2012-08-27 Reg - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Board; the Board of Trustees with the Police and Fire Pension Fund; and Board of Trustees Non-Uniformed Pension Fund. Mr. Kraft stated that on rule #32 the discussion was on the speaking part. He stated that if these are the only two issues, Council could come to some form of consensus tonight and take a vote on the rules. Mr. Kraft stated the rule in question was rule #38B. He said when the rules were reviewed in 2000, the appointments were rotated counter clockwise and it did not work. It was hard to determine which Councilmember was responsible for which appointment. The Boards were not diverse in sex, race or ward. He also stated that he and Mr. Sharpe set it up for each Councilmember to have at least one member on each of the Boards, which wasn’t the case in the past. Mr. Kraft stated there are 20 Boards which Council has the authority to make appointments to and there are 140 possible appointments. It was set up that each ward had 40 appointments and the Mayor had the difference. That meant each Councilmember would get 20 appointments. Mr. Kraft believed the system has worked and provided diversity, which was previously lacking. Mr. Kraft said there was a suggestion to rotate the appointments but his concern was it needed to be clarified exactly how it would work. Ms. Carr said it was unconscionable that she did not have the ability to appoint to either the Civil Service Board or the two Pension Boards meaning her constituents would never have the opportunity to be appointed. She noted that some appointments must conform to special conditions and City ordinances. She noted that some of the ordinances needed certain qualifications to serve on some Boards and other Boards’, “appointments are made by the Councilmember and turns rotate with the Mayor first then clockwise beginning with the Council seat to the far right, each in turn till all Councilmembers have had the opportunity to make an appointment to each Board. She stated the City Clerk shall keep track of which Councilmember has made which appointment for each Board and which Councilmember will be next to make an appointment.” Ms. Carr said Ms. Pumm was certainly capable of doing that. She stated she does it now for all the other Boards. Ms. Carr did not think this was an undue burden on the City Clerk. She noted the information could be made available for all Councilmembers periodically. As a note, Ms. Carr stated that as the transition from the previous lottery procedure was being made and if the Councilmember next in order had recently appointed to the Board in question in the last several appointments; he or she should be skipped for the first round until all Councilmembers have had the opportunity to appoint. Mr. Price said his focus was on the criminal activity that is widespread in the City and he was willing to move it to the next meeting. He also stated that if you look at the rotation grid and it took this long to explain, then something was wrong and it needed to be changed. Mr. Price suggested forming a committee of Ms. Carr, Mr. Kraft and Mr. Sharpe to review the Boards and Commission appointments and bring back a conclusion to the next meeting for a final vote. Mr. Crow agreed with Mr. Price, but would like to have the rules provided ahead of time so Council could take time to review and make one vote and get it done. 12