Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Government Review Task Force - 4/23/2001 TOWN OF ORO VALLEY GOVERNMENT REVIEW TASK FORCE MEETING MINUTES APRIL 23, 2001 • The nineteenth Government Review Task Force meeting was called to order by Chairman Paul Loomis at 4:36 p.m. • ATTENDANCE: • Chairman Paul Loomis • Vice Chairman Jim Kriegh • Marilyn Cook • Don Dvorak • Richard Feinberg • Larry Holden • Susan Baczkiewicz • Kathi Cuvelier • Dan Dudley • APPROVAL OF MINUTES. Don Dvorak motioned for approval of the April 16, 2001 meeting minutes. Seconded by Vice-Chairman Kriegh. Motion carried 5-0. • APPOINTMENT TO BOARDS/COMMISSIONS. Chairman Loomis opened the discussion concerning the appointment process for Boards/Commissions with an introduction of Town Manager Chuck Sweet and Community Development Director Brent Sinclair. Chairman Loomis then inquired about their previous experience with other municipalities as it relates to the appointment process, and whether they have any recommendations for a better volunteer application/interview process. • Chuck Sweet stated that the current appointment/interview process is as such (since 1995) because there had not been any clearly defined process in place prior to the current procedures. The Interview Panel consists of the Town Manager, Department Head, and Chairperson of the Board/Commission, and it is their duty to make a recommendation to the Council concerning appointments to Boards/Commissions as a regular agenda item. The presentation is not a public hearing because this process may illicit "mischief' from public input. Chuck Sweet felt that the current procedures provides a good opportunity for him to meet the residents of Oro Valley, however, he has noted that the current procedures are time-consuming primarily for the Staff because of the need to track vacancies, track lead-time before terms expire, advertise for openings, schedule interviews or meetings, and follow-up with those prospective volunteers that have not been chosen for appointment. Chuck Sweet also indicated that it was overwhelming to conduct as many interviews for volunteer positions as is necessary, and that he may designate a Department Head to sit in his place. Chuck Sweet further F:\Susan\Govt Task Force\DRAFT Minutes 042301 1 noted that in other municipalities, a list is submitted to the Council concerning prospective volunteers, without an interview, this may be a violation of the Open Meeting Law. Chuck Sweet concluded with his thoughts that the elected officials should be eliminated from the interview process in an effort to de-politicize such process. • Brent Sinclair felt that the current appointment/interview procedures are time consuming, but was a good indication that the Town has many individuals interested in volunteering. Since there is a lot of interest on behalf of the residents, this provides a larger talent pool of which to appoint prospective volunteers. Brent Sinclair mentioned that our interview process is satisfactory and provides for "screening" outside of the Council meetings, which may be embarrassing or awkward. Brent Sinclair further noted that in other municipalities, the Council has directly appointed the volunteer and the Council will later ask the Director about the volunteer's performance. This tactic puts the Director on the spot when in fact a "screening" process could eliminate this awkward position. Brent Sinclair concluded in agreement with Chuck Sweet in that the Council Liaison should be excluded from the Interview Panel in an effort to de-politicize the process. • Don Dvorak asked if there is a difference between the Town employee and Town volunteer interview process. • Chuck Sweet stated that the Town employee interview process is longer because the questions are more detailed. He indicated that an interview with an employee is typically one hour with 10-15 questions, and an interview with a volunteer is typically one half hour with 4-5 questions. Brent Sinclair added that the questions for Town employee interviews are usually more technical in nature, and agreed that the time spent interviewing a potential Town employee is lengthier than interviewing a prospective volunteer. • Richie Feinberg asked if there was an area in the volunteer application that would alleviate the time-consuming nature of the application/interview process. Further, were more specific questions on the application better than general questions? Richie Feinberg also inquired about whether someone already serving on a Board/Commission would be a better candidate for service than a new appointee would. In addition, he wondered if more persons on the Interview Panel would be better than just the Town Manager, Department Head, and Chairperson. • Chuck Sweet thought that the current application provided good information to paint a picture of the prospective volunteer. When reviewing an application, Chuck Sweet's focus is typically on the prospective volunteer's community involvement (in Oro Valley or elsewhere). Regardless of the prospective volunteer's age, Chuck Sweet is interested in how the individual has demonstrated community involvement, and whether this individual is committed to serving the community. In regard to re-appointments, Chuck Sweet looks at attendance and gets Chair input concerning the volunteer's performance. F:\Susan\Govt Task Force\DRAFT Minutes 042301 2 He also feels that a smaller number on the Interview Panel is best. Brent Sinclair agreed that it was difficult to coordinate interview schedules with any more than three persons on the Interview Panel. • Larry Holden stated that the Government Review Task Force was charged with the duty to de-politicize the application/interview process. He asked whether eliminating the Council Liaison would accomplish this task? • Chuck Sweet asserted that the Council Liaison position was needed long ago, but that the Town has currently outgrown the need for such position. He feels that the Council Members are better used in other capacities. Chuck Sweet also stated that there is an opportunity for politics to enter into the voting scheme when a Council Liaison is tied to a particular issue or prospective volunteer, although this always depends upon any one person's "agenda." Brent Sinclair agreed that whether or not there is any political influence among the Council Members is always dependent upon the person. • Vice-Chairman Kriegh asked how many of the questions asked of the prospective volunteers are the same among each interview, and whether the current length of the volunteer application (with yes/no questions) was appropriate. He also inquired about insight concerning direct appointment. In addition, Vice-Chairman Kriegh suggested a volunteer position to assist the Town in tracking vacancies, tracking lead-time before terms expire, assisting with advertisements for openings, scheduling interviews or meetings, and following-up with those prospective volunteers that have not been chosen for appointment. • Chuck Sweet stated that all or most of the questions asked during a prospective volunteer interview are the same during each interview since the Interview Panel has a list of general questions of which to choose. He also felt that the yes/no questions on the application were a good idea. Chuck Sweet felt that the Town has a great pool of talent and he feels that any application/interview process will render similar results. In addition, he stated that the Town has considered acquiring a Volunteer Coordinator in order to alleviate the burden currently shared between the Town Clerk and the Town Manager's Administrative Assistant. As pointed out by Don Dvorak, the Town may not warrant such a staff position due the availability of funds, space, etc., but that such a volunteer position is a good alternative. Brent Sinclair added that he has insight concerning a direct appointment process, however, such appointment was designed per ward/district. • Marilyn Cook asked if there was a difference in the appointments of prospective volunteers made by an Interview Panel's recommendation, and of those made by a Council's direct appointment. In addition, she stated that a volunteer with previous employment agency experience could assist in making assessments of a prospective volunteer during the interview process. • Brent Sinclair felt that it was difficult to relate the quality of the volunteer appointment to the appointment process. He felt that the Town is made up of quality persons of who are eager to serve the community. In F:\Susan\Govt Task Force\DRAFT Minutes 042301 3 • addition, Chuck Sweet thought that the appointment/interview process is directly proportionate to the effort put into such process. He felt that interviewing a prospective volunteer is better than direct Council appointment. He also indicated that it is somewhat of a "tight rope" when faced with appointing a new face or re-appointing a current Board/Commission member. Limiting terms would be a good solution so that the Town could benefit from the vast talent pool of interested individuals. Finally, another option concerning the interview process is to have a Staff person, instead of the Town Manager, serve on the Interview Panel and/or have the Department Heads serve on the Interview Panel on a rotation-basis. • COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP. In regard to the Public Opinion Forum Report, Richie Feinberg motioned for approval of the cover memo and report with revisions as discussed. Seconded by Don Dvorak. Motion carried 5-0. • NEW BUSINESS. In review of the Council Chambers Sound System/ Podium memo, Chairman Loomis suggested that the introduction should be elaborated and a closing statement should be added. Richie Feinberg stated that the memo could include an explanation that the GRTF was charged with the task to observe Council procedures and in so doing the GRTF discovered a deficiency in the sound system and the position of the podium. Don Dvorak stated that if members of the public could hear all of the presentations and comments made during a Council Meeting, then this may encourage attendance. Chuck Sweet warned that lapel microphones pick up all sounds (coughing, sneezing, etc.). Chairman Loomis indicated that the revised Council Chambers Sound System/Podium memo should be available for review by the next regularly scheduled meeting. • APPOINTMENT TO BOARDS/COMMISSIONS; continued. Regarding • the review of the revised volunteer application, Chairman Loomis suggested that the time commitment for the Citizen Planning Institute (CPI) needs to be verified. CPI is comprised of 8 regular classes scheduled from 6:30-8:30, one required attendance of a Council or Board/Commission meeting, and one Field Trip. The CPI initiated classes in mid-November and concluded in early March. Chairman Loomis also asked that a cover letter be drafted for submission to the various Boards/Commissions for review and input concerning the volunteer application. Don Dvorak motioned for approval of the volunteer application with revisions as discussed. Seconded by Marilyn Cook. Motion carried 5-0. • NEXT MEETING(S). • Loomis SPECIAL: On Monday, : ���� ::� � ::: ����... Chairman declared the next Special meeting date. The upcoming Special Meeting will address the final review of the Council Policies & Procedures. • Loomis Loom REGULAR: On Monday, �ti11 �����1��4� 1��� ��� �� : . Chairman declared the next regularly scheduled meeting date. The upcoming agenda will address the following: F:\Susan\Govt Task Force\DRAFT Minutes 042301 4 • Approval of April 30, 2001 Minutes • Discussion of the Council Chambers Sound System/Podium presentation before Council • Discussion of the Council Policies/Procedures presentation before Council • Discussion of Board/Commission volunteer application • New Business • Discussion of Next Meeting/Agenda . ADJOURNMENT. Vice-Chairman Kriegh moved to adjourn at 6:11 p.m. Seconded by Don Dvorak. Motion carried 5-0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, TOWN OF ORO VALLEY „„ -7 C77 ern I. Baczkiewicz Civil Paralegal F:\Susan\Govt Task Force\DRAFT Minutes 042301 5