HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-0303 Charter Review MIN
CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE
MARCH 3, 2005
PAGE 10f5
Charter Review Committee
March 3, 2005
Regular Meeting Minutes
Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street
I. CALL TO ORDER: Committee Chair John Enders called the Ashland Charter Review Committee
meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. on March 3,2005 in the Civic Center Council Chambers.
Members Present:
John Enders, Hal Cloer, Kate Culbertson, Laurie MacGraw, Pam Marsh, Keith
Massie, Donald Montgomery, Michael Riedeman and Carole Wheeldon.
Members Absent:
None
Staff Present:
Mike Franell, City Attorney
April Lucas, Assistant to City Recorder
Carole Wheeldon/Hal Cloer m/s to approve the minutes of February 17, 2005 as submitted. Voice
Vote: All AYES. Motion passed.
II. PUBLIC FORUM
Elizabeth Austin/272 Greenbriar Place/Noted Ashland's rich heritage and the amazing people who live
here. Ms. Austin stated that the City needed a Charter that "aims high and digs deep" and she spoke
against developing a "cookie-cutter Charter". Ms. Austin urged the Committee to revise the Charter
based on community values and asked them to make citizen involvement a top priority.
Art Bullock/791 Glendower/ Asked the Committee to consider adding 4 extra public forums to their
schedule. Mr. Bullock explained that without due public involvement, the Committee would end up with
proposals that lack voter support. Mr. Bullock presented his forum schedule and noted there were a
number of issues that would combine nicely together. Mr. Bullock proposed schedule included:
April ih - City Manager
May 5th - Planning and Parks Dept./Commissioners
June 2nd - Electing City Council
July ih - City Recorder and Municipal Judge
August 4th - Code of Ethics/City Band/Fire & Police.
Mr. Enders stated that the Committee would consider Mr. Bullocks suggestions.
III. GUEST SPEAKER LINDSAY BERRYMAN (GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE)
Lindsay Berryman stated that she was the Mayor of Medford for the past 6 years. Ms. Berryman
explained that the purpose of public service was to provide fair government and effective management.
She explained that when she became Mayor, she implemented a system for evaluating their City
Manager. She also stressed the importance of having a Community Vision, although she suggested that
the Vision Statement not be included in the Charter because values tend to change.
Ms. Berryman stated that a Mayor should only be allowed to vote if there is a tie and noted that some City
Manager's tend to lead through intimidation. Ms. Berryman clarified that the City Council could
determine whether the City Manager has the authority to hire or fire at will, and stated the Council could
require that the Manager have a valid case for terminating a City employee.
CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE
MARCH 3, 2005
PAGE 2 of5
Ms. Berryman clarified that to establish their City Manager evaluation process, the City of Medford hired
a consultant, formed focus groups and adopted an ordinance. She added that it was difficult to develop
their strategic plan and integrate it with the City's budget.
Ms. Berryman voiced her support for the Mayor having a strong role in the appointments to Committees
and Commissions. She added that the Mayor is the person responsible for establishing the tone and
direction of the City and therefore should have a hand in selecting the persons who will carry out that
VISIOn.
GUEST SPEAKER BURKE RAYMOND (GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE)
Burke Raymond stated that the primary purpose of local government was to provide services and that
which services to provide was a policy decision that should be made by the elected officials of the
community. Mr. Raymond noted the difference between effectiveness and efficiency and stressed that
services needed to be delivered in an effective manner. He stated that in his opinion, a City Manager is
the best person to manage the effectiveness of the delivery of services.
Mr. Raymond explained the four primary types of local government:
1) Weak Mayor/Strong Council
Mr. Raymond explained that this was the first type of government used and stated that it still exists today
in some communities. In this form of government the Council operates through committees and as a
result, there is very low accountability.
2) Strong Mayor/Weak Council
Mr. Raymond explained that this type of government is used in some of the larger cities and is growing in
popularity because citizens feels there is more political responsiveness. In this form, the Mayor appoints
everyone from the department heads to the committee members. All of the personnel report to the Mayor
and the Mayor then reports to the Council. The primary functions of the Council are to approve the
budget and deal with land use issues. Accountability is high in this form, because everyone knows that
the Mayor is running the organization, however there is no assurance that the elected Mayor will know
how to do the job.
3) Commission
Mr. Raymond noted that Portland, Oregon uses this form of government, although they are one of the few
large cities who use it. In this form, the Mayor allocates the various city departments to each of the
councilors and the councilors then run that department. Accountability in this form is high, however there
are often problems of "log rolling" at the council table.
4) CouncillManager
In this form of government, the Council appoints a qualified professional to perform the day to day
operations. The City Manager does not pick the services that the city offers, but is responsible for
ensuring that the services are carried out as outlined by the Council. If the City Manager does not
perform, they can be fired by the City Council. Mr. Raymond noted that the average tenure for a City
Manager is 6-7 years.
Mr. Raymond stated that in his experience, the hiring of department heads was always the City Manager's
responsibility, however when he was City Manager he would ask the City Council to sit in during the
final stages of the interview process.
Mr. Raymond expressed his support for the Council/Manager form of government and clarified that in
this form it is important for the Council and City Manager to work together. He explained that individual
CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE
MARCH 3, 2005
PAGE 3 of5
councilors should not go directly to the department heads if they have an issue, but should work through
the City Manager, and likewise the City Manager needed to deal with the Council as a whole. He also
commented that in this form of government, the City Manager works for the Council, not the other way
around.
Mr. Raymond stated that the judicial system should be kept separate and felt that the municipal judge
should remain an elected position. However he does not support electing the City Recorder or department
heads, stating that elected persons do not have to be loyal to the organization, only the voters who elected
them.
In terms of Council compensation, Mr. Raymond agreed that there should be a modest compensation, but
noted that in his experience money was not a factor for persons running for office, instead their key
motivation was wanting to give back to their community.
IV. PUBLIC INFORMA nON
Review Proposed Timeline / Discuss Additional Proposed Meetings
Ms. Wheeldon clarified that the Committee had previously agreed that 7-9:30 p.m. was the preferred time
to meet.
Mr. Enders stated that now was the appropriate time for the Committee to remove any of the new issues
from discussion.
Keith Massie stated that the Periodic Charter Review and the PayIHealth Benefits for Council/Mayor
could be potential Charter material. He also suggested that the City Band remain in the Charter and that it
be removed from further consideration.
Michael Riedeman agreed that the Committee should discuss the Periodic Charter Review and PayIHealth
Benefits and suggested that the Committee also discuss Instant Run-Off Elections, Voting for the Top
Three Vote Getters, Mixed Wards and discuss adding a Preamble to the Charter.
It was noted that the Committee had previously reached a consensus to remove the Fire/Police,
Annexation, and Term Limit issues from their list of discussion items.
Suggestion was made to take a majority vote on whether to remove new items from discussion.
Comment was made that the Committee needed to start paring down their list, not adding to it.
Some opposition was voiced regarding taking a vote at this point in the process.
Periodic Charter Review
Comment was made that there is no need to schedule a review, if there is enough dissatisfaction the
citizens will request that the Charter be changed. Opposing comment was made that if the Charter was
reviewed every so often, it would not require the formation of a committee and would not be such a time
consumlllg process.
Keith Massie left the meeting at 8: 45 p. m.
Carole Wheeldon/Laurie MacGraw m/s to include the Periodic Charter Revision to the list of
discussion topics. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion passed.
Pay Compensation for Mayor/Council
CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE
MARCH 3, 2005
PAGE 4 of5
City Attorney Mike Franell noted that it is common to have a mechanism for establishing pay in the City
Charter. He noted that there is currently a mechanism for compensation in Ashland's current Charter;
Article 3, Section 3, and noted that the current Charter requires that any salary change other than the City
Recorder's be subject to a vote by the people.
The Committee noted that the Council compensation had remained the same since 1974, which is $300 a
year plus health benefits. Mr. Franell noted that the provision for health benefits was not in the Charter,
but was adopted through an Ordinance.
Suggestion was made that the compensation not be included in the Charter and this issue would be best
addressed through an Ordinance.
Carole Wheeldon/Laurie MacGraw m/s include the issue of Council compensation to the list of
discussion topics. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion passed.
Instant Run-Off Elections, Top Three Vote Getters, Mixed Wards
Mr. Franell stated that instant run-off elections were not necessary in Ashland because we do not require a
majority vote.
Carole Wheeldon / Pam Marsh m/s to have all three election issues included on the list of discussion
topics and that they be discussed as one issue. DISCUSSION: Comment was made that there has
been no indication that there is a problem with the City's current election process. Other Committee
members disagreed. It was noted that several citizens at the public forum asked that this issue be
addressed.
Carole Wheeldon/Pam Marsh m/s to amend this issue to address only how council members are
elected. Voice Vote: Pam Marsh, Donald Montgomery, Michael Riedeman, Carole Wheeldon, Kate
Culbertson, YES. John Enders, Hal Cloer and Laurie MacGraw, NO. Motion passed 5-3.
Preamble value statement
Michael Riedeman motion to include a community value statement or preamble in the Charter.
Motion dies due to lack of a second.
Comment was made that values change over time and the appropriateness of including them in the
Charter was questioned. Suggestion was made to indicate in the Charter that the elected officials are the
ones responsible for the long term visioning.
Carole Wheeldon suggested that they use the last sentence of the Community Values statement as their
preamble. Ms. Wheeldon read the sentence aloud and the Committee agreed that this would make a nice
preamble and agreed to leave this on the table and see if they have citizen approval.
Timeline
It was noted that several Committee members would not be able to attend the March 1 ih meeting.
Suggestion was made for the Committee to work through subcommittees through the month of March to
develop the discussion templates.
The Committee discussed who would work on each template issue with the Public Outreach
Subcommittee and agreed that Don Montgomery and Hal Cloer would work on the Government Structure
topic, John Enders would work on the City Recorder and Municipal Judge topic, Keith Massie would
work on the Periodic Charter Review topic, and Michael Riedeman would work on the PayIHealth
Benefits and Council Election topics.
CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE
MARCH 3, 2005
PAGE 5 of5
The Committee discussed when they would be able to meet with the Public Outreach Committee. Ms.
Wheeldon stated she would put together a schedule and email it to the Committee.
Carole Wheeldon/Michael Riedeman m/s to cancel the meeting on March 17th. DISCUSSION: It
was noted that there would not be a quorum at the March 1 ih meeting. Voice Vote: All YES. Motion
passed.
Kate Culbertson submitted information on the City Band.
The Committee discussed if they should move ahead with the additionally scheduled meetings. Although
a few Committee members stated that they would not be able to attend the additional meetings, there was
a consensus that the Committee did not want to extend their timeline.
Carole Wheeldon/Hal Cloer m/s to adopt the new meeting timeline. Voice Vote: Hal Cloer, Kate
Culbertson, Laurie MacGraw, Pam Marsh, Donald Montgomery, John Enders and Carole
Wheeldon, YES. Michael Riedeman, NO. Motion passed 7-1.
V. OTHER ITEMS FROM COMMITTEE MEMBERS
VI. ADJOURNED: Meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
April Lucas, Assistant to City Recorder