Item 3A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Mr. Pape? reinforced Mr. Kelly’s comments with regard to the critical timeline that needs to be recognized in order for the auditor to be in place by July 1, 2006. He asked if the Human Resources staff could be utilized to develop the components of a recruitment and selection process. City Manager Taylor replied that staff stood ready to assist in whatever manner the City Council deemed appropriate. He said the City could be successful in its search through the utilization of a professional recruiter, or, through Human Resources staff; however, he pointed out that due to budgetary capacity, his preference would be to utilize in-house staff. Mr. Pape? concurred. Mr. Pape? then spoke to Mr. Poling’s concerns, and asked that progress reports be provided to the council on a regular basis. Ms. Bettman voiced support for the motion; however, she said her preference would have been for the tasks to be delegated to the ARRT, as it had already begun much of the preparatory work. Ms. Bettman referred to Mr. Poling’s concerns and stressed that the Police Commission and its chair were adamant that the success of the model was predicated on the creditability of the auditor; therefore, impartiality would be paramount to the success of the program. She added that the expertise the chair of the commission possesses could only move the process along in an expedient manner and she stressed that the council ultimately would make the final decisions. In conclusion, Ms. Bettman said that the amount of money allocated for a professional recruiter should be minimized and suggested that such an individual could take on the candidate search and present the applicants to Human Resources staff who could then do the screening process to ascertain minimum requirements. Additionally, she suggested that the community be included in the screening process prior to a presentation of a final list of candidates to the council. Ms. Taylor voiced opposition to the inclusion of a professional recruiter for any part of the process. She then said she was unwilling to cede the authority of the council and that it should be involved in the screening of the applications. Ms. Taylor said that if the ad hoc committee’s role was limited to the components listed in the motion, she could support it, with the understanding that the council would make all final decisions, including the hire of the auditor. Ms. Solomon voiced preference for a professional recruiter. She opined that part of the reason voters determined there was a need for a police auditor was due to a breakdown in process in the Human Resources division. However, Ms. Solomon noted that she would not make a final decision on that component prior to discussions that would ensue at the ad hoc committee level. Ms. Ortiz voiced support for Mr. Laue’s inclusion on the ad hoc committee and said his participation would be invaluable to the process. She opined that council authority would not be compromised and said she looked forward to the entire council providing feedback to the committee as it moves through the process. With regard to the use of a professional recruiter, Ms. Ortiz pointed out that there were only a small number of individuals in this specialized field who were currently qualified for the position. Therefore, she voiced her preference for in-house staff to provide its assistance and expressed confidence in their ability to present qualified candidates to the council. Mayor Piercy commented that she looked forward to serving on the committee and moving the process forward. City Manager Taylor voiced support for the substitute motion presented by Mr. Kelly. The motion passed unanimously. MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 18, 2005 Page 1 Work Session