CCMin 2011-06-27 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Concerns Committee, Parks and Recreation and Community Services Commission, Planning Commission and Port Commission). Also, she suggested placing under Parks and Recreation an Arts and Culture Advisory Body and the Senior Affairs Commission. Furthermore, she recommended that the Architectural Review Committee and the Historic Resources Committee be under the Planning Commission. She also proposed the elimination of the Home Improvement Loan Committee. Ms. Hetrick then proceeded to explain the difference between a formal Council appointed BCC and the Ad Hoc committees. She covered each change and the rationale behind her recommendations. In regards to the Pride and Beautification Commission, she noted that it was already on a very streamlined track with quarterly meetings. She suggested renaming it to Community Pride and Awards. Ms. Hetrick believed that given the number of community awards that already existed, this could be an opportunity to broaden the focus of this committee and to promote event planning. She recommended that this remain a coordinated effort through the City Manager's office, but broadening its focus to include all awards that reflect community efforts. These would be more in line with Council's initiatives and goals. She opined that applying all these best practices and her approach could save the city about $150,000 annually. Council Discussion One Council Member asked for confirmation on who was interviewed. Ms. Hetrick confirmed the Chairs, Staff liaisons, and some Members of the BCCs. Questions also arose about the methodology used on the hours estimated. Dr. Bell interjected saying that the numbers provided were an aggregate hour amount and he noted that it was hard to quantify the savings because we didn't have a mechanism to track hours. This Council Member inquired how a reduction in committees reporting to Council, but not the number of committees, would create savings. Ms. Hetrick said this would reduce the level of staff support for ad hoc committees and reduce the amount of time spent. Council asked about the Board of Building Review. Ms. Hetrick replied that it would be left where it was, because it was an appeals body for any items that came through the Planning Commission. One Council Member inquired if analysis was done on the value that these commissions brought to the table and how valuable they were in quantifiable terms. Ms. Hetrick commented that this was part of the goal and she was not disputing its contributions and value, but balancing it with a structure that had balance and had controlled staff resources. She said that there was no direct study on the value of these BCCs. One Council Member inquired when these bodies meet and if the majority had to meet at night or in the daytime. Department Heads in the audience provided the data requested. Most of the BCCs meet at night, with the exception of the Senior Affairs Commission at 1:00 p.m., the Architectural Review Commission at 7 a.m., and the Home Improvement Loan Committee at 8:00 a.m. Council inquired about the sunset clause. Ms. Hetrick noted that the recommendation was to use the sunset clause and would require each BCC to be reviewed at a predetermined time. She said the Pride Beautification Commission might be a little different. She suggested some training materials as a tool to make all this happen and to provide consistency. Another Council Member asked how long the non-chartered JOINT CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD June 27, 2011 MEETING/BUDGET STUDY SESSION II MINUTES PAGE 7 MINUTE BOOK NO. 63 Page No. 356