Boards and Commissions Under Scrutiny by Champaign City Council

City Council study session on January 28, 2020 covered two main topics- City of Champaign’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) (article here) and the review of Boards and Commissions.

During the Champaign City Council meeting on October 15, 2019, council member Clarissa Nickerson Fourman announced that she had initiated a study session request to review the roles of various boards and commissions. Fourman was unhappy with how Champaign Police Chief Anthony Cobb was put on the spot during a recent Champaign Citizen Review Subcommittee (CRS) meeting as he dodged simple questions regarding recommendations to improve the police complaint process. Fourman also accused commission members of not treating city staff with respect and overstepping their boundaries.

Council was presented with a 17-page report prepared by city staff, led by Assistant to the City Manager, Christopher Walton. The purpose of this review was to ensure that the duties and assignments of each of the boards and commissions aligned with City Council’s expectations,  and the vision and mission set by City Council.

The ten boards and commissions discussed in the report are: Board of Fire & Police Commissioners, Historic Preservation Commission, City Council Compensation Taskforce, Human Relations Commission, Citizen Review Subcommittee, Champaign Public Library Board of Trustees, Code Review and Appeals Board, Neighborhood Services Advisory Board, Plan Commission, and Zoning Board of Appeals.

Six other boards and commissions that are required by state law and whose activity and operations were governed by State law, or boards of intergovernmental agencies were not discussed. All city boards and commissions are required to adhere to the Open Meetings Act (OMA), the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), and the Ethics of the City Code.

---

Issues and recommendations by city staff

Walton presented 5 issues and recommendations identified by city staff. The first issue was that not all boards and commissions have their purpose and duties defined in the city’s ordinance. Some boards and commissions have broad duties such as “to inform and educate”, “eliminate all barriers”, “assist in the articulation of citizen concerns”. The concern was that such level of latitude allows board and commission members to self-identify how they can best achieve council’s goals. Staff recommended that council add language to the city code to define the duties and responsibilities of boards and commissions so that the volunteer residents that serve on the boards are clear on council’s expectations.

The next recommendation was to standardize board and commission bylaws. Currently, city code gives power to most of the boards and commissions to craft their own bylaws, rules, and regulations. This included allowing boards and commissions to determine their public commenting policy- a vital mechanism to communicating with citizens. City staff recommends taking away this freedom and suggests that a citywide policy is adopted for consistency.

There are currently four reasons the Mayor can remove a board or commission member. Staff recommends adding language to allow removal of a member for OMA certification non-compliance. In addition, city staff also recommends council review the attendance policy to determine the pattern and severity of absenteeism that would lead to removal of a member. This is because voting is based on the majority of all members authorized to vote, not just the majority of members present, thus absenteeism can be disruptive to boards and commissions actions.

The fourth and fifth recommendations are requirements for new members to complete a formal orientation and for boards and commissions to submit an annual report to City Council.

---

Questions from council members

Council member Alicia Beck pointed out that board and commission members do not have official city emails and use their individual private emails for official business. This is obviously a big concern as official communication, even through private email needs to be treated as public records. According to City Manager, Dorothy Ann David, obtaining these records when they are requested through FOIA relies on the voluntary action of the board member to retrieve those emails. Currently, the city has no way of preserving communication if they are going to personal email accounts.

Beck also asked what role would boards and commissions have in relation to City Council goals. David responded that boards and commissions could bring up related policies for discussion during a board meeting, as well as collect public input regarding the policy. This feedback could then be presented to City Council for consideration.

Council members Matthew Gladney and Greg Stock wanted to know more about the staffing impact and staff time spent. In the report to council, city staff spent hundreds of hours providing clerical, research, and administrative support for the boards and commissions in 2019- ranging from 80 hours for the Zoning Board of Appeals, to 680 hours for the Human Relations Commission and Citizen Review Subcommittee, to 1550 hours for the Board of Police and Fire Commissioners.

Among the questions raised: How do these hours compare to prior years? Are they steady numbers or do they fluctuate? How are the hours calculated especially since some of the hours do not correspond to the short meeting times of the boards? David clarified that the hours spent are relatively consistent yearly but with some fluctuations depending on specific events. She defended that there are many staff hours that go on behind the scenes such as meeting agenda prep and support, as well as hiring.

Council member Angie Brix then questioned why some boards and commissions have more meeting cancellations than others. Brix wondered why boards like the Historic Preservation Commission would have nothing to discuss when there should be ongoing work like performing surveys and designations.

Next, Council member Clarissa Nickerson Fourman asked if a board’s budget was set based on direction from council, or by the board/commission themselves; and if the boards could apply for grants. David clarified that only the Board of Library Trustees has budget authority, and all grants will have to be applied through the city administration as boards and commissions do not have fiduciary authority. Fourman also suggested that boards and commissions are underutilized, for example the Neighborhood Services Advisory Board could be used to pass information and improve communication with neighborhoods.

---

An emotionally charged audience participation session

The public, the majority of them members of the boards and commissions spoke to defend the autonomy of their boards, voice their opinions on the suggested changes, and ask for council support.  

“We would like to do more”, says Champaign Historic Preservation Commission member, Tod Satterthwaite in response to Brix’s questions on why meetings are cancelled. “But there’s never been any money in the budget to do that”, he adds. Most meetings held pertain to historic status designation and modification approvals for homes. The commission would like to conduct activities that are required as part of Champaign’s involvement in the Certified Local Government (CLG) program such as surveys of historic properties and neighborhoods. 

The Champaign Historic Preservation Commission is requesting a starting amount of $10,000. This money would jumpstart the groundwork and surveys needed to designate historic and conservation districts, as intended by the city ordinance.

Another Champaign resident spoke of the economical, sustainability, and quality of life benefits that the City of Champaign could gain by supporting historical preservation efforts. She also suggested using the 1974 Heitzman architectural survey as a starting point for a historical survey.

Champaign Citizen Review Subcommittee (CRS) chairwoman Emily Rodriguez challenged the suggestion by city staff to standardize the responsibilities, procedures, and duties of the boards and commissions as it would fundamentally change the way boards and commissions would operate. 

“What do you (council) want boards and commissions to contribute, what do you want us to give?”

Champaign Citizen Review Subcommittee Chairwoman Emily Rodriguez

“What do you (council) want boards and commissions to contribute, what do you want us to give?” asks Rodriguez. In the two years since the CRS was established, her conversations with council members have shown that council members are not in agreement on this fundamental question. Rodriquez has heard answers ranging from “we do not have any power to take away, so why would we be concerned with a review” to “we are also a rubber stamp, that we should ignore the language of the ordinance till we are explicitly asked to act on that, that item by the city council.”

Rodriguez used the CRS as a case study on how a board can contribute towards the city goals set by council.

The CRS provides a committed, focused, and ongoing conversation with the public regarding the relationship between citizens and the Champaign Police Department. CRS functions independently, and is outside the political fray. CRS members have specialized knowledge from ride-alongs and understanding of police policy. According to Rodriguez, when CRS is given the freedom to do their job, the CRS functions like a barometer on the community – a way to see how a community works towards goals and how they are achieved. 

Rodriguez cited the adoption of recommendations to improve the police complaint process by the Chief of Police Anthony Cobb and the Champaign Police Department as a sign of progress. She stressed that if the duties and responsibilities of boards and commissions were standardized, such efforts at responding to citizen input would be curtailed.

Next up, CRS member Alexandra Harmon-Threatt expressed thanks to Chief Cobb and the Champaign Police Department for their willingness to hear and address citizen concerns. “It shows a real commitment to our community and the process of citizen review”, says Harmon-Threatt. 

She’s hopeful that one of the outcomes of this review would be to identify ways that the CRS can be more impactful for the citizens that need it most. This is inline with Champaign’s noble guiding principles of being a forward thinking city that anticipates opportunities and trends that will transform our community, and being a city that strives to ensure that all residents have an excellent quality of life.

“The data shows citizen reviews work and can work really well”, says Harmon-Threatt citing data from a study (2016 Police Quarterly article examining citizen review in 8 cities) showing that external citizen oversight reviews of complaints resulted in greater effectiveness in holding officers accountable via more sustained complaints. 

Harmon-Threatt had two recommendations for improvement. The first is to update the subcommittee name to reflect its purpose, as suggested before by citizens. This can be done by including “Police” in the name of the committee. The second is to allow citizens to present cases to the CRS directly. The ability to investigate independently was one of the criteria identified in the 2016 study for the civilian review to be effective. 

CRS member Melissa Keeble urged council to consider the original intention of using broad language to describe the duties of the boards and commissions in the ordinance. 

“I want to ask, do you think that it was an oversight when the city council first wrote this ordinance, in the duties that they gave us, or do you think they could have been a purpose for such broad use of words. If you do believe it was an intentional use of words, what could those purposes have been?” says Keeble. 

Keeble also raised questions on what the process would look like as council begins to clarify the expectations of the boards and commissions. One of the proposed actions is for staff to draft language to promote better guidance on how to meet council’s expectations. From the perspective of citizens and even board members that strive to provide independent investigations to citizens, such language is very concerning. Such language can sound like council is trying to limit and control the process, relevance, and outcomes of the boards and commissions. Keeble requested more info on how these changes will be implemented.

Champaign resident, Emily Klose spoke on how difficult it is to get information from the city. She has spent many frustrating hours trying to obtain meeting minutes, being referred from person to person. Klose has talked to City of Champaign Communications Manager, Jeff Hamilton, Assistant City Attorney, Laura Hall, chairs, and department heads, but information is still hard to obtain. The city needs a more organized and transparent way for citizens to get info so that they can participate in local government.

Klose commented on the meeting times of boards and commissions which are all over the map and also during the work day. She’s concerned that some meeting times are not conducive to the democratic process, for example a 4.30pm start time, as citizens cannot attend due to work.

Ric Wiebl, Vice Chair of the Neighborhood Services Advisory Board noted the tension between City Council, board and commission members, and the community, which were catalysts for this review. Wiebl brought up the importance of questioning the efficacy of the current functions of the boards and commissions. 

“What do the people think about how it is working and representing their interests. Do you know the answer to that question?” he asked council members. 

Wiebl stressed that input from a broader swath of community is needed. “Because one thing that is clearly missing from this report is any reflection of what community members think our boards and commissions are doing. I wasn’t asked as a citizen, I wasn’t asked as a board member”, says Wiebl.

---

Council members address input from the audience

Council agreed that board and commission members should conduct official businesses through an official city email, and supported staff’s suggestions on requiring an annual report and formal orientation for new members, having more frequent reviews, and revising OMA compliance and attendance standards. Mayor Deborah Feinen added that OMA certification is currently tracked by Joe Lamberson (Mayor’s Office) and she is informed if there is non-compliance.

Council members agreed that better defining boards and commissions purpose and duties is paramount, but that there could also be room for individualization. This applies to the standardization of bylaws too, where Feinen suggested that there could be aspects of a board’s bylaws that were standardized, while leaving other aspects board-specific. 

Feinen says, “I do think there is a rub between allowing enough wiggle room for the board or commission to make their way and engage with the public, and do the job we are asking them to do, but also being mindful of the fact that they are being appointed by the city council, that they are not an elected body, that they are kind of another arm of government, and perhaps that rub is always where the tension always lies, but I think we need to do a better job of communicating together about what they would like to be doing and how we see that role in overall city government.”

Council member Clarissa Nickerson Fourman called for board and commission members to listen to the advice of city staff, to follow city staff tells them is best for their role, and to let city staff help commission members stay in their lanes. 

“They (city staff) are telling you, stay in this lane, this is what you do, this is how it works, and if everybody does that then we can all work together in coordination.”

Champaign City Council member Clarissa Nickerson Fourman

“They are telling you, stay in this lane, this is what you do, this is how it works, and if everybody does that then we can all work together in coordination”, says Fourman. 

This is despite citizen reports that several City of Champaign staff have ignored citizen complaints, blocked citizens out of the complaint process, and withheld information from citizens.

The issue of audience participation elicited a mixed response from council members, whereby some council members preferred standardization so that the public knows what to expect, and others leaving it up to the boards and commissions and/or city staff. Feinen suggested a minimum time could be established for example allowing each speaker “not less than 5 minutes”. 

Council members agreed that public input was an important aspect to accomplish council’s goals and welcomed feedback from the public. Council member Alicia Beck called for refining the process to have better communication between boards and commissions and City Council to help get that input. Fourman also suggested more education efforts to ensure that the public is aware of the boards and commissions and their purposes.

With regards to how meeting times should be determined, council members brought up several considerations- the expenditure of taxpayer’s dollars to have meetings staffed outside of typical city business hours, being careful not to be 1st shift centric, other obligations of board and commission members, and citizens that would like to attend the meetings in their professional capacities. 

Council member Greg Stock addressed the question of how serving on boards and commissions can be made more meaningful. He drew upon his personal experience serving on 3 boards and commissions saying “I got off the Historic Preservation Commission, I’ll be real honest, because we weren’t doing anything. It was frustrating to even show up after a while”. While cognizant of staff workload, Stock suggested that the annual report include feedback from boards and commissions on what they should be doing but are not, so that they can be provided with tools needed to do their job. 

Council member Matthew Gladney commented that it was a great problem to have- that people wanted to do more, that people wanted to be more involved. Council member Tom Bruno expanded on this topic by voicing his concerns on the use of public resources. Bruno preferred that boards and commissions remain neutral and not be involved in activities like bringing in guest speakers as it would lead to conflicts when disagreements about the speaker, or topic, or political angle arise. Bruno suggests that organized government may not be the best avenue for these types of efforts, and that there are groups and organizations with similar goals such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and other conservation organizations. 

With regards to funding issues, Bruno recommended a needs based approach as opposed to allocating funds and allowing the boards and commissions to find an issue to spend it on. Gladney wanted to ensure that boards and commissions had clear expectations and duties before discussing funding. He also wanted to know how the amount of funds allocated to each board was going to be allocated. 

Fourman was okay with providing a one time funding to the Historic Preservation Board for surveys but was unsure about a recurring budget as she cautioned that everytime the city spends funds on something, she would receive phone calls on why it wasn’t spent on something else. Council member Angie Brix wanted to know how council could help obtain grant funding if there was no room in the budget.

Beck commented on the composition of various boards and commissions. She called for a review to see what roles people needed to be representing in order to have a broader demographic and representation. 

Fourman followed up on this saying “The plan commission is all white men, there’s a white lady there I believe, but they are all white men.” Fourman found it disturbing that there was no diversity on the plan commission and questioned how the plan commission was a representation of the City of Champaign. She pointed out that giving someone who does not have that background the opportunity could be vital to the citizen process. 

Feinen announced that the boards and commissions are open to diversification and interviewing new applicants. She made a plea to the public, asking the public to talk to their friends and neighbors about applying to the various boards and commissions if they were interested.

---

Moving forward

Closing words from Foreman, who called for this review of the boards and commissions, “But the orientation of commissioners need to be, just like the orientation of city council members, they need to be humble just like we were. This is what your role is, this is what you do, this is why, you know, this is why you’re here, and you know just creating lines and coloring over here , that’s not going to be ok because it doesn’t serve the purpose of what you are doing, and it doesn’t help city staff further council goals …”

It was a dialogue filled study session with input from city staff, city council, boards and commissions members, and the public. City council agreed with City Manager Dorothy Ann David’s suggested plan to move forward- all the input would be compiled, boards and commission could open up dialogs about their roles during their meetings, and eventually present city council with summaries and recommendations. 

---

Review of Champaign Boards and Commissions submitted to City Council