Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Board Bylaws topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Parks advisory panel advances bylaws, recruitment and board‑operations changes to staff review

3760170 · June 3, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Clallam County Parks Advisory Board reviewed proposed amendments to board bylaws, order of business and appointment procedures and voted to forward bylaws and county code recommendations to staff for legal review and consideration.

The Parks Advisory Board voted to forward proposed changes to the board's bylaws and to a draft county code text on park boards to staff for legal review and consideration.

The proposed changes include clarifying which staff position serves as clerk of the board (changed to a designated staff support person rather than a specific job title), specifying that agendas and minutes be distributed at least seven days prior to meetings, adding a formal "draft agenda items for next meeting" line to the order of business, and modernizing language in the board mission (replacing "maximize" with "optimize" recreational opportunities).

Board members also discussed appointment timing. Staff noted two reappointments will not take effect until June 30 and those appointees cannot vote at the July meeting if reappointment paperwork is not completed. The board discussed using a small subcommittee to review applications when recruitment is open and the chair asked staff to forward applicant materials to the subcommittee for vetting before the July meeting.

The board made two separate formal recommendations: one to forward the draft bylaws and board operations language to staff (and ultimately to legal/prosecutor review), and one to forward recommended county code language (Title 23, parks) to staff. Both motions carried and staff said legal review timelines vary and could take days to months.

Board members instructed staff to correct typographical errors noted in the packet (for example, acreage and percent notations) and to return revised language for the board's consideration. Staff will also confirm standard notice timelines used by other county advisory bodies and will route the proposals to the county prosecutor for review as needed.