Laserfiche WebLink
Councilor Nathanson expressed concern that a precedent would be set for councilors to be involved in <br />something that they were prohibited from being involved in by the City Charter. She recognized that <br />executive managers had a different sort of position than most employees, but asserted that many <br />employees who are not executive managers had highly visible positions in the eyes of the public. She <br />wondered if the council was going to start asking to review complaints or personnel evaluations at a lower <br />level. She felt uncomfortable getting involved at this level. <br /> <br />Councilor Meisner said he would support the motion with the deletion of subsection (a), providing the <br />process would not circumvent the personnel process. <br /> <br /> Councilor Bettman offered a friendly amendment, accepted by Councilor Taylor, to <br /> her motion that provided for the deletion of subsection (a) from the language. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey asked legal counsel how the City Council could keep it from being a personnel issue. Mr. <br />Klein responded that the way the ordinance was currently crafted, it applied to some sort of disciplinary <br />action related to executive management. He said that a question for the council was what it would do <br />with the information. If the true purpose for the council in getting this information was to assist it with its <br />evaluation of the City Manager, it seemed that it would need, at a minimum, a full report including how <br />the City Manager addressed the complaint. As such, he suggested that if language was to be added, the <br />action should be tabled for this meeting in order to provide legal counsel an opportunity to assure that the <br />City would not be set up for an action filed by the City Manager as a result of being deprived his or her <br />due process rights. <br /> <br />Councilor Kelly supported tabling the item. He noted the language regarding the requirement for a <br />super-majority vote in Section 2.488 and questioned the necessity of such a vote. He asserted that this <br />detracted from the ordinance and asked the council to consider dropping this. <br /> <br /> Councilor Bettman moved, seconded by Councilor Kelly, to table the item. <br /> <br />Mr. Klein said that he could return with revised language at the soonest date that the City Manager could <br />place the item on the agenda again. Mr. Carlson added that this would be for the meeting of October 13. <br /> <br /> Roll call vote; the motion to table the item passed unanimously, 7:0. <br /> <br />5. ACTION: An Ordinance Amending Chapter 9 of the Eugene Code Regarding Hospital and <br /> Related Medical Uses; and Adopting a Severability Clause <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey clarified that action on the item had been deferred. He said that all of the written testimony <br />had been submitted and all councilors and staff had received copies. <br /> <br /> Councilor Bettman moved to direct the City Manager to return to the council with a <br /> resolution for consideration on Wednesday, September 24, 2003, that reflects the <br /> following: <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 22, 2003 Page 6 <br /> Regular Meeting <br /> <br /> <br />