CC Minutes - 07/31/00 Work Session

Home Browse Search

Mr. Meisner said that the application guidelines were clear, and if a request violated the guidelines it should be rejected. The council agreed to schedule a work session on the topic of contingency fund requests after January 1, 2001. Staff Assignments Mayor Torrey said that the council frequently made staff assignments without considering the resource impact on the organization, and he was concerned about that. He pointed out that the Land Use Code Update would require additional employees, and he questioned where the dollars for that would come from and how the council would make the decision about funding. Mayor Torrey emphasized his concern about the council's need for accountability, and wanted to ensure that the council realized all the costs associated with its direction to staff. Ms. Nathanson requested that staff provide the council with estimates of the hours required and the work postponed because of the council's requests rather than just an estimate of the cost alone. Mr. Meisner and Mr. Kelly agreed. Mr. Kelly said that it was the council's job to ask questions and the manager's job to identify the consequences of answering those questions. Mr. Johnson reported that he had asked staff to add a resource impact section to the council's agenda item summaries. Council Goals FY01 Mr. Johnson said that he would likely recommend to the council that it did not add many new goals in the coming year because staff was hoping the council could spend some focused time on the goal of financial stability. Mr. Carlson noted that the council's goal review with the executive managers was scheduled for September 27. City Manager Evaluation The council debriefed the recent evaluation process. Ms. Taylor did not like the evaluation form, and would revise it by asking the council to discuss its relationship with the manager, what it knew about the manager, and what it wanted him to do in its relationship with the council. Mr. Kelly requested that the council be given a different evaluation form than was distributed internally to reflect the different nature of the relationship between the council and manager. He said that a section could be added on progress on the council's goals and the manager's day-to- day relationships. Responding to a question from Ms. Nathanson, Mr. Johnson said that the City contacted other cities and the ICMA for information about how other cities evaluate their managers. Mr. Meisner said that when he evaluated the manager he was also evaluating the organization. He wanted an ability to reflect things related to the organization, such as organizational morale. Mr. Pap~ suggested that the evaluation of the manager occur in a special session along with a discussion of goals. MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 31, 2000 Page 7 Process Session