My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Agenda and Packet 2018 12 18
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
AGENDAS & PACKETS (45.010)
>
2010-2019 City Council Agendas and Packets
>
2018 City Council Agendas and Packets
>
City Council Agenda and Packet 2018 12 18
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:12:30 PM
Creation date
1/16/2019 9:14:18 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Packet
Original Hardcopy Storage
8D6
Supplemental fields
Test
CCAGPKT 2018 12 18
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
380
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City Council <br />Meeting Minutes <br />November 27, 2018 <br />Page 10 of 12 <br />Councilmember Stolzmann thanked all applicants and board members for their service. <br />She noted the wealth of applicants for the LBoT. She noted there are six boards with <br />only one applicant for multiple spots. She would like to readvertise for those six boards <br />for a larger, diverse pool of candidates. <br />Councilmember Leh stated not having other applicants is not a reason not to appoint <br />the applicants we did get. If any applicant does not have enough votes to be appointed <br />we can go back out; but he worries about opening it up wholesale. <br />Councilmember Loo supported appointing Mr. Menaker to the LRC. She feels he should <br />be appointed and to not appoint him when other boards have one applicant and we are <br />appointing them is inappropriate. Mr. Menaker has done a great deal for the City and <br />she feels he should be appointed. She noted she has received letters from members of <br />the LRC supporting his reappointment. <br />Councilmember Stolzmann noted that last year for the Recreation Board there were <br />enough applicants but we turned away people and reopened the pool as Council <br />wanted a different mix of candidates. She does not want to appoint people to the LCC <br />who didn't apply when we are turning down other applicants for that board. This does <br />not give us the best outcome. She thinks we should readvertise for a larger pool of <br />people so we get a better mix of people. <br />Councilmember Maloney stated the Council should respect the process. He likes the <br />application process as redesigned last year. He asked why the Committee wants to <br />discuss the reappointment of Mr. Menaker. <br />Mayor Muckle stated he suggested the discussion for two reasons. Mr. Menaker has <br />been a great member of the community, but perhaps is a lightning rod as well. He is <br />also reluctant to appoint him for another 5-year term which would give him 15 years on <br />the board without a new voice. <br />Councilmember Leh stated he is uncomfortable discussing a single candidate in the <br />absence of an interview of that candidate. He suggested the Council interview Mr. <br />Menaker and then make a decision. If there are not the votes for a candidate to be <br />appointed than it may take care of itself. <br />Mayor Muckle stated this is just a point of discussion; it can be done however Council <br />chooses. <br />Councilmember Loo stated there are other board members who have served on a board <br />for longer than 15 years. If he is still providing a valuable service to the community a <br />member should be reappointed. She would like him appointed without an interview. <br />35 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.