CC Minutes - 11/21/05 Work Session

Home Browse Search

Mayor Piercy observed that there appeared to be no consensus on the issue; some councilors supported an outright prohibition, while others preferred that people could be called on, depending on the circumstances. She determined there was support for giving her some discretion to make a decision. Discussion Regarding Council Meeting Times The council discussed a suggestion from Ms. Bettman to have extended Monday evening meetings and to no longer convene in work sessions on Wednesdays. After discussion about the impact of longer meetings, which some councilors believed could potentially affect councilor work schedules and council productivity, councilors agreed to retain the current meeting schedule for the time being. Ms. Taylor suggested the council consider changing Budget Committee meetings to daytime hours. Bringing Up, Deliberating, Noticing, and Voting on New Regulations, Measures, Resolutions, etc., at Council Meetings Mr. Pryor expressed a need for clarification in this area and asked if the council had an established policy. If not, he thought one was needed. He said the council often talked about the need for public input but items that he thought the public might want to weigh in on were raised and voted at a meeting with virtually no input. He pointed out that bringing up a new issue during committee reports at a council meeting meant that the public did not receive notice. He acknowledged that councilors had the right to make motions without notice to the public, but he questioned whether that was what it should do as a general practice. Ms. Bettman observed that sometimes when there is no staff-recommended motion in the Agenda Item Summary (AIS) it becomes apparent that staff wants action or definitive direction from the council. In those cases where staff seeks a definitive direction, it should include a motion for consideration in the packet. She believed that if staff expected the council to take a vote, a motion should be included in the AIS. In those cases, she added, at least the public would be aware that the council intended to discuss the topic. She pointed out the council’s notification process for an intent to make a motion, and said she was not sure how to involve the public in that process, or if the council could include the public in every decision. Mr. Kelly noted that the council’s process regarding its intent to offer a motion at a meeting should be codified in the operating agreements. There was general agreement. City Manager Taylor noted the council’s rule related to motions on page 7 of the operating agreements. Mr. Kelly believed that frequently, issues require quick action and may not be scheduled in a timely way. He invited ideas on how to get information out to the public and suggested that councilor motions be posted on the City’s Web site. He also pointed out that motions could be tabled. He acknowledged the distinction between motions during a work session and motions during committee reports, and agreed that the AIS for agenda items scheduled for work sessions should include a motion if staff wanted direction. He said a suggested motion was a red flag to the public that action could occur. Ms. Solomon referred to the recent memorandum from the Police Commission requesting council action, which was raised during committee reports and made her feel “put on the spot.” She believed the issue deserved a more robust discussion than it received. She thought the same was true of the council’s recent discussion on “upzoning” and establishing a Ballot Measure 37 Fund. Ms. Solomon believed that topic was so significant it also warranted a public hearing. She asked how the council could avoid such situations in the future. MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 21, 2005 Page 3 Process Session