Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

the media attention the issue received. She thought the process could be both transparent and local and could produce quality applicants. Ms. Solomon, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to adopt the position description for the police auditor dated February 2, 2006, and use that as the basis for recruitment and selection of the position. Referring to the section entitled “Supervision Received and Exercised” in Attachment A, the draft position description, Ms. Bettman objected to the recommendation that the council or its designee supervise the position, as it was so broadly worded “the designee” could be interpreted to mean the City Manager. She wanted to remove the phrase “or its designee.” Alternatively, she suggested the committee return with a description of a potential designee and general supervision for the council’s consideration. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to amend the motion by deleting the phrase “or its designee.” After a brief discussion about including or deleting the phrase, with Mr. Pryor pointing out it was merely in the position description, Ms. Solomon and Ms. Ortiz agreed to remove the phrase as a friendly amendment. Ms. Bettman said that legal counsel maintained that the City Manager Taylor would hire, fire, and supervise the auditor’s staff, which she felt would undermine the authority of the auditor to oversee staff, as employees’ loyalty would be to the City Manager rather than the auditor. She did not think that was consistent with what the public expected when it voted for the City to establish the auditor position. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to amend the motion by ending the first sen- tence in the last paragraph on page 36 after “training,” eliminating the remainder of the sen- tence, and replacing it with the following: “Responsibilities include hiring and evaluating auditor office staff consistent with City of Eugene procedural requirements.” Mr. Kelly believed the committee was creating a challenge for the auditor through the organization being proposed. He did not think it necessary for the City Manager to supervise the auditor’s staff and thought it would be an awkward arrangement. Responding to a request for comment from Mayor Piercy, City Manager Taylor said he was seeking a reasonable accommodation that was consistent with the charter and also met the spirit of what the council was trying to achieve. He asked the council to keep in mind such things as collective bargaining, liability issues, and some of the other obligations that the charter clearly identified as the responsibilities of the City Manager. He thought something could be worked out with the auditor’s office that would provide conceptual clarity while preserving the charter provisions regarding subordinate employees. Mr. Kelly asked for more information. City Manager Taylor declined to speak hypothetically, but there were certain issues that accrued to employees that were larger than their day-to-day supervision and the mission they may have. That was the reason, for instance, that Court employees were still under the supervision of the City Manager rather than the Municipal Court presiding judge. Mr. Kelly said he wished City Manager Taylor could speak hypothetically. City Manager Taylor said that he was speaking to what the charter provided and thought it consistent with what the voters adopted. Mr. Kelly said his bottom-line goal was to ensure that the auditor’s office was as successful and as smooth- running as possible. He supported the amendment, recognizing there was time before the auditor was hired to discuss the issue. MINUTES—Eugene City Council February 22, 2006 Page 6 Regular Meeting