Title
Discuss Recommendations Related to Council Appointed Advisory Bodies
Recommended Action
Committee Recommendation:
Not referred to a committee.
City Manager Recommendation:
Discuss recommendations related to City Council appointed advisory bodies and provide guidance related to recruitment processes and timelines.
Report
Issue:
Whether to discuss recommendations related to City Council appointed advisory bodies and provide guidance related to recruitment processes and timelines.
Staff Contact:
Stacey Ray, Assistant City Manager, 360.753.8150
Presenter(s):
Stacey Ray, Assistant City Manager
Background and Analysis:
On May 14, 2025, the Community Livability and Public Safety Committee (CLPS) discussed the effectiveness of City Council appointed advisory bodies in meeting the communication and community engagement goals for which they were created.
Assistant City Manager Debbie Sullivan presented an extensive evaluation of the existing bodies that included analysis of advisory body works plans, referrals from Council, attendance and member survey results. Following discussion of the results, CLPS directed staff to continue the evaluation process, and to bring back recommendations on possible changes for the Committee’s consideration.
In September 2025, the City contracted with Genevieve Canceko Chan to build upon the work previously completed by Assistant City Manager Sullivan, supplementing it with additional stakeholder meetings and further identifying systemic issues, barriers to participation, and common challenges for both staff and community participants. Her additional research included contacting other cities that had recently or were currently engaged in similar evaluations of their advisory bodies and meeting with council-appointed advisory body staff liaisons to share and receive feedback on draft recommendations.
On February 25, 2026, CLPS received a briefing on this work, including recommendations centered on two pathways for improvement; changes to make the current system more efficient and effective, and a scenario that envisions a multi-faceted and multidisciplinary approach to community engagement and advisory bodies. CLPS directed staff to further develop both options.
Since February, staff along with the consultant, have surveyed current advisory body members, met with advisory body chairs, advisory body staff liaisons, and the Social Justice & Equity Commission to seek additional input. The Social Justice & Equity Commission was asked to review and comment on the recommendations with an emphasis on reducing barriers for community members to engage with the City and supporting diverse experiences and perspectives in City decision-making.
Staff will present to CLPS more options to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of advisory bodies in meeting the Council’s engagement goals. The options fall into two categories, one focused on improvements to the current system and one focused on transitioning to a multi-faceted approach using a broader range of engagement methods beyond just standing advisory bodies. Both options include administrative updates to address recruitment, work planning, and onboarding.
Staff will also share a recommendation and timeline for restructuring the existing Advisory Bodies to better align and streamline the work.
During the discussion staff will request guidance specifically related to recruitment processes and timelines. Based on direction from the Committee, staff will return to CLPS at a later date to present an updated recommendation.
Climate Analysis:
This discussion is not expected to have an impact on greenhouse gas emissions.
Equity Analysis:
Public engagement that is equitable and inclusive of diverse community member perspectives is foundational to building trust in government, formulating effective policies, and developing programs that best meet community needs and priorities. The assessment of the current advisory body system is intended to identify barriers to participation and explore additional engagement strategies to allow for more diverse perspectives to be represented in Council and staff decision-making.
Neighborhood/Community Interests (if known):
The community has a high interest in participating in local government decision making. Advisory bodies have historically provided opportunities for more direct Council engagement with the community around policy decisions and Council decision-making. Over the last several years, however, staff and Council have explored and experienced success in using a variety of other ways in which to engage community members, broadening the voices and perspectives represented in planning efforts and community conversations.
Financial Impact:
The City contracted with consultant Genevieve Canceko Chan to complete an evaluation process for Council-appointed advisory bodies. The consultant’s scope of work includes crafting recommendations on improving the advisory body system, including addressing the recruitment and appointment process, work planning, and Council and advisory body member satisfaction. The contract is valued at $35,875 and is funded through the General Fund.
Options:
1. Discuss recommendations related to City Council appointed advisory bodies and provide guidance specifically related to recruitment processes and timelines. Direct staff to return at a later date having further developed the recommendations based on direction from the Committee.
2. Do not discuss recommendations related to City Council appointed advisory bodies or provide guidance on recruitment processes and timelines.
3. Take other action.
Attachments:
May 2025 Advisory Body Evaluation Presentation to Community Livability & Public Safety Committee
Advisory Body Member Survey Results Summary
Social Justice & Equity Commission Letter
Advisory Body Chairs Meeting Summary
Advisory Body Evaluation Process Briefing Paper