Laserfiche WebLink
ecia~ c- ci cct~ <br />M®~a~y, ~t , Z7 <br />~ag~ Zo <br />3) A Joint Meeting for the Planning Commission and City Coun- <br />cil to discuss a selection committee to discuss hiring the con- <br />sultant team. <br />Proposed Schedule <br />Jul 13 Proposals Due <br />Jul 24 - 27 Review of Proposals <br />Jul 30 - Au ust 3 Interviews <br />August 20 Recommendations at Joint Planning Commission & City Council <br />meeting <br />Au ust 27 Final Selection <br />September 2007 Be in Work <br />December 2008 Complete Work <br />Councilmember Pust spoke in support of the Steering Committee; and <br />questioned the intent of the joint meeting of the Planning Commission <br />and City Council. <br />Ms. Radel advised it was the intent of the joint meeting to clarify the <br />roles of the Planning Commission and City Council during the proc- <br />ess. <br />Councilmember Pust sought clarification that the intent of the joint <br />meeting was for a process discussion, not an in-depth discussion of <br />individual views on the Plan update itself. <br />Ms. Radel confirmed that the intent was to discuss the process and <br />whom the Selection Committee was recommending as a consultant. <br />Councilmember Ihlan noted the 2008 deadline for doing statutory re- <br />quirements, with any changes requiring a 4/5 vote of the City Council. <br />Councilmember Ihlan opined that the Council needed to focus on <br />building Council consensus, rather than a process timeline, so as not <br />to waste everyone's time. Councilmember Ihlan further opined that <br />she remained unconvinced that a total rewrite was necessary, nor that <br />4 votes would be available to pass the update. <br />Councilmember Kough spoke in support of the proposed schedule, <br />with the exception of creation of a Steering Committee, opining that <br />one was already used for the community visioning process and had <br />