Myself as personnel chair and then the administration has done and kind of give a perspective on what has been done and so that the work is not kind of duplicative, kind of understanding what has been the process, what are the considerations, what boards and commissions we've looked at.

So I just wanted to run through what has been done for the last few years or a few months and take any questions and then what my suggestions would be to move forward and what might be coming forward to you tonight, and then also in the next coming council cycle too.

So back in February, January, February, when I started the as personnel chair, one thing we were discussing was we had passed a resolution addressing the realignment of boards and commissions back two years ago.

That work was kind of left unfinished.

So when I came in, I made the commitment to pick that up and really look at boards and commissions and what's working and what's not working.

So the administration advisor John Dugic and myself and Dr.

Marsha Lou, we've met a couple of times to go through all of the boards and commissions and what could potentially be combined.

So this is kind of just an assessment of what we've explored to give some ideas.

So the work that we've already explored does not have to be duplicated next next round.

So I can start with the most basic one that has already kind of appeared forward in front of you regarding the human rights commission.

So when we were looking at the um protected class-based commissions and realized you know what the struggles were, I've kind of already spoken about what the benefits are of it moving into a committee under the human rights commission and what that structure looks like.

So tonight you'll see the NQ Commission has formally adopted to become a committee under the Human Rights Commission.

There have been some added um in the agenda, you'll see there's been some added um uh suggestion points from administration as well.

One was which uh the appointed member from the commission to go to the committee will still come through the council cycle.

Originally we had discussed that it was would be the human rights commission appointing um the members of the committee, and that committee choosing their chair, their designee to be the voting member in the human rights commission.

Uh the administration and I decided that you know it would be still best to make sure the human rights commission still went through the council process so the mayor would still have purview over the uh individual applicant that goes on to the human rights commission.

Um of course, any of the other commissions can join at any moment uh or any time that they take a vote to incorporate, and then um the human rights commission has been also exploring the committee formations of potentially an Asian American um committee uh formation and a Latinx committee formation as well.

So those are in conversations, and you might be seeing that um in the coming years.

So, and then um let me quickly also go through what has been discussed.

Right now, some of the things that we have spoken about was potentially the public arts combining with the um the heritage preservation fund.

That was not going to move forward because of a protected class that the heritage preservation fund has.

Um that was something we explored, but in order essentially when the state uh state has we have a heritage preservation district, instead of going through the state process, the city of Duluth with our unique committee structure can go through the heritage preservation committee.

If we were to combine that with the public arts, that might put that uh line in jeopardy.

So we did not move forward with that suggestion.

Another one we looked at was the citizens, sorry, um the community development committee alongside the um the heading home advisory committee or the uh housing trust fund committee.

Both of these committees have a partnership between uh sorry, the heading home advisory committee uh community uh committee and the housing trust fund review committee.

Both of them had an equal partnership with the city appointee, St.

Louis County appointees, as well as um uh some uh private sector and community members as well and nonprofits.

That was a suggestion we had considered to put potentially partner those two together.

That was not going to be able to move forward just due to some logistics on how the timelines worked for those committees.

Um there were a couple of other we explored, also the parking commission with the transportation commission, the nature of the parking commission being under the police department and the transportation commission being established potentially under engineering um or um you know planning that was not going to mesh well, so that was not something that was not gonna um move forward.

So that was not something that was not gonna move forward.

I think throughout my observations on all of these committees, as we've been talking about them, exploring, talking to the to the, you know, um the the departments is the departments, these are very unique committees that there's there's a struggle to combine.

I'm just gonna be frank.

Some of these that I thought were going to be work a lot smoother together to be combined, is going to end up there was a lot of pushback on like the process and what the risks were in those combinations.

The one that potentially on top of the human rights commission that will be coming in front of you potentially this coming cycle is actually the natural resources with a potential combination with the energy plan commission.

Um the other one we looked at pairing that with was actually the the parks uh the parks commission.

Um the administration and I had we were discussing how there's a lot of synergy between the parks commission with the Natural Resources Commission, and thought that they would be a good pairing together if we are looking at condensing the number of committees we have.

On further review, um, there were some concerns from the Natural Resources Commission that if they were to be combined with the parks, their intent was to protect or to really look at natural resources, potentially look at land that could be developed sold or developable or look at energy projects, look at overall sustainability.

The natural resource commissioners, their kind of their perspective is that combining with parks would couple them under parks in a way that might not be productive in talking about natural resources in the sense like is this land should it be developed, should it be retained, what is the protected class status on this, or what are the the statuses of energy around you know our um uh uh in in sustainability essentially.

So that conversation is still ongoing right now, and I'm just if that were not to come forward, you know, this cycle as we finish the year, that might be something that I would recommend the next personnel chair commit uh com counselor to continue to explore with with the um with the the energy the energy plan commissioners and the natural resource commissioners and the parks commissioners.

We were trying to get a meeting together with all three heads and just all three chairs, and just wouldn't was not able to be successful in setting up that meeting.

So conversation is still on way to see if the energy plan commission, which is uh which was um really developed with a goal of addressing um uh the the goal of reducing the city's greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent by 2050.

They had met given recommendations, those recommendations are kind of they feel like they've done some of their goals and they're still wanting to pursue that.

Some of the works you know, we can say may have been paused because the uh sustainability officer position is on a hold.

So um this Energy Plan Commission potentially looking at adding a sustainability element on top of it with um uh and then coupling that with natural resources.

So energy, natural resources, um, and sustainability as the mission that might be driven by the um the uh sustainability director.

So that's the conversation still happening.

The other thing I wanted to say is I've been working with the clerk's office to address the interview process.

We have a list that I will email out of uh kind of determining, you know, we've had a lot of struggle on what commissions should be interviewed, what commissions not being interviewed.

So the after kind of hearing some of the struggles from the counselors, hearing what your expectations were, um, we've I've condensed a list of the fine uh authorities are always being interviewed, financial uh receiving, or anyone who is uh providing grants, um dealing with housing, planning, potentially moving forward with interviews, and then all of the other commissions really uh having a robust application process.

I think that will streamline and really make clear what commissions and committees are being interviewed and what's not, and that list will come uh before you.

I believe I'm not gonna be able to have time to take action right now with that, so I wanted to leave those recommendations with you for future action.

Um, and then let's talk about the interview process.

Um as the personnel chair this uh this year, it's been very um sometimes it's been uncomfortable asking questions of conflict of interests or you know, availability, things that historically have been asked of our interviewees to ask those questions at the in the time of the interview and not prior in the application process.

So I had mentioned that you know, I was looking at the application process and wanted to give some time back to counselors to see what your recommendations was.

Right now, what we're doing is potentially taking uh those questions and embedding it into the application.

So those questions that I routinely asked during the interviews can be just in the applications to make that more seem seeming um smoother, and you have those qu uh answers within the application itself.

Um those were some of the bigger things that I want to talk.

I know I have really few time to go over.