10.5. SR 06-07-2021 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

#4 - Would it be helpful to have turnover on your commission? Explain your answer. I tend to think not because our commission relies on a knowledge of long term, historical matters, but I have also seen new members bring exciting initiatives to the group. To my previous point about individual cases, maybe it’s best to aim for a balance of experience and fresh thinking. Not necessarily. Again, if the commission participates actively and contributes regularly, there is a great benefit to the experience that comes with years of service. Commissioners that do not participate and grow, should be replaced. Yes, only if there is someone better to fill there spot. I would generally say yes to this, so as to more consistently represent the ever-changing demographics. However, I do believe until a certain threshold of initial setup/operation/guidelines and the like have been put in place, that a consistent group be to our advantage in order to keep progressing as efficiently as possible toward a mostly resolved initial platform. Once that somewhat subjective barrier is reached, then I feel we turn a proverbial corner in operation where we seem to be ‘amending’ more than ‘setting’ policy. Energy City has had plenty of turnover. I am hopeful we don’t have any for a while. I think we have a really good group and the last few meetings we are getting traction with Commissioners doing projects outside of the meeting or just delegating staff to work on things. Commission participation is much better with this group. Being the newest member of the commission it takes a bit to come up to speed. I am a bit envious of the historical knowledge that other members on the commission possess, so frequent turnover, I don't believe frequent turnover is beneficial. Yes. Any leadership council/committee, etc., should always have a mechanism in place to bring in new people with new ideas and perspectives. No for both commissions that I serve on. The Parks & Rec Commission has a blend of some long serving multiple term commissioners as well as newer commissioners & I think it's a great blend. The Furniture and Things Community Event Center Advisory is quite new but we have a fabulous blend of the community all focused on making this facility top of the line from top to bottom. We have had quite a bit of turnover over the years. Just Lance Lindberg and myself are original commissioners since 2007. I think it takes a couple of terms to really get to know everything that is going on. Yes. But have terms staggered so don’t lose all the experience at one time. No, current process works well. Yes, absolutely some turnover is beneficial. Fresh eyes, so to speak, allowing the seasoned appointee receive feedback to established plans, measure ideas and sharing new enthusiasm. There is automated turnover—continuity is important for history and movement. Continuity for a 2 year term would be helpful from the Council especially for a commission that only meets quarterly. Yes it would be helpful to have turnover. Term limits of say three terms would also be helpful. Members who are on for a long time may become complacent and entitled which may not be the best for the commission for the city. New ideas and new ways to address issues is good for everyone. I do not think high turnover is good. I think it is particularly challenging in our current atmosphere that is tied to Covid-related adjustments. It took me 2-3 meetings to get into the swing of things. High turnover, would erode forward momentum; however, the addition of new voices and