01/28/1976 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~ Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Haws to adopt as policy that a position on a board or commission shall be considered vacant when a term expires, and that procedure for reappointment shall be the sarne as for appointment as set out in the Council bylaws, applications to be taken from anyone, including encumbents wish- ing to reapply. In response to Manager's inquiry whether the policy would apply to those appointed for the balance of an unexpired term, Mr. Murray said it would apply any time a term expired regardless of how a person had been appointed or how long the position had been held. Manager, in response to Councilwoman Shirey, said that in University City, where he had previously served, the criteria was attendance - members were re- appointed for one term only if their attendance records were reasonably satisfactory. Councilman Keller read that portion of the Council bylaws covering appointment pro- cedure, and Mr. Murray clarified intent of his motion - that there would be no auto- matic reappointment, and selection of members would follow one of the three procedures set out in the bylaws. Councilwoman Beal wondered about those members who had served one term or a portion of one tem - they would have to remember to reapply or they would automatically be disqualified? Mr. Murray thought publicity about a vacancy would cover that problem. He thought once a policy of not having automatic reappointments was decided upon, members of the major commissions would be aware of that when their terms expired. However, he thought some provision for advertising vacancies could be included in the policy statement. ,-,e Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Haws to incorporate into the main motion as part of standard policy that three months before the ex- piration date of any position, encumbents would be notified of terms expiring and that they should file application if they are interested in serving another term. Mrs. Beal said she would rather automatically reappoint a member for another term than appear ungrateful or unappreciative of someone's dedicated interest and very able work on a commission. Mr. Murray thought it was just as ungrateful or unap- preciative telling the people who did express interest and were qualified that they were not wanted. But Mrs. Beal disagreed, saying that the first consideration should be service to the city - are those chosen going to be the best people in a particular position? Also, anyone would be hesitant about accepting if they were aware of the possibility they would serve only a couple of years. She thought it would take that long to gain knowledge and background in commission work. Mr. Murray, however, didn't think it would take two years, nor did he think two years' service would necessarily make a good commissioner. Councilman Bradley suggested two-thirds vote of the Council for reappointment rather than having automatic reappointment. If the two-thirds majority isn't forthcoming, he said, then the member would have to reapply in open process with new applicants. He added that criteria could be developed - attendance and maybe three or four other things - for determining whether a person should be reappointed. But Mrs. Shirey thought requiring a two-thirds vote would put the selection on a "personal" level. Mr. Haws added that the problem then gets back to the "whole elite system - one gets elected because someone knows you." ,-e Manager commented that it was more than just training, particularly in the case of the Planning Commission. It sometimes takes six months to a year, he said, just to become familiar with what is going on. Some of the types of things before the Planning Commission hark back to actions taken four or five years earlier. He noted S8 1/28/76 - 3