Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Boards And Committees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board begins multi-step reappointment process for advisory boards, approves many renewals and raises term-limit, vacancy and service-on-multiple-boards issues
Summary
County staff presented an update on board-and-committee reappointments; commissioners approved a large set of renewals and directed further vetting of many new applicants. The discussion focused on attendance, the option to limit multiple-board service, and better application ranking and vetting processes.
Get email alerts on the Boards And Committees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County attorneys and staff presented a consolidated list of advisory-board appointments and a batch of incumbent reappointments for the board's consideration. Commissioners and staff described a recent outreach campaign that produced many new applicants and noted that some incumbents were serving long terms or multiple advisory appointments.
The board moved through a long list of reappointments across multiple advisory boards (Beaches & Shores, Children's Services Advisory Committee, Code Enforcement, Construction Board of Adjustment & Appeals, Environmental Control Hearing Board, Tourist Development Council and others). Several incumbents were reappointed by voice vote; in some cases commissioners asked staff to return with additional vetting, attendance records or to consider applying term limits and a policy to limit an individual's service to a single advisory body.
Commissioners discussed options for next steps: (1) ask county attorney/staff to prepare a clearer vetting process and candidate matrix; (2) return with attendance records and recommendations for terms and limits; and (3) invite commissioners to interview applicants for district-specific appointments before final action. The board approved the majority of the reappointment requests on the Feb. 25 agenda and instructed staff to come back with a second wave of appointments and a recommended process for vetting the many new applicants.
No county-code changes were adopted at the meeting; commissioners asked that staff compile attendance records and draft procedural improvements for future rounds of appointments.
