21 - Laserfiche WebLink

purview of each individual commission. Recognizing the potential for this situation, staff prepared a matrix (Attachment 3) outlining meeting agendas, length of meeting and cancellations to provide the commissions a summary of this information. As indicated on Attachment 3, seven out of the 24 (29%) meetings held in 2010 by the two commissions were cancelled due to lack of pressing agenda items. In addition, five of the human services meetings focused on the roundtable discussion regarding various human services needs and while these were important, they are typically not held every year. A total of eight meetings (those listed in red) pertained to the HHSG/CDBG grant process review addressed by both commissions and as highlighted, these are standing items. Note that many of the special items heard by the Housing Commission were both updates and single item issues. Regarding the length of the meetings, Attachment 3 outlines the meeting times for each meeting held during 2010. As can be expected, the meetings related to CDBG and grant funding were the longest, and staff anticipates that the time taken to review these items is not additive but rather somewhat redundant. As a result, having them heard by a single commission would not necessarily result in increased meeting time. Also, note that while there is concern regarding meeting length in general, a portion of each meeting is spent addressing administrative and redundant agenda items such as roll call, consent items and meeting open to the public, and these items would also not be additive. Also, to improve efficiency, staff assumes that a merged commission would take action to streamline meeting processes such as using the consent calendar to address a wider range of informational reports. Nevertheless, based on reviewing the agendas and the meeting times in 2010, the potential for increased meeting times is real, and discussion would be needed identifying ways to streamline meetings. Regarding focus, staff assumes that a merged commission would continue to focus on items required by ordinance and those that it finds to be the most important. To address this, staff assumes that at least initially, a merged commission would actively engage in goal setting and other processes to focus its attention on matters that it finds important. Survey of Surrounding Communities Included as Attachment 4 is a survey identifying existing housing and human services commissions in other communities. As indicated, while most communities have a human services type commission that deals with CDBG and grant funding most cities do not have a housing commission. Others, such as San Jose, combine a human services focus with neighborhood services focus. Staff has, however, included information as part of Attachment 4 from Sunnyvale (California) and Longmont, Colorado, which are two communities that have a combined commission. Additional information regarding these individual cities can be provided if requested by the commissions. Page - d -