10.5. SR 06-07-2021 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

perspectives is essential as well. Turnover needs to be monitored and managed as best possible. Hard to say. We have had quite a bit of turnover in my opinion. Whoever gets appointed needs to become a student real quick about the process being used and rationales. Took me a couple years to get familiar and I have a background in planning. Hard to tell, I am in my second two-year term. For the first two years there were always vacancies and no applicants. We finally have a full complement of commissioners. (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. Yes... any info shared would enhance the incoming persons experience. Yes, fresh ideas and energy are important. Yes and no. Again, if someone is appointed and is not participating, perhaps they should be replaced. I had to reinterview after a six month stint. I think we met five times in that six months. This short time didn't really give us enough time to finish what we started. It takes some time to learn and understand the role and responsibilities of a commission so there can be value in keeping experienced commissioners on. But new members can offer fresh perspectives and insights so I think it can also be helpful to have some turnover. This could be accomplished by setting limits of two or three full terms for appointees. Then no one would have the task of informing commissioners that their services are no longer needed and commissioners would not have to feel that they have signed on for life. Yes as long as the new members are aligned with the goals of moving Elk River forward towards a sustainable future. Explain your answer. A. There seems to be a few people that don’t think science and technology are helpful to our society. Climate change is real and we must do all we can to preserve our world for future generations. If an individual holds these types of anti science attitudes then I think they should not be on the commission. If there is a will for more turnover the best way would be through term limits. Two terms? Three terms? I know that I really enjoy being on my commission and have years of experience on which to draw. I'd hate to be term limited out personally. I think we have had decent turnover on the planning commission without imposing term limits or any other methodology. The natural churn of the commission provides fresh perspectives while still allowing for consistency and longevity in the decisions being made. I think there should be a balance between turnover and improvement. With the amount of time it takes to establish relationships and see progress with respect to various efforts and projects, the commission representatives likely need at least the length of a single term to see any material gains. Reappointments should be reviewed on a term by term basis. No, the more experience people have on it, the better able they are to serve. YES, turnover is usually a good thing especially if there is a board member that is a pain. I think there should be term limits to every board.