CCMinutes - 04/07/04 Process - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

decisions. Mr. Taylor asked if what was desired was a discussion of the range of options or just an articulation of options. Mr. Poling responded that the councilors wished for presentation of the options accompanied by points of view, but not the underpinnings. He commented that what was often heard was staff's opinion on an issue and the council wished to hear arguments against staff opinion as well. Ms. Bettman remarked that a range of options meant everything from a decision to do nothing to doing ;;everything." The first staff group consisted of Mr. Chouinard and Mr. Carlson. Mr. Carlson commented that staff had a shorter list from which to choose. Mr. Carlson explained that the expectation that the council should act as a body was the top priority. He stated that staff implements all council decisions with equal verve, whether the vote was unanimous or split. Mr. Kelly asserted that the council did act as a body. He asked what Mr. Carlson meant by acting as a body. Mr. Carlson replied that sometimes councilors who are not on the prevailing side continue to ask for help in overturning a decision or delaying its implementation. Mr. Kelly opined that it would be a ;;nightmare" if it became a constant that once things were settled, they were never revisited. He wondered if people were discovering new information and were trying to gain traction with their colleagues. He felt the problem was overstated. He added that he had heard from constituents regarding the urban renewal district issues and averred it was equally valid to represent the continuing angst over such an item. Mr. Chouinard cited, as an example, a hypothetical situation in which the executive manager makes a decision for the staff team and the manager on the staff team gives a different direction to those who work under his or her supervision. He underscored the importance of maintaining the good of the whole. Ms. Bettman commented that the example Mr. Kelly brought up pointed to the other decisions that get made as a result of the first decision, such as funding, etc. She felt that issues are not just settled and done at any given point; that is not the way politics works. Ms. Hays surmised that the priority had arisen because of the feeling that the continuation of decisions slowed the City's process down. Ms. Taylor represented the second group, which included Ms. Nathanson and Mr. Pap6. She recognized the instructions were to cite a new priority from the list but wished to note that the top priority for the group had been identical to the first group's top priority. In lieu of that, she shared the group's second priority which was that staff should follow City Council policy and not try to influence it. Mr. Carlson said typically the Agenda Item Summary included staff recommendations. He asked if it was the council's wish that such recommendations not be included. Ms. Taylor suggested that staff not make strong recommendations but, rather, provide options only. MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 7, 2004 Page 2 Process Session