PaulTheOak and JulesJames have valid points. People are more willing to serve when they feel their work is valued. In the past, the Port Commission agreed to implement projects studied and recommended by the POCAC, including EV chargers and Community Solar. What has changed in recent years?
1. Port leadership reneged on agreements to fund Community Solar, even though that's a high priority for participants in the port's Vision 2050 study.
2. Port boss Gibboney appointed herself to the POCAC with a heavy hand, changing rules and reducing the Committee's autonomy. Cookies are not enough, sorry.
3. The only in***bent port commissioner often micromanages the POCAC too.
4. Highly qualified POCAC applicants are often ignored in favor of political appointees. We got a good crop of POCAC people a few years ago, with Decker, Hansen, Szymoniak, and a couple of others. Sorry to see that they are choosing not to re-up.
Recommendations:
* Restore autonomy to the POCAC
* Port staff should serve as resources to the POCAC - not managers of the volunteers.
* Study the port's Vision 2050, and note public priorities: environmental cleanup, waterfront recreation, and social issues. Reach out to people in these areas - including excellent past applicants.
* Support good POCAC studies with Port action - and follow through on promises.
* Have the Port's HR director interview recently departed POCAC members. Why did they leave? What role did current POCAC leadership play in their decision? Listen, and make changes.
Please explain the inappropriate content below.
