Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 10/27/03 Mtg MINUTES Eugene City Council Regular Meeting Council Chamber--City Hall October 27, 2003 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Gary Pap6, Nancy Nathanson, Scott Meisner, David Kelly, Betty Taylor, Bonny Bettman, Jennifer Solomon, George Poling. Mayor James Torrey called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. 1. PUBLIC FORUM Mayor Torrey reviewed the rules of the Public Forum. Janetta Overholser, 30300 Cottage Grove-Lorane Road, Cottage Grove, thanked the council for comments made in regard to the cattery at the previous City Council meeting and for its willingness to reexamine the issue. Ms. Overholser stated that the Animal Welfare Network, an umbrella organization with membership from all of the animal organizations that serve Lane County, operated a booth at the Eugene Celebration. She explained that a petition had been circulated to restore the funding for the Lane County Animal Regulation Authority (LCARA) cattery. She provided copies of the petition, signed by more than 200 people. Noting the question from the council on whether the funding for the cattery that the County had indicated it would provide contingent upon the City's provision of funding would still be available, Ms. 0verholser said e-mails were sent to County Commissioner Dwyer and LCARA lead staff, Mike Wellington. Mr. Wellington ascertained that the funding was still designated for that purpose. Mary Blackburn, 3914 Shasta View Drive, thanked the council for agreeing to review the cattery issue in December. She asserted free cat ads in the newspaper were evidence enough of the need for such a facility. She urged the council to "step up and take responsibility for Eugene cats." She felt ignoring the burgeon- ing cat population and not funding the cattery impacted the entire county. Ms. Blackburn related a story of feral cats living by her husband's office building. She explained that a pregnant cat had given birth to three kittens, now mature, and now had another litter of four. She commented that all of the cats would be breeding in the coming spring and asked councilors to consider the exponential impact. She discussed the cost of spaying and neutering, noting that most people do not have the resources to provide this service for feral cats. Ms. Blackburn asked the council to seriously consider a cat protection ordinance. She alleged the fees generated by this would help offset some of the costs of operating the cattery. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 27, 2003 Page 1 Regular Meeting Judy Iugram, 450 West 8th Avenue, # 1, noted that she worked as a receptionist in a veterinary clinic. She said she had become aware in recent weeks of an explosion in the population of unwanted cats and kittens. She related that the clinic received several calls per day from people who have had kittens placed on their doorstep or otherwise abandoned. She expressed concern for the cats and also for the wildlife that will suffer as a result of the increase in the population of feral cats. Bruce Miller, PO 50968, noted he had provided the council with copies of several articles from the University of Oregon student newspaper, The Daily Emerald. He registered his opposition to the placement of the new basketball arena at the Howe Field location. He expressed displeasure at University President David Frohnmayer's support for the site. He felt the location presented transportation issues. He commented that the Catholic student leader also opposed siting the arena there. John Brown, 1260 Charnelton Street, stated for the record that he was speaking on his own behalf and not as a member of a board, commission, or other organization. He said he had participated in an anti-war march in Eugene with a group that was organized and had resources and that the march had been organized in a way that made the City aware of what had been planned. He remarked that veterans, on the other hand, had to pay for a parade permit in order to march. He felt the treatment of the two groups was not equitable, calling it inappropriate for one group to convey a message accompanied by police protection while the other one could not do so freely. He questioned whether freedom of speech could be exercised had no war veterans fought for it. He noted his support for police protection for the anti-war march, but asked the council to look at it from the perspective of veterans who also have a message to convey and also need police protection, but are required to pay for it. Arthur Farley, 1669 Fairmount Boulevard, indicated he was before the council to comment on the decision to not adopt an increase in stormwater fees. He expressed disappointment in this decision. He said he scrutinized the minutes of the City Council meetings held on July 16 and August 11 in order to understand the perceived problems with the program. He disagreed with the arguments made against the adoption of the following and raised the following points: while other programs had been cut for funding reasons, the stormwater program provided a service and could be funded with revenue from fees; the program was not over-funded now and, he opined, this argument was irrelevant to the discussion; no real data was provided to support the assertion that the program was inefficiently run, noting the Stream Team volunteers who help to keep costs down; and no fee increase had been implemented in years. Mr. Farley stressed the effectiveness of the program and its popularity with the people in the community. He asserted it was consistent with the adopted growth management policies, the adopted sustainability goals, the adopted annual council goals, and with the adopted Rivers to Ridges program. In closing, Mr. Farley underscored that the fee would increase by 50 cents to members of the community. He urged the council to reconsider its decision, stating that a little money would go a long way, when looking to the future. Zachary ¥ishanoff, Villard Street, expressed concern regarding the development of nanotechnology at the Riverfront Research Park in the City of Eugene. He asserted that Urban Renewal Agency funding could be used for such development. He urged councilors to read the information he provided them. He felt the technology could be directed toward developing enhanced athletes and soldiers. He alleged that University of Oregon students were opposed to these sorts of developments and highly recommended a forum be held to provide students the opportunity to speak to this. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 27, 2003 Page 2 Regular Meeting Mayor Torrey closed the Public Forum and invited comments from councilors. Councilor Meisner requested that staff provide to the City Councilors a list of staff and FTEs provided and paid for by the Stormwater Fund. He wanted the council to be aware of how much of parks planning and maintenance were paid for by the Stormwater Fund. Regarding the cattery, Councilor Meisner noted Councilor Nathanson's intention to present a supplemental request for one-time bridge funding to pay the City's share of restoring the services. He asked staff to provide the council information on the contractual agreement made with the Greenhill Humane Society. He wondered if, as an option, the City could include in its contract with Greenhill the type of cattery service LCARA would provide. Councilor Taylor expressed appreciation for all of the people in the community who care about issues and come before the council to speak on them. She applauded the dedication exhibited by the supporters of funding for the LCARA cattery. She supported the request for one-time funding for the service. Councilor Taylor called Mr. Farley's comments very important, stating that nothing was more important than preserving the quality of the environment and the stream corridors. She noted the fee had passed but had not been implemented before the council had rescinded it. She conveyed her hope that supporters of the fee would exhibit the same tenacity the supporters of the cattery had demonstrated. Regarding Mr. Vishanoff's testimony, Councilor Taylor admired his dedication. Councilor Taylor agreed with Mr. Brown that all citizens should be able to march in the streets without having to pay to do so. Councilor Bettman thanked all those who spoke at the Public Forum. She said the City's legal counsel and the police chief were looking at the permit issue. She suggested the council may want to explore options on whether or not such fees should be implemented. Councilor Bettman, noting she had not voted for the reduction in the stormwater fee, opined the situation was worse than it had looked. She stated that there was already a $2 million deficit in the budget and the budget was slated to increase by $2 million, adding that this could translate to a $4 million deficit should it remain unaddressed. She asserted that the improvement in the level of cleanliness of the river was an indication that the program had been working. She said the program was for water quality of the community in the future and whether the water would continue to be ;;drinkable, swimmable, and fishable." Councilor Bettman expressed admiration for the persistence of the people who supported the cattery. She wished the same kind of constituency would show up to solicit support for Station 7, which provides aid to homeless youth. Councilor Nathanson concurred with the points raised by Councilor Meisner. Councilor Kelly thanked participants for taking the time to speak in the Public Forum. He echoed Councilor Bettman's response to Mr. Brown's testimony. He suggested staff provide in a memorandum options as to how to best balance free speech issues, remuneration issues, and staff cost issues. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 27, 2003 Page 3 Regular Meeting Councilor Kelly thanked Mr. Farley for "summarizing very well" the "sad decision" of the council in terms of the stormwater program. He noted, however, that the issue provided direction to staff to develop the FY05 budget. He suggested this would allow time to develop a constituency as tenacious and devoted as the cattery supporters to raise those issues to the Budget Committee and, then, the Council. Councilor Kelly stated, in regard to Mr. Vishanoff's comments, that urban renewal did not have anything to do with potential areas of technology that may locate in an urban renewal district. He commented that such an entity could more easily locate in an I-1 or 1-2 zone. He noted, in response to a specific reference to his alma mater, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), that it had refused for decades to do any classified research as a matter of principle. Councilor Pap6 asked staff to determine how many other communities provide support for LCARA. He opined that, although Eugene is approximately 40 percent of the county's population, perhaps the County should provide this service for Eugene as it does for other communities in the county. Councilor Pap6 concurred with Councilors Bettman and Kelly regarding Mr. Brown's comments. He asked staff to provide information regarding whether there had been any parades or public protests in which the parade fee had been waived or not charged and how much this had cost the City. 2. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of City Council Minutes - September 22, 2003, Work Session - September 22, 2003, City Council Meeting - September 24, 2003, Work Session - October 8, 2003, Work Session - October 13, 2003, Work Session B. Approval of Tentative Working Agenda C. Approval of HOME Investment Partnerships Program Funding for Low-Income Housing Projects D. Resolution 4779 Authorizing the Transfer of Funds from the Reserve For Encum- brances to Departments and to Non-Departmental Accounts Councilor Pap~, seconded by Councilor Nathanson, moved to approve the items on the Consent Calendar. Councilor Bettman stated that she submitted corrections to the minutes via e-mail. Mayor Torrey, noting no objections to the minutes corrections, deemed them approved. Councilor Kelly said he had submitted corrections to the minutes via e-mail and requested that Item D be pulled for further discussion. Mayor Torrey stated that, without objections, the corrections to the minutes were approved. Councilor Meisner also had submitted a correction to the minutes. Mayor Torrey deemed the correction, MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 27, 2003 Page 4 Regular Meeting without objection from the council, approved. Roll call vote; the motion to approve the Consent Calendar, absent Item D, passed by unanimous vote, 8:0. Councilor Kelly thanked Sandy Halonen for attending on behalf of her project, the HOME investment partnership, and wished her luck. Councilor Kelly pointed out that Item D was primarily a bookkeeping function, but called attention to the surplus of $372,000. He thought this raised a policy question regarding staff's suggestion to put the money into the reserve for revenue shortfall. He suggested that an alternative would be to apply some of it to a one-time expense, such a one-time budget bridge for Planning staff, the cattery, or neighborhood matching grants. He asked the City Manager what the appropriate venue would be to consider this. City Manager Dennis Taylor recommended making this sort of decision within the guidelines for building the FY05 budget, so that all of the opportunities for reductions or increased expenditures could be seen within the context of the entire budget and not in only one particular area. He reminded councilors of the relationship between the City's reserves and its ability to maintain bond ratings. Councilor Meisner agreed the most appropriate place to consider ongoing funding was the next budget cycle. He commented that he would be willing to consider at a future date looking at using a portion of this reserve for some true one-time expenditures, but would be opposed to applying it to an ongoing expense. He added that he would consider utilizing some of the remaining funding to assist the Planning Division address land use issues related to hospital clinic siting. Councilor Bettman asked Mr. Taylor to elaborate on how councilors Meisner and Kelly's suggestion to apply one-time funding out of the surplus funding could be implemented. Mr. Taylor responded that the council would be able to examine this possibility when looking at the supplemental budget, but reiterated his suggestion that the allocation of this money be deferred until the entire budget had been set forth. Councilor Bettman commented that this supported her argument against the urban renewal budget as it took projects out of the queue and gave them priority. She also thought she would use this argument when considering additional funding for the LCARA cattery, as it too brought an item outside of the scrutiny of the budget process. She felt the council should look into crafting a way to consider how best to allocate such large amounts of money. Mr. Taylor replied that he hoped the council would adopt the staff recommendation. He reminded the council that the General Fund forecast and multi-year financial plan would be presented at the meeting scheduled for November 17. Councilor Taylor requested staff to make the council aware of all money that was available. Councilor Pap~ asked if it was urgent to act on this issue at the present meeting. Kitty Murdoch, Budget Manager, responded that there were no funds to her knowledge that would have extreme difficulty should the money not be moved prior to action on Supplemental Budget 1. She called it %lean-up" money from the previous year, stating that it had been left over the previous year's bills had been paid. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 27, 2003 Page 5 Regular Meeting Councilor Nathanson said there was not a narrative to explain the difference and it was unknown as to whether the sum of money was due to overestimating expected spending or underestimating revenues and whether it was due to several large items or many small items. She asked if the budget difference was comparable to previous years. Ms. Murdoch replied that the remainder was $393,890 in FY03, represent- ing a $20,000 difference. She explained that staff asked departments to estimate how much their outstanding purchase orders would be in May through the end of the year. She stated that staff had to ~juggle" many elements of their payroll and were reserving funds to be able to pay bills it expected to come through the year. Councilor Kelly encouraged the council to think of outstanding one-time expenditures that had been considered and rejected in the recent past and to bring that to the next discussion of Supplemental Budget 1. He noted that Planning and Development Director Tom Coyle had made a list of items that had fallen by the wayside due to funding. He asked staff to let the council know by memorandum when it could be brought forward and revisited for funding consideration. Roll call vote; the motion to approve Resolution 4779 authorizing the transfer of funds from the reserve for encumbrances to departments and to nondepartment accounts passed unanimously; 8:0. 3. ACTION: Appointments to Boards, Commissions, and Committees Mayor Torrey said the votes for appointments to the Budget Committee would be deferred to the end of the item. Councilor Pap~, seconded by Councilor Nathanson, moved to appoint Hugh Massengill to Position 4 on the Human Rights Commission for a three-year term beginning November 1, 2003, and ending on October 31, 2006. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Councilor Pap~, seconded by Councilor Nathanson, moved to appoint Megan Thompson to Position 10 on the Human Rights Commission for a three-year term beginning November 1, 2003, and ending October 31, 2006. Councilor Taylor moved to substitute Christina Greening for the position. The mo- tion died for lack of a second. Councilor Taylor stated that the person nominated had applied to the Human Rights Commission for the first time this year while Ms. Greening had applied previously. Ms. Greening had subsequently served one year on a committee. She felt it to be an injustice that Ms. Greening was passed over in this nomination. Roll call vote; the motion passed, 6:2; councilors Solomon and Taylor voting in opposition. Councilor Pap~, seconded by Councilor Nathanson, moved to reappoint Sheila Coats to Position 12 on the Human Rights Commission for a three-year term beginning November 1, 2003, and ending October 31, 2006. Roll call vote; the motion passed MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 27, 2003 Page 6 Regular Meeting unanimously, 8:0. Councilor Pape, seconded by Councilor Nathanson, moved to reappoint Neff Van Steenbergen to Position 13 on the Human Rights Commission for a three-year term beginning November 1, 2003, and ending October 31, 2006. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Councilor Pape, seconded by Councilor Nathanson, moved to appoint Carmen Urbina to Position 14 on the Human Rights Commission for a three-year term beginning on November 1, 2003, and ending on October 31, 2006. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Councilor Pape, seconded by Councilor Nathanson, moved to reappoint Jon Belcher to Position 1 on the Planning Commission for a four-year term beginning on November 1, 2003, and ending on October 31, 2007. Councilor Poling declared he was not willing to vote for Mr. Belcher, though he believed Mr. Belcher to be qualified. He related that some of his constituents felt citizens living north of the river were not adequately represented on the Planning Commission. Roll call vote; the motion passed, 7:1; Councilor Poling voting in opposition. Councilor Pape, seconded by Councilor Nathanson, moved to appoint Steve Johnson to Position 4, an advocacy representative on the Toxics Board for a three-year term beginning on November 1, 2003, and ending on October 31, 2006. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Councilor Pape, seconded by Councilor Nathanson, moved to reappoint Brian Allen to Position 1, a business representative on the Toxics Board for a three-year term be- ginning on November 1, 2003, and ending on October 31, 2006. Councilor Meisner stated he would support the motion. However, he encouraged staff and councilors to recruit people to apply for these positions. He felt it regrettable that the community showed so little interest in serving on the Toxics Board. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Councilor Pape, seconded by Councilor Nathanson, moved to reappoint Eric Forrest to Position 5 on the Budget Committee for a three-year term beginning November 1, 2003, and ending on October 31, 2006. In response to a question from Councilor Kelly, Councilor Pap~ said the order of the appointments had been changed as it had been anticipated there would be discussion on the last vote. He explained the vote was expected to be a tie. Councilor Kelly objected, calling it a process problem. He thought that all councilors should be made aware of a change in the straw vote. Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Bettman, moved to table the motion to reap- MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 27, 2003 Page 7 Regular Meeting point Eric Forrest to Position 5 on the Budget Committee. Roll call vote; the vote on the motion resulted in a tie, 4:4; councilors Nathanson, Bettman, Kelly, and Taylor voting in favor, and councilors Solomon, Meisner, Pap6, and Poling voting in opposi- tion. Mayor Torrey cast a vote in opposition and the motion failed on a final vote of 5:4. Councilor Kelly said, given he was unaware of the change in vote, he would oppose the reappointment of Mr. Forrest. Councilor Bettman concurred with Councilor Kelly. She felt the process had been manipulated, though not intentionally. She stated that she had voted for Mr. Forrest's reappointment initially because he did a good job and participated in the process well. She noted that more often than not she disagreed with him, but asserted he was articulate and always came to committee meetings prepared. She opined that strong business and development advocates were over-represented on the Budget Committee. She felt there needed to be a broader political spectrum. Councilor Pap~ agreed with Councilor Bettman on Mr. Forrest's record as a Budget Committee member. He did not feel that any manipulation had occurred. He said he had heard at the beginning of the work session that one councilor had changed a vote. Councilor Solomon disagreed with the notion that the process had been manipulated. She related that she had initially been the only person to vote for one applicant and had switched her vote as a result. She commented, regarding the balance on the committee, that just because a person was a business leader did not make them unable to understand social service issues, asserting that many business leaders donated substantial sums of money to social service providers. Councilor Meisner preferred the motion be made to reflect the sentiments registered in the straw poll. He stressed that neither candidate, a school principal and a former minister turned public defender, could be accurately characterized as having a particular business or development interest. Councilor Bettman agreed that the business community contributed generously and that the less public dollars available, the more the social service providers were starved for donations from businesses. Roll call vote; the motion passed, 7:1; Councilor Taylor voting in opposition. Councilor Pap~, seconded by Councilor Nathanson, moved to appoint Robert Peters to Position 3 on the Budget Committee for a three-year term beginning November 1, 2003, and ending on October 31, 2006. Councilor Bettman conveyed her support for the motion. She expressed admiration for the work of Maurice Denner, the other applicant under consideration for the position. She related that she had worked with Mr. Denner on the Police Commission for the past three years and called him an asset to any committee. However, she asserted that Mr. Denner was a staunch supporter of the Eugene Police Department (EPD), suggesting that Mr. Peters would bring a broader view to the budget process. Councilor Pap~ disagreed. He felt Mr. Denner had a broad view of many issues and brought with him a firm background in budget development from his career in public education. He noted the applicants had MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 27, 2003 Page 8 Regular Meeting made it difficult to choose as both were highly qualified. He added that Mr. Denner would likely continue in service to the community. Councilor Pap6 observed that while Mr. Peters had been involved in many volunteer activities, he had not been involved in City government. He supported his appointment, and felt he would be a welcome addition to City government. Councilor Solomon stated she had worked with Mr. Denner on the Police Commission. She said she would welcome his expertise at the Budget Committee table. She called him an outstanding individual and lauded his level of commitment. She believed he would carry his valuable skills forward from the Police Commission to the Budget Committee, and therefore declared her support for Mr. Denner. Councilor Nathanson called both candidates %utstanding," while voicing her support for Mr. Denner. She recalled his role when not serving the City as a volunteer, noting that he speaks with many parents in the community and that his focus of interest was education. Councilor Kelly supported the motion on the table. He asserted that Mr. Peters had a breadth of experience, both professionally and in the community. He said, as a retiree, Mr. Peters had the time to devote to the Budget Committee. He felt Mr. Peters' appointment would improve the political diversity of the committee. Councilor Meisner expressed his support for the motion, noting that he knew both applicants fairly well. He thought the applicants would be surprised to hear themselves characterized as diametrically opposed in a political forum. He said he would not vote against either candidate and opined that it would be difficult to predict how either would vote on specific votes. He thought neither candidate would vote on a single platform, such as solely in favor of police and public safety. Mayor Torrey declared his support for Mr. Denner in the event of a tie. He cited Mr. Denner's experience as principal of a grade school in an area of town that has a diverse student body. He felt it inappropriate to say that Mr. Denner did not have a social orientation. He thought Mr. Denner's experience as a police commissioner provided him with an edge over the other candidate who had not served the City prior to this. He added that he had interviewed candidates for the Police Commission and had been struck by the abundance of talent prepared to serve on that commission. Ms. Nathanson, seconded by Mr. Poling, moved to substitute Maurice Denner for Robert Peters in the motion. Councilor Bettman stated that Mr. Denner had called himself an advocate for funding for police and public safety. Roll call vote; the motion to substitute the name Maurice Denner for Robert Peters failed, 5:3; councilors Solomon, Nathanson, and Poling voting in favor. Roll call vote; the motion to appoint Robert Peters to Position 3 on the Budget Com- mittee passed, 6:2; councilors Solomon and Poling voting in opposition. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 27, 2003 Page 9 Regular Meeting 4. ACTION: An Ordinance Concerning a Code of Ethics for Public Officials; and Adding Sections 2.480, 2.482, 2.486, and 2. 488 to the Eugene Code, 1971 City Manager Dennis Taylor clarified that he could not support the motion to amend the ordinance as it unnecessarily burdened the City Charter. City Attorney Glenn Klein reminded the council that, procedurally, prior to tabling the motion, there had been a motion to adopt the ordinance and that, following this, Councilor Bettman had sought to amend the ordinance to add language. He stated that he had been instructed to provide counsel regarding the legality of the amendment. Having done so, he said the motions before the council were a motion to adopt the ordinance, Councilor Bettman's motion to amend, and the motion to amend the amendment. Councilor Pap~, seconded by Councilor Nathanson, moved to amend the amendment to Section 2.486(1)(b) to read, as follows: ~A copy of the city attorney's report, to- gether with the city manager's response to the report, shall be forwarded to the City Council." Councilor Bettman called the claim that her amendment would drastically impair the charter language %xaggerated." She felt it would provide future councils with the ability to evaluate strictly on the issue of conflict of interest the response of the City Manager and how it would be handled. She stressed it was an infrequent occurrence. She thought the council had little information on matters of personnel and the amendment would change policy and provide valuable information. Councilor Solomon asked Mr. Taylor if he felt comfortable with the amendment. Mr. Taylor responded that he did not, and reiterated his recommendation that the ordinance be passed without further amendment. He noted that city managers preceding him had, in word and deed, upheld ethical traditions. He asserted that having ~just one bit" of information was limited and not of use and in no way enhanced the charter. Councilor Solomon agreed with Mr. Taylor, adding she opposed the amendment to the amendment. Councilor Kelly reiterated Councilor Bettman's assertion that this would only apply under a very narrow circumstance. He reaffirmed that, should such a case arise, it would only come before the council as an information item in a case where a conflict of interest regarding an executive manager had been found by the city attorney to have merit. In response to a question from Councilor Kelly, Mr. Taylor said the amendment would unnecessarily erode the City Charter and what was inherent in the City Manager form of government, with the City Manager as the only employee under the supervision of the council. He questioned the usefulness of taking only one piece of information, the substantiated complaint and resulting action by the City Manager in appraising the City Manager's performance. Councilor Kelly asserted that it was the job of the employer to know such information. Councilor Kelly asked what part of the City Charter this amendment would erode. Mr. Taylor responded that it would erode the portion that instructed the City Manager to manage City employees. Councilor Kelly reaffirmed his support for both the amendment and its amendment. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 27, 2003 Page 10 Regular Meeting Councilor Meisner opposed the amendments. He felt it would be difficult to maintain confidentiality in such a matter. Mr. Klein clarified, for Councilor Pap~, that the report mandated by the amendments would be exempt under the Public Records Act, but the ordinance unamended would leave the issue to the purview of the City Manager. Councilor Pap~ asked if it would be legal to address such a review in an executive session. Mr. Klein replied that the manager could provide the report to the council in an executive session, but there would be a risk of a councilor critiquing the City Manager's action. He said this would be considered a direct attempt to influence the City Manager in the hiring or firing of an employee and, in mm, the councilor would run the risk of forfeiting his or her office. Councilor Pap~ registered his opposition to the amendment and its amendment. Councilor Bettman, noting the discussion on confidentiality at the previous meeting and the response from legal counsel, asserted no liability would be created so long as the council maintained this confidence. Councilor Bettman maintained that a vote against the amendments would deny the council the tools to monitor conflicts of interest. Councilor Nathanson expressed her opposition to the amendments. She stated that once the strict boundary between the City Council and the management of the organization was compromised, it would be difficult to determine where the line should be. She felt there were highly visible staff people throughout the organization that were outside of the ranks of the executive managers. She wondered if the City Council would begin requesting reports on other employees. Councilor Bettman pointed out the language in the ordinance that specified that a complaint must have merit. Roll call vote; the motion on the amendment to Councilor Bettman's amendment to Section 2.486(1)(b) failed, 5: 3; councilors Bettman, Kelly, and Taylor voting yes. Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Bettman, moved the amendment to the amendment of section 2.486(1)(b) to read, as follows: "A copy of the city attorney's report, together with the city manager's re- sponse to the report, shall be shared with the City Council in an executive ses- sion.'' Councilor Pap~ questioned the validity of this tack. He asked if the council wanted to manage with trust or distrust, stating the amendment suggested management with distrust. Councilor Bettman called the ordinance as it was written a "don't ask, don't tell" philosophy to evaluate the City Manager and how the organization would be managed. She felt information provided to the council regarding management was scant and anecdotal. She supported the amendment. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 27, 2003 Page 11 Regular Meeting Councilor Taylor agreed that not enough was known about the actions of the City Manager. She felt that more information would benefit the council in such matters. Councilor Meisner supported the amendment to the amendment, as currently stated. He felt it to be consistent with charter amendments voted on by citizens. Councilor Solomon expressed opposition to the proposed amendment to the amendment. She found it ironic that some members of the council felt they did not know the actions of the City Manager, as ten months earlier the council had written the job description for the position. She stressed that the City Manager could not mismanage the organization unnoticed. Mayor Torrey asked legal counsel what the implications would be in a situation, should the amendment be approved, whereby an executive session was held and it was determined a councilor had let a written report fall into the hands of a member of the media. Mr. Klein responded that there could be a possibility of liability, but that he would have to do research in order to determine whether the City or the councilor would be liable. He said that, other than the liability, there would be no legal sanction. Mayor Torrey conveyed his discomfort with the amendment and its amendment. He stated that, in case of a tie, he would vote in opposition. Councilor Solomon echoed Councilor Papa's concerns regarding trust. She asked legal counsel if the information the amendment would require to be provided could be referred to in the course of a future evaluation. Mr. Klein responded that it would not be possible. Councilor Solomon then questioned the wisdom of using such information in a high-level evaluation when it could not be specifically referred to in such an evaluation. Councilor Poling said he would not support the amendment or its amendment. He concurred with Councilor Pap~. He commented it would be difficult to evaluate without being able to cite specifics. Roll call vote; the vote to amend the amendment was a tie, 4:4; councilors Taylor, Bettman, Meisner, and Kelly voting in favor, councilors Solomon, Poling, Pap~, and Nathanson voting in opposition. The Mayor voted against the amendment and the motion failed on a final vote of 5:4. Mayor Torrey called for the vote on the motion to amend the ordinance by adding a new sentence at the end of 2.486(1)(b) to read as follows: ~A copy of the city attorney's report shall also be forwarded to the City Council." Roll call vote; the motion failed, 5:3; councilors Kelly, Bettman, and Taylor voting yes. Mayor Torrey called for the vote on the ordinance concerning a code of ethics for public officials. Councilor Bettman indicated she wished to support the ordinance but felt too strongly that it should be amended to do so. She suggested the ordinance would not adequately protect the public. Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Bettman, moved to amend Section 1 of the MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 27, 2003 Page 12 Regular Meeting ordinance by removing from Section 2.488 the following sentence: %uch a determination shall require six affirmative votes." Councilor Kelly asserted that, as the council did most things by simple majority, so should it determine the intentionality of a violation of the code of ethics. Councilor Taylor averred it should be a large majority in cases of ethics. Councilor Nathanson felt it would not be difficult to attain a %upermajority" should such a situation arise. She added that it should require the extra majority as it was a vote to remove the representation the electors put into office. Councilor Meisner said the determination of an intentional violation was not a mandate for removal from office according to the language. He stated that such a vote would only be made by seven councilors, assuming the eighth councilor was under investigation. Councilor Bettman noted redistricting was done by a simple majority, as was the hiring of a city manager. She felt the amendment would make the ordinance consistent with these other kinds of decisions. Councilor Pap6 disagreed, stating that such a vote impugns a person in the public eye. He likened it to finding a person guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. Mayor Torrey concurred. He stressed that such a finding indicated to the public that an individual deserved to be removed from the governing body because of illegal or immoral actions. He expressed his opposition to the amendment. Mr. Klein clarified, at Councilor Meisner's request, that it would take a majority of six votes to determine whether a violation of the code of ethics was intentional, but it would take a simple majority to vote the councilor out of office. Roll call vote; the motion to amend the motion failed, 5:3; councilors Kelly, Meisner, and Bettman voting in favor. Councilor Taylor conveyed her opposition to the main motion. She opined the ordinance would weaken what was already in place. Roll call vote; the motion passed, 6:2; Councilors Bettman and Taylor voting in op- position. The meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dennis M. Taylor City Manager MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 27, 2003 Page 13 Regular Meeting (Recorded by Ruth Atcherson) MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 27, 2003 Page 14 Regular Meeting