Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />31 <br />32 <br />33 <br />34 <br />35 <br />36 <br />37 <br />38 <br />39 <br />40 <br />41 <br />42 <br />43 <br />44 <br />45 <br />Attachment B <br />DRAFT Regular City Council Meeting <br />Monday, May 11, 2015 <br />Page 25 <br />prompting the need to look at dates again. Mr. Trudgeon clarified that staff was <br />open to the process dictated by the City Council, but also cautioned that by bring- <br />ing more people into the loop at this point, it would create a much larger area of <br />context. <br />While recognizing the benefit of tonight's discussion, Councilmember Willmus <br />questioned how to bring Councilmember Laliberte into that discussion prior to <br />taking formal action. <br />In fairness to that desire, City Manager Trudgeon suggested perhaps another dis- <br />cussion on June 8, perhaps a summary plan not fully ratified would suffice for the <br />HRA's joint meeting with the City Council on June 15, provided the City Council <br />was comfortable with the housing and redevelopment aspect and any other priori- <br />ties involving the HRA directly that would serve to facilitate that conversation. <br />Councilmember Etten agreed with City Manager Trudgeon that this document in- <br />volved a lot of work for the City Council, and there would be many additional op- <br />portunities for staff to involve the community and/or advisory commissions. <br />Councilmember Etten also recognized that 2015 was half over before this docu- <br />ment was going to be adopted, and therefore, he expressed his support for a final <br />touch on June 8, followed by formal action at the next meeting to move it far- <br />ward. Councilmember Etten also noted that this was a living document and <br />should be flexible enough to allow revisions based on the six month updates — or <br />quarterly if applicable — but would still allow those changes and the process to <br />move forward sooner rather than later. <br />Based on his perception of discussions to-date, Mayor Roe stated he considered <br />these strategic priorities as the focus indicated by the City Council for the next <br />few years, in addition to other items that are standard operating or special circum- <br />stance issues. <br />Therefore, Mayor Roe opined he didn't see a need at this time to seek agreement <br />from advisory commissions with the Strategic Plan Summary, but instead to make <br />sure they have an opportunity to engage and provide additional suggestions to the <br />mix, with this document serving as a starting point. Based on that general under- <br />standing apparently shared by the body, Mayor Roe suggested coming bacic to the <br />June 8 meeting to incorporate Councilmember Laliberte's feedback with staff <br />providing this original draft document, and a revised red-lined copy as well incor- <br />parating tonight's discussion; with final adoption slated for adoption on June l 5. <br />Mayor Roe further clarified that future joint meetings of advisory commissions <br />and through their feedback to staff liaisons, they would be plugged into the pro- <br />cess, starting with the first joint meeting with the HRA, and provide additional in- <br />put to the revised strategic initiatives. However, Mayor Roe supported going <br />ahead with further discussion on June 8 and adoption on June 15. <br />