Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 02/19/08 Special Session M I N U T E S Eugene City Council Special Session McNutt Room—City Hall February 19, 2008 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: George Poling, Bonny Bettman, Betty Taylor, Jennifer Solomon, Andrea Ortiz, Mike Clark, Alan Zelenka. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Chris Pryor. Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the executive session of the Eugene City Council to order. A. EXECUTIVE SESSION In accordance with Oregon Revised Statute 192.660(2)(b), the Eugene City Council met in executive session. Mayor Piercy adjourned the executive session and called the council into open session at 6:33 p.m. B. WORK SESSION Procedures and Guidelines for City Council Employees Mayor Piercy announced that Lane County District Attorney Douglas Harcleroad had indicated his investigation was complete and he concluded there was no evidence of any violation of State criminal statutes by Police Auditor Cristina Beamud. The case would proceed to an administrative investigation. Mayor Piercy reviewed the motion passed unanimously by the council in executive session: Mr. Zelenka, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to ask complainant (Swanson) to provide a written report describing the factual basis for his assertions; provide that written report to the Police Auditor so that she can prepare a response; and then, based on that information (as well as other information from the District Attorney’s investigation), decide (a) more in- formation is needed (gathered through some type of additional investigation), or (b) suffi- cient information exists for the council to act on the complaint. The council would consider that information in a follow-up executive session to be scheduled on March 12, 2008. Acting Assistant City Manager Scott Luell indicated that staff would provide a response to councilors’ questions about when the City had received the complaint and how it worked through the organization to the point the council was informed. That information would be delivered to the council the next day or the following day. MINUTES—Eugene City Council February 19, 2008 Page 1 Special Session Mayor Piercy said the council also oversaw the City Manager and Municipal Court Judge but it was her understanding that there were no guidelines in place for processing complaints against those individuals. Speaking to the question of whether there was an existing complaint process for the positions mentioned by Mayor Piercy, Ms. Bettman reviewed City Code Section 2.4860, related to the public official code of ethics complaint process for elected and appointed officials, the City Manager, and the Municipal Court Judge. Those sections stipulated that the City Attorney was to determine if such complaints had merit, and she believed that in this instance, the City Attorney should have determined if the complaint had merit. She said the process was laid out to the point of investigation of the complaint. She thought the section should include specific mention of council-hired employees and of directing those complaints to both the City Attorney and the council. City Attorney Glenn Klein said the council could choose to amend that section of the code to include the Police Auditor. He clarified that code provisions in question were for complaints related to the part of the code cited by Ms. Bettman. The council could adopt that process for whatever complaints it received against its employees. He suggested the council should think about how quickly it wanted to be notified of such complaints. Responding to a question from Mayor Piercy, City Attorney Klein said that misuse of office could encompass more than a violation of the ethics code. The council could determine that something was a violation of policy that would not be a violation of the ethics code. Mayor Piercy suggested that the cited section was a good starting place, although it might not cover everything the council wanted to cover. Mr. Clark asked City Attorney Klein if there were other ways to proceed on such complaints or a different type of complaint so the council could choose from the best of all available options. City Attorney Klein suggested the council could design whatever system met the majority of its objections. He suggested that complaints were directed by the code to his office in order to provide some distance between the organization and the complainant. He emphasized his client was the City, not a judge, manager, or auditor, so a rationale for such an approach was that his duty was to the City as a whole and he was legally obligated to bring any complaint to the council’s attention. He recommended the council consider whether he should take complaints to the entire body, the Mayor, or the officers. Mr. Clark recalled that the council had some issues related to the performance of the previous manager in regard to the dissemination of information and the council had agreed that the manager would contact all councilors about emerging situations that might appear in the media. He said that in this case, he was still “smarting” that it took several days for word to reach him that a complaint existed. That information should have been provided to all councilors and the Mayor the instance it was recognized as an emerging situation. He wanted to ensure that in the future, that occurred. Mr. Zelenka agreed with the remarks of Mr. Clark. He said that notice should have been given to all councilors, and in cases of this magnitude, it was critical. He recommended that staff be directed to outline several options for the council to consider. He also wanted a process to deal with someone who abused the system or engaged in criminal conduct by making frivolous accusations. Ms. Ortiz agreed with Mr. Clark and noted a past instance where she had requested notice and it had not seemed a like a big request but it seemed to staff like another step to take. She suggested the council discuss the issue with the new manager, and suggested the possibility of a council telephone tree to make each councilor aware of the information when it became available. MINUTES—Eugene City Council February 19, 2008 Page 2 Special Session Mr. Zelenka left the meeting for another obligation. Mr. Poling also felt “left out in the cold” in regard to the situation. He hoped any process the council developed included a section on how the council or its employee made comments to the press. He had been unaware of the press conference that had been called until it happened and thought the council should have been informed of it. Mr. Poling cautioned the council against taking sides on the issue and suggested it limit its comments so as to not favor one side over another. Ms. Taylor called for immediate council notification of such situations by both telephone and e-mail. She said that staff should make sure the councilors received notification by requesting call-backs. She did not think it was too much effort for staff to contact nine people. Speaking to Mr. Zelenka’s remarks regarding abuse of the process, Mr. Clark cautioned the council against making such statements. Any employee of the City had the right to complain if they thought they were treated unfairly, and the council was obliged to address those complaints fairly and equitably. He hoped the council could do so in this case. Mayor Piercy said it appeared the council was interested in using the current code section related to the code of ethics as a model for proceeding. Assistant City Manager Luell said that staff would use that section as a basis and attempt to craft some different options as suggested by Mr. Zelenka, incorporating a communica- tion element. Mayor Piercy said that since the police auditor was the council’s employee, she thought it incumbent on the auditor to inform the council of the situation since she did not report to the manager. Mr. Clark questioned whether that was the best procedure. Ms. Bettman said Mayor Piercy’s remarks highlighted why the council needed to know the chain of custody of the complaint, which was dated February 4, but which was not seen by the council until February 12. If the complaint was against the auditor, the auditor might not see it as fast as the council. For that reason, she wanted to look at the past chain of custody and where the gaps existed. Ms. Bettman said the council lacked time to explore the nuances of the bifurcated process she foresaw as it related to criminal and administrative complaints and verifying the reality of the complaint. She envisioned a variety of complaints and conflicts that could exist and suggested the council might wish to categorize those. Ms. Ortiz, seconded by Mr. Poling, moved to direct the council officers to develop a sug- gested process for how the council will respond to complaints that are filed with the City in- volving the City Manager, the Municipal Court Judge, or the Police Auditor. When queried by Mayor Piercy as to the nature of the process, Ms. Ortiz envisioned a group exercise with legal input. She accepted a friendly amendment from Ms. Bettman that the officers’ recommendations would come back to the council. MINUTES—Eugene City Council February 19, 2008 Page 3 Special Session Mr. Poling called for consistency in the manner in which complaints were processed. He also wanted to see timelines established for the process so employees were not left wondering their fate. He also called for flexibility in those timelines. The motion passed unanimously, 6:0. Mayor Piercy noted the auditor would report to the council on her work to-date as well as the work of the Civilian Review Board (CRB), and Human Resources Director, Lauren Chouinard, was working on an evaluation process for the auditor. Ms. Taylor called for more frequent reports to the council from the auditor because she thought the council needed to know what the auditor was doing. Ms. Bettman did not oppose more reports from the auditor but did not want to give the auditor “busy-work.” She was unsure how practical regular reports were and pointed out that councilors could request such reports at any time. She also suggested the council might benefit from more than one year of data. Mr. Clark agreed with Ms. Taylor about the need for more reports from the auditor. He thought the council needed to do a better job in overseeing its employees. The auditor did more than collect data and the council needed to ensure it was supervising her properly to ensure she met the council’s level of expectations and to avoid such complaints and problems in the future. He recommended quarterly, if not more frequent, evaluations. Mayor Piercy adjourned the meeting at 7 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Angel Jones City Manager pro tem (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES—Eugene City Council February 19, 2008 Page 4 Special Session