Just in case you missed this from yesterday.

City of Lake Worth Advisory Boards:

“Mayor Triolo and Commissioner Amoroso spoke about requiring a workshop on the issue”.

The quote above is from the minutes of the Lake Worth City Commission meeting on April 4th (more excerpts below).

Our volunteer City boards were a very big issue last April, and recently this issue came up once again vis-à-vis the Sister City Board — or rather the lack of functioning Sister City Board — that Mr. Greg Rice is none too happy about.

Then there’s the “Recreation Advisory Board” that hasn’t had a meeting in over a year. The “C-51 Advisory Committee” formed last year that, to this point, also has never met.

Basically the issues are:

• How many boards does the City need with such a small population of residents?
• What issues should a board handle?
• Should some boards be eliminated and others consolidated?
• Should the qualifications, e.g., a résumé, be required to serve on a specific board for which technical experience would bring a big benefit to the City?
• And how best to eliminate the possibility the public would see this process as politically motivated?

Here it is, over three months later, there has still not been a workshop or work session scheduled to discuss the issue of “Advisory Boards”. By the way, Commissioner Amoroso’s suggestion last April there be public comment on this issue is a very good one.

It’s important to remember, without our volunteers serving on boards, giving of their time and energy, the City would not be able to function — also important to remember — each of our boards require City staff time, resources, and taxpayer money.

From the minutes of the City Commission meeting last April from the City Attorney’s Report:

“Discussion on issue with Board Appointments and Newly Elected Commissioners”, City Attorney [Glen] Torcivia said that “formal policy direction would be needed going forward regarding board appointments.”

“Mayor [Pam] Triolo stated the rules should be revisited either in a work session or during a regular meeting. She said the current policy was instituted to keep the boards full all year. She said that there were inconsistencies in the rules and she would meet with the City Attorney to discuss the issue.”

and. . .

“Commissioner [Omari] Hardy said that processes that require more consensus on the appointees should be adopted.

Mayor Triolo and Commissioner [Andy] Amoroso spoke about requiring a workshop on the issue; Commissioner Amoroso suggested having a work session with several items on the agenda and open to public comment.

City Attorney Torcivia said that the Commission should have a policy before the issue would be placed on a regular meeting.”

Am not sure how current this information is, but take the “Recreation Advisory Board” for example:

“The Board assists in promoting awareness and involvement in City’s recreation programs. The Board also serves as advisors in policy, programming, finances, future land acquisition, and facility capital projects relating to recreational needs of the citizens. Members: Three year terms.”

OK.

The City of Lake Worth already has a Planning and Zoning Board, it’s the job of the City Commission to set policy and they get plenty of advice already, the City has a “Finance Advisory Board”, and the big question is. . .

Why doesn’t this board just focus on the present recreational needs of the public in Lake Worth?

Also, there are only 3 members on this 7-member Recreation Board. They can’t have a quorum anyhow. Then why not just eliminate the board and give these volunteers the opportunity to serve on another board of their choosing?

Maybe the Sister City Board?