December 30, 2005

Location: City Hall
Convened: 2 p.m.
 

Attending Committee members: Allison Banks, Carol Dejka, George Jensen, Bruce Tedtsen, Greg Streveler (acting chair). Lexa Meyer (City Clerk)

Agenda Item #1 - Preparation for Meeting with Committee Chairs to Explain City Budgeting and Planning Procedures.

After discussion of Carolyn Edelman’s draft meeting outline, it was agreed that:

- the meeting will be brief, concise and relevant to general requirements & questions; items specific to individual committees should be referred to either Lexa or the appropriate Planning Committee member for one-on-one discussions later;

- introduction will give background on the development and use of the Strategic Plan and the role of the Planning Committee;

- Planning Committee members will lead discussion on the Annual Work Plan material on the city website; and

- Lexa will explain standardized budgeting.

Each committee liason will prepare a draft work plan for their committee in order to get them started on the subject. Appropriate materials from the Strategic Plan and various City documents will be passed out to the attendees.

The meeting time was changed to 11:00am on February 11 in order to provide for Lexa’s presence. The monthly Planning Committee meeting will be moved up to February 17 so that it provides a timely follow-up to the Committee Chairs meeting.

Agenda Item #2 - The DRC grant proposal to the Denali Commission.

Consideration of the grant proposal led to a detailed discussion of the Planning Committee’s general role regarding proposals and work plans, with these results:

Our most fundamental role in this regard is to act as a clearinghouse for planning, providing the Council with concise and timely summaries of things that require their attention, and removing other things from their plate. In order to do this we should:

1) see that work plans and proposals are clearly articulated and congruent with the Strategic Plan;

2) review work plans and proposals in a broader context, considering the plans & proposals of other committees and the general direction set by the City Council;

3) answer questions raised during review when possible; others should be either remanded to the relevant committees or elevated to the Council, as appropriate.

It was agreed that the DRC grant proposal was clear and in accord with the Strategic Plan, but that transmitting a recommendation to the Council should be deferred pending further clarity on whether submission of one proposal to the Denali Commission affects the chances for others submitted by the same organization. Carol will look into this. If the answer is affirmative, Lexa suggested that the Council may want to consider funding DRC needs rather than asking for Denali commission funds for this, given the other requests being made. A draft resolution for the Council consideration is being prepared. We are now aiming to have a recommendation for the Council’s January 19 work session.
 

Agenda Item #3 - Dealing with Socio-environmental Aspects of Major Development Projects.

This topic was brought to the fore because of the number of large development proposals in prospect for Gustavus in the next decade, which have many potential social and environmental ramifications. It was agreed that this was an important need, and that “if the Planning Committee doesn’t do it, who will?” Greg brought up to possibility of asking the Council for authorization that might include:

- preparing a draft checklist of possible social and environmental effects (Allison can get a copy of a Federal list);

- drafting a procedure for reviewing infrastructure development proposals, plans and contracts in light of these effects;

- identifying organs of the City that are best positioned to deal with effects that require attention.

It was agreed that if we got into this arena, it should be kept simple and non-bureaucratic, and that the principal purpose would be to elevate key questions to the Council for their consideration. The committee members present unanimously agreed that this was a matter germane to our committee, and that we should ask the Council for their permission to proceed. But since this would be a significant addition to the Committee mandate, we then voted unanimously to defer final action on it pending getting the opinion of absent committee members.
 

Committee Protocol

As a final matter, we agreed to a meeting format that allowed unstructured conversation on agenda items, but that at the end of each discussion we would switch to Robert’s rules and vote formally on decisions.