Laserfiche WebLink
government was a public record, but some were exempt from disclosure. Mr. Lidz believed that <br />most people, using a common sense interpretation of the term "public record," would read the <br />sentence and believe that they had access to those exempted records. He suggested that the <br />sentence in question could be deleted, or alternatively, the text included in Appendix W of the <br />council's notebook regarding the amendments could be used. <br /> <br />Mr. Carlson reported that the City Council formerly had an Audit Committee composed of <br />councilors that oversaw the details of the City's financial audit. The council discontinued the <br />committee because of a lack of interest. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pap~, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to refer the proposed new <br /> section creating the position of a city performance auditor to the ballot in the <br /> November 2002 election. <br /> <br /> Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to amend the motion by <br /> revising the sentence that read "All audit reports are public records" to read <br /> "All audit reports are public records and are subject to disclosures required <br /> by and in accordance with State law pertaining to disclosure of public <br /> records." <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly called for council comments and questions. <br /> <br />Ms. Nathanson preferred the City Manager's approach, which was to adopt text parallel to that <br />used for the City Attorney position, as opposed to the more detailed recommendation of the <br />CCRC. <br /> <br />Mr. Fart indicated support for the amendment but said he did not favor the main motion because <br />of the complexity of the text being proposed. <br /> <br />Responding to a question from Mr. PapS, Mr. Lidz said that the amendment ensured that audits <br />were subject to State law regarding public records. It did not add substance in that the <br />requirements for disclosure would be the same under State law, but it did provide assurance to a <br />member of the public reading the charter that the reports would be treated like other public <br />records, and not placed where they could not be reviewed. He believed that it would be a rare <br />instance in which a report was exempt from disclosure. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap8 opposed the amendment, saying he preferred the charter remain simple. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor thought the amendment accomplished the simplicity Mr. Pap8 was seeking. Mr. Lidz <br />concurred. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly believed the amendment was responsive to the legal counsel's concerns. He also <br />believed it provided philosophical assurance related to the public nature of the audit reports. <br /> <br />Mr. Carlson said that the amendment was actually a restatement of State law. <br /> <br /> The motion passed, 7:1; Mr. Pap8 voting no. <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 10, 2002 Page 2 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />