CC Minutes - 12/13/06 Work Session

Home Browse Search

7) Amend 2.246 to fix a numbering error: the second (9) should be numbered (10) and the section numbered (10) should be numbered (11). Mr. Papé asked what the significance was of the deletion of ‘criminal proceedings from section 2.456(3). Mr. Kelly responded that he felt that there was language elsewhere in the ordinance that addressed this and that a criminal proceeding could conceivably span a decade. Ms. Rudnick noted that this was consistent with how things worked at present. The motion to amend passed unanimously, 8:0. Mr. Kelly, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to amend Council Bill #4936 to make the fol- lowing changes: 1) Amend 2.454(4) so that it reads as follows: To the extent permitted by Oregon Public Records Law, the auditor’s office and any investigators or consultants it may employ shall maintain the confidentiality of records and information in accordance only with applicable federal, state, and local law and other applicable city policies and collec- tive bargaining agreements. 2) Amend 2.246(9) so that it reads as follows: To the extent permitted by the Oregon Public Records Law, members of the Civilian Review Board shall maintain the confi- dentiality of records and information in accordance only with applicable federal, state, and local law and other applicable city policies and collective bargaining agreements. Mr. Kelly did not believe striking ‘applicable city policies’ would be controversial. He believed ‘city policies’ was overly broad. He said the “heart of the matter” was the collective bargaining agreement. Ms. Rudnick explained that the legal implications of the amendment were that the council could not legally exempt the auditor or the Civilian Review Board (CRB) from the application of the collective bargaining agreement because it was illegal. She underscored that every section of the City was subject to the collective bargaining laws and those laws would make it an Unfair Labor Practice (ULP), meaning it would be illegal to refuse to bargain in good faith or to fail to comply with a written collective bargaining agreement. She believed that the amendment, as it stood, would draw a ULP. With regard to the policies, Ms. Rudnick believed the applicable city policies referenced in the ordinance were those related to confidentiality as it pertained to personnel records. She did not think the council could exempt the auditor or the CRB from those policies because the policies were adopted administratively by the City Manager. She understood that Mr. Kelly was trying to provide surety that as policies were developed and contracts were being negotiated, that they would account for and meet the needs of the auditor and the CRB to have access to information in order to do the job the ordinance sets out that they should do, which was to review cases and police investigation in as transparent and open forum as could be legally provided. She said if including the language there was at issue for other reasons, the council should delete it. Ms. Rudnick did not see a way for the council to direct the outcome of collective bargaining agreements in an ordinance. However, she provided a suggested motion that would direct the City Manager and his designee on a policy basis to, when adopting personnel policies related to confidentiality or release of records or when negotiating collective bargaining agreements, either take into account or to meet the needs of the auditor and the CRB to have access to appropriate personnel information. She noted that using the MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 13, 2006 Page 3 Work Session