SR-10-26-2013-4ACity Council Meeting: October 26, 2013
Agenda Item: "+-A
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Rod Gould, City Manager
Subject: Changes to Boards and Commissions Processes
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Review and comment on potential revisions to the current application,
recruitment, screening and recommendation process for new board and
commission members for Council consideration and direct staff to implement the
proposed changes.
2. Direct staff to evaluate current boards and commissions and return with
recommendations regarding meeting frequency and strategies to reduce
duplication and strengthen roles and responsibilities.
Executive Summary
To improve the application and screening process for new board and commission
members, staff proposes revising application forms to solicit information relative to
applicants' skill set. This would facilitate Council's ability to select people that
complement existing members and better advance the board or commission's mission.
Staff recommends that, with the exception of the formation of new task force or working
groups, staff not review applications in order to avoid potential conflicts with Board and
Commission members.
Recognizing that there are several commissions that may have overlapping roles and
responsibilities, staff requests Council direction to meet with current boards and
commissions, evaluate roles and responsibilities and return with recommendations
regarding focus and frequency of meetings.
Background
Current Process
City Council votes on all appointments. Except for five members appointed by the
Chamber of Commerce to the CVB Board of Directors (Council appoints the other five)
and six members elected by Santa Monica Property Owners to Downtown Santa
1
Monica Board of Directors (Council appoints the other six), the Council appoints all
commissioners. Task force and working group appointees are often recommended by
staff, based on criteria related to the work of the group.
In addition to reviewing applications, Council currently receives additional input
regarding prospective board and commission members in a variety of ways. Current
practices vary by Council member, by board or commission, and by interest of outside
organizations. Some boards and commissions perform individual applicant interviews
on an ad hoc basis via chairpersons or subcommittees, with recommendations
forwarded to the Council either informally or via letters of support and /or
recommendation.
Another common practice is for individual board or commission members to forward
their assessment of prospective applicants informally to individual Council members.
Additionally, representatives of outside organizations will assess applicants on occasion
and forward their findings to Council either informally or by submitting letters of support
and /or recommendation for the public record. Whereas, past practice involved
recommendations of the Council liaisons, this is no longer an element of the board and
commission structure. Due to the number of annual vacancies on the many boards and
commissions, the opportunities for Council members to interview applicants individually
are limited and varied. Consequently, Council is increasingly challenged to make
appointments based primarily on the written applications. Council votes on all
appointments during a City Council meeting, usually tabling the decision, to a meeting at
which all Council members are present.
Applications for membership are accepted year -round and are valid for one year; they
may be renewed for an additional year. On a quarterly basis the City Clerk's Office
updates the current pool to remove expired applications. Prospective applicants are
notified in writing how to reapply should they remain interested in serving on the board
or commission.
2
In December 2011 Council directed staff to implement a new recruitment and application
process for the reconstituted Pier Corporation Board of Directors. This recent
recruitment and vetting process for the reconstituted Pier Board included a more
detailed application form and a process that included staff review. Board - specific
application forms were designed to solicit information relative to eligibility requirements
and identified skills and experience that reflected the new Pier Board's focused
objectives to help give staff and Council a complete understanding of how the applicant
could contribute to the board. Staff reviewed the applications, interviewed candidates,
and submitted recommendations to Council for consideration.
Council received copies of all applications in addition to those that staff recommended
for the board. The number of recommended applicants exceeded the number of
vacancies. Ultimately, the Board selected by the Council included applicants
recommended by staff, applicants with recommendations from outside organizations,
and applicants who were not recommended. Council members commented that the
staff recruitment, screening and recommendation process provided them with an
independent assessment that was useful in evaluating prospective board members.
The recent recruitment for the Civic Working Group has employed a similar process,
including a new application form and staff involvement in the vetting of applicants.
Discussion
To build on the strengths of these recent recruitment efforts, staff recommends that
several adjustments be made to the current application process for filling vacant seats
on the City's boards and commissions. The recommended revisions are intended to
facilitate the Council's ability to match the skills and experience of prospective members
with the mission of the respective Boards and Commissions.
Specifically, based on the Council's feedback on the Pier Board recruitment and vetting
process, staff recommends that the application form be updated to solicit information
C]
similar to the forms used for the recent Pier Board and Civic Working Group
recruitments. Additionally, staff recommends that its role in the recruitment process be
limited as discussed below.
Board and Commission Application Forms
Staff recommends application forms be revised to solicit additional information relative
to applicants' skills and abilities in the following areas:
• Areas of demonstrated expertise relative to the board /commission;
• Vision for the City relative to the mission and responsibilities of the
board /commission;
• Confirmation of time commitment required for board /commission;
• Personal qualities relative to leadership, creativity and innovation as well as the
ability to work effectively in a group setting and an ability to balance competing
needs.
Soliciting this information in addition to the standard questions regarding community
involvement and service on City boards and commissions would better inform the
Council regarding the skills and abilities of, prospective members. This would facilitate
the Council's ability to select people that would complement the existing membership
and better advance the board or commission task or mission. To implement this new
procedure, the application form for each board and commission would be changed to
include additional questions in a format similar to the Pier Board and Civic Working
Group applications.
Applicant Interviews
Due to the large number of appointments made on an annual basis and the high level of
community interest in serving on the City boards and commissions, staff recognizes the
challenges inherent in a selection process that relies on individual interviews with
applicants. Currently, applicants may be interviewed by Council members, by the
respective board or commission, or a subcommittee of that body; however, there is no
V
formalized process to facilitate this type of assessment. At this time staff does not
propose instituting any changes to the current ad hoc interview process.
Staff Role
For the Pier Board recruitment, staff reviewed the applications, interviewed candidates,
and submitted recommendations to Council for consideration. Council received copies
of all applications in addition to those that staff recommended for the board. Staff has
also been actively involved in the review of applications for the Civic Working Group.
However, while this approach was deemed necessary for these newly formed groups,
this approach is not recommended for annual Council appointments to the boards and
commissions or to fill unscheduled vacancies. Staff believes that their active
involvement in the recruitment process for appointments may be problematic, especially
for those boards and commissions with quasi - judicial functions, i.e. the Planning
Commission, Personnel Board, and Building and Fire -Life Safety Commission, and
could create conflicts between staff and the boards and commissions they staff.
Therefore, it is recommended that staff involvement be limited to the formation of new
task force or working groups.
5
Potential Commission Changes
There are several commissions that may have overlapping roles and responsibilities.
Staff requests Council direction to consider if and how the core missions and community
focus of the boards and commissions may have evolved since their inception and
whether adjustments are warranted to ensure that these groups remain relevant to
community needs, as well as the required number of meetings for each commission to
determine if the current number is appropriate relative to their current mission(s).
Restructuring several commissions that have overlapping roles and responsibilities into
one commission may be appropriate in light of past accomplishments and changes in
policy focus over time. Staff requests Council direction to meet with current Boards and
Commissions, evaluate roles and responsibilities and return with recommendations
regarding focus and frequency of meetings.
Financial Impacts & Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the
recommended action.
Prepared by: Laura Beck, AICP, Management Rotation Program
Approved: Forwarded to Council:
Rod Gould, City Manager Rod Gould, City Manager
0