Board and Committee Week Brings Out The Best
By Scott R. Cooper, Crook County Judge
This column originally appeared in the Central Oregonian of January 2006
Traditionally, the week between Christmas and New Years is a very bad week to take a phone call from the county judge or a county commissioner . Fortunately, this is a little known and often forgotten fact. If everyone knew this fact (and knew the reason why) the business of county government might come to a sudden halt.
The significance of this time frame that this is traditionally the week when the county scrambles to find bodies to fill board and committee appointments, which are traditionally made at the first meeting in January.
At present, the Court is responsible for recruiting and filling 311 distinct positions, distributed across 34 separate commissions, boards and committees. Additionally, there are 73 local elected positions (excluding state and federal races) for which at least one candidate must be recruited to run. There are also 136 precinct committee positions which appear on the ballot which keep the Republican and Democratic party apparatus running (fortunately, the parties recruit these folks.)
If you add those numbers up that equals 520 positions which must be appointed at any given time. Based on the county’s new population statistics, that means just over 2 out of every 100 residents or just under 5 registered voters are tasked with the job of governing the rest of us.
And these numbers are for county-appointed boards only. They don’t include the volunteers needed by the city, the school district, the fire board and the parks district, nor do they include the volunteers who keep the churches, non-profits, service clubs, sports teams and other worthy causes running.
Such intense competition for bodies may be one reason why there tends to be a high rate of attrition among volunteers. The County Court made 47 appointments on January 4. Of those, 23 were reappointments and 24 were new appointments, so just slightly more than a majority turned over this year. That’s actually a good thing in my view because as our community changes, we need to stay vigilant about giving opportunities to hear fresh ideas.
The job of finding appointees is tricky. Although the county runs frequent advertisements recruiting potential new members, the response provides only a small number of the candidates (probably less than 5 percent.) The reest of the positions have to be filled by Court members, other board and committee members and county staff begging, pleading, cajoling, arm-twisting and calling in favors. It’s not a pretty side, but it gets the job done.
That’s what makes those phone calls during the last week of the year so dangerous: Take my call, and you may find yourself supervising mosquito spraying or voting on whether to put down vicious dogs or advising the county on how to recycle more garbage. They’re not the most glamorous jobs, but somebody somewhere created a board and somebody has to fill the resulting positions.
Whereever appointees land in service to the county, the tasks they assume are challenging.
Some of are more high profile than others. The planning commission may be the worst job in the county with the heated feelings that surround land use. Fair Board members are constantly challenged with how to ikeeping the fairgrounds running, given the size of grounds, number of buildings and interest groups involved in policymaking. I’ve pointed out before that those involved in library governance, among other chores, get to hear challenges from members of the public who want to ban certain authors or types of books from the collection.
The hardest positions to fill are undoubtedly those serving road, water and sanitary sewer districts. Because these boards serve such a small geographic area, the board members are often familiar with all the parties involved. The decisions and debates tend to get personal. It’s one thing to hear a plea from someone you’ve never met before and won’t likely meet again. It can be miserable saying “no” to one neighbor in order to say “yes” to another. These appointees in my view are the unsung heros of local government.
Finding the quantity of bodies needed to fill boards and commissions is only half the challenge the Court faces. Finding the right bodies is equally daunting. Boards made up entirely of old, white, Republican men who have been doing the same job foreever aren’t reflective of the community at large. A good board is broadly representative of the community it serves. That means the Court when making appointments must factor in the mix of men and women, must balance grandparents with parents of young children. We also try to mix up political and ideological viewpoints and try to ensure that minorities willing to serve are represented. Then there’s the intangible part of finding a person whose personality will fit with the rest of the board. In the end, the ultimate goal is to appoint the best qualified person, but there are a lot of factors that go into that determination.
Sometimes, the challenge of finding appointees who fit certain profiles mandated by the State becomes almost comical. How do you politely ask a potential nominee to the mental health advisory board if he or she or any member of his or her family has ever been mentally ill or addicted to gambling or substances, yet at least some of the spots on the Mental Health Advisory Board are required to be filled by such a candidate. (The answer is, delicately—VERY delicately.)
What I can report to you proudly is that once again this year the Court completed the appointment process on January 4 with an almost full slate of appointees. Out of 49 potential appointments, 47 nominees were identified and appointed. I’m deeply grateful to those who have stepped up and agreed to serve. For their efforts they will receive no pay and they may be subjected to intense public scrutiny. If all goes well, they will contribute something lasting to the betterment of the community.
Meanwhile, there’s still that 1 percent vacancy rate. Is anybody out there dying to contribute time to crafting a workforce agenda for Central Oregon? Call me. I’ve got a board for you!
This column originally appeared in the Central Oregonian of January 2006
Filling 520 Volunteer Positions Taxes Friendships and Patience
Traditionally, the week between Christmas and New Years is a very bad week to take a phone call from the county judge or a county commissioner . Fortunately, this is a little known and often forgotten fact. If everyone knew this fact (and knew the reason why) the business of county government might come to a sudden halt.
The significance of this time frame that this is traditionally the week when the county scrambles to find bodies to fill board and committee appointments, which are traditionally made at the first meeting in January.
At present, the Court is responsible for recruiting and filling 311 distinct positions, distributed across 34 separate commissions, boards and committees. Additionally, there are 73 local elected positions (excluding state and federal races) for which at least one candidate must be recruited to run. There are also 136 precinct committee positions which appear on the ballot which keep the Republican and Democratic party apparatus running (fortunately, the parties recruit these folks.)
If you add those numbers up that equals 520 positions which must be appointed at any given time. Based on the county’s new population statistics, that means just over 2 out of every 100 residents or just under 5 registered voters are tasked with the job of governing the rest of us.
And these numbers are for county-appointed boards only. They don’t include the volunteers needed by the city, the school district, the fire board and the parks district, nor do they include the volunteers who keep the churches, non-profits, service clubs, sports teams and other worthy causes running.
Such intense competition for bodies may be one reason why there tends to be a high rate of attrition among volunteers. The County Court made 47 appointments on January 4. Of those, 23 were reappointments and 24 were new appointments, so just slightly more than a majority turned over this year. That’s actually a good thing in my view because as our community changes, we need to stay vigilant about giving opportunities to hear fresh ideas.
The job of finding appointees is tricky. Although the county runs frequent advertisements recruiting potential new members, the response provides only a small number of the candidates (probably less than 5 percent.) The reest of the positions have to be filled by Court members, other board and committee members and county staff begging, pleading, cajoling, arm-twisting and calling in favors. It’s not a pretty side, but it gets the job done.
That’s what makes those phone calls during the last week of the year so dangerous: Take my call, and you may find yourself supervising mosquito spraying or voting on whether to put down vicious dogs or advising the county on how to recycle more garbage. They’re not the most glamorous jobs, but somebody somewhere created a board and somebody has to fill the resulting positions.
Whereever appointees land in service to the county, the tasks they assume are challenging.
Some of are more high profile than others. The planning commission may be the worst job in the county with the heated feelings that surround land use. Fair Board members are constantly challenged with how to ikeeping the fairgrounds running, given the size of grounds, number of buildings and interest groups involved in policymaking. I’ve pointed out before that those involved in library governance, among other chores, get to hear challenges from members of the public who want to ban certain authors or types of books from the collection.
The hardest positions to fill are undoubtedly those serving road, water and sanitary sewer districts. Because these boards serve such a small geographic area, the board members are often familiar with all the parties involved. The decisions and debates tend to get personal. It’s one thing to hear a plea from someone you’ve never met before and won’t likely meet again. It can be miserable saying “no” to one neighbor in order to say “yes” to another. These appointees in my view are the unsung heros of local government.
Finding the quantity of bodies needed to fill boards and commissions is only half the challenge the Court faces. Finding the right bodies is equally daunting. Boards made up entirely of old, white, Republican men who have been doing the same job foreever aren’t reflective of the community at large. A good board is broadly representative of the community it serves. That means the Court when making appointments must factor in the mix of men and women, must balance grandparents with parents of young children. We also try to mix up political and ideological viewpoints and try to ensure that minorities willing to serve are represented. Then there’s the intangible part of finding a person whose personality will fit with the rest of the board. In the end, the ultimate goal is to appoint the best qualified person, but there are a lot of factors that go into that determination.
Sometimes, the challenge of finding appointees who fit certain profiles mandated by the State becomes almost comical. How do you politely ask a potential nominee to the mental health advisory board if he or she or any member of his or her family has ever been mentally ill or addicted to gambling or substances, yet at least some of the spots on the Mental Health Advisory Board are required to be filled by such a candidate. (The answer is, delicately—VERY delicately.)
What I can report to you proudly is that once again this year the Court completed the appointment process on January 4 with an almost full slate of appointees. Out of 49 potential appointments, 47 nominees were identified and appointed. I’m deeply grateful to those who have stepped up and agreed to serve. For their efforts they will receive no pay and they may be subjected to intense public scrutiny. If all goes well, they will contribute something lasting to the betterment of the community.
Meanwhile, there’s still that 1 percent vacancy rate. Is anybody out there dying to contribute time to crafting a workforce agenda for Central Oregon? Call me. I’ve got a board for you!
Labels: Filling 520 Volunteer Positions Taxes Friendships and Patience
posted by Scott Cooper | 10:18 PM
|
0 Comments
