HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 2A: Approval of MinutesEUGENE CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Approval of City Council Minutes
Meeting Date: May 23, 2005 Agenda Item Number: 2A
Department: City Manager's Office Staff Contact: Lynda Rose
www. cl. eugene, or. us Contact Telephone Number: 682-5017
ISSUE STATEMENT
This is a routine item to approve City Council meeting minutes.
SUGGESTED MOTION
Move to approve the minutes of the April 20, 2005, Work Session and April 25, 2005, City Council
Meeting.
ATTACHMENTS
A. April 20, 2005, Work Session
B. April 25, 2005, City Council Meeting
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Staff Contact: Lynda Rose
Telephone: 682-5017
Staff E-Mail: lynda.l.rose~ci.eugene.or.us
L:\CMO\2005 Council Agendas\M050523\S0505232A. doc
ATTACHMENT A
MINUTES
Eugene City Council
Work Session
McNutt Room--City Hall
April 20, 2005
Noon
COUNCILORS PRESENT: George Poling, Jennifer Solomon, Betty Taylor, David Kelly, Gary Pap6,
Bonny Bettman, Andrea Ortiz, Chris Pryor.
Mayor Kitty Piercy called the work session of the Eugene City Council to order.
A. ACTION:
Resolution 4832 Authorizing the City Manager to Make Application to the State of Oregon for
Designation of a West Eugene Enterprise Zone
Mr. Poling, seconded by Ms. Solomon, moved to approve Resolution 4832 authorizing the
City Manager to make application to the State of Oregon for designation of a West
Eugene Enterprise Zone.
Ms. Taylor declared that the City was entering into the enterprise zone process unwisely and without
enough public input. She cited several resources that supported her argument that such a zone would
insulate development from the public arena for ten years and that little benefit had been reaped from such
tax incentives in other areas of the country. She averred that an enterprise zone tended to redistribute the
existing business activity and did not increase jobs. She felt the zone would more likely transfer jobs from
one area of town to another. She predicted that six to eight people would move to the City of Eugene for
every job provided. She quoted Eben Fodor, who said enterprise zones robbed communities of their tax
base, subsidizing only a few businesses and giving no advantage to others.
Ms. Taylor cited related City policies, on page 24 of the agenda packet, adding that staff could "relate
anything they wanted to do to City policy."
Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to amend Resolution No. 4832, the Attach-
ment B version on page 31 of the agenda packet, to add the following provision to Section
B; 'in addition, no investment within the Enterprise Zone will receive a tax exemption
greater than an amount per new job created, with numbers to be determined prior to the
zone's implementation.'
Ms. Bettman averred that the zone would transfer tax money from needed services to subsidize jobs. She
felt the zone was based on the amount of the investment and not the number of jobs new business would
provide. She thought this benefit was disproportionate to the benefit to the community. She wanted there
to be a threshold for community standards. She said a vote for her amendment would motivate her to
support the main motion.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 20, 2005 Page 1
Work Session
Mr. Kelly voiced his support for the amendment. He averred it would maximize the benefit of the
enterprise zone. He was pleased to note that the amendment did not break new ground; such a cap had
been instituted in a prior zone.
Ms. Solomon called it premature to begin to frame community standards at this point. She said the
council had already decided to have a community discussion on standards after the initial zone application
was submitted.
Mr. Pap6 agreed, stating that standards were not needed at this stage of the process. He asked if such a
standard would help or hurt the application at the State level.
Loan Specialist for the Financial Services Division Denny Braud responded that it would be an interim
standard similar to what had been already proposed.
Mr. Pap6 reiterated that he would prefer not to discuss and implement individual community standards
separately.
Mr. Kelly underscored that there was no monetary amount included in the current amendment. He stated
that the amendment demonstrated the council's intent to be flexible.
Ms. Bettman stated that her intent was that this cap would become "one with the zone" and embed the cap
as part of it.
Mr. Poling said the council had worked hard to get to a seven-to-one vote on the application process. He
recalled that the intent at this point was that the council would go ahead with the process with the
understanding that a public process for j ob quality standards would ensue. He reminded the council that
City Manager Dennis Taylor had recommended the council use 1997 standards as a placeholder. He did
not want to be rushed because the result could be a "shoddy product." He averred that the amendment
bypassed the public process and was, as a result, unfair.
Mr. Pryor commented that there were two issues that the council was addressing individually. He
appreciated the desire on the part of people to insert what they felt was important into the community
standards, but stressed that this was "discussion number two." He said the need to get the application in
place was "discussion number one."
Ms. Bettman said this was not a new issue. She reiterated her reasons for incorporating the cap in the
language of the zone. She felt that without specific language, it would be completely open-ended. She
predicted the enterprise zone would fail should it come to a tie vote.
The motion failed, 5:3; Mr. Kelly, Ms. Ortiz, and Ms. Bettman voting in
favor.
Mr. Poling said the process should remain as simple as possible. He commented that one tax lot was not
railroad property, the site of an auto "pick and pull" yard.
Mr. Poling, seconded by Ms. Solomon, moved to adopt Resolution No.
4832, as amended in Attachment B of this agenda item, with the boundary
MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 20, 2005 Page 2
Work Session
as proposed in Attachment F of this agenda item, including the addition
of the 49.3 acre Pick and Pull parcel (tax lot 3700) to the boundary.
Mr. Poling reiterated that it would exclude the other six properties that were considered railroad
properties.
Ms. Ortiz said while she appreciated the spirit in which the amendment was offered, the chance that
something of no benefit to the community would take over the property should it sell was too great. She
indicated that she would place a motion to amend on the table should Mr. Poling's motion pass.
City Attorney Glenn Klein suggested that Ms. Ortiz move to delete the language she objected to from the
amendment.
Ms. Ortiz, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to amend Mr. Poling's
amendment to delete the Pick and Pull property.
Mr. Kelly said it was important over the short term to respect the community's wishes on this. He pointed
out that the City Council could, by resolution, amend the boundary of the zone at any time.
Mr. Poling stated that the intent of his amendment was to make sure the definition of the railroad property
was addressed and the council was clear on the issue. He expressed his willingness to support Ms. Ortiz's
amendment.
Ms. Bettman supported Ms. Ortiz's amendment. She added that she hoped the motion that removed
greenfields would be adhered to carefully. Mr. Braud assured her that staff had reviewed the entire area
and removed all of the greenfield sites according to the traditional Planning definition of greenfield.
Mr. Pap6 commented that he had never considered this property to be a railroad property. He thought
presupposing what would move on to this site was a mistake. He noted that substantial properties had
already been pulled out.
Ms. Taylor opined that the whole community stood to lose from the proposed enterprise zone. She said
her goal at this meeting had been to influence others to vote against the enterprise zone. Now she saw that
in all likelihood the main motion would pass and she wished to change her vote on Ms. Bettman's motion
to amend.
Mr. Klein explained that it was not possible to change her vote at this point. Ms. Bettman indicated she
would remake her motion.
Ms. Taylor, seconded by Ms. Solomon, moved to extend the time by five
minutes. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0.
Mayor Piercy called for the vote on Ms. Ortiz's amendment to Mr. Poling's amendment.
The motion to amend the amendment passed, 5:3; Mr. Poling, Mr. Pap6,
and Ms. Solomon voting in opposition.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 20, 2005 Page 3
Work Session
The motion to amend the main motion passed unanimously, 8:0.
Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to amend the motion with
her previously moved amendment. The vote on the motion was a 4:4 tie;
Mr. Kelly, Ms. Bettman, Ms. Ortiz, and Ms. Taylor voting yes, and Mr.
Poling, Ms. Solomon, Mr. Pap6, and Mr. Pryor voting no. Mayor Piercy
voted in support of the amendment and it passed.
Speaking to the main motion, Ms. Taylor averred that an enterprise zone did not fit in with the City's
policy of supporting sustainable development. She felt the income level provided by incoming businesses
in the last enterprise zone fell below State and national averages. She predicted the zone would cause
growth in certain parts of the City. She reiterated her feeling that the assumption that development would
not happen without the zone was unsubstantiated.
Ms. Bettman conveyed her appreciation for the work of staff and for the support her amendment had
received.
Mr. Kelly, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to extend the time by two
minutes. The motion passed, 6:2; Ms. Taylor and Mr. Poling voting in
opposition.
Mr. Kelly thanked staff and his colleagues for their work.
Mayor Piercy called for the vote on the main motion.
The main motion passed, 7:1; Ms. Taylor voting in opposition.
Mr. Poling, seconded by Ms. Solomon, moved to direct the City Manager,
in the event that Eugene's enterprise zone designation application is ap-
proved by the State of Oregon this year, to bring back a resolution prior to
July 1, 2005, for adoption of interim local criteria consistent with the
Public Benefit Criteria included in Attachment B and amended in At-
tachment C, with the understanding that new job quality standards would
be adopted as soon as practical following notification of a successful des-
ignation application, in accordance with a public involvement process ap-
proved by the council, with the intent that 25 percent of the tax exemption
benefit for qualified enterprise zone investments would be subject to the
job quality standards.
Mr. Poling underscored that the motion reflected the council's intent as agreed upon at the Council
Process Session.
The motion passed unanimously, 8:0.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 20, 2005 Page 4
Work Session
B. ACTION:
Resolution 4831 Forming a Local Improvement District For Paving, Constructing Curbs
and Gutters, Sidewalks, Pedestrian Medians, Street Lights, and Stormwater Drainage on
River Avenue From 200 Feet East of River Road to 100 Feet West of Beltline Highway
City Manager Taylor explained that this was a matter that had been coming before the council for some
time. He noted that the project had first appeared in the TransPlan in 1986 and had been in the current
TransPlan and is part of the Eugene Arterial and Collector Street Plan, adopted in 1999. He said the
project, as it currently stood, had been included in the Fiscal Year (FY) 2001 Capital Budget. He
underscored that the entity that had submitted the successful bid to undertake the work had agreed to hold
to the amount of the bid from July 2004 until May 2005. He emphasized that expenses would only
continue to increase should the work be delayed.
Mr. Pap6 appreciated the memorandum staff provided on the subject. He related that he attended one of
the public sessions that had been held and a great deal of concern had been expressed about the level of
development that had been proposed. He tended to agree with area residents. He felt, given that most of
River Avenue was commercially developed by businesses that did not draw pedestrian traffic the need for
sidewalks on both sides of the street and two bicycle paths was not great. He hoped the council would
consider scaling down the project so that only one sidewalk and the curbs and gutters would be con-
stmcted.
Mr. Kelly commented that it was disturbing that bicycle lanes were considered as an afterthought for
many people. It was important to him that bicycle facilities be improved. He noted that State law
required such facilities for major collectors. Regarding the plan for sidewalks on both sides of the street,
he asked how flexible the standards were. Principal Civil Engineer for the Public Works Department,
Michelle Cahill, explained that the standards required sidewalks for both sides of a collector and were not
flexible. City Manager Taylor added that the same standards applied for the County portion of the road.
Ms. Bettman acknowledged that there had been a lot of citizen input and that both sides of the issue had
been heard. She appreciated that the City had standards. She remarked that perhaps the reason the street
did not have pedestrian traffic was that it did not have sidewalks. She indicated she would support
postponement of the item until more input could be garnered. She did not feel well-acquainted enough
with the details of the issue to provide a qualified response to it. She suggested that staff work with the
affected people and come back with another proposal.
Mr. Poling observed the similarities the situation on River Avenue had with the Crest Drive neighborhood.
He agreed with some of the public input, stating that he thought the proposal was "overbuilding" for the
street it was planned for. He did not believe it necessary to have a sidewalk go by the Metropolitan
Wastewater Treatment Plant. He felt there was very little pedestrian traffic east of the post office. He
recommended that the plan be made less "frilly." He added that no one was certain what the Oregon
Department of Transportation (ODOT) was going to do with the River Avenue/Beltline Road interchange
and whether ODOT would choose to shut it down altogether. He pointed out that if the latter should
occur, the City would have a "nice road to nowhere."
Mr. Poling, seconded by Ms. Solomon, moved to substantially modify the improvements,
re-bidding if necessary, and then conduct a hearing on the modified improvements.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 20, 2005 Page 5
Work Session
City Attorney Glenn Klein advised the council that re-bidding would likely be necessary if the improve-
ments were modified and that a public hearing would likely be required if the improvements were put out
to bid again.
City Manager Taylor reiterated that the present bid would be lost and a bid on a modified plan for
improvements would "certainly cost more" even if the level of improvement was substantially reduced.
Ms. Ortiz asked how it would cost more if the project was less encompassing. City Manager Taylor
attributed the potential increase to cost increases, such as those for petroleum products, which had
occurred within the last year. He thought the City would ultimately pay more for less.
Mr. Pap~ disagreed with the notion that the cost of the current project as proposed should drive whether it
continued as it stood. Regarding State standards on bicycle lanes, he asked if one bicycle lane would meet
the requirement. Ms. Cahill replied that she did not believe that a partial bicycle path would meet the rule.
City Manager Taylor pointed out that the bicycle lanes would not be assessed as part of the local
improvement district (LID).
Mr. Pap6 agreed that no sidewalk was really necessary in front of the sewage treatment plant. He also
agreed that the River Avenue situation was similar to the Crest Drive situation. He thought the City
should at the very least allow the River Avenue residents and business owners the same latitude it had
extended to the Crest Drive neighbors in letting them participate in the design process to a degree.
Ms. Taylor thought the council should listen to the property owners and take its time. She said of the mail
she had received on the issue, the preponderance was in opposition to the current plan.
Mr. Pryor commented that standards were intended to serve a purpose. In this case, he said, the plan
seemed to propose more improvement than was needed. He favored looking at the project to see if it
could be scaled back even though it could cost the same or more.
City Manager Taylor reiterated that the proposal sought to apply the design standards for a major
collector. He asked if the council's intent was to be open, as a general policy, to redesigning all of the
standards on all of the streets or was this specific to River Avenue. He pointed out that any time a project
involving an LID was proposed, local residents come forward in opposition to it.
Mr. Kelly remarked that a delicate balance was needed between having standards as a touchstone for the
progress of development and having standards with some flexibility.
Ms. Bettman advised staff to take into strong consideration the desires of an affected neighborhood when
making proposals such as the one before the council in order to avoid reworking them. She said a
proposal for local improvements that was being roundly opposed by residents in the area suggested to be
improved would likely not gain council approval.
The motion passed unanimously, 8:0.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 20, 2005 Page 6
Work Session
C. EXECUTIVE SESSION:
The Executive Session was held pursuant to ORS 192.660(2)(e)
Prior to beginning of the Executive Session, Mr. Klein briefly reviewed the Overview of Eugene Code
Provisions on Disposition of Real Property. Copies were provided to all those present. He stated that the
four different processes the City could dispose of a piece of real property were, as follows:
1) The City manager could either use a public notice that the City intended to sell a property or
proposals could be solicited for the property;
2) The City Manager could declare a property "surplus" and the council would receive notice of it
and could object or not;
3) The City Council could initiate the disposal of real property with or without public notice if it was
to another governmental body;
4) When the manager had a proposal that was acceptable in his or her mind then he or she could
present it to the City Council for approval.
In response to a question from Mr. Kelly, Mr. Klein stated that the Urban Renewal Agency was another
government agency but it would have to go through the same public process the council was required to
go through to purchase property.
Mayor Piercy adjourned the City Council work session at 1:10 p.m. The council then entered into an
executive session.
Mayor Piercy reconvened the meeting of the City Council following the executive session.
Mr. Poling, seconded by Ms. Solomon, moved to direct the City Manager to discuss with
interested parties ideas that would facilitate the development of a Whole Foods Market,
music school, and parking structure, all in the downtown area near City Hall. The motion
passed unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
Dennis M. Taylor
City Manager
(Recorded by Ruth Atcherson)
MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 20, 2005 Page 7
Work Session
ATTACHMENT B
MINUTES
Eugene City Council
Regular Session
Council Chamber--City Hall
April 25, 2005
7:30 p.m.
COUNCILORS PRESENT: George Poling, David Kelly, Betty Taylor, Jennifer Solomon, Chris
Pryor, Andrea Ortiz, Bonny Bettman, Gary Pap&
Mayor Kitty Piercy convened the meeting of the Eugene City Council and welcomed all those present.
1. PUBLIC HEARING
Police Executive Research Forum and International City Management Association Report on
Selected Police Operations
City Manager Taylor recounted that thc City had jointly commissioned an outside audit of the Eugene
Police Department (EPD) in October 2004, which had culminated in the report submitted to thc City
Council during thc previous month. He stated that thc report contained 57 recommendations for
improving thc EPD and the present public hearing sought to provide the community with an opportunity to
weigh in on them. EPD Chief Bob Lchner and Executive Director of thc Human Risk and Resource
Services (HRRS) Lauren Chouinard would subsequently provide their responses to thc recommendations.
He noted that thc City was about to receive its annual internal affairs audit report from its contracted
auditor, Howell Lankford, to be presented to a joint meeting of thc Police Commission and thc Human
Rights Commission. Because of thc three events coming together, he indicated he had extended to May 9
thc time frame for Chief Lerner and Mr. Chouinard to respond to thc report and thc public hearing.
Mayor Picrcy opened the public hearing and reviewed thc rules that governed the proceeding.
Nadia Sindi, 3950 Goodpasturc Island Loop, #J-111, submitted her testimony in writing. She alleged that
she had been harassed, intimidated, and followed by officers of the EPD since 1983. She felt this
harassment had increased after she had filed a complaint in 1997 regarding an incident in which she was
allegedly assaulted by a police officer. She suggested vandalism to her vehicle was connected to her
allegations regarding the Police Department. She said she filed numerous complaints and testified before
thc council and police commission. She thought thc more she complained, the more she had been
retaliated against. She asserted that she had been ticketed more than other members of thc City's
populace. She felt she had been "boycotted" from serving on any City committee or commission.
Zachary Vishanoff, Patterson Street, thought the Planning and Development Department (PDD) was
integrally tied to the EPD because the situations that "got the police in a bad way" were related to PDD.
He cited thc "smart growth" Broadway Apartments, which had won a Governor's Livability Award since
its construction.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 25, 2005 Page 1
Regular Session
Mr. Vishanoff thought the "big report about police misconduct" under consideration precluded the "real
stories about what was happening with the citizens." He indicated that he was not likely to read the
report. He recalled his encounter with the EPD when he was hit with a non-lethal beanbag. He said his
complaints about being hit had gone unaddressed and alleged the police continued to characterize his
actions on that day as threatening. He wished the EPD would apologize to him.
Continuing, Mr. Vishanoff likened the report before the council to "big reports" the University of Oregon
generated to support planning changes. He asserted that people were "torn from their homes and thrown
in the street." He wished the University of Oregon would talk to its neighbors more and rely less on big
reports written by outsiders. He suggested the City start over and find out everything the police had done.
David C. Woods, 935 West 8th Avenue, called the problems at hand a deep issue. He averred that the
problem was not the police so much as it was violence. He said people try to raise children to talk to each
other and resolve problems civilly while citizens tell our leaders to solve problems through violence. He
asserted that citizens were supposed to have a civil society and not a militaristic society or a police state.
He pointed out that police officers were citizens like the rest of the citizenry. He said police officers put
their lives on the line in their work but so did construction workers and medical personnel, among others.
He stated that police officers did not have special rights to intimidate the people of the community. He
thought the police should show respect to the citizens and the respect would be returned.
Jim Hale, 1715 Linnea Avenue, commented that the only time he felt intimidated by police officers was
when he was receiving a traffic ticket that he deserved. He disputed the need to hire consultants or an
assistant to the police chief. He averred that the department needed to hire more officers. He pointed out
that the city of Eugene had a high incidence of property crimes. He disagreed with the report's
recommendation that a consultant be hired to do a time study of the sergeants. He thought an increase in
sergeants was unneeded, though perhaps a few more lieutenants should be hired.
Mr. Hale said answers were needed to the questions raised by the report, such as whether the HRRS
tampered with files and whether investigative reports were changed at its behest. He thought there was a
need for better records security so that police and personnel files did not disappear and reappear.
Mr. Hale reiterated that the primary conclusion of the report, in his opinion, was that there were not
enough officers to do community policing.
Jana Jackson, 1012 East 22® Avenue, spoke in support of the EPD. She said she was one of the 1,500
friends of Officer Randy Ellis. She related that she had spoken with over 2,000 people in the past two
months regarding policing in the city of Eugene. She had concluded from speaking to people that most of
the citizens were more "far more conservative" than those who frequented City Council meetings. She
asserted that people, in general, wanted more policing and an increased budget for the EPD. She
expressed her support for the modifications to the Metro Plan that would provide more funding for the
Lane County Sheriff's Office.
Ms. Jackson shared that some people she discussed these issues with had spoken wistfully of "Sheriff
Joe," the sheriff in Arizona who kept prisoners in a tent city. She related that a couple of merchants
expressed concern that some people would begin to take the law into their own hands. She said a greater
number of people were more matter-of-fact about such things; the people would take the law into their
own hands and this was inevitable given the lack of community policing.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 25, 2005 Page 2
Regular Session
Regarding racial profiling and racism in Eugene, Ms. Jackson stated that Eugene was "the whitest town"
she had ever been in and the people needed to take a hard look inward. She did not think anyone could
point an accusatory finger at the police without looking in the mirror first.
Susan Miller, homeless, said she was 55-years-old and had raised three children. She related that she had
been harassed for being homeless. She recounted several incidents in which she had felt harassed. She
asserted that she contributed to her community and that her daughter volunteered. She said Eugene
citizens were all people and needed love and respect. She averred that the police should not step outside
"the box of the law." She stressed that she was not against the law or the police, she was against hate.
Charles Biggs, 540 Antelope Way, thanked the City for investigating the EPD. He said he had reviewed
the report up to page 55 and had made four pages of notes. He thought the report was "sugar-coated," as it
called the problems that had prompted the investigation "incidents" and "mishaps." He asserted that the
report missed the point. He asked what kind of community would allow something so horrendous to go
unaddressed for so long. He noted that Terry Orsby had filed a sexual harassment suit in 1996. He
recognized that an ethics program was part of the EPD training, but thought there was a culture within the
Police Department that fostered "protectionist" behaviors.
Patricia Hadley, 2611 Edison Street, said there was no option to "wait and see" at this point. She stated
that the role of the police and the role of good citizens had become adversarial. She agreed with the
Police Union that an external review board was in order. She thought the community should define what
it considered dangerous to public safety and there was no "one size fits all."
Ms. Hadley commented that the police issued tickets to homeless people for sitting on the grass and asked
if this made citizens feel safer. She averred that a homeless person who returned to a patch of grass that
he or she had been evicted from would receive a second ticket and ultimately be subject to arrest. She
recounted that she had recently met a homeless man in a wheelchair who had 30 tickets, some for sitting
in the wrong place and some for sitting in the wrong place again. She asked how it served our society for
this man to be ticketed and ultimately incarcerated.
Ms. Hadley believed racial profiling in Eugene was real. Referring to the recently publicized incident in
which Cortez Johnson was stopped, she asserted that if he felt racial bias then there was racial bias. She
noted that she had been accused in the past of seeing gender bias where there was none, but it felt like
gender bias and ultimately her feelings proved to be true.
Ms. Hadley thought the third recommendation should be the top priority of the council, that of
determining what the community's expectations of the police department and development of policies that
matched those expectations and fully implementing community policing. She remarked that there were
already active neighborhood groups. She pointed out that nearly every day she witnessed people being
ticketed for speeding on Roosevelt Boulevard while two drug houses in her immediate neighborhood went
unaddressed. She felt no one cared about that.
In closing, Ms. Hadley said she wished to know the name of her "beat cop." She opined that if New York
City could do it, Eugene could do it, too.
Majeska Seese-Green, PO Box 1214, speaking on behalf of the Whiteaker Community Council,
conveyed the community council's recommendation to form an independent external police review
process. She was pleased to see that it was the fourth recommendation in the report. She expressed the
MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 25, 2005 Page 3
Regular Session
Whiteaker council's support for the first and third recommendations, regarding the development of
mechanisms to access more segments of the community and the determination of community expectations
of the police department respectively. She stated that the Whiteaker Community Council, together with
the Police Commission, planned to co-sponsor a discussion of the report and also of the progress on the
independent police review at 7 p.m. on June 1.
Speaking for herself, Ms. Seese-Green urged implementation of nearly all of the recommendations. She
appreciated that the report was done and expressed hope that the community would get its "money's
worth" out of it.
Tim Laue, 124 Spencers Crest Drive, thanked the council for the opportunity to address the issue. He
said the Police Commission had sent a memorandum regarding its recommendations on the report. He
noted the City Manager said the report had provided a "road map" for addressing some of the most critical
hiring, training, and management practices that were at issue in the organization of the EPD. He stated
that while the commission acknowledged that ultimately successful implementation of the report would
require significant resources and leadership from the City and the council, the commissioners were
hopeful that through such a commitment, police services to the community could be enhanced and the
complaint system could be redesigned to provide accountability and increased transparency. He averred
that this would ultimately yield the changes that would in turn generate trust and confidence in the EPD.
He said this would prevent the reoccurrence of the type of activities that brought about the report in the
first place.
Mr. Laue averred that social scientists had understood for decades that in trying to build a better
community, people were unwilling to cooperate with people they do not know and unwilling to trust
people they had not met. He asserted that in order to reestablish the mutual trust and support necessary
for the community to get past the crisis and to diminish the isolation that separated and divided people,
people needed to reintroduce themselves to one another and acknowledge the mistakes made and address
the attitudes and practices that allowed such mistakes to be made in the first place. He felt that no report
and no amount of money could accomplish this. He said this result could only happen if the community
found common ground and worked together to serve the community that the residents loved.
Mayor Piercy closed the public hearing and called for comments from the City Council.
Councilor Pap6 appreciated Police Commission Chair Laue's contribution to the hearing as well as the
substantive report provided to the council by the commission.
In response to a question from Councilor Pap6, City Manager Taylor stated that input and
recommendations had been encouraged from all citizens and the Human Rights Commission and Police
Commission.
Councilor Ortiz thanked everyone for testifying, particularly those for whom it took great courage to
speak.
Councilor Kelly noted that the Police Commission memorandum made the point that it was the initial
reaction to the report and not the final analysis of it. He underscored that the Police Commission would
be providing further input regarding the results of the review.
MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 25, 2005 Page 4
Regular Session
Councilor Kelly asked if the reports from Chief Lehner and Mr. Chouinard could be posted on the City's
Web site as soon as they were available. City Manager Taylor responded that he would ensure this was
done.
City Manager Taylor reiterated that this was one of the council's areas for action planning and
implementation. He said an action plan would come before the council in a work session as well as a
strategic plan and recommendations on some of the specifics of the internal affairs complaint handling.
He indicated there would be multiple opportunities to talk about the progress the City would make going
forward based on the framework formed by the study's recommendations.
Councilor Kelly said a joint meeting of the Police Commission and the City Council would be held on
July 25 to discuss the commission's recommendations regarding external review.
City Manager Taylor reiterated that the report from Chief Lehner and Mr. Chouinard would come to him
on May 9. He stated that an update on the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF)/International City
Management Association (ICMA) review process was scheduled for the work session on June 22. He
underscored his intent to keep the public informed as the process unfolded.
Mayor Piercy appreciated that the City was keeping the process in from of the public. She adjourned the
meeting at 8:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dennis M. Taylor
City Manager
(Recorded by Ruth Atcherson)
MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 25, 2005 Page 5
Regular Session