My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2020_09-22_PWETCpacket
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
202x
>
2020
>
2020_09-22_PWETCpacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/18/2020 11:24:01 AM
Creation date
9/18/2020 11:20:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
9/22/2020
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
152
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
166 <br />167 Mr. Culver thought that was a good analogy and he thought this is starting off better <br />168 then the recycling program did. He continued with his review of the survey. <br />169 <br />170 Member Misra indicated she was curious about the demographics portion at the <br />171 beginning of the report and wondered if that represented the demographics of the <br />172 people who took the survey and not the demographics of the City. <br />173 <br />174 Mr. Culver indicated that was correct. <br />175 <br />176 Member Misra wondered if the demographics in the survey is representative of the <br />177 City. <br />178 <br />179 Mr. Culver explained that is a hard statistic to keep up on and he thought 2021 the <br />180 City will have a better understanding of the demographics as a result of the Census. <br />181 What is interesting is the School District does keep a pretty good demographic data <br />182 about enrollment and their numbers are really starting to increase on some of the <br />183 racial diversity numbers. It could be that this is more reflective of the community <br />184 then the City thinks. F <br />185 <br />186 Member Misra thought it was kind of astounding from an age perspective as well <br />187 as cultural diversity. <br />188 <br />189 Member Joyce asked if staff knows if this was a random sampling and if the data <br />190 can be broken down into the four groups. <br />191 <br />192 Mr. Culver indicated the consultant could probably drill down further on these <br />193 things if the City wanted them to. He thought there was some level of anonymity <br />194 to be maintained. <br />195 <br />196 7. Year in Review/Preliminary 2020/2021 Calendar <br />197 Mr. Culver reviewed the Preliminary 2020/2021 Calendar and Year in Review with <br />198 the Commission. <br />199 <br />200 Member Huiett wondered if staff could include the Master Plan progress in one of <br />201 the upcoming meetings or would that be more appropriate in a separate format. <br />202 <br />203 Mr. Culver indicated the next update with the Council is September 21sr and the <br />204 PWETC meeting is September 22°d so he thought potentially, depending on how <br />205 detailed the Utility Rate Schedule discussion is there could be an opportunity to <br />206 have a discussion on that at the October meeting. <br />207 <br />208 Chair Wozniak indicated several new members are on the PWETC and he <br />209 wondered if a tour of the Public Works Facility could be included in a future <br />210 meeting, either a virtual tour or socially distanced tour. <br />211 <br />Page 5 of 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.