It’s fair to say that most towns and cities rely on volunteers to meet the needs of their citizens, mainly by serving on boards and commissions. In Columbus, members are appointed by the city council and agree to serve anywhere from three to five years. The city has 11 commissions/boards and membership ranges from three (Civil Service Commission) to nine (Historic Preservation Committee).

Almost all of the boards/commissions are filled by unpaid volunteers and serve in an advisory capacity. They are people who do the legwork, making recommendations to the city council on policy matters. It’s important but mostly thankless work.

Because they volunteer to serve, the expression, “Don’t look a gift horse in the mouth” applies to some degree. The city often struggles to attract a good pool of candidates when positions on these commissions/boards come open. Between June and December, the city council will fill 12 positions on nine boards, a number which includes boards that are composed of both city and county representatives.

Because good board members are sometimes difficult to find, it is important that the city does not impose too many conditions on service. However, those who serve on these boards and commissions have obligations, too, despite their volunteer status, the most basic of which is to show up for their meetings.

In some instances, there have been board/commission members whose chronic absenteeism makes it difficult for their group to function efficiently.

How attendance is enforced – if it is enforced at all – is not uniform. Some commissions/boards have written attendance requirements. Others do not.

On Tuesday, city building official Kenneth Wiegel asked the city council to set a policy that allows the city council to remove members of the city planning commission who miss more than two consecutive meetings, a policy that is already in effect for the zoning commission. No action was taken, but we believe Wiegel’s request makes sense.

We do not favor across-the-board policies for all city boards and commissions. Each group has its own role and should be governed by policy based on its unique circumstances. But there are policies that should govern all of these boards/commissions. Attendance is one of those requirements that should be clearly stated and enforced.

It’s important to note that while missing two consecutive meetings would be grounds for replacement, the individual board and the city council have discretion. There are, after all, circumstances beyond the board member’s control that might create that situation. There is no reason to believe that a board or city council acting in good faith would not recognize legitimate absences.

Of course, board members, too, must be realistic about their ability to regularly attend and participate in these meetings. It is a commitment a board member should be both willing and able to make.

We like the idea of incorporating a uniform attendance requirement for the 11 boards/commission that operate solely under the city council’s authority.

Whether it’s two consecutive meetings or some other threshold, establishing a written requirement communicates the message that board members are expected to attend and participate regularly.

It’s a minimum requirement to expect of those who would serve their city on boards and commissions, one that should not discourage qualified people to apply for openings when they occur.

The Dispatch Editorial Board is made up of publisher Peter Imes, columnist Slim Smith, managing editor Zack Plair and senior newsroom staff.

READER FAVORITES

• 

  Our View: CPD: Finally, stability at the top?

  By Dispatch Editorial Board • 2 days ago

• 

  Slimantics: The recycling game has changed a bit

  By Slim Smith • 12 hours ago