CC_Minutes_2017_0130 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday,January 30,2017 Page 19 opined that the user numbers may have been improved by one particularly hot topic, but generally he found less expensive and more accepted options available. Councilmember McGehee spoke in support of the motion, suggesting the money saved on this contract would be better applied to an additional newsletter edition or by increasing post card mailings outside social media options. While being initially supportive of this option, Councilmember Laliberte stated that she wouldn't rally for continuing the contract, expressing her disappointment with the little engagement resulting from this tool. Councilmember Laliberte ad- mitted it was cumbersome to use on a mobile platform, along with limiting in the amount of customization available for the city. Councilmember Laliberte noted the concerns expressed to her by people not knowing if their comments had been heard, and a lack of dialogue with those users and the city. Councilmember Laliberte opined that the city may have failed or at least the perception was that the city didn't deliver, whether that was the city's doing or the system's inability to document that follow-up. Councilmember Laliberte opined that it was a good idea that just didn't work. Mayor Roe agreed that the program didn't work as advertised; and agreed that there were more effective means of receiving input and encouraging dialogue. Mayor Roe agreed that perhaps a hard copy newsletter or paying for more en- gagement options as part of the comprehensive plan update process may prove better uses for the money. Roll Call Ayes: Laliberte, McGehee, Willmus, Etten and Roe. Nays: None. e. Update on the Greater Notification Pilot Program and Fee Changes to Cer- tain Application Processes As detailed in the staff report, Senior Planner Thomas Paschke sought any feed- back on this pilot program. At the request of Mayor Roe, Mr. Paschke clarified next steps, as outlined in lines 35-39 (page 2) of the staff report, with code amendments implemented unless directed otherwise by the City Council. At the request of Councilmember Etten, City Planner Paschke clarified that the 2017 Fee Schedule as adopted by the City Council included estimated costs for this program, or any escrow increases as applicable, with staff continuing to monitor that on an annual or more frequent basis as needed. Mr. Paschke noted that adjustments to existing fees could be addressed on application forms until code language was in place and the existing fees adjusted to reflect nay additional costs. Mr. Paschke noted that most of the changes to fees would be addressed on the Open House application form and yet not part of city code, but under revision