S090923A-attA - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Zelenka saw the meetings between the mayor and council officers to discuss upcoming agendas as useful. He did not see the meetings as additional power for officers, but rather as facilitating the work of the council. Ms. Taylor thought that decisions about items on the agenda should involve the entire council and the meetings should be open to all councilors. She had heard people say “let the council officers decide” and she was not comfortable with that. Ms. Piercy clarified that no changes to the agenda occurred during her meetings with officers. Mr. Clark asked if issues such as votes or strategy on agenda items ever discussed at meetings between the mayor and officers. In an environment where votes were close or split, he said those conversations had the capacity to affect outcomes Ms. Bettman said the discussions concerned meeting management issues; the officers did not speak for other councilors. Mr. Pryor said his approach was to facilitate the functions of the council and manage the meeting, not change the agenda or manipulate outcomes. He reiterated that no decisions were made at the officers’ meetings. Mr. Ruiz asked if the public meetings requirements applied to council officer meetings. Mr. Klein indicated that as long as no decisions or recommendations were being made and only two councilors were present no public meeting notice was required, but if other councilors attended and there was a quorum it would be considered a public meeting and notice would be required. He said if five or more councilors intended to participate, staff should be notified at least 24 hours in advance so the meeting could be properly noticed. Mr. Ruiz asked whether invitations to represent the City or participate in news conferences should be directed to the council officers or all councilors and whether it was appropriate to use council officers as an information conduit to the full council. Councilors agreed that invitations should be extended to all councilors as no one councilor could speak for the entire council. Councilors could speak for themselves or speak to action taken by the council, but there should be no presumption that an individual councilor was speaking for the council itself. Information should be provided to all councilors directly instead of relying on officers as a conduit. The responsibility of council officers with respect to information and decisions regarding a council employee would be discussed at a November council meeting. Topic: Appropriate use of staff within two-hour rule (e.g. one councilor with multiple two-hour requests) Mr. Pryor said this issue related to what it was appropriate for a councilor to ask staff to do without the authority of the full body if there could be an official implication. He said the two-hour rule was meant to address use of staff resources, but wanted some clarification about whether that could include a request to work on a policy issue in which no one else on the council had an interest. Ms. Ortiz asked there had been concerns in the past that prompted adding the topic to the agenda. She requested feedback from staff. Mr. Ruiz replied that staff was responsive to the council as a whole and within established guidelines to individual councilors. He had not received feedback from staff regarding MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 15, 2008 Page 6 Work Session