Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

? Development of tools to solicit high volume and high quality feedback on perform- ance from managerial and non-managerial staff. Ms. Bettman opined that it was appropriate to retain the existing criteria for evaluation until new criteria had been developed. Mr. Pryor observed that the “world would not end” if the council used the old system for the current year. He said the most important thing to him was what the new system the council would come up with would be. He wanted it to be effective, useful, and to reflect what the council wished to accomplish. He did not perceive anything in Ms. Bettman’s proposal that would preempt this. He was glad the council was discussing a change in the evaluation process. Ms. Taylor thought the ideal time to discuss a new system was after an evaluation because that was the time councilors were most cognizant of what did not work in the current process. Regarding compensation, she was not sure whether the City of Eugene should be compared with other places. She believed in “that extra paycheck we get.” She commented that there had not been any shortage of applicants when the job had been open and that it cost more to live in some places. Mr. Clark said he would appreciate having the opportunity to have a subcommittee delve into the process prior to the evaluation. He stated that in the absence of this, he would be happy to trust the council officers in their work to try to bring it to a revised process. He felt that either way the council would be able to get to a reasonably similar outcome for the present year. Mr. Zelenka reiterated his preference to retain the current process for the current year while a council subcommittee worked on revising it. He agreed that the best time to revise it would be just after completion. He added his agreement that the COLA should be automatic and not part of the contract. Ms. Ortiz offered a friendly amendment to include bullet points 5, 7, and 8 from the Sum- mary of Recommendations, as follows: 5. The City Manager will provide a written self-evaluation. 7. Set a date certain work session for the City Manager to return to the council with an articulated set of expectations and goals for the coming year that would be agreed upon by all. 8. Conduct a market study and decide on compensation policy prior to the evaluation work session. Ms. Bettman accepted the friendly amendment. Ms. Ortiz indicated that she planned to offer her services on the subcommittee. Mr. Pryor said if the motion should fail because of the first sentence he would be willing to put the same motion on indicating that the transitional process would be used in the current year. In response to a question from Mr. Clark, Ms. Ortiz explained that the transitional process was less bulky and involved less finger-pointing. Mr. Pryor concurred. He said it focused more on the subjective elements of having an evaluation that was based on conversation and discussion rather than just numbers. The motion failed, 5:3; Ms. Taylor, Ms. Bettman, and Mr. Zelenka voting in favor. MINUTES—Eugene City Council May 16, 2007 Page 4 Work Session