rather than approve or adopt the policy, the council could accept it. Mr. Zelenka noted his own use of the word “accept,” which applied council acceptance of reports that were subject to change, as opposed to documents or policies that the council adopted. Mr. Poling indicated he could not accept the policy due to his concerns about Section 309.4(1). Mr. Poling indicated support for leaving the policy within the purview of the Manager and Police Chief. Ms. Taylor believed that the policy was the public’s business and the public was very interested in the policy. She again called for a public hearing. She reiterated her belief that the policy was within the purview of the council. Ms. Ortiz believed the council had given the subject a lot of time because the community asked it to. She thought the council had fulfilled its role by directing the commission to examine the policy, and she recognized the amount of public input that occurred. She did not object to holding another public hearing, but thought the commission, council, and staff had already given the subject considerable time and energy. Mr. Clark emphasized the time the commission had put into the issue. While he was willing to offer the council a motion related to the policy, he personally felt that approach was inappropriate because he considered the policy to be like any other policy recommendation put forth by the commission to the chief. However, he did not object to endorsing the policy. Mr. Clark, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to accept the Police Commission’s draft policy and endorse to the chief. Ms. Taylor indicated she seconded the motion as a matter of form but would not vote for the motion. Mr. Pryor thought if the council endorsed the policy, it placed a stamp of approval that sent a message to the community that the council had heard it and endorsed the work that been done, but was not trying to control it. He wanted to be supportive, and thought endorsing the policy sent the right message of support. He emphasized the element of the motion related to endorsement of the policy. The motion passed, 6:2; Ms. Taylor and Mr. Poling voting no. MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 14, 2010 Page 8 Work Session