Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 03/15/99 WS MINUTES Eugene City Council McNutt Room--City Hall March 15, 1999 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Scott Meisner, Pat Fart, David Kelly, Bobby Lee, Nancy Nathanson, Gary Pap~, Gary Rayor, Betty Taylor. I. CALL TO ORDER The adjourned March 10, 1999, Eugene City Council meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m.; His Honor Mayor James D. Torrey presiding. II. PROCESS SESSION: GOALS SETTING Mary Walston, City Manager's Office, referred the council to the meeting packet and asked if there were anything not captured in the draft of the operating agreements. Mr. Kelly noted, as he had in a previous e-mail message to all members of the council, that it was not specifically stated in the operating agreements that council members would respond to public testimony given at public hearings immediately after closing the public hearing. The council asked that the section on public hearings should be clarified using language similar to that under the public forum but deleting the two-minute limit on council members. Ms. Nathanson said council members do not directly question people giving public testimony-- something that is done in other venues, e.g., Planning Commission meetings. She wondered if the council might want to allow itself that flexibility. Mr. Torrey asked the council to clarify its desire regarding time limits for members following public testimony at public hearings. Mr. Kelly recalled that the council's decision from the February work session was that council responses at the end of the public forum period would be limited to two minutes per member but there would be no limit set for comments by the council following a public hearing. Mr. Meisner said Mr. Kelly was correct. He commented that if the Planning Commission, in "the highly ritualistic and legalistic world of land use law," can find a way to clarify public testimony by allowing some interaction, the council should be able to do it if that is its decision. Mr. Farr said the issue for him was the amount of time the council spent in meetings and he preferred that council members needing additional information seek it outside that meeting. He noted the council's ground rule that action not be taken at public hearings, which allowed time for clarification of issues by individual members. Minutes-Eugene City Council March 15, 1999 Page 1 5:30 p.m. Mr. Rayor agreed, saying that the council should have had its questions answered before an issue comes before the public. Ms. Taylor disagreed, saying raising questions would illuminate issues for both the public and the council and if the council exercised self-restraint, it was manageable. Mr. Meisner cautioned against having ex parte contacts, saying he could agree to getting written responses to council questions from a witness later that were made part of the public record. Mr. Lee said he preferred flexibility and appreciated and trusted the mayor's facilitation skills and was sure he could manage the time as needed. Mr. Meisner observed that at least four council members favored the opportunity to pose questions of those providing public testimony to be answered then or later in writing as part of the public record. Self-restraint was urged. He emphasized that asking questions remained an option for council members. For continuity's sake, Mr. Torrey said he favored individual questions from the council immediately following an individual's testimony. Ms. Nathanson agreed but said close attention would need to be paid to the distinction between council question and discussion times. She added that the council queue lights for councilors requesting to speak, on the mayor's control panel are pale orange and could be easily missed. City Manager Jim Johnson acknowledged the problem and said it called for expert facilitation on the Mayor's part. Mr. Torrey encouraged councilors to help him maintain control and help facilitate at meetings. Ms. Walston summarized the discussion: the council wants the opportunity to ask questions of witnesses, either immediately after an individual's testimony or at the end; asking questions is optional; councilors should exercise self-restraint in seeking further information; and the meeting's facilitator carries the burden of managing the meeting. Mr. Kelly added the codification of the council's question and discussion period after the close of the public hearing. There was general consensus to adopt new Section 7, Conduct at Meetings. City Manager Jim Johnson referred the council to the section on Councilor Request for Staff Assistance, saying Jan Bohman had some time available for "generalist" issues that council members might have that required research. He invited council members to contact her directly. Mr. Rayor ascertained that councilors would be advised of any request requiring more than two hours of staff research time by bringing it before the council for direction. Mr. Pap8 arrived at the meeting. The council reviewed new Section 9, Representing City Positions and Personal Positions and adopted it by consensus. Mayor Torrey urged councilors addressing the State Legislature to Minutes--Eugene City Council March 15, 1999 Page 2 5:30 p.m. identify their comments as personal positions and not those held by the council, unless the councilor is there to represent the City's position. Ms. Walston noted two changes to new Section 10, Council Expenses: 1) the word "from" has been substituted for "in" in the last sentence of the first paragraph; and 2) the last paragraph is new. She explained that the new paragraph codifies the practices that the council has adopted related to travel. Mr. Kelly asked that "from" also be substituted for "in" under Local Expenses in the last paragraph of that section. In response to a question from Ms. Nathanson regarding a cap on expenses, Mr. Johnson said that if the annual travel allowance were to be allocated per councillor it would be around $2,400 per councilor, which is about two trips. He said he hesitated officially putting a cap per individual and wished to remain flexible. Some councilors who do not travel as much could be "trading" travel expenses. Addressing a question from Ms. Taylor, Mr. Johnson said the limit was not intended to apply to trips related to service on the National League of Cities. Mr. Meisner noted an inconsistency in the amount reimbursed from petty cash. Ms. Walston will amend the guideline, which reimburses expenses under $50 out of Petty Cash. In response to a question from Mr. Pap~, Mr. Johnson said staff kept track of each councilor's expenditures and those are made available on request. The council adopted new Section 10 by consensus. New Section 11, Ethics Reporting, with no proposed changes, was adopted by consensus. Ms. Walston will correct the typographic error. Ms. Walston indicated minor changes to Section XII, Seating Arrangements. Mr. Kelly pointed out an error, noting that under April, Councilor D was represented twice and Councilor C not at all. The section was adopted by general consensus. Mr. Kelly wondered if the council wanted to codify the unwritten policy of limiting staff presentations to 15 minutes, allowing for some flexibility. Mr. Johnson said a section addressing that would be added. Committees of the Council Mr. Meisner expressed concern that there seemed to be a pattern of council committees increasing in number regularly, occasionally with designated council representation, without consultation or notification to the council. He said the council needed to discuss the five committees established in 1997, although most have informally sunseted. He did not find the language in the ground rules problematic but said the council needed to discuss how they applied to creation and continuity of committees. Mr. Kelly said the council could exercise most control over internal committees and his preference was that the general presumption was not to form internal committees; that most issues, if worthy of discussion, are worthy of discussion in the full council, with the exception of a Minutes--Eugene City Council March 15, 1999 Page 3 5:30 p.m. focused, technical, short-term problem. He suggested drafting a guideline describing the ideal purpose and components of a council committee. Mr. Kelly asked that sunseted committees be removed from rosters. Mr. Meisner clarified that sunseted committees were inactive but the council had not taken official action. Ms. Taylor questioned the need for any council committees, opining that they did not necessarily save the council time since decisions are made by the entire council, where the issues are discussed again. Ms. Nathanson said she was interested in Mr. Kelly's suggestion, but his descriptors were not broad enough for the purposes she had in mind for committees, e.g., conduct research, analyze a broad range of options, and recommend the best. Addressing Ms. Taylor's concern about the final decision resting with the council, she said she trusted the work of committees and of the council's representation on committees and appreciated not having to spend the time in committees herself. She added that the council always had the option of rejecting or modifying a committee's recommendation Mr. Pap8 asked that the council ensure that committees are properly acknowledged and thanked for their work. Mr. Pap8 spoke in support of committees, adding their work should be recognized and acknowledged, and their term not ended before final decisions are made on their products. Mr. Fart agreed that committees were essential to the council's work, calling it an indispensable part of the process. Mr. Meisner clarified that the committee that was sunseted before releasing its product referred to in Mr. PapS's comments was a departmental committee. He said he did not support the council standing committee system established last year but noted that ad hoc committees had been very successful and he believed there was a place for them, provided their charges and expectations were clear and their work outcome-oriented. Mr. Kelly said he agreed with comments made by both Ms. Nathanson and Mr. Meisner that technical committees might be over-limiting, but asked that reports to the council reflect all the work of the committee. He assumed that any ad hoc council committee was created by a council vote, which served as a barrier and limited the amount of committees. In response to a question from Ms. Nathanson, Ms. Walston listed as currently active standing committees of the council: the Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations (CCIGR); Council Committee on Homelessness and Youth (CCHY); and Council Committee on Telecommunications. Ms. Nathanson said the latter committee had not been active for a couple of years. She said her problem with previous standing committees of the council had been in part due to the fact that they were advisory to the City Manager and staff, and the material presented at council meetings was redundant. Ms. Nathanson expressed support for both the CClGR and the CCHY. Mr. Rayor said that the CClGR was a self-fulfilling prophecy because staff submitted bills with its recommendations to that committee to assign to the City's lobbyists. He said he was ambivalent about the committee but wondered if it was the best venue for "watching the City's position." He added that so long as it existed, he wanted to be a part of it. Minutes--Eugene City Council March 15, 1999 Page 4 5:30 p.m. Mr. Meisner said he supported the CClGR but its process was unwieldily for the council. He said he would appreciate getting agendas and minutes from the committee in a timely manner, adding that applied to the City's other boards and commissions. Mr. Meisner said he preferred to assign ad hoc status to the CCHY to allow for review of expectations and charge. Ms. Taylor expressed concern that the council had little control over CClGR actions. Mr. Lee said it came down to the amount of influence the council wished to have versus the time it wished to invest. He believed that committees helped to prioritize issues for the council and so it was a way to create efficiency, allowing for influence on those issues important to the council. Mr. Lee said he liked the current language, which allowed flexibility, and there was no need to change it. Mr. Kelly said the CClGR seemed to be making the best of a bad situation, pointing out that the Legislature in session moves at lightening pace. He echoed Mr. Meisner's request to receive IGR Committee meeting materials earlier. He also agreed that the CCHY should be an ad hoc committee. Mr. Rayor said committees sometimes do work that is time-sensitive and suggested that a section be added calling for expediency for those situations. Mr. Fart agreed that the CClGR should remain a standing committee of the council, and supported ad hoc status for the CCHY. Mr. Pap~ agreed with previous comments. Mr. Meisner said he did not wish to maintain standing committees of the council on Finance, Infrastructure and Planning Services, Citizen Involvement and Organizational Change, and Public Safety. Mr. Torrey suggested terminating all standing committees, except for the CClGR; assigning ad hoc status to the CCHY, with annual review. Mr. Lee, seconded by Mr. Pap~, to defease the five standing committees of the council that were created in September, 1997, in addition to the Council Committee on Telecommunications; change the status of the Committee on Homelessness and Youth to ad hoc and direct staff to recommend a charge to direct its activities through the end of the year. Mr. Lee clarified that this does not preclude council creation of another standing committees of the council in the future. He added his support for the CClGR. Mr. Fart suggested initiating a monthly newsletter that describes the activities of the committees. Mr. Pap~ urged the council to schedule a review the CClGR's charge and structure, preferably after this legislative session. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Minutes--Eugene City Council March 15, 1999 Page 5 5:30 p.m. Ms. Taylor requested full CCIGR packets. Mr. Meisner and Mr. Pap~ will receive agendas for the other boards and commissions. Ms. Nathanson said a related theme was that in reports to the council the full work of a committee, in addition to recommendations, be included. Mr. Kelly asked for clarification on the council committee appointment process, particularly with the appointment of lay members. He asked for the distinction between the two methods: 1) council interviews and appoints; and 2) mayor nominates and council appoints. He explained that the second method seemed a granting of power to the mayor in excess of that in the charter. Mr. Meisner noted that in both cases the council appoints, but he urged revising the application form to provide more information about the applicants. Mr. Farr said there was a safeguard in having the council appoint. He echoed Mr. Meisner's request and asked that the council be provided with the applications of non-successful candidates as part of the regular process. Ms. Nathanson noted that there were at least two different versions of the application forms. She asked that the new version include a question about involvement in other public agency work or committees. Addressing the appointment process, she said the mayor often consults people on appointments. She supported the mayor's role in appointments as he represents the entire city-- his constituency--and some appointments require so much coordination that it makes sense to have a central place where that can happen. She agreed that it was important for the council to receive all that information at the time of the appointment. Mr. Lee wondered if council officers played any role in the nominating process. Mr. Johnson said there was no formal role for the officers of this council, although it had occurred in the past. Ms. Taylor preferred having the council both nominate and appoint. Mr. Kelly said he preferred council nominations because he appreciated the powerful momentum behind a mayor nomination. He expressed a desire to interview all potential candidates, but indicated that some of the process suggestions made in the discussion would make him more comfortable. Addressing a question from Mr. Lee, Mr. Johnson said the five standing advisory committees to the council are: Budget Committee, Citizen Involvement Committee (CIC), Human Rights Commission (HRC), Planning Commission, and Police Commission. Of the five, only the new Police Commission is one for which the mayor nominates and council appoints. The others, except for CIC, are all council interviews, council appoints. For the CIC, the members of the committee nominate and the council appoints. Mr. Kelly ascertained that there were intergovernmental committees to which the mayor also nominated members. Ms. Walston said the Mayor nominated members to all intergovernmental committees; for some committees, the council appoints from the mayor's nominations. Mr. Johnson indicated that supplemental questionnaires will be created for applications to the standing committees to the council which ask about expertise in that particular area. Minutes--Eugene City Council March 15, 1999 Page 6 5:30 p.m. Mr. Meisner said the recruitment notebook included a page identifying the committees that was impossible to use because it was illegible. As an example of why close attention needs to be paid to recruitment, he cited the current recruitment effort for a Planning Commissioner, noting that the seat being vacated was filled by a resident from the Whitaker area and the remaining commissioners are all from the south Eugene area. Mr. Pap~ agreed, saying the council might consider a nominating committee, perhaps involving the ClC. There seemed to be some support for the suggestion. Ms. Nathanson suggested that candidates selected for council interviews for this recruitment be sent supplemental questionnaires to save "precious" interview time. Mr. Meisner said that as the council creates a new committee, it makes a choice about how members are appointed. Ms. Walston expressed appreciation for the council's input and summarized the discussion: 1) the Recruitment Notebooks need improvement; and 2) the applications for the current recruitment will include a supplemental questionnaire for interview candidates. For the public's benefit, she announced that the recruitment period closed on March 31, and applications and further information were available on the City's Web page. Mr. Meisner asked staff to solicit questions from the council, and especially the Planning Commission, for the supplemental questionnaire questions. The council supported the suggestion. Mr. Lee suggested asking for references. Mr. Meisner wondered if other municipalities were asking for them. Mr. Kelly cautioned that the issue of references in the human resources world was a "mine field" currently. Mr. Meisner raised the issue of changing the council's Wednesday work session time to 5:30 p.m. on an experimental basis. He expressed concern that this limited the opportunity for public involvement to the dinner hour. Ms. Taylor shared his concern. Mr. Fart moved, seconded by Mr. Pap~, to change the time of the usual Wednesday work sessions (on the second, third, fourth, and fifth Wednesdays each month) to 5:30-7:30 p.m. on a trial basis, beginning with the work session after the spring break through the next council break. Ms. Nathanson said it seemed that the council is best-served when it makes available to the public the opportunity to watch live broadcasts of work sessions rather than rely on reports from the media about those meetings. She wondered if the library might consider a viewing station for viewing of those meetings missed by the public. She concluded that the proposed time was just as good as the old time with respect to citizen involvement as there is no opportunity for public input during work sessions. Mr. Pap~ said the council might consider moving one of the Wednesday meetings to the Monday the council now takes off. Ms. Taylor pointed out that other community groups schedule their meetings around the council's schedule. She noted that that particular time slot was "family time" in most families with children. Minutes--Eugene City Council March 15, 1999 Page 7 5:30 p.m. She urged the council to move one of the Wednesday work session to the unscheduled Monday evening retain the other Wednesday work sessions, from 11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. Mr. Farr expressed support for the Wednesday evening work sessions, saying it opened up service on the council to a broader group of people as those who held regular daytime jobs find it difficult to get away for two or three hours in the middle of the day. He agreed with Ms. Nathanson that broadcasts of evening council meetings reached more people. Mr. Lee said he would support the motion on a trial basis, adding that his schedule was flexible in that regard. Ms. Taylor moved to amend the motion, by moving two of the Wednesday work sessions to Monday evenings and retaining one at the usual time. The motion died for lack of a second. Ms. Taylor moved, seconded by Mr. Meisner, to amend the motion by moving two of the Wednesday work sessions to Monday evenings and retaining one at the usual time on Wednesday. Mr. Fart pointed out that the council infrequently has only two Monday evening meetings in a month. The motion failed, 2:6; with Ms. Taylor and Mr. Meisner voting in favor. Mr. Pap~ called for the question. The motion to call the question passed unanimously, 8:0. The main motion passed, 6:2; with Ms. Taylor and Mr. Meisner opposed. The motion adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, James R. Johnson City Manager (Recorded by Yolanda Paule) Minutes--Eugene City Council March 15, 1999 Page 8 5:30 p.m.