While we've had some urgent challenges to address these past few months, I'm also slowly (but surely!) tackling some of the platform items I ran on in last year's election. One of these early action items has been the Boards and Commissions appointment process, and I'd like to share how that's going so far.
The Applicant Binder -- I believe that the Mayor should be the Recruiter-In-Chief for city boards, and should be continually working to develop a roster of qualified and enthusiastic current and future civic leaders. To do that, I've printed out all the past applications the city had on file electronically; when I have a few free minutes, I'm working through that binder to call each applicant, thank them for applying in the past and see they'd like to be considered for other boards and commissions too. Right now there are 56 applicants in the pool -- I'd really like to get that pool up to 100 or 150, since we have 122 spots that will need to be filled over time. I also want to be familiar with their skills, interests, and experience, so if there's a special need or emergency, I can reach out and know who might be a great help for a short-term project or effort. Civic leadership!
The Application Process -- I'm formalizing the application process to provide more structure and predictability. City Staff, board members, the Mayor Pro Tem and I have had some great conversations about how to best ensure that the recommended candidate is the most qualified person for the board, without ceding away the Mayor's authority as the "recommender". I'm looking forward to rolling out this policy by July 1st, and we've already begun implementing aspects of it. More to follow!
General Selection Criteria -- I know that perceived conflicts of interest has been a contentious point recently for boards and commissions, and I'm addressing that head-on with the guidance I've provided our Selection Committees (which will normally be the Mayor Pro Tem, Department Head, Manager, Staff Liaison, and Board Chair). If their proposed nominee is lacking in these areas, it will be cause for reconsideration. As the 'Recruiter-In-Chief' I need to help generate a diverse list of applicants, and it's explicitly stated in the selection criteria that diversity in demographics AND in thought is both welcome and expected. Here's what those general criteria are, in addition to any specific criteria applicable to each board.
- Gender. The candidate should contribute to gender balancing in that board or commission, where a nearly equal number of men and women are desired.
- Knowledge. The candidate should have a general appreciation of the topics under consideration by that board or commission, or the ability to gain and use such knowledge.
- Absence of Pervasive Conflicts of Interest. While a certain level of topical knowledge is important for board service, ‘expert level’ familiarity is not necessary. In some cases, such a keen knowledge may come at a high cost; expertise and connections may pervasively cause potential conflicts of interest and lead to the public appearance of “the fox guarding the henhouse”. Such applicants should, therefore, be scrupulously avoided to ensure public confidence in the city’s decision-making processes.
- Demographic Diversity. The candidate should help the board or commission to represent the demographics of the community.
- Perspective. The candidate should contribute to the board or commission’s diversity of thought and personality, where a wide range of worldviews and philosophies are necessary for effective decision-making.
- Communication. The candidate should be able to appropriately express opinions, disagreement, and thoughtful questioning in a public setting. The dialogue surrounding a decision is as important as the decision itself; all board and commission members are expected to contribute to the deliberative process through open discussion.
- Understanding of Board Membership. The candidate should appreciate that members act solely as a deliberative body, and that members have no power or authority outside the confines of that board meeting. A candidate should not approach board service with an ‘ax to grind’ or preconceived agenda, but should be an open-minded critical thinker, with strong teamwork skills for overall group success.
These are qualities that transcend individual boards and commissions and will be guiding my nomination process in the years ahead. Did I miss any?
Overall, my goal is a more transparent, collaborative process for the recruitment, selection, and retention for our city's 18+ boards and commissions. It will never be a finished process -- there's always iterative improvements to be made. I'm especially interested in hearing ideas for how to best show appreciation to the volunteers who currently serve. Can you share ideas of what works in other cities?
Thanks for reading to the end!