Laserfiche WebLink
3. Minutes <br />HRA Meeting <br />Minutes – Tuesday, July 21, 2015 <br />Page 10 <br />1 <br />By consensus, Item “I” was reworded to include: “Assess the Living Smarter Home and <br />2 <br />Garden Fair for alternate delivery models and options…” <br />3 <br />4 <br />General Comments <br />5 <br />Chair Maschka stated he was not troubled with retaining all five of these goals, in addressing <br />6 <br />the next steps and where the HRA wanted to go in the next four years as a viable objective. <br />7 <br />8 <br />After further discussion and consideration, Ms. Kelsey opined that the HRA had too much on <br />9 <br />its plate now, and if it intended to retain all five goals and various initiatives. <br />10 <br />11 <br />Member Masche concurred that, based on his review of meeting minutes from the Strategic <br />12 <br />Planning exercise that he’d been unable to attend, this was too much to accomplish in four <br />13 <br />years, and needed more distilling and condensing those items overlapping depending on how <br />14 <br />they were interpreted. <br />15 <br />16 <br />Member Etten noted that while some could be moved to the background, others would require <br />17 <br />a massive amount of work; and suggested prioritization at this point to force individual HRA <br />18 <br />members to define what was important and what was not. <br />19 <br />20 <br />Member Masche opined that appetite to pursue all goals listed was part of the maturation of the <br />21 <br />HRA as it continued to grow, but agreed the focus needed to be narrowed to be realistic. <br />22 <br />23 <br />Chair Maschka agreed with the assessment of Member Etten that some areas would continue, <br />24 <br />but not add any new workload to the HRA and staff, while others would require considerable <br />25 <br />staff time (e.g. infill lots), and if established as a priority going forward, needed to be analyzed <br />26 <br />to understand how that affected other work. <br />27 <br />28 <br />Ms. Raye referenced a comment of Mayor Roe at the City Council meeting that the HRA <br />29 <br />should do what they needed to do to accomplish goals, and if necessary to apply their <br />30 <br />maximum levy authority or obtain additional skill sets not currently available, the HRA should <br />31 <br />make that case to the City Council. Ms. Raye noted whether that included doing infill projects <br />32 <br />or site acquisition for commercial//businesses pieces, it would add capital or a percentage of <br />33 <br />time that grew back into the bricks and mortar area; making priority setting the obvious step. <br />34 <br />35 <br />Chair Maschka noted the overlap with economic development efforts of some components as <br />36 <br />well. <br />37 <br />38 <br />Member Wall noted the need to plug goals into the budget as some point as percentages are <br />39 <br />allocated based on priorities. <br />40 <br />41 <br />Goal Prioritization Exercise <br />42 <br />As individual members addressed their priorities for each goal, Ms. Raye noted this not only <br />43 <br />forced the board to define their priorities or areas of focus, but also gave staff an opportunity to <br />44 <br />let the board know how and if they could accomplish those goals and provide a point of <br />45 <br />discussion when conflicts occurred. <br />46 <br />47 <br />Member Masche noted many initiatives were process/procedure oriented in nature versus <br />48 <br />actual policy issues. <br />49 <br />50 <br />Ms. Kelsey also noted that many of the initiatives only required a financial support aspect <br />51 <br />without staff time by supporting Community Development Department programs with <br />52 <br />funding. Ms. Kelsey noted some items budgeted for may not have line items on the current <br />53 <br />budget or defined location for HRA dollars. <br />54 <br /> <br />