Laserfiche WebLink
<br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Miller stated he sees this year as an opportunity to bring several issues to <br />fruition, including the concept of intergovernmental services to achieve <br />economies of scale; and urban transition in the River Road/Santa Clara area. <br />He also said that he foresees dynamic changes on Council issues. He mentioned <br />that he wishes to explore the idea of pay for Councilors and would soon be <br />presenting a letter to the Council on the subject. He expressed concern about <br />the need to have qualified people serving on the Council, and at time accurat- <br />ely representing the community. Overall, he sees the next year as an exciting <br />opportunity to under take a number of projects. <br /> <br />Boles discussed his concern regarding the public's participation. In his <br />opinion, the neighborhood groups are not the only forum in the community; there <br />are others but they are not always representative of the community as they tend <br />to be focused on one issue. He said that the issues are what draw the citizens <br />to participate, and stated that he would like to see some type of survey to <br />find out what members of the community think about a number of issues. The <br />survey could be used as an opportunity to look at issues which are important to <br />the community as a whole and also as a means to integrate community issues, <br />such as urban mass transit or light rail. He felt that there were a number of <br />good ideas among the citizenry and that a survey might yield some creative, <br />innovative and fun ways to deal with community issues. <br /> <br />This was the end of the "around the table" sharing of personal goals. <br /> <br />Miller then gave a report on the 1988 Council Goals. He summarized the efforts <br />and progress around the 1988 priorities. (A copy of the complete report and a <br />summary of the report were distributed in advance to the Councilors.) <br /> <br />Sharon Thorne then lead a discussion of the Council ground rules around <br />communication. (A summary of the Council ground rules was distributed in <br />advance to Councilors.) During that discussion it was noted that any Councilor <br />could call for a process check at any point, if he/she were feeling in need of <br />clarification about an issue. <br /> <br />Ehrman mentioned that at the last Council meeting it seemed that public <br />testimony had taken up too much time. Miller said that he did not have the <br />timer and that he didn't feel comfortable about cutting off some of the later <br />speakers because the first one had taken so much time. It was noted that the <br />time would be used at future meetings and that speakers would be informed when <br />their time was expired. <br /> <br />Boles commented that it was important to him that he receive news or informa- <br />tion in person and not through the newspaper. Rutan also commented that it was <br />important that Councilors talk to each other and not carryon conversations <br />through the media. <br /> <br />Ehrman mentioned that the Monday night sessions were to be more formal, and <br />that Councilors should be addressed as "Councilor ". Wednesday sessions <br />are less formal and in those Councilors can use first names. <br /> <br />Bascom added that if a Councilor was going to be absent, it was alright to hold <br />over items, if requested by that Councilor. <br /> <br />DRAFT COUNCIL GOAL SESSION <br /> <br />PAGE 5 <br />