HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 2 - Advisory Body Appointments for Unscheduled Vacancies (ARB) Department Name: Administration
Cost Center: 1021
For Agenda of: September 1, 2020
Placement: Consent
Estimated Time: N/A
FROM: Greg Hermann, Deputy City Manager
Prepared By: Teresa Purrington, City Clerk
Kevin Christian, Deputy City Clerk
SUBJECT: ADVISORY BODY APPOINTMENTS FOR UNSCHEDULED VACANCIES
RECOMMENDATION
Confirm appointment of Joe Benson, as recommended by the Council Liaison Subcommittee, for
the Administrative Review Board (ARB).
DISCUSSION
Due to a lack of candidates, recruitment for an unfilled vacancy has continued for the ARB since
April 2019 (16 months). Our recent mid-year recruitment push for various advisory body
vacancies was successful in generating multiple candidates for this position. Teleconference
interviews with the candidates were held by the Council Liaison Sub-committee on August 13,
2020. The Council Liaison Sub-committee found Joe Benson to be the most qualified of the three
candidates interviewed by his background experience and interview performance.
Policy Context
The Advisory Body Handbook, last adopted by City Council in February 2018, outlines the
recruitment procedures, membership requirements, and term limits. Also contained in the
Advisory Body Handbook are the bylaws for all advisory bodies, some of which include
additional membership requirements. Additionally, the City Council Policies and Procedures
Manual, last adopted in August 2019, describes the “Appointment Procedure” and “Process” for
Advisory Body appointments. Recruitment and appointment recommendations were performed
in conformance with all recruitment procedures, processes, and bylaws found in these resources.
Public Engagement
Recruitment for the ARB has been open continuously since the 2018 annual recruitment cycle,
was advertised in print media, posted on the City website and social media, and has been listed
and noticed as required by the “Maddy Act” (GC 54972, Local Appointments List) for both the
2018 and 2019 recruitment cycles.
Item 2
Packet Page 3
CONCURRENCE
The Council Liaison Subcommittees concur with the recommendations.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to the recommended actions in this
report, because the action does not constitute a “Project” under CEQA Guidelines sec. 15378.
FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: Yes/No Budget Year: 2020-21
Funding Identified: Yes/No
Fiscal Analysis:
Funding Sources Current FY Cost
Annualized
On-going Cost
Total Project
Cost
General Fund N/A
State
Federal
Fees
Other:
Total
There is no additional impact for appointment of Advisory Body members.
ALTERNATIVES
Council could recommend changes to the recommended appointment or direct staff to re -open
recruitment for additional candidates. This is not recommended as recruitment for the ARB has
resulted in few candidates, and the continued small membership size of the body could make
definitive decisions unattainable.
AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW
All applications are available for public review, by request, in the Office of the City Clerk, which
can be reached at (805) 781-7100 or cityclerk@slocity.org during normal business hours.
Item 2
Packet Page 4