Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 2F: Resolution Adopting IGR Operating Agreements ECC UGENE ITY OUNCIL AIS GENDA TEM UMMARY Adoption of Resolution 4930 Amending Eugene City Council Operating Agreements and Repealing Resolution Number 4872 Meeting Date: February 25, 2008 Agenda Item Number: 2F Department: City Manager’s Office Staff Contact: Beth Forrest www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-5882 ISSUE STATEMENT The City Council Operating Agreements is the document that guides how the City Council conducts its business. Occasionally, amendments are made to the document to reflect council’s desire to update processes. This action is to incorporate the Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations (IGR) operating agreements into the Eugene City Council Operating Agreements. BACKGROUND At the January 28, 2008, City Council meeting, the IGR Operating Agreements was approved the Council. Those agreements state “the operating agreements of the IGR Committee are to be incorporated into the Operating Agreements of the Eugene City Council.” RELATED CITY POLICIES No policy issues are related directly to consideration of this resolution. COUNCIL OPTIONS The City Council may choose to 1) adopt the revisions and proposed resolution as submitted; 2) offer suggestions for modified language; or 3) not adopt the resolution. CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION The City Manager recommends adoption of the proposed resolution. SUGGESTED MOTION Move to adopt Resolution 4930 amending Eugene City Council Operating Agreements and repealing Resolution Number 4872. F:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080225\S0802252F.doc ATTACHMENTS A. Proposed Resolution B. City Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations Operating Agreements as adopted by the City Council on January 28, 2008 FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Beth Forrest Telephone: 682-5882 Staff E-Mail: beth.l.forrest@ci.eugene.or.us F:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080225\S0802252F.doc ATTACHMENT A RESOLUTION NO. ________ A RESOLUTION AMENDING EUGENE CITY COUNCIL OPERATING AGREEMENTS AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 4872. The City Council of the City of Eugene finds that: A. On June 14, 1999, Ordinance No. 20156 was adopted by the Council and approved by the Mayor amending Section 2.007 of the Eugene Code, 1971, concerning regular meetings and council ground rules. B. The Eugene City Council Operating Agreements were adopted by Resolution No. 4588 on April 12, 1999, and have been subsequently amended, most recently by Resolution No. 4872 on May 22, 2006. C. At its Regular Meeting Session on January 28, 2008, the Council approved the City Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations Operating Agreements. Contained in that document is direction that the “operating agreements of the Intergovernmental Relations ” Committee are to be incorporated into the Operating Agreements of the Eugene City Council. In order to ensure the intention of the Council is accurately reflected the City Council Operating Agreements should be amended and Resolution No. 4872 repealed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EUGENE, a Municipal Corporation of the State of Oregon, as follows: Section 1. Based on the above findings, the Eugene City Council Operating Agreements, referred to as ground rules in the Eugene Code, 1971, are hereby amended as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein. Section 2. Resolution No. 4872 and the Operating Agreements adopted therein are hereby repealed as of the effective date of this Resolution. Section 3. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption. The foregoing Resolution adopted the ____ day of February, 2008. _________________________________________ City Recorder Resolution ATTACHMENTB CCCIR ITY OUNCIL OMMITTEE ON NTERGOVERNMENTAL ELATIONS OA PERATING GREEMENTS ACCJ28,2008 DOPTED BY THE ITY OUNCIL ON ANUARY 1. Purpose of Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations The Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations (IGR Committee) exists to make recommendations to the City Council on State and Federal legislative issues and on City applications for funding from outside agencies. At this time it is the only standing committee of the City Council. 2. Membership The IGR Committee consists of three City Council members. The three IGR Committee Council members are appointed annually by the Mayor in the normal course of appointments to various boards and commissions on which City of Eugene elected officials serve. The Mayor will appoint members that represent the City Council’s political and ideological diversity. The Mayor serves as an ex-officio member of the IGR committee. 3. Committee Chair The IGR Committee shall elect a chair of the committee at the first regularly scheduled meeting after the Mayor has appointed the members to the IGR Committee. 4. Conducting the Business of Meeting IGR Committee meetings are governed by Roberts Rules of Order, Revised. Like the City Council, the IGR Committee has the obligation to be clear and simple in its procedures and in its consideration of the questions coming before it. 5. Meetings The IGR Committee meets as needed and generally meets more frequently when the Oregon Legislature is in session. Meetings of the IGR Committee are subject to the requirements of Oregon Public Meetings Law, ORS 192.620. The meetings shall be held within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City. No IGR Committee meeting shall be held at any place where discrimination on the basis of an individual’s race, religion, color, sex, national origin, ethnicity, marital status, familial status, age, sexual orientation, source of income or disability, is practiced. Advance notice of at least 24 hours shall be provided for all meetings. Notice shall include written notice to all news media that requested notice. Page 1 of 8 6. Quorum Two members of the IGR Committee constitute a quorum for the transaction of Committee business. Other members of the City Council may attend meetings of the IGR Committee, but shall have no authority or status to vote on matters considered by the IGR Committee during that meeting. Unanimous votes of the IGR Committee require 3 votes, not 2 votes, should an IGR Committee member be absent. An IGR Committee member may designate the Mayor to serve as an alternate in the member’s absence. 7. Minutes Written minutes shall be taken for all IGR Committee meetings in accordance with the Oregon Attorney General’s Public Records and Meetings Manual. The minutes must give a true reflection of the matters discussed but need not be a full transcript, verbatim or recording. 8. Process for Sessions of the Oregon Legislature The Regular Session of the Oregon State Legislature convenes in January of odd numbered years, with a Special Session convening in January of even numbered years. The Regular Session generally lasts for six months with the Special Session lasting for two months. In February 2008, the Oregon legislature convened a Supplemental Session in lieu of the Special Session, lasting for only one month. Supplemental Sessions may be held in subsequent even numbered years. Preparation for the Regular Session is begun by IGR staff who meet with the members of the IGR Committee and other City departmental staff to outline legislative policies and concepts for the upcoming session based upon City Council goals, priorities, community needs and organizational issues. These concepts, after being vetted by staff and the IGR Committee, are then submitted to the full City Council for review and approval. Once the concepts are approved, they become the basis for the Legislative Policies document that serves as the cornerstone for position and lobbying efforts on particular pieces of legislation during the session. The Legislative Policies document includes principles and precepts that will help determine the city position on bills. The City of Eugene first adopted a formal set of legislative policies prior to the 1985 session recognizing from past sessions that many staff recommendations were repeated from session to session and that a great percentage of a session’s legislative proposals could be anticipated. 9. Process for Introducing Legislation The City may wish to introduce legislative concepts on its behalf to the legislature. The IGR Committee meets and reviews all proposals for legislation prior to submittal to the Legislature. ? Any City staff or elected official interested in introducing legislation prepares a written overview of the purpose of the legislative concept and draft language for review by the IGR Page 2 of 8 Committee. Once the IGR Committee has voted on proposed legislative concepts, the action of the IGR approval. After the proposed legislative concepts have been reviewed and approved by the full City Council, legislative concepts that have been approved are presented to the Legislature for drafting. The bill, as introduced, is then presented to the IGR Committee under the regular bill review process. 10. Process for Review and Prioritization of Legislation The Legislative session is relatively short and as a result, bills can move quickly through the legislative process. Regardless, the City will maintain a neutral position on any bills not yet reviewed by City staff and acted upon by the IGR Committee. Review by City staff: ? Once the bills are introduced, they are assigned by an IGR staff person to the appropriate LC for review. ? Legislative Coordinators (LCs) in the appropriate City department analyze all introduced bills that are of interest to or may affect the City. LC staff is determined by each Department. ? LC staff turnaround for review and analysis of a bill is expected to be within 10 working days of the assignment of a bill unless the movement of a bill warrants a faster turn- around. In those cases, IGR staff will contact the LC and arrange for a faster review. ? If a bill addresses one or more of the policies presented in the Legislative Policies for that session, the particular policy is noted in the LC staff’s analysis of the bill. ? LC staff will relay both the pros and cons of a bill in their comments as well as any amendments that would make the bill more favorable. ? LC will assign each bill a priority and a recommendation. Legislative advocacy is done on the basis of a priority and recommendation system. LC staff recommends a “support,” “oppose,” “neutral,” “monitor,” or “drop” recommendation for all reviewed bills. LC staff also recommends a priority of 1, 2, or 3 on all reviewed bills. The three priority assignments for legislative bills are as follows: PRIORITY ONE BILLS – The issues addressed by the bill areidentified in the City’s Legislative Policies document. The bill would have a significant impact on City operations, services, or finances in such ways as to fundamentally impact department administration, organization, personnel, allocation of City resources, or local decision-making, either negatively or positively. The issues addressed by the bill are of significant interest to the City even if they do not directly impact the operations, services, or finances of the City. Lobby Resource Allocation: Both IGR staff in Salem work on the bill, with a high support level from the legislative coordinator(s) assigned to the bill. The Mayor and/or Council members may testify before committees, possibly with both IGR staff and/or a legislative coordinator. IGR staff contacts all or close to all members of all committees the bill is assigned to. Depending on topic and recommendation, IGR staff will also contact as many legislators as possible prior to public hearings or work sessions. In the event of a floor vote, IGR staff contacts as many legislators as is possible in the 2-5 day period between committee passage and the floor vote. Handouts would be Page 3 of 8 placed in the Capitol mailboxes of all legislators prior to a floor vote. PRIORITY TWO BILLS – The issues addressed by the bill are identified in the City’s Legislative Policies document. The bill would have some impact, although manageable, on City operations, services, or finances and would impact administration, organization, personnel, allocation of City resources, or local decision-making, either negatively or positively. The issues addressed by the bill are of high interest to the City even if they do not directly impact the operations, services, or finances of the City. Lobby Resource Allocation: IGR Staff in Salem work closely with legislative coordinators. If the bill is a City specific issue, IGR will testify, with a legislative coordinator if necessary. This, may necessitate the involvement of an executive or expert department staff or the Mayor and/or Council members. If it is an issue less specific to the City, written testimony will be offered. IGR staff will contact members of the bill’s committee prior to a bill being passed out of committee. In the event of a floor vote, IGR staff will submit letters to all legislators and try to contact as many of them as possible, starting with our delegation first, and then to legislators we suspect might be “swing votes.” PRIORITY THREE BILLS - The issues addressed by the bill are alluded to in the City’s Legislative Policies document or included in other policy document or direction. The bill would have a slight impact on City administration, operations, or services, with potential implications for City finances, either negatively or positively. The bill requires tracking because amendments could elevate bill to Priority One or Priority Two. The issues addressed by the bill are of slight interest to the City even if they do not directly impact the operations, services, or finances of the City. Lobby Resource Allocation: Depending on recommendation, IGR staff contacts committee members from local delegation, as well as the committee chair or submits written testimony or letter to proper committee, with no further involvement. In the event of a floor vote, IGR staff will submit letters to all legislators. Review by the IGR Committee: ? The bill is placed on the IGR Committee agenda for review as soon as possible after all applicable staff has commented on the bill. ? The IGR Committee meets and reviews all bills on the IGR Committee agenda and may pull any or all bills off the agenda for discussion. ? Any LC staff that has reviewed and commented on a bill that is pulled for discussion will be prepared to discuss the bill at the IGR Committee meeting. ? If a bill is not pulled for discussion, the staff recommendation stands. If a bill is pulled for discussion, the IGR Committee may keep or change the staff recommendation. The IGR may also direct that IGR staff work to amend a bill. ? The IGR Committee votes on all bill priorities and recommendations; the votes need not be unanimous – with unanimous being 3 votes. The actions of the IGR Committee are presented on the full City Council’s agenda for review and approval. The minutes of the IGR Committee are ratified by the City Council. Any bill that has been reviewed by the IGR Committee may be pulled for discussion at the request of any councilor Page 4 of 8 or by the Mayor. 11. Status of Positions on Bills until Final Ratification by the City Council Time demands in the Legislature may not allow for each bill on which the IGR Committee takes a position to be fully vetted by the full City Council before some type of action on the bill needs to occur. If a position the IGR Committee has taken on a bill is not unanimous, the position on that bill will be neutral until the full City Council weighs in and directs a position. The bill will then be placed on the next available City Council agenda. Although any bill that has been reviewed by the IGR Committee may be pulled for discussion at the request of any councilor or the Mayor at the City Council meeting, as a matter of practice and courtesy to the members of the Council who do not sit on the IGR Committee, any bill on which the IGR Committee is not in unanimous agreement will be specifically noted. The City Council can modify the position taken by the IGR Committee on a bill; the final direction to staff on any bill comes from the City Council. 12. Process for Federal Lobbying Efforts The IGR Committee and IGR staff address Federal lobbying priorities in concert with a number of the City’s local governmental partners. The Federal priorities begin with a review of opportunities for funding in the next Federal budget and goals that are specific to Eugene or the area. The IGR Committee meets and reviews the list of potential priority projects. Potential projects should be those projects which have already gone through the proper authorization channels and are “shovel ready” projects. Once the IGR Committee reviews the list of potential projects, the Committee develops a list of project goals that are considered to be achievable. After the proposed goals have been vetted by staff, United Front partners, and other community partners, and the IGR Committee, the priorities list is then presented to the full City Council for review and approval. The final list becomes part of the “United Front” agenda which is presented to the area’s congressional representatives, executive department staff, and other potential funding sources in Washington, D.C. The attendees on the lobbying trips typically include the Mayor, chair of the IGR Committee, and appropriate City staff. 13. Grants and Funding Applications The IGR Committee acts on staff recommendations for grant and other funding applications from outside agencies such as governmental or private entities. This process is intended to help avoid situations in which City departments may inadvertently be competing with each other for funding, and to allow the IGR Committee and City Council to review staff plans for expenditures of grant funds. Page 5 of 8 City staff interested in seeking funding prepares a written overview of the funding application for review by the IGR Committee at its next regularly scheduled meeting. If timing is critical and there is no IGR Committee meeting scheduled, the Committee may give its approval via e-mail. IGR staff will keep full and complete records of the documents related to the request for funding, the electronic notification of the request to review and the disposition of the request. In all cases the IGR Committee and City Council have authority to direct that an application not go forward or if it has already been submitted, that it be withdrawn. 14. Resolution 4908 On April 18, 2007, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 4908, “A Resolution Establishing Policy Governing City Testimony and Funding Requests, and Repealing Resolution No. 4139”. This speaks to the issue of testimony before legislative bodies, funding requests and the role of the Council in setting legislative policy. This Resolution is incorporated into this document as Attachment A. 15. City Council Operating Agreements The operating agreements of the IGR Committee are to be incorporated into the Operating Agreements of the Eugene City Council. As the IGR Committee is a subset of the City Council, any and all process and operating agreements supersede this document. All process and operating agreements of the City Council, by extension and when relevant apply to the IGR Committee. Attachment A: City of Eugene Resolution 4908. Page 6 of 8