CC Minutes - 07/25/05 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

transparency that seem to be at issue. Mr. Laue responded that was part of it, and the commission felt the oversight board had to be appointed by the council, but also felt the auditor needed on some level be accountable to the council. Mr. Brown noted that an option the commission considered for the oversight board that differed from the way other boards and commissions were appointed was for the mayor to appoint a broad section of the community as a nominating or screening committee, although that was not obligatory. He said the intent was to ensure that the oversight board was not politicized or constituent- based, but based purely on fairness. Mr. Papé observed that the previous ballot measure related to an oversight board and not an auditor. He cautioned the council to really consider whether it wanted to have employees and the associated supervisory responsibilities. He felt that transparency could be achieved through the city manager governance approach. Ms. Bettman pointed out that the council would only hire the auditor and the auditor would be responsible for hiring and supervising the other staff. She cited other communities that had an oversight entity that was answerable to the legislative body. In terms of whether the oversight entity should be administered by the legislative or administrative branch of government, she pointed out that there were three city managers in office during the time that officers Magana and Lara were committing crimes and the model could have been instituted at any time, but was not. Mr. Pryor appreciated Ms. Solomon’s concerns about the implications of a charter amendment and his instinct was to be reluctant to open a document as important as a charter. He said that action should be thoughtful and all aspects considered, but circumstances were extraordinary and it was important to resolve the issues of trust and accountability. He asked what discussions the commission had around the signifi- cantly different impacts in terms of the trust and accountability of the two governance models. He could see trust issues in both approaches and wanted to choose the one that would create the maximum amount of trust within the community. Mr. Laue said it was a difficult discussion for the commission and the biggest concern about council involvement in personnel matters related to making people’s job political; however, the commission ultimately decided that structural independence of the auditor’s office from the chief executive of the municipal organization was important. He said there were risks in both approaches and speculated that the commission’s decision was influenced by operating in the context of Magana/Lara and the abuse that occurred over a period of years. In response to a request from Ms. Taylor, Ms. Bettman read the proposed ballot measure language: “Shall the Eugene Charter be amended to authorize the council to appoint a civilian review board and employ a professional police auditor?” Ms. Taylor noted that the language did not specify any details or obligate the council to specific actions; it asked permission from the voters to appoint and hire. She agreed that the public hearings mentioned by Ms. Solomon should happen at a later date, along with considerable discussion by the council and with the community. Ms. Ortiz said her support of the commission’s recommendation was not personal with respect to the City Manager’s role or the Police Department and was not about placing blame for problems. She said it was about putting in place a system that would ensure transparency in the complaint process so that her constituents could feel there was an unbiased person available to discuss their issues. Mayor Piercy solicited a second round of comments. MINUTES—Eugene City Council July 25, 2005 Page 8 Work Session