Kiffi Summa, LWV Observer
An agenda of 5 complex items for discussion prompted Mayor Rossing to note that although it was a "packed" agenda, there was "no reason we can't move through it with brevity and focus". The Mayor asked that comments be kept to "how to move ahead".
SHARPENING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS:
Joel Walinski, City Administrator, began by recalling that the Council's two previous conversations about Boards and Commissions centered on the Council goal of improving the communication process. In 2009, the Council has established the liaison communication to Boards and Commissions, communications from the liaisons back to the Council, and Boards and Commissions monthly reports which are to be attached to the Administrator's Friday Memo.
Mayor Rossing felt the Council had communicated the Council's goals to the B/Cs, had tasks identified, and asked that those tasks be carried out. For 2010, the Mayor felt that training for the B/Cs would result in more effective meetings. The Council seemed to be in general agreement.
C. Buckheit began the Council discussion by saying that she felt the Council's own goals were somewhat "diffuse", which sometimes caused difficulty in communicating. She felt that different B/Cs might have different operational modes. For example the Planning Commission has their regulatory agenda set for them, and now, having the new Land Development Code ( LDC ) on their 'plate' was meeting every week on that project; so they are doing all, if not more, than can be expected of them. She gave additional examples.
Mayor Rossing was interested in the EQC (Environmental Quality Commission) and asked C. Zweifel about how to move ahead with the EQC's many ideas, as well as those of their sub-groups. C. Zweifel said the EQC had almost morphed into a 'sustainability' commission. C. Zweifel pointed out the advisory nature of the EQC on recent issues like the LDC, the stormwater/erosion ordinances, and a new tree list for the City. The Mayor asked C. Zweifel if it would be difficult for the council liaison to say to an advisory group: that's a great idea, but you need to check with Council.
There was then discussion on the subject of initiatives from advisory B/Cs, checking to make sure those aligned with Council goals, origination of policy, policy suggestions possibly coming from a Board to Council, and the training for B/Cs. The Mayor stated that a Board could initiate what they wanted to work on, but should come to Council for approval. The Mayor also felt that a liaison, when at a B/C meeting, should take the responsibility to say "Wait a minute, is that a direction the council wants to go in 20--?
After more discussion on training, C. Buckheit again stated that she felt there were different roles for various B/Cs and that would cause different ways of pursuing goals. The mayor again reiterated the need for liaisons to stop B/Cs from "going too far down the road and having too much ownership" ...
Mayor Rossing summarized the next steps as: Training sessions for B/C Chairs, Roles and Responsibilities clarified, strengthen the Liaison relationship and identify what initiatives needed to go to Council, and link initiatives to Council work goals.
***Note: There was no discussion of eliminating some Boards and Commissions at this meeting. A list of Boards and Commissions and their Council liaisons can be found in the packet, online or at the Library.
SAFETY CENTER PROJECT UPDATE:
After the submission of the Safety Center Taskforce Report on June 22, and the 'minority report' written by Ray Cox, a Taskforce member, the Council made 5 requests of Staff for further information:
. Develop additional information on service levels and standards for Police and Fire Departments
. Complete a Flood Plain Analysis of the current Safety Center Site
. Develop a public education process for the project ...
. Begin negotiations with the property owners of the two recommended sites
. Continue to investigate grants or shared partnerships for funding the project ...
It was nearly impossible to conclude what exactly was the disposition of the Council as the discussion ranged all over many options of separated or combined facilities, some reuse of the current site, possible separation of the Rural Fire Dept., importance of relationship with the RFD, the deferred maintenance problems of the current site, possible re-use of the current site by demolition of the existing building, costs of mitigating flood plain construction, rebuilding on a raised level at current site, the need for a second fire station in 20-30 years, the current site/facility as a 'gateway' to NF, and on and on.
This discussion, which virtually seemed to start the decision making process all over again, concluded with Mr. Walinski telling the Council "they did not have to make any decisions tonight", but that they would "have to make decisions by the end of September or first of October, to complete the CIP (Capital improvement Plan) process for the Budget". Council will also have to determine the method of financing the project; if the project is completed in 2011, it will impact the 2012 property taxes.
SKATE PARK PLAZA REVIEW/CRITERIA RESULTS:
All Councilors completed a matrix to determine their criteria for siting a skateboard plaza. The task was to review the results of the scoring exercise and determine which sites to eliminate and which to continue evaluating. They would also identify their reasons for removing sites from consideration and then discuss next steps.
After a methodical review three parks remained for discussion: Spring Creek Park (soccer fields location), Old Memorial Field (swimming pool area), and Babcock Park(North). Mini-sites at multiple park locations was also left as an idea for implementation in the future; and the "School District Area" was left in because although the School District had already indicated they would not permit, it was felt a formalized request and rejection was needed.
***Note: there was an interesting policy discussion which arose out of the possible Spring Creek Park location. C. Buckheit felt that the Council must discuss the policy issues of a park which is comprised of city land , but which is largely/partially funded by a private sports association, and may be maintained to varying degrees by such an organization, and staffed by volunteers. It was determined that before moving forward, there would be a work session to discuss: examples being the soccer fields at Spring Creek, and baseball fields at Sechlar.
UPDATE ON CITY ATTORNEY SELECTION PROCESS:
Mr.Walinski gave an update of the city attorney selection process, and suggested that the selection committee needs to separate out the RFP requests a bit differently, as some applicants are interested only in the civil part of the legal services contract, some only in the criminal/prosecution portion, and some would be willing to take on both areas.
Some interviews have begun.
Mr. Walinski also said that it has been determined that having an in-house legal department would be far more costly, considering the necessary administrative and support staff costs.
UTILITY RATE STUDY DISCUSSION:
Kathleen MacBride, City Finance Director, and a consultant firm, Donohue and Associates, have completed an initial analysis and future projections of the enterprise(utility) funds. Staff provided an overview of this project and discussed possible rate changes to ensure proper fund balances for the future.
Ms. McBride emphasized the need for the city to:
. manage rate changes year to year
. build the financial health of each utility
. maintain infrastructure
. create capacity to expand an expensive facility
It was agreed that some rate structure changes might be more equitable, i.e. since it takes the same infrastructure to deliver a teaspoon, or a gallon of water, to a property, the base rate should be at a higher fixed amount, with the variable occurring in the volume used.
The need for an additional water tower in the NW quadrant of the city was also discussed as well as the area service assessment that would result.
The rate study is not fully complete , but the council gave direction for proceeding.
MEETING ADJOURNED, 10:04 PM
