03/24/1975 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Council was comfortable that such things could happen on is the kind of legalistic background which would have to be of a similar situation in.Eugene. ,'-- . ,~: -? At Councilman Haws request,. 11r. Bradley' read tD.e\....s'~~tion of the Charter on which he based his opinion. Councilwoman Beal suggested': that ,.rather than "go in the face of the Charter" a resolution equId be prepared -b/-'t,he~:l1ulnager pro tern listing the names of people hired or fir,ed' for consideration. ~t,;C6uncil..meetings. Councilman Murray wondered about the ,propriety of that kind pf puqJic -d~splay of names and thought there should be some other way or process thqt could'be carried on. Assistant Manager said .th,rre was never any queshon.in.~:his5 mind.:;'whether the Council could delegate this {~at~ority. And he expressed ~~~iou?'resefvations about putting in a public; document '.m'atters treated confh1'entia1ly ~ith regard ,to ..discipline or dismissal of empl'o')'es, that would introduce something into pubI'ic .records that would be contrary to the way the city treated its employes and have an affect on ~~ployer/employe\relations. . ~ 1~ -- --- Councilman Williams didn't see in the Charter language an obligation on the part of the Council but rather a grant of authority to the Council to decide whether a pro tem . would or would not have the authority. He saw nothing wrong \.,ri th giving to the pro tern the authority the manager normally would have. He thought if the intent was for the Council to have individual review of hiring and firing, separate language would have been adopted~ The only decision was whether the pro tern was to have the same authority that a city manager would have or whether that authority was to be reserved to the Council. ' in such things. If the the federal level, that used ~or interpretation . Councilman Murray asked if action at this meeting was necessary. He wondered whether a written memo from the city attorney could be made available explaining more thoroughly", the proper way to proceed. Assistant Manager said that action could be delayed, '" however if it was the language would have to be made retroactive because employes come and go with substantial frequency. He said a memo could be prepared and a special meet- ing called. since it appeared a little too long to wait until the regular April 14 meeting without clearly defined authority. Mr. Korth said several attorneys in the city attorney's office worked on the proposed resolution and were of the same opinion stated by Mr. Williams, so he doubted there would be anything different in a written opinion. He added that research had indicated clearly that advance delegation of authority equId be made by the Council, recognizing that delegation could be rescinded if the Countil was dissatisfied'with any decision made under the delegated authority. Councilman Hamel said he had confidence in the city attorney's and assistant manager's opinion, also the Council upon the former manager's resignation put a "lot of weightli on the assistant manager then. He felt the proposed resolution should be adopted now. Councilman Haws asked whether the resolution exempted authority with regard to hiring or dismissal of department heads. Assistant Manager answered that the Council should be concerned if a department head was dismissed, delegation of that power would not be wise, especially in the unsettled period between managers. Leaving the appointing power with the Council so far as department heads were concerned would also lend them more stability. Coucnilman Raws said he would have to go with the original Charter prOVISIon although the logic appeared to be with the prop9sed resolution in trying to have a smooth transition period. ~ Mayor Anderson thought the Charter would have been more explicit had the intent been for the Council not to be able to delegate appointing power. He felt the decision at 3/24/75 - 20 ISo . .. 4. . '.