01/28/1976 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

that in interviews for the most recent Planning Commission appointment each indi- vidual was asked the reason for seeking appointment to the Planning Commission' and it was noteworthy that no one cited past actions by the Commission. Another effect if the turnover is too fast, he said, would be that of giving more power to the staff, as there would be less and less experience on the Commission itself. Mr. Murray didn't think that opening the reappointment procedure to new applica- tions would preclude having experience on the Commission. He said that almost every commission had four-year staggered terms so there were bound to be some members with experience. And he thought it a healthy situation to give new people a chance to take part. He said that evidently eight-year terms were considered too long when the commissions were initiated, yet that same thing occurs when auto- matic reappointment occurs after good attendance for one term. Councilman Hamel thought there would be some who would not want to serve more than one term, in which case the selection process for a successor should be opened to new applicants. But if a person had served one term and, wanted to serve another term, reappointment should occur without the person's having to go throught the entire interview process again. He added that a new applicant could feel like a second choice if interviewed along with another person who had already served and who was then reappointed. Mrs. Beal agreed. Councilman Keller thought the primary consideration should be to obtain the best people possible to fill the positions vacant, and if they were available for two terms, the ,city should be grateful. He was somewhat concerned about opening the process to new applicants after one term, knowing full well the encumbent, if service had been satisfactory, was going to be reappointed. He said a lot of things could change -illness, death, etc. - but as long as the first choice was a "quality" person doing a "quality" job, then that person should really be allowed to serve again. He was somewhat concerned too about the inference of an "elite" group; neither did he like the word "automatic." He said if an important position was being filled, he thought the Council would have to be swayed by some type of knowledge of one person over another. He thought that was assuming responsibility rather than practicing elitism. Mr. Keller continued that a great many of the people who had been his choice this evening in selecting the commissions' member- ships had been unknown to him, but he had had recommendations on all of the names and he didn't feel that was an elitist approach. Councilman Murray did not accept the thinking that when one was appointed to a com- mission, that person wuld serve for two terms; nor did. he accept the. assumption that fulfillment of service for one term would be a mwasure of quality and enough to warrant,reappointment. Mr. Murray said that even with the process of receiving other applications, the fact that a person had already served should not be the basis for reappointment - the consideration should be getting the best person for the job. When the process is not opened up, he said, there is no reflection of the large, diverse community. Dicussion continued. touching on recent appointments to the Planning Commission, duties of the Commission. and general political philosophy in terms of the rela- tionship between the Commission and the Council. Vote was taken on the motion that reappointment to boards and commissions would be through the same process as original appointments, and that en- cumbents would be notified three months prior to expiration of their terms that applications would be needed should they desire to serve another term. . Motion carried - all Council members present voting aye, except Councilman Keller voting no. . 1/28/76 - 4 59 _e e - e .-