City Council (View All)
Monday, November 05, 2012
MINUTES FOR THE STUDY SESSION
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
Monday, November 5, 2012
Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way
Mayor Stromberg called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room.
Councilor Slattery, Silbiger, Morris, Lemhouse, and Voisin were present.
1. Look Ahead
City Administrator Dave Kanner reviewed items on the Look Ahead.
2. Discussion Regarding Appointment of Council Position #6
City Recorder Barbara Christensen submitted into the record documentation from 2006 when Council replaced Councilor Hardestyís position. She suggested implementing the 10-day process used for elections as a timeframe to place an advertisement in the newspaper. Based on the number of applications received Council would decide whether to conduct interviews at a regular meeting or schedule a special meeting. She recommended applicants submit a letter of interest along with their application.
Council suggested a five-person maximum for final interviews, use the same criteria voters had during an election process, and possibly have a special meeting December 17, 2012 instead of a Study Session.
Ms. Christensen thought a Friday November 16, 2012 deadline would give Council the opportunity to review applications and decide the interview process during the November 19, 2012 Study Session or the November 20, 2012 Council meeting. Council could conduct interviews and make a decision during a special meeting scheduled December 3, 2012.
Council discussed having applicants write responses to specific questions to determine the interview pool.
Mayor Stromberg suggested the following questions:
- What background do you have in municipal government?
- What experience do you have working in decision-making groups?
- What issues do you see facing the City of Ashland in the next two years?
- How much time do you expect to spend as City Councilor?
- What do you know about AFR, the Water Master Plan, the Homeless Day Use Center, the PERs increase, the Gun Club, and the Economic Development Strategy?
Councilor Voisin added:
- What three goals do you want to see the Council address in the next year?
- How do you see yourself relating to citizens who speak to you at Council meetings, email or call you?
Councilor Morris disagreed and thought it was more important to have someone who was intelligent, could set aside ego, deal with outbursts, own their decisions, and remain accountable. He suggested candidates provide examples that demonstrated their ability to work in a group and how they managed stress.
Ms. Christensen noted the only requirements to run for office were being registered to vote and living within city limits.
Council discussed posting questions on the website and initially having 10 random questions that would help determine second interviews.
Ms. Christensen would provide ballots for Council to select individuals for final interviews during the November 19, 2012 or November 20, 2012 meeting. Council would then forward questions they wanted asked during the December 3, 2012 meeting.
Councilor Lemhouse suggested having the final candidates do a presentation instead of a second interview.
Council majority agreed the following questions should go into the advertisement for the position:
- What do you think are the biggest issues facing the city?
- What is your primary motivation for seeking the vacant council seat?
- What community and city activities have you been involved in recently?
- What is the role of the city councilor?
Council decided to review applications during the November 20, 2012 meeting, select the final candidate pool, determine the interview process, and submit additional questions. In order to have the applications in the agenda packet by 5:00 p.m. Thursday November 15, 2012, Council changed the deadline to apply from November 16, 2012 to November 14, 2012.
City Attorney Dave Lohman clarified there were no set rules for voting and Council could determine a process once they knew how many people applied. Ms. Christensen would include voting options in the agenda packet.
3. Discussion Regarding Allowing Meeting Attendance by Electronic Means
City Administrator Dave Kanner explained Oregon law allowed electronic attendance as long as it was pursuant to a charter amendment or an ordinance. City Attorney Dave Lohman further explained under the current absence of any provisions Council had two options, one, to suspend the rules to allow participation by phone. The second pertained to boards and commissions. Currently boards and commissions had the ability to set their own rules regarding electronic participation in a meeting. Council could determine they should have the same or stricter rules than boards and commissions. Currently ORS (Oregon Revised Statutes) did not define meeting participation but Council could establish guidelines. Robertís Rules stated a meeting was determined as all were present. However, a city ordinance trumped Robertís Rules.
Council agreed it should be a rare occurrence, with strict criteria, and was not applicable for every commission. Electronic participation tended to make meetings difficult for both sides. Opposing comments thought there were too many issues and a loss of control associated with electronic attendance. Supporting comments thought it should be allowable, infrequent, and have parameters. It should pertain to circumstances beyond a Councilorís control and emergencies where Council needed a Councilor that was out of town to participate.
Mr. Lohman would draft an ordinance for Council to consider at a future meeting.
4. Discussion of City Policy Regarding Air Force Flyovers (request of Councilor Slattery)
Councilor Slattery explained a citizen was interested in having an Air Force Memorial Day flyover and it was his understanding the City authorized flyovers for the 4th of July celebration only. Council discussed the history of flyovers and directed staff to develop a resolution to allow flyovers in general with processes for approval and notifying the public.
Meeting adjourned at 7:57 p.m.
Assistant to the City Recorder