HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 02/08/05 PS MINUTES
Eugene City Council
Process Session
Classroom 2, Fire/EMS/Police Training Facility
1705 West 2nd Avenue
February 8, 2005
5:30 p.m.
PRESENT: Bonny Bettman, Chris Pryor, Andrea Ortiz, David Kelly, Betty Taylor, Gary Pap6, Jennifer
Solomon, George Poling.
Mayor Kitty Piercy called the City Council process session to order.
A. WORK SESSION:
City Council Process Session
1) Introduction/Icebreaker
Facilitators Greta Utecht and Alicia Hayes introduced themselves to the council. Ms. Utecht asked
councilors to participate in a short exercise as an icebreaker. She instructed the councilors to imagine they
were, over the course of a dinner with friends ten years from the present, asked to share what one thing most
symbolized their fulfilled public aspirations as a policy decision maker.
Ms. Hayes cited, as an example, her service on the Human Rights Commission (HRC), which she had
undertaken primarily to lobby for curb cuts in the Harlow neighborhood. She said now there were curb cuts
from one end of the City to the other and staff had improved upon the design.
Ms. Utecht shared her experience working in the division that licensed local businesses, including garbage
haulers. She related that, at the time, there was little motivation to recycle, but now thanks to her efforts and
the efforts of others, all garbage haulers provide recycling services.
Ms. Ortiz said ten years from now she still wanted to work as an emergency room registered nurse, but that
in ten years the hospital and all City services would reflect every facet of society, every color, and staff
would be bilingual.
Council, Public, and Government Affairs Manager Mary Walston stated that she was on the Board of
Directors for Greenhill Humane Society. She said they were working on a low-cost spay and neuter clinic
and she hoped that in ten years there would be a reduction in unwanted animals as a result.
Mr. Pryor aspired to foster a high level of trust in City government and in the functionality of the City.
Mr. Poling commented that he shared Mr. Pryor's aspiration, as did all of the councilors. He shared his
vision of a 20-year supply of usable land and a computerized system that tracked it, in order to avoid the
cost of a land inventory.
MINUTES-- Eugene City Council February 8, 2005 Page 1
Process Session
Mr. Kelly said he would want to leave behind a vibrant, 24-hour downtown, and an increase in affordable
housing. He also wanted population growth to be absorbed without expansion of the urban growth
boundary (UGB).
Mr. Pap6 also shared having a vibrant downtown as a goal. He added that he wanted a new modem hospital
to be built south of the river, the federal courthouse to be completed, the Eugene Water & Electric Board
(EWEB) property to be redeveloped, and the issues involving the River Road/Santa Clara neighborhood to
be resolved.
City Manager Dennis Taylor said in ten years he would be celebrating his 40th wedding anniversary in his
new accessible home in the downtown area where he was able to shop for all of his needs and added that
when he looked around, he saw people of all ages enjoying the many amenities the downtown had to offer.
Ms. Solomon arrived.
Ms. Bettman wished to leave behind a fixed rail trolley system that connected the new hospital, the
University neighborhood, the federal courthouse, and a new City Hall that featured separate offices for each
city councilor.
Ms. Solomon foresaw herself having dinner riverside on a concrete patio that was part of a mixed-use
development overlooking the hospital and the river.
Ms. Taylor wanted her legacy to be that all of the Amazon headwaters land was preserved as open space,
including the Beverly property.
Council Coordinator Lynda Rose hoped the City would become one of the most technologically advanced
cities for disseminating information. She added that she would also love to live downtown.
Mr. Poling remarked that any one of the councilors could pick any number of the different visions set forth.
Mayor Piercy said she wanted the downtown to be revitalized and the City to be known as a regional arts
center and a place that supported sustainable business practices. She wanted the citizens to feel great about
Eugene as a community.
2) Review Operating Agreements/Shared Expectations
Ms. Hayes divided the council into three small groups, with one new member in each group. Ms. Utecht
noted that some discussion had already occurred via email.
Mr. Kelly commented that six out of nine of the elected officials present %weated a long time" to adopt
operating agreements. He wondered if this review could be done more efficiently by allowing the three new
members to address the other six with their questions and comments regarding the agreements.
Ms. Hayes said the small group portion would not take a long time. She felt the one-on-one format would
allow people to ask all of their questions. She recognized the desire to remain in a larger group, but wished
to create a format in which no one would hold back their questions.
Ms. Taylor agreed with Mr. Kelly.
MINUTES-- Eugene City Council February 8, 2005 Page 2
Process Session
The councilors and mayor spent ten minutes discussing the operating agreements in groups of three.
Ms. Utecht listed the topics of concern that came out of the email communications between councilors and
staff, as follows:
· Section 9.03 of the operating agreements;
· Microphone time;
· Motions to reconsider;
· Parking (specific to Ms. Bettman).
Ms. Walston explained that she had included Section 9.03: Representing City Positions and Personal
Positions, on the back of the draft language for Section 9.03 for comparison purposes. She said she listened
to the tape of the discussion on the issue and extrapolated the main points, from which she crafted the draft
language.
Mr. Kelly felt the draft language captured the council's intent, but wished Section 9.03 had been written
more succinctly. He liked that it had been divided into three different paragraphs as there had been three
separate concerns that needed to be addressed. His only concern lay in the paragraph regarding local
intergovernmental bodies or advisory groups. He felt the sentence that directed councilors to inform the
other members of the council of matters being considered by an intergovernmental body should contain the
caveat ;if possible,' given that agendas sometimes did not arrive with adequate time to provide notice and
receive direction on such policies. He commented that the last sentence of the second paragraph, which
directed councilors to vote on matters with policy implications or budgetary considerations as per adopted
City or council policy and direction, was a key point for him.
Ms. Taylor said sometimes the council knew in advance what was being considered, as in the case of the
Metropolitan Policy Committee (MPC). She advocated for holding a work session on MPC agenda items in
order to solidify which direction the City Council representatives should take.
Mayor Piercy asked Mr. Kelly to consider a situation in which he was in that voting position and, to the best
of his ability, believed he was following City Council direction but had, in fact, misinterpreted the direction.
Mr. Kelly responded that there were fuzzy areas sometimes and one did the best he or she could.
Ms. Taylor commented that sometimes that just happened.
Mr. Pryor related his experience as a representative of the School District 4J to the Lane Council of
Governments (LCOG). He underscored that he spoke for himself in that capacity and not for the school
board, unless specifically directed by the board to do so.
Mr. Pryor remarked that it seemed unnecessary to list the different intergovernmental bodies and advisory
groups given the definition. He also pointed out it was possible that a group could be left off the list. He
recommended eliminating the list, noting that this alone would shorten the section by three sentences.
Ms. Bettman said one reason this issue had been raised based on events at the MPC, and the former mayor
and Ms. Bettman brought them to the council. She averred that councilors did not always have the time to
check in with other councilors regarding their positions on issues, but where there was clear council policy
she declared councilors should vote consistently based on the policy. She noted that legal counsel had
indicated that there was no legal requirement for an elected representative to vote in any way other than how
they wanted to.
MINUTES-- Eugene City Council February 8, 2005 Page 3
Process Session
Mr. Pryor said the principle was fine because the councilors were part of a larger representative body.
Mr. Papd suggested the following change to the second sentence of the second paragraph of Section 9.03:
~The Mayor or councilors should inform the other members of the City Council of the matters being
considered by the abe~ve ne~ted intergovernmental bodies, and to the greatest extent possible, seek direction
from the City Council on issues directly pertaining to the City of Eugene,,, ..... ~,,.o,,~:~*:~ and adopted city
policy."
Mr. Papd also recommended making the following change to the fourth sentence of the third paragraph:
~Ifthere is existing City or Council policy, the voting delegate should ~vill vote in accordance with that
policy."
Mr. Kelly noted that the council needed to adopt the revised agreements via resolution in a regular session,
but suggested the council move to approve the revision.
Mr. Kelly, seconded by Mr. Poling, moved approval of the revisions, as
discussed. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0.
Continuing, Mr. Pap6 underscored that microphone time continued to be an issue. He hoped the council
would be judicious with its time. He recalled a recent meeting at which members of the public who made
time to testify at a public hearing were turned away because the preceding items on the agenda took
too long due to copious discussion.
Ms. Ortiz said she did not feel compelled to weigh in on agenda items all of the time. She declared that
respect for public speakers was very important.
Mayor Piercy commented that a tight schedule meant she should monitor and shorten comment time after the
Public Forum.
Ms. Taylor reiterated her objection to ending meetings at 10 p.m. She thought this rushed some items,
adding that it was always better to postpone than to push something through without adequate discussion.
She preferred to shorten the council's response time to the Public Forum than the speaker's time to testify.
Mr. Kelly agreed that the problem arose sometimes but did not think it was as ubiquitous as some people
thought it was. He pointed out that everyone was given an opportunity to speak in every round, should they
so choose. He felt that a new rule regarding microphone time was not needed, rather he thought a
combination of self-discipline and peer pressure, i.e., an after-meeting comment, would work to curtail
microphone abuse. He asserted the meeting cited by Mr. Pap6 had an over-full agenda.
Mr. Pryor said self-discipline would take care of the problem. He noted that most questions to staff could
be dealt with prior to meetings and then meetings could be solely for the purpose of deliberation and
comments. He remarked that he was unprepared to change the current system with time limits until he saw
how long some comments were and also how focused they were utilizing a greater degree of self-discipline.
Ms. Bettman opined that more expository material in agenda packets would reduce the need for council
questions. She also wished that staff would limit its comments to its presentations. She said it had gotten to
the point where staff was participating in the decision-making process and did not have a timer. She
underscored her feelings that staff should be there to answer questions and not to exposit or rebut issues.
MINUTES-- Eugene City Council February 8, 2005 Page 4
Process Session
Additionally, she registered her opposition to one-minute rounds for council comments and questions.
Ms. Taylor suggested the council try a meeting without the timer. She noted that former Mayor Jim Torrey
had initially presided over meetings without timers. She thought it was undignified to be stopped by a
buzzer. She posited that one might have more to say in the second or third round than the first.
Ms. Solomon said she had come to appreciate having time limits. She disagreed that staff participated in
discussions or rebutted the council. She stressed that staff members were the experts called upon to ensure
the council received correct information. She commented that staff presentations had dramatically improved
since the council goals session at which they had been asked to utilize PowerPoint presentations more and
talk less.
Mr. Kelly observed that the ~vibe" of the process session felt more like dialogue than posturing. He said he
was ~jazzed about that."
Mr. Kelly suggested experimenting with the timer and using it, but without the buzzer. He thought it would
provide good feedback for councilors.
Regarding staff, Mr. Kelly agreed presentations had improved. He said there were some staff members that
were better than others at answering questions succinctly.
City Manager Taylor asked if these comments pertained more to work sessions than regular sessions. Mr.
Kelly replied that he was referring to work sessions. City Manager Taylor said he would convey these
comments to the executive managers.
Ms. Hayes suggested the meeting move on. She observed that the councilors supported trying a meeting
without the buzzer.
Mr. Pryor remarked that he liked staff participation. He averred that it helped to fill in all the pieces and
facilitated the council's ability to make informed decisions. He said when all was said and done, only the
councilors held the right to vote.
Ms. Hayes surmised from the conversation that concerns regarding staff presentations were being addressed
and had gotten somewhat better.
Mr. Poling underscored that staff members come into a meeting having done the work on an issue. He felt
sometimes staff might need to remind the council as to what direction the council was headed. He
commented that some staff members had been ~dressed down" in the public eye and this had hampered their
ability provide their best professional input.
Mr. Pap~ also appreciated the timer being there. He advocated using the microphone with self-discipline
and courtesy for everyone else there.
Ms. Rose indicated it would not be a problem to disconnect the buzzer for a meeting.
Ms. Bettman thought it might make more sense if councilors had a monthly cumulative time allotment. She
said some issues required more deliberation. She commented that she would hold back off on an issue that
was less important to her and speak at greater length to an important issue. She called the time limits
~artificial constraints."
MINUTES-- Eugene City Council February 8, 2005 Page 5
Process Session
Speaking to the issue of staff, Ms. Bettman opined it had more to do with staff "ideology and agenda." She
opined staff members advocated for particular issues and discriminated against people who did not agree
with them. She pointed out that staff people had an entire agenda item summary (ALS) and an uninterrupted
presentation to "make their case."
Ms. Ortiz liked having a timer and also the idea of a cumulative amount of time. However, she agreed with
contentions that the one-minute time limit was unrealistic. She suggested rounds should go no lower than
two minutes.
Ms. Ortiz said interactions with staff worked best when it provided the facts and not direction.
Ms. Taylor opined that staff members were sometimes trying to make policy and this was the job of the
council.
Mr. Kelly remarked that this sort of abuse was not widespread. He agreed with Ms. Ortiz that after a
presentation, staff should only provide facts.
Mr. Kelly averred that agenda packets were getting thinner. He pointed out that the agenda packet for the
next work session at which the council would consider remanding an ordinance did not contain a copy of the
ordinance.
Mr. Pryor related his expectation that staff would have a position on an agenda item. He said elected
officials relied upon this because the staff members were hired based on their expertise. He agreed,
however, that staff members should draw the line at lobbying for a particular position.
Ms. Utecht summarized the discussion, as follows:
· The council would hold a work session without the buzzer;
· Mayor Piercy would try to help draw attention to time limits;
· It was suggested that people who attend a meeting to testify at a public hearing that looked to be
ultimately postponed due to time constraints be sent home earlier than at the end of the meeting;
· Ms. Bettman and Ms. Taylor talked about the possibility of having a cumulative amount of time to
speak to issues;
· Some councilors felt the one-minute rounds for comments and questions should be eliminated.
Ms. Utecht noted that Mr. Pap6 included Robert's Rules of Order on his list of concerns. Mr. Pap6 clarified
that his concern was particular to the act of reconsidering a motion. He stated that should the maker of the
motion not be present and/or not informed 24 hours prior to the motion to reconsider, then the motion should
be tabled.
Mr. Kelly thought it could be brought up and tabled again. He said a motion to reconsider meant something
unusual was going on. He felt there were two rules in place that addressed this - one that dictated that a
councilor with a motion needed to let staff know in advance and the other that said a councilor could request
in writing that a motion not be considered in their absence.
Mr. Poling asked how one would know in advance if a motion to reconsider "came out of left field." Ms.
Rose read the clause from the operating agreements that governed such motions and it was determined that
Mr. Papa's concern was addressed.
MINUTES-- Eugene City Council February 8, 2005 Page 6
Process Session
Mr. Poling was not sure how to address the issue. He felt the language would still allow someone to make a
motion to reconsider at a meeting at which the councilor who made the original motion was absent.
Ms. Bettman said if one had the intent to get the motion out there but found it not possible to do so,
parliamentary rules should not be imposed upon the body. She thought such a situation was only a remote
instance and if it happened it was up to the council to decide whether or not to proceed with the motion
depending on the circumstances. She felt there had only been a few instances under which a councilor had
been specifically undermined, but given that former Mayor Torrey was no longer in office she asserted this
was not likely to happen anymore.
Ms. Taylor commented that things of this nature had occurred in the past.
Mr. Pap6 acceded that clarifying rules were not necessary at this time.
Ms. Hayes noted that the last item to be discussed under the operating agreements was parking.
Ms. Bettman discussed her difficulties in finding parking for meetings and the number of parking tickets she
received given that meetings were sometimes unpredictably long.
Mr. Poling suggested a universal parking permit. He registered his offense at the last sentence in the
memorandum on parking that indicated the annual cost was $6,000.
Mr. Kelly thought the 4A parking permit could serve as the universal permit.
City Manager Taylor asked if it would be possible to create a special parking key for the councilors or,
perhaps, coupons. Mr. Kelly thought a parking key that would work in the meters could end up costing
more. City Manager Taylor also suggested a parking decal that would allow councilors to park in all City-
owned and managed parking spaces. He indicated he would investigate the possibilities.
Ms. Utecht asked the councilors if they wished to work on the Shared Expectations List.
Ms. Taylor and Mr. Kelly indicated their preference not to work on it. Mr. Poling thought Mr. Pryor and
Ms. Ortiz could ask the senior members of the council clarifying questions if they wanted to.
Ms. Ortiz asked if the list had been distilled from a larger list. She requested a copy of the larger list.
Mayor Piercy commented that the expectations might not be shared given that they were not actually
adopted.
Ms. Utecht commented that there was a lengthy discussion on the expectations in September 2003. She
asked that Ms. Rose provide the three new members with copies of the full discussion. Should they feel a
need to further discuss the list, she suggested they bring the list to the next process session.
Ms. Hayes called for a ten-minute break.
3) Boards and Commissions Process
Ms. Walston explained that the Boards and Commissions process existed on two levels, the ;;macro level,"
MINUTES-- Eugene City Council February 8, 2005 Page 7
Process Session
as dictated by code, and the "micro level," consisting of the council's process to set up interviews and
timelines. She noted that some interview questions were redundant and there had been some confusion as to
who should be interviewed and with other aspects of the interviews. She said there had not been a
comprehensive look at the Boards and Commissions process and the codes that govern them in twelve years.
Ms. Taylor thought the questioning process was artificial. She opined that the same questions were not
appropriate for every person. She wondered if some questions could be improvised and whether the process
could be made more informal. She commented that the person ended up being judged by the quality of the
interview.
Mr. Kelly averred that being articulate in an interview demonstrated how articulate a person would be in
their capacity as an appointed member of a group. He supported printing the schedule of interviews up
front. He advocated for building in %verflow" for the interviews.
Mr. Kelly alleged that some votes were not counted correctly in the last round of appointees. He also
commented that councilors should make a commitment to attend all of the interviews.
Regarding the interview questions, Mr. Kelly noted that the council inevitably changed the questions prior to
interviews. He suggested the questions be provided in advance to the council. He felt two or three of the
same questions should be asked of every interviewee and then the council should be able to reserve the right
to ask other questions.
Ms. Walston pointed out, for new members, that some committees required an application, a supplemental
questionnaire, and the interview.
Mr. Kelly thought there was much redundancy between the supplemental questionnaire and the interview
questions. He suggested that a single distinct application be created for the ~weightier" groups, such as the
Human Rights Commission, Planning Commission, and Budget Committee.
Ms. Ortiz thought a little redundancy in the line of questioning was acceptable. However, she also felt that
to fully engage the community, it was important to occasionally overlook a small lack of expertise or a lack
of articulateness. She liked the idea of formulating applications that pertained to the particular groups. She
asked, though, if there was a legal rationale for having the same questions.
Mr. Poling commented that he had sat on hundreds of interview panels and all of them were obligated to ask
the same questions of every applicant. He was also curious as to whether there was a legal rationale for
doing so in this situation.
Ms. Utecht surmised that there would be less exposure with volunteers because they did not receive a
financial benefit as a result of being selected. She commented that one would have to be careful to ensure
the same objectives were addressed. She said that the selection of an applicant based on a question asked
only of that person could be problematic.
Mr. Poling advocated for asking the same questions for all applicants.
Mr. Kelly said the only instance in which he would want to ask an individual a unique question would be to
respond to a unique response on an application or supplemental questionnaire.
Mr. Poling recommended the application process begin earlier. He said the current process resulted in a
MINUTES-- Eugene City Council February 8, 2005 Page 8
Process Session
time crunch for the Budget Committee, which started the month after the interview process was completed.
He also felt a procedure should be created to fill unexpected vacancies, such as a matrix of second choices.
Ms. Bettman wanted a standardized process for vacancies as well. She appreciated Mr. Ortiz' comments
regarding being open to appointing people with other strengths. She said that the City's current boards and
commissions looked homogenous to her and advocated for more diversity in the council's selections.
Regarding interview questions, Ms. Bettman indicated she would like to be able to ask follow-up questions.
She also wished the applications could be made "more beautiful," adding that sometimes they were hard to
read.
Mayor Piercy asked if the applicants for the boards and commissions had preferences for who they wanted
to serve. She thought it would be helpful for them to have guiding principles and to know who needed to be
at the table.
Ms. Solomon wished for a better distribution of ward constituents among such groups. She noted that only
one person had applied from Ward 6. She felt Ms. Walston did a great job of providing the information on
applicants regarding age, gender, race, and neighborhood.
Mr. Pap6 said he always tried to look at ward distribution when selecting members for boards, committees,
and commissions. He suggested the council have a work session to talk about improving the selection
process and the questions they asked applicants. He thought the council should "scramble" the questions
every year.
Mr. Poling suggested that soliciting information from people currently on the boards, commissions, and
committees regarding what they look for in a fellow member could ultimately narrow the scope and decrease
diversity. Mayor Piercy countered that they could also recommend having different perspectives. She
commented on the importance of having people with different income levels participate.
Ms. Taylor did not think it mattered where people lived in the City. She advocated for having a variety of
people with differences in philosophical stance and vocation sit on the committees.
Mr. Pryor said he would look for diverse perspectives on a committee so that the results would come from a
collaboration of different points of view.
Ms. Utecht asked if a scheduled work session would include all aspects of this topic.
Ms. Solomon preferred to "take a stab" at this topic in the next process session as opposed to a work
session.
Mr. Kelly was concerned that the next process session was not scheduled until April. He wanted to make
sure there would be time to work through this. Regarding diversity, he agreed the council should seek to
increase it in every aspect. He commented that deliberating in public sometimes caused constraint and
wondered if personnel matters could extend to commissions, etc. He felt such deliberations should be held in
executive session. City Manager Taylor said he would pose this question to legal counsel.
Ms. Bettman believed there were many kinds of diversity that should be considered before geographic
diversity. She asked to hear from staff as to whether other communities had found ways to create more
diversity. She opined that councilors wanted people who represented their own points of view to be on the
MINUTES-- Eugene City Council February 8, 2005 Page 9
Process Session
boards and commissions.
Mayor Piercy remarked that people could have more than one quality, and regardless of where they fell on
the political spectrum, a person added something unique to the committee process.
Mr. Pryor liked the distinction between the work sessions and the process sessions. He found the process
session to be the most helpful and useful meeting he had participated in thus far. He did not mind waiting
until April to finish addressing the issue.
Ms. Utecht asked the mayor and councilors how they wished to proceed.
After some discussion on whether to schedule an additional earlier process session, the council decided to
have staff work on the results from the discussion and bring the extrapolation back to the council process
session scheduled for Monday, April 18.
Mr. Pap6 objected to allowing this topic to take up the whole process session.
Ms. Ortiz said it was an important topic. She wanted to do it right so that the results would have a long
shelf life and did not want to limit the process.
Mr. Pap~ suggested splitting the issue and addressing one piece in the process session and one piece in a
work session.
Ms. Taylor advocated for devoting the process session to this issue.
Mr. Kelly stated that there was formalized code language for standardized commissions and committees, but
there was nothing like that for committees formed by the mayor. He thought there should be some kind of
guiding language for mayor's committees. He opined there was some value in bounding what a mayor's
committee could be. He noted that the council had approved the nominations for former Mayor Torrey's
Economic Development Committee. He likened it to the Senate approving the President's nominations and
advocated for continuing this confirmation role.
Mayor Piercy said while she recognized why the issue had arisen, she only had a couple of things under her
charge, the ability to weigh in on the agenda and the right to form committees (with the caveat that budget
considerations had to be weighed), and the rest of her job was %howing up." She was concerned about
being constrained, especially given that any recommendations or proposed actions that resulted from a
committee would come before the council anyway.
Ms. Taylor concurred with Mr. Kelly. She remarked that the council was %xpected" to support the results
from such committees. She felt a committee should bring ideas but not have the assumption that the council
would automatically support them.
Mr. Pap~ said he would not put limitations on the mayor's committees.
Mr. Pryor called it a great check and balance. He thought it was an interesting conversation but did not
want to constrain the rights of the executive branch.
Ms. Utecht observed that Mr. Kelly and Ms. Taylor were the only councilors interested in discussing this
item further. Mr. Kelly suggested the item be ~parked" until fall 2005.
MINUTES-- Eugene City Council February 8, 2005 Page 10
Process Session
4) Strategic Planning Session
City Manager Taylor asked if the suggested start and stop times would work for councilors.
Mr. Kelly could not make it on Friday until 10 a.m.
Ms. Bettman had conflicts on both days. She said she could make arrangements to stay later on February
25 and asked if the council could agree to a later start time on February 26, such as 10:30 a.m.
Mr. Pryor felt the council might not need the entire time it had scheduled for the session.
Ms. Solomon stated that she had to be finished at 5 p.m. on Friday, February 25.
Mr. Papd expressed his frustration that the council still had difficulty setting aside this time. He was
opposed to cutting the time back.
Mr. Kelly proposed the session be scheduled from 10:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Friday and 10:30 a.m. to 5:30
p.m. on Saturday.
Ms. Taylor declared the session to be ~way too long."
Ms. Bettman observed that the session had been shorter in 2004 and asked why it had been scheduled for
longer this year.
City Manager Taylor responded that they were hoping for two full days of retreat time and if it ended
earlier, then this would be a reward for the work. He felt the time set aside would provide ample parameters
to cover the ground the council needed to cover.
Ms. Bettman thought it would be a good compromise to go with the times suggested by Mr. Kelly.
Mr. Kelly asked that the tentative schedule be circulated to the mayor and City Council for comments, once
it had been submitted by the facilitator.
Mr. Papd stressed that the City had hired a qualified facilitator and though the councilors might think items
on her agenda were superfluous, they were likely borne of good ideas.
Ms. Bettman recalled that the councilors had jettisoned a visioning exercise in the previous year's strategic
planning session. She encouraged staff to recommend to the facilitator that she get right to the issues.
Ms. Solomon recommended that the council be open and receptive to doing business in another way. She
was reluctant to cut the facilitator short. She appreciated the opportunity to work with her and encouraged
her colleagues not to be too picky about the agenda.
Regarding the role of executives at the retreat, Mr. Kelly registered his opposition to allowing the mayor to
vote on the internal decision-making process.
Mr. Pryor agreed with Mr. Kelly's logic but thought it more compelling to have the mayor be part of the
team.
MINUTES-- Eugene City Council February 8, 2005 Page 11
Process Session
Mayor Piercy said the facilitator was thinking that full participation did not have a bearing on the final vote.
City Manager Taylor concurred, stating that the results from the planning session would come before the
council for the final vote.
The meeting adjourned at 8:31 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dennis M. Taylor
City Manager
(Recorded by Ruth Atcherson)
MINUTES-- Eugene City Council February 8, 2005 Page 12
Process Session