Laserfiche WebLink
Regarding the recommendation regarding a new section for citizen participation, Mr. Kelly asked <br />what practical effect the text would have. <br /> <br />Speaking to Mr. Kelly's first question, Ms. Colbath said that Mr. Lidz had indicated that all <br />elections for City officers must be held at the same time and place as elections for State and <br />County officers, and the provision could violate Oregon Revised Statute 254.035. <br /> <br />Speaking to Mr. Kelly's second question, Mr. Tollenaar said that the committee found on no <br />precedence elsewhere for such an approach. The committee hoped the ordinance provided another <br />option for those seeking to amend the charter. <br /> <br />Speaking to Mr. Kelly's third question, Ms. Colbath said the proposal on citizen involvement was <br />to elicit a City commitment that citizens are actively participating in local government. That was a <br />very important feature of City government to the committee, and members wanted the council to <br />be mindful of the issue. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey asked if the committee had reviewed other council/manager governments employing <br />a performance auditor, whether it had worked, and where it had worked. He asked why the <br />CCRC did not ask the council to instruct the city manager to hire the auditor using normal budget <br />processes. Ms. Colbath did not have a percentage breakdown of those cities with a <br />council/manager form of government employing a performance auditor. Several of the cities had <br />been the size of Eugene. She indicated she would provide Mayor Torrey with a list of the cities <br />using a performance auditor. Anecdotally, three auditors she spoke to worked in a <br />council/manager government. Mayor Torrey asked why the performance auditor needed to be in <br />the charter. Mr. Tollenaar responded that to have a truly independent auditor, the council would <br />have to make the appointment, and the charter now precludes the council from making such <br />appointments. <br />Mayor Torrey called for the second round of council questions. <br /> <br />Mr. Farr asked Mr. Tollenaar if the committee had discussed the budget for an in-house City <br />Attorney. Mr. Tollenaar said that a portion of the current contract, about $230,000, would be <br />directed toward that budget. He thought that would cover the costs of the position, with the <br />exception of start-up costs. Mr. Farr said that some of the criticism he heard of the concept was <br />that high-quality attorneys were not attracted to municipal work. Mr. Tollenaar noted that <br />Portland and Salem both had in-house city attorneys and suggested they would be offended by the <br />criticism. In his own opinion, over time, municipal law had grown into a highly professional career <br />path for attorneys. The first contract attorney for Eugene (30 years ago) testified in support of an- <br />house attorney. Another former in-house attorney had indicated to him that at that time, municipal <br />law was generally handled by younger, more inexperienced attorneys who soon moved on. <br />However, he believed that had changed, and Eugene would be able to attract a qualified person <br />who would serve in the position for a long period. <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 14, 2002 Page 7 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />