Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Ann Hermes asked that the public comment first, then the issues should be prioritized with <br />police and fire. <br /> <br />5. Phase 2: Discussion <br /> <br />Kim Way explained (with a hand out) the Phase 2 process and a third phase with costs, <br />implementation strategy and more detailed picture of the proposal The formal <br />recommendation to the City Council would occur in year 2000. <br /> <br />Scott Berg suggested Phase 2 should provide alternatives for public comment. Jan <br />Vanderwall noted that the process will (may) determine the number of alternatives. <br /> <br />Chair Wietecki noted that 'a vision without a budget is hallucination'. <br /> <br />Consensus: The CCTF agreed Kim Way's generalized outline of Phase 2 activities <br />shown on the monthly schedule. Kim Way will expand upon the products/outcomes <br />expected each month. A public input process will be added at the end of each phase. <br /> <br />6. Public Input Process <br /> <br />There is a need for more general public comment in addition to the special interest <br />comment. A representative sample should be done. The CCTF should include a <br />communication tool to the public - ways of giving information and asking for comment <br /> <br />Could there be communication by newsletter, newspaper, cable and a "hot line" phone <br />recording? <br /> <br />Chair Wietecki asked that the program for the site be prepared and be available for <br />comment and prioritized. Define what the needs are. <br /> <br />Pat Johnson asked for a press release to the local newsletter after each meeting; email and <br />the internet web site are also available. <br /> <br />Craig Klausing asked that public input be in depth and provide give and take. Jan <br />Vanderwall asked that "mini-reports" come out in graphic and written form after each <br />phase. <br /> <br />Kim Way suggested a series of public input sessions with "open houses" after August 1999 <br />meeting to discuss work to date. Is there a need for a broader public discussion of the <br />issues? Could the next meeting be an "open house" with boards and drawings? <br /> <br />Chair Wietecki asked for a concrete summary of what has been completed to date be part of <br />the "open house". Scott Berg asked for a "likes/dislikes" questionnaire at the open house. <br /> <br />Jan Vanderwall asked if the proposals could be present around the community. <br /> <br />Page 3 of 4 <br />