HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/09/1992 Meeting
M I NUT E S
. Eugene City Council
McNutt Room--City Hall
November 9, 1992
5:30 p.m.
COUNCILORS PRESENT: Shawn Boles, Bobby Green, Ruth Bascom, Debra Ehrman,
Randy MacDonald, Paul Nicholson, Kaye Robinette.
COUNCILORS ABSENT: Roger Rutan.
The regular City Council meeting of November 9, 1992, was called to order by
His Honor Mayor Jeff Miller.
Before proceeding with the regular agenda items, Mayor Miller announced that
two councilors had items to share at this time.
Mr. Boles distributed the text of the address of the Deputy Mayor of the city
of Kathmandu, from which the City's delegation recently returned. He also
displayed a scroll given to the council and said that a written report on the
trip is forthcoming.
. Ms. Ehrman said that the Intergovernmental Human Services Committee and the
United Way have similar interests and wondered if, as a way of doing things
differently, the City might explore sharing administrative resources with that
organization. There was consensus to explore the possibility.
Mayor Miller explained that the council will hold a total of three consecutive
meetings today. This meeting, he said, would serve to review the process for
the ongoing implementation phase of Eugene Decisions, and will be facilitated
by John O'Connor. He acknowledged councilors-elect Nancy Nathanson and Kevin
Hornbuckle, saying they would be invited to give input. The second council
session will be held in the council chamber and deal with public business.
The last session will reconvene in the McNutt Room and include executive
managers, and be facilitated by Mr. O'Connor. Mayor Miller said the discus-
sion will revolve around how to work together to implement Eugene Decisions.
A. EUGENE DECISIONS IMPLEMENTATION
Mr. O'Connor said that the task before the council is to decide how and when
to address the implementation issues resulting from Eugene Decisions. He
invited councilors to share their views.
Referring to the list of issues, Mr. Boles said that once the council decides
how it wants to process the items, it can be fleshed out. He said that
council officers discussed adopting a process similar in spirit to that used
. MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 9, 1992 Page 1
5:30 p.m.
- ---- ---- ---- -------
in the planning phase of Eugene Decisions. It involves convening subgroups of .
council~rs to work issues to be presented to the full council for final
decision. Mr. Boles said that multiple groups would have built-in protection
against subgroups closing on issues, as councilors will be both recipient and
presenter of group work.
Mayor Miller felt it important to begin implementing the service cuts and user
fees portion of the strategy. He said this would add clarity to what is at
stake in the community. The Mayor noted that one of the issues is "What does
it look like, if there are no additional revenues?"
Mr. Green said he is most concerned with the transition from planning to
implementation. He said the community has yet to feel the impact of the
service changes. Mr. Green expressed concern with how the council presents
new revenue sources to the public, saying it should unite around a source or
rethink its position.
Mr. MacDonald said he was frustrated that the reality that City government is
changing dramatically has yet to be understood by the public. He said it
. requires developing a process to manage those changes. He supported the
multi-group process for working issues, provided staff can accommodate the
work plans and there are regular council check-in points and an understood
time line. Mr. MacDonald described implementation as processing elements as
discrete components that are also viewed as a whole.
Ms. Ehrman supported the multi-group model. She expressed concern that the
council was losing the focus of the community. Ms. Ehrman is also concerned .
about the uncertainty involved in the organizational change, saying the City
could lose employees unnecessarily. She felt it important to prioritize the
list of issues.
Ms. Bascom said the council's next assignment should be to implement the
$5.2 million in service changes. She added that if a revenue stream cannot be
identified in a timely manner, the council may have to consider the Eugene
Decisions Committee's Strategy C.
Mr. Robinette supported the multi-group model, saying the task before the
council is more difficult than that just accomplished. He said his primary
concern is that the council, as a whole, feel ownership for the decisions it
makes. Mr. Robinette said that the media and community also need to under-
stand the decisions the council makes.
Mr. Nicholson pointed to the Revenue Committee as a good example of a focused
work group. He expressed concern about Ms. Bascom's hesitancy to put the
restaurant tax to a vote, saying a "no" vote will provide important informa-
tion that will move the work forward. Mr. Nicholson said he needs to have a
clear sense that the full council supports the process as a whole before going
forward.
Ms. Bascom reiterated her lack of support for a restaurant tax, saying the
MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 9, 1992 Page 2 .
5:30 p.m.
. community will not accept it.
Mr. Boles reminded the council that it unanimously approved Eugene Decisions
at the end of the planning phase. He said that there may be sequencing
issues, but the package was approved as a whole and it will be implemented as
a whole, with community input.
At Mr. O'Connors invitation, Ms. Nathanson shared her view that the community
wants closure. It would like to have an indication of what is happening by
the end of the year--not just that committees are working on it. She said
people are skeptical and need to know that efficiencies and cuts are in place.
Ms. Nathanson said it is not clear out in the community that the City has done
anything yet.
Summarizing the discussion, Mr. O'Connor said that councilors are in agreement
on the following: the multi-group model can be successfully used to process
the issues; the issues need to be prioritized; the "no-revenue" strategy is a
priority; to move forward on the $5.2 million service changes (and that it is
a community trust issue); implementation is more difficult that the question-
ing part of Eugene Decisions; implementation will greatly impact staff and
council work plans, requiring many changes; tax is not a top option, although
it ;s often seen that way; that the council needs a clear sense of where it
is; and that the council must proceed in agreement as it works out these
issues.
B. Council Process and Work Plan Issues
. The council generated the following list of issues without priority consider-
ation:
Budget re-design
Implementation of $5.2 million service changes
Implementation of $3.8 million portion of strategy
Boards and commissions/citizen oversight of government
Review Financial Goals & Policies in light of Eugene Decisions
Downtown/DEI/Staffing
No-Revenue strategy
Library
Revenue Strategy
Time line
Implementation of DPS Long-Range Plan
- Fire Redeployment
Organizational systems change
- Compensation policy
- Volunteers
- Contracting-out
Communication
- with public
- with intergovernmental partners
Performance measures
. MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 9, 1992 Page 3
5:30 p.m.
Agenda control .
The council decided to get input from executive managers before grouping the
issues further or prioritizing them.
There was a brief discussion about whether there was council consensus with
regard to the tax. Several councilors expressed frustration at the suggestion
of revisiting the issue.
Mr. O'Connor observed that the council reached consensus on what it needed to
talk about next and the tax was not on that list.
Mayor Mill er sa i d he sensed that the counc il was not ready to move forward
because of the tax. He said that councilors are willing to refer a tax
because it is consistent with Eugene Decisions, but they are not willing to go
out and campaign for it.
Mr. Boles said that the council is in the implementation phase and so long as
it keeps that in mind, it will move forward. He said the kinds of questions
he hears around revenue sources will be addressed by whatever group is
assigned to it.
Ms. Ehrman reminded the council it had put off the discussion pending election
results, and asked to hear from councilors-elect.
Mr. Hornbuckle said he appreciated the council's work and respected the need
to maintain the integrity of the package. However, ,he expr.esse( a l.~Ck of .
support for a restaurant tax, describing it as a ,sales tax~-a ,re"gres'sive form
of tax. Mr. Hornbuckle favors a personal income tax. "He expre~sed ~ willing-
ness to work with the council in maintaining the integrity of the package,
provided that integrity can be maintained'without there being a regressive tax
in the new revenue.
Ms. Nathanson said she would support whatever the council puts forth, although
she is not convinced that all possible cuts have been made. She said the
council must demonstrate that that has been done before there can be support
for any revenue option. Ms. Nathanson noted that most people view a restau-
rant tax as more of a luxury tax, so long as a restaurant is defined more
along traditional lines.
Mr. Gleason drew similarities between the budget process and Eugene Decisions,
saying they are planning tools. He noted that the new council will need to
affirm the process as a strategic plan, which has been completed. The
implementation phase, he said, requires a different type of focus and expecta-
tion, realizing that implementation may require more planning. He suggested
the council move forward by forming work groups.
Mayor Miller asked councilors Bascom, Boles, and MacDonald to flesh out the
list of issues in the next week and suggest work group items for the council
to process. At Ms. Ehrman's suggestion, councilors agreed to initial issues
MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 9, 1992 Page 4 .
5:30 p.m.
on the list that they are interested in.
. The meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m.
Following a 7:30 p.m. public hearing in the Council Chamber, the council
reconvened in the McNutt Room for a meeting with councilors-elect Nancy
Nathanson and Kevin Hornbuckle and the Executive Management Team. Members
present included City Manager Mike Gleason, Deputy City Manager Linda Norris,
Administrative Services Director Warren Wong, Municipal Court Administrator
Sandra Franklin, Public Works Director Christine Andersen, Acting Director of
Recreation and Cultural Services Bob Schutz, Acting Librarian Carol Hildebr-
and, Planning and Development Director Abe Farkas, and Marilyn Nelson (for
Department of Public Safety Director Dave Whitlow).
Mayor Miller explained that the purpose of this meeting was to discuss the
implementation of Eugene Decisions, including the future of the council's
relationship with executive managers.
Seating was arranged in a large circle to create an informal atmosphere. John
O'Connor facilitated a round-robin discussion in which each person was asked
to share his/her feedback concerning the implementation of Eugene Decisions
and work load as the City reduces service capacity.
The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
..
(Recorded by Yolanda Paule and David Straub)
cc53009.112
. MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 9, 1992 Page 5
5:30 p.m.