City of Eugene Human Rights Commission
Regular MeetingEugene, OR · February 19, 2019
Minutes
City of Eugene
Human Rights Commission
MINUTES
Tuesday, February 19, 2019
5:30pm – 8:35pm Meeting
Atrium Building, Sloat Room, 99 W. 10th Avenue, Eugene
Present:
Human Rights Commissioners: Joel Iboa (Chair), Ibrahim Coulibaly (Vice Chair), Julia Johnson, Ela
Kubok, Ibrahim Hamide, Bonnie Souza, Serena Markstrom, Rick Guerra
Human Rights and Neighborhood Involvement Staff: Jennifer Van Der Haeghen, Fabio Ramos de
Andrade
1 – Opening business
J. Iboa – Declared the meeting open, introduced Caitlin Estes who would take pictures during the meeting
and invited questions on the draft agenda.
Agenda
Motion: Move to approve the February 2019 agenda as amended to include a conversation on soon to
start City Council session on panhandling ordinance and Technical Assistance Collaborative (TAC) report
to the agenda.
Made by: J. Johnson
Second: Ela Kubok
Vote: Unanimous
Minutes
J Iboa – Asked if commissioners wanted to propose changes to the January minutes.
B Souza – requested a correction on Kris Galago’s name, who spoke during public comments in the
January meeting.
Motion: Move to approve the January 2019 minutes.
Made by: I. Hamide
Second: B. Souza
Vote: Approved by 4 votes. E. Kubok and R. Guerra abstained for not attending the January meeting.
2. Public Comments
Jen Frenzer
Introduced herself as a 2014-17 Human Rights Commission (HRC) member. Presented support for
Serena Markstrom in her discussion, report, and potential motion for including homeless people, housing
status as protected status in Eugene’s Human Rights Code. Jen noted that it was tried and failed in the
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 |HRNI@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/HRC
past, but that the recent TAC report, could help with that claim now. Expressed her support and
congratulated HRC’s position on panhandling. Jen noted that every time she does something about
homelessness, the city brings up safety concerns. For her, it is not the right way to go. She stated that
contracting civil rights with unnecessary law is the wrong thing to do in Eugene.
Mary Christiansen
Mary introduced herself, introduced the climate group 350 Eugene, of which she is a member, and noted
how her group’s work fits in with HRC’s work. Mary indicated that a representative of the group will attend
the meetings to see how they can support it.
3 – Funding Request
Disorient Film Festival (DFF)
Susan Hirata introduced the 14th edition of DFF, which will be held at the UO campus, listing 37 films this
year. Susan explained that typical DDF films focus on social justice and identity. Susan added that DFF
celebrates minorities and help them feel represented. DFF is coordinating with 4J to have a STEM day in
this year’s edition. Film showed on STEM day will highlight groups of children around the world, finding
solutions through STEM. Susan described some of the movies and requested $250 in HRC co-
sponsorship.
B. Souza – Supported the requested by describing her experience attending it in the past.
I. Hamide – Questioned how many countries would be represented and heard from Susan that this year’s
list includes movies from South Korea, China, Vietnam, India, Pakistan and Indonesia.
Serena Markstrom volunteered to be HRC’s representative at the event.
Motion: Move to approve the request as amended.
Made by: B. Souza
Second: R. Guerra
Vote: Unanimous
4 – Eugene Police Department (EPD) Liaison Updates
Lieutenant Natt presented a brief report including three hate crime incidents. Two incidents were cleared
by arrest. The 3rd involves odd circumstances, affecting a local business over internet. Lieutenant Natt
also reported on a call from the FBI last week about vandalism on a downtown church. The violator, who
had mental health issues, was arrested for charges against church property. The suspect was sentenced
in federal court and will receive mental health services before completing jail time. Lieutenant Natt also
reported on a visit and tour with J. Van der Haeghen and Fabio Andrade at EPD.
Questions
R. Guerra – Is the number of cases average for this time of year?
Lieutenant Natt noted that March’s report could provide comparative numbers and that he will provide data
to HRNI team working on final 2018 report.
5 – Funding Request
Showing Up for Racial Justice -SURJ Film Festival.
Gary Baran introduced the plan for the film festival, which will start on March 11 and include four showings
followed by community discussions. This year’s films address White nationalism. SURJ requested $200.
B. Souza, J. Iboa, J. Johnson, and I. Coulibaly volunteered to support and/or attend the showings.
B. Souza, - Noted that the Whole Eugene Community United (WeCU) work group was approached about
co-sponsorship. Was told by Nadia that sponsorship would show up in future promotional materials.
Motion: Move to approve the request as amended.
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 | HRNI@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/HRC
Made by: E. Kubok
Second: J. Coulibaly
Vote: Unanimous
6 – Discussion on City Council’s session on Panhandling Ordinance and TAC Report
J. Iboa – Reminded commissioners about a previous agreement to have a member speak at the public
hearing on panhandling ordinance. J. Iboa noted that the HRC previously agreed to send someone to
speak on the issue. The meeting was scheduled for 7:30pm on Feb 19. The designated speaker would
need to arrive before the meeting start time. Joel asked if someone felt comfortable leaving the HRC
meeting early to give testimony about the panhandling ordinance at the City Council meeting.
S. Markstrom inquired about a draft comment.
J. Iboa proposed to submit written comments.
J. Johnson suggested Joel to leave the HRC meeting earlier to offer comments on behalf of the HRC at
the City Council hearing and to let I. Coulibaly chair the meeting in Joel’s absence.
E. Kubok agreed that commission chairs give a stronger message.
J. Iboa agreed with proposal.
No vote was taken.
7 - Presentation on Housing Tools & Strategies
Anne Fifield – Community Development Division.
Anne provided a brief review of her position and this project including how stakeholders from different
groups were involved in it. In May 2018, City Council directed staff to identify barriers to affordability and
diversity in housing. The goal of the Housing Tools and Strategies project was to identify short- and long-
term administrative and policy actions to City Council to act on. Participants in project work group included
an external consultancy, two people from each ward, project partners representatives, tenants, owners,
K12 representatives, neighborhoods, Centro Latino, NAACP, AARP, etc. Work group identified 80 actions.
Staff provided updates to City Council in December. The project team will need to go back to City Council
because some actions are not just administrative actions and will need to be reviewed by City Council. In
January, City Council discussed a Construction Excise Tax (CET) on new construction to support local
fund for affordable housing, subsidized affordable housing. It would go in effect this July at .33% and then
increase to .5% to finally reach 1% on all new construction in two years. The intent of phasing in was to
minimize burden. It is an attempt to ease the pain for those folks paying it. Builders pay System
Development Charges (SDCs), which are very large (waste water, parks etc.). Two years of CET would be
decreased from SDCs in equal amount. The shift in the short term will make it so no new fees are
assessed in the first two years. Money collected through this process would go to affordable housing fund.
In addition to moneys raised via CET, the City of Eugene would contribute funds to show that investment
is coming from the whole community. An advisory community would decide on when money would be
spent and Council would review it every two years. There is a hearing tonight on CET. That’s the big
council action out of housing tools and strategies. On March 13, staff will present a handful of actions. She
would know them by Friday (February 21). They are due to City Council next week. Agenda would be
posted on the website. Staff are looking at a mix of recommendation, looking at city code, zoning code.
Some items would be easily implemented, some would take 18-24 months to implement. A few proposals
the city is exploring include: Streamlining permit process for small projects, moving them to the front of the
line and smaller housing that is affordable by design. Everything has subsequent reaction to it. Internal
hashing out of which ones to recommend to City Council is underway.
Questions
I. Coulibaly – Hearing that you are planning to raise affordable housing by increasing cost of construction
with 2 years phasing, what do you hear from developers? What is their feedback?
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 | HRNI@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/HRC
A. Fifield – Staff recommended .5%. Builders don’t like it, but it is a problem that we don’t have enough for
affordable housing, the percentage of community in need is very high. Home Builders’ Association doesn’t
like it but will go along with .5%. Large builders stated they are in favor of .5 CET, but City Council moved
ahead with 1% CET. The technical analysis looked at 1% impact on different housing types, increasing it
did not shift projects to be financially unfeasible. Cottage housing is not feasible now.
R. Guerra asked about how funds were going to be used and about discussion with the community to
encourage people to build.
A. Fifield - You could use it to buy land, flexible partnership with builders, down payment assistance.
R. Guerra – Do you have the recommendations from the group?
A. Fifield – Yes, but don’t have it at hand. I can get it back to you. Many actions need funding source.
E. Kubok - I spend my day time talking affordable housing. Years ago City Council showed a continuum of
housing, we are lacking types of housing for different incomes. For low income, we lack 30,000 units.
When you build financial structure for multiple family, you get X% from federal, etc. a small amount can
make or break projects. It is important to support it.
B. Souza – What kind of push back have you gotten. Who’s from? What?
A. Fifield – Many emails today, 1% is too high. Should go with .5%. Coming from the builders.
J. Iboa – Are there any materials you can send our way?
Anne Fifield – There is a 30-page report, executive summary with 4-5 pages. I will talk to Jen and send it
over to you.
S. Markstrom - Can you add that to a list of things to talk at the hearing (referring to J Iboa’s participation
at City Council hearing).
E. Kubok – You would have to talk twice. It is a complicated issue. The needed number of housing will not
be built by people opposing it. They don’t have plan to build it anyway.
S. Markstrom – It would be a benefit for certain types of builders.
E. Kubok – Bend has done it successfully. City Council really wants one percent.
8 - Presentation on Guardian Trailers (GT)
Lieutenant Mozan - EPD
After introducing himself, Lieutenant Mozan explained that when Chief Skinner arrived, he had a number
of innovative ways to change brand, deliver police services in Eugene and be more effective. One such
thing was camera trailers branded ‘guardian trailers’, which are an effective measure around the country.
Lieutenant Mozan explained the process of acquiring the trailers. Competitors were vetted considering
integration with city’s IT structure, local weather, and data safety and privacy. Lieutenant Mozan described
the technical features of the equipment. He then proceeded to give some examples of how guardian
trailers have been used by EPD to solve cases. He explained that when guardian trailers are placed,
whatever illegal activity was going on the area stops. For example, Kesey Square was scary, but criminal
activity went down. He has heard that feedback from food trucks operators and from patrons as well.
Many appreciate, others not so much. He also mentioned examples from placement of cameras on MLK
and Coburg underpass. Bicyclists and pedestrians feel more comfortable using the area now. He also
offered an example of how someone placed graffiti on one of the trailers.
Questions
B. Souza – What are the policies around information stored on the guardian trailers?
Lieutenant Mozan – There is a policy. I meant to bring copy.
B. Souza – Can you send it?
Lieutenant Mozan – All of EPDs policies are publicly posted and outward facing. Will make sure to send
it. Specifies it is a pilot process, this policy was vetted by Police Commission, images are stored for 30
days unless it is evidentiary. In that case, we extract the video we need and log on normal schedule
retention for crimes. Data is overridden after 32 days. This is a company-specified amount of storage, our
IT folks not impressed, to double that, we had to tweak settings to get that storage.
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 | HRNI@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/HRC
E. Kubok – I’m curious about the type of outreach that was done to the community to know about what is
happening. I work close to the Coburg underpass, I saw the pole, was curious about it. How do people
know about it?
Lieutenant Mozan – There were City Council meetings discussing this project extensively. This Power
Point Presentation was given to City Council and news cameras there. When GT arrived, we hosted a
media event in parking lot, news stations and radio attended. There has been outreach to let people know
it is out there. Generating media as they are deployed. Comic came from Eugene Weekly, got tour of
cameras.
I. Coulibaly – Is there a possibility to add feature to identify stolen cars?
Lieutenant Mozan – Guardian Trailers are scalable. We can add any type of camera. With 150K you can
have what we can afford, with unlimited funds we can add license plate recognition. It was a hot issue in
previous iteration and Police Commission wants license plate and facial recognition. They exist, but we
don’t have them in the guardian trailers. Parking enforcement has license plate recognition in their carts. It
will be easy to add it.
R. Guerra – Is there a schedule of deployment? Who reviews videos?
Lieutenant Mozan – No schedule, they move a lot. Have one in West Eugene, near a place with several
break ins. One in Kesey square, one is down due to camera malfunctioning, replacement is expected by
tomorrow. We have requests from a home builder with construction theft, competing request for the Park
Blocks. Park Blocks will win, but we will get it to the other area. Put in area, reduce behaviors, move to
different area. MLK and Coburg issues have come back.
I. Hamide – Are there four units? Did they pay dividends, will they pay dividends?
Lieutenant Mozan - I believe they did and they will. (even) With all increase in staff at EPD, we cannot be
everywhere. The earlier question on reviews, we review when investigators ask for footage. We give them
access to cameras, they set it up for investigative needs. After an officer takes the report, they can ask for
video review. I give officers ability to view and review, so they can isolate what they need, then we send
someone to extract the video and save it as evidentidence.it is great to have it out there when you can’t
afford to have EPD there all the time.
R. Guerra – Can they erase (videos)?
Lieutenant Mozan – No, they can view and review, but can’t erase.
B. Souza – Evidence is valid, but seems creepy, the surveillance state, communicate over internet. Which
protections are there to protect innocent people. Share with other agencies?
Lieutenant Mozan – We had request from federal marshals seeking a fugitive in this area. The person was
tracked by Portland field office after using a credit card in downtown. I was able to verify that subject was
in downtown. Sent them video, but no other involvement. It was a completely different person using the
credit card. If marshals saw video, they might decide not to spend federal dollars coming to track a person
in the community.
Question about catching innocent people. Guardian trailers are in public places, pair of binoculars in police
cars, we trust they are not looking into people’s homes. Not looking in private areas, sensitive areas.
Zoom could be misused, look into something closer than naked eye. They are recorded, if someone did
that, we can view footage and see who did that.
B. Souza – Do people from the outside have access to it?
Lieutenant Mozan – We use a secure communication system. Like in your cell phone. 4G technology, can
be hacked, but going over secure IP to City of Eugene servers, we can access it that way. Each GT create
hotspots around them. They are invisible, you cannot connect to them. Harry Potter technology, not my
area.
J. Iboa - Last question to Lieutenant Mozan
S. Markstrom – What you look for is report driven? Or are you looking to find things?
Lieutenant Mozan – Think of it as passive versus active. Active surveillance is what you saw on flash mob.
I was watching something that was in progress. Useful for events like 2021, trials, where there is not
capacity to deploy officers. Supremely useful in clearing area, what is going on in specific zone. Not what
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 | HRNI@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/HRC
we are doing. No time to sit in front of a monitor. We deploy them to given zones. People will know if
camera is pointing at them. EPD doesn’t wish to see everything in real life.
We want people to consider not doing those things, but biking, enjoying the city. Project is ongoing, here is
the policy (pointing to website).
9 – Presentation on Climate Recovery Ordinance.
Jen Van De Haeghen – Human Rights and Neighborhood Involvement (HRNI)
Jen started by describing how HRNI supports City of Eugene programs on how to reach marginalized
communities to increase access and engagement. She noted that her presentation would not get into
technicalities of climate action plan but focus on the community engagement process. She also noted that
an expert on the topic could come at a future HRC meeting to offer more details on the issue. She noted
that a Sustainability Commission report on the topic was schedule for February 20, 2019. That
commission and report have amazing amounts of science and math on how to reach the climate recovery
ordinance goals. Jen proceeded presenting the timeline of this and related project, which is expected to be
completed in 2019. She described the goals that apply to the entire city and discussed the need for
coordination process with other units of government. Jen explained how organizations in the Eugene
Climate Collaborative (ECC) are supporting the project. Jen noted that HRC have an ability to impact
plans via its advising role to City Council, especially regarding to climate change impacts on
underrepresented and marginalized communities. By looking at how other cities have engaged community
on the issue, a model from Portland was identified as a good case study. Following the Portland model,
six organizations will receive $3,000 for their time at the Equity Panel discussions developing an equity
lens for this and related projects. That process is getting attention by other departments. Preliminary
concerns are around water, salmon run for indigenous communities and electricity for wheel chair users
were. The work group is using community education models including storytelling, drawing, and play to
help communities explain their own experience, which will then be synthetized into a recommendation and
a case study to be shared. Jen noted that Dr. Reyes Santos will lead this facilitation process.
Questions
I. Hamide – How long is the project? How is it going with inroads for marginalized communities to
participate? Have you seen success?
J. Van Der Haeghen – Traditionally, we have not created pathways for these communities. Acknowledged
that the facilitation process is helping people trust the planning process. The approach is to be honest and
vulnerable with these groups. Meetings with equity panel until June. Meetings have been positive, not
without pushback, getting hard questions, real conversation on stories and conversations will be used.
The goal is to lift their experience up and have them be part of the process. That can be a challenge,
given how our families have experienced govt in the past. I’m optimistic, but acknowledge that this will not
be without tension and hiccups, that the process is very productive.
J. Iboa – Anything we can do to be helpful?
J. Van Der Haeghen – One of the components is to take education back to community, engage more
feedback. It is helpful to have your feedback and engagement, to lift organizations up and their leaders.
For some this will be the first time they are trying to educate their communities on climate change.
B. Souza – Possible for us to get slides?
J. Van Der Haeghen – Yes, a longer version with more technical info was shared with City Council. I can
share video and a couple of slides.
10 - Conversation on letter regarding Lane County Sherriff actions
J. Iboa Told HRC members that he signed a letter addressing the fact that Lane County Sheriffs’ office
has been calling immigration officers when inmates are about to be released. Joel explained that a
decision had to be made quickly. He would be happy to answer questions on process.
J. Johnson - How has it been?
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 | HRNI@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/HRC
J. Iboa – Doozey. I had a chance to go to City Council and bring issue up. My concern is that Eugene has
a sanctuary ordinance. Why spend money on county jail? Spending money there puts us in violation of
ordinance. What does it mean to community? We ask City Council to take action. Lane County sheriff
believes he is not in violation of OR statute. Lane County commissioners are involved, organizations
involved, I will continue to keep you updated.
B. Souza – Any plans for legal actions?
J. Iboa – There will be a discussion this week. Folks that sent the letter will discuss legal action later this
week.
B. Souza – It was a good letter!
11 - J. Iboa left the meeting to attend City Council hearing. I. Coulibaly assumed chairman
position.
12 - Workgroup and liaison updates
12.1 Whole Eugene Community United (WeCU) work group updates – Bonnie Souza
B. Souza referred to three documents attached to February’s HRC meeting packet. Noted that last
September WeCU presented the Marginalized Voices Report and recommendations during a City Council
work session. WeCU prioritized three of them. City Manager agreed with recommendations and instructed
staff to move forward. City Manager had a few questions on more details on the requests. WeCU worked
on these documents. The first document provides WeCU’s vision for a multicultural center in Eugene,
which was provided to City Manager, the mayor, Jen Van Der Haeghen, and HRC. The second is about
the liaison position. A proposal from CMO for that position was submitted to the Budget Committee. The
last document merits discussion. WeCU members felt strongly that a statement about Charlie Landero’s
death should be made. WeCU held discussions, drafted and shared the statement with everybody. WeCU
asks that HRC either approves the statement on behalf of WeCU, or endorses it, or both. Bonnie noted
that each WeCU member present could speak for themselves on that. Bonnie described main points from
her perspective. First is about de-escalation policies and how that impacted the situation at the school.
The second is about differences in perspectives from people in marginalized communities in this situation.
Third, District Attorney (DA) in press release chose to include damming information about the person who
was killed. She hopes that EPD will be open and transparent in the investigation. Bonnie asked HRC to
approve or endorse the statement.
Questions
E. Kubok – A question for Jennifer. How does it work when a work group wants to approve a statement?
Just the technicalities.
J. Van Der Haeghen – Work groups advise HRC. HRC advises City Council. What is the distinction
between approving and endorsing the statement?
B. Souza – Work group members issuing statement versus HRC issuing it.
J. Van Der Haeghen – Work groups are an extension of HRC, they don’t exactly exist as entity. I think an
endorsement is actually were you all end if you find appropriate ground.
B. Souza – We will have our monthly meeting this Saturday. Changes to this bring to WeCU if HRC
agrees.
S. Markstrom – Do you want it out immediately because you want to influence police investigation? I know
a feeling of urgency, but there are procedures police is going through. I like the statement, concerns me
as well. Don’t know exactly what is going on through.
B. Souza – Some WeCU members want to get it out soon. They have not heard from this group who
shares similar feelings and concerns. This discussion is going for a long time in the country, it needs to
happen in Eugene.
E. Kubok – I am not familiar with the case. This is very detailed and oriented to one situation. We don’t
know the full story yet. It is sensitive from both sides. I’m thinking about parents in the community
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 | HRNI@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/HRC
B Souza – Is there something specific?
E. Kubok - If the group feels they need to say something, I would say something more general. It happens
here, but very central to this one event.
J. Johnson – I feel the question I had is that it is this a statement coming from a work group. I would need
more time as they had. I would not be ready to endorse it tonight. I don’t want disrespect folks who worked
on it. What decisions need to be made tonight?
B. Souza – What are your reservations? I would like information to bring to WeCU on Saturday.
I. Coulibaly – Questions if a motion to extend the meeting is needed.
J. Van Der Haeghen explained that a vote was not needed, but that any decision would need quorum.
I. Hamide – I hear everything makes sense, just different angles of it. Bonnie’s concerns are valid. What
can she bring back to WeCU meeting on Saturday as input from this body? Something that says: ‘we don’t
know enough, we need some time, keep it general’, so the draft can become a better draft. National
conversation is part of the picture. Those things are important for HRC, people are asking. At MLK march,
people asked WeCU what are you doing for Landeros? Draft is important for us to make a statement. For
the record. We don’t want to take that position. It’s specific for this case.
E. Kubok – I like the statement, I don’t think we should forget about it.
I. Hamide – Would be nice to know edits on it. What should we edit?
E. Kubok – who will it be sent to?
B. Souza – It’s in the statement and memo to you. Police Auditor, Civilian Review Board (CRB), Chief of
Police, District Attorney, City Manager, Mayor, City Council and Civil Liberties Defense Center.
S. Markstrom – I feel a sense of urgency, there are threats from things like Patriot Prayer. It has been so
mischaracterized. I don’t know if that would happen without damming information to make them less
comfortable. A letter like this one could have an impact on investigation in terms of what questions would
be asked. I think they are asking these questions already. But it is good to reiterate that we need these
answers, not that I disagree with conclusions, but maybe the things that led to it. It reminds me of the
situation when the camera trailer was there, and someone vandalized it. It reminds of a situation when
someone is arrested for resisting arrest. There is a bit of provocation happening. How to balance that. It is
very specific to case, because maybe he was known to police. We don’t know the answer to that. I have
not watched the video yet.
B. Souza – I know body cam fell off, it is not on the camera. Can’t see what happened. Otherwise I
wouldn’t have watched.
R. Guerra – I’m a little conflicted. I don’t have much information, I don’t feel as informed as the group. I
was out of town when the situation happened. How does it dovetail with the work we expect the committee
to be advising us on? Does it fall in the scope of work this group is about? We know what WeCU has done
with report from last year. Does this fall in line?
B. Souza – Yes it does, it is in our work plan to address things that happen in the community.
R. Guerra - To that point, if we are endorsing, it should come from us not from the group.
E. Kubok – How often does EPD commission meet? Isn’t Joel in the commission?
J. Van Der Haeghen – Joel is in it, they just met last week, they meet monthly.
E. Kubok – Is there a place for him to address it?
J. Van Der Haeghen – We have two CRB folks in the room.
Vicky Cox – Joel can present comments.
J. Van Der Haeghen explained what EPD commission and Civilian Review Board do.
Vicki Cox (Police Auditor’s Office)– EPD commission takes on policy issues.
E. Kubok – Has it been discussed in those bodies?
B. Souza – This has not been reviewed in the CRB yet, investigation is under way.
E. Kubok – Can we work with CRB and see if we can discuss these questions?
I. Coulibaly – Every situation like that means community as a whole is hurting. Someone died. Doesn’t
matter the reason, it must be a teaching moment. What do we learn from this? Is the Police Auditor
investigating?
J. Van De Haeghen - Police auditor is investigating. Police auditor is a part of the process.
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 | HRNI@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/HRC
I. Coulibaly - We will get a better picture after that. If EPD as an agency has done wrong either via officer
involved or policies that are not appropriate, we can probably make a recommendation for training or to
review procedures that land into this situation. From the videos, everybody has their own lens. Some
people watching video try to find what Charlie did wrong. Some watch the video to monitor what the police
officer did wrong. At this point, we can probably wait for the second investigation, the internal investigation
before putting up a detailed letter. I’m hearing that the concerns are about details. When you go in the
details, it can be challenging for some people to accept it. As HRC, we should think how we can avoid this
situation in the future. Probably, after internal review, we can have a discussion with Chief Skinner. WeCU
can invite Chief Skinner to review video, have a discussion. What do you think about that?
B. Souza – A few WeCU members met with J. Van Der Haeghen. We talked about this, our desire to start
a discussion with the new Chief. For people to get a better understanding how community see this,
particularly how they relate to police.
I. Coulibaly – Can we postpone a vote on this?
B. Souza – Yes, just wanted to know what to tell members of WeCU on Saturday.
12.2 Homelessness Work Group Updates - Serena Markstrom
Serena noted that that was her first report on homelessness since taking over from Aria and that some of
the issues she was working on were heavy ones. She decided to address the easy ones first. Serena
reported on the showings of the film TONY around the community, which were attended by 15-25 people
each. The promoters compiled a list of email addresses for people attending the events with the intent of
recruiting volunteers for future events and study groups. Serena noted that there is a steep empathy gap
in the community and that the movies are keeping the topic in people’s minds. Then, she proceeded to
talk about the TAC report, which has been on the news because the city contracted an external
consultancy for recommendations on how to eliminate homelessness. Serena sked if the HRC wanted a
presentation on that report. She listed two things the work group wants HRC to do: 1 – reintroduce the
idea of adding housing status as protected class in city code. HRC tried it when Ken Neubeck was here.
The TAC report is recommending a housing first model, but if unhoused are not protected the existing
barriers would make housing first unfeasible. The homelessness work group wants HRC to recommend it
to City Council. 2 – The city is forming an executive committee by May 1 to present how they want the
TAC report recommendations implemented. The homelessness work group would like to have two
recently unhoused people in that committee. That would be a way to have voices at the table centered on
the experience of the unhoused, not just people with jobs and home stability making decisions. The work
group noted that people working with homelessness already made the recommendation the city paid
$80,000.00 for and want to push the city to include people who have lived experience in this process.
Questions
E. Kubok – I know one person in the homelessness board who had that experience. Not sure if they
confirmed every member or if they are reaching out to people.
S. Markstrom – If it is already formed, it is a moot point. I’m new to this work group and I don’t know what
to tell them, what is possible.
S. Markstrom – How do you feel about that? Do you need to know more about the TAC report?
Implementation will start after May 1.
I. Coulibaly – Maybe next meeting, add it to the agenda.
E. Kubok – It would be useful. A short version presentation.
S. Markstrom – The report is online, 30 pages online. Blind spot or no analysis on EPD impact on
homelessness. Some people can’t get housing for felony but have a felony for being homeless. That is not
in the report.
E. Kubok – Lane County sponsors studies like that. There is a correlation between having felony and
accessing housing. Many agencies that support housing created very low barrier entry. Two types of
offenses are not allowed (sexual offender and manufactured Meth in housing unit) any other felony is
allowed.
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 | HRNI@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/HRC
S. Markstrom – People who advocate it say that without that layer of protection, law will not have teeth.
I. Coulibaly – Need someone to come and present a report. Subject matter expert o unhoused. What does
it mean for the city? It is deeper than what we can see at the surface. If possible, try to find someone to
speak to the protected class component.
J. Van Der Haeghen – I will look through archives from past proposals.
S. Markstrom – I will meet with Ken to get details.
E. Kubok – Not sure why it did not go through the first time.
J. Van Der Haeghen – I was not here – The loose history I remember is that they tried to include Gender
and Homelessness simultaneously, but there was no agreement on language. HRC took it to City Council,
but they never voted on that. I will need to double check. They had language, they had research, but it did
not go through. The state actually added gender to the protected class list, so that took care of it. It left
homelessness out at that point.
B. Souza – Wasn’t it added by State a couple years ago?
E. Kubok – Not sure. Let’s learn why it did not work out. We are in unprecedented time. In May, we will get
results of Point in Time Count, which is the number they use in decision making. Let’s educate ourselves
and plan to around May have a stronger statement.
B. Souza – I think it was just about profiling.
E. Kubok – it would be useful for housing to have low barrier.
S. Markstrom – I see a reason to support it. If this provides a political in because the TAC report. I can tell
them we are open and need to learn more. It was in 2015 that that discussion happened.
12.3 Civilian Review Board - Serena Markstrom
Serena became the new liaison to the CRB. In their last meeting, they did a presentation on the
procedures following the DA’s clearance of police officers. EPD’s internal review of the Landero’s case will
take six weeks. They are forming a group to review the use of force by officers. After that, the case could
become a community impact case. Serena asked if that was the right term.
The CRB Representative answered that that is a case that is important to the community. The
investigative process is the same as other cases, but it allows CRB to look at a case before it is closed
and emit opinion if more investigation would be needed.
Questions
B. Souza – Is there a difference with it being label that? There was a case decided by the Supreme Court,
also a community impact case, that gave the public access to a case they otherwise would not have.
Vicky Cox – I don’t think so. OR law is so different.
B. Souza – It was a public access decision. We only had one other case in the past years, not sure.
S. Markstrom – They said something at the meeting to that effect. Not that family decides it, but they
consider if family wants it. Same information as public information records, but not displayed.
B. Souza – I write in the past, but some time ad to the packet.
S. Markstrom - Do you talk about the cases they review in the meeting?
B. Souza – I’ve written them up in the past.
12.4 Triple Bottom Line – Ela Kubok
Ela noted that TBL doesn’t meet often, but right now it is doing an evaluation of the Santa Clara/River
Road plan. It was the first meeting she attended. She will share materials once they produce them. Santa
Clara/River Road has been working over a year creating a community plan and policy changes they want.
TBL is another way the city looks at proposals, looking at sustainable and in sync with the environment, in
line with equity and human rights, and economic development. She described the process used to analyze
proposals and promised to share a report once its published.
12.5 Housing Policy Board (HPB) - Ibrahim Hamide
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 | HRNI@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/HRC
Ibrahim noted that HPB discussed CET tax and homelessness, affordable housing, lots of dry stuff. He
said that their meeting discussed codes and affordable housing legislation at the state level. He would
share more once he receives minutes on timely fashion.
12.6 Equity and Human Rights Board – Rick Guerra
Rick has not been to a meeting yet. February meeting has been cancelled, so the first one will be in
March.
13 Staff Updates - Jennifer Van Der Haeghen
Neighborhood Matching Grants has money available, proposed projects will need a plan to use the funds
by June 30. The city will open really soon the next Neighborhood Matching Grant cycle with larger funding.
Jennifer asked the HRC to help promote the current call for proposals and noted that Cindy Koehler could
explain the grant requirements.
Questions
B. Souza – Can you give some examples?
J. Van Der Haeghen – Sure, there are murals around town. There will be one at the YMCA and
Westmoreland park. We funded that for this year with small grants. Another example is the community
health survey at the Whitaker, trying to better understand what is going on. Projects need to have large
impact and engage more than a handful of people. We have a Department Advisory Committee, which
welcomes participation from HRC. Any grant over 10,000 we ask them to come and present on it. This
committee advisees on how funds are used. If you are interested in serving on it let me know. It is a direct
appointment by our office
I. Coulibaly – How often they meet?
J. Van Der Haeghen – They meet three to four nights to hear all presentations and decide how funds are
used.
I. Coulibaly – I would be interested.
E. Kubok – Can you send email we can forward to people?
J. Van Der Haeghen – Yes. Lieutenant Natt mentioned we are working on Bias and Hate Crimes report,
expected release is no later than late spring. We are also working on Public Safety Forum in Spanish.
Expect more info soon.
I. Coulibaly welcomed Fabio Andrade and congratulated him on the new job.
Motion: Move to adjourn
Made By: Rick Guerra
Second: Ela Kubok
Vote: Unanimous
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 | HRNI@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/HRC
Agenda
City of Eugene
Human Rights Commission
Human Rights Commission Meeting 2-19-19
Packet Contents
Draft Agenda Page 1
Draft Minutes from 10/2017 Page 3
Budget Update Page 15
Support Request – SURJ Film Series Page 16
WeCU work group update Page 19
WeCU MCL proposal memo Page 20
Eugene MCC Vision WeCU memo Page 21
WeCU statement on Charlie Landeros Page 22
Letter: Homeless Empathy and Action Team Page 24
March Draft Agenda Page 26
Office of Human Rights & Neighborhood Involvement | City of Eugene | 99 W 10th Ave | Eugene OR 97401 | (541) 682-5272
City of Eugene
Human Rights Commission
The mission of the Human Rights Commission is to promote implementation of universal human rights values and principles in
all City of Eugene programs and throughout the wider community.
To carry out this mission the commission shall affirm, encourage and initiate programs and services within the City of Eugene
and in the wider community designed to place priority upon protecting, respecting, and fulfilling the full range of universal
human rights as enumerated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. To support and promote human rights, the
commission will: provide human rights education, be proactive in human rights efforts, address human rights violations, ensure
active public participation, be transparent and open, be publicly accountable for human rights progress.
Human Rights Commissioners: Joel Iboa (Chair), Ibrahim Coulibaly (Vice Chair), Ela Kubok, Ibrahim
Hamide, Serena Markstrom, Rick Guerra, Bonnie Souza, Aria Seligmann, Julia Johnson, Aimee Walsh,
Councilor Emily Semple
Human Rights and Neighborhood Involvement Staff: Jennifer Lleras Van Der Haeghen and Fabio Andrade
The Human Rights Commission meets on the third Tuesday of each month.
Tuesday, February 19, 2019
5:30 – 7:30 PM Meeting
Sloat Room, Atrium Building, 99 W 10th Street
Contact: Jennifer Lleras Van Der Haeghen, 541-682-5177 jvanderhaeghen@eugene-or.us
ITEM _______________ACTION______ TIME
1. Agenda/Minutes Review and Approval (Chair) Discuss/Vote 5:30 - 5:35 (5 min)
2. Public Comment (Chair) 5:35 - 5:40 (5 min)
3. Support Request (Chair) Discuss/Vote 5:40 – 5:45 (5 min)
4. EPD Liaison Update 5:45 – 5:55 (10 min)
5. Housing Tools and Strategies Recommendations Presentation 5:55 – 6:10 (15 min)
Anne Fifield – Community Development
6. Guardian Trailers Presentation 6:10 – 6:40 (30 min)
Lt. Mozan - Eugene Police Department
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 |ehrcenter@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/hrc
7. Equity Panel for the CAP 2.0 Presentation 6:40 – 6:50 (10 min)
Jen Lleras Van Der Haeghen - HRNI
8. Work Group Lead Updates 6:50 – 7:00 (10 min)
9. Commission Liaison Updates 7:00 – 7:10 (10 min)
10. Council Update 7:10 – 7:20 (10 min)
11. Staff Update 7:20 -7:25 – (5 min)
12. March HRC Meeting Agenda 7:25 – 7:30 (5 min)
Upcoming events, activities or meetings of which the HRC should be aware:
Until April 21, 2019 - VISUAL CLAVE – The experience of the Latino/a Experience through
Album Cover Art:1940-90 at the Jordan Schnitzer Museum of Art. Free passes for groups can be
arranged with Lidice Ludia <lidice_ludia@yahoo.com>
2/26 6-7pm Refugee Resettlement fundraiser at St. Mary’s Episcopal Church, 1300 Pearl Street,
Eugene. Tickets: $20
The Eugene Human Rights Commission welcomes your interest in these agenda items. This meeting location is wheelchair
accessible. For the hearing impaired, FM-assistive listening devices are available or 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 staff at (541) 682-5177.
La Comisión de Derechos Humanos agradece su interés por participar en los asuntos de esta agenda. El local de la
reunión tiene acceso para personas en silla de ruedas. Para las personas con dificultades auditivas ofrecemos sistemas FM
para ayudarlo a escuchar, o intérpretes de lenguaje de señas. También ofrecemos intérpretes de español. Si necesita
cualquiera de estos servicios por favor solicítelos con 48 horas de anticipación, llamando al (541) 682-5177.
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 | HRNI@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/hrc
City of Eugene
Human Rights Commission
MINUTES
Tuesday, January 15, 2019
5:30pm – 7:30pm Meeting
Atrium Building, Sloat Room, 99 W. 10th Avenue, Eugene
Present:
Human Rights Commissioners: Joel Iboa (Chair), Ibrahim Coulibaly (Vice Chair), Julia Johnson, Aimee
Walsh, Aria Seligmann, Ibrahim Hamide, Bonnie Souza, Councilor Emily Semple
Human Rights and Neighborhood Involvement Staff: Jennifer Van Der Haeghen, Elena Domingo
J. Iboa – I hope everyone had a good holiday season. There is a lot of work ahead of us this year, so let’s
dive right in. Have people had a chance to look at the minutes. Let’s chat about the agenda. We
anticipated a lot of folks making public comment tonight, but it doesn’t look like there are that many so the
agenda will remain the same except Lieutenant Mozan and Chief Carmichael will not be here today.
Those 2 agenda items will get bumped to the next meeting. Everything will remain the same.
Motion: Move to approve the January 2019 agenda as amend
Made by: J. Johnson
Second: A. Walsh
Vote: Unanimous
Motion: Move to approve the January 2019 agenda.
Made by: A. Walsh
Second: A. Seligmann
Vote: J. Johnson abstain because she was not in attendance
2. Public Comment
Stephan Carson – I am making a statement on behalf of statement of the Eugene Democratic Socialists of
America about the killing of Charlie Landeros. Eugene DSA extends condolences to family and friends
who was gunned down by Eugene police in front of their daughter at Cascade Middle School Friday
morning. He touched many lives in the Eugene area and his absence will be missed in our community.
Misinformation spread quickly and it was initially identified as a school shooting but we learned only police
made shots. The details of Charlie’s killing are still unclear why were police called to the school and why
did they use lethal force. Any and all footage of the incident must be released to the public. Numerous
cover-ups show we cannot trust police to investigate their own officers. Independent investigation is
needed. People of color make up 52 percent of those killed my police and elsewhere in the world there are
fewer killings. This is an ongoing national tragedy that has visited us in Eugene. We are experiencing grief
and rage because of unjust killing, we must stop this. We demand accountability for the officers that killed
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 |HRNI@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/HRC
Charlie and municipal leaders who created the policies that lead to this tragedy. In solidarity, Eugene
DSA.
Adam Kiskal – I live in South Eugene. I am here to express concerns over police actions surrounding
shooting over beloved activist Charlie Landeros. EPD has released limited vague info after Charlie’s
death. They provided that there was a custody dispute that during a police escort a struggle ensued, a
weapon was produced, and Charlie was shot and died soon after. Police are careful with their language. I
am unclear what producing means, did he pull it out or just make them aware that he was armed. EPD
hasn’t provided video evidence or a timeline of events. We cannot trust their word without corroborating
evidence. We are told that they can’t provide info because info is being investigated by state. They
released statements early to sway public opinion in their favor. What we got was a predictable response to
vague information. Rumors are flying. He has been described as a school shooter, psychotic, dangerous –
completely counter to Charlie’s friends experience. Support the independent non police or district attorney
investigation. Demand evidence now not later.
Majeska Seesegreen – I don’t know if Silver is coming tonight, he is on the police commission, Joel is the
liaison. I wanted to make members aware that the Police Commission is taking a few months to look at
issues of homelessness related to the Police Department. They’ll be looking at police practices related to
towing and impoundment of vehicles that people live in. I’m not sure how the discussion will be framed.
HRC has a homelessness work group. I want to say that the Police Commission has gone through two
different series of reviewing the policies related to homelessness. There’s very little in terms of how it gets
to the problems we know are out there. It’s long past time that our ordinances need to be updated in a
number of ways. Police Commission looks at EPD policies but can make recommendations to Council.
HRC can do that too. We need a lot more studying of the policies and grassroots and commissioners
taking a good look to see what needs to be adjusted, changed, or replaced. I’m asking you for more
coordination on this. It’s an opportunity to make some headway on ordinance changes.
Rita Ludwig – I moved here 5 or 6 years ago for grad school, I’m currently doctoral student. I’m here to
express concern for what happened at Cascade Middle School on Friday. Eugene is such a neighborly
and friendly community. I’m devastated by the loss of a beloved community member, parent, and activist
who worked to support neighbors and if we believe in Eugene as a place to support each other then we
shouldn’t live in a place where police feel they can take the lives of people experiencing a crisis. We had a
loss to our community and it should be looked into how this happened. The impression that is being left is
unfortunate for someone who did a lot to make Eugene a community.
J. Iboa – I’d like to take the opportunity to thank those who came to talk about this particular issue. I want
to let the HRC know that Ibrahim, Bonnie and I met with Chief Skinner and community members to
discuss what happened to Charlie. It’s our responsibility as the HRC to draft a statement to the public. We
were handpicked by council to provide guidance and suggestions about how to make our city a more
welcoming place and to address human rights. I’ve prepared a draft of a proposed statement. Do
commissioners want to have a conversation about what to expect next with the Interagency Deadly Force
Investigation?
A. Seligmann - Thank you for doing this. We as a commission need to call for full transparency including
release of video and body cams so that everyone can see what happened and understand why someone
in police custody was killed instead of subdued. Why was this person killed? The public has an absolute
right to know and to see what happened.
J. Iboa – I’d like to invite Chief Skinner to the table to explain the process.
Chief Skinner: Good evening, I have been here for 9 months and believe I’ve met most of you. It’s with a
heavy heart that our community is going through this tragic event resulting from what occurred between
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 | HRNI@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/HRC
Charlie and our Police Officers. I don’t disagree that in a vacuum of information the narrative gets filled in
by variety of sources. I want the commission to know that at every turn I have pushed for the release of
information in the sense that it wouldn’t compromise the investigation from the Lane County District
Attorney’s Office where the investigation is being conducted. I’ll talk about the process so that you will
have a better understanding of what happens from here. In every county in the state SB 111 legislation
mandated that each county come up with deadly force protocol. First we build a team of criminal
investigators, experts, when deadly force is used. A homicide investigation is conducted. In this case, a
team of investigators in Lane County and Oregon State Police is put together. From the minute that team
is called in to take over the investigation it is immediately placed under the authority of the District
Attorney’s Office in the county. At this point EPD has a minimal role. Oregon State Police establishes a
lead detective on the investigation and makes assignments to gather evidence, review statements and
video. We are marching down a path of doing the investigation to seek the truth of what happened that
day regardless of what the truth tells us. The challenge that EPD has is that we have very little influence
on the process which is intentional so there is no bias as a result of EPD employees involvement. LCDA
has the investigation and I, much like you, sit and wait for that process to happen and learn all of the
details. I will know some of the details before the general public. We as a profession need to be
transparent, objective, and impartial. Information should be revealed that doesn’t compromise the
investigation and is of interests to the general public. That is not happening right now and it is out my
control. I continue to ask for the release of information and am denied. I don’t agree with the decision, but
have to respect the decision and hope this investigation will wrap up quickly, hopefully by the end of the
week. Once the investigation is completed it is delivered to the District Attorney for her evaluation and
review. She has made a commitment in the past to make her findings known within 2 weeks and
communicated that to the public based on the evidence that was found. That is the only timeline I have
now, and it is a loose timeline. That is my best guess on how quickly we will see something. This is all
based on the law we are governed by with respect to deadly force encounters with police. This is a
criminal investigation and then there will be an Internal Affairs investigation to review policies and
procedures in order to see what may have been violated the Police Auditor will be involved in this process.
There is some level of public engagement and outside involvement with respect to Internal Affairs
investigation. The only mechanism for a criminal investigation is to have criminal investigators conduct it.
I’m happy to answer questions that I can, and there may be questions I can’t answer. It’s important to
have the public understand what happened that day but also important to preserve the integrity of the
investigation. This is a delicate balance.
B. Souza - There is public records law as it relates to body cam footage in particular. In cases of public
interest, there should be camera footage available. What would keep us from seeing that? Would we have
to wait until after the DA’s decision?
Chief Skinner - There is public records law about what’s to be produced by public officials in the course of
their duty. But the exemption is that it’s not releasable in a current criminal investigation. Evidence is
generally not released before an investigation is completed. The DA has the only authority to release that
info.
B. Souza - I don’t know how EPD policy ended up, but early on for body cams I remember seeing that
body cam footage would be available to police officers before they were interviewed, but not to the public.
Would that video footage be available to officers involved in the shooting before their interviews?
Chief Skinner: I don’t know the answer regarding the chronology of how video is reviewed. I can find out if
officers review video before interviews.
S. Markstrom - Who is involved in the investigation?
Chief Skinner - Everyone involved in investigation is a criminal investigator.
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 | HRNI@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/HRC
S. Markstrom - It makes sense, but the part that might be a challenge is that that doesn’t inherently breed
trust in the public because the perception is that officers are in a brotherhood situation. Intersecting with
the activist community there will be a problem with trust. Is there anything that can be done in addition to
that isn’t state mandated, but is possible.
Chief Skinner - It begs the question of whether or not what we’re doing today is contemporary for our
times. The Senate Bill was written in 2007. I don’t know if the Senate Bill creates a framework for people
external to the departments to participate or if it states particular people to be involved. Right now only
people with Law Enforcement Certification would be involved. As with any investigation, if there is a need
to go to trial with something, they will need to testify why they were qualified to do the job.
J. Iboa – I’d like to provide context about SB 111. It was introduced by African American Senator and she
worked for 6 years to get this passed. The reason was to have a more transparent and independent
investigative process when it comes to the use of deadly force. With a goal to take the investigation out of
the local jurisdiction to be more unbiased.
Chief Skinner - When you look at the deadly force protocol, the piece that is relevant and deserves a
reworking is the communication piece. What mechanism do we have to communicate with the
community? There’s no reason why decision makers couldn’t at least communicate to public where we’re
at in the investigation. Unfortunately, that information isn’t getting out. There’s an opportunity to revisit this
deadly force policy and to make it more contemporary for 21st century policing.
A. Seligmann: How many officers are currently on leave because of this?
Chief Skinner - 2 officers are on admin leave, that doesn’t mean that there are 2 officers that either shot or
didn’t shoot. More about who is involved in the incident vs. who actually used force. We have had people
on admin leave after seeing horrific car crashes and a variety of other traumatic events they see in the line
of duty.
I. Hamide: Is the Police Auditor the only civilian or non-law enforcement person that is involved in this
investigation?
Chief Skinner - The Police Auditor is not involved in the criminal investigation. The Auditors role will come
in once the criminal investigation is done and they will have opportunity to review the entire investigation.
I. Hamide: What other authorities do they have?
Chief Skinner: They will have the findings from criminal investigation. The Police Auditor will have the
ability to determine whether or not there were policies or procedures violated through this. Everything from
the way we responded initially through the tragic events that unfolded. The can review all evidence to
render their own decision on whether EPD adhered to its policy. Independent from DA investigation, but
they will see everything they see.
B. Souza - How much weight would their opinion carry?
Chief Skinner – The DA will only make a decision about criminal conduct and won’t make a finding about
policies or procedures. The Auditor will be looking for every nuance through the investigation where EPD
didn’t follow a policy or procedure that is in place. That is more of the administrative side of it. There are
two implications. Criminal conduct with greater implications and other implications are through admin
process which are employment and disciplinary process throughout the organization.
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 | HRNI@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/HRC
A. Seligmann: If the DA decides not to prosecute, could you still fire the officer involved?
Chief Skinner: Yes, if policies and procedures were violated, I could take employment action even if DA
decided not to prosecute.
S. Markstrom: What if DA is not going to release the body cam footage?
Chief Skinner: I’m going to release the body cam footage. Once the DA makes a final decision. My
intention is for this community to see the body cam footage.
Councilor Semple: Thank you for coming to this meeting. I find it reassuring and want to tell everyone that
Chief Skinner has been very good about frequent updates. Even if nothing can be said he has explained
the process. This is a tragedy for everyone on all the sides. We try to stay calm and realize that we don’t
have the information yet. I support a full transparent look at this, but I want to caution that we not jump to
conclusions but keep love and openness to what the truth is. We just don’t have the information right now.
It’s a heartfelt tragedy for everyone and its important to be a community, come together, support each
other and remember that assumptions can be dangerous. Thank you for listening and thank you to the
Chief for being here.
Chief Skinner: This is a moment of tragedy and emotion. Since I’ve been here I’ve tried to be vulnerable
and build a Police Department that this community can trust and I recognize that at this moment that is
fractured right now. I have the opportunity to come and share as much info and be available as possible.
Regardless of what the facts are, the truth is what we seek. If we do a good job of gathering facts, we will
all be able to understand what happened that day and that’s important for all sides.
J. Iboa: Let’s read the statement and see if anyone wants to add or have red flags. I knew Charlie and had
the chance to work with him. He had a great smile, spoke softly, and had a big heart. A lot of folks miss
him.
Charlie was a father, veteran, and respected member of our community. Charlie Landeros leaves behind
their daughters, brother, parents, partner, and many family and friends. The role of the Human Rights
Commission is to promote implementation of universal human rights values and principles in the City of
Eugene. We will act in this role by asking for full transparency in the investigation.
B. Souza: Let’s add that information should be shared as soon as possible.
J. Lleras Van Der Haeghen: It might be useful to add in a few sentences about the current process and
link to some more information on it.
J. Iboa : I would like to send a release to the media.
B. Souza: I’d also ask for Joel to email it to us.
J. Iboa: I can give folks a small window to respond to edits. Want the public to know that HRC is paying
attention to this and continue to try to make sure Eugene is a safe place for everyone to live.
Motion: I move that the HRC makes this statement with edits to include info about IDFIT and that the info
be shared as soon as possible.
Made by: Councilor Semple
Second: A. Walsh
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 | HRNI@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/HRC
Vote: Unanimous
Support Request
Anne Milhollen: This is a repeat of a request from your last meeting. We’re hoping to host a summer film
on homelessness outdoors and show the Under the Bridge film. We would like to do a double feature and
are hoping to get local Eugene homeless community footage for that feature. The request was for $300 for
staff to show the film and we went to recreation and asked if that could be set aside given that we are all
Eugene entities and the answer was no because it’s evening staff time. I’m’ here to ask again if we can
have $300 for Recreation to show the summer movie.
A. Seligmann: I am willing to sponsor this.
Motion: Move to approve the request.
Motion made by: A. Walsh
Second: A. Seligmann
Vote: Unanimous
Point in Time Count – Womenspace report
Julie Wiseman (Womenspace)- I’m the Executive Director of Womenspace I’ve been there for just under
2 years. Thank you for having me. I want to thank you for the work you all do. I have admired you from
afar and appreciate what you have done. Thank you for your time, passion, and energy.
I’m here to talk about the County’s Point in Time Count that Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
requires. There were a few issues that Womenspace found out about. The number of women counted was
very low. Our county chose not to ask a domestic violence question. We have a tendency as a community
to talk about homeless people as a homeless person and don’t differentiate between men and women
when there are critical differences and needs.
Prior to 2018 our national coalition partners worked with HUD to form a consortium to do technical
assistance to identify a link between domestic violence and homelessness. We were able to get HUD to
prioritize a question about homelessness as it’s related to domestic violence. We are excited to have more
of a definitive number based on the responses to the answer to this question. We were alarmed when the
County made the decision not to ask the question and we have since rectified this with the county and we
have the domestic violence question on for this year. We’ve also helped with a training plan to know when
and when not to ask the question for safety purposes.
The other part of the PIT count is how low the number was. 1642 folks were found during the PIT count
and of the number, 464 adult women were found. That number was outrageously low and we were
surprised and alarmed. Community members didn’t seem to be surprised and I decided it was important to
know how many homeless women we have in our community. We know there are plenty of women hiding
and invisible because that is the only way to be safe. We reached out to the University of Oregon
consulting group to produce methodology and statistics. We identified that by talking to community
partners we could find averages, etc. Based on that information, 964 homeless women should have been
counted that were not. There should have been 500 additional women counted and that is a conservative
number. The importance of these numbers can’t be overstated. We have to go for grant funding and
everyone knows that HUD numbers are way too low, but they are reported and used and it’s important
that these numbers are accurate. They decided to find out how many women were unstably housed and
found an additional 1600 women. 35-40% are homeless due to domestic violence.
One of the priorities we did start talking about is shelter. We don’t have access to a lot of housing money
and it’s hard for folks to use vouchers. We served 2800 unduplicated women, children, and men last year.
When HUD reported about cities and counties that used domestic violence questions 49,000 checked the
box. Veterans represented 39,000. There are plenty of veterans services but not for those fleeing
domestic violence. We need to start addressing the fact that we don’t talk about women who are
homeless. We started to reach out to community partners. In our community we talk about the homeless
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 | HRNI@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/HRC
population as a single entity and as though their needs are the same. There has to be an agency
addressing women’s needs, but it doesn’t seem there is. The TAC study talked about the same thing.
They recommended a mixed gender shelter. They put all of the men in women in one camp together at
Camp 99. Women were trafficked and sexually exploited. Suggesting a mixed gender shelter is alarming
because the safety of women is not being discussed. I’m appealing to the HRC asking that you talk about
women’s rights and homeless women. No one is speaking for them and their safety as we address a
homeless problem. I don’t know what to do about it but we need your expertise and something has to be
done. We have to address domestic and sexual violence on streets and in homes.
The bottom line is women and children’s safety should be at the forefront of our work in order to move the
needle. Women need to have a safe place to sleep without being assaulted. Just walk over to Community
Court and they attorneys who represent women will share the horror stories they have heard. If we stop
talking about this, women are going to disappear. And we can’t disappear them. We have to provide them
with safe places to sleep.
I. Hamide: Who are you advocating that to?
Julie Weismann - We don’t provide mental health services and I don’t know what to do for the homeless
population in the city. No one is speaking on their behalf.
A. Seligmann - At a Homelessness Work Group meeting Downtown we had women show up saying hey
what about us and one woman in particular said that she was at the mission and her abusive ex-partner
was also there. She couldn’t have a cell phone because her ex-partner kept track of her cell phone and as
a result it was hard for her to be in touch with other people. I agree that this is something that has been
overlooked. Egan has a women’s only shelter that helps, but we need more.
Councilor Semple: This is incredibly important information and you are so right that a homeless person is
basically described as a single male and the women and children are hiding and those you can see get
the reputation for the whole group. We can’t change it until we know about it, it’s great to spread this word
and advocate and get it to all the other agencies and advocates and to council, county, PHB, and sub-
groups working on homeless issues. Some of these groups may be more aware than others and I’m not
sure how to get the energy to do this because you’re just one person. PIT is coming up so soon and I wish
we had a huge team that included unhoused people because they could find other unhoused people
easier. I’m concerned that this is overlooked. I’m glad the question is now on there. Contact the Weekly
and Register Guard, KLCC, they may want to do a story. Totally under the commission’s area to get this
information out there.
A. Walsh: The purpose of inviting Julie is as board member of Womenspace this was shared with me. We
are disadvantaged by the lack of data because funding is so tied to the numbers. We’re working with the
youth advisory council and incentivizing them to participate and engage youth in filling this out. We’re
seeing an increase in trafficking of our young people out of community to other places. Surprised that here
is this incredible risk to women on the streets that we don’t hear about or have data about. I’m paying staff
to participate in PIT because this is so important. We absolutely need people of color to participate in this,
so that people of color will be more likely to respond.
Julie: It would be great if the homeless network could assist. There are 2 very large women’s camps and
we are trying to find some homeless women we could pay to assist us so they’re incentivized to
participate. We’re building Ziploc bags with tampons and hat and soap to be handed out to women to
incentivize them to be counted. There are number of flaws in PIT count. People can choose not to
participate.
S. Markstrom: How often do they do this?
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 | HRNI@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/HRC
Julie Weismann: Every year. This year on January 31st.
S. Markstrom: Homeless individuals can encourage others to be counted. Outreach to the media for
volunteers and donations for gift cards.
I. Hamide: The system is flawed but they haven’t found a way to fix it?
Julie Weismann: The County makes the decision on how to do a PIT count. They want to have
unduplicated counts and make sure people are homeless. But HUD allows for an observational county.
This year, the process is fixed but hoping to work with the county to encourage them to do this differently.
All the numbers we have should be seriously inflated. We know it’s a flawed system.
J. Iboa: Any more questions? No more questions, thank you for coming. I’m in awe of the work
Womenspace has done over the years. You have long been a trusted NGO in our community. Please
don’t hesitate to contact us, were interested in learning more about this. Do you have any idea how many
of these women are trans women or women of color?
Julie: We weren’t able to do an analysis with the students, just an aggregate. The county has some
numbers. 70,000 trans women out of the 220,000 national average. Women of color was around half.
The demographics nationally are 22% Latinx and 6% African American 4% native and American Indian.
Only 32% white.
J. Iboa: Folks at the table may be able to help try and move the County in the right direction once that
conversation comes back up.
WORKGOUP LEAD UPDATES
A. Seligmann - The Homelessness Work Group has been meeting on Saturday mornings which is not
ideal for the schedule they would prefer. I have been trying to find a commissioner available and Serena
has agreed to convene the workgroup on the 2nd and 4th Wednesday of the month in the Sloat Room.
Serena and I co-chaired the meeting this past Saturday as part of a transition. Anne shared about the film
showings. Continuing to work on shelters and a day shelter downtown that would have showers, laundry,
and supportive services. Very much needed in our community. Last night at the City Council meeting
people were advocating for an anti-panhandling ordinance because it would go against freedom of speech
and expression. I would ask that the HRC oppose the anti-panhandling ordinance because while it may be
seen as annoying or a nuisance, we need to show compassion to people who are poor. Maybe we can
discuss this tonight.
J. Lleras Van Der Haeghen: I believe that Council asked for language to be brought back to them that they
can consider.
Councilor Semple: The Council asked for a public hearing to be scheduled. I voted for the public hearing, I
did not say I would vote for such a thing, but think it’s important for people to talk about it.
J. Iboa – Can you share the timeline?
Councilor Semple: I do not know yet.
A. Seligmann - Would it happen before our next meeting?
Councilor Semple: It could happen on February 19th. It’s being discussed as a safety issue – between
standing cars and pedestrians. It will be come at as a safety issue. The idea is to limit the ability for a
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 | HRNI@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/HRC
physical exchange out of a car. It would mean that fill the boot might not happen with the firefighters. We
did get the language of Springfield’s ordinance.
J. Lleras Van Der Haeghen: I would urge you to make a broad enough motion about the topic but not tie it
to specific phrasing because there you won’t have a chance to revisit this before your next meeting.
J. Iboa - Can we go through other workgroup updates and come back to this?
B. Souza - WeCU work group met this past Saturday this was the first time meeting since the International
Human Rights Day event. We were deliberate with the budget and getting everyone paid. The Human
Rights Office approved additional money but we barely needed to touch it. Aimee will finish that and get it
to the city. Talked about creation of sub-committees to move forward recommendations from the
Marginalized Voices Report. Created a liaison and multicultural center subcommittee that will bring back
recommendation to the full group at the end of the month. One of the prioritized recommendations is
regarding rapid response for city leaders in the case of hate crimes and incidents. Ibrahim Hamide agreed
to be point person to funnel ideas to him about rapid response that the city should consider when putting
together protocol. Talked about scope of WeCU workgroup, and Kris Nalango will develop first draft of
mission statement to clarify what our mission is. Some WECU members are planning to march using the
banner we have.
J. Iboa - Let’s go back. What do folks think? We can do something now and go on behalf of commission to
read a statement.
J. Lleras Van Der Haeghen - Maybe you could propose a motion that would allow Joel to work with Aria to
take a stance. That would mean people could weigh in now and they could use that information as they
put together thoughts and statements.
J. Iboa - Does anyone have serious concerns?
B. Souza – Jen, do you have suggested wording?
A. Seligmann – For now I think we leave it broad until we hear more about the proposed language.
Motion: I move that we speak against an ordinance that would limit a freedom of speech including asking
for money from passersby for people experience poverty.
Councilor Semple: I have a friendly amendment because you don’t have to be experiencing poverty to be
asking for money.
B. Souza - The ACLU has worked on this in the past and I’m interested in looking into what that stance
was and what they were proposing. I think that it was in line with what we’re talking about.
A. Seligmann - People have expressed dismay about this idea and it is a matter of free speech.
J. Lleras Van Der Haeghen: The language may mirror the Springfield policy and I would suggest that you
think about looking at the ordinance language and understand how it might be written in a way that might
not limit free speech.
A. Seligmann – We should have something about the exchange of resources in there.
J. Iboa - It seems everyone is in agreement that an anti-panhandling ordinance is something that we don’t
want for our city. Is that enough? Do we have to vote on something or can Aria and I work together?
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 | HRNI@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/HRC
J. Lleras Van Der Haeghen - This is enough because Joel has the right to speak on behalf of the
commission.
J. Iboa - We can avoid a motion because there is consensus and chair can speak on behalf of
commission.
I. Hamide: If safety can be addressed it should be.
S. Markstrom - This is for the hearing to express HRC’s position?
J. Iboa - Yes, once there is a hearing date I am happy to receive input and incorporate it.
A. Seligmann: We can come up with a draft to disperse to the commission.
A. Walsh - Is this a good use of council time? Is there data and incidents of people being hurt? It might be
useful for us to communicate to council that this is unnecessary given the lack of data.
Councilor Semple: It’s being crafted specifically to mirror Springfield’s law.
J. Iboa – I missed the Police Commission meeting last Thursday, I was unable to attend. I will be following
up to make sure I get updates I may have missed.
I. Hamide - Housing Policy Board did a one-time change of their meeting date and I could not attend.
A. Walsh – I brought a copy of the Housing Tools and Strategies Working Group recommendations. I will
also email these to the group. I was able to participate and think that they did a good job of being inclusive
and documenting people’s thoughts. It’s a lengthy report.
J. Iboa - Can someone present to HRC about the housing tools and strategies?
J. Lleras Van Der Haeghen – I can look into that.
B. Souza – I’m in my 4th year as liaison to CRB and I was approaching burn-out and decided that is not
something I’ll continue to do but intend to follow through on Charlie Landeros case. Right now Serena is
taking on some unhoused issues and was the alternate for me. Is anyone interested in taking on the
liaison role? It’s important for HRC to have a presence there. I have appreciated and learned a lot in those
meetings. They meet on the 2nd Tuesday of every month.
S. Marksrom - I could serve as the liaison.
J. Iboa - Is this something you want to do?
S. Markstrom - Yes, I want to do this.
J. Iboa - Who wants to be Serena’s alternate?
B. Souza - I can be the alternate.
A. Walsh - So moved.
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 | HRNI@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/HRC
Motion: Move that Serena will serve as the liaison to the CRB and Bonnie will be the alternate.
Made by: A. Walsh
Second: J. Johnson
Vote: Unanimous
Council Update
Councilor Semple: Yesterday we talked about a Construction Excise Tax and voted to send it to a Public
Hearing. When someone builds something they have to pay a tax for anything above $250,000 as a
onetime tax. This proposal is to start at .33, then .5, then 1 percent. The builders would pay the tax and
the City would compensate by reducing SDCs for first two years. We wouldn’t be gaining money for first
two years. The advantage is that the tax money during this time would be going into the affordable
housing fund. The City is also proposing to add $500,000 a year into affordable housing fund. The hope si
that this will stimulate low-income housing. I would prefer not to be giving the SDC money back, but
people want this to happen and this is a way to get some revenue for affordable housing. The amount
raised could range from ½ a million – 3 million. Bend has been quite successful. I haven’t seen an email
against this. Better Homes Together was supportive.
We heard an update on the Library Levy, they have been fulfilling promises and it has been hugely
successful. I questioned how we will pay for it once levy runs out.
Next week the TAC report is coming out. Wednesday we will be having a Rest Stop update. HPB update
will happen mid-February and Human Rights update on Feb 25th. Data collection will be coming to
Council in April. Housing is getting a lot of attention, affordable housing is getting a lot of attention. Hard
deadline for closing Camp 99 is Thursday from what I’ve heard and about 20 people are left on the site at
this time. Unfortunately, more people are back in the Whitaker. It was mentioned that not everyone is
happy that St. Vinnies is the only provider and not everyone willing to go to St Vinnies camp and we’re
trying to accommodate that. Do you have any questions?
A. Seligmann - Have you heard that St. Vinnies can ban people? Do they have the right to do so when
they receive public dollars?
Councilor Semple: LTD gets public dollars and they ban people. I get your point, but it might not go
anywhere. There are a lot of attempts to accommodate people who can’t go to St. Vinnies. We need to
find new Rest Stop areas.
Staff Update
J. Lleras Van Der Haeghen - Board and Commission recruitment opens next week and closes March 10th.
There will be openings on HRC and it would be helpful if you participated in inviting people to apply. MLK
day is on Monday, will be brining banner but HRC members will hold it.
J. Iboa - Ibrahim can present the award if I’m not there. A small group chose to present award to based on
scoring everyone who applied, chose 2 people Raquel Hecht and Carla Casteneda who works for Centro
Latino Americano. Chose those folks to receive Human Rights award this year.
J. Lleras Van Der Haeghen - They are excited and will both be there on Monday. Packets have info about
freedom fund dinner and black history month dinners. Think about who you want to send. Equity and
Human Rights position that Katie vacated is very close to being filled and I will communicate as soon as
possible about that new hire. Once the position is filled you can expect the new person to will be reaching
out to get to know you all and the work you’re passionate about.
We hope to release the Hate and Bias report by March. So far we have 3 reports of hate and bias for the
year. If you have questions, I can talk to you or can reach out to Lt. Nat about those cases.
Our office is supporting Equity Panel for Climate Action Plan. There will be a Council update in February
of Police, Sustainability, and Human Rights Commissions. This will be a mid-year check-in on work plans.
HRC usually uses part of it’s budget to support participation in the dinners.
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 | HRNI@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/HRC
J. Iboa - Do we want to fund both again this year?
B. Souza - A certain number went to one, and a certain number to another. We should do that again. I
would like to go to the NAACP dinner.
J. Iboa - Who wants to go to BIG dinner? Ibrahim Coulibaly and possibly Julia Johnson. Let’s approve 3
for BIG incase Rick or Ela want to go. Who wants to go to NAACP? Bonnie, Serena, and Joel. Let’s
approve 3 to each.
Motion: Move to approve sending 3 to each.
Made By: A. Walsh
Second: Bonnie
Vote: Unanimous
B. Souza - I’m interested in a follow up on the Equity Panel, it would be a good thing for us to learn more
about.
J. Lleras Van Der Haeghen – I can provide a presentation with process up to this panel and what will
happen moving forward.
Motion: Move to adjourn
Made By: A. Walsh
Second: S. Markstrom
Vote: Unanimous
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 | HRNI@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/HRC
Human Rights
Commission Budget
Fiscal Year 2019 (FY19)
REQUESTING
DATE GROUP EVENT OR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT BALANCE
7/1/18 $4,500.00
SPONSORSHIP
Under The HRC Homelessness
Bridge Workgroup Film Showing & Discussion $30.00 $4,470.00
Tony - The HRC Homelessness
Movie Workgroup Film Showing & Discussion $50.00 $4,420.00
Raising Respectful Kids in a Diverse
Workshop CALC World $200.00 $4,220.00
BIG Dinner BIG Blacks in Gov't Fundraiser Dinner $150.00 $4,070.00
Freedom Fund
Dinner NAACP Freedom Fund Dinner $375.00 $3,695.00
SUBTOTAL $805.00
WORKPLAN
EXPENSE
IHRD WeCU IHRD Celebration $1,000.00
SUBTOTAL $1,000.00
TOTALS $1,280.00 $2,695.00
Human Rights Commission Work Group Updates
Date: February 13, 2019
Work Group: WeCU
Prepared by: Bonnie Souza
Date of last meeting: January 26, 2019
Summary of last meeting attached? No.
What were the main topics discussed in the last meeting?
• Update and discussion on Subcommittee work, Liaison and Multicultural Center
(MCC) planning committee.
• Daniel drafted WeCU vision of a MCC. Bonnie and Daniel worked together to
finalize draft, share it with WeCU members, get WeCU approval on draft and
plan to send it to City Manager, Mayor, Manager HRNI office, Chair and Vice-
Chair of HRC (document attached).
• Seda drafted proposal regarding new Liaison position. Bonnie and Seda worked
together to finalize draft, send it to WeCU members to review and approve the
draft and also to approve the plan to send it to City Manager, Assistant City
Manager, Mayor and Manager of HRNI office (document attached).
• Meeting scheduled with Jen V. on February 1 to talk about planning committee
for MCC, particularly WeCU involvement, and relations between EPD and
marginalized communities, in light of Charlie Landeros fatal shooting.
• Police shooting on Jan 11 at Cascade Middle School, Charlie Landeros death.
Plan to draft WeCU statement about Landeros death (see attached memo to
HRC seeking HRC approval).
Do you have a proposal for the HRC to consider or any issues you need the
HRC’s feedback on during the next meeting? Yes.
If yes, please provide any supporting documents to be included in the packet by the Thursday before the
meeting.
• Would like HRC to review and approve WeCU statement on police shooting and
Charlie Landeros death on January 11, 2019 (memo/statement attached)
MEMO
TO: John Ruiz, Eugene City Manager
CC: Kristie Hammitt, Assistant City Manager
Lucy Vinis, Mayor
Jennifer Van Der Haeghen, Manager, Human Rights and Neighborhood Involvement
FM: WeCU (Whole Eugene Community United), a Human Rights Commission Work Group
RE: WeCU Proposal Regarding Multicultural Liaison, new staff position
DT: February 11, 2019
We, the members of WeCU (Whole Eugene Community United) a Eugene Human Rights Commission
work group, request that the position of Multicultural Liaison (MCL), be created as a direct report to
the Assistant City Manager in the City Manager’s Office (CMO).
The MCL should be empowered to have direct access to the City Manager and the Executive Board, as
well as to the City’s various commissions, boards and local communities. The position should be given
broad outreach capabilities. It is also important that the MCL have direct access to the Chief of Police,
both because marginalized communities historically have deep wounds and distrust of police, and to
create a forum in which positive relationships and trust can built. Placement in the City Manager’s
chain of command would give the CMO greater ability to connect the issue of equity and inclusion
with other initiatives that the City is pursuing, such as climate recovery actions, development of
disaster and emergency routes, and policies that may otherwise have a disproportionate and negative
effect on marginalized communities. The MCL would also be well situated in the CMO to assist with
reviewing and drafting communications to the public that are sensitive to marginalized communities in
our City.
WeCU believes that placement of the MCL in the Human Rights and Neighborhood Involvement
(HRNI) office, as a report to the HRNI manager, would be counter-productive and limiting, because it
would essentially marginalize the voice of the liaison to marginalized communities, compounding the
marginalization that already exists. The MCL would then have direct access only to the HRNI director,
and would have to funnel all interactions with representative groups and communities, as well as with
the Executive Board, through an intermediary empowered to direct those interactions.
A further, and hypothetical, reason for placement as direct report within the CMO is that a possible
function for this position in the future could be as director of the Multicultural Center that has been
proposed in the Marginalized Voices report. As the City moves forward to create and develop a
Multicultural Center, the MCL could be well placed as director, with broad reach within both the
organization and the community.
For the above-stated reasons, we believe it is important that the position of Multicultural Liaison will
be most effective if it is placed as a direct report to the Assistant City Manager, and not under the
direction of the HRNI manager.
Thank you. We look forward to further discussion and appreciate your consideration of this proposal.
MEMO
TO: John Ruiz, Eugene City Manager
Lucy Vinis, Mayor
Jennifer Van Der Haeghen, Manager, HRNI Office
Joel Iboa, Chair, Eugene Human Rights Commission
Ibrahim Coulibaly, Vice-Chair, Eugene Human Rights Commission
FM: Whole Eugene Community United (WeCU), Human Rights Commission Work
Group
RE: Vision of Multicultural Center in Eugene
DT: January 26, 2019
As one of our high-priority recommendations, the WeCU work group has formed a
subcommittee and begun earnest discussions on several items, including the creation of a
Multicultural Center in Eugene. WeCU would like to share with you some specifics of our
vision for such a Center in Eugene, as each of you consider moving forward on this
recommendation.
In a search for a space for a future Multicultural Center in Eugene, certain high-level
requirements should be considered. First, the space should be centrally located and
accessible. It should have high visibility, as that will be a key element in building cross-
cultural connections. The Center should be able to accommodate large events, such as
large meetings, conferences, workshops, stage performances, and community dances and
feasts. Next, the space should be able to accommodate small, intimate gatherings, such
as small meetings, book clubs, affinity groups, and rehearsal space. The Center should
also include office space, with a shared conference room and shared facilities for copying
and printing. The space might also be able to host a multicultural child care center during
weekday hours, as most other events would likely take place on evenings and weekends.
WeCU members have considered the possibility of using the EWEB North Building for this
Multicultural Center. The downstairs spaces could be adapted to large, medium and small
events and gatherings, and it could be easily adapted to a performance space. There is
also storage/office space downstairs. Upstairs, the old cafeteria is a large, open space that
could serve as another space for events and performances, including feasts. There was a
fully functional kitchen there previously, and it could be (easily?) converted back to that
use. There’s also room for office space and there’s a conference room on the second floor.
The second floor could also possibly be used for child care during the week.
There are likely other city-owned spaces that might work, as well. Whatever space is
chosen, we hope that WeCU members can participate directly on the planning committee
and that the voices of all marginalized communities are heard, so that it could truly be a
welcoming space for all in Eugene.
MEMO
TO: Eugene Human Rights Commission
FM: WeCU Work Group
RE: Statement on Charlie Landeros
DT: February 11, 2019
WeCU believes it is important that we make a statement regarding Charlie Landeros. We
have drafted the following and are submitting it to the full Human Rights Commission for
your consideration at the upcoming HRC meeting on February 19, 2019. Our intention is to
send this statement to: The Police Auditor, Civilian Review Board, Chief of Police, District
Attorney, City Manager, Mayor and City Councilors, and the Civil Liberties Defense Center.
We respectfully request the HRC’s approval of the following statement:
The Eugene Human Rights Commission hereby endorses (or approves of) the statement of
WeCU (Whole Eugene Community United), a Human Rights Commission Work Group,
regarding the killing of Charlie Landeros (pronouns: they, them, theirs) at Cascade Middle
School on January 11, 2019. WeCU is comprised of members from 10 different marginalized
communities in Eugene (African immigrant, Latinx, Native American/Alaska Native, Pacific
Islander, Palestinian, Muslim, Jewish, Gay, Trans, Disabled). The WeCU statement dated
February 11, 2019 follows:
Charlie was known as a racial justice activist and was also a volunteer at the Civil Liberties
Defense Center (CLDC). They were loved and respected by many in the Latinx and LGBTQ
communities. What happened shocked and saddened us. The video that was released shows
clearly that Charlie drew their gun in the presence of police officers and fired shots. The video
also shows that the situation moved from relative calm to violent in a matter of seconds. This
leaves us with many unanswered questions, including:
• Why did the officers not employ, or continue to employ, de-escalation tactics? At what
point were additional officers called?
• Did the officer know of Charlie and the work that they did, and did that have any
influence on the decisions made by police?
• Is what can be seen in the released videos standard police practice, and if so, why are
de-escalation tactics not the norm?
Unfortunately, a great deal of mistrust of police already existed among many in marginalized
communities, in Eugene and across this country, prior to this killing. This tragic incident has only
increased that mistrust.
In the last three paragraphs of District Attorney Patricia Perlow’s 1/24/19 press release
regarding the fatal shooting, the DA added information from Charlie’s social media posts about
their antipathy and mistrust towards the police. In our estimation, the inclusion of this
information seems gratuitous and inflammatory and could be used by many as a justification for
what happened. Alternatively, their posts could be viewed as a reflection of the oppression that
marginalized people have experienced in the past at the hands of police officers. Additionally, in
other incidents where police have shot members of marginalized communities, some fact about
the victim’s misdeeds is often used to show that the victim must have deserved it. While in this
particular incident, there seems to be no doubt that Charlie pulled a gun out intending to fire at a
police officer, members of marginalized groups might see the DA’s use of Charlie's social media
posts as an intentional attempt to vilify the ultimate victim with information that is clearly
prejudicial. And further, the District Attorney did this in her first public statement about the
incident.
This kind of information also feeds another serious concern of WeCU. There are now videos
posted online by right-wing groups who misleadingly claim that police prevented an armed
Antifa from going on a shooting spree at the school. We believe this sort of misinformation may
be used to justify increased violence against marginalized communities that are already
experiencing an increasing number of hate and bias crimes and incidents.
WeCU understands that there is an independent investigation that the Civil Liberties Defense
Center is conducting, and we hope that our questions might be answered. We also hope that
the City of Eugene will conduct its own investigation, not only into this incident, but into how
police procedure, training, and culture might be improved to avoid any further such incidents.
We also ask that all investigations into this matter be fully open and transparent, including by
Eugene’s Civilian Review Board. In a civil society, trust in our police force must include those in
marginalized communities, in order for our society to remain civil.
City of Eugene
Human Rights Commission
The mission of the Human Rights Commission is to promote implementation of universal human rights values and principles in
all City of Eugene programs and throughout the wider community.
To carry out this mission the commission shall affirm, encourage and initiate programs and services within the City of Eugene
and in the wider community designed to place priority upon protecting, respecting, and fulfilling the full range of universal
human rights as enumerated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. To support and promote human rights, the
commission will: provide human rights education, be proactive in human rights efforts, address human rights violations, ensure
active public participation, be transparent and open, be publicly accountable for human rights progress.
Human Rights Commissioners: Joel Iboa (Chair), Ibrahim Coulibaly (Vice Chair), Ela Kubok, Ibrahim
Hamide, Serena Markstrom, Rick Guerra, Bonnie Souza, Aria Seligmann, Julia Johnson, Aimee Walsh,
Councilor Emily Semple
Human Rights and Neighborhood Involvement Staff: Jennifer Lleras Van Der Haeghen
The Human Rights Commission meets on the third Tuesday of each month.
Tuesday, March 19, 2019
5:30 – 7:30 PM Meeting
Sloat Room, Atrium Building, 99 W 10th Street
Contact: Jennifer Lleras Van Der Haeghen, 541-682-5177 jvanderhaeghen@eugene-or.us
ITEM _______________ACTION______ TIME
1. Agenda/Minutes Review and Approval (Chair) Discuss/Vote 5:30 - 5:35 (5 min)
2. Public Comment (Chair) 5:35 - 5:45 (10 min)
3. Support Request (Chair) Discuss/Vote 5:45 – 5:50 (5 min)
4. EPD Liaison Update 5:50 – 6:00 (10 min)
5. 6:00 – 6:30 (30 min)
6. 6:30 – 7:00 (30 min)
7. 7:00 – 7:10 (10 min)
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 |ehrcenter@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/hrc
8. 7:10 – 7:20 (10 min)
9. Work Group Lead Updates 7:20 – 7:30 (10 min)
10. Commission Liaison Updates 7:30 – 7:40 (10 min)
11. Council Update 7:40 – 7:55 (15 min)
12. Staff Update 7:55 – 8:05 (10 min)
13. April HRC Meeting Agenda 8:05 – 8:10 (5 min)
The Eugene Human Rights Commission welcomes your interest in these agenda items. This meeting location is wheelchair
accessible. For the hearing impaired, FM-assistive listening devices are available or 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 staff at (541) 682-5177.
La Comisión de Derechos Humanos agradece su interés por participar en los asuntos de esta agenda. El local de la
reunión tiene acceso para personas en silla de ruedas. Para las personas con dificultades auditivas ofrecemos sistemas FM
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 | HRNI@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/hrc
para ayudarlo a escuchar, o intérpretes de lenguaje de señas. También ofrecemos intérpretes de español. Si necesita
cualquiera de estos servicios por favor solicítelos con 48 horas de anticipación, llamando al (541) 682-5177.
99 W. 10th Avenue, Suite 116, Eugene, OR 97401
541.682.5177 | HRNI@ci.eugene.or.us | www.eugene-or.gov/hrc
Get email alerts for Eugene
A daily email when new agendas and minutes are posted.