HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-1216 Charter Review MIN
Charter Review Committee
December 16, 2004
Regular Meeting Minutes
Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street
I. CALL TO ORDER: Chair John Enders called the Ashland Charter Review Committee
meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. on December 16, 2004 in the Civic Center Council Chambers,
.
1175 E Main Street, Ashland, Oregon
Members Present: Roy Bashaw, Hal Cloer, John Enders, Pam Marsh, Keith Massie, Donald
Montgomery, Michael Riedeman and Carole Wheeldon
Member Absent: Kate Culbertson
Staff Present: Ann Seltzer, Management Analyst, Staff Liaison
Mike Franell, City Attorney
Wheeldon/Riedeman m/s to approve the minutes of the December 2, 2004 as submitted. Motion
passed unanimously.
II. PUBLIC FORUM No one spoke.
III. White Paper Presentations
On behalf of the Charter Review Committee, Enders expressed appreciation for the work of
committee member Roy Bashaw who recently retired from the committee.
There was discussion about bringing all the identified issues forward to the public. The
committee agreed that the issues are proposals and are not final decisions. Wheeldon reminds
the committee that the issues are coming from different sources and that it would be helpful to
include in the background of the white paper how the issue arose.
Enders explained that the white papers are working documents and research papers. They are
meant to provide information to the full committee on the various issues and include pros and
cons on each issue. They do not represent a definitive position of the committee. The white
papers will be distilled and improved over the next few weeks. They will be available for the
public at the public forum on January 20, 2005. The purpose of tonight’s meeting is to give each
committee member an opportunity to comment on each paper to the extent that it is as inclusive
as possible, that it covers all the possible pros and cons on each issue and request additional
research if necessary.
#b Should the city recorder and judge be elected positions? What about compensation?
Enders gave a brief summary of his paper. Wheeldon asked for clarification about the statement
that the “city recorder can investigate citizen complaints regarding the Mayor, Council or City
Administrator and his or her staff, and report freely on the findings.” Wheeldon noted that this
task is not identified as a duty of the city recorder in the charter and requested that the statement
be removed. Enders agreed and will place it in the background.
There was some discussion as to why and how this statement was included. Montgomery noted
that it implies an informal ethics process implying that the recorder has the powers of an ethics
officer. City Attorney Franell was asked to comment. Franell explained that the current mayor
occasionally has asked the recorder to gather information and work directly with citizens who
have complaints about the mayor or council or staff. Montgomery asks what power does this
person have to accomplish this? Franell explained that the recorder has no power or authority to
do anything with that information, it is simply a tool that the Mayor has used for some citizen
complaints. Wheeldon asked Franell to explain the normal route if someone believes there is an
ethics violation. Franell explained a citizen comes forward to the State Standards and Practices
Commission who has the authority to take action. Massie reiterated that the charter does not
give this type of power to the recorder.
It was agreed that this statement be removed from the white paper.
Massie noted that the charter does not require that the judge be a licensed attorney in the State of
Oregon. If the committee does leave the judge position in the charter, the committee should add
language that requires the candidates by licensed to practice law in Oregon.
Riedeman asked that leading statements be removed from the paper. Cloer noted that the model
charter does not include either the judge or the city recorder. He wonders if in the future a
municipal court might be eliminated and cases be heard by the county/justice of the peace.
There was some discussion about salaries for the two positions and questions about the formulas.
Massie expressed concern that the salaries increase at a great rate than department heads. Massie
noted that if the two positions are elected, newly elected persons should not receive the same
salary as the outgoing official but rather start a beginning salary again. Massie asked that the
salary structure be addressed more fully and be included in the background.
#c Should the Parks Commission be elected? Should the powers of the commission change?
What are the issues related to the organization of the parks Department?
MacGraw gave a brief summary of her paper and noted that she did not include all the various
scenarios of how the Parks Commission/Department could be configured.
There was much discussion about the various statements in the paper and the merits of including
information about the creation of a Parks district. Massie believes that the information should
remain in the charter, because it informs the community that there may be an entirely new model
that might be beneficial to the community. Massie asks that an introductory statement precede
the summary to the effect that the committee is looking at the function and role of the
commission and the function of the administration and possible ways to structure these might
include and then list the various scenarios that have been identified.
MacGraw was complimented on her thoroughness. Enders suggested boiling down the paper
and offered to help edit the paper.
#d Should the council be elected by position?
Massie gave a brief summary on the election of council members by wards. There was some
discussion on if this is of importance to the community. Massie will incorporate comments into
the paper and agreed that the committee will learn at the forum if the public is interested in this
issue.
#g Should provisions for the City Band remain in the Charter?
Enders reported on the white paper for the city band for Kate Culbertson and gave a brief
summary.
#h What are the uses related to the Planning Commission?
Riedeman
IV Update from Public Outreach Committee
V. ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
John Enders
Chair
Respectfully Submitted,
Ann Seltzer
Management Analyst