Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Farr thanked the committee for its work. He said many of the CCRC's recommendations <br />involve getting the council more involved in managing the City organization, and he asked how a <br />group of what he characterized as political part timers had the time, staff, and financial resources <br />to do what the committee was proposing that it do. Mr. Tollenaar said the committee was charged <br />to look into the possible role of the council in terms of its involvement in department head hiring <br />and department organization and reorganization, and he did not think the committee did much in <br />"redressing" the balance of power between the council and city manager. The committee's <br />recommendations acknowledged the council's interest in the hiring and firing of department <br />directors. The proposals for the City attorney and auditor, if accepted, would give the council <br />more tools to oversee the City administration, but did not change the basic council/manager form <br />of government. Mr. Farr questioned how council-initiated ordinances would work without council <br />support staff. Mr. Tollenaar said it would work in the same way as it did currently; a majority of <br />councilors would direct the City Manager to prepare an ordinance. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap~ also thanked the committee for its work. He had hoped the committee would do more <br />about EWEB, and asked what land mines the committee envisioned in addressing the issue. Ms. <br />Colbath said that a subcommittee met to discuss what the issues involved were, and realized there <br />were many differences of opinion about the topics that needed to be pursued. Accordingly, given <br />the time the issue would take, the CCRC recommended another committee that included EWEB <br />representation be charged to address the topic. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap~ asked to whom the performance auditor would report, who would do performance <br />reviews, and who would fire or hire that individual. Ms. Colbath responded that the council would <br />have authority over the position, but its work would be guided by an audit committee. The CCRC <br />had made a recommendation for the membership of the proposed audit committee. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner said the committee did not state in its report if the city manager would explain the <br />reason for dismissal of a department head in public or executive session, noting it was unlikely an <br />executive would choose to be fired publicly and would probably prefer to resign. Regarding <br />hiring, the committee provided for the council to designate a hiring process, not to get a statement <br />of the reasons for a hiring; he questioned why it took that approach. Mr. Tollenaar said that the <br />committee had initially agreed that the city manager's report after a firing would be in executive <br />session, but the City Attorney questioned whether that was consistent with the State's Open <br />Meeting Laws. The effect of the final text would be that the mayor would be in the position of <br />deciding if an executive session would be called, and that would occur in accordance with the <br />relevant State statutes. Responding to the second question, Ms. Colbath confirmed that the <br />proposals related to the hiring of department directors simply provided an information process for <br />the council. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly asked for an explanation of the statement on page 32 that indicated the concept of <br />decreasing the amount of time a person can be appointed to office could encounter legal <br />ramifications at the State level. He found the protected ordinance recommendation an appealing <br />way to avoid charter clutter, and asked if the committee found precedent for it elsewhere. <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 14, 2002 Page 6 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />