Laserfiche WebLink
 <br /> Mike—this process becomes a mechanism to never expand (because we ? on unreliastic tactics) 3) <br /> <br /> George—process chokes off opportunity find regionalize solution <br /> <br /> Betty—expand UGb to include prime forst and farm land <br /> <br /> Alan— <br /> <br /> Andrea—end up in court andbeocmes another blood bath for eguene or weapon for community <br /> <br /> Pat--Unrelaistic expections ® leaving us with insufficient land use choices <br /> <br /> Jon—palnning fails to account for residue of ? 2) meetings are insufficient to inform public and get <br />feedback; 3) go too slow toacocmmodate anxious and too fast for clarity <br /> <br /> Jennifer—too much focus on numbers and percentages and not agree to more of a policy approach <br /> <br /> Don—every participant reverts to old way of speaking and thinking so conversationin end is not at <br />all new <br /> <br /> Carolyn—each strategy and tactic requires at least three work sessions <br /> <br /> Bill-get or stay so entrenched in linear thinking willmiss opps for livability <br /> <br /> Randy—spend too much time and money debating philosophy about growth,gets remanded, done <br />when its time to start again <br /> <br /> Jeff—that CRG will not reach agreement. <br /> <br /> Lisa—that fremwork does not meet expectations for needed clear policy choices <br /> <br /> Heidi—econoimc reasons keeps us from achieving desired results, and after all the work to bring <br />new voices in same strong voices overpower it <br /> <br /> Kitty—framework won’t work and things will fail and people will be mad and lack a shared vision <br /> <br /> Chris—it will become a close process with experts controlling outcome, and decisions will be based <br />on convenience. <br /> <br />Best Outcomes/Advice on how to get there <br /> <br /> <br /> Kitty—framework provides data and options that enable us well-thought ways to accommodate new <br />people while protecting what we value () and do it together. Check in with those with needs, get <br />them what they need or reasons they don’t need it <br /> <br /> Heidi—decision makers take responsibility and make it happen <br /> <br /> Lisa—framework so brilliant council decides quickly single work session <br /> <br /> Jeff—CRG will develop a set of real practical alternatives for PC and CC, and members of the <br />CRG will support outside group framework, share with neighbors. <br /> <br /> Randy—all intelligence citizens with constructive ideas get chance to be heard, competing ideas <br />heard in civil manner, etc. let CRG complete it work, let staff analyze, synthesize, take to broader <br />general public, council decide <br /> <br /> Bill—we realize all is connected and need to get beyond linear thought something green <br /> <br /> Carolyn—® begin structuring conversations in framework of strategies and tactics to help prepare <br />decision makers <br /> <br /> Don—opposites attract—framework opportunity for others to see what others think and disagree <br />respectfully. Stop talking about how big we will be <br /> <br /> Jennifer—really like having strategies and tactics to point to and ability to articulate will helpful. <br />Best outcome new UGB so we can focus on things that truly effect citizens, like jobs. <br /> <br /> Jon—we find the sweet spot with suffiinet specificity ® and become the Eugene we all want to be. <br />Trust, have comfort to share thoughts ® <br /> <br /> Pat—have a shopping list of tactics within strategies that allow us to fill basket with land use choic- <br />es inside UGB andsomething about land outside UGB to accommodate balance. Listen to Mr. <br />Brown and put it into streets and parcels so we can see what it looks like. <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—City Council November 22, 2010 Page 4 <br /> <br />