Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Rayor expressed concern that the current agenda setting method could allow one or two <br />individuals to keep a politically sensitive issue off council agendas. He asked if an issue could get <br />buried even if it was controversial or if a strong minority of the council wanted to discuss it. <br /> <br />Mr. Lee identified as an issue how an item got placed on the council's agenda, and the <br />appropriate use of e-mail in that process. He also was concerned about what constituted public <br />deliberation, and e-mail's use for communications between councilors. <br /> <br />Ms. Helphand asked the councilors to comment on or offer solutions to the issues that had been <br />raised. <br /> <br />Mr. Lee said that the council's goals should drive its work plan and the mayor and city manager <br />should ensure that occurs. He advocated for the use of common sense and mutual trust in spite <br />of differing individual ideologies. He said that all the councilors were trying to do the right thing for <br />the community and all had to work under close public scrutiny. Mr. Lee urged councilors to give <br />each other "the benefit of the doubt." <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly noted the shod time period the council had for review of its meeting packet and asked <br />how he could get information to the council if he wished to take a new direction on an agenda item <br />in a timely way. <br /> <br />Mr. Torrey said that the City Manager and his staff placed items on the agenda. He provided input <br />about the time and order of items. He suggested that councilors could ask the manager to place <br />an agenda item on the Consent Calendar, and if a council majority approved the calender with the <br />item it would be placed on a council agenda. Mr. Torrey also suggested that to address <br />councilors' concerns about limited speaking time, the number of agenda items be limited to two, <br />and that each item be limited to 45 minutes, including staff presentation. <br /> <br />Mr. Torrey said he was opposed to taking the youth leadership forum off the council agenda. He <br />said that it was not a good message to send to a group of important young people, and he was <br />more interested in knowing what local high school students were concerned about than in <br />discussion of issues such as the nuclear test ban treaty. He pointed out that the council had not <br />had the students on an agenda since early May because of its full agendas. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner said he liked the youth leadership forum but the council had never discussed the <br />presentations as a regular agenda item. He said that the council's agendas were full and as a <br />matter of courtesy the council should have discussed what was an addition to its workload. Mr. <br />Meisner did not support Mr. Torrey's suggestion to employ the Consent Calendar to place items on <br />the agenda because he believed it would stifle discussion and, if used, the current rules worked. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly supported the youth leadership forum and suggested some work sessions could be <br />extended an hour and that the students be encouraged to meet beforehand to prepare more <br />unified presentations to the council. <br /> <br />Ms. Helphand asked the council if it supported referring the issue of how to keep the youth <br />leadership forum going and better facilitate it to the manager and Mr. Torrey for a recommendation <br />back to the council. All councilors with the exception of Ms. Taylor indicated support for such a <br />process. <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 24, 1999 Page 3 <br /> 4:30 p.m. <br /> <br /> <br />