Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Piercy said respect should be present in all forms of communications, including email, and people <br />should discuss the issue without being accusatory. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman expressed her disappointment that the meeting was not being telecast. She said the council <br />was a body that did not need to work together like the board of a corporation. Members represented <br />different constituencies and vastly different value systems. She said issues were very political and a <br />discussion of intent regarding how an issue was framed was a political consideration. She felt the council <br />had conducted itself well and the discussions had been civilized. She said it was appropriate to point out the <br />real issue below the issue as it was framed. <br /> <br />Mr. Zelenka indicated he had served on 15 boards in his career and the council did not operate any <br />differently than the others. He agreed that most communications had been civil. He said the council dealt <br />with challenging issues and discussions could sometimes be emotional because members cared and tried to <br />make their cases as forcefully and persuasively as possible. He thought if councilors made their motivations <br />explicit it would avoid problems that arose when others had to guess. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor saw no reason to share motives when discussing issues. She felt the council was respectful <br />enough. Motives could be revealed through questioning. She said councilors represented different values <br />and goals and the council should not function like a corporate board or family. <br /> <br />Mr. Clark remarked that one of his first questions as a councilor was about the appropriateness of <br />characterizing the motivations or intent of his fellow councilors. He said the answer from colleagues was <br />consistently that it was not acceptable to do that. He agreed that people were on the council because they <br />cared, but he preferred a working environment that was less corrosive in terms of comments to and about <br />others. He hoped councilors, including himself, would search for opportunities to treat one another well. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Ms. Bettman, City Manager Jon Ruiz said it was his understanding that past <br />process sessions had not been televised and the McNutt Room was being used in order to make it more <br />accessible to the public. <br /> <br />Following a discussion of whether process sessions should be televised, Ms. Piercy suggested that such <br />direction should be explicit and from the entire council to avoid individual councilor’s opinions being taken <br />as council direction. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Clark, moved to have the cameras on when the <br />council met as a body, except in executive session. The motion passed 6:1; Mr. <br />Poling voting no. <br /> <br />Mr. Poling said he did not feel that process sessions had to be broadcast because the council was not <br />discussing public business, only its operating rules and procedures. <br /> <br />Topic: Council direction to staff <br /> <br />Mr. Poling said he noted that in public hearings on ordinances, in the council’s discussion following public <br />testimony a councilor might indicate a preference for different language and the next time the ordinance <br />came before the council those changes were embedded in it instead of being presented as proposed <br />amendments. He questioned why one councilor would have the authority to direct staff to change the <br />wording of a proposed ordinance instead of having the changes brought forward as proposed motions to <br />amend. <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 15, 2008 Page 2 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />