08/07/1991 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e 5. Provides direction for the operation of City departments (in- cludes providing leadership, communicating council direction, and staying in touch with major projects/issues) Mr. Gleason received very high marks from the council on his management and leadership in this area. The City staff's expertise, enthusiasm, and cohe- siveness were cited as a reflection of Mr. Gleason's high standards. Mr. Nicholson hoped that Mr. Gleason would act more quickly to eliminate ineffective programs and repair flawed areas in the organization. However, Mr. Boles appreciated his making corrections at natural change points. 6. Provides effective and strategic City administration (includes planning, budgeting, and internal systems) Councilors discussed the need for innovation in proposing solutions, and generally agreed that while innovative approaches are desirable, the council and the community are not always willing to bear the costs associated with experimentation. Mr. MacDonald referred to the City's continuing high bond rating as indication of its effective financial mechanisms. 7. Is aware of emerging community trends/problems/issues and integrates the same into staff recommendations This area produced the lowest overall ratings of Mr. Gleason's performance. e Councilors urged Mr. Gleason to seek and present a broader range of community views and asked about his personal community activities. Mr. Gleason told the council that in assessing the community's point of view, his opinions must be put aside when he offers his professional advice. C. General Comments Councilors reviewed their lists of what Mr. Gleason should be doing more or less of. Comments touched on his becoming more innovative, on "locking horns" with members of the community, and on his proclivity for long explanations. Mr. Gleason expressed his appreciation for the council's frank discussion and observed that public service compensates the individual by encouraging person- al growth. Councilors briefly discussed the format and logistics for the annual evalua- tion. Mr. Gleason was asked to bring his notes from this evaluation to next year's session to help review his progress and accomplishments. The council agreed that City staff, particularly department heads, may have valuable feedback that would aid in the evaluation process, but felt that the public has ample opportunity for evaluating the council's policies and their imple- mentation through the ballot and the public forum. After some discussion, there appeared to be consensus to continue holding the evaluations in public session. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council August 7, 1991 Page 3