HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 04/26/2022 - BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS RECRUITMENT REVIEWDATE:
STAFF:
April 26, 2022
Anissa Hollingshead, City Clerk
Tammi Pusheck, Privacy & Records Mgr.
Sylvia Tatman-Burruss, Sr. Project Manager
WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Boards and Commissions Recruitment Review.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to explore opportunities to improve the recruitment process for Boards &
Commissions and seek feedback from Council on priorities for next steps.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Do Councilmembers have feedback on formalizing standard recruitment processes and other process
improvements related to appointed Boards and Commissions?
2. Are there additional structural or other shifts building on the work done since 2019 to reimagine Boards and
Commissions Councilmembers would like to explore?
3. How would Councilmembers like to be engaged in ongoing work around appointed Boards and
Commissions?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
HISTORY
Boards and commissions are intended to provide a pathway for formally engaging residents and community
members in a range of issues of importance to the City organization and the community. There is a unique
connection between Council and these entities, as members are appointed directly by the Council and one or
more Councilmembers are assigned as liaisons to each board or commission. The City Clerk’s Office provides
support for the appointed boards and commissions program, includ ing coordination of the recruiting and
appointment process as well as the general structure of how boards and commissions operate.
In total, there are 24 boards and commissions that perform a range of specific functions from advising to decision
making. Over 200 residents share their valuable time and expertise through board membership. Approximately
45 staff members spend time directly supporting them in various ways. The 24 appointed Boards & Commissions
include:
• 6 quasi-judicial commissions using forma l procedures to objectively determine facts, interpret law, and draw
conclusions to provide the basis of their actions which are subject to appeal to Council or the courts.
• 4 advisory type 2 boards serving an advisory function to Council and staff and also have authority to make
decisions on certain matters specified in City Code to serve as formal recommendations to Council or staff.
• 14 advisory type 1 boards that make recommendations to Council and staff on areas of particular knowledge
or expertise.
Ensuring effective operations of appointed Boards & Commissions is an ongoing and iterative process. One value
consistently expressed by Council is the importance of hearing from voices representative of all of Fort Collins
through boards and commissions. More recent efforts to support this value started with efforts to quantify the
current make up of appointees to boards and commissions. In 2017, the City’s Equity Team researched and
April 26, 2022 Page 2
created a Public Participation Report that included a survey and analysis of existing board member
demographics, as well as recommendations to remove barriers and increase diverse participation.
Link to report:
<https://www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/files/publicparticipationreport-final.pdf?1557934233>
REIMAGINE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
On July 2, 2019, Council adopted a priority to Reimagine Boards and Commissions, outlined as:
Better structure the board and commission system to set up success into the future, align with Outcome
Areas and allow for integrated perspectives. Explore models that allow for greater use of ad hoc
meetings, diverse stakeholders, and additional community participation.
Following adoption of this Council priority, staff has had extensive communication with current and former board
members on what works and what could be improved. This included engaging 79 board membe rs with a
Reimagine Boards and Commissions questionnaire and convening 55 board members at the Boards and
Commissions Super Issues Meeting in February of 2020 to discuss this Council Priority in small, facilitated
groups.
Momentum in the Reimagine process slowed as the pandemic set in. Significant shifts did move forward in April
of 2021 making changes to the Code provisions governing appointed boards and commissions. Ordinance No.
049, 2021 included updated provisions addressing:
• Allowing boards and commissions to meet remotely.
• Clarifying naming structure to make quasi-judicial bodies all commissions, and other appointed bodies
boards.
• Encouraging collaboration through joint meetings of different boards.
• Adding new and varied term lengths, to allow a shorter-term commitment by appointees.
• Staggering terms manually as a reset to ensure different end dates for appointed members.
• Updating attendance policy for appointees.
• Shifting the residency requirement to eliminate the requirement to reside within the Urban Growth Area for at
least a year prior to appointment.
2021 ANNUAL RECRUITMENT PILOT
In late 2021, staff engaged Council in a conversation regarding the recruitment proce ss for Boards &
Commissions. Councilmembers expressed interest in treating the annual recruitment in 2021 as a pilot to allow
revisiting the workability of different elements of the process before finalizing any ongoing shifts. With plans to
return to Council this spring following that process, filling any remaining or new vacancies has been paused since
the beginning of the year to allow this opportunity for Council input on an updated process for handling vacancies
outside of the annual process and on the recruitment process generally based on the pilot approach.
The following points are listed as a reminder of the way the pilot recruitment process was structured based on
Councilmember comments at the November 9, 2021, work session:
• Who will participate in interviews and how will that be determined?
o Council Liaison and a randomly selected Councilmember (preferred alphabetical method of
randomizing when appropriate and schedules allow) conducted interviews. For quasi -judicial
commissions, the Mayor was also added to all interviews as a participant where possible.
April 26, 2022 Page 3
• Will all candidates be interviewed?
o A limit of 10 candidates to be interviewed was be set, with the Council Liaison was identified as
the person responsible for vetting applications.
• Will back-up selections be identified?
o If applicable, back-up selections were noted, but only where the interviewers considered
appropriate.
• How long are back-up selections kept and will they be maintained when one or more of the interview team
has left Council?
o Back-ups will only be recognized as back -ups until the time of annual recruitment at which time
they will need to reapply.
• Should there be a different interview process for Quasi -judicial Commissions?
o Yes. The process the Mayor, Council Liaison, and a randomly selected Councilmember did these
interviews in a public meeting that was posted in advance.
• What actions will prompt a separate recruitment after the Annual Recruitment/Appointment process has taken
place in the final quarter of each year?
o If a board does not meet quorum requirements a separate recruitment would be initiated outside
the annual recruitment period.
Some lessons staff learned related to the pilot:
WHAT WORKED:
• 15-minute interviews for each applicant with members of Council helps applicant s to feel heard and valued.
• One recruitment per year helps to concentrate staff efforts and focus community outreach for Board &
Commission vacancies.
• Having Council liaisons for each Board & Commission helps to increase visibility of the body’s work to al ign
with Council priorities.
RECRUITMENT PROCESS CHALLENGES
• With only one recruitment per year, vacancies often remain for long periods of time, sometimes resulting in an
inability to meet quorum, currently defined in the Boards and Commissions Manual as c onsisting of the
majority of the total number of members specified by the City Code to comprise the board or commission.
(This quorum requirement does not change when a position on the board or commission is vacant).
• Even with a robust annual appointment process, all open seats were not able to be filled. A summary of the
number of vacancies in 2021 by body, applications received, appointments made, and current vacancies is
attached to these materials. (Attachment 1)
• “Special Recruitments” to fill vacancies have not followed a defined process and may therefore lead to
inconsistent and limited outreach.
• Recruitment timing results in a crunch during the holiday season in December when staff, community
members and Council members are unavailable.
• Specific to 2021, the position in the Clerk’s Office focused on Boards and Commissions became vacant mid -
year. Also vacant for much of the same time period was the City Clerk role, leaving the Interim City Clerk
April 26, 2022 Page 4
responsible for multiple roles including managing the recruitment process and the implementation of the
adopted Reimagine provisions.
ROLE OF COUNCIL LIAISONS
Each board or commission has a Councilmember appointed as a liaison. The role of these liaisons was originally
defined via Resolution 1988-78. In 2000, Council updated this area through the passage of Resolution 2000 -76,
and then again in 2016 via Resolution 2016-039. (Attachment 2) The Resolution defines the role
Councilmembers play in recruitment, communication, and board operations. Any updates desired t o this scope
can be made via a new resolution.
POTENTIAL CHANGES
1) Should the recruitment and appointment schedule be changed?
The current recruitment and appointment process for Boards & Commissions often runs into the December
holiday season, which is not ideal for Council, staff, or candidates. There are also potential issues with
elections and Council members beginning their terms shortly after potential appointments. Therefore, staff
can explore moving the recruitment and appointment schedule.
Recruitment Cycle Options
• Continue with annual recruitment process and consider timing changes, such as pushing the time for
interviews and appointments from November/December.
• Continue with annual recruitment and add ad hoc “special” recruitments as needed.
• Create a biannual or quarterly recruitment system.
Potential Benefits:
o Avoid the holiday season when many people are out of town or unavailable.
o May match up better with Council election timing, allowing appointees to carry out their Boards &
Commissions terms with Councilmembers who appointed them (although consideration needs to be
given to potential election timing change.)
Potential Drawbacks:
o Would be a change to the current system and would require changes to term dates for Boards &
Commissions that line up with the current timing.
o Would require staff resources to undertake the change and assess impacts to Boards &
Commissions, staff, and Councilmembers.
April 26, 2022 Page 5
2) Should staff formalize an off-cycle recruitment process?
Some Boards & Commissions are experiencing vac ancies that have not allowed them to meet the current
“quorum” definition to conduct their meetings. This has resulted in staff liaisons and others requesting
recruitment processes outside of the annual process. Currently, there is no formal process for th ese ad hoc
recruitment cycles. Therefore, outreach is limited and may not be in line with comprehensive outreach goals.
Potential Benefits:
o A formal, step-by-step process would offer clarity as to when and how to conduct off-cycle recruitments.
o May allow staff to plan for outreach strategies depending on the type of Board or Commission and time of
year.
o May allow for better communication and planning between staff and Council liaisons.
Potential Drawbacks:
o Will require staff time to create a formal off-cycle process.
o May need to prioritize different vacancy thresholds depending on the decision-making or advisory
authority of a given Board or Commission to limit number of off-cycle processes.
o May still result in low numbers of applicants for vacancies.
3) Should the interview and appointment process be revised?
During the last annual recruitment, applications for regular Boards and Commissions were reviewed by the
Council liaison, as well as a randomly selected (by the Clerk’s Office) Councilmember. For quasi -judicial
commissions, the applications were reviewed by the Council liaison, a randomly selected Councilmember,
and the Mayor. After review of all applications, interviews were set-up and completed by the same team of
Councilmembers that reviewed the applications. Interviews were scheduled at 15-minute intervals. The quasi-
judicial commissions were considered a public meeting and as such required additional preparations for
appropriate notice. Upon completion of interviews, Councilmembers made their final rec ommendation to the
Clerk’s Office to prepare for presentation to the full Council for approval.
Potential Changes:
o Treat quasi-judicial commissions the same as all other boards and commissions and not require the
Mayor to participate. This would eliminate the need for noticing each interview and reduce demands on
Councilmembers’ time.
o Consider creation of a Council Committee for Boards & Commissions that would act as the subject matter
experts for all things concerning recruitment, interviewing, and appo inting, including potentially reviewing
applications and making process recommendations.
Potential Benefits:
o Allows a smaller number of Councilmembers to winnow the applicant pool and bring forward potentially a
smaller number of applicants. The result would be less of a time commitment for the members of Council
that are not part of the Council Committee.
4) Should the definition of “quorum” for boards and commissions be updated?
Quorum is currently defined in the Boards and Commissions manual and can le ad to the inability of a Board
or Commission to formally meet and discuss business. For some Boards & Commissions, there have been
fewer applicants than positions available making it difficult to meet quorum if there are any absences at
meetings.
April 26, 2022 Page 6
Potential Benefits:
o If the requirement for quorum were to be redefined for some Boards & Commissions to require fewer
members to be present, meetings could move forward even with a limited number of absences or
vacancies.
o Lowering the quorum requirement for some Boards & Commissions could lessen the pressure to fill
vacancies and allow Boards & Commissions to meet and conduct business more easily.
Potential Drawbacks:
o Reducing the requirement for quorum for some Boards & Commissions may reduce the number of voices
at the table for discussion.
o Reducing the requirement for quorum does not necessarily address reasons behind a small applicant
pool or potential low attendance at Board & Commission meetings.
5) Should there be exploration of reducing the number of Boards & Co mmissions or changing the
number of seats on some boards or commissions?
The goal of reducing the number of bodies was outlined in the original “Reimagining Boards & Commissions”
effort but was not implemented. There are several Boards & Commissions where members may benefit from
changes to better align with their intended community benefit.
Most boards and commissions currently have either seven or nine members. Of the 14 Type 1 Advisory
Boards, two currently have seven members, while 11 have nine members and the Youth Advisory Board has
a variable number of members. Three of four Type 2 Advisory Boards have seven members, with just one
body at nine members, while the quasi-judicial commissions are split evenly between those with seven and
those with nine members.
Potential Changes:
o Explore possibility of combining some Boards, especially those who may be better served with aligned
goals and intentions.
o Explore ways to improve clarity and benefits resulting from Board membership.
o Explore alignment of Boards & Commissions with Strategic Outcome Areas (this was outlined in the
original priority to reimagine Boards & Commissions on July 2, 2019.)
o Consider if some current boards have reached their natural end of life.
o Consider changing all Type 1 advisory boards to seven seats.
Potential Benefits:
o Some Boards & Commissions may benefit from renewed purpose in assessment and engagement.
o If some Boards & Commissions could be combined, there could be greater efficacy and renewed strength
of purpose.
Potential Drawbacks:
o Existing members may feel as if their current contribution does not matter if they are told that they must
be combined with another Board.
o Underlying issues of a given Board may persist even if Boards are combined.
o Workloads of Boards may increase, or members may feel they are misaligned if the process of combining
them is not done with care and intention.
April 26, 2022 Page 7
POTENTIAL NEXT STEPS
With input from Council on which areas Council would value further focused attention, staff is prepared to take
next steps in shifts to boards and commissions. At this time, the primary position focused on boards and
commissions in the Clerk’s Office remains vacant. During the time of vacancy, the position has been analyzed to
make some adjustments to its focus to include more capacity for outreach and engagement in the recruitment
process. In the interim, the City Clerk and the Privacy and Records Manager who served as the interim Clerk
previously are working together to manage ongoing processes around this program of work as wel l coordinating
any further evolutions.
Possible next steps to identify a path forward for further shifts the Council may wish to consider recommending
include:
• Create ad hoc Council Committee to guide potential changes to Boards & Commissions, to allow for an
intentional process with ongoing Council involvement and input without burdening the full Council throughout
each step.
• Staff can also explore specific changes and improvements with Council’s guidance at this time to bring back
for full Council consideration and action.
• If Council desires to make changes to the parameters for Council liaisons to boards and commissions, staff
can prepare and bring back a new resolution reflecting those changes.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Recruitment Summary (PDF)
2. Resolution 2016-039 (PDF)
3. Powerpoint Presentation (PDF)
List of Boards Commissions with 2021 Appointment Process Information
Board Name Board
Acronym Type of Board Number
of seats*
Number of seats
needing to be
filled at annual
recruitment 2021
Number of
Applications
Received
How many
Appointments
were made
Current
Vacant
Seats
Notes
Building Review Commission BRC Quasi-judicial 7 3 1 1 2
Historic Preservation Commission
HPC Quasi-judicial 9 4 2 2 2
Anticipating 1-2
upcoming resignations
Human Relations Commission HRC Quasi-judicial 9 6 5 4 2 Some of the applicants
that applied to this
board also applied to
several other boards.
Some were appointed
to other boards.
Land Use Review Commission LURC Quasi-judicial 7 2 0 0 2
Planning and Zoning Commission
PZC Quasi-judicial 7 2 6 2 0
Water Commission WC Quasi-judicial 9 2 4 2 0
Affordable Housing Board AHB Type 1 7 5 11 5 0
Air Quality Advisory Board AQAB Type 1 9 6 4 4 2
Arts in Public Places Board APP Type 2 7 4 5 3 1 Some of the applicants
that applied to this
board also applied to
several other boards.
Some were appointed
to other boards.
Citizen Review Board CiRB Type 2 7 3 6 3 0
ATTACHMENT 1
List of Boards Commissions with 2021 Appointment Process Information
Board Name Board
Acronym Type of Board Number
of seats*
Number of seats
needing to be
filled at annual
recruitment 2021
Number of
Applications
Received
How many
Appointments
were made
Current
Vacant
Seats
Notes
Cultural Resources Board CuRB Type 2 7 3 5 3 1 One of the newly
appointed applicants
declined appointment
because he was moving.
Disability Advisory Board DAB Type 1 9 4 4 4 0
Economic Advisory Board EAB Type 1 9 6 7 6 0 Some of the applicants
that applied to this
board also applied to
several other boards.
Some were appointed
to other boards.
Energy Board EB Type 1 9 5 12 5 0
Golf Board GB Type 1 7 4 4 4 0
Housing Services and Housing
Funding Board
HSHFB Type 2 9 5 4 3 2 Some of the applicants
that applied to this
board also applied to
several other boards.
Some were appointed
to other boards.
List of Boards Commissions with 2021 Appointment Process Information
Board Name Board
Acronym Type of Board Number
of seats*
Number of seats
needing to be
filled at annual
recruitment 2021
Number of
Applications
Received
How many
Appointments
were made
Current
Vacant
Seats
Notes
Natural Resources Advisory Board NRAB Type 1 9 5 4 3 2 Some of the applicants
that applied to this
board also applied to
several other boards.
Some were appointed
to other boards.
Land Conservation Stewardship
Board
LCSB Type 1 9 4 6 4 0
Parking Advisory Board PAB Type 1 9 6 2 2 5
Parks and Recreation Board PRB Type 1 9 5 3 3 5
Senior Advisory Board SAB Type 1 9 4 4 3 1 Some of the applicants
that applied to this
board also applied to
several other boards.
Some were appointed
to other boards.
Transportation Board TB Type 1 9 3 2 1 2 Some of the applicants
that applied to this
board also applied to
several other boards.
Some were appointed
to other boards.
List of Boards Commissions with 2021 Appointment Process Information
Board Name Board
Acronym Type of Board Number
of seats*
Number of seats
needing to be
filled at annual
recruitment 2021
Number of
Applications
Received
How many
Appointments
were made
Current
Vacant
Seats
Notes
Women's Advisory Board WAB Type 1 9 6 3 8 Several board members
resigned shortly after
annual recruitment
Youth Advisory Board YAB Type 1 5-9 1 0
Quasi-
judicial
Type 1
Type 2 In addition to serving an advisory funciton to the City Council and City staff, type 2 advisory
boards also have as part of their assigned functions the authority to make decisions on
certain matters specified in the City Code, which then serve as formal recommendations to
City Council or City staff for their consideration and adoption.
Type 1 Advisory boards make recommendations to the City Council and City staff on areas of
particular knowledge or expertise. Recommendations made by advisory boards are formal
opinions to the City Council on items and subjects that are on the boards' approved
workplans. These recommendations are limited to advisement and are not decisive actions.
Quasi-judicial commissions are non-judicial bodies that use formal procedures to objectively
determine facts, interpret the law, and draw conclusions to provide the basis of an official
action. Decisions of quasi-judicial commissions are subject to appeal to the City Council or
the courts.
*Quorum is defined in the existing Boards & Commissions Manual as a majority of the total
number of members specified by City Code to comprise the body.
ATTACHMENT 2
COPY
COPY
Boards and
Commissions
April 26, 2022
Council Work Session
Anissa Hollingshead
ATTACHMENT 3
2Questions for Council
1.Do Councilmembers have feedback on formalizing standard recruitment processes and other process
improvements related to Boards & Commissions?
2.Are there additional structural or other shifts building on the work done since 2019 to reimagine boards
and commissions Councilmembers would like to explore?
3.How would Councilmembers like to be engaged in ongoing work around appointed Boards &
Commissions?
History
24 appointed Boards & Commissions
•6 commissions
Quasi-Judicial
•14 boards
Ty pe 1 Advisory
•4 boards
Ty pe 2 Advisory
History
•45 City staff members directly support appointed Boards & Commissions
•Every board or commission has a Councilmember appointed as a liaison
•Work has occurred over time making shifts and changes to the board and commission
program to ensure it is meeting Council’s objectives
•The role of Council liaisons is defined via resolution, last updated in 2016
•Ti ming of annual appointments last shifted in 2007 from mid year to end of year
•In 2017, the City’s Equity Te am researched and created a Public Participation Report
that included an analysis and recommendations to remove barriers and increase
diversity of participants
•In 2019, Council undertook reimagining boards and commissions as a priority
Reimagine Boards and Commissions
History
6Current Process
May of odd years
•Councilmember
liaisons
appointed to
each board or
commission
Feb./March
•Annual
election of
officers by
boards and
commissio
ns
January
•New
members
start their
terms/
Onboarding
•Annual
reports are
due by
January 31
Fall
•Annual
recruitment
process
•Applications
accepted Sept.-
Oct.
•Interviews &
appointments
made in Dec.
November
•Work plans
due by
November
30
Current Board & Commission Annual Timeline with Fall Recruitment:
7Current Process –2021 Annual Recruitment as a Pilot
In late 2021, Council feedback included a desire to treat the annual recruitment process as a
pilot.
These were the parameters used in recruitment process:
·Who will participate in interviews and how will that be determined?
o Council Liaison and a randomly selected Councilmember (preferred alphabetical method of randomizing when
appropriate and schedules allow). For quasi-judicial commissions, the Mayor was also added to all interviews as
a participant where possible.
·Will all candidates be interviewed?
o A l imit of 10 candidates to be interviewed will be set, with the Council Liaison identified as the person responsible
for vetting applications.
·Will back-up selections be identified?
o If applicable, back-up selections will be noted, but are not required.
·How long are back-up selections kept and will they be maintained when one or more of the interview team has left
Council?
o Back-ups will only remain as back-ups until the time of annual recruitment at which time they will need to reapply.
·Should there be a different interview process for Quasi-judicial Commissions?
o Ye s. The process will only be different in that the Mayor, Council Liaison, and a randomly selected
Councilmember will do the interviews. This will be considered a public meeting and need to be noticed as that.
·What actions will prompt a separate recruitment after the Annual Recruitment/Appointment process has taken place in
the final quarter of each year?
o If a board does not meet quorum requirements a separate recruitment will be initiated outside the annual
recruitment period.
8Current Process –2021 Annual Recruitment as a Pilot
What Worked
•15-minute interviews for each applicant with members of Council helps applicants to feel heard and
valued
•One recruitment per year helps to concentrate staff efforts and focus community outreach for Board &
Commission vacancies
Recruitment Process Challenges
·Because there is only one recruitment per year, vacancies often remain for long periods of time,
sometimes resulting in an inability to meet quorum (currently defined within the Boards & Commissions
Manual)
·“Special Recruitments” to fill vacancies are not yet defined and may therefore lead to inconsistent and
limited outreach
·Recruitment timing results in a crunch during the holiday season in December when staff, community
members and Council members are unavailable
9Current Process
Councilmember Liaisons
•Role is defined currently in Resolution 2016-039, including:
•Serving as the primary two-way communications channel between Council and the body
•Ta king the lead in filling vacancies and the application & interview process
•Serving as the primary informal Council contact for the body
•Helping resolve questions from the body about the role of Council, municipal government and
the body
•Establishing formal or informal contact with the chair of the body
•Providing procedural direction and relaying Council’s position to the body with clarity the
liaison’s role is not to direct the board’s activities or work
•Serving as a Council contact rather than as an advocate or an ex-officio member
•Reviewing the annual work plan of the body and make recommendations to the Council
regarding the work plan
•Identifying and helping resolve any problems with the functioning of the body
•Facilitating the training of new members by providing suggestions and relevant information to
City staff responsible for providing the training
•Conducting a periodic review with the body according to an established schedule and providing
an oral summation of that review at a regular Council meeting
Potential Changes 10
Explore formalization of an off-cycle recruitment
process
Explore changing the recruitment and appointment
schedule
Explore ways to streamline the review of
applications, interview, and appointment process
Explore options to update the definition of “quorum”
in the Boards & Commissions manual
Explore reducing the number of Boards &
Commissions possibly aligning with outcome areas
11Questions for Council
1.Do Councilmembers have feedback on formalizing standard recruitment processes and other process
improvements related to Boards & Commissions?
2.Are there additional structural or other shifts building on the work done since 2019 to reimagine boards
and commissions Councilmembers would like to explore?
3.How would Councilmembers like to be engaged in ongoing work around appointed Boards &
Commissions?
Potential Changes 13
Explore formalization of an off-cycle recruitment
process
Potential Benefits:
·A f ormal, step-by-step process would offer clarity as to when and how to conduct off-
cycle recruitments
·May allow staff to plan for outreach strategies depending on the type of Board or
Commission and time of year
·May allow for better communication and planning between staff and Council liaisons
Potential Drawbacks:
·Will require staff time to create a formal off-cycle process
·May need to prioritize different vacancy thresholds depending on the decision-making
or advisory authority of a given Board or Commission to limit number of off-cycle
processes
·May still result in low numbers of applicants for vacancies
Potential Changes 14
Explore changing the recruitment and appointment
schedule
Recruitment Cycle Options
•Continue with annual recruitment process and shift current timing from November/December
•Continue with annual recruitment and add ad hoc “special” recruitments as needed
•Create a quarterly or bi-annual recruitment system
Potential Benefits:
•Avoid the holiday season when many people are out of town or unavailable
•May match up better with Council election timing, allowing appointees to carry out their Boards &
Commissions terms with Councilmembers who appointed them
Potential Drawbacks:
•Would be a change to the current system and would require changes to start-times for Boards &
Commissions that line up with the current timing
•Would require staff resources to undertake the change and assess impacts to Boards & Commissions, staff,
and Councilmembers
Potential Changes 15
Explore ways to streamline the review of
applications, interview, and appointment process
Potential Changes:
·Tr eat quasi-judicial commissions the same as all other boards and commissions and not require the Mayor to participate.
This would eliminate the need for special preparations done by staff (i.e., public noticing each interview).
·Create an ad hoc Council Committee for Boards & Commissions that would act as the subject matter experts for all things
concerning recruitment, interviewing, and appointing.
Potential Benefits:
·Allows a smaller number of Councilmembers to winnow the applicant pool and bring forward potentially a
smaller number of applicants. The result would be less of a time commitment for the members of Council that
are not part of the Council Committee.
Potential Changes 16
Explore options to update the definition of “quorum”
in the Boards & Commissions manual
Potential Benefits:
•If the requirement for quorum were to be redefined for some Boards & Commissions to require fewer members to
be present, meetings could move forward even with a limited number of absences or vacancies
•Lowering the quorum requirement for some Boards & Commissions could lessen the pressure to fill vacancies
and allow Boards & Commissions to meet and conduct business more easily
Potential Drawbacks:
•Reducing the requirement for quorum for some Boards & Commissions may reduce the number of voices at the
table for discussion
•Reducing the requirement for quorum does not necessarily address reasons behind a small applicant pool or
potential low attendance at Board & Commission meetings
Potential Changes 17
Explore reducing the number of Boards &
Commissions and/or changing number of seats
Potential Benefits:
•Some Boards & Commissions may benefit from renewed purpose in assessment and engagement
•If some Boards & Commissions could be combined, there could be greater efficacy and renewed strength of
purpose
Potential Drawbacks:
•Existing members may feel as if their current contribution doesn’t matter if they are told that they must be
combined with another Board
•Underlying issues of a given Board may persist even if Boards are combined
•Workloads of Boards may increase, or members may feel they are misaligned if the process of combining them is
not done with care and intention