10.5. SR 06-07-2021 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

do not participate. Maybe there is someone who would like to run that can do it better. Instead of automatic reappointments, why not just extend the length of the term? (this person’s response was for questions 3 & 4) I think each commission could potentially be different. The utility board is served well by experience & understanding how a utility works, and getting a handle on how things work takes some time. (Experience does not always = time on the commission). Active participation in the discussion going on & preparation by actually reading the documents prepared by staff is key. I know there are some boards it is actually hard to find interested people, so to limit them by a set number of years wouldn’t really work. But other commissions, like the parks commission, seems to have a huge & constant interest. It also probably doesn’t require a specific skill set either. So that is one that could possibly stand for a time limit. I don’t see any reason why these should be lifetime appointments. Council should be empowered to make personnel decisions based on the best interests of the community. These decisions would depend largely on the circumstances of individual cases and what each applicant could offer the commission. Yes, if they are doing a good job, meaning actively participating in most discussions, educating themselves in areas they are not familiar with so they can participate. Attendance is an important part of the process, but just showing up is not of much help unless you participate. Not necessarily, I think the incumbent should have the biggest advantage as long as they are doing what is asked of them, not being one sided i.e.: only interested in their own agenda, but if there is another candidate that is head and shoulders more qualified and fits the need of the board, then by all rights they should be selected. Three people responded no to this question with no further explanation.