|
Central Missouri Development Council
Demands Action
CMDC has been working to call attention to the City Council's priorities and their lack of concern for important isssues such as job creation, public safety and crime, as well as bringing jobs to Columbia. A print ad campaign is running in the Columbia Daily Tribune.
Priceless Ad [download]
What's Missing Ad [download]
We're Fortunate Ad [download]
Check back as we'll be posting a first-hand perspective on the council's retreat and their progress.
Update #2
June 6, 2008
Account by Don Stamper, Executive Director of CMDC
Natural Resources Inventory
• The Council received a lengthy presentation this morning from Professor Tim Haithcoat on the inventory of natural resources. This project would include the inventor of numerous natural resources and community assets via high quality GIS-Aerial Digitized maps for the metro Columbia area, in addition to another 18 square miles. The technology is impressive and has a great amount of detail and resolution. The community could use the technology to study stream buffers, storm water designs, tree cover, natural habitat, etc. Like most city programmers, this one has a double-edged sword. If used properly it could be a great asset; however, there are a number of possibilities for abuse.
Land Disturbance
• The council had another lengthy discussion on land disturbance policies during this meeting. Unfortunately, the basis of these discussions once again focuses on a couple of problem areas and fails to recognize the dozens of quality developments that have occurred under existing city ordinances and are of the highest quality. These include: the Highlands, the Grasslands, Broadway Farms, the Cascades, Old Hawthorne and many other high-quality developments. Our council seems more content to focus on the problems while ignoring the successes.
• Today's discussion centered on limiting cut and fill, maximum slope limits, additional tree preservation requirements, limiting clear cutting of sites, prohibiting or limiting top soil piles and further restrictions on planned zoning.
• As you know, we are prohibited from participating in the discussions. If we could have engaged, I would be compelled to remind the council that limiting cut and fill will produce un-walkable communities and could promote urban sprawl, prohibit density and infill development and is generally not a good idea (or at least one that must be approached cautiously).
• The general consensus seems to be a desire to regulate and control what Councilman Wade called the "uglyfying of the community." The council continues to evaluate development on how it looks in the process, and to ignore the end result and what it contributes.
City Council Retreat Update #1
June 5, 2008
Account by Don Stamper, Executive Director of CMDC
Opening Session: Implementation of the Visioning Report
• Bill announced Toni Messina would be leading the project from the staff until Paula Hertwig-Hopkins comes back from leave.
• Sarah Read has been hired by the city as the consultant to lead the implementation.
• The discussion on implementation involved a lengthy discussion on changing the name of the Over Site Committee to the "CVS Focus on More Coordination." They plan to form 3 groups:
1) Coordinating Committee - five to seven members who will meet monthly
2) Resources Members- three to five members who will meet quarterly
3) Liaison Members- members who will meet as needed
• The purpose of the CVC will be to track, watch, report, reflect, engage, educate and recommend, though not to implement.
• There is currently a draft implementation plan in process. This will include elected officials and public and private sector citizens.
• A major call for more visibility of the visioning project was made. Citizens are wondering what's going on in this project.
• There was also a major call for a more open process, designed to collaborate and empower the community at large. There is some confusion on how it will be presented. Much time and energy today was spent trying to protect those who are not accustomed to conflict, but still want to participate.
• I am concerned that the previously open and free visioning process may be losing its focus.
• There was also lengthy and disturbing discussion on how we communicate: more open communication, dialogue circles, dialogue models while at the same time citing wanting to protect those who don't like the openness of the process. They would also like more confidentiality and are concerned with the requirement of the open meeting law/requirements. If I understand the desire, they want to create a process that protects those who don't like the conflict and debate at the expense of those who value spirited discussion. They hope to accomplish these things without public monitoring and openness and somehow make the process seamless and transparent. This is a confusing issue for many of us to follow.
• In my opinion, the most concerning part of evening was the transition into a discussion on reinventing how we conduct government. I will admit, I left this meeting feeling confused. The bottom line is that we can't stop paying attention to the visioning project and my concern remains that we may have the foxes watching the hen house.
|
