CC Minutes - 03/10/03 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ms. Bettman requested information about trees that would be removed from the property. Mr. Braud said that one significant tree on the site was a walnut tree that was moved a couple of years ago. Most of the trees on the site were small. Those in the interior would be removed because of the way the site would be oriented to the street. Ms. Bettman requested a memorandum on the topic so that the council could respond to constituents questions. = Mayor Torrey supported the Planning Commission recommendation. He endorsed Mr. Papés suggested for = earnest money and suggested it could be phased over time. With regard to the MUPTE, he thought the project a good way to use that tool because he thought it would stimulate additional housing projects in the core of the city. He hoped that the council would be able to act on the item on March 12 when Ms. Nathanson and Ms. Taylor were present. C.WORK SESSION: Development of a Code of Ethics Ordinance The council was joined for the item by Mary Walston of the City Managers Office and Glenn Klein of the City = Attorneys Office. = Ms. Walston provided brief background on the item before the council. She reminded the council that in November 2002, the voters approved a charter amendment initially proposed by the Citizen Charter Review Committee calling for the council to develop and adopt an ordinance establishing a code of ethics. Ms. Walston noted that the staff materials included Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) Chapter 244, which covered government standards and practices. She suggested it as the basis for an ordinance for Eugene. The law was inclusive, and it had already been extensively interpreted in law. Ms. Walston solicited input from the council on what the Citys ordinance should address, and who should be covered by such an ordinance. = Mr. Klein responded to questions submitted earlier by Mr. Kelly. Regarding what was being recommended from ORS Chapter 244, Mr. Klein indicated the ordinance would include some of the statutes definitions and = the sections related to personal gain and how to handle actual and potential conflicts. Responding to Mr. Kellys question regarding why and when Salem adopted its ethics provision, Mr. Klein said that it appeared to = have been adopted in 1996 but he had been unable to find out why. Two of the provisions of Salems code = went beyond State law. First, under State law, an actual conflict of interest precluded an elected officials = participation in a matter except when authorized by the rule of necessity; if there were not enough councilors A@ to take action, a councilor with a conflict could vote, although he or she could not participate in the discussion. Salems code and the Eugene charter prohibited that. Second, Mr. Klein said that Salems code also exceeded == State law in that State law prohibited people from benefitting or taking advantage of confidential information, but Salems code also precludes any disclosure of confidential information as well. = Speaking to the question of what staff did not recommend from the Salem ordinance, Mr. Klein said that Eugene staff had not contemplated an ethics commission. Staff did not propose to incorporate all employees in the ordinance as did Salems ordinance. He noted that the States law covered all City employees and elected == officials. Ms. Bettman thought the State statute a good place to start. She also was interested in addressing the issues of gifting and reporting, honoraria, the revolving door policy, and who filed a statement of economic interest. A@ MINUTESEugene City Council March 10, 2003 Page 5 C Work Session