By KENNETH LIPP/YachatsNews
YACHATS — In what the mayor described as a “power grab,” a split city council voted Thursday to take away the Parks and Commons Commission’s oversight of the Yachats Commons and Little Log Church Museum.
The issue was teed up last June when council voted unanimously to “pause” the commission’s oversight of those two key city facilities. But since then two former commission members were elected to the council — Craig Berdie as mayor and Catherine Whitten-Carey as a councilor.
The commission had spent the two previous years planning several projects that stalled when they reached city hall, with new city manager Heide Lambert playing catch up after an extended period with no full time manager, little office staff, two Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries investigations and other issues.
Council approved the pause last year at Lambert’s request and on the motion of councilor Ann Stott, who said at the time she thought the commission’s responsibilities were too broad and their demands had become a drain on the new city manager.
Recent communications from commission members show they’re eager for some resolution regarding their duties.
In a March 28 email to Lambert and councilors, commission chair Adam Alston noted that among goals recently submitted by the commission was “what I hope would be an easy one — get clarity on our commission’s charter, especially regarding the Commons.” The email prompted Berdie, a former Parks and Commons Commission chair who defeated Stott in November’s mayoral election, to add an item to Thursday’s council agenda.
During public comment at the beginning of the meeting, Parks and Commons member Dean Shrock extolled Yachats’ tradition of volunteerism and urged the council to allow its volunteers to help move projects forward, specifically mentioning the planned boardwalk overlooking the Yachats River, pocket parks along Ocean View Drive and improving the green space to the west of city hall.
Lambert suggested that Shrock’s comments could supplant the agenda item, but Berdie insisted it should still occur.
The mayor said he wanted all parties involved — council members and others who believe the commission is overstepping its charge and commission members who believe they have a role in seeing projects through — to submit written proposals for what its duties should be.
Lambert said the commission has repeatedly crossed the line into “project management” — it has been performing administrative duties, including overseeing facilities, rather than just making policy recommendations to council as required by the city charter.
The commission’s submitted goals do include some details and general timelines for ongoing and planned projects. Members want to “continue helping plan and coordinate the (boardwalk)” and complete the two pocket parks with plants currently in storage at a state facility near Beaver Creek. If allowed continued oversight of the Commons, the commission wants to continue planning enhancement of its north entrance.
Councilor Greg Scott agreed with the city manager. He, Lambert and Berdie debated the policy-versus-administrative role of the commission at some length until Stott interjected.
“Why are we still talking about this?” she asked. She moved that council remove the Commons and the Log Church Museum from the commission’s purview.
“I will say that that is a power grab,” Berdie said.
The council’s attitude and vote on oversight of the Commons contrasts with its handling of the city’s Library Commission, which has spent the past 18 months working directly with two consultants and a design/build firm to remodel the library on West Seventh Street. Work is expected to start as soon as August for a 1,200-square-foot addition and remodeled interior that is expected to cost more than $1 million. In February the council voted unanimously to allocate an additional $265,000 to the project — with the rest coming from earlier city allocations, two large bequests and potentially a grant from the Ford Family Foundation.
Tom Lauritzen, a financial consultant for the city and member of the Finance Committee, said that committee had recently applied a successful model for defining its duties via an ordinance. That approach seemed agreeable to most council members, but Stott’s motion remained on the floor.
Councilor Mary Ellen O’Shaughnessy joined Scott and Stott in voting yes. O’Shaughnessy earlier noted she was uncomfortable with the idea.
Whitten-Carey, who had frequent difficulty connecting via Zoom throughout the meeting, delivered an adamant vote against the motion. Berdie joined her in voting “no,” saying he believed the action would upset a lot of people.
- Kenneth Lipp is YachatsNews’ full-time reporter and can be reached at KenLipp@YachatsNews.com
This group spends far more time fighting about who is going to be in charge of projects than it does actually getting projects done. It behaves more like an HOA than a city council.
Does the city manager have a job description? Can the residents see it?
Hmmm, normally, when another team in your organization rolls up their sleeves to pitch in and help we call it teamwork.
The P&C Commission is accountable to the City Council. And leaders know how to support their teams and help them get back on track if they lose direction.
So why not lead versus whatever this was.
Basically.
https://www.yachatsoregon.org/211/City-Manager#:~:text=Hiring%20and%20managing%20City%20employees,departments%20to%20assure%20utmost%20efficiency
Sigh.
Here we go again. Another council, another mayor … la de dah. Sidewalks and Dollar Generals and no tables outside. Oh my, things were so much more laid back 10 years ago.
What does the city manager’s job description have to do with commission operations and procedures? Why is this a “power grab”? On what basis did the mayor feel like he needed to use that term? I could have it wrong, but I recommend folks review City of Yachats Administrative Policy No. 18 (Commission Operations & Procedures), which seems to be the issue and start there if they feel like changes are needed (https://yachatsoregon.org/DocumentCenter/View/210/Administrative-Policy-18—Commission-Procedures-PDF).
Having listened to the Council Meeting, I’m very concerned with how the City Manager has acted and the Councilor’s who enable her. The way she spoke about the Parks and (formerly) Commons Commission, a group of community volunteers, was disrespectful, inappropriate and unprofessional.
I think it’s legitimate to have a discussion regarding the scope of a commission’s responsibilities and I think many people would agree that it’s not practical to have a commission responsible for facilities oversight. But there was no nuance amongst the City Council discussion or debate. It also seems premature to strip Parks and Commons of the Commons responsibility when there is still no full or even part time city staff member in place to maintain, manage or promote the Commons.
I’d also challenge those Council members who argue so vociferously about Commissions butting into administrative matters to take a step back and ask why that may be? Why would a group of retired volunteers expend their time and energy doing work that has been interpreted as city staff job when it would be far easier to just kick their feet up and read a book instead? It’s certainly not because they want to fulfill their lifelong unrealized fantasy of playing City Manager or Project Manager for a day and it’s certainly not because they’re trying to get their name on a Boardwalk plank.
It seems that some members of the Council either fail, or refuse, to recognize that the reason some Commissions may be overstepping their bounds is because there is a deep lack of trust between portions of the community and City leadership. Many people in the community are deeply invested and they want to see progress being made on projects that they care about. The City Manager has often resisted calls for greater transparency, and in the absence of an open dialogue, it’s not unreasonable to question whether the City is really making a good faith effort to advance these important projects or if the City Manager has unilaterally decided that they are not a priority.