Item 4A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Mr. Zelenka commented that he wanted to ensure that the public had involvement. He hoped there would be additional involvement before the process was completed. Ms. Solomon supported the budget alignment process. She believed it was an “exciting opportunity” for a different process that would ultimately be less divisive. She was not bothered by the truncated process. She felt it was to their advantage to do this “in two steps.” She said it was important to exercise fiscal responsibility and get “ahead of the curve.” She noted that the City had not gotten out ahead of the transportation infrastructure needs; the City had known since 1999 that it had a problem with the way it funded road maintenance and preservation and still had not taken action to change its approach. Ms. Ortiz appreciated Ms. Jones’ attempt to do this. She agreed that it would have been easier, as City Manager Pro Tem, to continue conducting the budget process as it had been. She felt Ms. Jones was trying to create a partnership with the council. She indicated that she would support the motion. Mayor Piercy expressed her appreciation for Ms. Jones’ comments and her efforts to involve the council. She stated that Ms. Jones had her confidence that she would undertake the process in a way that was aligned with the values of the organization. Ms. Ortiz, seconded by Mr. Pryor, moved to endorse using the City Council’s five vision statements as the foundation for aligning services and allocating resources in the FY09 Pro- posed Budget. Mr. Poling underscored that Ms. Jones was charged with “fixing what was broken.” He had been concerned as to how the budget alignment process would treat the unions and that it could lead to some privatization but he had come to believe that the system and policies that were in place had sufficiently addressed those concerns. He thought involving the staff in the process would provide a pride in ownership. He intended to support the motion. He expressed his appreciation to Ms. Jones for the work she had done on this and for the courage and dedication she had shown in taking these tasks on. He considered budget alignment to be a “huge task.” Mr. Pryor commented that while speaking of aligning with goals and visions could be considered rhetoric, he sensed the City was also talking about setting metrics and he supported this. He applauded staff for coming forward and asking for metrics. He thought the metrics would help the council and staff to understand whether the money actually went to the services that were designated and what happened as a result. He wanted to move away from people bringing a “shopping list” of what they wanted to the budget process. He wanted the money to be tied to the desired outcomes and council goals. He felt the budget alignment process would move everyone in that direction. Ms. Bettman took issue with performance measures and metrics. She said she had always wanted to see performance measures, but she wanted measures that “had some meaning.” She averred that in the past such measures included surveys which she considered to be intangibles. She felt the budget alignment process had no community input and was not justifiable at this time. She recalled that the council had voted to not dispose of the Kaufman Senior Center and had voted to take money from selling the annex and put it into a trust to provide the Kaufman Senior Center with funding into perpetuity. She noted that this was against the staff’s wishes, but the council supported doing so. She also recalled that staff had recommended that there be bicycle and foot patrol public safety for urban core parks and the downtown and the council had put into place the funding for this, also into perpetuity. She asked what would happen to those services if staff decided that in order to “reach some obscure benchmark” the budget would not include these. MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 31, 2007 Page 7 Work Session