Latest in a series of posts on City Government
I agree with your assessment on appointment vs. re-appointment.
I think the number one thing that should be assessed on a re-appointment is a board member’s attendance record. If there were, say, ten meetings each year, how many did the re-appointee attend over their term?
Second, should be the availability of other interested residents. Councilwoman Crampsie-Smith pursued this with the Mayor. The Mayor informed her that he receives resumes. Perhaps someone should have gone a step further and inquired about those resumes. How many do you have and how many have expressed an interest in serving on a particular board?
Make no mistake about it, this kind of service by residents is exemplary, and it truly is public service. However, when the same people are constantly re-appointed over decades, it prevents new ideas and energy from becoming part of the authority/board/commission landscape.
We complain about elected officials making careers out of their elected positions, so many want to see term limits instituted. Bethlehem’s Mayor is term limited. Other city elected positions should be. Certainly there should be at higher levels of government.
When it comes to the ABCs, perhaps those that have valuable talents could be moved to other boards so that additional utilization of those talents could be achieved across these other organizations as well, while bringing fresh blood into the boards.