Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-25-16 Admin. Comm. MinutesDUBLIN CITY COUNCIL ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE Monday, January 26, 2016 6:30 p.m. — Council Chambers Mr. Keenan, Committee Chair called the meeting to order. Committee members present: Mr. Keenan, Mr. Lecklider and Ms. Salay. Other Council members present: Mayor Peterson, Ms. Amorose Groomes and Ms. Alutto. Staff present: Mr. McDaniel, Ms. Crandall Mr. Keenan noted that the purpose of this meeting is to begin to discuss planning for the goal setting retreat. The retreat is scheduled Thursday evening, March 10 and all day Friday, March 11. There is a need to identify a facilitator and the discussion topics. He has shared an email with Council members with his suggestions. Ms. Crandall has provided information on three potential facilitators. That information is provided in the first section of the binder he had prepared for the meeting. The second section contains executive session materials concerning the committee's personnel evaluation process. Goal Setting Facilitators Ms. Crandall stated that she provided Mr. Keenan with a summary of information regarding the potential facilitators, who all have a background in government and facilitation experience. She has spoken with each of them. She believes all three facilitators would do a good job. Julia Novak Ms. Novak has facilitated previous goal setting sessions, and has performed additional internal work for the City. She has a good understanding of the City of Dublin organization. She has a strong background in local government with a focus on goal -setting and strategic planning. Mark Weaver Mr. Weaver has experience in facilitation of strategic planning. The primary focus of his firm is on communication and crisis communication. His was one of the firms considered when the City previously interviewed for that purpose. He has a process that he believes could be followed for Council goal -setting, if he is provided an understanding upfront of Council's needs to help him structure the process for the two days. Jacqueline Romer-Sensky Ms. Romer-Sensky's focus is on strategic planning and group facilitation. She has a varied list of individuals and groups from local government and nonprofits with whom she has worked. She has a strong background working with government, primarily at the state level. She has structured a process that will Administrative Committee of Whole January 25, 2016 Page 2 allow for any needed flexibility during the course of the two days. She also offers the ability to initially conduct phone interviews with Council members to gather information upfront. Mr. Keenan asked her for a recommendation. She would recommend Ms. Romer-Sensky. Her background is very strong. From her examples -- it seems her ability to read a group is good, and she evidenced good energy, as well. Mr. Keenan stated that some Council members know Ms. Novak, and Mr. McDaniel indicates that he knows Mr. Weaver. He, personally, has had experience with Ms. Romer-Sensky; however, he has no preference in facilitators. [He requested Council members' input.] Ms. Amorose Groomes inquired if one of these facilitators was used for last year's goal -setting retreat. Mr. Keenan responded that last year's facilitator was very qualified, but a couple of Council members expressed the desire to consider other facilitators this year. Ms. Salay stated that her preference among the three recommended individuals would be Ms. Romer-Sensky, due to her local government focus. Her background appears to be more what is needed. She is known, and has previously conducted interviews with individual Council members -- that is important, given that we have two new members and a different dynamic. It would be good to have her input. She knows where we have been and where we are going. Because she has misgivings about the others, she would prefer Ms. Romer-Sensky. Mr. Lecklider stated that he has a similar view. He is not aware of any criticisms of Ms. Romer-Sensky's previous work with the City; in fact, he believes her management would fill in some of the gaps that were present with last year's facilitator. She is very focused and understands Dublin, and she would be his preference, as well. Mayor Peterson stated that he had expressed an interest in trying a different facilitator this year. That did not have anything to do with last year's facilitator, but he believed conducting the goal -setting topics with a new facilitator might be beneficial. It was his suggestion to consider Mr. Weaver. He has a thorough knowledge of executive sessions, public records, etc. Those concerns could be addressed either in this agenda or in some other platform, but he believes it would be good for Council to re-train itself on those types of issues. He also completely supports utilizing Ms. Novak, if that is Council's preference. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that the only fees she saw were from Mr. Weaver. Are the facilitators' fees all comparable? Administrative Committee of Whole January 25, 2016 Page 3 Ms. Crandall responded that the costs are similar. Ms. Romer-Sensky's fee is $1,800/day, but with the upfront work and follow-up work totaling four to five days, her fee would probably be the highest. Ms. Novak's fee is in line with Mr. Weaver's fee. The cost will probably be within the range of $5,00046,000 with any of the three. Mr. Lecklider stated that Mr. Weaver would be of value in another setting. He is very skilled in his area of expertise. Mr. Keenan stated that based on his extensive experience with Ms. Romer- Sensky, he believes she would do a great job. It sounds like Ms. Novak is the preferred candidate. Council consensus was to engage Ms. Novak. Ms. Crandall responded that she would contact the three candidates tomorrow and advise them accordingly. Goal -setting Topics Mr. Keenan invited Council members' suggestions. Ms. Salay suggested the following goal -setting topics: - Crawford-Hoying update, with an emphasis on the Next Projects - Pedestrian Bridge update, including approvals needed to advance that to the next level - Library update and next steps to make that a reality - Land acquisition. The City is running out of land. Looking at economic development opportunities for the future, are there any strategic pieces the City should acquire? - Transit options. There is a host of information available concerning driverless vehicles and driverless transit for the future. We have discussed the danger of office parks becoming irrelevant, becoming little islands where no one wants to work. Dublin is a City of primarily suburban office parks, so it would be beneficial to identify a way to connect them via transit. It has become clear that COTA is not going to become the answer for our community, but we could consider ways to connect ourselves to the COTA system, and transport them in this direction. We need to connect our office parks, Bridge Street and other areas with the services they desire. This will be significant in the future, particularly with millennials. - Council expectations regarding architecture in Bridge Street and the rest of the City. We have new Planning staff, Planning Director and Director of Development, and a relatively new Planning and Zoning Commission. There have been a couple of recent cases in which staff has taken an interesting direction. It is important to make sure that we are all "on the Administrative Committee of Whole January 25, 2016 Page 4 same page," so good direction can be given to the applicants. It can be frustrating for the applicant if staff, PZC, and Council express different thoughts. Ms. Amorose Groomes suggested the following goal -setting topics: - Council's policy on a wide variety of topics, such as legacy office parks, land acquisition, land donation or sale. She prefers not to deal with such on a case by case basis, as that can lead to making decisions that Council is expected to replicate, although that may not be Council's intention. Perhaps McDaniel or Ms. Crandall could suggest the sort of policy decisions they would look to Council to make, including benchmarks, such as we have for hotel -motel tax grants. It is easy to make decisions when there is a clear policy. She particularly would like to discuss Council's policies on land acquisition and handling of private property. - Term limits - Architectural expectations Mr. Lecklider suggested the following goal -setting topics: - Dublin Jerome/US33/Post Road crossroads area (goal -setting or a workshop discussion) There is development pressure there with important decisions to be made soon. Council needs to be fully informed when making these decisions, which will have financial consequences and long-term implications. - Long-term visioning for the community. What policy can be defined today to set the stage for the future? Some existing products of past visioning that positioned the City well for the future are: fiber optics; Emerald Parkway; the appearance of Frantz Road (mounding, screened parking lots), which set the tone for the "look" of the community; the sign code. Our discussion might be on transit issues; communication, such as extending fiber into the City's legacy office parks; future workplaces within the City. - City engagement. It is important for a community to be engaged with its government. There are residents who do not know who the City's current mayor is, or even that Dublin has a city manager form of government. Only perhaps 20% of the community residents are engaged with their government. People need to know that there is a local government and that they can accomplish things through their local government. Many residents think City Council is also the School Board -- a hybrid organization. Mr. Keenan noted that is true. They also believe much of their real estate taxes go to the City, although the City has attempted to clarify that misconception through various educational materials. However, the citizenry may not be engaged because there isn't a problem. Administrative Committee of Whole January 25, 2016 Page 5 Mr. Lecklider noted that the vast majority of them do not get a tax bill; it is escrowed. They just assume it all goes to the City of Dublin. Ms. Amorose Groomes stated that it would be good to identify a way in which to go to the citizens, to be personally engaged with them. One of the best recent examples of this is the Heroin Town Hall meeting, which drew many people. Council reached out to the community because of an issue that was occurring in the community. It was neutral ground, a format in which the Council goes to the people, invites their comments, and doesn't hold a seat at the front of the room. Mr. Keenan stated that the Council attends HOA meetings, and very few members attend. With Coventry Woods, 8-9 out of 300 people attended. Ms. Salay stated that she is recalling staff's "coffee and conversation" opportunities. Could there be "Council coffee and conversation" opportunities? She noted that she likes the suggested topic for visioning. Ms. Alutto suggested the following goal -setting topics: - What are the primary challenges and opportunities? - Economic development projects, current and future - Underserved areas of the City of Dublin that we could reach out to. - PR strategy to encourage community engagement - Review of the Planning and Zoning review process She has heard complaints that people appreciate the review guidelines, because that is what makes the community great, but the review process is difficult. (If not goal -setting, then another forum) Mr. Reiner indicated he would forward his list of suggested topics, which he left at home. Mayor Peterson suggested the following goal -setting topics: - Concurs with the suggestion to discuss Jerome Township & US33. In a meeting a couple of weeks ago, Mr. McDaniel covered the main points of this issue. To understand all the moving pieces, it is important to understand the history of the issue. Mr. McDaniel has been involved with this issue for several years, so it was helpful to have that history and a map. - Refresher regarding what comprises public meetings and public records. This could be just a lecture, rather than a goal -setting discussion. - Land. Ms. Salay mentioned that we are running out of land. It would be helpful to develop an inventory of the major blocks of land remaining, such as the Bright Road plant. With all the frontage created with Emerald Administrative Committee of Whole January 25, 2016 Page 6 Parkway and the highway, that is an important piece. It is a good time to inventory and re -assess any remaining "holes" to fill. Mr. Keenan reiterated the ideas he had suggested to Council: - Update on Bridge Street and what are the next steps. He is interested to know if any future tenants have been identified. Some leases may have been signed by now -- any information that is not confidential, and they are at liberty to share. - Jerome Township and US33 corridor update. Because it is now Jerome Township, there is a belief that it will remain so. However, there is a 20-30-50 year planning outlook. We need to continue that type of planning. It is probably the single most important area for Dublin over the next 10-20 years. - Land acquisition possibilities. He is aware that staff continues to work on an inventory. Mr. Keenan invited staffs suggestions for goal -setting topics. Mr. McDaniel stated that: - Concurs with the suggestion to discuss visioning. A dialogue about the next big items is needed. Council had five strategic focus areas, which, at the last goal -setting retreat, were reduced to four. Staff will provide an update on those in advance of the retreat. It is good to take time to think strategically as far out as possible. - Land acquisition list. Staff does have an inventory, which can be provided. A map identifying staffs areas of interest was provided previously to Council. Any areas of Council interest could be added, as well, and then reviewed by all. Mr. Keenan inquired if that is confidential. Mr. McDaniel responded that it is a topic for executive session discussion. Mr. Keenan stated that he is unsure how that discussion could occur at a Council retreat. Mr. McDaniel responded that he believes that at previous Council retreats, Council has adjourned to executive session for discussion of land acquisition. - Legacy office parks This has been suggested as a workshop topic in February. - US 33 corridor He will be addressing this issue. He does not have a specific action plan, although he has some ideas. This is a discussion that he would recommend Council have soon. - Council goal of a Performing Arts Center has not yet reached closure and probably requires some level of discussion. - Wellness Center concept — same status as above - Architectural standards. Administrative Committee of Whole January 25, 2016 Page 7 He agrees it would be beneficial to ensure we all are aligned on these standards. It would be helpful to have parameters within which staff can work. He does not begrudge professional staff pushing the envelope here and there — primarily abiding within general guidelines, and by exception considering options outside the lines. - Council committee structure Perhaps there are ways to leverage the committee structure to make Council more productive, although sometimes that can create more work for everyone. That has been explored over the years, and he looked at it again this year, thinking it might be of Council interest. What Council does is sufficient, but there could be a dialogue on potentially better ways. Ms. Salay inquired if he has suggestions, or perhaps Ms. Novak would have experience with other entities on this topic. Mr. McDaniel responded that question could be posed to Ms. Novak, and he can share the information he has obtained from other cities. There may be more work that could be done at Committee level. However, he does not want to add more meetings to Council's calendar, as often Council members can feel obligated to be at every committee meeting. - Polices regarding bed tax and a couple other topics. There may be some policies that have been practiced, which should be formalized. - Benefits and compensation plan. Staff is currently working on this in preparation for the upcoming Finance Committee meeting, as well. Mr. Keenan requested that staff compile the suggestions made tonight, and we'll determine what staff can do and what the facilitator will address. He will put together a proposed agenda, which can be shared with Council for feedback. Mr. Reiner suggested the following goal -setting topics: - In view of all the sequential development over the next five years, how secure are the City's finances, and how much flexibility is there for additional projects? - Adding to Planning and Zoning development criteria the consideration of: will this be financially beneficial to the City, or will it add to the burden of the school system? - Should Council re -consider the opportunity to purchase Corazon? The City has a long-term plan to build another recreation center for $30 million, but there is the opportunity to have another recreation center immediately — within 30-60 days. He has been told by Recreation Center patrons that they can no longer utilize the current facility, because it is over -crowded. Is the City providing the public good service with one of the City's "flagship" items? In the long term, we could have an agreement with OU to provide a recreation center there, but that is getting further away Administrative Committee of Whole January 25, 2016 Page 8 from the core of the City — on the border of Marysville. It doesn't make sense that Dublin residents will go to there to work out with OU people. In addition, such a construction would involve significant expense. In a discussion with an Ohio Health individual, he was told that the City's current recreation center is not well used; it has a significant amount of vacant space. His suggestion was to engage a specialist who works on reconstruction of recreation facilities. He further suggested purchase of Corazon and renovation of the current recreation facility, rather than financing construction of another facility. Do we have $33 million to build another recreation center with the participation of OU or Ohio State? What he has seen with their existing involvement -- the Hyatt Center — is that their fees are $89/month. However, Dublin has always tried to promote the general health of its citizens by keeping fees low. Mr. Keenan stated that staff would incorporate that consideration into developing a proposed agenda. Mr. Keenan moved to adjourn into executive session for discussion of personnel matters. Ms. Salay seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Ms. Amorose Groomes, yes; Mayor Peterson, yes; Ms. Alutto, yes; Mr. Lecklider, yes; Ms. Salay, yes; Vice Mayor Reiner, yes; Mr. Keenan, yes. Clerk of Council