2005_0718_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

'Y4� ��F Roseville HRA Community Dialogues on Housing Executive Summary Draft Purpose and Process The Roseville Housing & Redevelopment Autharity (RHRA), with the support of the Roseville City Council, held neighbarhood meetings to better understand what residents like and dislike about the changes they see occurring and how the City might be able to provide assistance. Residents were invited to meetings "where you can leaa�rt about the residential and li�usi��g changes m your area, express your views on what issues you see as a result � these clianges, and nrake suggestionsfor your �2eiglibor•lzood." Over 160 accepted the invitation and attended one or more of five neighborhood meetings, two meetings for businesses, and one with representatives of the two school districts. RHRA members and Roseville City staff attended each meeting and provided welcome and closing comments, facilitation of small group discussion, and responses to questions for which they could provide answers. Summaries of each meeting were developed and provided at each subsequent meeting to support the sense � dialogue and transparency throughout the process. They were also posted on the website along with the other materials provided during each meeting regarding City services, programs, trend data for each planning district, and maps of interest. Participants were asked to evaluate the meetings in terms of opportunity to express themselves, value as being informative, and the support they had far the suggestions offered during the meeting. The sessions were generally divided into three sections after brief welcoming and introductions; a) what housing related issues are you seeing or concerned about? b) offering � specific data related to the planning districts and c) suggestions far what both the City and residents themselves could do to address the issues identified. Combinations of small gzoup�Iarge group conversations allowed each person to have ltis�her own individual opinion as well as hear what others were saying and have the opportunity to ask clarifying questions � the other groups. When RHRA, Planning staff or other public officials were present they were asked to respond to specific questions to the extent they could. Questions without immediate answers jqr�r� recarded and RHRA staff assigned responsibility to follow up as appropriate. All meetings were facilitated and summarized by the Center far Policy, Planning, and Perfarmance. This allowed far neutrality, consistency, and reduced concern that the meeting held some pre-existing purpose or expected conclusion. Overall the satisfaction with the meetings was very high. Seventy-six percent (76%�aid they found the meetings to be infarmative, eight percent (80%)said they had an opportunity to express their opinion, and fifty percent (50%�dentified at least one suggestion that they could support. Executive Summary ---DRAFT---May 17,2005