Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda Packet 9-26-18 Work Session
September 26, 2018, Work Session EUGENE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA September 26, 2018 12:00 p.m. CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION Harris Hall, 125 East 8th Avenue Eugene, Oregon 97401 Meeting of September 26, 2018; Her Honor Mayor Lucy Vinis Presiding Councilors Mike Clark, President Betty Taylor, Vice President Greg Evans Chris Pryor Emily Semple Claire Syrett Jennifer Yeh Alan Zelenka 12:00 p.m. CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION Harris Hall, 125 East 8th Avenue Eugene, Oregon 97401 1.WORK SESSION: Community Safety System Update September 26, 2018, Work Session The Eugene City Council welcomes your interest in these agenda items. This meeting location is wheelchair-accessible. For the hearing impaired, an interpreter can be provided with 48 hours' notice prior to the meeting. Spanish-language interpretation will also be provided with 48 hours' notice. To arrange for these services, contact the receptionist at 541-682-5010. City Council meetings are telecast live on Metro Television, Comcast channel 21, and rebroadcast later in the week. El consejo de la Ciudad de Eugene agradece su interés en estos asuntos de la agenda. El lugar de la reunión tiene acceso para sillas de ruedas. Se puede proveer a un intérprete para las personas con discapacidad auditiva si avisa con 48 horas de anticipación. También se puede proveer interpretación para español si avisa con 48 horas de anticipación. Para reservar estos servicios llame al 541-682-5010. Las reuniones del consejo de la ciudad se transmiten en vivo por Metro Television, Canal 21 de Comcast y son retransmitidas durante la semana. For more information, contact the Council Coordinator at 541-682-5010, or visit us online at www.eugene-or.gov. September 26, 2018, Work Session – Item 1 EUGENE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Work Session: Community Safety System Update Meeting Date: September 26, 2018 Agenda Item Number: 1 Departments: Central Services Staff Contact: Kristie Hammitt Police Chief Chris Skinner Fire and Emergency Medical Services Chief Joe Zaludek www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 541-682-5524 ISSUE STATEMENT The purpose of this work session is to provide the City Council with an update on the progress of the Community Safety Initiative, to report back on the work completed by staff since the July 2018 council work session on this topic, and to receive City Council input on the next steps in developing Community Safety funding strategy. BACKGROUND At the July 18, 2018, council work session on Community Safety, staff informed the council about several strategies for obtaining community input on the Community Safety System priorities. One of those strategies is outreach to community members that is focused on achieving the following objectives: 1. Gauge the current perception of public safety, including measuring how safe community members feel in their home, neighborhood, neighborhood parks, and downtown. 2. Gauge the level of community awareness about the current state of public safety in Eugene based on several data points to be provided by the City. 3. Gather information that will help the City staff develop a public outreach and engagement strategy for this effort. 4. Identify public safety outcomes that the Eugene community members want the City government to achieve with regard to public safety. Additionally, the council endorsed a set of desired outcomes for the Community Safety System and provided direction to staff on developing Community Safety funding options. This work session is to provide the council with an update on the work completed by staff since July, which was primarily focused on the following three areas: 1) Staff developed funding proposals to achieve outcomes identified by the council. 2) An online survey patterned after the Strategy Research Institute survey was conducted from July 27 to September 10. 3) Community outreach activities were held throughout the summer including participation at September 26, 2018, Work Session – Item 1 community events, a speaker’s series, online outreach and media outreach. Community Safety Funding Options A cross-departmental team developed funding proposals addressing the community safety system gaps and desired outcomes identified by the council. As a conceptual framework, the team developed several different levels of funding packages, starting with immediate and urgent unmet needs. Two more funding packages were developed to address short-term funding needs (1 - 5 years) and medium range funding needs (6 - 10 years). Team representatives from EPD, Fire/EMS, Municipal Court, City Manager’s Office, and Library, Recreation, and Cultural Services worked with their respective managers and front-line personnel to develop individualized service-gap assessments and subsequent cost estimates designed to close those service gaps. As the funding packages were developed, the desired outcomes were examined and closely considered. Alignment of the funding options with council-approved outcomes was used as one of the prioritization criteria in developing the packages. A high-level summary of Community Safety funding options was shared with the Council Community Safety Subcommittee on Thursday, September 20. Staff will share the subcommittee feedback at the work session. Community Outreach Community outreach efforts started in June 2018 with the purpose of educating the public about the current challenges experienced by the Community Safety System. These outreach efforts included setting up booths at community events such as the Farmers’ Market Family Day, Party in the Parks, Touch a Truck, Sunday Streets and Family Fun Nights. Outreach efforts also included speaking engagements to civic groups such as Eugene Chamber of Commerce Board, Eugene Rotary, and Eugene Chamber of Commerce Greeters. Police and fire chiefs or their designees and a municipal court judge attended and spoke at most of the events. A full list of events covered by the City staff in June through the first half of September2018 as part of the Community Safety outreach is provided in Attachment A. Additional outreach efforts included the Community Safety website (in English and Spanish), social media posts, and coverage by local media including the Register Guard and local TV and radio stations. Online Survey An online survey was posted on the City’s website from July 27, 2018, to September 10, 2018, in an effort to collect more data from City residents regarding community safety. The online survey was patterned after the Strategy Research Institute scientific telephone survey conducted in June-July, and had three additional qualitative questions where respondents could type their responses to the questions. There were 2,478 responses to the online survey. The quantitative responses to the online survey followed the results of the SRI survey generally, with a few exceptions. The qualitative data were examined using a content analysis approach, and as with the SRI survey, most of the dominant themes centered on concerns about homelessness and public safety. The results of the online survey are summarized in Attachment B. September 26, 2018, Work Session – Item 1 RELATED CITY POLICIES City Council goals of safe community and effective and accountable municipal government. ATTACHMENTS A. Summary of Community Safety Outreach Efforts B. Online Community Survey Summary CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION None FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Kristie Hammitt Telephone: 541-682-5524 Staff E-Mail: khammitt@eugene-or.gov Community Safety System Communications – Overview Website www.eugene-or.gov/CommunitySafety 3,273 Page Views 6:20 Average time on page Spanish language website 164 Page Views 4:37 Average time on page Social Media Facebook – City of Eugene Post info Shares Reach 9/12 EPD video 8 373 9/5 English survey 62 13,685 8/28 Spanish translated survey 2 2,213 8/8 Park Ambassador/survey link 9 5,049 7/30 English survey 65 13,251 7/20 Shared EPD post 23 662 7/12 Touch-a-Truck w/link to website 2 1,440 6/26 Family Fun Day at Farmer’s Market 3 1,294 Facebook – EPD Post info Shares Reach Sept 12 Community Safety Video 72 15,645 Aug 14 Party in the Park 4 4,142 Aug 1 Increase calls; survey 3 719 Jul 29 Sunday Streets 2 2967 July 13 KMTR story 171 79,336 July 13 Register Guard story 3 2,559 Twitter Tweet info Retweets Link clicks Impressions 9/7 Survey promotion – English 5 17 3,251 9/5 Survey promotion – English 2 22 1,742 8/28 Spanish translation of survey 3 1,204 8/9 English survey 1 21 2,564 7/31 English survey 9 71 4,670 7/26 RT of Chief Skinner tweet, link Community Safety page 2 2,479 September 26, 2018, Work Session – Item 1 ATTACHMENT A Community Safety System Communications – Overview Event booth – 14 events June 26 11:00-1:00 Farmers’ Market Family Day July 10 5:30-7:30 p.m. Party in the Parks, Churchill Sports Park July 12 5-7:30 p.m. Touch-a-Truck, Petersen Barn July 17 5:30-7:30 p.m. Party in the Parks, Maurie Jacobs Park July 29 12:00 4:00 p.m. Sunday Streets, Downtown Eugene August 5 12:00 - 3:00 PM Cal Young Neighborhood Block Party August 7 5:30-7:30 p.m. Party in the Parks, Bethel Community Park August 8 6:00 – 8:00 PM Whiteaker Community Council Ice Cream Social August 14 5:30-7:30 PM Party in the Parks, Washington Jefferson Park August 16 5:30 – 7:00 PM Family Fun Night, Petersen Barn August 21 5:30-7:30 PM Party in the Parks, Arrowhead Park Sept 6 5:00 – 7:00 PM 2018 Pearl Street Block Party Sept 7 5:30 – 8:30 PM Fiesta Cultural Sept 9 4:00 – 7:00 PM Southwest Hills Neighborhood Association Annual Picnic Speaker series – 12 meetings July 18 10:00 AM League of Women Voters Wednesday July 24 7:30 AM Eugene Chamber of Commerce Board August 7, at noon. Eugene Rotary August 20 6:00 – 7:00 PM Grupo Latino Accion Directa (GLAD) August 22 5:30 – 6:30 PM Jewish Community Relations Council Sept 7 at 7:30 AM Eugene Chamber of Commerce Greeters Sept 7 3:30—5:00 PM LatinX Alliance Sept 11 7:00 – 9:00 PM Jefferson Westside Neighbors Sept 17 7:00 – 9:00 PM Northeast Neighbors Association Sept 18 7:00—9:00 PM Active Bethel Neighborhood Association October 17 9:30—11:00 AM Integration Network October 25 7:00—9:00 PM - Friendly Area Neighborhood Association Media Coverage Eugene Police Release Video About Community Safety (KEZI, Sept. 12, 2018) Police Seek More Funding (KEZI, Aug. 9, 2018) City of Eugene launches public safety survey (Register-Guard, Aug. 4, 2018) Lack of patrol officers has new Eugene Police Chief facing tough problems (KMTR/KVAL, July 11, 2018) Eugene police chief orders review of patrol operations (Register-Guard, July 6, 2018) Survey 2,478 respondents to English language survey, 10 to Spanish language survey through September 10 Surveys remain online to continue to collect community input and feedback September 26, 2018, Work Session – Item 1 Esri, HERE, Garmin, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS usercommunity How safe do you feel in your neighborhood? - A compilement of over 400 community member responses collected at 14 events around Eugene - Legend !(Safe !(Moderately Safe !(Unsafe ^`Outreach Events Eugene Urban Growth Boundary September 26, 2018, Work Session – Item 1 of 1 19 City of Eugene Community Justice Initiative Analysis of Online Survey and Comparison with SRI Phase I Survey Online Q1.1: How safe do you feel visiting Downtown Eugene? SRI Phase Q5.1: How safe do you feel when visiting Downtown Eugene? Extremely Safe Extremely Safe Somewhat Safe Somewhat Safe Neutral/Unsure Neutral/Unsure Somewhat Anxious Somewhat Anxious Extremely Anxious Extremely Anxious 0 25 50 75 100 Online Survey SRI Survey Phase I The following analysis and comparison examines 2,478 online responses from a SurveyMonkey survey included on the City of Eugene website “Community Safety and Services” (https://www.eugene-or.gov/3946/ Community-Safety-and-Services). The survey was constructed by the City’s Community Outreach team as part of the City’s ongoing Community Justice Initiative work. The survey went “live” on 7/27/18 and closed on 9/10/18. The online survey was designed using Strategy Research Institute’s (SRI) Benchmark scientific survey as a template. SRI’s Benchmark survey was administered to high propensity voters in the City of Eugene in July 2018. One of the primary differences with the online survey was the inclusion of three questions that asked respondents for qualitative feedback. The qualitative data in this report was analyzed using Taylor-Powell and Renner’s (2003) five step process that included a content analysis. The online survey was available in Spanish, whereas the scientific Benchmark survey was English only. There were ten responses to the Spanish survey, and half of those respondents indicated they lived outside of Eugene. This analysis includes the English language online survey data through 9/10/18, both quantitative and qualitative. The analysis includes the Spanish language qualitative data but not the Spanish quantitative data because of the extremely small sample size. It is important to note the online survey was nonscientific—that is, respondents volunteered to participate, therefore the sample is not randomly selected and the results are not generalizable to the larger population of likely Eugene voters. That said, the online survey provided additional and important qualitative data that the scientific Benchmark survey did not. In this way, the online survey supplemented the Benchmark survey in a meaningful way. September 26, 2018, Work Session – Item 1 ATTACHMENT B of 2 19 0 25 50 75 100 Online Survey SRI Survey Phase I Extremely Safe Strongly Agree Somewhat Safe Somewhat Agree Neutral/Unsure Unsure Somewhat Anxious Somewhat Disagree Extremely Anxious Strongly Disagree Online Q1.3: How safe do you feel walking in your neighborhood during the evening hours? SRI Phase 1 Q5.3: How safe do you feel when walking in your neighborhood during evening hours or night? 0 25 50 75 100 Online Survey SRI Survey Phase I Online Q1.2: How safe do you feel walking in your neighborhood during the daytime hours? SRI Phase 1 Q5.2: How safe do you feel when walking in your neighborhood during daytime hours? Extremely Safe Strongly Agree Somewhat Safe Somewhat Agree Neutral/Unsure Unsure Somewhat Anxious Somewhat Disagree Extremely Anxious Strongly Disagree September 26, 2018, Work Session – Item 1 of 3 19 Online Q1.4: How safe do you feel listing the community park or neighborhood park nearest your home? SRI Phase 1 Q5.4: How safe do you feel listing the community park or neighborhood park nearest your home? 0 25 50 75 100 Online Survey SRI Survey Phase I Extremely Safe Strongly Agree Somewhat Safe Somewhat Agree Neutral/Unsure Unsure Somewhat Anxious Somewhat Disagree Extremely Anxious Strongly Disagree Online Q1.5: How safe do you feel driving, biking or walking on City roads and sidewalks? SRI Phase 1: No similar question 0 25 50 75 100 Online Survey Extremely Safe Somewhat Safe Neutral/Unsure Somewhat Anxious Extremely Anxious September 26, 2018, Work Session – Item 1 of 4 19 Online Q1.5: How safe do you feel about the security of your personal property? SRI Phase 1: No similar question 0 25 50 75 100 Online Survey Extremely Safe Somewhat Safe Neutral/Unsure Somewhat Anxious Extremely Anxious Online Q2: Over the last 12 months, to what extent have your feelings of safety in our community increased, decreased, or stayed the same? SRI Phase 1: No similar question 0 25 50 75 100 Online Survey Decreased a lot Decreased some Stayed the same Increased some Increased a lot September 26, 2018, Work Session – Item 1 of 5 19 Online Q3: Please share any other thoughts about your feelings of safety in Eugene SRI Phase 1: No similar question There were 1,706 individual responses (136 pages of text) to this question. The content analysis of the data revealed these dominant themes: concerns about homelessness, concerns about Downtown Eugene, concerns about property crimes, concerns about the safety of bike paths and parks, and concerns about police response. Within each category of concern, there were multiple related subcategories. Less dominant themes in the data revealed concerns about traffic safety in Eugene, the increase in bias and hate crimes, increased white supremacy activities, and concerns about attracting more homeless people if additional services were offered. While there were generally supportive comments about police and the need to increase the number of police, there were a small number of negative comments that described the respondents’ fear and distrust of police. Homelessness By far the most common theme was about homelessness and associated issues (subcategories) that respondents perceived to be directly related to homelessness. The subcategories included drug use, public health issues (sanitation, discarded needles), perceptions of decreased safety due to the presence of homeless people, and a desire for people perceived to be homeless to “move on,” or have them forcibly removed. There were strong connections made between homelessness, drug use, mental illness, aggressive panhandling/harassment, and crime. Many respondents expressed frustration stemming from their perception that the City was paying more attention to the homeless population downtown than to residents and businesses, and there was a prominent cry to “do something.” There was an implicit differentiation between people feeling “unsafe” and feeling “uncomfortable.” Toolis and Hammack (2015) described this difference as being related to how privileged residents (housed) perceive and define public spaces in ways that essentially exclude unhoused people and move toward an ideology of privatizing so called public spaces to prohibit sitting, standing, panhandling, and sleeping in those areas—essentially to create clear “in- groups” (housed people) and “out-groups” (unhoused people). The difference between feeling unsafe and feeling uncomfortable was present in the data and was associated with different suggested solutions to the problem. Generally, respondents who reported feeling unsafe were more likely to suggest removing homeless people from the area. Respondents who implied they were uncomfortable with seeing homeless people were more inclined to suggest increased social services. Many people mentioned their support of CAHOOTS and their desire to increase their services. Downtown Most of the concerns centered around the Downtown area, with most comments being related in some way to homelessness. Subcategories included the perceptions that Downtown is not family friendly, particularly unsafe for women, that the area is unsafe especially at night, and that the presence of homeless people has created a public health issue (lack of sanitation and discarded needles). Some respondents replied that they either live or work Downtown, and their comments echoed the concerns about homelessness and decreased safety. A smaller subset of respondents claimed they have lived in other large metropolitan areas and that Downtown Eugene is relatively safe in comparison. Another subcategory was a concern that increased police presence downtown (although appreciated) had pushed problems to surrounding areas including the Whitaker neighborhood and the Washington Jefferson Street area. Property Crime Respondents were concerned about the increase in property crime in their neighborhoods that included Downtown, West Eugene, Goodpasture Loop, Delta Ponds, River Road and Santa Clara. Many respondents reported that their homes/cars had been burglarized, property vandalized, and items stolen from their yards. There was a strong connection made between homeless people, illegal camping, and property crime. There was a general concern about the lack of/slow response from police. September 26, 2018, Work Session – Item 1 of 6 19 Online Q4: Prior to this survey, did you know about the City’s CORT program? SRI Phase 1 Q6.1: Prior to the present interview, did you know about the City’s CORT program? 0 25 50 75 100 Online Survey SRI Survey Phase I Yes No Yes No Bike Paths and Parks The safety of the area’s bike paths and parks were a dominant theme in the data. Respondents believed that the presence of homeless camps near bike paths and parks decreased the safety of the areas and had changed the way in which respondents utilized the bike paths and parks. For example, many people restricted their use of bike paths and parks to daylight hours only, would only use the areas if accompanied by their dog, or carried pepper spray. A small number of people stated they obtained conceal carry permits for firearms because of their fear of being attacked. Police Response Respondents were concerned about slow police response to non life threatening calls such as burglary and other property crime. Most attributed the slow response time to an overall lack of police officers. Many people commented that they believed if police were concentrating on a specific geographic area like Downtown, that decreased the police’s ability to respond quickly to other areas in the City. There was a strong nexus between increased number of police officers and faster response times. Less Dominant Themes There were several less dominant themes in the data that deserve mention because they were not present in the preliminary data analysis (N = 1,321, July 8, 2018), and therefore represent emergent trends. Many respondents reported they were concerned with traffic safety in Eugene, including issues of reckless driving, speeding, road rage, and red light runners. These issues have decreased the feeling of safety when utilizing Eugene’s roadways either by car, bike, or walking. A small number of respondents described their concerns about increased white supremacy activities, racism, and the increase of hate/bias crimes. It is important to mention this category because research has shown that these types of activities are typically underreported because of barriers including fear of reprisal from perpetrators, concerns about deportation, and general mistrust of law enforcement and judicial systems. Finally, a number of respondents commented on their concerns that if more social services were offered to homeless people, that would attract more homeless people to the area, seeking the additional services. This is called the “Magnet Myth” and has been shown to be largely inaccurate in other metropolitan areas, such as San Francisco (Laslavik, 2015). September 26, 2018, Work Session – Item 1 of 7 19 Online Q5: Based on what you know about the program, or how it was described here, what priority should City officials place in this program? SRI Phase 1 Q6.1a: What priority should City officials place on the program? 0 25 50 75 100 Online Survey SRI Survey Phase I A high priority, kept in place no matter what High Priority A medium priority, funded so long as the budget allows Medium Priority A low priority, not really needed at this time Low Priority Unsure/don’t know Unsure/refused Online Q6: Prior to this survey, did you know about the City’s Mental Health Court Program? SRI Phase 1 Q6.2: Prior to the present interview, did you know about the City’s Mental Health Court program? 0 25 50 75 100 Online Survey SRI Survey Phase I Yes No Yes No September 26, 2018, Work Session – Item 1 of 8 19 Online Q7: Based on what you know about the program, or how it was described here, what priority should City officials place in this program? SRI Phase 1 Q6.2a: What priority should City officials place on the program? 0 25 50 75 100 Online Survey SRI Survey Phase I A high priority, kept in place no matter what High Priority A medium priority, funded so long as the budget allows Medium Priority A low priority, not really needed at this time Low Priority Unsure/don’t know Unsure/refused Online Q8: Prior to this survey, did you know about the City’s Community Court Program? SRI Phase 1 Q6.3: Prior to the present interview, did you know about the City’s Community Court program? 0 25 50 75 100 Online Survey SRI Survey Phase I Yes No Yes No September 26, 2018, Work Session – Item 1 of 9 19 Online Q9: Based on what you know about the program, or how it was described here, what priority should City officials place in this program? SRI Phase 1 Q6.3a: What priority should City officials place on the program? 0 25 50 75 100 Online Survey SRI Survey Phase I A high priority, kept in place no matter what High Priority A medium priority, funded so long as the budget allows Medium Priority A low priority, not really needed at this time Low Priority Unsure/don’t know Unsure/refused Online Q10: Prior to this survey, did you know about CAHOOTS? SRI Phase 1 Q6.4: Prior to the present interview, did you know about the CAHOOTS? 0 25 50 75 100 Online Survey SRI Survey Phase I Yes No Yes No September 26, 2018, Work Session – Item 1 of 10 19 Online Q11: Based on what you know about the program, or how it was described here, what priority should City officials place in this program? SRI Phase 1 Q6.4a: What priority should City officials place on the program? 0 25 50 75 100 Online Survey SRI Survey Phase I A high priority, kept in place no matter what High Priority A medium priority, funded so long as the budget allows Medium Priority A low priority, not really needed at this time Low Priority Unsure/don’t know Unsure/refused Online Q12: Prior to this survey, did you know about the City’s Teen Court? SRI Phase 1 Q6.5: Prior to the present interview, did you know about the City’s Teen Court Program? 0 25 50 75 100 Online Survey SRI Survey Phase I Yes No Yes No September 26, 2018, Work Session – Item 1 of 11 19 Online Q13: Based on what you know about the program, or how it was described here, what priority should City officials place in this program? SRI Phase 1 Q6.5a: What priority should City officials place on the program? 0 25 50 75 100 Online Survey SRI Survey Phase I A high priority, kept in place no matter what High Priority A medium priority, funded so long as the budget allows Medium Priority A low priority, not really needed at this time Low Priority Unsure/don’t know Unsure/refused Online Q14: City officials face many challenges relating to public safety, as described below. What is your level of awareness about each of the following facts? Eugene’s Police Department staffing has remained stagnant, or flat, over the past several years, while Eugene’s population has continued to grow SRI Phase 1 Q7.1: Before the present interview, were you aware of the fact that the Eugene Police Department staffing has remained stagnant, meaning flat, over the past several years, while Eugene’s population has continued to grow? 0 25 50 75 100 Online Survey SRI Survey Phase I Extremely Aware Extremely Aware Somewhat Aware Somewhat Aware Not at all Aware Not at all Aware September 26, 2018, Work Session – Item 1 of 12 19 Online Q14: City officials face many challenges relating to public safety, as described below. What is your level of awareness about each of the following facts? The daily average of public-initiated calls for Eugene Police services have increased 21% since 2014. SRI Phase 1 Q7.2: Before the present interview, were you aware of the fact that the daily average of public-initiated calls for Eugene Police services have increased 21% since 2014? 0 25 50 75 100 Online Survey SRI Survey Phase I Extremely Aware Extremely Aware Somewhat Aware Somewhat Aware Not at all Aware Not at all Aware September 26, 2018, Work Session – Item 1 of 13 19 Online Q14: City officials face many challenges relating to public safety, as described below. What is your level of awareness about each of the following facts? There has been an 18% increase in crime in Eugene in recent years, including homicide, rape robbery, assault, sex offenses, family offenses, and kidnapping SRI Phase 1 Q7.3: Before the present interview, were you aware of the fact that the there has been a significant increase in crimes in Eugene in recent years, including homicide, rape, robbery, assault, sex offenses, family offenses, and kidnapping; these have increased by 18% since 2014? 0 25 50 75 100 Online Survey SRI Survey Phase I Extremely Aware Extremely Aware Somewhat Aware Somewhat Aware Not at all Aware Not at all Aware Online Q14: City officials face many challenges relating to public safety, as described below. What is your level of awareness about each of the following facts? Increased calls for service and crime, combined with stagnant police department staffing levels, has resulted in an increase in the average response time by approximately 20 minutes since 2014 SRI Phase 1 Q7.4: Before the present interview, were you aware of that there has been a significant increase int he City Police Department’s average response time as a result of crime going up, while the Department’s resources have remained stagnant? In fact, average response time has increased from 22.5 minutes in 2014 to 41.8 minutes in 2017—an increase of 86%? 0 25 50 75 100 Online Survey SRI Survey Phase I Extremely Aware Extremely Aware Somewhat Aware Somewhat Aware Not at all Aware Not at all Aware September 26, 2018, Work Session – Item 1 of 14 19 Online Q14: City officials face many challenges relating to public safety, as described below. What is your level of awareness about each of the following facts? Due to insufficient staffing, the number of calls (about non-life threatening situations) that the police are unable to respond to have increase by more than 36% SRI Phase 1 Q7.5: Before the present interview, were you aware of that the number of unable-to- respond police calls, due to insufficient staffing, has increased from 59 per day in 2014 to more than 80 per day today… an increase of over 36%? 0 25 50 75 100 Online Survey SRI Survey Phase I Extremely Aware Extremely Aware Somewhat Aware Somewhat Aware Not at all Aware Not at all Aware Online Q15: To what extent do you agree or disagree that City officials should take specific steps to address these challenges? SRI Phase 1 Q9: Now that we have identified a set facts that City officials believe are negatively impacting the level of Public Safety presently being provided to Eugene residents, do you agree or disagree with the notion that City officials should take specific steps to address these challenges? 0 25 50 75 100 Online Survey SRI Survey Phase I Strongly Agree Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Somewhat Agree Neutral/Unsure Unsure Somewhat Disagree Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree Strongly Disagree September 26, 2018, Work Session – Item 1 of 15 19 Online Q16: Eugene officials are regularly faced with making decisions regarding how best to invest the available local tax dollars for services and programs that benefit residents and make the community a more desirable place to live. If you were an advisor to the City, how would you prioritize the following outcomes? SRI Phase 1: No similar question Reduce calls with no response Resolve cases swiftly Align resources with needs Reduce crime Reduce time response Preserve livability Reduce the cycle of repeated arrests Enhance staff training Expand earlier interventions like Teen Ct Increase connections to services for those in need Support efforts to address homelessness Promote community solutions 0 2 4 6 8 10 Online Survey Not a Priority at all Top Priority (Absolutely essential) Online Q17:Are there any other outcomes that you think are important for the City Council to consider? SRI Phase 1: No similar question There were 991 individual responses (54 pages of text) to this question. The content analysis of the data revealed one dominant theme: concerns about homelessness, with two distinct subcategories: Don’t criminalize the homeless, and Be More Strict with the Homeless. There was also mention of the desire to use the EWEB office as the new City Hall. Concerns about homelessness Don’t Criminalize the Homeless: One distinct trend in the data were comments centered on the idea of providing more services to people who are homeless, including basic needs (food, clothing, shelter), addiction services, physical and mental health services, and more trauma-informed policing efforts. The homeless population was separated into two groups: the “travelers” (not from here), and “local” (from here). There was more inclination to offer services to the “local” population than to the “travelers.” Many respondents believed that the “travelers” are responsible for a good share of the undesirable behaviors that cause people to feel less safe (aggressive panhandling, verbal confrontations, drug use, dogs). The idea of a day shelter with a shower was mentioned, as was continued support for CAHOOTS (with enhanced social worker/mental health response). There was a consistent thread of support for programs designed to address the root causes of homelessness. Several respondents mentioned a program located in Fort Worth, Texas that pays homeless people an hourly wage to pick up trash in their downtown area. September 26, 2018, Work Session – Item 1 of 16 19 Online Q18: Is there anything you would like to add about community safety in Eugene? SRI Phase 1: No similar question There were 1,040 individual responses to this question (57 pages of text). Again, as in the previous two qualitative questions, the central theme of the responses was homelessness, with two distinct subcategories: the need for more services, and the need for stronger enforcement. Additionally, there were a small number of respondents that mentioned concerns about systemic economic issues such as PERS (Public Employee Retirement System), and insufficient funding for public education. Concerns about bike path safety and traffic safety were also mentioned. Homelessness Need More Services: Many respondents recognized the complex array of issues that surround homelessness, including drug and alcohol abuse, mental health, housing, and the fact that some people identified as homeless are merely travelers—and that these folks are less “worthy” of receiving social services support. Other strong threads of agreement included concerns about public health (sanitation and discarded needles), and support for basic needs services, and CAHOOTS. While most of the comments focused on the Downtown area, many respondents were concerned about adjacent neighborhoods (i.e. Whitaker) and other areas in Eugene. There was a small number of comments that supported more police officers trained in how to interact with homeless people, especially people experiencing mental health issues. Need More Enforcement: the predominant theme in this subcategory was the need for more police officers and stronger enforcement of existing laws that would discourage homeless people from congregating in Downtown Eugene. There were numerous emphatic suggestions to copy what other cities (i.e. Springfield, Corvallis) have done to move the homeless population out of their downtown cores. The “Magnet Myth” was also a central theme, with the feeling that providing more services attracts more homeless people, and that stricter enforcement would decrease the number of homeless people in Eugene. Many respondents who advocated for more services also pointed out their concern that increased enforcement activities in Downtown Eugene would push problems out into adjacent neighborhoods and parks. Be More Strict with the Homeless: The other distinct trend in the data was the feeling that the City should be less tolerant with the homeless population, and that the presence of support services actually increased the number of homeless people in our community because they come here seeking support services (known as the “Magnet Myth”). This group of comments included ideas such as a camping ban, a panhandling ban, and a loitering ban. More aggressive police enforcement, and increased police patrols was also mentioned predominantly. Many respondents suggested looking to Springfield as a model that aggressively targets undesirable behaviors and therefore decreases the number of homeless people in their downtown area. September 26, 2018, Work Session – Item 1 of 17 19 Online Q19: What is your gender? SRI Phase 1 Q22: Gender of respondent? Prefer not to answer Female Male Another gender identity 0 25 50 75 100 Online Survey SRI Survey Phase I Online Q20: What is your age? SRI Phase 1 Q19: Into which of the following age categories do you fit? 0 25 50 75 100 Online Survey SRI Survey Phase I Prefer not to answer Refused 18 - 30 years 31 - 40 years 41 - 50 years 51 - 55 years Over 55 years September 26, 2018, Work Session – Item 1 of 18 19 Online Q21: Select all races/ethnicities you identify with SRI Phase 1 Q21: What is your ethnic background? Refused American Indian or Alaska Native Asian Black or African American Hispanic, Latino or Spanish origin White Another Race/ethnicity Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 0 25 50 75 100 Online Survey SRI Survey Phase I 0-5 years 6-10 years 11-25 years over 25 years Refused 0 25 50 75 100 Online Survey SRI Survey Phase I Online Q22: How long have you lived in Eugene? SRI Phase 1 Q13: How long have you lived in Eugene? September 26, 2018, Work Session – Item 1 of 19 19 Online Q23: Which ward do you live in? SRI Phase 1 Q25: Which ward do you live in? 1 Emily Semple 2 Betty Taylor 3 Alan Zelenka 4 Jennifer Yeh 5 Mike Clark 6 Greg Evans 7 Claire Syrett 8 Chris Pryor Lane Co Other 0 5 10 15 20 25 Online Survey SRI Survey Phase I September 26, 2018, Work Session – Item 1