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