Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners, nominating committee clash over appointment timing, process
Summary
Members of the Economic and Tourism Development Commission questioned why one vacancy was filled quickly by the county commissioners while other nominations followed the commission's nominating‑committee process; commissioners said the three county commissioners acted to fill an unexpired seat after closed‑session consultation.
Kent County Economic and Tourism Development Commission members debated the commission’s nominating process after an unexpired seat was filled by the county commissioners.
Commission members said they had expected consistent procedure: either the commission’s nominating committee should present candidates to the full commission for comment before forwarding recommendations to the county commissioners, or the nominating committee should forward its slate directly to the commissioners without additional full‑board discussion.
Several members said a recent appointment — the commissioners’ selection of Bob Jacob to fill an unexpired term — was executed before the full commission had an opportunity to review or discuss candidates. "Either we have a process that we do for every nominee or we make it up as we go along," one member said during the meeting.
Commissioner Price (speaking for the county commissioners) said the three commissioners discussed the vacancy with the director in closed session and decided to fill the seat to restore a full board. He told the commission that commissioners sometimes accept the nominating committee’s recommendations and sometimes make different appointments.
The commission voted at the meeting to advance one of the nominating‑committee’s ranked candidates (the committee’s second choice) for submission to the county commissioners; several members said they were not comfortable voting on other names they had not interviewed.
During the discussion members proposed clarifying the commission’s procedure: either expand the nominating committee to include the full board, conduct candidate interviews before a full‑board recommendation, or forward committee recommendations directly to the county commissioners without additional review. Staff said the procedure could be revised following the commission’s discussion.
Ending: The commission asked staff to review the appointment process and the possibility of changing the nominating procedure; the nominated candidate approved at the meeting will be forwarded to the county commissioners for final appointment.
