HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 08/11/2020 - REIMAGINE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONSDATE:
STAFF:
August 11, 2020
Honore Depew, Interim Policy and Project Manager
Kelly DiMartino, Deputy City Manager
Delynn Coldiron, City Clerk
WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Council Priority: Reimagine Boards and Commissions.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to provide an update on progress made towards the Council priority to Reimagine
Boards and Commissions, based on previous direction, and seek direction on further implementation. Staff will
also share opportunities for recalibration and lessons learned from COVID-19 adaptations.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Would Councilmembers consider ordinances implementing the Tier 2 actions? (Term length, remote meeting
access, standardized nomenclature)
2. Would Councilmembers like to pursue any of the Tier 3 options prior to additional public engagement?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
On July 2, 2019, Council adopted the priority to Reimagine Boards and Commissions:
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.
The City has 25 boards and commissions that perform a range of functions from advising to decision making.
Over 200 residents volunteer valuable time and expertise through board membership. Approximately 45 staff
members spend time directly supporting them in various ways. Six of these boards are considered “quasi-judicial,”
meaning they make official decisions/deliver findings, in addition to advising Council. The modifications
considered as part of this project pertain primarily to advisory boards.
In late 2017-early 2018, the City’s Equity Team researched and 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> In 2018, a pilot was
conducted, spearheaded by members of the Economic Advisory Committee, to combine meetings of the boards
and commissions housed under Sustainability Services. Attachment 1 highlights participants’ appreciation and
desire to work cross-functionally and to provide meaningful input early in a process rather than as a final check
before (or after) an item goes to Council.
Previous Direction
During the December 10, 2019 work session (Attachment 2), Council gave direction to:
• Implement continuous improvement measures.
• Explore larger, structural enhancement options to:
o Focus on increasing membership diversity
o Seek input from community. [Delayed due to COVID
August 11, 2020 Page 2
Peer City Research Summary
Staff has examined the ways that peer communities utilize boards and commissions (Attachment 3) and has
found that while structurally many are similar - types of boards, term lengths, and number of members per board -
the City has more boards than the peer city average number of boards. And there are a variety of differences in
the details that provide some alternatives and options for the City to consider (e.g., board member composition,
requirements, appointment processes, etc.).
Outreach and Engagement Summary
In February 2020, staff engaged 79 board members through a Reimagine Boards and Commissions questionnaire
and convened 55 board members at the Boards and Commissions Super Issues Meeting to discuss this Council
Priority in small, facilitated groups. (Attachment 4) Since adoption of this Council priority, staff has had extensive
communication with current and former board members on what works and what needs improving.
The next phase of planned engagement was to hold a Spring Community Issues Forum with the support of CSU’s
Center for Public Deliberation, and to conduct focus group sessions/interviews with the intended goal of engaging
underrepresented community members. These outreach efforts were canceled or paused to adhere to public
safety guidelines and in respect of community needs during the emergency response to COVID-19. If
Councilmembers support the plan, staff intends to resume engagement efforts in Q3 (dependent on public health
guidelines). The recent increase in community interest to become more involved with local government may help
spur participation in such forums.
Task Status
Boards and Commissions Super Issue Meeting Held - February 2020
Spring Community Issues Forum Canceled - April 2020
Focus Groups / Interviews • Historically underrepresented
populations • City volunteers / Engage users • City Works 101
alumni
Paused - to be rescheduled for
Fall 2020
Questionnaire / Interviews with staff liaisons Paused - to be rescheduled after
Work Session
Explore and conduct remote and in person community
engagement opportunities
To be scheduled for Fall 2020
Possible Actions
The modifications for consideration can be grouped into three categories - Tier 1, 2, and 3 - and desired Council
engagement on each corresponds to levels of the IAP2 spectrum of engagement: consult, involve, or collaborate.
Tier 1 - Implementation since previous direction, finished or underway - Consult
Some changes have already been implemented or are underway, based on previous Council direction. Those are
categorized as Tier 1 actions and staff is seeking to consult with Council on them.
• Handbook update - City staff have edited the Boards and Commission handbook (2016) consisting of minor
edits and updates. It is still in draft version as it has not yet been approved by Council.
• Training for staff liaisons and board members - City Clerk’s Office is updating and expanding training and
resources for both staff and board members. Training includes general responsibilities and duties, legal
considerations, and how to utilize the online volunteer management platform Engage.
• Improved recruitment process - City Clerk’s Office is enhancing the recruitment process, including
requirements, advertisement, application, interview, and onboarding. Some updates have been made
internally others will be brought to Council for approval in the future.
Tier 2 - Possible council actions / COVID-19 recalibration - Involve
Some enhancements would require Council action to implement and are recommended by staff at this time
because they have received enough positive public feedback and/or prior Council direction. Those are
categorized as Tier 2 actions and staff is seeking to involve Council in them.
August 11, 2020 Page 3
Allow for shorter terms
All but one of the 25 City Boards and Commissions have four-year term lengths, with the Economic Advisory
Commission having three-year terms. While four-year terms provide consistency and institutional knowledge, they
can also create a barrier to participation for those who do not wish to make such a long commitment.
• Alternative 1: Reduce all board seat terms to 3-, 2- or 1-year term lengths.
• Alternative 2: Designate a mix of seats with varying term lengths, i.e. some seats with four-year
terms and other seats with two-year terms.
• Alternative 3: Reserve seats for “youth/young adult/college student” with one-year term
length.(Could be combined with alternative 1 or 2)
Additional operational changes may need to be made to manage the increase in the frequency of recruitment
efforts and appointments. However, it should be noted that shorter terms should reduce vacancies that result from
preterm resignations, which currently add significantly to the recruitment demand.
• Potential operational change: Allow the short-term members a second term opt-in that would not require a
competitive application process.
Continued remote participation at meetings
Under Ordinance No. 079, 2020, Boards and Commissions are currently permitted to meet and conduct business
remotely including remote voting and quasi-judicial hearings. During this informal pilot period, staff has identified
a few areas of concern that are still being worked out, including, hybrid capabilities and adequate access to
remote technology. Staff is currently working to address both for improved functionality.
• Utilization of remote technology was a recommended equity and inclusion improvement from the 2017 Public
Participation Report.
• Utilization of remote technology is one of the most frequently mentioned and highly supported improvements
among the current board and commission members (Attachment 6).
• Action: Update City Code to permit boards and commissions to continue to conduct business remotely
regardless of “emergency” status.
Revise naming structure
The current naming structure lacks clarity and there is confusion and concern among staff and board members
about the meaning behind “board” versus “commission” titles. Staff recommends the following naming restructure:
• Use “Commission” for quasi-judicial groups
• Use “Board” for advisory groups
This would impact a total of 8 boards and commissions:
• Community Development Block Grant Commission Board
• Economic Advisory Commission Board
• Women’s Commission Advisory Board
• Building Review Board Commission
• Planning and Zoning Board Commission
• Water Board Commission
• Retirement Committee Commission
City Code cleanup for consistent language
Major code cleanup:
• Staff will work to comb through City Code pertaining to boards and commissions to clean up outdated
language that no longer reflects how the board or commission functions.
o Attachment 5 provides an example of code changes to the Youth Advisory Board (YAB). Over the years,
the YAB has evolved to function differently than how the current city code outlines the board’s
membership and functions.
August 11, 2020 Page 4
• Minor code language cleanup for consistency in the charge of boards. For example:
o Informs and advises
o Advises City Council or Advises City Council and staff
o Makes recommendations
Tier 3 - Structural enhancement options - Collaborate
Some enhancements would require Council action to implement but have received neither enough feedback (due
to delay in spring public engagement schedule) nor enough specific direction from Council to be recommended by
staff at this time. Those are categorized as Tier 3 actions and staff is seeking to collaborate with Council on them.
(Attachment 6)
• Convene fewer, larger advisory groups around similar areas of interest (e.g., by Service Area or Strategic
Plan Outcome Area) and form ad hoc or on-going subcommittees out of them as needed. (Attachment 7)
• Reserve seats on certain advisory boards for people with lived experience.
• Increase communication expectations and level of involvement with Council Liaisons.
• Allocate resources to support interpretation/translation services, transportation, and childcare.
• Reduce meeting frequency (e.g., semi-monthly or quarterly meetings).
• Hold multiple board meetings at the same location at the same time for efficiency of services (e.g., food,
childcare, etc.).
• Provide monetary and/or nonmonetary incentives to participate to better attract middle- and low-income
residents.
• Recruit and support advisory board members without subject matter expertise.
Regarding the first Tier 3 option, an example from the Planning, Development, and Transportation (PDT) service
area can help illustrate why exploring better strategic alignment among advisory boards may be warranted.
In addition to supporting four quasi-judicial commissions, PDT currently supports two advisory boards
(Transportation Board and Parking Advisory Board) and two committees - the Bicycle Advisory Committee (an
official sub-committee of the Transportation Board) and the Dial-A-Ride and Transit Advisory Committee
(DARTAC) (a standalone Committee not linked to a Board or Commission). In addition to several chartered
committees, like the Bicycle Advisory Committee, boards and commissions may convene temporary committees
as needed. The following figure shows the various groups related to the PDT Service Area.
This system leaves gaps for advising on certain policy initiatives (pedestrian projects, for example). Transit policy
is not aligned with a board and does not operate in an official capacity. The Parking Advisory Board has
experienced long periods of time without active policy or operational initiatives to review.
August 11, 2020 Page 5
Several models could be considered to better align the transportation-focused advisory boards and committees
for optimal results.
Option 1: The Parking Board and DARTAC could each be official sub-committees of the Transportation Board.
Option 2: Bicycle and a broader Transit-focused group could each be full Boards to be consistent with Parking.
Option 3: For either of the options above, the Bicycle Committee could be broadened to be an “Active Modes”
committee/board.
Option 4: All four of the boards and committees could be consolidated into a single Transportation Board.
Specific policy initiatives for parking, transit, or active modes could be reviewed by limited-duration ad-hoc
committees.
Option 5: The board/committee structure could be dissolved, and policy specific resident-committees could be
formed on an as-needed basis.
Next Steps
Staff will bring ordinances for consideration to a regular meeting in September to enact those Tier 2 actions
supported by Council members. As directed by Council, staff can also bring ordinances related to Tier 3 actions
and/or conduct additional outreach in Q3, as outlined above. A Q4 work session may be scheduled to report on
community feedback and seek further direction on implementation.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Board Pilot Memo (PDF)
2. Peer City Analysis (PDF)
3. Work Session Summary (PDF)
4. Current Board Member Engagement Summary (PDF)
5. Youth Advisory Board Code Changes - Draft (PDF)
6. Tier 3 Actions - Opportunities and Tradeoffs (PDF)
7. Alignment to Outcome Areas (PDF)
8. Powerpoint Presentation (PDF)
Sustainability Services
222 LaPorte Ave.
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6505
970.224.6107 - fax
fcgov.com
MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 18, 2019
TO: Mayor Wade Troxell & City Councilmembers
THRU: Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Jeff Mihelich, Deputy City Manager
Jacqueline Kozak-Thiel, Chief Sustainability Officer
FROM: Victoria Shaw, Senior Finance Analyst, SSA
RE: Joint Board & Commission Pilot Meeting
________________________________________________________________________
Bottom-line:
Per a resolution adopted by Council in July 2018, a pilot meeting including
representation from all Boards and Commissions supported by Sustainability Services
staff liaisons was held April 11
th
. The meeting focused on the Triple Bottom Line Scan
(TBL-S) and Accessory Dwelling Units. Feedback to date has been positive, and a
second pilot meeting will be held before the end of the year.
Background:
In May 2018, Futures Committee discussed the future of community advisory
engagement. Two members of the Economic Advisory Commission recommended an
experiment involving representation from mixed boards. In July 2018, a Resolution was
unanimously adopted by Council to allow for two pilot meetings. The Resolution outlined
that all six Boards and Commissions supported by Sustainability Services would be
included, and allowed the flexibility to expand to invite additional Boards and
Commissions as needed. The two pilot meetings were intended to develop and test the
process and effectiveness of this engagement model. The Resolution outlines that staff
will determine topics, which Boards participate, and when the joint meetings occur.
Early Learnings:
Staff met with board liaisons and representatives multiple times during the planning
process for the first pilot meeting. Initially, the proposed topics for the joint meetings
were identified collaboratively. This yielded good indicators of where various Boards
and Commissions might share interest; however, it generally identified the topics too
late to be successful scheduling and convening the large group before the next decision
point. Representatives provided feedback that they felt a limited timeline would reduce
the effectiveness and impact the collective group could have. To mitigate this issue,
DocuSign Envelope ID: E083B888-E383-4AE8-985F-BEAAD5149659
ATTACHMENT 1
2
staff pivoted the focus for the first pilot meeting to an internal City process that did not
have upcoming Council milestones.
Process:
The TBL-S was selected as a topic because all invited Boards and Commissions will
review results of TBL-S assessments. This topic was coupled with City Plan Housing
options, specifically Accessory Dwelling Units, to demonstrate and test how the internal
TBL-S process is performed. Staff presented overviews and supported participant
dialogues. Participants were mixed at small tables and each table completed a separate
TBL-S with the assistance of a table facilitator. The results of all scans were presented
and discussed by participants.
Feedback:
17 board and committee representatives attended. Feedback within the meeting was
positive for the meeting structure. Specifically, participants expressed that they enjoyed
having a mix of Boards and Commissions that were connected to the topic, with the
opportunity for them to ask the same questions. There was also expressed desire to tie
knowledge from the meeting to an outcome, such as joint statement. Participants stated
they felt the model of engagement was different and significantly more active compared
to a Board and Commission Super Issues Board meeting, which also addresses
multiple Boards and Commissions collectively.
Feedback was also collected on impressions of the TBL-S and Accessory Dwelling
Units. This feedback was provided to the relevant core teams.
A follow up survey was also sent to all invited participants. Highlights from survey
results for attendees include
100% of participants were satisfied or very satisfied with the meeting
100% would recommend attending a joint Board and Commission meeting to peers
100% would attend a future joint Board & Commission meeting
Among members that were invited, but did not attend the pilot meeting:
80% were unable to attend due to schedule or conflicts
30% indicated they would be more willing to attend if there were clearer outcomes
Next steps:
1. Ongoing - Participating Boards & Commissions will debrief individually in their
regular meetings and complete an online survey on their experience.
2. Q2 2019 - Staff will regroup with the data from board discussions and participant
surveys responses. This information will help inform direction for the second and
final approved pilot meeting.
3. Q3 2019 - The planning process for the second pilot meeting will begin, including
staff liaisons and representatives from participating Boards and Commissions.
DocuSign Envelope ID: E083B888-E383-4AE8-985F-BEAAD5149659
3
4. Q4 2019 – Current targeted timeline for the next joint board and commission pilot
meeting.
5. End 2019 – Results from pilot will be complete and communicated to Council.
DocuSign Envelope ID: E083B888-E383-4AE8-985F-BEAAD5149659
1
Boards and Commissions Peer City Analysis
City Number of Boards Average Term
Length
Average # of Members
Per Board
Santa Barbra, CA 32 3.6 7.56
Ann Arbor, MI 30 3.24 8.8
Cedar Rapids, IA 25 3.6 8
Charlottesville, VA 25 3.21 3.64
Athens, GA 24 4.2 8.04
Tacoma, WA 23 3.2 9.4
Norman, OK 23 3.1 7.5
Loveland, CO 22 3.2 8.9
Gainesville, FL 21 2.75 8
Greeley, CO 21 3.4 8.4
Ashville, NC 20 3.3 9
Boulder, CO 20 5.1 5.4
Longmont, CO 20 3.5 7.5
Burbank, CA 18 3.7 6.94
Irving, TX 17 2 8.4
Denton, TX 17 8.29 2.12
Portland, ME 15 3 7.3
Arvada, CO 15 3.38 6.93
Eugene, OR 14 3.37 9
Olathe, KS 14 3.1 9
Provo, UT 13 3.6 7.4
Garland, TX 13 2 9.7
Santa Rosa, CA 13 4 7.5
Anaheim, CA 13 3.7 8.9
Boise, ID 12 3.6 6.6
Bellevue, WA 12 3.7 9
Westminster, CO 10 2 8.2
Thornton, CO 10 3.7 8.4
Richardson, TX 9 4 6.1
Palo Alto, CA 9 3.3 6.5
Lakewood, CO 8 3.6 6
Peer Average: 17.35 3.84 7.41
Fort Collins 25 3.96 8.6
ATTACHMENT 2
2
The above chart outlines the average number of boards, average number of members per board,
and average term length for each of the City of Fort Collins’ peer cities. This data was collected
from information provided on each city’s website and municipal code/charter. As a result, Coral
Springs, FL, one of the peer cities, is not listed above as their online board and commission
information was significantly incomplete. This data reflects boards and commissions that are
solely city entities, not joint boards, or boards of outside organizations. As a result, Lincoln NE,
one of the peer cities, is not listed above due to their joint board structure.
The City of Fort Collins tracks closely with its peer cities in the average term length and number
of members per board. However, the City of Fort Collins has 7.65 more boards than the peer city
average.
The cities of Irving, Garland, and Westminster are unique in that they have 2-year terms for all
their boards (except their youth advisory boards which serve 1-year terms). Whereas, the rest of
the cities have term lengths more similar to that of the City of Fort Collins.
The chart below outlines the structure and process alternatives used by the same group of peer
cities. Many cities use a mix of these processes, with some variation between individual boards.
Peer City Process Alternatives
Process Alternative Peer Cities that Use Process
Appointments made by Mayor Provo, Olathe, Cedar Rapids, Ashville,
Athens, Lincoln
Seats on board are assigned to districts/wards
and or at large.
Santa Rosa, Ashville, Portland
Specific board seats are reserved for current
board members (of same board or different
board) to fill and appoint
Provo, Eugene, Bellevue, Athens, Lincoln,
Ashville, Tacoma, Burbank
Individual council members appoint one
board member each1
Santa Rosa, Thornton, Anaheim
Reserved seat(s) for youth Eugene, Loveland, Tacoma, Santa Barbra
Specific profession assigned seats Provo, Tacoma, Gainesville, Olathe, Cedar
Rapids, Santa Barbra, Athens, Irving,
Charlottesville, Ashville, Portland, Greeley,
Loveland, Lakewood, Boulder, Thornton
Must have attended prior meetings to be
eligible to apply
Lakewood
Use of active alternates 1-3 per board2
Irving, Ashville, Longmont, Provo,
Westminster
A mix of non-voting and voting members Irving, Charlottesville, Ashville, Westminster,
Tacoma
Large board with subcommittees Lakewood
Two-year terms Irving, Garland, Westminster
3
Explicit diversity requirement statement, or
strict diversity demographic seat
requirements3
Tacoma, Garland, Santa Barbra, Ashville
Staff advisory boards and council advisory
boards4
Eugene, Tacoma
Percent of board appointments made (or
recommended) by specific community
groups/outside entities
Tacoma, Athens, Norman, Portland,
Loveland, Thornton, Longmont
City Manager appointments Provo, Gainesville, Bellevue, Irving, Portland
Residency requirements vary per board or
certain seats of boards, versus a blanket
residency requirement for all boards
Most
Use of ex-official members Longmont, Tacoma
The following provides examples and further explanation of a few of the alternatives listed and
noted in the table above:
1 In addition to assigning each seat on the board to a ward/district or at-large, the City of
Anaheim’s Senior Citizen Commission has terms that run concurrently with the current term of
the elected official who appointed the member.
2 The City of Longmont is one of the cities that uses alternate appointments for several of their
boards. These alternates are asked to attend every meeting and step in if an appointed member is
unable to attend a meeting and or take the position of a member that must resign from their term.
3 There were several variations of diversity requirements among the cities that had them. The
City of Ashville’s Human Relations Commission requires that a set number of members be from
specific community groups. The seat requirements are as follows, “6 African Americans, 2
Latinx individuals, 2 members of the LGBTQ community, 2 youth members, between the ages
of 18 and 25, 2 to 3 individuals who live in public housing, 2 individuals with a disability and 3
individuals who are recognized as community leaders”. Whereas, the City of Tacoma uses the
following statement, “membership must reflect the diversity of our community as to race and
culture, gender, age, socioeconomics, geography, and interest in commission membership”.
4 The City of Tacoma and the City of Eugene have boards that advise city staff instead of
advising the city council. The City of Eugene has six Department Advisory Groups, with board
members appointed by department managers. These advisory groups can only exist for two years
before being evaluated.
ATTACHMENT 3
1
Summary of Reimagine Boards and Commissions Engagement with
Current Board Members
Pre-Event Survey Response Summary
In early 2020, current board and commission members received a Reimagine Boards and
Commissions questionnaire so the results could be shared and discussed at the February 24, 2020
Super Issues Meeting.
The following data summarizes the responses of the 79 participants, representing thirty-eight
percent of all board and commission members. The data includes at least one response from a
member of 22 of the 25 boards, representing eighty-eight percent of the city’s boards and
commissions.
Figure 1
Figure 1 shows that most respondents have served on a board and commission between one and
eight years. With thirty-seven percent (or 19 respondents) serving for one to four years and thirty-
five percent serving for four to eight years. While eight percent of respondents have served on a
board for more than 13 years.
0-1 Year
1-4 Years
4-8 Years
8-12 Years
13+ Years
HOW LONG HAVE YOU SERVED ON OR SUPPORTED
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS?
ATTACHMENT 4
2
Figure 2
Seventy-four percent of the respondents agree or strongly agree that boards and commissions
ensure meaningful experiences for volunteers. While eight percent of respondents disagree or
strongly disagree with the statement.
Figure 3
Seventy-three percent of the respondents agree or strongly agree that boards and commissions
provide timely and useful advice for City Council. While eight percent of respondents disagreed
or strongly disagreed with the statement.
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
I BELIEVE THAT BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS ENSURE
MEANINGFUL EXPERIENCES FOR VOLUNTEERS?
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Other
I BELIEVE THAT BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS PROVIDE
TIMELY AND USEFUL ADVICE FOR CITY COUNCIL FROM
A VARIETY OF PERSPECTIVES.
3
Figure 4
Sixty-nine percent of respondents agree or strongly agree that they are satisfied with their
experience participating with board and commissions, while six percent of respondents disagreed
or strongly disagreed with the statement.
Open-ended Responses
Charts 1-6 convey thematically coded responses to the open-end questions from the survey. The
left-hand column of the chart lists the common themes and the right-hand column displays how
frequently an answer aligned with that theme. Responses may have demonstrated more than one
theme and were counted to reflect each theme it aligned with. Several themes may only have had
one response; however, it was still listed to thoroughly reflect the data that was collected. Each
chart is followed by direct quotes to elaborate on the themes that were most frequently mentioned.
Chart 1. What changes would you like to see, if any, to the current structure of boards and
commissions? Structure: how many boards, what type of boards, term lengths, etc.
Theme Frequency
Increase boards effectiveness/City Council communication loop 8
Consolidate some boards 7
Shorter Terms 6
Increase Diversity 6
No structure changes/existing structure is working 4
More board collaboration 4
More strict number of terms limit 3
Some boards should meet less frequently 2
Increase remote meeting capabilities 2
Clarify board purpose and roles 2
Utilize ad hoc capabilities 2
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly Disagree Other
I AM SATISFIED WITH MY EXPERIENCES
PARTICIPATING WITH BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
4
You cannot force diversity 1
Review bylaws 1
More strict attendance policy 1
Create an Ethics Board 1
“Just ensuring that the number and purpose of the boards aligns with the city's needs. If not much output
is being produced by certain boards, or there aren't ongoing needs, maybe some boards can meet
quarterly, or even just “as needed” which may be zero times per year in some cases. Other boards should
be eliminated if that makes the most sense”.
“Boards should be flexible enough to deal with new issues as the arise in the city. I've been in 2 boards
and both had specific charges. I can't speak to whether other board are duplicative and should be
combined. Here's an idea: appoint a group of people to rotate across boards for their term, instead of
being on a single board. They may or may not vote on the boards on which they serve for 3 or 6 month
stretches, but their rotation would allow for cross pollination”.
Chart 2. What changes would you like to see, if any, to the boards and commissions program
management? Program management: how the boards conduct meetings, when and where of
meetings, meeting logistics, onboarding, training, etc.
“The City does a great job of supporting and training boards and commissions members. I think if you
keep on the path you are on, we will just become more effective for our entire community”.
“I believe staff liaisons need training. What their role is. How this differs from being a board member.
Helping to coordinate, ensuring that the agenda and minutes are out at least one week prior to the meeting
day. Helping to look at the City Council Calendar of topics and ensure that the committee is thinking
about and possibly addressing topics that relate to the board. Identifying upcoming reports that are due
and due dates, ensuring ample time for members to produce the document”.
Theme Frequency
No changes recommended 14
Increase board effectiveness in advising City Council 6
More training for new members/better onboarding process 6
Increase staff training and role clarification 4
Increase remote and technological capabilities 3
Increase board collaboration 3
Diversify meeting location 2
Increase diversity of board membership 2
Increase public participation at meetings 1
Accessible meeting times (later, weekends) 1
No longer use Roberts Rules of Order 1
5
Chart 3. What changes would you like to see, if any, to the relationship between Council
liaisons and their boards and commissions?
Theme Frequency
Increase in-person interaction with council liaison (annually, quarterly, twice
per year)
13
Increased remote communication and increased confirmation (close feedback
loop that council liaisons have read minutes, reports, recommendations, etc.)
9
No change suggested 8
Clarify what is effective communication for each council liaisons specifically/
role clarification
8
Increase visibility of board successes to City Council 4
“1. It would be helpful to B&C's if Council liaisons could be encouraged to attend at least 1-2 meetings
per year and keep in touch with B&C's through emails or other communications. 2. Council liaisons
might solicit greater assistance from B&C's in addressing Council's agenda items - especially in areas
where B&C's might have specific expertise”.
“Really we should talk with them if we need direction. They should contact us if they want specific
feedback on council agenda items. We don't do this. It feels very separated right now. It could be better”
Chart 4. What changes would you like to see, if any, to the purpose of boards and
commissions?
“I would like to see more direct questions come from council. As in collecting questions that arose during
work sessions and sending them to boards to help collate answers to them if they are not based only on
what the city staff are currently doing”.
“I think our purpose is pretty clear and well defined. If a board or commission is struggling to identify
their purpose, or City Council/Staff are having the same issue, perhaps that board or commission is not
working. Perhaps that one needs restructuring or has run its course”.
Theme Frequency
Council seeking board feedback 6
If boards cannot have influence they should be eliminated/ needs to be
worthwhile for all parties
5
Clarification and general education of board member role 5
Connect to and influence specific projects, priorities, and objectives 3
Provide diverse stakeholder input to City Council 2
Get public more involved at meetings/engage with and educate community
members
2
No changes recommended/works well as is 1
Not just a sounding board for staff 1
6
Chart 5. Please give an example of something about the boards and commissions program
that works well for you.
Theme Frequency
Teamwork/respectful conversations with diverse perspectives 14
Education received 7
Community impact 6
Staff support 5
Staff presentations 4
Monthly meetings 4
Outside networking and educational opportunities 1
Work sessions 1
Number of board/commission members 1
Engage platform communication 1
“Being on the LPC has enabled me to understand the preservation program in a way I simply couldn't
otherwise. And that has enabled me to educate neighbors and other residents, as well as preservation
advocates in other communities, about how our program works and what the benefits have been. Though
the impact might be small, it is far reaching and, in my opinion, does contribute a bit toward making
NoCo a better place”.
“I take pride in being able to share my experience and to be respectfully heard. It is encouraging and
satisfying to me to see the changes around the city that I spoke about at a board meeting. Working
together and collaborating between boards and commissions brings on more results. For example, CDBG
and Affordable Housing Board working together on housing funding”.
Chart 6. What do you think would make it easier for people of different backgrounds to
participate?
Theme Frequency
Conduct targeted, culturally responsive outreach during recruitment 18
Meeting times- later, weekends, more flexible 7
Remote meeting capabilities 5
Childcare 5
Avoid echo chamber (i.e., ask community, not just board members) 4
Mentorship of new or potential members 4
Educate the recruitment, interview, appointment process with information
about current diversity gaps on boards
3
Meeting location (in community space that is more accessible to
underrepresented groups)
3
Shorter terms 3
Cannot force diversity 2
Transportation assistance 2
7
Utilize ad hoc capabilities 1
People need to be knowledgeable above all else 1
Council members should mention and promote boards and commission during
council meetings
1
Education on diversity topics for board members 1
Invite underrepresented community members to meetings 1
Less frequent meetings 1
More thorough onboarding 1
“Develop a strategic representation plan for each board and commission. Identify member types that can
provide value to the goals and objectives of the board. Part of that process may be to identify
representation gaps and determine strategies to fill those gaps”
“We need to be proactively seeking people out and inviting them to join our boards. And giving a new
person a "mentor" to help them onboard could be useful... especially on the quasi-judicial boards. If
expert discussions is an issue, then ask a former board or commission member to be a mentor for a few
months to help that person get their sea legs.”
Super Issue Meeting: In-person Engagement Summary
On February 25, 2020 46 current board and commission members attended a Super Issues Meeting
that included facilitated small groups discussion of the Reimagine boards and Commissions
Council priority. The following data summarizes the responses captured during those discussions.
19 of the 25 total City boards and commissions (76%) were represented by one or more members.
Board members were asked to respond to the following questions by writing down their responses
and discussing them with their fellow participants. Chart 7 demonstrates thematically coded
responses from answers that were captured on worksheet.
Chart 7. What would make the boards and commissions volunteer experience more meaningful
(fulfilling) for you?
Theme Frequency
Close feedback loop with City Council 13
Clarity of purpose of boards and roles all parties (staff, council liaison, board
member)
10
More collaboration between boards 10
More involvement and visibility with the public 9
More training/better onboarding 6
Be more effective during meetings, contribute to projects and priorities 5
Increase diversity on boards 5
Shorter terms/term limits 2
Utilize remote meeting capabilities 1
I feel fulfilled as is 1
8
Matrix Exercise
Board and commission members were given a chart that displayed a matrix of Reimagine Boards
and Commissions options (these options were generated from the Equity Matrix created by the
2017 Public Participation Report). Participants were asked to place a “checkmark” next to the
three options they liked the most and an “X” next to the three options they liked the least. The
chart below reflects the number of tallies for each.
Reimagine Boards and Commissions Options Most
Liked
Least
Liked
Council liaison relationships 16 1
Conduct targeted, culturally responsive outreach during
recruitment
13 6
B&C members assist with public engagement and recruitment
efforts
13 0
Increased B&C collaboration 13 1
Reduce potential barriers to participation 12 1
Adjust meeting parameters (time, location, frequency, and
technology)
10 3
Align purpose with City Council priorities 10 3
Reimagine how B&C engage with the public 9 0
Allocate funds to support interpretation/translation services,
transportation, and childcare
8 5
Representation on action boards: People with lived experience:
Seniors, people with mobility impairments, youth, LGBTQIA+,
women's commission
8 1
Education on charter, manual and bylaws 6 4
Reimagine the role of the public (testimony for items, less formal) 6 1
Develop and provide more clarity of purpose 6 1
Update City code with consistent functions and authority 6 3
Review naming conventions (e.g., boards vs. commissions) 6 5
Shorter term limits 6 8
Include demographic questionnaire into applications 5 5
Use standardized interview questions 5 9
Convene fewer, larger groups in a similar area of interest that can
form smaller working groups as needed (i.e., subcommittees)
5 2
Define and support different types of board members (experts,
deliberators, advocates)
5 5
Volunteer manager training for staff 4 0
Form temporary, ad hoc committees 4 7
Legal training and support 3 6
Conflict training for staff liaison and board members 3 1
Standard expectation and budget for food 3 9
Standardize minutes, agenda item, reports, and process 3 5
Provide incentives to participate 2 12
More structured attendance policy and notice of resignation policy 2 8
DRAFT Youth Advisory Board Code Changes
Sec. 2-447. - Membership; term.
(a) The Board shall consist of no less than five (5) and no more than nine (9) members appointed by
the City Council. All members shall be qualified by experience, training, age, ethnicity or
socioeconomic background to represent a diverse cross section of youth in the Fort Collins
community. At least five (5) of the members of the Board shall be under the age of twenty-one (21)
years at the time of appointment. Each member of the Board shall be under the age of nineteen (19)
and currently be enrolled in high school or a high school equivalency such as home-school or
distance learning. A quorum of the Board shall consist of three (3) members for a five-member Board
or four (4) members for a Board consisting of six (6) to nine (9) members.
(b) Each member over the age of twenty-one (21) years at the time of appointment shall serve without
compensation for a term of four (4) years, except that such members may be appointed by the City
Council for a shorter term in order to achieve overlapping tenure. Each member under the age of
twenty-one (21) years at the time of appointment shall serve without compensation for a term of no
less than one (1) year, unless otherwise specified by City Council, and no member can serve more
than four (4) years. Appointments shall specify the term of office of each individual. All members
shall be subject to removal by the City Council. If a vacancy occurs on the Board, it shall be filled by
the City Council for the remaining unexpired portion of the term unless otherwise specified by City
Council. or one (1) year, whichever is longer. A member over the age of twenty-one (21) years at the
time such member's term expires shall be eligible to apply for one (1) additional term of four (4)
years. For the purposes of this provision, a "term" shall include the balance of an unexpired term
served by a person appointed to fill a vacancy if such unexpired term exceeds twenty-four (24)
months.
(Ord. No. 58, 1994, 4-19-94; Ord. No. 93, 2002, § 5, 7-16-02; Ord. No. 93, 2006, 7-18-06; Ord.
No. 002, 2010, 2-2-10)
Sec. 2-449. - Officers; bylaws.
The Board shall elect annually from its membership a chairperson, vice-chairperson and such other
officers as may be deemed necessary by the Board. The chairperson and vice-chairperson shall be under
the age of twenty-one (21) years at the time of election. Bylaws may be adopted by the Board, which
bylaws shall not be inconsistent with the Charter, the Code or other policies that may be established by
the City Council. A copy of the bylaws shall be filed with the City Clerk for the use of the City Council
immediately after adoption by the Board and they may be subject to the approval of the City Council.
(Ord. No. 58, 1994, 4-19-94; Ord. No. 104, 2002, § 4, 8-20-02)
ATTACHMENT 5
Reimagine Boards and Commissions Tier 3 Actions – Opportunities and Tradeoffs
Action Opportunity Tradeoff
Convene fewer, larger advisory groups
around similar areas of interest (e.g.,
by Service Area or Strategic Plan
Outcome Area) and form ad hoc or on-
going subcommittees out of them as
needed.
Would provide flexibility, board
integration, and interdisciplinary
thinking.
While providing flexibility, ad hoc committees
would lack the consistency and expertise of the
current structure. Learning curves would be
accelerated.
Reserve seats on certain advisory
boards for people with lived
experience (e.g., seniors, youth, people
with disabilities, LGBTQIA+, etc.).
Distributing members with lived diverse
experience throughout the board
system, rather than having designated
boards, would increase diverse
perspectives within each board.
While increasing diversity, this could border on
tokenism or be perceived as creating diversity
quotas.
Increase communication expectations
and level of involvement with Council
Liaisons.
Would help boards align more with
Strategic Plan and Council priorities.
Would reinforce board sense of
purpose.
Would require an increased time commitment
from councilmembers, who already have heavy
workloads and limited availability.
Allocate resources to support
interpretation/translation services,
transportation, and childcare.
Would reduce barriers to participation
by underrepresented populations.
Would add costs and logistical support needs.
Reduce meeting frequency (e.g.,
semimonthly or quarterly meetings).
Could reduce costs and barriers to
participation by underrepresented
populations.
Could decrease board member sense of
connection and timeliness of advice, regarding
Council deliberations.
Hold multiple board meetings at the
same location at the same time for
efficiency of services (e.g., food,
childcare, etc.).
Could reduce costs and barriers to
participation by underrepresented
populations.
Identifying specific times and locations that would
work for multiple boards could be difficult.
1ST 2ND 3RD
Affordable Housing Board
Air Quality Advisory Board
Art in Public Places Board
Cultural Resources Board
Commission on Disability
Community Development Block Grant Commission
Citizen Review Board
Economic Advisory Commission
Energy Board
Golf Board
Land Conservation Stewardship Board
Natural Resources Advisory Board
Parking Advisory Board
Parks & Recreation Board
Senior Advisory Board
Transportation Board
Women's Commission
Youth Advisory Board
Neighborhood Livability Culture & Recreation Economic Health Environmental Health Safe Community
Transportation & Mobility High Performing Government
Auxiliary aids and services are available for persons with disabilities. V/TDD: 711 20-22519
ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
Alignment to the Seven Key Outcome Areas
Quasi-judicial Boards and Commissions are not included in this graphic
ATTACHMENT 7
August 11, 2020
Council Priority: Reimagine Boards & Commissions
Honore Depew, City Manager’s Office; Elizabeth Blythe, City Clerk’s Office
ATTACHMENT 8
Direction Sought
2
1. Would Councilmembers like to consider ordinances implementing
Tier 2 actions?
• Term length, remote meeting access, standardized nomenclature
2. Would Councilmembers like to pursue any Tier 3 options prior to
additional public engagement?
3
REIMAGINE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
4
Strategic Alignment
HPG 7.3 - Improve effectiveness of community
engagement with enhanced inclusion of all
identities, languages and needs
2019 Adopted Council Priority
5
Reimagine Boards and Commissions:
“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.”
6
Timeline
Summary of Boards & Commissions
§ 25 Boards & Commissions Advising Council
§ 6 Quasi-judicial
§ Governed by Chapter 2, Articles 3&4
of Municipal Code
§ Majority created in the 80s and 90s
§ Between 7 and 11 members each
§ 210 (+/-) Total Volunteers
§ 45 Staff Liaisons and Admin Support
§ 17 Vacancies (July 2020)
7
Peer City Research
8
Number of
Boards Average Term Length
Average
# of Members Per Board
Peer Average 17.35 3.84 7.41
City of Fort Collins 25 3.96 8.6
Peer City Process Alternatives
• Profession assigned seats/requirements
• Current board members influence or directly appoint new members
• Diversity requirements
• The board should reflect and match community
• Specific demographic assigned seats
• Use of active alternates
• Reserved seat(s) for youth
2017 Public Participation Report
9
Findings:
• Lack of representation & diversity
• Race, age, income
• Lack of clarity regarding expectations
Recommendations:
• Reduce barriers to participation
• Recruit from underrepresented populations
• Improve clarity and consistency
fcgov.com/cityclerk/boards
Previous Council Direction
10
• Implement Continuous Improvement Measures – Tier 1
• No action needed by Council
• Explore Structural Enhancement Options – Tiers 2 & 3
• Council action / direction needed
• Seek Input from the Community
• Especially Focus on Increasing Membership Diversity
Three Tiers of Action
11
Tier 1
Consult
Tier 2
Involve
Tier 3
Collaborate
Consult
Tier 1 – Complete or Underway
Implementation since previous direction:
• Board member handbook
• Revisions and updates
• Staff liaisons and board members
• Updated and expanded trainings / resources
• Recruitment process
• Improvements to advertisement, application, interview,
and onboarding processes
12
Involve
Tier 2 – Possible Council Actions
Improve Efficiency
• Revise naming structure
• Commission = quasi-judicial
• Board = advisory group
• City Code cleanup for consistent language and alignment with
current board functions
Reduce Barriers
• Continue to allow remote meeting option
• Allow for shorter member terms
13
Tier 2 Action
Shorter Term Options
• Alternative 1: Reduce all board seat terms to 3-, 2- or 1-year term
lengths.
• Alternative 2: Designate a mix of seats with varying term lengths, i.e.
some seats with four-year terms and other seats with two-year terms.
• Alternative 3: Reserve seats for “youth/young adult/college student”
with one-year term length.
• Could be combined with alternative 1 or 2
14
Tier 3 Actions
Opportunities & Tradeoffs
15
• Eight options identified
• Based on peer
research, 2017 report,
and board member
feedback
• Not fully vetted with the
public
Collaborate
Tier 3 – Structural Enhancement Options
• Convene fewer, larger advisory groups around similar areas of
interest
• form ad hoc, temporary subcommittees as needed
• Reserve seats on certain advisory boards for people with lived
experience
• Increase communication expectations and level of involvement
with Council Liaisons
• Allocate resources to support interpretation/translation services,
transportation, and childcare
16
Collaborate
Tier 3 – Structural Enhancement Options
[continued]
• Reduce meeting frequency
• e.g.; semimonthly or quarterly meetings
• Hold multiple board meetings at the same time / location for
efficiency of support services
• e.g.; food, childcare, etc.
• Provide monetary and/or nonmonetary incentives to participate
to better attract middle- and low-income residents
• Recruit and support advisory board members without subject
matter expertise
17
Direction Sought
18
1. Would Councilmembers like to consider ordinances implementing
Tier 2 actions?
• Term length, remote meeting access, standardized nomenclature
2. Would Councilmembers like to pursue any Tier 3 options prior to
additional public engagement?
Provide monetary and/or nonmonetary
incentives to participate to better
attract middle- and low-income
residents.
Would reduce barriers to participation
by underrepresented populations.
Would increase costs.
Boards and Commissions have traditionally been
a volunteer activity, and once we begin to
compensate residents for engagement, it may be
expected more broadly.
Recruit and support advisory board
members without subject matter
expertise.
Would increase diverse perspectives
and deliberation within each board.
Would require an intentional recruitment process
and thorough onboarding/staff support process to
achieve a sufficient comfort level for non-expert
participants.
ATTACHMENT 6