HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024/03/04 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Study SessionOfficial minutes
Boards and Commissions workshop
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
March 4, 2024
March 4, 2024: The workshop convened at 6:03 p.m. at Westwood Hills Nature Center.
Council members present: Mayor Mohamed, Sue Budd, Tim Brausen, Lynette Dumalag, Yolanda
Farris, and Margaret Rog
Council member absent: Paul Baudhuin
Staff present: City manager (Ms. Keller), administrative services director (Ms. Brodeen), deputy
city clerk (Ms. Scott-Lerdal), sustainability manager (Ms. Ziring), city attorney (Ms. Schmidt)
Guests: Chad Henderson and Keelin Yenny, Yellow Umbrella Coaching & Consulting
Ms. Keller welcomed the group and introduced the purpose of the meeting. She introduced Mr.
Henderson and Ms. Yenny. They reviewed the workshop format, beginning with a 30-minute
introduction to the boards and commissions followed by a discussion period of 90 minutes.
Ms. Yenny gave the guiding principles of conversation as openness, respect and
communication. She asked if any other principles should be included, no amendments were
offered.
Ms. Yenny outlined the goals for the workshop as understanding the council's appetite for
change as individuals and as a collective, to seek clarity of opinion and proposed changes, and
making sure that all voices were heard.
Ms. Yenny covered the timeline of the external review, through examination of role and
external review highlights, beginning in January of 2023. She pointed out how closely council
and community points are aligned.
The new program purpose included several potential structures and took a deeper analysis of
task force models, strategic priority-based commissions, and a single strategic board. In
November of 2023, Yellow Umbrella gathered challenges, opportunities and concerns from
boards and commissions members. Concerns included challenges such as loss of clarity, loss of
specialized enterprise, devaluing members, meeting effectiveness with a large board, limited
leadership opportunities and the role of staff perceived as a firewall. Opportunities such as
cross-topic collaborations, flexible structure, and more open opportunity for collaboration were
also covered.
Mr. Henderson shared that there would be time spent discussing several questions, including
feedback received from Council Member Baudhuin. The questions posed to the group were:
Reflection/global questions:
1. After reviewing stakeholder feedback how well do you feel the new proposed structure
addresses existing challenges and opportunities? Have your feelings or thoughts changed
over time?
DocuSign Envelope ID: B796E180-3E2D-41A9-A1D0-14459EEA43EB
City council workshop -2- March 4, 2024
Council members shared their perspectives of both the current and proposed structures.
Conversation included personal experience through serving on boards and commissions prior to
council election, questions about process versus structure, barriers to participation,
compensation, and potential solutions to long-standing concerns and issues by boards and
commissions members. They agreed that there were positive aspects of the current structure
and gave deference and respect to the work accomplished by dedicated commissioners over
the years. Council members also agreed that community feedback was a major factor in their
current concerns of both the current and the proposed boards and commissions structures.
2. How comfortable do you feel in undertaking change to address the concerns and
opportunities identified over the past year? What makes you excited to undergo change?
What makes you feel apprehension?
Each member of the group confirmed that they felt comfort with change and felt excitement
particularly when change brings about improvement and gains trust. They also agreed that the
pace of change is important to ensure that effective strategies are retained. Apprehension
arose in concerns of changing too quickly to properly identify what to maintain. In reference to
the boards and commissions proposed structure change, the group agreed that some level of
change is needed.
3. If no changes were to be made to the existing structure, who would stand to benefit? Who
would be more likely to be left out?
Council members agreed that without change to the current program structure, the same
groups of people who experience fewer barriers to participation would continue to experience
fewer barriers, and groups of people who the council would like to see both recruited and
retained would continue to experience comparatively more barriers to participation. They
discussed societal and historical patterns of public service barriers, and potential solutions.
Conversation on solutions included suggestions for a robust orientation program, offering more
specific invitation to welcome broad perspectives, and support of participation such as food
and childcare.
Ms. Schmidt was asked to add her perspective regarding these suggestions, and she reflected
that any expenditure of this nature must have public purpose.
Board/commission structure/relationship questions:
1. Changes to the existing structure may provide opportunities to reconsider the ways in
which the council interacts with the boards and commissions. What level of time
commitment do you feel is appropriate and manageable for you as a council member to give
to boards and commissions?
Members of the city council each shared their current and potential time commitments with
honesty and respect for each other, for commissioners, and for the intense commitment that
comes with public service – not just for the group of people attending this workshop, but for
future elected officials and commissioners as well.
DocuSign Envelope ID: B796E180-3E2D-41A9-A1D0-14459EEA43EB
City council workshop -3- March 4, 2024
Mr. Henderson pointed out that there is a mutual time problem, and asked if a change to the
existing structure could include a way to reallocate time.
Potential solutions were discussed, such as attending boards and commissions meetings
quarterly, written reports to convey work plans and progress, annual presentations by each
board and commission for their annual work plan and including a systems approach to annual
work plans.
Two additional ideas were to have boards and commissions fall under the at-Large council
members and mayor, and to try a boards and commissions liaison approach. These two ideas
brought the council’s conversation back to time commitment and concerns of representing a
limited point of view as a boards and commissions liaison.
2. Maintaining a “community friendly” process for input was a clear theme across multiple
stakeholders. How strongly do you feel that quorum, open meeting law barriers, and
parliamentary procedures should be addressed through any changes to the current boards
and commissions structure?
Conversation ranged from council members sharing their personal experiences with boards and
commissions in the past to changes that they would like to see to the current structure,
including strong support for working within open meeting law to remove barriers to
participation.
Though every board and commission utilize parliamentary procedure, the group agreed that
these processes could be beneficial and skill-building for some commissioners, while at the
same time, could pose obstacles and intimidation to participation for others.
Ms. Schmidt was asked to clarify some points of what is required. She pointed out that
compliance with open meeting law is mandated by state law. The use of parliamentary
procedure is a city decision.
The group agreed that within legal boundaries, they would like to see boards and commissions
be able to function nimbly to provide more timely communication to inform council’s policy-
making work.
3. A change in structure provides opportunities to reconsider workflow. How do you believe
workflow to the board should function in any structure that is in place?
A variety of opinions and suggestions arose from council members as they discussed the
question of workflow direction and how it relates to council action. The group conversed about
concepts such as board and commission naming, compensation, reporting structure, and the
many differences between staff recommendation and advisory commission advice - including
the limited ability for advisory commissions to be nimble in responding to council.
Potential solutions to workflow included synchronization with the city’s systems approach and
strategic priorities. Council members questioned the extent to which open meeting law
affected smaller groups of commissioners and board members in workflow.
DocuSign Envelope ID: B796E180-3E2D-41A9-A1D0-14459EEA43EB
City council workshop -4- March 4, 2024
Ms. Schmidt added that how a group is formed and constituted is important. Boards and
commissions, under their current structure, are subject to the roles, charges and duties that city
council originally created for them. Also, some commissions are statutory and limited to specific
roles and actions.
Ms. Keller remarked that who a body reports to is also a statutory consideration. For example, a
small group that does not meet quorum – any sub-committee or task force of a larger
committee - are still subject to open meeting law.
Ms. Schmidt addressed the idea of compensation for boards and commissions, cautioning that
there are limited ways to pursue compensation via payroll thoughtfully and specifically.
The conversation returned to the question of workflow and the potential interaction of city
council, city staff, and boards and commissions. The group agreed that there is potential value
in defining the role of boards and commissions under the city’s strategic priorities. Using the
systems approach could inform workflow, coordination and community alignment. Council
members agreed that staff recommendation along with boards and commissions advice could
better inform policy decisions taken by the city council.
Mr. Henderson gave concluding comments and thanked all of the workshop attendees.
Council member Brausen thanked staff for coming up with proposal for a new structure, not
diminishing the current work of boards and commissions but making the "wheel smoother."
Ms. Keller thanked attendees for their time. She informed the group that March 25, 2024 is the
city council study session where formal discussion on this topic will take place.
The workshop was adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Nadia Mohamed, mayor
DocuSign Envelope ID: B796E180-3E2D-41A9-A1D0-14459EEA43EB