Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 01/28/02 Work Session MINUTES Eugene City Council Work Session McNutt Room--Eugene City Hall January 28, 2002 5:30 pm COUNCILORS PRESENT: Betty Taylor, David Kelly, Nancy Nathanson, Scott Meisner, Gary Rayor, Gary Pap~, Bonny Bettman. COUNCILORS ABSENT: Pat Farr. CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION Mayor James D. Torrey called the meeting to order. A.Work Session: Items from Mayor, Council and Manager Ms. Bettman called for discussion on a zoning map as part of the Land Use Code Update process. She raised concern over losing opportunities to achieve the goals associated with the council's growth management policies. Mr. Rayor related that he had testified in Springfield regarding the land intended to be used for a sports center and which was now being re-zoned to Campus Industrial. He said that the quote that was in The Register-Guard was not representative of his testimony and added that he was considering an op-ed piece that would clarify his testimony and communicate his concerns to the people of Eugene and Springfield. Ms. Taylor reiterated Ms. Bettman's desire to have a discussion on a zoning map. She also suggested a more flexible policy around tree preservation that would allow more trees to be saved and would allow for tree exchanges. Ms. Taylor also called for a discussion regarding fines and deterrents for proceeding in cut and fill work without a permit. She raised concern that the penalties were not stringent enough to keep some people from proceeding without a permit. Ms. Taylor remarked that some citizens in her ward were concerned over tree cutting being done by the Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) and called for a discussion regarding whether the City had any control over EVVEB's tree cutting practices. Ms. Nathanson clarified comments she had made at a previous meeting expressing her disappointment that pedestrians did not use pedestrian bridges more often. She remarked that the pedestrian bridges worked well as bike bridges. Mr. Pap~ thanked the committee that planned the Martin Luther King, Jr., Day activities on behalf of the Human Rights Commission and the City Council. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 28, 2002 Page 1 Work Session Mr. Pap8 called for a list of issues from City Manager Jim Johnson that he felt needed to be addressed. Mr. Kelly said he had received a request for funding from the sponsors of a community reading event. He asked for head nods that the matter could be brought before the council. Councilors concurred. Speaking to Ms. Taylor's remarks, City Manager Johnson noted that a tree exchange might require a code change. Regarding EWEB's tree-cutting policies, Mr. Johnson said the utility was bound by the City's rules and regulations regarding tree cutting. Mayor Torrey questioned what the County position was on cell towers. City Manager Johnson said that if Lane County adopted the Land Use Code Update, it would have language that addressed the placement of cell towers. B.WORK SESSION: Recruitment Process for City Manager Human Resource and Risk Services Department Director Lauren Chouinard outlined the attachments he had provided for the meeting packet regarding the recruitment process for a new city manager. Mr. Chouinard noted that the 1996 process had taken 14 months, which was longer than usual. He emphasized that the recruitment process was a council process and not his own, and that his ideas had come from his experience in working with recruiters. Mr. Chouinard said the first two critical decisions that the council needed to make were: Who would manage the recruitment? Mr. Chouinard noted that his suggestion was the council officers plus one other person manage the recruitment. 2. When would the process end? Mr. Chouinard noted that there was some question regarding whether the hiring decision would be done by the council seated in January 2003. He said a definite deadline for the process to end would help determine what kind of a hiring process would be used. Mayor Torrey called for a round of initial comments from councilors. Ms. Taylor expressed a desire for a fast process. She wanted the new city manager to start work in January 2003. She was not in favor of hiring a recruiter and commented that the job could be done just as well without one. She called for a three-person committee to manage the recruitment and volunteered her services as one of the members. She expressed a desire to see the hiring process begin immediately. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 28, 2002 Page 2 Work Session Ms. Nathanson said there would be benefit in having a recruiter provide limited services in the process. She raised concern over the cost of the recruiter but noted that the best talent available might be outside the state of Oregon. She remarked that speed was not important to her at the current time. She noted that an internal candidate would affect the recruitment process. She suggested checking out internal candidates before committing to a timeline. In response to a question from Ms. Nathanson regarding the estimated cost of a recruiter as presented in the meeting packet, Mr. Chouinard cited page 12 of the meeting packet where different recruitment services and prices were listed. Mr. Pap8 reiterated Ms. Taylor's belief that the process for hiring should begin immediately. He added that, in his opinion, the process should begin with items 2 and 3 as presented on page 13 of the meeting packet. He stressed that a salary needed to be stated and a job description defined before the search for a new city manager began. Mr. Chouinard acknowledged that the job description had not been updated since 1996. City Manager Johnson noted that the job description for the city manager was general enough to still be accurate and cited, what he called, a very important clause that said "other duties as assigned." Mr. Pap8 urged City Manager Johnson to provide input about things that needed to be changed in the job description and urged the council to review the 1996 description. Mr. Pap8 also noted that the revisions to the charter might also have an impact on the job description of the City Manager. Mr. Kelly said he was comfortable with Mr. Chouinard's recommendations excepting the timeline. He commented that a recruiter would be beneficial to the process, but stressed the importance of the council being involved in the process as well. He said he was interested in internal candidates but expressed a desire to have a nationwide search. Mr. Kelly stressed the importance of involving new city councilors in the process of hiring the new city manager but added that he did not think that the process needed to wait until those new councilors were seated in January. Ms. Bettman said she supported Mr. Chouinard's recommendations, but raised concern over the salary level proposed. She said she was comfortable with a subcommittee of council officers to manage the recruitment process and suggested that one or two Human Resources staff be added as well. Mr. Meisner said he would support the idea of a committee to manage the recruitment process but stressed the importance of clearly defining its role. He also emphasized the importance of keeping a careful watch on the salary range for the position. He expressed a desire to have a better recruiter than the one used in 1996 and to have a nationwide search. Mr. Rayor reiterated the suggestion that the committee assigned to manage the recruitment process be the council officers plus one. He also expressed a desire to see some internal candidates for the position. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 28, 2002 Page 3 Work Session Mayor Torrey commented that the speed of the process was not as important as finding a quality candidate for the position. He urged the council not to be in too much of a hurry. He said it would be a disservice to any new councilors to not allow them to participate in the hiring process. Ms. Bettman expressed a desire to be ready to hire an individual by January 3, 2003. Ms. Taylor expressed a desire to have the new manager hired by that date. She noted that the job description of the City Manager changed with council decisions. Mr. Meisner stressed the importance of having an active City Manager. He thought that the new council should hire the person selected. Mr. Kelly commented that possible new councilors would not be completely knowledgeable of City processes by January 3, but acknowledged that new councilors-elect should participate in the hiring decision. Mr. Rayor stressed the importance of having a solid City staff. He suggested appointing an Acting City Manager and taking the time to make a good hiring decision. Ms. Nathanson said the job description and profile needed to be defined before recruiting. She said a recruitment schedule could be decided in June or July. She noted that there would already be an acting City Manager in place at that time. Mr. Pap~ said there was no reason to rush the process. He added that the new council should make the hiring decision. Mayor Torrey urged the council to wait until after May to make a decision. He noted that there would be a new councilor for Ward 4 and there would probably be some impact on the City Manager position from the charter review process. He added that the Mayor should not be forgotten in the hiring process. Mr. Kelly urged the council not to wait until June or July to establish a timeline. Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Pap~, moved to accept the staff recommendation for hiring a new City Manager with two modifications: 1. The committee to manage the recruitment process would consist of the council officers plus one councilor. 2. Preliminary steps such as salary survey, job description, and profile begin as soon as possible but the timeline be decided by the council in June 2002. In response to a question from Mayor Torrey regarding who would select the third councilor for the committee, Mr. Kelly said he would be open to a friendly amendment. Ms. Nathanson reiterated her concern over the cost of the recruiter. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 28, 2002 Page 4 Work Session Mr. Kelly said that, implicit in his motion, was that the recruiter would have a more full involvement rather than lesser involvement. In response to a question from Mr. Meisner regarding the duties of the committee, Mr. Chouinard said he, or his staff, would work on the job description and profile and submit them to the committee. He said the committee would bring back all issues to the full council. Mr. Meisner was not sure that a committee would save time since the council tended to "nigglingly discuss every word and detail" and all decisions of the committee would be brought before the full council in any event. Ms. Taylor suggested consulting Salem staff, who had just gone through the process of hiring a City Manager. She thought that a committee would save time since the five members of the council could not meet without public notice. She said the committee could meet with the recruiter and bring information back to the full council. Ms. Taylor raised concern that waiting until June to determine a timeline might be too late. She suggested coming up with an earlier date. Ms. Bettman stressed the importance of finding a new city manager as soon as possible. She said the selection process needed to rise above partisan politics. She said there was no need to delay the process and the council was shirking its duty by not pursuing a new city manager immediately and aggressively. Mayor Torrey noted that there would be a period of learning for the person who was eventually hired to get used to their new position. He said there was a benefit for the council to be involved in the learning curve. Regarding the third person for the committee, Mayor Torrey suggested that the third person needed to complement the officers and provide the broadest cross section of the council. He stressed the importance of striking a balance of opinions. Mr. Kelly suggested that the council officers should choose the third person. Ms. Taylor, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to amend the motion by changing the establishment of the timeline from June to April. Mr. Meisner said he would not support the amendment. He raised concern about not including new council electees. The amendment failed, 5:2; Ms. Taylor and Ms. Bettman voting in favor. The main motion passed unanimously. C.WORK SESSION: Discussion of Recommendations from the Citizen Charter Review Committee and Consideration of Election Dates MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 28, 2002 Page 5 Work Session Mary Walston of the City Manager's Office provided an overview of the item. She said that the night's meeting was an opportunity for the council to discuss the recommendations in the report and provide direction as to the next steps in regard to the May 2002 election. She added that, at the direction of the council, the opinions of City Manager Johnson were valued and sought as well in this discussion. Ms. Walston noted that the majority of the recommendations were of a "housekeeping" nature. She noted that there was a matrix included in the meeting packet that listed each recommendation in charter order and classified it as "housekeeping," "minor," or "substantial." She said the purpose of the work session was to come to an agreement on the housekeeping items so they could be put on the May ballot. She said the minor and substantial items could be discussed at future work sessions. Mayor Torrey called for roundtable comments from the councilors. Mr. Kelly said he was very interested in getting the housekeeping items on the ballot in May. In the housekeeping items, Ms. Bettman suggested clearer language for Section 8 regarding redistricting. She said clearer language was also needed for Section 11. In Section 17, Ms. Bettman suggested that the wording was vague enough that local control would be put in question. For Section 54, Ms. Bettman called for more discussion. Mr. Meisner supported packaging all the housekeeping items for the May ballot. Mr. Meisner said the matrix noting the creation of the position of an in-house counsel needed to be more clearly defined; in the current version, it was not obvious to the reader. In response to a question from Mr. Meisner regarding the inclusion of a section on citizen participation in the preamble of the charter, Ms. Walston noted that some charters had preambles that stated the purpose of the charter. Mr. Meisner said he would oppose the inclusion of such a section on citizen participation in the preamble and the city auditor position. He remarked that he had found no support for the city auditor position among the groups with whom he had spoken. Mr. Rayor complimented the staff work involved in classifying the recommendations of the Citizen Charter Review Committee. He said he had no comments on the housekeeping items but raised concern over the proposed new citizen involvement section, proposed changes to Section 16(2)(c), and the proposed new protected ordinance. Ms. Taylor suggested trying to put some substantial items on the May ballot such as the city auditor and in-house legal counsel. Ms. Nathanson said an exact list of housekeeping items needed to be defined for the May ballot. She said staff should not be directed to research items that did not have support from a council majority. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 28, 2002 Page 6 Work Session In response to a question from Mr. Pap8 regarding when amendments to the charter would take effect if approved by voters, City Attorney Jerry Lidz said the amendments would take effect 30 days after the election. Mr. Pap8 suggested getting items on the May ballot that would minimize the effects on selection of the new City Manager. In response to a question from Mr. Pap8 regarding the reason why Oregon Revised Statute language was not used to address conflicts of interest, Mr. Lidz said the Citizen Charter Review Committee had decided to add to the State law regarding conflicts of interest. Mr. Kelly, seconded by Mr. PapS, moved to approve the staff recommendation for classification of housekeeping, minor, and substantial items. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to amend the motion by pulling Section 8 pending clarification from the City Attorney. Mr. Kelly commented that the item did not really need to be reclassified but that it did need to have its wording changed. City Manager Johnson commented that the items should not be reclassified but rather pulled from the list until questions could be answered. In response to a question from Mr. Meisner regarding the difference between housekeeping and minor items, City Manager Johnson said minor items would be voted on individually by the council. The motion to amend failed, 4:3; Ms. Bettman, Mr. Kelly and Ms. Nathanson voting in favor. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to amend the motion by pulling Section 11 pending clarification from the City Attorney. The motion passed unanimously. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to amend the motion by reclassifying Section 14 as a substantial item. The motion failed, 4:3; Ms. Taylor, Ms. Bettman, and Mr. Pap8 voting in favor. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to amend the motion by pulling Section 17(3) pending clarification by the City Attorney. The motion passed unanimously. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. PapS, moved to amend the motion by pulling Section 51(1) pending clarification by the City Attorney. The motion passed, 5:2; Mr. Meisner and Ms. Nathanson voting in opposition. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to pull Section 54 pending clarification by the City Attorney. The motion passed unanimously. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 28, 2002 Page 7 Work Session Mr. Kelly, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, moved to amend the motion by reclassifying Section 20 to a housekeeping item. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Kelly, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, moved to amend the motion by reclassifying Section 35 to a housekeeping item. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Kelly, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, moved to amend the motion by reclassifying Section 43 to a housekeeping item. The motion passed unanimously. In response to a question from Ms. Nathanson regarding the appropriate time to add items for discussion, City Manager Johnson suggested completing the housekeeping items first. Ms. Bettman said she was not in favor of considering new issues before the Citizen Charter Review Committee recommendations had been acted upon. Mayor Torrey stressed that councilors had the right to bring items before the full council and added that the Citizen Charter Review Committee was not the final authority on submitting recommendations. The main motion to approve the staff recommendation for classifications passed unanimously. City Manager Johnson called for a motion to place the remaining items in housekeeping on the May ballot. Mr. Kelly, seconded by Mr. Pap~, moved to place the remaining housekeeping items on the May 2002 ballot. Mr. Pap~ raised concern over submitting charter revisions to the voters piecemeal. Ms. Bettman opined that it would be better to have all the proposed charter amendments on the same ballot. Mr. Rayor commented that housekeeping items could be submitted to the voters as one bundle. He said minor and substantial items could come later. Ms. Taylor was in favor of trying to have all the proposed charter amendments on the May ballot. Mr. Kelly thought that having the housekeeping items on the May ballot would get voters thinking about other charter amendments to be submitted on later ballots. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to amend the motion to delete the words "May 2002" from the motion language. Ms. Bettman said this would put the housekeeping items on an unspecified ballot. The amendment passed, 6:1; Mr. Kelly voting in opposition. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 28, 2002 Page 8 Work Session The main motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 7:50 p.m. (Recorded by Joe Sams) MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 28, 2002 Page 9 Work Session