Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved that the City oppose any mandatory positions, but was willing to utilize deferral periods as long as taxes during the deferral were not lower than previous. Responding to a question from Mr. Clark, Ms. Bettman clarified that it was her position that deferrals should only be used for involuntary annexations, rather than for properties that the owner wished to develop. She did not want mandates from the state. The motion passed 7:1; Mr. Poling voting no. B. WORK SESSION: Discussion on Role of Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations and Process to Establish City Council Policy on Legislative Matters Council, Public, and Government Affairs Manager Mary Walston provided some historic background on the Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations (CCIGR). She reviewed the CCIGR process for reviewing proposed legislation and said that the committee’s recommendations were to be ratified by the full council. She said that two questions had recently come up with regard to the committee, one being whether the committee’s actions must be ratified by the full council prior to lobbying in Salem, which the council discussed earlier in the week, and the other was the committee’s purview over legislation related to human resources and collective bargaining, which were currently the responsibility of the City Manager through council resolution. Ms. Wilson, Intergovernmental Relations Manager, said that when the committee did not have a unanimous position on a bill, she still assumed that it represented the position of the council, but in one situation the committee’s position on a bill was overturned by the full council. It had not affected the City’s lobbying efforts on that particular bill, but it might in other cases. She asked for council direction. Ms. Wilson described how bills were reviewed and said bills that addressed staffing, employment, and collective bargaining were referred to staff in Human Resources and Risk Services (HRRS), as the staff there were best qualified to evaluate them. In some cases it was clear that a bill was specific to personnel and management issues while others addressed broader issues, such as medical marijuana in the work place and discrimination based on sexual orientation. The resolution previously mentioned delegated that authority to the manager. She asked for direction on that issue. Ms. Bettman called for the recession of the resolution mentioned by Ms. Walston, which she considered ambiguous. She suggested that if the council could not get through all the issues today, it endorse the current protocol of the CCIGR and schedule another work session. Ms. Bettman offered a list of questions for the council to consider: Did the position of the CCIGR stand as the council position before council ratification of committee actions? Was there a distinction between a 2:1 vote and a unanimous vote at the committee, regardless of the makeup of the committee? Did the council want to consider appointments based on different constituencies to ensure a broad range of opinions on the committee? Did the position of staff represent the position of the council either before committee action or council ratification? If the committee was not authorized to represent the City position unless ratified by the council action, should it change its meeting format to make them longer and more frequent to expedite ratification? Should members be appointed with the goal of achieving political balance? Was there a charter justification that prohibited the council from taking action on State legislation related to human MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 11, 2007 Page 6 Work Session