Item 3A - Minutes Approval - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

another group. He agreed with Ms. Nathanson that the existing policy should not be removed, although it should be more explicit on some of the issues being discussed. Mr. Poling agreed with Mr. Meisner's comments and suggested that language be added to make it more explicit that councilors should represent the council's adopted policy in their votes on other bodies. Mayor Torrey remarked that there were two questions: procedures through December 2004 and procedures after January 1, 2005. He suggested that the council could draft a new policy and adopt it shortly after the first of the year. He noted that there were MPC and LOC activities before the end of the year and if the council wished to implement a policy sooner than January 2005 it would need to provide direction to councilors who would be participating. He added that the council officers could develop draft language for review. Mr. Kelly commented that issues arose around the topic of 9. 03 Attending Conferences, Other Meetings, but he did not think it was the intent of the council to remove the section as there was value in the protection afforded by existing language. Mr. Kelly moved, seconded by Mr. Meisner, to reinstate 9. 03 Attending Confer- ences, Other Meetings of the operating agreements and direct staff to draft addi- tional language relating to intergovernmental bodies, the League of Oregon Cities, and the National League of Cities for consideration at the next process session. Mr. Pap~ asked that staff differentiate between an MPC-type body where a councilor was appointed by the council to serve and bodies such as the NLC where a councilor went on his or her own initiative. City Manager Taylor asked if the council perceived a difference between LOC and NLC and intergovern- mental bodies like MPC, Lane Regional Air Pollution Authority (LRAPA), or Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC). In the case of intergovernmental bodies where a councilor was a member of a governing body that made budgetary and policy decision, he asked if it was the intent for the council representative to be an ~instructed delegate" at all times or only when there was an articulated council policy. Mr. Kelly clarified his intent with respect to intergovernmental bodies was that representatives' votes would follow adopted council policy. He did not feel that the existing language in 9. 03 Attending Conferences, Other Meetings accomplished that. Mr. Meisner expressed hope that staff would consult actively with council officers in crafting proposed language. He agreed that LOC and NLC appointments were made by those bodies; however, memberships in both organizations were paid for by the City, not individuals, and when issues on which the council had adopted a position were considered, the delegate should be guided by that position. Ms. Taylor noted that it was not always feasible for a member to confer with the council before voting, such as on funding determinations by the Human Services Commission (HSC), but she believed that MPC votes should be discussed in advance by the council. Ms. Nathanson asked for clarification of the phrase ~instructed delegate." City Manager Taylor replied that an ~instructed delegate" was one whose purpose was to represent the body's interests within defined policy MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 8, 2004 Page 4 Process Session