Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/06/1989 Meeting e M I NUT E S Eugene City Council Work Session McNutt Room--City Hall .../ December 6, 1989 11:30 a.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Ruth Bascom, Rob Bennett, Shawn Boles, Debra Ehrman, Bobby Green, Freeman Holmer, Roger Rutan, Emily Schue. The adjourned meeting of December 4, 1989, was called to order by His Honor Mayor Jeff Miller. 1. ITEMS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL, MAYOR, AND CITY MANAGER A. Arts Funding Committee Ms. Bascom announced that the Arts Funding Committee meeting scheduled for December 7 has been postponed at the request of hotel and motel owners. e Meetings have been scheduled for January 4 and 16, 1990. B. WISTEC Ms. Bascom reported that Governor Goldschmidt spoke in favor of science education earlier in the day and announced a $16,000 challenge grant on behalf of WISTEC. Ms. Bascom hoped the City will participate in funding the continued operation of the facility. C. Budget Committee Nominations Councilors confirmed that Jack Eberly (Mr. Rutan's nomination) and Bobbie Green (Mr. Green's nomination) were appointed to the Budget Committee at the December 4 meeting. D. Drug Abuse Mr. Green reported on a forum held earlier in the day for elected officials to hear from young people involved in the Drug Abuse Response Team (DART) and Sacred Heart Adolescent Recovery Program (SHARP). He said that resources should be focused on education in the schools and homes and on treatment facilities. E. Announcements Ms. Bascom announced the recent birth of a grandson. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 6, 1989 Page 1 e Mr. Holmer referred to the recent resignation of the East German president who now resides in the community of Pankow. II. DISCUSSION TO REVIEW AND EVALUATE EMPLOYMENT-RELATED PERFORMANCE OF CITY MANAGER Mayor MiJler called councilors' attention to the resolution passed at Monday evening's meeting which he said would help provide structure to the process. Mr. Gleason was asked to participate in the process by providing clarifica- tion and answering questions. Councilors considered three general questions in their discussion of Mr. Gleason's performance, citing examples and noting ideas for improvement in each. A. Does the City Manager carry out the majority direction of the City Council as defined by the council's annual goals? B. How well does the City Manager administer policies as adopted by the Council? C. How well does the City Manager carry out the administrative functions of the position? e Ms. Ehrman gave Mr. Gleason high ratings on the first two questions. She said that when policy is reflected in the budget, councilors and the manager sometimes differ in their interpretation. Ms. Ehrman cited the Airport and the social goal of housing as examples of Mr. Gleason's ability to work toward the council's goals. She suggested that mid-year status reports on steps being taken to achieve the council's goals would be helpful. Ms. Bascom concurred with Ms. Ehrman's favorable comments and said that the Community Response Team was a successful effort to work towards the council's goal of achieving new public safety strategies. Commending Mr. Gleason for his work on the council's goals, Mr. Rutan suggested that Mr. Gleason try to be more aware of when work programs undertaken to achieve the council's goals begin to cross policy issues. For example, in carrying out the work plan on annexation, Mr. Gleason could have checked back with the council for further direction. Mr. Boles advised Mr. Gleason to be sure that the policies from which he operates have been made explicit by the council. For example, the issue of public/private partnerships and creative financing may have been consistent with implied policy, but Mr. Boles did not recall there being overt, unanimous support by the council. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 6, 1989 Page 2 e Ms. Schue commended Mr. Gleason for his work on the council's goals and agreed that he should check back with the council on sensitive issues, particularly those with budgeting implications. Mr. Green observed that the council needs to be very clear in its direction to the manager, and he also supported more frequent checks for council direction as issues emerge. Ms. Bascom referred to urban renewal as an example of an issue coming back to the council for reaffirmation of direction. Ms. Schue commented that as the council changes and new members are elected or appointed, old issues need to be revisited to ascertain whether they still have council support. Mr. Boles said that Mr. Gleason is very capable of reading the center of the council, but sometimes the council is fairly evenly divided over an issue. In these situations, the majority decision on how to proceed may put the manager in a somewhat precarious position. Responding to questions from Ms. Schue, Mr. Gleason said that animal control and building permit enforcement are typically among the most difficult issues faced by city managers. Recently, the number of permit-related complaints have decreased, the City's relationship with the building community has improved, the workload has increased, and Mr. Gleason felt that progress is e being made. Ms. Ehrman said it is difficult for councilors to evaluate Mr. Gleason1s administration of policy at the department level and she urged that an appearance of departmental favoritism be avoided. Mayor Miller asked councilors to consider Mr. Gleason's administration in those areas in which there is no adopted council policy for him to enforce. Ms. Schue said she was comfortable with Mr. Gleason's design of specific implementation for general policies. While Mr. Boles considered public safety a council goal, he criticized the creation of the Community Response Team (CRT) as a large-scale program in the midst of a budget cycle. He was particularly concerned about the allocation of $100,000 in Community Development Block Grant funds for the program, which he said came before the Community Development Committee unexpectedly. He suggested that proposed work plans should be discussed by the council before actual work plans are developed. Other councilors recalled that the Crime Action Task Force and discussions of community policing provided the policy foundation for the CRT before Mr. Boles joined the council. Ms. Ehrman wondered whether recent clearing of vegetation along the Willamette River, which councilors appeared not to know about in advance, was a policy issue or an administrative activity. Mr. Gleason pointed out that the Joint Parks Committee had reviewed a vegetation master plan for two e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 6, 1989 Page 3 e years. The plan specified locations where vegetation would remain and where it would be removed, and he maintained that the recent clearing was consistent with the adopted plan. In addition, the activity provided an opportunity to work with youth as part of the community response effort. Ms. Bascom observed that it is difficult to know when the full council needs to be informed or reinformed about issues individual councilors haye p.~~n 1n~ol~od ~l~R_ Mr. Rutan pointed out that the council asks th~ ma"as~~ to show l~~der~hip dnd po~;t;v~ d~rection in runnin9 ~he orgdnlldtlon. and at th~ ~~m~ timA ;t need~ to be 1nform~d about 1~~u~~ t~!t eouncilors fee' may be sensitive and significant. Ms. Ehrman suggested that press releases may be an appropriate vehicle for informing the public when actions are being undertaken to carry out council policy that will be noticeable to the public. Mayor Miller posed the question, "Does the City Manager execute policies of the councilor does he create policy for the council?" Ms. Schue described the constraints of the city manager form of local government and stressed that it differs from the form of our County government which has paid elected officials. She did not feel controlled by City staff. e Ms. Ehrman agreed and cited the council's goals sessions as an example of the council's establishing goals while the manager observes and helps identify ways to achieve them. Ms. Bascom added that the council's task is to ask where it wants to go and the manager's is to suggest how to get there. The council can judge whether it likes the proposals of those knowledgeable about how its goals might be achieved. Mayor Miller asked the council to discuss the manager's performance in the context of urban renewal and tax increment financing issues. Mr. Rutan said that Mr. Gleason has executed the council's policy in this area. He said the council should assess whether in that execution, additional issues have surfaced that require another policy decision. Agreeing with Mr. Rutan's comments, Ms. Ehrman said that one of the problems associated with this particular issue is its complexity and the difficulty of explaining it to the general public. Ms. Schue added that there is some confusion among councilors about urban renewal and she viewed Mr. Gleason's presentation of reports and proposals as an appropriate response to the council's direction. Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Mr. Bennett, to rank Mr. Gleason highly in his carrying out of the majority direction of the e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 6, 1989 Page 4 e council and to direct that as implementation of policies proceeds, mid-point checks are to be provided in order to determine if new policies are needed. Mr. Boles said the Manager has a responsibility to inform the council about the potential consequences of policies as they are being crafted. Mr. Green said he felt that Mr. Gleason informs the council of the political implicatjons of policies. Mr. Holmer commented on the difficulty of the task being attempted by the council (evaluation of the Manager) and referred to a memorandum he had presented to councilors December 4. He asked whether the memo should be maintained as confidential at this time. Bill Gary, City Attorney's Office, said that the fact that the council was not in executive session eliminated one of the bases upon which that memorandum or any materials related to the session could be considered to be exempt from disclosure. ORS 192.502 Section (1) exempts from disclosure, conditionally, "Communications within a public body or between public bodies of an advisory nature to the extent that they cover other than purely factual materials and are preliminary to any final agency determination of policy or action." Mr. Gary said that councilors' notes and memoranda they may have exchanged in e preparation for the evaluation could be interpreted as preliminary to the final evaluation and so W9Ylg fit under that @~@mDtion_ ~owova~. tk6 :~~mB318n aDDll~~ OnlY If tno BU81~~ g~~y ~~~~ludes and S~?~i ihii ih~ lR(B~8!t "- ' - ~n Qncour~~in~ Trinh Gommunlcatlon b~tWQQn Offl~1~1~ ~~~ employes of public bodies clearly outw~ighs the public interest in disclosure." Given the fact that the process was taking place in a public meeting, it may be difficult to reach that conclusion. Mayor Miller noted the importance of identifying any single councilor's opinion as that individual's if it did not represent the majority opinion of the council. Councilors agreed with Mr. Holmer's request to release his memorandum to representatives of the media. Mr. Rutan said that during an evaluation, it is important to consider general performance and not to focus on single issues or circumstances. Ms. Bascom wished to avoid evaluating the Manager at the detailed level proposed by Mr. Holmer. She pointed out that in Mr. Holmer's memorandum, he erroneously attributed to staff proposals having to do with the Tree Commission and Cultural Affairs Commission for which Ms. Bascom had in fact been responsible. Mayor Miller described Mr. Holmer's memorandum as containing errors and omissions and said responsible reporting would make it incumbent on the media to verify the truth of Mr. Holmer's points. He suggested that Mr. Holmer's criticism may be directed more legitimately toward the council and its direction to staff than toward the Manager's performance. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 6, 1989 Page 5 e Mr. Holmer responded that his memorandum does not reflect differences with the council but provides suggestions for improvement in the Manager's style and in his staff1s work. Councilors discussed Mr. Boles' request to include the charge to provide councilors advance knowledge of proposed work plans and their consequences if implemented in the motion under consideration. , . Ms. Bascom withdrew her motion. Mr. Rutan maintained that Mr. Gleason informs the council of potential consequences of actions to the extent that is possible. Mr. Boles clarified that his request was for the manager to tell councilors what questions they should ask. He cited the funding of the Airport as an example of a situation in which he was not made aware that the project constituted 20 percent of the capital budget. Other councilors maintained that they were aware of those costs and approved them with full knowledge of the consequences. Councilors considered Mr. Gleason1s performance in the third area, that of his carrying out of the administrative functions of his position. Mr. Rutan and Ms. Ehrman agreed that councilors have inadequate contact with this area to evaluate it in detail. Mr. Holmer disagreed and said he was concerned about complaints having to do with the management of trees, e building contractors, and unfair treatment of departments. Mr. Rutan considered complaints less important than whether the manager and his staff are working toward solutions. Ms. Ehrman added that complaints and rumors are inevitable and she considered the low turnover of City department heads an indication of Mr. Gleason's accomplishments in the administrative function. Ms. Bascom reported receiving a number of citizen complaints and said she was satisfied with City staff's general ability to address those complaints. Mr. Bennett reiterated that his preference had been to hold an executive session to better allow the free flow of ideas. He commented that after ten years in his position, it would be natural for Mr. Gleason's energy and commitment levels to diminish. He encouraged Mr. Gleason to consider the future direction and structure of the organization, and to assess the commitment and energy of key individuals in the organization. Mr. Bennett stated that he supports Mr. Gleason and appreciates the effectiveness of his leadership. Mr. Bennett referred to intergovernmental relations as an extremely important area in which the City can improve its efforts and he encouraged staff to consider how the council can assist that effort through policy. Additionally, Mr. Bennett said the public's impression of the relationship between the council and the City Manager is important and he supported e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 6, 1989 Page 6 e developing a process to assure that the public is aware of council policy. He said that potentially controversial issues require reiteration of that policy. Mr. Bennett encouraged staff to strive to keep all councilors up-to-date on administrative implementation of policy. Referring to Mr. Bennett's comments about improving intergovernmental relationships, Ms. Ehrman said she thought that relationships with Lane County and EWEB had improved and the most improvement is needed in the City's relationship with Springfield. Mr. Bennett concurred. Ms. Schue pointed out that the City is working more productively with the Oregon Department of Transportation than it did in the past. Mayor Miller summarized councilors' direction as being to strive to work with chief administrators and policy-making bodies of other public agencies to find ways of strengthening relationships. Mr. Boles said that formal evaluation of the manager should occur on an annual basis. He emphasized that to achieve excellence, detail is important. For example, he said spelling errors on flip charts at public meetings detract from the City's overall excellence. As a monopoly, it is imperative that the organization have quality control mechanisms in place that will remain high across time. To guarantee long-term employment to competent persons (and to not expand staff), high-quality training and retraining and high standards are imperative. e Specifically, Mr. Boles said it would be helpful if there were assurance that all council goals were processed in a timely fashion, regardless of their relative priority. In the past year, he felt that public input and alternative citizen involvement mechanisms were put aside until the end of the year. Regarding budget changes, Mr. Boles said those items that would obviously meet with large-scale public resistance should be recognized (e.g., neighborhood associations, pools, parks, and recreation) and should not continue to be suggested as potential areas for budget cuts. Next, Mr. Boles suggested that reorgan;zational changes, particularly those involving managerial span of control, should be timed so that their consequences can be processed inside a coherent budget picture. Mr. Boles continued by asking for a common information base for all councilors. He suggested that written documentation addressing all points to be covered accompany the manager's discussions with individual councilors and that all councilors be privy to that documentation. Mr. Boles further requested assurance that those aspects of a work plan that ;s being implemented that might affect a particular ward will be brought to the attention of the appropriate councilor and the affected citizens before being put into place (e.g., the Chambers underpass). By involving the public initially, a higher-quality solution is possible. By relying on staff perceptions or expertise for solutions without checking with the community in e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 6, 1989 Page 7 -~- --- e advance of their implementation, Mr. Boles said lower-quality solutions and angry citizenry result. Ms. Bascom said it would be difficult for the manager to deal effectively with every suggestion made by councilors and she had attempted to limit her list of suggestions to what she considered the vital few. It was her opinion that the review of the initiative and referendum undertaken during the past year was inappropriate in its extent and timing. She said she would appreciate more attention and sensitivity being shown to the larger issue of the fracturing tendency of the community. Admitting that the council and mayor provided the impetus for the review, Ms. Bascom pointed out that Mr. Gleason encouraged that decision. Referring to a comment made earlier by Mr. Holmer relating to the manager's communication with the public and whether Mr. Gleason was making use of the structure in place within the organization for working with the minority community, Mr. Green commended Mr. Gleason for his attendance at an October 25 public forum on minority issues and said Mr. Gleason now must reflect those concerns. Responding to Mr. Boles's earlier comments about achieving excellence, Ms. Schue maintained that it is unnecessary to strive for excellence in all things. She considered the City.s desire to be the best a reason for some of its problems in intergovernmental relations. e Mr. Rutan encouraged Mr. Gleason to demonstrate sensitivity to policy and policy issues; to be sure department heads know the extent of their authority and are sensitive to that limit; to depersonalize critical input, evaluate it, develop a plan of action, and then present the council with his conclusion; and to be sure that within the organization, mistakes are recognized and identified, acknowledged, and corrected. He cited the recent acquisition of a fire truck and the River Road/Santa Clara annexation strategy as examples of situations in which it took too long to realize and acknowledge that a mistake had been made. Ms. Ehrman said that Lincoln School was an example of a situation in which the City was moving in the wrong direction when several councilors approached Mr. Gleason with a request to revisit the decision. She commended the council and Mr. Gleason for recognizing the mistake and adjusting in response to the community. Mr. Bennett responded that he considered the Lincoln School development one in which an evolutionary process occurred and at no particular point was the City proceeding in the wrong direction. Mr. Ehrman replied that she felt that Lincoln School was an example of a situation in which Mr. Gleason responded to emerging community issues. Ms. Ehrman gave Mr. Gleason high marks for treating all councilors equally, regardless of whether they were experienced or new councilors, or represented the minority or majority position of the council. - MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 6, 1989 Page 8 --- -~ e As the newest councilor, Mr. Green added that Mr. Gleason had been helpful in orienting him to his new role and in directing Mr. Green in how to pursue his own concerns. As an experienced councilor, Ms. Bascom recalled an earlier evaluation in which Mr. Gleason was advised to lImellow" and she thought he had responded to this direction. Mr. Holmer said that although he has more concerns and suggestions for improvement than other councilors, he hoped not to be misunderstood as feeling that Mr. Gleason fails to do as good a job as the council has trained him to do. Mr. Holmer stated his objective as being to help Mr. Gleason be the best. At this point, Mayor Miller asked whether the council concurred that Mr. Gleason should be given high marks on his performance and that the suggestions that were made for improvement should be used to develop a format for review next year. Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Mr. Bennett, that the council give Mr. Gleason its vote of confidence and that the council indicate its support for Mr. Gleason so that as he acts in the community, he does so at the direction of and on behalf of the Eugene City Council; with the suggestions for improvement made during the evaluation session part of that direction by the council. The motion passed unanimously, e 8:0. Mr. Gleason expressed his appreciation for the support of the council and emphasized the importance of public service. For the city manager form of local government to function effectively, Mr. Gleason said that the administration and policy direction must work in harmony, but it is sometimes difficult to differentiate between them. He felt that discussion of those boundaries is helpfu~, an~ he applauded the council for its effort to do that. Mayor Miller commended Mr. Gleason for requesting an open session for his performance evaluation. He said that the-issua of compensation would be treated according to traditional policy (similarly to-the rest of the organization, with cost-of-living adjustments, etc.) in the near-.fu,ture. .. - The meeting was adjourned at 1:35 p.m. -, R~ectft:iliy. submi.tted~,<: /~.;;'~~~~~'>~.>~' - MiC~.-Gleason~ City Manager (Recorded by Mary Feldman) mncc 120689 e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 6, 1989 Page 9 ---