MIN CHC 2000-05-31 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

YUEN: This is an issue that we left open at the end of the last meeting and some of the Commission members wanted to actually see how much of a conflict there was. We •proposed that there would be a requirement that some Commissions change from having a more general geographic requirement to having one member from each Council district. At the present time, some of these Commissions — Well, let's just talk about Water and Salary. They each have, at present, two members who are in the same Council district. I think it's both in Council district 6. And then the question comes up what do we do as far as the taking of effect of this amendment. I think we should, rather than just leave it an open question that somebody has to worry about later, spell out what we want to do. The two basic alternatives are: Alternative (1) is to allow the sitting members to serve out their full terms and when the Mayor appoints new members, the Mayor would have to appoint a member from a district that's not represented on the Commission. And I've written language that would do that. Alternative (2) would be to disqualify one of those members of the Commissions — one of we'll call the duplicate members, or the overlapping members, or the over -represented members. And if you want to disqualify the member, then you have to come up with some method of deciding who would be disqualified. There's only, as I said, on these two Commissions that we're going to the single member districts, there's only one pair of overlapping members on each of those two Commissions. Looking ahead, we're talking about the Liquor Commission. There's no duplicates on the Liquor Commission, so if we went to nine single members on the Liquor Commission, the Mayor could simply nominate two people from the districts that are not currently represented. So those are really the alternatives — the decision that has to be made on the alternatives. •RAY: Does everybody understand the discussion? So, either we let it transition naturally or we come up with some sort of an arbitrary methodology that would expedite that. HERKES: Would you like a motion or do you just want to discuss? SANTANGELO: Can we discuss? RAY: Sure, we could — HERKES: I'd be willing to make a motion to transition naturally. IRVINE: Second. RAY: Discussion. That's Alternative A. YUEN: Alternative 1. RAY: Alternative 1, and Chris came up with the language for that. IRVINE: In favor of that, Chris does say in this letter that for Council members, the Charter makes it clear that they continue to serve their full terms and then at the end of that time, transition. And I think it would be more consistent to just let Boards and Commissions do the same thing. Of course, the Council people, it's with the next election. But with Boards and • Commissions it would be as terms expire. 19