MINUTES OF THE METRO' S TRANSITION ADVISORY TASK FORCE MEETING

February 27, 2002

Room 370A/B

Members Present:  Jeff Condit (Chair), Gary Blackmer, Larry Hilderbrand, Michael Jordan, Ted Kyle

Members Absent:  Jeff Alden, Rob Drake, Judie Hammerstad, Rick Gustafson, Don McClave, Felicia Trader, Matt Hennessee

Others Present:    Alexis Dow

1.  Jeff Condit convened the Metro Transition Advisory Task Force meeting at 3:06 p.m. and noted the lack of a quorum.

2.  Consideration of the minutes of the February 6, 2002 Metro Transition Advisory Task Force meeting did not occur due to the lack of a quorum.

3.  Review Draft Report to Council.

Chair Condit overviewed the Draft MTATF Transition Report and Recommendations (dated February 25, 2002) and the changes. He noted Peggy Coats recommendation to include a one- page summary of recommendations. The Chair noted changes from the original draft based on committee recommendations. He said that Don McClave had suggested that the Task Force had involved the full Council in too much of the selection of the COO and the Metro Attorney process. Mr. Hilderbrand said he was concerned about this as well. Chair Condit suggested reading through the portion of the report (as included in the meeting record) concerning the discussion of the delegation of administrative authority of the COO. There was some concern that the committee hadn't fully expressed the conversation about the delegation of all administrative authority to the COO. He had included clarifying language. He said this was under subsection B-1, page 5. He had added a section on page 9, E-3 at Mr. Kyle's request to note that they believed that the policy committees should continue to report directly to the Council and staffing should be provided through central staffing.

Larry Hilderbrand asked about the MERC/Metro relationship and the Task Force's responsibility to give guidance to the Council.

Chair Condit said this was not in the scope of work of the Task Force.

Dan Cooper, General Counsel, responded that the way the charter amendment was structured there were four provisions in section 26; the first, was for the creation of the office of the Chief Operating Officer (COO), the second, was the Metro Attorney, the third, was for other offices that might be created that would not be subordinate to the COO, the fourth, was for commissions. The current ordinance that created the MERC Commission was in the Code. It did not need any changing in order to sit as a commission under the new charter structure. There was nothing in the new charter structure that necessitated any change in the MERC ordinance.

Mr. Hilderbrand asked if MERC would be subordinate to the COO?

Mr. Cooper responded no, MERC was a commission that was created by the Council, had its autonomous authority granted to it directly by the Council and was independent of the COO except for the question of how to provide support services and the relationship of the auditor to the Commission. The auditor audited the Commission as well as the rest of Metro.

Mr. Hilderbrand asked if the Council did the budget for MERC?

Mr. Cooper said the Council approved the budget for MERC and had the authority to change the operating authority in the future.

Chair Condit said that was part of the language added at Ted Kyle’s recommendations. They had discussed policy committees' authority. The Task Force felt these committees should report directly to the Council.

Michael Jordan said MERC was not in the charter but a creation by ordinance.

Mr. Cooper said yes, what the charter now had in it was a specific subsection that directly authorized the creation of commissions and provided that commissioners were appointed by the Council President and confirmed by the Council.

Chair Condit said he had experience having worked on the Metro Budget Committee concerning funding of MERC and how much support the agency could provide.

Mr. Hilderbrand summarized that they did not have to make a recommendation on that issue.

Mr. Cooper said it did not seem to be a current topic of discussion at Council.

Mr. Hilderbrand said it surfaced during budget season. MERC always felt that it could provide its central services cheaper and better.

Chair Condit said this had always been the problem. Metro provided its administrative services at cost. He added that he had gotten an email from Judie Hammerstad and a fax from Rob Drake concurring with Condit/Alden draft.

Gary Blackmer suggested revisions as follows: page 1, paragraph 2, adding a sentence about voter approval.

Chair Condit said he actually had had that sentence in the first line but had edited it out. He felt that they should lead in with Measure 26-10.

Mr. Blackmer continued with his recommendations. He noted Larry Hilderbrand's name had been misspelled.

Mr. Hilderbrand said the Oregonian should be The Oregonian.

Mr. Blackmer asked about the use of "relative consensus" on page 6. He asked if this was a legal term?

Chair Condit said he used that phrase advisedly because he thought while they had agreement on the approach there was some relative differences in comfort level. He noted that there had been one descending vote.

Mr. Blackmer felt that there were strong arguments on either side. He spoke to 5-C, "Council should begin recruitment for the COO as soon as possible". He suggested a grammatical change.

Mr. Hilderbrand suggested, if there was to be a change it should be "if so, then the process should…"

Mr. Blackmer referred to Attachment A, Powers and Duties of the Chief Operating Officer and made some technical changes. He clarified, management's role was to prepare the financial statement and the auditor verified whether it was true. It was an attestation of the accuracy of that financial.

Chair Condit asked about whether or not they needed to require a bond for the COO? It was in the standard city manager ordinance.

Mr. Cooper said he did not know the answer to that. He noted differences between that kind of a bond and the cash-handling bond. He explained how the agency handled the cash-handling bond.

Chair Condit said he would leave this in the report.

Mr. Blackmer thought this was based on a national model, he thought they had taken this requirement out following the charter.

Chair Condit said they had taken this requirement out at the City of Lake Oswego.

Mr. Blackmer asked about COO "attending all meetings…and take part in discussion of all matters coming before the Council." He assumed this did not imply that the COO sat at the dais with Council but was called up to discuss issues.

Chair Condit said this was a typical city charter provision. The manager had the opportunity to be recognized by the Chair but they did not participate in the deliberations.

Mr. Blackmer thought the word "all" sounded mandatory.

Chair Condit suggested the word "may" instead of "all".

Mr. Hilderbrand said since the auditor issue was raised, was there a need to restate a requirement to have the COO or the Council responded to an auditor's recommendation?

Mr. Blackmer asked if` that was in the charter now?

Alexis Dow, Metro Auditor, responded, it was not in the charter now but it was part of the auditor's section of the Code.

Chair Condit said he made a blanket recommendation, he had read all of Title 2 to see what was in there. There were a lot of changes that would have to be made. He did not think there was anything necessary to add concerning the auditor.

Ms. Dow said no, she felt the current language covered her authority and responsibilities.

Chair Condit said he would go back and make the changes. Since they could not take a vote on the draft due to the lack of a quorum and since not everyone had seen the final document, he thought he would send it out to the Task Force and asked that everyone attend the March 6, 2002 meeting or email him suggestions. He said the Mr. McClave would be attending on the 6^th and he would like to talk about the parameters of the Council involvement concerning selection of the COO. He thought many committee members felt pretty strongly that the Council needed to be involved.

Mr. Hilderbrand said he would not be here on March 6, 2002.He asked if the report would be presented to the Council on March 7^th.

Chair Condit said the Presiding Officer had asked that the Task Force present on March 7^th. He had suggested putting a place holder on the Council agenda and if the Task Force was finished with their work, they could present at the Council meeting on March 7^th or request a delay.

Mr. Blackmer clarified; the chair wanted additional comments and their vote if they could not be in attendance at the March 6^th meeting.

Chair Condit said he would like Task Force members to weigh in on the report. He thought it was important to represent all Task Force members' perspectives. He did want to have the discussion concerning Council involvement in the COO's selection.

4.  Citizen Communications

There were none.

There being no further business to come before the Metro Transition Advisory Task, Chair Condit adjourned the meeting at 3:31 p.m.

Prepared by,

Chris Billington

Clerk of the Council

Attachments to the Public Record for the Meeting of February 27, 2002

The following have been included as part of the official public record: