CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
November 19, 2024 10c
4859-1536-9209 v1
REPORT ON ADMINISTRATION AND OVERSIGHT OF CITY BOARDS,
COMMISSIONS, COMMITTEES, AND COUNCILMEMBER ASSIGNMENTS
RECOMMENDATION:
Review and provide direction, as needed, on revisions to the administration of the City's boards, commissions, committees, and Councilmember assignments.
BACKGROUND:
The City of Coronado appoints an array of volunteer boards, commissions, and committees (“advisory boards”) to engage residents in local governance and decisionmaking processes. These advisory boards serve various purposes with differing levels of discretion and authority.
Quasi-judicial boards, which includes the Library Board of Trustees, Civil Service Commission, Design Review Commission, Historic Resource Commission, Planning Commission, and Street Tree Committee are responsible for carrying out review and approval of applications and permits and applying general rules or policies. These boards make decisions that directly affect individuals and/or property within the City.
Along with the quasi-judicial boards, the City has advisory Commissions created to provide specialized expertise and diverse community perspectives. These include the Cultural Arts Commission, Mobility Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission, and the inactive Senior Affairs Commissions. These Commissions are largely assigned to offer recommendations to the City Council on policy matters within their respective domains.
The City also maintains three boards focused on specific facilities or issues: Discover Coronado/CTID, the Golf Course Advisory Committee, and the Spreckels Center Advisory Committee. These boards are unique in that they are predominantly composed of representatives from outside organizations with a minority of City appointments and do not directly report to the City Council. While Discover Coronado/CTID is outside the scope of this review, it will be included in a comprehensive scope review of all BCCs in 2025.
The gradual creation of these advisory boards over time has resulted in significant variations in their scope of duties, size, and staff support. On July 16, City Manager Friend and staff presented a brief report (Attachment 2) that identified several challenges with the City’s board, commission, and committee structure and administration.
At the same meeting, the City Council discussed their individual assignments to outside governmental agencies and community organizations, focusing on clarifying roles, addressing the lack of written records, and considering the establishment of a policy for 4859-1536-9209 v1
serving on outside boards. Other topics included the distribution of assignments, the process for appointments and exploring a standing subcommittee with Caltrans.
The Council directed staff to consider these challenges and return with recommendations for administration of the advisory boards and Councilmember assignments and the appointment process.
ANALYSIS:
I. BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, AND COMMITTEES (BCCS)
The July 16th agenda report identified ten challenges relating to the structure and administration of the City’s BCCs:
1) Varying Board Size
2) Varying Levels of Staff Support
3) Inconsistent Governing/Founding Documents
4) Inconsistent Distribution of Responsibilities and Resources 5) Ambiguity of Mission, Purpose, and Authority
6) Ambiguous Roles of Members, Chair, and Staff
7) Inconsistent Agenda Setting and Agenda Item Selection 8) Unclear/Undefined Communication Channels
9) Inconsistent Board Term Dates
10)Low Compliance with State Mandated Trainings and Filings In the months since the July presentation of these challenges, staff conducted a survey of all advisory board members to gain feedback on their experiences serving on a commission, interviewed the commission staff members, and reviewed board and commission administration practices in cities across the state. From this analysis, staff developed a series of best practices recommendations in four focus areas:
Board Organization;
Mission, Vision, and Goals;
Commission Work; and
Board Appointment and Reappointment Administration.
Each focus area includes a series of substantive recommendations that will require formal policy updates (Council Policy, Municipal Code, or Resolution), along with administrative improvements for implementation. Upon receiving Council direction on which substantive recommendations to advance, staff will proceed with the necessary updates and return for final approval.
FOCUS AREA 1: BOARD ORGANIZATION
Staff identified four organization-related challenges: varying board size; varying levels of staff support; inconsistent governing documents; and inconsistent distribution of responsibilities and resources.
4859-1536-9209 v1
Recommendation 1.1: Standardize Definitions and Rename Certain Bodies To clarify advisory body roles, staff recommends establishing a formal structure with definitions that relate to authority and scope for Boards, Commissions, and Committees.
Currently, the City’s advisory boards do not follow any particular naming convention, creating confusion on the authority of certain advisory bodies. This change aims to better define an advisory's body purpose and authority without significantly altering duties.
Name Role Function Recommended
Advisory Bodies
Boards Governing body with
some formal
decision-making
power delegated by
an outside authority
and/or state law.
Although functions are
semi-independent in
some respects, boards
remain accountable to
the City Council and
actions within the
Council’s ambit require
Council approval.
Library Board of
Trustees
Commissions Quasi-judicial body
with specific
regulatory focus that
offers
recommendations or
determinations on
behalf of the City
Council. Members
typically have
expertise in a specific
subject area and
meetings may require
a city attorney to be
present due to the
nature of the work.
Reviews and
approves/denies
permits and submits
policy documents for
City Council review.
Planning
Commission
Design Review
Commission
Historic Resource
Commission
Civil Service
Commission
Street Tree
Commission
Committees Advisory body that
focuses on specific
tasks or projects and
investigates issues
that the City Council
has identified.
Generally tasked with
producing reports or
recommendations on
specific issues for the
City Council. May be
assigned projects or
programs as
determined by the City
Council. Can be
standing or created on
an ad-hoc basis.
Cultural Arts
Committee
Mobility Committee
Parks and
Recreation
Committee
4859-1536-9209 v1
To align with the proposed definitions, staff recommends adjusting the advisory body names with their appropriate classification (Board, Commission or Committee).
Renaming these bodies has no effect on their authority or scope of work; rather, the new naming conventions more accurately reflect and categorize the type of work they perform.
Recommendation 1.2: Align all Advisory Boards to Five Members Consistent with the Number of City Council Seats
Currently, the Cultural Arts and Mobility Commissions are the only boards with seven members. Both boards have historically experienced high turnover and, at times, have faced challenges in meeting quorum requirements. To enhance parity across commissions, reduce turnover, and balance workloads more effectively, staff recommend reducing both boards to five members. This change would occur gradually, with the reduction to five members implemented through natural attrition.
Recommendation 1.3: Sunset the Spreckels Center Advisory Committee, Reclassify the Golf Course Advisory Committee to an As-Needed Working Group, and Repeal Coronado Municipal Code (CMC) Section 2.70
The Spreckels Center Advisory Committee was established in 2016 with the mission to oversee the construction and opening of the Spreckels Center. Having fulfilled its original purpose, staff recommends sunsetting this committee. This action does not preclude engagement between the Coronado Senior Association or other citizens and Spreckels Center staff, rather it removes the requirement to follow formal Brown Act procedures.
Similarly, reclassifying the Golf Course Advisory Committee as an as-needed working group to advise the Recreation and Golf Services Director, would preserve stakeholder engagement while eliminating formal meeting requirements, streamlining administrative processes.
Additionally, staff research identified that CMC Section 2.70, which governs a Senior Affairs Commission, is currently inactive. As part of administrative code maintenance, staff recommends repealing CMC Section 2.70.
Finally, staff assessed the potential merger of commissions/committees to balance workloads. While there is not a specific recommendation for mergers presented here, the City Council could consider any consolidation of work it deems appropriate.
Recommendation 1.4: Revise Meeting Frequency for Mobility, Parks and Recreation, Planning, and Street Tree Bodies
Currently, the Mobility, Parks and Recreation, Planning, and Street Tree advisory bodies are scheduled to meet monthly or twice a month, as outlined in their founding documents.
After consulting with staff liaisons and reviewing the workload of these bodies, staff found that they have relatively few action items. Meeting too frequently can dilute focus, place additional demands on volunteers and staff to conduct meetings even in the absence of substantive agenda items, and at times make it difficult to achieve a quorum. 4859-1536-9209 v1
Year to date, these bodies have met the following number of times:
Body Number of
Meetings
Scheduled
Number of Meetings
Held
Mobility 10 9
Parks and Recreation 14 4
Planning 20 5
Street Tree 11 5
The Parks and Recreation, Planning, and Street Tree bodies meet, on average, five times a year. Reducing meeting frequency to quarterly would reduce the administrative burden of posting cancellation notices due to a lack of actionable content and ensure that volunteer time is used more effectively. Additionally, when meetings are cancelled frequently, volunteers may come to expect cancellations and make alternative plans, leading to inconsistent participation and reduced engagement. Establishing a quarterly or every two-month meeting schedule would provide greater predictability, helping to maintain volunteer commitment.
Although the Mobility Commission has only canceled one meeting this year, most of its meetings have focused on informational items including subcommittee reports and staff presentations. As such, and in conjunction with recommendation 3.1 - Prioritize Meetings for Action vs Informational Items, staff recommend adjusting the Mobility Commission meeting frequency to quarterly.
Reducing non-substantive meeting frequency will help ensure that agendas are focused on actionable items and that volunteer time is utilized more effectively. This change does not preclude these bodies from scheduling special meetings if necessary to address timesensitive matters.
FOCUS AREA 2: MISSION, PURPOSE, GOALS
Staff identified two challenges related to mission clarity and role responsibilities. These challenges indicate a need for several administrative changes including updating the Commissioner’s Handbook, providing additional training resources for staff liaisons, and implementing a five-year review process of founding documents.
Recommendation 2.1: Review Work Plans and Proposed Missions, Visions, and Goals Along with the administrative changes, staff recommends the City Council’s annual approval of workplans. Draft workplans for each advisory body are provided in Attachment 1 for initial review.
These workplans are designed to support each advisory body by setting clear goals and creating a record of progress, ensuring that work remains focused throughout the year.
They also allow the City Council to review each advisory body’s mission, track accomplishments, and assess the overall impact of each body’s contributions.
Additionally, workplans enable Council to communicate priorities and align volunteer 4859-1536-9209 v1
efforts with broader city goals. Overall, workplans enhance accountability and transparency, fostering stronger collaboration between advisory bodies and the Council.
Workplans will be brought to the City Council on an annual basis. The quasi-judicial bodies will have more static workplans, while the advisory committee workplans will change each year to adapt to evolving priorities.
Should the Council decide to implement annual workplans, staff will return to Council in 2025 following a comprehensive scope review of all BCCs, working closely with staff liaisons and BCC members to finalize the work plans.
FOCUS AREA 3: COMMISSION WORK
Staff identified two challenges related to commission work: inconsistent practices in agenda setting and item selection, and unclear and undefined communication channels.
To address these issues, staff will implement a standard template for staff reports, agendas, and minutes, creating uniformity across all advisory bodies. Additionally, an administrative procedure will be developed to outline a clear process for BCCs to bring an item to the City Council for consideration.
Recommendation 3.1: Prioritize Meetings for Action vs Informational Items City staff aims to prioritize meetings for action over informational items in BCC meetings by conducting meetings only when there are items requiring action. A significant amount of volunteer and staff time is dedicated to these meetings and holding sessions solely for informational updates is not the most efficient use of public resources.
This recommendation would still allow BCCs to present subcommittee reports during meetings that include actionable items. Additionally, it will not prevent a staff liaison from scheduling special meetings if important informational updates need to be shared.
Additionally, in effort to manage resources more effectively, it is recommended that requests for presentations or reports from City staff outside the designated staff liaison will be limited to once per quarter.
FOCUS AREA 4: BOARD APPOINTMENT AND REAPPOINTMENT
ADMINISTRATION
Recommendation 4.1: Standardize Term Start Dates
Currently, terms for BCCs expire in seven different months across the year, creating a diluted and ongoing recruitment and appointment schedule, which impacts public interest in community service. Staff proposes implementing a standardized term start date, with all terms beginning on January 1 and expiring on December 31 of their respective years.
This adjustment, along with the various administrative improvements to enhance the application process, is expected to streamline recruitment and onboarding efforts. A stronger, coordinated recruitment push each year will help reduce administrative burden and conducting interviews in a single meeting will enhance efficiency and continuity in board and commission appointments.
4859-1536-9209 v1
Recommendation 4.2: Implement a Competitive Reappointment Process and Clarify Term Limits
City Council Policy 23 guides the reappointment process for BCC members. Under this policy, the City Clerk contacts members with expiring terms to confirm their interest in reappointment, after which interested members submit a letter to the City Council, which is presented at a following meeting. However, this process has led to some confusion, as members report unclear expectations for reappointment and uncertainty about what to include in their letters. Additionally, the current approach may limit diversity by reducing opportunities for new applicants, as it generally bypasses a competitive selection process.
Updating the reappointment process to include a competitive review could address these concerns. In this model, the City Clerk would confirm expiring members' interest, and interested members would submit either a letter or an updated application detailing their qualifications. Reappointment requests would then be presented to the Council alongside any new applications, ensuring a fair assessment of all candidates. Further clarity and guidelines on reappointment letter content could be provided in the Commissioner’s Handbook.
Additionally, while Council Policy 6 and established practices limit service to two terms or eight years, the original 1973 minute order lacks specificity on whether this limit applies collectively across all boards or resets for new boards. Clarifying this policy would standardize term limits and encourage broader participation. A revised, transparent reappointment process would balance the retention of experience with the promotion of opportunities to serve on City boards.
RECOMMENDED ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES
In addition to the substantive recommendations presented above, staff is in the process of implementing the following administrative changes:
1. Implement a Five-Year Founding Document Review Process: Starting in 2025, staff will initiate periodic reviews of each BCC's founding documents. This process will ensure that the mission, scope, and responsibilities of each body remain aligned with the evolving goals and priorities of the City Council and community.
Reviews will be conducted in tandem with the formal rollout of annual workplans and will be brough back to the City Council at a later date.
2. Update Commissioner’s Handbook: Feedback from staff and commissioners highlighted the need for more practical information in the current Commissioner’s Handbook. The revised version will provide a clearer foundation for incoming commissioners, detailing roles, expectations, and board functions to better support them. It will also clarify policies on board structure and administrative practices, emphasizing that commissioners are volunteers and Council approval is necessary for certain actions.
4859-1536-9209 v1
3. Provide Additional Trainings and Resources for Staff Liaisons: Continuing the focus on enhancing documentation and resources, the City Clerk's Office is developing training and support materials for staff liaisons and support staff assigned to boards and commissions. Previously, the City Clerk's Office hosted quarterly meetings with support staff to address issues, update staff on new laws or legislation impacting committees, and share best practices. The City Clerk's Office intends to continue these quarterly meetings and provide additional written resources to serve as reference materials for both new and current staff.
4. Develop Standard Agenda and Minute Templates: Staff identified inconsistencies in the level of detail and information within agendas, packet materials, and minutes across the advisory bodies. Although these bodies may not receive the same level of scrutiny as Council items, staff believes it is essential to ensure agendas and packets are well-documented. To enhance cohesion and alignment with City branding, staff will focus on standardizing agenda templates over the next year. A standardized minutes template will also be developed, with training provided to staff on how to draft clear, accurate, and neutral minutes. This approach aims to eliminate the current disparity in agenda and minute formats across City bodies, promoting a consistent and professional presentation of City materials.
5. Develop Process for BCCs to Bring Items to the City Council: As of now, there is no defined or standard mechanism for advisory bodies to bring items to the attention of the City Council. Administrative Procedure 115 – Correspondence with the City Council establishes a procedure for staff to communicate directly with the City Council and indicates that a similar procedure should be established for BCCs.
While the annual work plans are intended to serve as the primary form of communication between advisory body and the City Council, staff will develop an Administrative Procedure to assist staff in coordinating advisory body and council communication.
6. Develop Enhanced Application Process: Staff is updating the application process to allow individuals to apply for multiple boards simultaneously and include custom questions tailored to each board or commission. This process will provide Council with more detailed candidate information and highlight any required qualifications, streamlining the selection process.
7. Implement Rolling Application Cycle: The City currently accepts applications only for immediate or upcoming vacancies due to expiring terms. Staff is amending this process to allow individuals to apply at any time, with applications held for one year. Applicants will be informed of the status of their application and anticipated vacancy dates.
8. Require Minimum Number of Applicants for Council Consideration: Staff recommends a minimum of three applicants be presented to Council for any board or commission vacancy, except in cases where a lack of quorum risks commission 4859-1536-9209 v1
operations. Currently, single applicants are often brought to Council, limiting candidate options and the ability for others to apply after initial vacancies are posted.
9. Standardize Process for Excusing Absences: CMC Section 2.30.040(B) states that a member who is absent for four consecutive regular meetings without cause shall automatically vacate their seat, with the respective board, commission, or committee determining if the absence was for cause. City staff is developing a standardized process for excusing absences, with clear guidance to be included in the Commissioner’s Handbook and staff training materials on acceptable reasons for excused absences.
10.Limit Meeting Participation for Incomplete Mandatory Filings or Trainings:
CMC Section 1.20.070 requires board, commission, and committee members to file a Statement of Economic Interests (Form 700) and complete AB1234 ethics training. Members must submit Form 700s and complete ethics training within 30 days of appointment, file Form 700 annually, and renew ethics training every two years. Currently, there is no enforcement mechanism within the City to penalize members who fail to file or remain non-compliant with required training. Staff proposes that members who fail to meet these requirements by the deadline will be notified, along with their staff liaison, that they cannot participate or vote until compliance is achieved. Any missed meetings during this period will count as unexcused absences, and members may be removed after four consecutive unexcused absences per CMC Section 2.30.040(B). Given that some advisory bodies meet infrequently, this could result in a member remaining on a board for several months or even up to a year without completing the necessary filings or training. Staff is seeking Council guidance on how long such non-compliance should be tolerated.
II. CITY COUNCIL ASSIGNMENTS AND APPOINTMENT PROCESS
Staff's review of historical practices revealed a lack of consistent documentation for Councilmember assignments. Records are available from the mid-2000s, with limited data going back to the 1970s. Over this period, the City Council has formed, dissolved, and occasionally reinstated various subcommittee assignments. Staff has identified four key areas for improvement and seeks Council direction on the recommendations provided.
ASSIGNMENTS, ROTATION, AND SELECTION
As a general law city, Coronado follows California Government Code Section 40605, which grants the Mayor the prerogative, with Council approval, to make appointments to committee assignments unless otherwise specified by statute. Historically, the City Council has rotated members through subcommittee and board appointments, giving each member an opportunity to gain experience and foster broader engagement. 4859-1536-9209 v1
Additionally, Councilmembers have sometimes been assigned roles based on seniority, allowing longer serving members to select or retain assignments.
According to CMC Section 2.02.020(C), the Mayor Pro Tempore is to serve a one-year term or until a successor is appointed. In practice, the Mayor Pro Tempore has served longer than the prescribed term, continuing in the role until subcommittee assignments are reviewed.
Appointment to Subcommittees
Option 1: Formalize the current process whereby the Mayor nominates, with Council approval, Councilmembers to serve on subcommittees with the Mayor’s discretion to apply various approaches, such as, direct appointment, rotation, selection by seniority, or other methods.
Option 2: Establish a process that formalizes a single method for subcommittee assignments, such as rotation, seniority, or another consistent approach.
Mayor Pro Tempore Selection
Option 1: Direct staff to prepare an update to CMC Section 2.02.020(c) to reflect the current practice of the Mayor Pro Tempore serving beyond a one-year term.
Option 2: Retain CMC Section 2.02.020(c) as is and enforce the one-year term limit for the Mayor Pro Tempore role.
COUNCILMEMBERS AS EX OFFICIO BCC MEMBERS
Currently, Councilmembers serve as ex officio officers on three advisory bodies: the Library Board of Trustees, the Golf Course Advisory Committee, and the Spreckels Center Advisory Committee. In this capacity, they participate in discussions but do not hold voting rights. Their participation offers a direct channel for information sharing between advisory bodies and the City Council, ensuring alignment with City goals and policies. However, as non-voting members, Councilmembers should not influence the recommendations or decisions made by these advisory groups.
The ex officio role can be ambiguous as Councilmembers are expected to offer insights without participating directly in decision making. This may raise questions about the purpose and extent of their involvement. While Councilmembers do not vote, their presence may create a perception of influence over discussions or recommendations, potentially affecting the independence of these advisory groups. Conversely, advisory bodies without an assigned Councilmember may feel disadvantaged because they lack a direct line of communication with the City Council.
Ex Officio Participation Across Advisory Bodies
4859-1536-9209 v1
If recommendation 1.2 — sunset the Spreckels Center Advisory Committee and reclassify the Golf Course Advisory Committee to a Working Group — is approved, then ex officio participation would remain only for the Library Board of Trustees.
Option 1: Remove ex officio participation across all BCCs. Alternative communication channels, such as the proposed work plans, could fulfill the information-sharing role currently served by ex officio members.
Option 2: Maintain ex officio roles as is and direct staff to develop a clear policy that defines the role's scope and purpose, establishing expectations for participation, communication, and boundaries of influence.
COUNCIL INVOLVEMENT WITH GRANT-FUNDED GROUPS AND HOMEOWNER
ASSOCIATIONS
The City Council has historically engaged with a variety of community organizations, including Coronado MainStreet, the Coronado Historical Association, Safe Harbor Coronado, and the Coronado Chamber of Commerce. Councilmembers also meet regularly with the Coronado Cays Homeowners Association (HOA), the only HOA in Coronado currently maintaining a formal connection to the City Council. These engagements allow Councilmembers to remain informed on community priorities, offer updates on City initiatives, and address resident concerns.
Notably, Coronado's approach to maintaining formal relationships with community organizations and HOAs, coupled with its unique grant program, is distinct from many other cities. This dynamic reflects Coronado's commitment to direct community engagement but also raises considerations regarding potential conflicts of interest and perceived influence.
For community organizations that receive City grant funding, the dual role of Councilmembers as liaisons can create a perception of favoritism. Without a formal standard for determining which community organizations should receive a Council liaison, the current approach risks unintentionally favoring certain groups over others.
Additionally, the expected level of engagement varies widely across organizations, with some expecting updates on City business and others requiring no more than a presence at meetings. This inconsistency can lead to varied representation and influence.
Similarly, Councilmembers’ formal engagement with homeowner associations is presently limited to the Coronado Cays HOA. Other like-sized residential associations, like the Coronado Shores HOA, do not have similar representation. This difference in engagement may limit the Council’s insight into issues faced by residents and could be addressed by expanding liaison roles to additional HOAs.
Council Liaisons to Grant-Funded Organizations
4859-1536-9209 v1
Option 1: Maintain Council liaison roles with grant-funded organization and direct staff to develop a policy that clarifies the role of Council liaisons to these organizations. The policy should outline expectations for Councilmember engagement, including whether liaisons should recuse themselves from grantrelated votes, the appropriate level of involvement, and any limitations to prevent perceived favoritism or advocacy.
Option 2: Discontinue Council liaison roles for organizations receiving grant funding, and direct staff to develop a policy that prohibits Councilmembers from serving in this capacity.
Council Liaisons to Homeowner Associations (HOA)
Option 1: Maintain current practice of serving as the Coronado Cays HOA liaison, rotating on a quarterly basis.
Option 2: Assess the potential benefits of expanding Council liaison roles with other HOAs, such as Coronado Shores HOA and Landing HOA, and direct staff to develop a formal policy. The City Council may also determine whether these meetings should be attended monthly or quarterly, and whether the liaison should continue to rotate or be assigned as a static position.
CALTRANS SUBCOMMITTEE
At the July 16 Council meeting, the Council considered establishing a regular subcommittee with Caltrans to ensure both entities stay informed of projects in the area, support progress on shared initiatives, and maintain mutual accountability. Currently, the Mayor along with a few staff members meet with Caltrans informally on a quarterly basis.
Establishing a Standing Council Subcommittee with Caltrans Option 1: Maintain the current process of having an informal partnership with Caltrans.
Option 2: Establish a Caltrans Subcommittee and direct staff on meeting frequency. The City council may also consider whether the appointee to Caltrans should also serve as the representative to SANDAG and MTS to maintain consistency.
NEXT STEPS
Upon receiving City Council direction on any changes it wishes to make to the BCCs or Council assignments structure and processes, staff will prepare and return with any necessary implementing Resolutions, Policies or Ordinances for final Council approval.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impacts have been identified.
4859-1536-9209 v1
ALTERNATIVE:
The City Council may direct staff to explore additional questions or issues or may choose to make no changes.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT:
Not Applicable.
PUBLIC NOTICE:
No notice required.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Summary of BCC and Council Assignments Recommendations/Options
2. July 16, 2024 Agenda Report
3. Council Board/Commission/Committee Assignments
4. Draft Workplans
5. Council Policy 6, 23, and 1973 Minute Order
6. CMC 2.02.020
Submitted By: The Offices of the City Clerk and City Manager / submitted by Kelsea Holian and Kelli Maples