Agenda - 05-14-2013 - 4 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Attachment A Excerpt from approved minutes from January 29, 2013 3. Discussion of Some Board of Commissioners and Advisory Board Protocols Chair Jacobs referenced the yellow sheet (copy of 2008 Advisory Board Chairs Meeting) and the need to orient the advisory board chairs. He said this came up, in part, when Commissioner Dorosin brought up the process of how they appoint to advisory boards. He said some of the advisory boards develop the expectation that if they nominate people, it is a breach of faith if the Board does not accept the nominations. He noted an email conversation clarifying that this is not how it works. The County Commissioners are the only body that can appoint to boards. These things need to be gone over with the advisory boards and he noted the need to provide guidance to these boards on several issues, i.e. closed session meetings, and to give them an opportunity to ask questions. He is talking about meeting with advisory board chairs. Chair Jacobs said work sessions were one issue that needed clarification. He noted that at work sessions, the public cannot speak, and there is no voting, no approvals or rejections. Items may be referred to a regular meeting and that items are not added to the agenda. There is a petitioning of the board at the beginning of Board meetings. In order to put items on the agenda, they must be reviewed at agenda review and will then put on a suitable agenda or clear reason will be given if they are not added. He said that an item not added is not considered "dead" and can be brought back at a later date. This system was developed to give order to the way in which matters are put on the agenda and to prevent items from appearing on the agenda without proper vetting about what is involved. He said this process has been used a little, but not much since the new members were seated. He referenced one petition by Commissioner Pelissier to have the Chair write a letter to all the advisory board members who have finished terms. Chair Jacobs said they currently receive a letter from the clerk and it will now have the Chair's signature on it. That is an example of a petition that will be answered. Commissioner Rich asked about time frames for responding to petitions and Chair Jacobs said there are two answers; one is ASAP and the other is the staff has to respond, which may take awhile for staff to get things together sufficiently to bring it back to the agenda. In either case, an answer will be given promptly. This response will tell you that if it is going to be on an agenda or not, and if not on the agenda at the next meeting, a time frame will be given. Frank Clifton said that if a petition requires research or legal research, there will be a listing of what staff members are pursuing it or have been assigned. A sheet will be given that give a status update and where the issue is projected to be on the agenda. This is especially true when several advisory boards are involved. Some type of response about action taken is usually given within a week of the petition. Chair Jacobs addressed the question of, do we care if our advisory boards make presentations to other elected boards and John Roberts asked for a moment to look into this. Chair Jacobs addressed the question of how letters are written. He said, if you use personal stationary, you may do what you want. If county stationary is used, make it clear that it is from you and not the board, unless you are the Chair speaking on behalf of the board. John Roberts, addressing the prior question, said the general advisory board policy section 11, page 14, subsection C3 states: — Advisory Boards and any members thereof shall not (and shall not have the express or implied authority to): 1. Take positions, in their capacity as an advisory board member, on any political issue or support or oppose any candidate for public office Chair Jacobs noted that this should be part of new member orientation.