Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - Government Services Committee - Meeting Date: 3/30/2017Government Services Committee Thursday – March 30, 2017 Regular Meeting Minutes Council Conference Room 5850 West Glendale Avenue Glendale, AZ Councilmember Lauren Tolmachoff called the meeting to order at 10:00 a.m. Present were Councilmember Jamie Aldama (Arrived late), Councilmember Lauren Tolmachoff, and Councilmember Ray Malnar. Also in attendance were Van Ornelas; Charyn Eirich-Palmisano, Community Revitalization; Elaine Adamczyk, Community Services; Jenna Goad, Government Relations; Julie K. Bower, City Clerk; and City Attorney Michael Bailey. #1 – Approval of Minutes from GSC Meeting of February 2, 2017 Councilmember Malnar made a motion to approve the minutes from the February 2, 2017 GSC meeting. Councilmember Tolmachoff seconded the motion. Minutes approved by Councilmember Tolmachoff and Councilmember Malnar. #2 – Resignations Discussed Mr. Manuel Padia’s resignation (Barrel) from Parks and Recreation Advisory Board due to change in meeting schedule. #3 – Community Development Advisory Committee (CDAC) Committee Update – Charyn Eirich-Palmisano, Community Revitalization and Elaine Adamczyk, Community Services Ms. Elaine Adamczyk presented on the following:  CDAC structure, committee resolution and responsibilities - o CDAC is responsible for $2.5 million in Federal funding.  13-member board committee size and make-up.  Federal policy and regulations of CDAC.  Difficulty of membership and quorum issues.  Solicited GSC for assistance with required vacancies and recruitment ideas- o HUD requirements for membership must be met. o Would like to have a public housing family participate. o Used a flyer/brochure to help recruit members. Councilmember Malnar inquired as to the reasons why so certain members are close to dropping out of the committee. Ms. Adamczyk replied that members have a variety of issues that prevent them from attending committee meetings. Councilmember Malnar also asked what are the low- income qualifications for participating as a member. Ms. Charyn Eirich-Palmisano responded that the committee must have five members that are from an area that is designated as low-income and one member from the Glendale Elementary School District. Councilmember Aldama asked if this was the committee that oversees the CBDG grants and what the major issue is regarding the CDAC committee. Ms. Adamczyk and Ms. Charyn Eirich- Palmisano replied that the major issue is lack of quorum. Councilmember Aldama further stated that he did not know that this was an issue. Ms. Adamczyk added that membership has fallen to nine, and March 2017 meeting only had seven, which is exactly the quorum that is needed. With the January 4th and 5th meetings, quorum was not met and meetings had to be canceled. Councilmember Tolmachoff inquired if CDAC was seeking a proposal regarding changing the number of people needed for the committee. Ms. Adamczyk answered that CDAC has to have 13, federal guidelines say five from low income representation, seven members to represent one of each of the city’s districts, and one member from the Glendale Elementary School District (GESD). Councilmember Tolmachoff also asked what can GSC do to fix the problem. Ms. Adamczyk suggested that lowering the committee membership would help with the quorum issue, however, the federal requirement is five from low income areas and one from GESD. Councilmember Malnar suggested adding two members at-large and if there is an advantage to adding a youth to the committee. Jenna Goad replied that her understanding of the seven appointments represent council districts, which have an easier time recruiting and filling those vacancies. Councilmember Malnar thought by adding members to the committee would make it easier. Councilmember Tolmachoff suggested making the committee smaller rather than larger to help with quorum. Ms. Charyn Eirich Palmisano announced that by making the committee smaller it would put a greater emphasis on the set five low-income membership, which would make recruitment much more difficult. Councilmember Malnar asked to look at a Census district map and wondered why his district didn’t show any low-income neighborhoods. Ms. Charyn Eirich Palmisano indicated that the Census tracts take all information based on the 2010 Census. She also mentioned that they could go down further to Census blocks and use those numbers. Councilmember Malnar suggested Census blocks be used in his district because he knows that there are tracts/blocks below poverty. Ms. Adamczyk asked Charyn if the low-income residents also have to be from a low-income census tract or district, so it can't be someone who lives up north but still be low-income. Ms. Charyn Eirich Palmisano responded that they have to represent the neighborhood in which they reside. She also indicated that CDAC could use Census blocks and the micro-data to help qualify members. Councilmember Malnar mentioned that he would like to see that used because portions of his district have needs and are often overlooked. Ms. Adamczyk replied that if someone participates in some sort of way and therefore represents their position on this for the responsibility of this board, it would not necessarily be to advocate for themselves or their neighborhood, it would be for the allocation of $3 million of federal funds to qualified applicants/nonprofits. Councilmember Aldama clarified Councilmember Malnar’s point by stating that the criteria used to qualify commission members comes from HUD’s Federal Low-income Standards requirement that uses Census data. Councilmember Malnar asked for an explanation between census tracts versus blocks. Ms. Eirich Palmisano explained the difference between census tracts and blocks. She further mentioned that she would have to reference the CAP guidelines to see how far they could go down in a census tract or block to qualify an individual commissioner. Councilmember Aldama asked if CDAC would like to comeback with a proposal and see how the GSC can help with the quorum issues. Ms. Adamczyk announced that they would like to come back with a proposal and understands that there may be prospective applicants for the CDAC commission. Councilmember Aldama asked that CDAC clarify with the City Attorney about the possible changes to the committee and bring forth a proposal at the next GSC meeting. Councilmember Tolmachoff inquired about the committee’s make up and if the group was proposing to change the number of commissioners on this committee and if they were wanting to add at large members. Councilmember Malnar asked if there were any absentee issues and if they are monitored, and if members are needing to be replaced. Van Ornelas commented that attendance is monitored and that GSC would be discussing in executive session. Ms. Adamczyk mentioned that there are several attendance issues as well that are affecting CDAC’s ability to meet quorum. Councilmember Aldama announced that GSC will discuss this matter in executive session and will try to resolve it if possible. He also asked Ms. Adamczyk and Ms. Eirich Palmisano to please verify with the City Attorney if those changes can be made and to research HUD on the federal guidelines. Ms. Adamczyk agreed to have the City Attorney look at lowering the number of commissioners, and if they can go from Census tracts to blocks. She further mentioned that they would advertise with HUD housing families and would look at HUD regulations to see if changes can occur. Both Ms. Adamczyk and Ms. Eirich Palmisano agreed to come back and update the committee. #4 - Julie K. Bower, City Clerk – Update on Standardization of Boards & Commissions Agendas; and Michael Bailey, City Attorney - Agenda Review Committee Ms. Julie Bower presented the following:  Updated the committee on the implementation process for standardizing the agendas/minutes for the Boards & Commissions.  Provided a background and need for standardizing agendas and minutes.  Mentioned new system would allow for quicker postings from boards and commissions.  Public can view posted items of agendas and supportive packets/documents.  Discussed and provided samples of the new format that will follow council agendas.  Currently in the process of meeting with liaisons from the various boards and commissions.  Training will be provided to staff liaisons who put agendas/minutes together. Councilmember Malnar inquired about whose responsible for creating the agendas and the reason for needing to standardize them. Van Ornelas explained that staff liaisons from each board and commission is responsible for creating their own agenda and minutes. Ms. Bower stated that every board and commission uses a different format. She handed out a sample agenda to the committee. Councilmember Tolmachoff inquired about past agendas and information. Ms. Bowers replied that the new system would allow for data retrieval of archival items. Councilmember Aldama inquired about possible staffing issues with minutes taking, particularly with Parks and Recreation. Ms. Bowers noted that the new system would have a minutes module, and that minutes are required by law and that all boards and commissions should taking minutes. She indicated that her meetings with people has been a good exercise and has created some concerns for the need of proper training and records keeping. Ms. Bower plans to follow up with these committees. Councilmember Aldama asked why this standardize process was necessary. Ms. Bower replied that every board and commission uses a different format. She handed out samples of the different types of agendas being used. Councilmember Aldama inquired about the agendas being posted on the City’s kiosk. Ms. Bower said all agendas are posted to the public as well as the kiosk. Councilmember Tolmachoff announced the minutes taking issue regarding Parks and Recreation. She and Councilmember Aldama inquired whether that issue was resolved or not? Councilmember Aldama asked Van to look into the matter with Erik Strunk and report back. Councilmember Malnar inquired whether the standardizing would make it easier and faster create agendas. Ms. Bower replied that yes it would make it easier and format more uniform. Van Ornelas inquired about the roll out and timeline of the new standardized process. Ms. Bower mentioned that the process would begin with training in April and completed by the first part of May. Mr. Michael Bailey presented the following:  Need/background for an Agenda Review Committee- o Council Standpoint  Meetings canceled due to other scheduled events  The number of council agenda items  Lengthy meetings o Staff Standpoint  Agenda authority and structure  Time allotment, management, and scheduling  Elements of the Agenda Review Committee- o Proposed members of the committee-  City Attorney  City Clerk  City Manager Representative  Mayor  One Councilmember  Process for implementing the Agenda Review Committee. Councilmember Tolmachoff inquired as to who has authority to add items to the council agenda. Mr. Bailey indicated that part of the issue for this is that there is no real structure. He gave an example that when he sees only one item on the agenda, he feels that he can add important legal items to discuss and have the appropriate time allotted for that discussion. Mr. Bailey further mentions that often times what happens is that others add to the agenda and meetings and executive sessions then go for long periods of time. He explained the need for Agenda Review Committee and how it would elevate this issue. Councilmember Tolmachoff asked about the structure of the committee as it pertains to council members. She indicated that she would like to see two councilmembers on the committee, not just one, and the mayor be considered part of the council. Mr. Bailey outlined the reason for the structure since the Mayor is the chair of the council meeting. Councilmember Aldama stated that the Mayor’s role is ceremonial and is more like a councilmember. Councilmember Tolmachoff voiced her concern that this committee could become too political and felt that if councilmembers and the mayor were to rotate, it would minimize this from happening. Mr. Bailey suggested since there are five members represented on the committee it would be balanced. Councilmember Aldama mentioned that since the mayor had no role in creating or setting the agenda, he should not have to be on the committee at all times while councilmembers have to rotate. He further stated that its inappropriate to have this structure in place and that the mayor should have to alternate just like councilmembers. Mr. Bailey responded that he would go back and work on the structure so that the importance of the agenda committee is on the merits and substance of the agenda items. Councilmember Malnar inquired as to who sets the agenda for the council. Mr. Bailey replied that there is no real structure/authority and there lies the problem. Councilmember Aldama asked what is the current practice for setting the agenda. Ms. Bower mentioned that there is no real practice and that staff just puts items on agenda. Mr. Bailey explained the process on how items get on the agenda through the online system. Julie Bower and Jenna Goad added that a spreadsheet is used to determine generally what’s on the agenda. Ms. Bower further mentioned that she notifies city departments if there is room on the agenda but doesn’t have the authority to make departments add or delete items from the agenda. Councilmember Tolmachoff inquired as to why doesn’t the City Clerk have the authority to make those decisions regarding the agenda. Mr. Bailey indicated that the purpose of the Agenda Review Committee was designed for that purpose. Councilmember Aldama asked Jenna Goad to comment on the current agenda process. Ms. Goad mentioned that Glendale uses a software that allows departments to upload their items/attachments into the system, and is then approved by a department head or city attorney depending on the item, but ultimately ends up in the city manager’s office. Ms. Goad further states that there is a mechanism and sequencing for approval through the software system. Mr. Bailey added that this only illustrates how an idea/item gets on a paper agenda and not substance of the item that will be discussed. Councilmember Malnar inquired about the administrative role of the city manager as it relates to formulating/creating the agenda. He believes that the city manager should be the most involved in the process on how things get on the agenda. Councilmember Tolmachoff asked Ms. Bower how it’s done in other places she has been. Ms. Bower responded that typically the city manager is very involved with what’s on the agenda and the control of the process, and always the city clerk produces the agenda. She also indicated that this was the first time she has seen where the city manager is not as involved. Councilmember Tolmachoff suggested that the council should communicate their concerns to the city manager about the agenda-making process and to empower the city clerk to have more authority over the agenda. Councilmember Aldama stated that he would like to know from the city manager to what extent is he involved with the agenda-making process and would like to know why it’s done the way it is currently. Councilmember Tolmachoff indicated that she would like to see the city manager or a designated staff member oversee this process. Councilmember Malnar expressed concern over the agenda process, lack of coordination, and the lack of progress with the Items of Special Interest. He stated that he feels that staff is letting the items go too long and they don’t ever get around to the them after so much time has passed. Councilmember Aldama posed a question that he wants to know if Kevin has a role in the process or if he even wants a role in the agenda-making process. Councilmember Malnar announced that he agrees with the process of an Agenda Review Committee and thinks it will expedite and reduce problems. Councilmember Aldama agreed with councilmember Malnar and inquired about the committee’s purpose. Mr. Bailey explained that the main purpose of the committee is to work with council to help balance and manage the amount of time needed for agenda items. Councilmember Tolmachoff agreed with Mr. Bailey that the purpose of the committee is to help manage the work load. Councilmember Aldama inquired about the purpose of the mayor and the overall structure of the review committee. He feels that he has not seen where there are standing members in other city committees. Ms. Bower mentioned that she was familiar with this structure from previous places she worked. Mr. Bailey also responded that there are standing members in the public safety committees that are outlined by statue. GSC members agreed that they were being asked to approve the Agenda Review Committee or some set of guidelines to help improve the agenda process. Councilmember Aldama suggested that maybe they create an Agenda Review Committee without councilmembers since the process is more administrative than policy. All three committee members agreed with that suggestion and would like to see the city clerk empowered with more authority, along with the city manager or designee to oversee this review committee. All three also felt that this function is an administrative task and not a council function. Councilmember Tolmachoff indicated that she would like to see criteria for what goes on and off the agenda, as well as, deadlines for posting. Councilmember Aldama agreed that the city attorney and city clerk should have more authority and empowerment over the process. Mr. Bailey clarified with GSC that he and the city clerk to would work together on this review process. Ms. Bower stated that she would include hard deadlines regarding the agenda process unless it’s an emergency. Councilmember Tolmachoff suggested that the clerk have authority on the scheduling of council meetings and workshops. Councilmember Aldama inquired about the next steps of this proposal. Mr. Bailey felt that he and the city clerk have adequate direction and will begin the agenda review process. Councilmember Malnar mentioned that he would like to see the big picture as well. He would like to know who or what’s driving the agenda. He further mentioned that he feels no one is leading the agenda process and maybe the Council should address with city manager. Ms. Goad responded that the majority of the agenda items come from one of the various department heads and directors and ultimately the city manager. She indicated that since the city manager’s office was not present and not part of the discussion, she suggested they get feedback from the city manager’s office. Councilmember Tolmachoff posed a question as to whether the council needs to set expectations with the city manager or designee that they need to be working with the city clerk and city attorney. She further explained that this would help with the work flow and management of the agenda process. Councilmember Malnar felt that the city attorney and city clerk were looking for greater guidance and authority. Councilmember Aldama inquired on how GSC or the council should communicate this information to the city manager. Mr. Bailey stated that GSC could invite him to a GSC committee meeting. Councilmember Aldama suggested to Mr. Bailey that he inform the city manager that GSC wold like for him or designee involved with the agenda process. #6 – Next GSC Meeting: Tuesday, April 18, 2017 Committee discussed the next meeting date and time, and all agreed with the scheduled date/time for Tuesday, April 18, 2017. Committee also mentioned that they would hold the next GSC meeting on May, 16, 2017. Request for Motion to Adjourn At 11:10 a.m., Councilmember Aldama made a motion to adjourn. Councilmember Tolmachoff seconded the motion. Motion approved unanimously.