[0:13] Okay.

[0:14] >> So, first we'd like to find out who we

[0:16] » So, first we'd like to find out who we

[0:16] have present. I can see Gary Mertoff.

[0:19] >> Yes.

[0:20] » Yes.

[0:20] >> I see Dan Grady's office is online. Is

[0:23] » I see Dan Grady's office is online. Is

[0:23] that us or is that Dan?

[0:24] >> His boardroom.

[0:25] » His boardroom.

[0:25] >> That's his boardroom. And we need to

[0:27] » That's his boardroom. And we need to

[0:27] know who we can see Northwest Regional

[0:30] Planning is online. Who's with us from

[0:31] Northwest?

[0:34] >> This is Autumn. Emily will be joining in

[0:36] » This is Autumn. Emily will be joining in

[0:36] just a couple minutes as well.

[0:39] >> Autumn and who?

[0:40] » Autumn and who?

[0:40] >> Emily.

[0:41] » Emily.

[0:41] >> Autumn. Okay. Okay. Thank you.

[0:44] » Autumn. Okay. Okay. Thank you.

[0:44] >> She just appeared online.

[0:47] » She just appeared online.

[0:47] >> And then, hi Emily. And then we need to

[0:50] » And then, hi Emily. And then we need to

[0:50] know who is area code 715.

[0:54] Can I read that?

[0:55] >> 9696732.

[0:59] » Meaning that's me, Elizabeth Franic.

[1:01] >> Hi Liz.

[1:02] » Hi Liz.

[1:02] >> Hi Liz.

[1:03] » Hi Liz.

[1:03] >> Okay. Glad everybody's here.

[1:04] » Okay. Glad everybody's here.

[1:04] >> Hi.

[1:06] » Hi.

[1:06] >> So uh we could take a roll call then

[1:08] » So uh we could take a roll call then

[1:08] please. Karisha.

[1:10] >> Okay. George Busousay

[1:12] » Okay. George Busousay

[1:12] >> here.

[1:13] » here.

[1:13] >> Bradley Ray is excused. Elizabeth Franic

[1:17] » Bradley Ray is excused. Elizabeth Franic

[1:17] >> here. Pat Kenny

[1:19] » here. Pat Kenny

[1:20] >> here.

[1:20] » here.

[1:20] >> Gary Mertig

[1:22] » Gary Mertig

[1:22] >> here.

[1:23] » here.

[1:23] >> Dan Greedy is excused. Lisa Radkey.

[1:29] » Is Lisa Radkkey online?

[1:33] >> No. Okay. And then Charlie Ortman

[1:35] » No. Okay. And then Charlie Ortman

[1:35] >> here.

[1:36] » here.

[1:36] >> And then Paul Wilharm.

[1:42] » Okay. So business,

[1:44] >> first order of business will be uh this

[1:46] » first order of business will be uh this

[1:46] is the Ashlin County Planning Committee

[1:49] working on the Ashlin County

[1:50] Comprehensive Plan. Uh for anybody here

[1:53] for public comment or uh or listening in

[1:56] and we will be uh going over the agenda

[1:58] as posted online. It's uh Monday, July

[2:02] 21st, 1 p.m. over at Ashlin County

[2:03] Courthouse and my name is George Buset

[2:06] and I'm the I chair of the committee. So

[2:08] we start with the approval of the

[2:10] agenda. Uh, has everybody had a chance

[2:12] to look it over and can we have a motion

[2:15] for an approval or comments or

[2:16] amendments? Anybody?

[2:18] >> Move to approve.

[2:19] » Move to approve.

[2:19] >> Charlie move.

[2:21] » Charlie move.

[2:21] >> Is that a second from you, Liz?

[2:24] » Is that a second from you, Liz?

[2:24] >> Yeah.

[2:25] » Yeah.

[2:25] >> Okay. Seconded by Liz Franek. So, the

[2:27] » Okay. Seconded by Liz Franek. So, the

[2:27] agenda is approved.

[2:29] The first uh item after the approval

[2:32] agenda is item number three, public

[2:35] comments order. We had a motion or a

[2:36] second, but we didn't vote.

[2:38] >> Oh. Oh, you like to move move to Yes, I

[2:41] » Oh. Oh, you like to move move to Yes, I

[2:41] stand corrected that. Uh,

[2:44] there was a second. So, all in favor of

[2:46] approving the agenda, say I.

[2:48] >> I. I.

[2:49] » I. I.

[2:49] >> Oppos.

[2:49] » Oppos.

[2:49] >> I.

[2:50] » I.

[2:50] >> Thank you for that correction. And then

[2:52] » Thank you for that correction. And then

[2:52] we move on to public comments. Is there

[2:55] anybody online or present for public

[2:56] comment?

[2:59] Anybody online for public comment?

[3:01] Present. Hearing. No public comment. We

[3:04] move on to the next agenda item, which

[3:06] is approval of the minutes of the prior

[3:08] meeting.

[3:09] Move to approve.

[3:11] >> Uh, Charlie Orman moves to approve the

[3:13] » Uh, Charlie Orman moves to approve the

[3:13] minutes. Is there a second?

[3:19] » This is paddle. Second.

[3:21] >> Kenny seconds. Uh, is there discussion?

[3:25] » Kenny seconds. Uh, is there discussion?

[3:25] Corrections. All in favor of approving

[3:27] the minutes of the prior meeting of June

[3:29] 17, please say I.

[3:30] >> I.

[3:31] » I.

[3:31] >> I.

[3:31] » I.

[3:31] >> Any opposed?

[3:34] » Any opposed?

[3:34] >> One abstension. W Paul Wilharm abstains.

[3:38] » One abstension. W Paul Wilharm abstains.

[3:38] And the motion carries. So that's done.

[3:41] So now we're on to discussion and action

[3:44] items. And item A is little fun facts or

[3:48] favorite things about Ashlin County.

[3:49] Does anybody have something to offer?

[3:52] >> Oh, could I uh if we could back up just

[3:56] » Oh, could I uh if we could back up just

[3:56] a minute. I'm not sure if Carver, did

[3:59] you get here before public minutes or

[4:01] public comments was offered?

[4:04] >> Okay. Thank you. That All right. Thank

[4:06] » Okay. Thank you. That All right. Thank

[4:06] you. of note, there's a second chance to

[4:08] public comment at the end of the agenda.

[4:11] Anything for uh fun facts? Okay, I have

[4:14] one thing here.

[4:19] » Maybe you know this, but Ashlin County

[4:20] was founded in 1854

[4:23] by Asaf Whittley.

[4:28] » Oh, there's Lissa. Okay, Lissa uh

[4:32] right survived. So the panic of 1857

[4:36] and then the Civil War nearly overcame

[4:39] the little settlement completely.

[4:43] But one family remained.

[4:46] >> One family. And then in 1870 when a

[4:50] » One family. And then in 1870 when a

[4:50] railroad line headed in that direction,

[4:52] it made a new start. In 1877, the first

[4:55] railroad, the Wisconsin Central, reached

[4:57] it. The years 1886 and 1887 saw a boom

[5:02] caused by the realization that Ashlin

[5:04] would be the port of the newly opened

[5:06] Gogeic iron range. In the 80s and 90s,

[5:10] Ashlin was also a great sawmill town. A

[5:14] little bit of Ashlin history. Any fun

[5:16] facts, Lissa, to add? Not today. Okay.

[5:20] >> Uh, no. I could add a quick one. Nothing

[5:22] » Uh, no. I could add a quick one. Nothing

[5:22] cool like that.

[5:24] Um well, while you're talking about

[5:26] people history, we have lots of um

[5:28] famous people from Ashlin, famous in the

[5:32] big picture, maybe not famous that we

[5:33] can claim, but um a Pulitzer

[5:36] Prizewinning author, David Marinus. He's

[5:40] written numerous biographies of other

[5:42] well-known figures like Vince Lombardi.

[5:46] Um, Lewis Robert Blake was Blake was an

[5:49] American ice hockey player who played

[5:51] with the Boston Bruins

[5:54] for 17 years. And Milton Leroy Moose

[5:59] Gardner was a professional American

[6:02] football guard in the National Football

[6:04] League playing for Detroit and Buffalo

[6:07] and finally the Green Bay Packers.

[6:12] » Thank you for that. Any more fun facts?

[6:14] If not, we move on to item 5B, which is

[6:18] subcommittee status reports.

[6:21] And we usually take this in order

[6:22] starting with uh intergovernmental. Uh

[6:25] Mr. Ortman,

[6:26] >> I have nothing to report at this time.

[6:30] » I have nothing to report at this time.

[6:30] >> Okay. Reviewing and moving along.

[6:33] » Okay. Reviewing and moving along.

[6:33] >> Subcommittee report from trends and

[6:35] » Subcommittee report from trends and

[6:35] issues. Uh Lisa Ratkkey.

[6:39] Um, yes. I've been contacting some

[6:42] people who have expressed in the past an

[6:45] interest to talk about issues and

[6:46] opportunities. We're going to do just

[6:48] little half an hour um check-ins to pull

[6:53] together a team who wants to look at

[6:57] those ideas in a more formal way. that

[6:59] they would come to one of these meetings

[7:01] and express their opinions as well as

[7:03] help spread the idea to their friends

[7:06] and neighbors that these discussions

[7:09] about issues and opportunities and

[7:11] obstacles are are happening.

[7:17] » Any questions for the um the transit

[7:20] issues team? Uh then cultural resources

[7:24] and community facilities. Uh Liz, do you

[7:26] have something to add today?

[7:29] nothing at this time. I'm going to be

[7:32] inviting certain um folks to our

[7:35] meetings I think that and putting that

[7:38] on their agenda in the very near near

[7:42] future. Thank you.

[7:45] >> Uh moving on, uh agriculture, forestry,

[7:48] » Uh moving on, uh agriculture, forestry,

[7:48] and natural resources. that Kenny,

[7:51] >> we had another farmland preservation

[7:53] » we had another farmland preservation

[7:53] meeting since the last comp plan meeting

[7:56] and we're going to have another meeting

[7:57] every month or so for the remainder of

[7:59] the year. But I got a question for

[8:01] Alyssa. Back in um December, January, we

[8:05] had I believe three egg related

[8:08] meetings. And so my question is why did

[8:13] we have those meetings? How do they tie

[8:15] into the comp plan? and the timing of

[8:17] that before we even made assignments for

[8:20] who would have who on the comp plan.

[8:22] Could you explain that to me?

[8:29] » Go ahead.

[8:31] >> Yeah. So, um, about a year ago, I

[8:34] » Yeah. So, um, about a year ago, I

[8:34] started talking to Dan Grady about, um,

[8:38] hearing from people that in the county

[8:41] that they were very interested in making

[8:42] sure that the new comp plan included

[8:45] robust conversations about how extreme

[8:48] weather was affecting county, people,

[8:51] places, and resources.

[8:53] And so, I was working with National Park

[8:56] Services um, team of expert planners who

[8:59] deal with this. and we came up with this

[9:03] method of working with

[9:06] each of the nine elements

[9:09] um current plan goals and objectives and

[9:13] making sure that they were infused with

[9:15] issues of importance related to ex

[9:18] extreme weather. So those were just

[9:20] conversations around each chapter. Um we

[9:23] we went through five chapters and then

[9:25] the federal government um cut the people

[9:28] on the National Park Service team. So, I

[9:31] don't have access to them anymore, but

[9:33] we met with transportation, natural

[9:35] resource, agriculture, land use, and um

[9:39] utilities and community facilities. And

[9:42] so each of those committees when um they

[9:47] meet with a larger group looking at all

[9:50] egg issues in this case, not just

[9:52] climate related or weather related that

[9:56] they would get a copy of those

[9:58] recommendations from that group of

[10:00] experts and specialists and people like

[10:02] yourself working in those areas and say,

[10:05] "Will you please consider our

[10:07] recommendations

[10:08] about how the county could deal with um

[10:11] impacts from extreme weather when you're

[10:13] looking at your broader chapter

[10:16] >> and then we'll have to figure out how to

[10:17] » and then we'll have to figure out how to

[10:17] tie that into what we're doing on the

[10:19] comp plan going forward.

[10:21] >> Yeah. So, the way we had set it up was

[10:24] » Yeah. So, the way we had set it up was

[10:24] let's say you're going to um regional

[10:26] planning is going to have a meeting

[10:28] scheduled to talk about the egg chapter.

[10:32] Then everybody involved, the public can

[10:34] have a copy. We'll post it online. will

[10:36] certainly give it to the members and say

[10:37] here's what a group of local and state

[10:40] specialists had decided were good

[10:42] recommendations to be included and then

[10:45] that egg committee will look at those

[10:47] and say yeah this one really fits really

[10:49] well or this one we don't feel is viable

[10:54] >> all right thank you

[10:55] » all right thank you

[10:55] >> does that sound like what you were

[10:57] » does that sound like what you were

[10:57] hoping okay cool and thanks for being

[11:00] >> so I have a another question about the

[11:03] » so I have a another question about the

[11:03] egg section and the I don't quite

[11:06] understand fully how the farmland

[11:08] preservation plan work flows into the

[11:12] comprehensive plan as is it like a third

[11:14] section how do you see that Pat and I'd

[11:17] like to ask the same thing of Emily how

[11:19] does the farmland preservation plan flow

[11:22] into the comprehensive plan

[11:23] >> the farmland preservation plan has to be

[11:25] » the farmland preservation plan has to be

[11:26] updated anyway and just with the timing

[11:30] of it all it ties in with the schedule

[11:33] we're on and So the farmland

[11:36] preservation plan like the forestry plan

[11:38] is a rather lengthy document and what

[11:40] goes in the comp plan is going to be

[11:44] much more brief than that. Um but then

[11:47] another round of input for the public

[11:49] specifically for the comp plan even

[11:51] though we have input opportunities for

[11:52] the farmland preservation plan. So it's

[11:55] going to provide a lot of background

[11:57] that the whole document won't be in

[11:59] there.

[12:01] So does that mean we'll be utilizing a

[12:03] lot of the background information from

[12:05] the farmland preservation plan plan

[12:08] for data requirements within the comp

[12:10] plan like land usage, land mapping.

[12:14] The topics in the farmland preservation

[12:17] plan should provide

[12:20] an excellent starting point for the

[12:22] conversation on the egg component. But

[12:26] because the comp plan is going to have

[12:27] its own opportunities for input, we

[12:30] shouldn't

[12:32] um decide in advance what should go or

[12:36] not go into the comp plan and how it

[12:38] should be framed. So the comp plan is

[12:41] another opportunity for that discussion.

[12:43] But the farmland preservation plan and

[12:45] the outcomes from there, Charlie's on

[12:47] that also should give us a very strong

[12:50] framework to work from as we consider

[12:53] topics and issues to bring forward for

[12:55] the discussion on egg.

[12:58] >> So as I understand that then both Lisa's

[13:00] » So as I understand that then both Lisa's

[13:00] pre-work and the farmland preservation

[13:03] pre-work all feeds into being available

[13:06] information for the um the egg section

[13:08] of the comp plan.

[13:10] >> That is the hope. That's what we've been

[13:12] » That is the hope. That's what we've been

[13:12] working towards.

[13:13] >> Yeah.

[13:13] » Yeah.

[13:14] >> So, I'd like to if Emily, if you're

[13:15] » So, I'd like to if Emily, if you're

[13:15] online, do you have an observation with

[13:17] that regard?

[13:23] » I'm not.

[13:23] >> Yeah. Can you hear me everyone?

[13:25] » Yeah. Can you hear me everyone?

[13:25] >> I can hear you now.

[13:27] » I can hear you now.

[13:27] So they're two distinct but closely

[13:30] related planning documents

[13:34] and the farmland preservation

[13:38] even has follows the same adoption

[13:42] procedures that the comprehensive plan

[13:44] does so that they can be fully um

[13:47] coordinated and integrated with each

[13:49] other.

[13:51] So comprehensive plan would be talk

[13:53] thinking about broadland use guidance

[13:55] and then the farmland preservation plan

[13:57] focused on

[13:59] eggland protection.

[14:05] » Okay.

[14:07] >> Thank you. Um Pat,

[14:10] » Thank you. Um Pat,

[14:10] >> I have a question.

[14:12] » I have a question.

[14:12] >> Go ahead, Liz.

[14:15] » Go ahead, Liz.

[14:15] in the plan. Can we have data um like if

[14:21] there's any existing small dairy farms

[14:25] in the area and how do they see their uh

[14:30] future in the farming community and how

[14:34] are they staying small as opposed to

[14:38] growing?

[14:41] Yeah,

[14:42] >> the farmland preservation plan has in

[14:46] » the farmland preservation plan has in

[14:46] the current draft version and the

[14:48] updated version will have information on

[14:51] all the different types of farming and

[14:53] sizes. And they've got information on

[14:55] the number of headed cattle, dairy and

[14:56] beef. So that's all in there. And then

[14:59] those issues and concerns related to,

[15:01] you know, egg in general, but also dairy

[15:03] farms. And we've talked about smallcale

[15:06] farming and smaller ones um at um

[15:09] extensively also. And Emily, you made a

[15:12] comment about, you know, the two plans.

[15:14] Um, forget the exact phrase you

[15:16] mentioned, but it's important that

[15:18] there's consistency in there when we're

[15:20] done so that one plan doesn't say one

[15:23] thing and the other one's at odds with

[15:25] it.

[15:28] Any other discussion on the egg?

[15:30] >> Thank you.

[15:31] » Thank you.

[15:31] >> Section. Then we move on to

[15:33] » Section. Then we move on to

[15:33] transportation. So that's my element. I

[15:36] have asked Paul Wilharm to join me in

[15:39] that effort on uh transportation

[15:42] utilities particularly in sense that

[15:44] Mandal Island has uh unique

[15:46] transportation issues and that there are

[15:49] issues around the future of

[15:50] transportation on the water in Bay and

[15:53] around the Basel Islands. And I think

[15:55] Paul you also have some background on uh

[15:57] with regard to airports. Is that

[15:58] correct?

[16:02] Maybe you could uh give us a little bit

[16:03] of your what you might bring as insights

[16:06] from your background for transportation.

[16:10] >> Uh well, as far as aviation goes, uh

[16:13] » Uh well, as far as aviation goes, uh

[16:14] just like uh the electric cars that are

[16:16] coming, uh you know, there's going to be

[16:18] electric aircraft.

[16:21] Uh there's already

[16:23] uh one V tall single person aircraft you

[16:27] can buy for $100,000 that has 20

[16:30] minutes. So you'd be able to take off

[16:33] and you know whip over to to Bayfield

[16:36] from from the island. Uh and there's

[16:39] more of this coming.

[16:43] » Uh thank you. I just note that I I I saw

[16:45] an article this week on small uh

[16:47] hydrooil electric fairies because

[16:49] they're hydrooil. They are much more

[16:50] efficient and carry much smaller battery

[16:52] and fry around, you know, between 10 and

[16:55] 20 people might be ideal for Schwaming

[16:57] Bay in the future. So there a lot of

[16:58] things could change in the next 20 years

[17:00] technologically with regard to utilities

[17:02] and transportation and uh that's where

[17:05] we'll be be looking. So next is housing

[17:08] and that's Brad's element but he's not

[17:10] here. So Gary, you have uh land use and

[17:13] economic development. Where do we stand

[17:15] with that?

[17:16] >> Yeah, I just a more of a comment than in

[17:20] » Yeah, I just a more of a comment than in

[17:20] depth because there's more background to

[17:22] find out. But in our last plan on

[17:25] economic development, it said we would

[17:27] develop and maintain a strong economy,

[17:30] supports residents and the community

[17:32] with services and so on.

[17:36] down below it talks about the fastest

[17:37] growing industry 10 years ago or so was

[17:40] in Ashen County was tourism.

[17:43] Um

[17:45] that will have to define where we're

[17:46] really going now. Is tourism our fastest

[17:49] growing industry

[17:51] and then how do we maintain a strong

[17:55] economy for the residents if that's it.

[17:58] Um so that's just a a thought that I

[18:01] had. The other one that I um in land use

[18:05] projections

[18:06] back in the last plan it said based on

[18:09] the growth in the county um more than

[18:14] 85% of the growth will occur in

[18:15] unincorporated areas of the county. And

[18:18] I'd like to look at that sometime a

[18:20] little deeper because what I'm seeing in

[18:21] the southern part of the county is every

[18:24] home that's up for sale, there's a 50%

[18:28] chance that those homes are being bought

[18:30] up by somebody from outside the county

[18:32] who does not live here. Um I can take

[18:36] you down roads here where 10 homes and

[18:39] nine of them are not lived in year

[18:42] round. we wonder why we have a housing

[18:44] shortage or uh employers say, "Hey, we

[18:46] need employees employees need housing."

[18:50] So that's a just a short look at it, but

[18:53] that's something we're going to have to

[18:55] be concerned about is uh if we want

[18:57] development and we want people, are we

[19:01] going for tourism, which I'm not saying

[19:03] we aren't, but how do we maintain who we

[19:06] have here and support schools,

[19:09] industries, and things if most of our

[19:12] housing is being bought up by somebody

[19:14] that doesn't live here year round? So,

[19:17] like I say, there's a lot more to that

[19:20] down the road to come, but those are

[19:21] just some of the points I see that we

[19:24] need to discuss.

[19:28] Any uh observations or comments on uh

[19:31] the economic development element?

[19:34] Um

[19:36] see, I think we pretty much covered the

[19:37] bases. We do have a risk and

[19:40] opportunities element, but we're

[19:41] probably a little bit too soon to be

[19:42] getting to that. And then there'll be an

[19:44] implementation element. We're probably a

[19:46] little bit early on the um calendar for

[19:48] that as well. So, if there's no

[19:50] objection, I think I'll move on to the

[19:52] next uh agenda item, which is um let's

[19:56] stand or reconsider or amend a

[19:57] previously approved public participation

[19:59] plan. So,

[20:02] at our last meeting, we approved a

[20:03] public participation plan uh with the

[20:06] understanding that anybody who voted in

[20:08] favor could bring a motion to reconsider

[20:12] and if there was a second and a vote in

[20:13] favor of reconsidering could be

[20:15] reconsidered. Now, this is on the public

[20:18] on the county board agenda for approval

[20:21] tomorrow.

[20:23] So to rewrite it, it'd be tricky. But if

[20:28] we really wanted to, we could amend it

[20:32] and then the amendment would be an

[20:34] add-on to what's being approved by the

[20:36] county board tomorrow hopefully because

[20:38] we need it to be approval to be

[20:40] completed.

[20:41] My personal preference would be let it

[20:44] stand and if we need to amend it at a

[20:46] future date, we could do so. But open

[20:49] for discussion.

[20:51] Anybody?

[20:54] >> Sean,

[20:54] » Sean,

[20:54] >> I guess I I'm I'm in the process of

[20:57] » I guess I I'm I'm in the process of

[20:57] outlining and then attempting to flesh

[20:59] out two additional elements. Um,

[21:02] community health and sustainability.

[21:05] And I just want to make sure this would

[21:07] allow to have those entered if we if

[21:10] after review of these sections, this

[21:12] body felt them appropriate. And and I

[21:16] know that it's got some specific

[21:17] elements listed. Does it would that be

[21:19] exclusionary to any additional ones or

[21:21] not?

[21:23] >> Uh, no. I don't think my interpretation

[21:25] » Uh, no. I don't think my interpretation

[21:25] would be no exclusion, but I think that

[21:27] falls into the discussion about scope of

[21:29] work.

[21:30] >> Okay?

[21:31] » Okay?

[21:31] >> Because this is this is about how we

[21:33] » Because this is this is about how we

[21:33] engage the public to be able to comment

[21:35] and participate,

[21:36] >> right?

[21:36] » right?

[21:36] >> And if we add work to the process, they

[21:39] » And if we add work to the process, they

[21:39] can easily participate and comment on

[21:41] that as well. But this is what we know

[21:43] as our baseline because we haven't added

[21:45] any elements as of this point in time.

[21:48] Mary Erica,

[21:51] >> just one thing that I wanted to um point

[21:54] » just one thing that I wanted to um point

[21:54] out here and is in the email that I sent

[21:58] all of you with notes is that there's a

[22:01] lot that is in here that is sort of

[22:04] extra that I assume we will never use

[22:07] and I feel like it would be a clearer

[22:09] document if we cut some of it. Um

[22:14] there are also like there's there are no

[22:18] activities assigned to any single person

[22:21] or to any group. And so this is

[22:25] something I would really like to have

[22:26] some kind of open conversation with. I

[22:28] would think in a meeting with at least

[22:30] Lisa and probably all of us because

[22:34] these are big things. Um

[22:38] so like as just a general document sure

[22:41] it's fine but there's like there's also

[22:43] still inconsistent language across

[22:46] documents. So one the scope of work

[22:49] calls something a digital public survey

[22:52] whereas we just call it a survey and it

[22:56] doesn't tell the mechanism. It doesn't

[22:59] sort of say anything. So there's just

[23:00] there's a lot of like different terms

[23:02] used across the two documents and yet

[23:04] there's they're referring to each other

[23:06] sort of constantly. So that that was the

[23:09] those were the things I was trying to

[23:10] point out. I'm not trying to halt this.

[23:14] In fact, you know, we we need to get it

[23:16] done. Um but

[23:20] just wanted to offer that up.

[23:23] Other comments I'd like to ask uh Emily

[23:26] you're there or Autumn about the digital

[23:30] public survey. Is that a capacity that's

[23:32] offered by Northwest Regional Planning?

[23:35] Yeah, within the

[23:38] uh current cost the 75,000

[23:41] would be the opportunity to do a digital

[23:45] survey with Northwest Regional Planning

[23:48] assisting the committee with developing

[23:49] questions

[23:51] um creating usually we create a QR code

[23:55] and then it would be the county or

[23:57] committee's responsibility to

[24:00] um distribute the survey information

[24:04] whether that's social media, newspapers

[24:07] on county website to get that

[24:09] information about the survey opportunity

[24:11] out to the public. And then once those

[24:15] um surveys are completed, Northwest

[24:19] Regional Planning would do a summary

[24:22] report of all of the um answers within

[24:28] the survey and that would be within the

[24:30] current constructs of the cost.

[24:35] >> Uh thank you. Other comment on a

[24:37] » Uh thank you. Other comment on a

[24:37] question, Pat? Well, what Erica said, I

[24:41] I've got some of the same questions,

[24:43] thoughts, concerns. One is it seems

[24:46] ambitious, which is fine, but then the

[24:49] question of who's going to do what and

[24:50] when, and that isn't in there. So, for

[24:54] example, I've got the egg section, but

[24:56] I've had three meetings with Alyssa.

[24:57] We're going to have a good nine or more

[24:59] with farmland preservation, and that's

[25:01] all outside of whatever the comp plan

[25:03] says we're going to do. Then I have the

[25:05] forestry. So, I'm thinking about all

[25:08] these meetings just for the comp plan

[25:10] update in those sections, let alone

[25:12] everything else. Um, it's not clear to

[25:14] me what I have to do, when I'm going to

[25:19] have to do it, where I'm going to have

[25:21] to do it. And that's partly penciling

[25:23] in, you know, this update around

[25:26] everything else in life. And then I, you

[25:29] know, I've mentioned this before, next

[25:31] April, there's an election and the comp

[25:34] plan doesn't need to be done until the

[25:36] end of 2026.

[25:38] All things being equal, it' be a nice if

[25:40] the group of us that are active now, you

[25:42] know, largely have it what we need to do

[25:45] done by April. But if we don't, it

[25:48] should be really clear to whoever picks

[25:49] it up, if anybody's not here after

[25:51] April, that they know what they would be

[25:54] getting into if they take it on. So

[25:57] there's there's no clarity on that yet.

[26:00] I'd like to get to it when we get a

[26:02] chance. Other other discussion, Erica,

[26:06] >> just to make things really clear. So in

[26:09] » just to make things really clear. So in

[26:10] the public participation plan, there's

[26:12] something called summaries.

[26:14] Whereas in the public participation

[26:16] plan, there's the word summaries being

[26:20] used, summaries of meetings that are

[26:23] transcribed. I believe in in Ashlin

[26:25] County we call those minutes. So I mean

[26:28] some of these things are really easy to

[26:29] change just to make them consistent so

[26:31] that we're referring to actual documents

[26:34] that are recorded um that we don't so we

[26:37] don't need to do additional summaries,

[26:39] right? Um, also listed under its own um,

[26:44] bolded subheading is community display

[26:48] and exhibit. That is separate from our

[26:51] open house, our all of our other

[26:54] meetings, sort of everything else. At

[26:56] least to my knowledge, we haven't talked

[26:58] about a community display and exhibit. I

[27:01] don't know if Lisa is thinking about an

[27:03] extra community display and exhibit. And

[27:06] if we're not, why don't we just delete

[27:08] that part? like if we're not going to do

[27:09] it, if nobody's going to pick that up,

[27:11] wouldn't that just be a super easy fix?

[27:14] Um

[27:17] there's also, let's see, an email

[27:21] mailing list that someone should be

[27:25] overseeing, collecting emails, and then

[27:30] sending out updates to things. Do we

[27:32] have anyone in mind for who's going to

[27:34] do that? Uh if not, I think we could

[27:37] take that out too. Um I think if it's

[27:40] more the subcommittees are creating

[27:42] their own sort of groups of people, then

[27:45] maybe that doesn't need to be in here.

[27:47] And then there's also a newsletter.

[27:51] Someone is going to create a newsletter

[27:54] uh periodically and pass that out. Um,

[27:59] there's also quite a few things listed

[28:01] here that need to be on the website that

[28:03] are not on the website yet. So, like a

[28:06] lot of it is not I I don't feel like

[28:09] it's sort of debatable. Like I don't I

[28:11] don't know like if we're not intending

[28:13] to do it, it would be it would be a more

[28:15] concise document. It would be easier to

[28:17] read and things would actually reference

[28:20] across multiple documents.

[28:24] Lisa,

[28:27] >> thank you. Um, yeah, I know when we were

[28:30] » thank you. Um, yeah, I know when we were

[28:30] when Erica and I met and we talked about

[28:33] this, it was almost like we should not

[28:36] um quote pass this yet until we met in

[28:41] August with regional planning to find

[28:43] out like what exactly they're doing and

[28:47] what we were doing. So, thanks for

[28:49] mentioning my name a hundred times, but

[28:51] I don't have the capacity to do that in

[28:53] the next year. you know, I can do a few

[28:55] things. Um, but I can't be the keeper of

[28:58] the outreach for the county's plan. Um,

[29:01] I'm not sure what is in the um contract.

[29:06] You know, um, Emily mentioned maybe

[29:08] $20,000 for a survey. I don't know if

[29:11] that's already in the scope of work as a

[29:13] contract item or if that's an additional

[29:16] thing. So it seemed like before we

[29:19] passed this and you could pass this and

[29:22] say this is our first attempt but it's

[29:24] an organic process and we know things

[29:26] will change and then go back to the

[29:28] board and say we want to do some changes

[29:30] or I think we're meeting with regional

[29:32] planning in August for the first time

[29:35] you know get more information then about

[29:37] what is theirs and then what is our real

[29:41] goal our real are we going the Cadillac

[29:45] template outreach That's this or are we

[29:48] doing the Chevy or the bicycle

[29:52] and then figure out who could do what

[29:55] >> or the electric airplane ready to go?

[29:59] » or the electric airplane ready to go?

[29:59] >> I would just are do

[30:02] » I would just are do

[30:02] are you both kind of suggesting that

[30:05] this might be a little premature

[30:07] approving this till until we meet in

[30:09] August and if so is there any rush

[30:11] George that we couldn't take this off

[30:14] the agenda for this month? It's my

[30:16] understanding we're required to have it

[30:17] now when the contract goes into place.

[30:19] The contract has not yet been put in

[30:21] place. The next thing on the agenda is

[30:23] to talk about the scope of work. Uh

[30:25] point out to of the things that I find

[30:27] in this the state law says, you know,

[30:30] shall adopt written procedures designed

[30:33] to foster public participation. That's

[30:35] the requirement. She'll adopt written

[30:36] procedures designed to foster written

[30:38] participation.

[30:41] There'll be open discussion,

[30:42] communication programs, information

[30:44] services, public meetings, and with

[30:46] advanced notice and opportunity for

[30:49] written comments. That's all that's

[30:50] required.

[30:52] So, I see this as documentation

[30:56] of a smorgus board of options for the

[30:59] committee and future committee if it's

[31:01] different than us next year to be

[31:03] working with. And if we leave things

[31:05] out, they won't be there on this

[31:07] mortgage board table for people to

[31:08] choose from. I'll point out that most of

[31:10] these are open house and openhouse.

[31:14] Okay, one open house is actually

[31:16] required by law. But when you come to

[31:18] some of these other items, it's

[31:22] uh see where

[31:25] it's a may. So, community play may be

[31:30] used. Doesn't say it will be used. It

[31:32] says it may be used. Is there as an

[31:34] option?

[31:36] um a newsletter may be prepared. So, I

[31:39] see no point in deleting these items

[31:41] because they're reminders of something

[31:43] that we could do and we might decide to

[31:44] do later in the process. Um the last

[31:49] thing I'll say is that um personally I

[31:52] support leaving this alone and letting

[31:53] the county board approve it tomorrow,

[31:55] but it's up to the committee. Um, this

[31:58] has already been approved. So, would

[32:01] take a a motion and a vote to reconsider

[32:04] and to open reopen discussion and then

[32:07] revise it at this meeting or at a future

[32:10] meeting. But, if we delay to the future

[32:12] meeting, then it won't be in place for

[32:14] the satisfaction of the contract and the

[32:16] grant requirements. So, it's um it's up

[32:20] to the committee. But, uh, Charlie, you

[32:22] have the floor.

[32:23] >> That Thank you. That clarifies things

[32:26] » That Thank you. That clarifies things

[32:26] for me. Um, and I support approving this

[32:29] now. Um, and then I suspect when we meet

[32:33] in August, then we'll be able to decide

[32:35] which of these options are our best ones

[32:37] to use should we choose. I'm glad

[32:40] they're not mandatory. You said there

[32:42] was three mandatory things, I think. So,

[32:44] thank you.

[32:45] >> Just want to point out there's there's

[32:47] » Just want to point out there's there's

[32:47] nothing to be done now if nobody brings

[32:50] a motion to reconsider. was just

[32:52] discussion and we move on because it's

[32:54] already been an approved document and

[32:57] it's already on the agenda for the

[32:58] county board for tomorrow. But we do

[32:59] have the option of bringing it up for

[33:01] reconsideration if someone wants to do

[33:03] so.

[33:04] >> Right. Pat.

[33:06] » Right. Pat.

[33:06] >> So at the board meeting tomorrow, if the

[33:08] » So at the board meeting tomorrow, if the

[33:08] board as a whole wants to modify this

[33:10] document and approve the modified

[33:12] version, I would assume that that is

[33:15] then the document that this committee

[33:17] would be working with.

[33:18] >> Yes. Totally within their empowerment.

[33:20] » Yes. Totally within their empowerment.

[33:20] Yeah. So if Erica and Lisa

[33:27] had one or more things that they say,

[33:29] you know, this really really should be

[33:31] changed and they sent it to the board

[33:34] prior to the meeting tomorrow, the board

[33:36] consider could consider making the

[33:38] changes in. Some of it's just language

[33:40] for consistency of language so it's

[33:43] clear that it's the same thing and not

[33:45] different things.

[33:47] Um, you know, but it's a long list of

[33:50] stuff to do and then, you know,

[33:52] ultimately you got to rouse it with

[33:53] who's going to do it. And I've heard

[33:54] multiple people say, "I'm busy enough.

[33:57] Don't put that on my plate." And I know

[34:00] how busy my plate is just with the comp

[34:03] plan stuff, let alone everything else.

[34:06] So,

[34:09] and then we talk about how often does

[34:11] anybody look at the comp plan. You know,

[34:13] we hear those comments all the time. And

[34:14] for those of us on the board, we know

[34:16] how often the comp plan is referred to,

[34:19] like not often, you know, it's rarely

[34:22] referred to. So, in many ways, if we had

[34:25] a shorter, more focused list, I I think

[34:29] being realistic,

[34:31] that would be helpful. But I think it

[34:33] would be good to get input. I mean, just

[34:34] in terms of process, because you don't

[34:36] want to modify this today and then amend

[34:37] the agenda with here's a new one. Not

[34:39] that we couldn't. We certainly could,

[34:41] but we could also agree on a list of

[34:43] changes today and then if someone on

[34:45] this committee that's on the board then

[34:47] wants to make that motion tomorrow and

[34:49] and bring it forward, the board could

[34:51] consider that as a whole.

[34:54] >> Further discussion,

[34:56] » Further discussion,

[34:56] >> Lissa? I mean, one of the amendments

[34:58] » Lissa? I mean, one of the amendments

[34:58] could be that um a sentence or so near

[35:02] the beginning that says these are proven

[35:06] successful outreach strategies that can

[35:09] help reach more people, blah blah blah.

[35:12] Um

[35:15] we will work on them or accomplish them

[35:17] as staff and resources are available.

[35:22] I mean, I don't I just don't want

[35:23] somebody in the public to get a hold of

[35:25] the public participation plan and say,

[35:29] "You didn't do an email list and you

[35:32] didn't do a display or I didn't hear

[35:34] anything about it. What's your plan?"

[35:36] And then you say, "Well, here's our

[35:38] plan." And they say, "Well, who's doing

[35:39] your website?" And we said, "Well, we

[35:41] don't know. That was just our idea.

[35:43] We'll figure that out." I just don't

[35:45] want to have create that vulnerability

[35:48] of setting up because this is a this is

[35:50] a Cadillac plan. I mean, it doesn't have

[35:52] social media on it, but I was going to

[35:54] do that anyway just because I do social

[35:56] media, but I'd hate for it to be like

[36:01] here's how we intend to engage people,

[36:04] but then we come back, somebody says,

[36:06] well, you didn't talk to seniors. and we

[36:08] come back and say, "Well, these were

[36:10] maze or maybe if we had a person." So,

[36:15] if we added a disclaimer,

[36:18] maybe it's a little bit of a bumper

[36:21] as an amendment because you did ask us

[36:23] if we had things that we wanted to be

[36:25] reconsidered or amended. Does that make

[36:27] sense? What do you think? What if

[36:29] somebody came to you and said, "I saw

[36:30] your public participation plan. Where's

[36:32] this newsletter?" And you know,

[36:35] >> I'd ask them if they didn't know what

[36:36] » I'd ask them if they didn't know what

[36:36] the word may meant. I mean, we still

[36:39] have to decide of of what those we're

[36:41] going to use. And I think that's so we

[36:44] leave those options there and then in

[36:46] August we we rewrite it and say these

[36:49] are the ones we're going to use. And

[36:51] then if they don't find those, they have

[36:53] a beef with us. But if they don't find

[36:56] us using something that we said we might

[36:58] use but didn't, then they don't have

[37:00] really a grounds for a complaint. But I

[37:02] see where that could possibly happen,

[37:05] but I think that going to jam us up more

[37:07] than it would help us at this phase.

[37:10] >> Can is there um would you have a issue

[37:12] » Can is there um would you have a issue

[37:12] with adding some language that says

[37:16] this is our first great plan depending

[37:19] on resources and staffing. I

[37:23] >> I look at this now that we're looking at

[37:25] » I look at this now that we're looking at

[37:25] this Cadillac option plan to determine

[37:28] what part of it we want to use. Can we

[37:30] decide that today?

[37:33] >> Uh, not my daily wick, but if George

[37:35] » Uh, not my daily wick, but if George

[37:35] says we can, is it adopted?

[37:38] >> Yeah, let me let me chime in here. Um, I

[37:41] » Yeah, let me let me chime in here. Um, I

[37:41] think it' be more expeditious for us to

[37:44] amend this at a future meeting if we

[37:47] wish to. There's nothing says that we

[37:49] have to do all these things. I view this

[37:51] more as a checklist and a a keeping us

[37:57] on plan. sort of a checklist of things

[37:58] we can and will be doing during the

[38:01] course of the year. We might do some and

[38:02] we might not do others. So just because

[38:05] it's a plan doesn't mean that

[38:08] everything's going to be done as long as

[38:09] we meet the legal requirement

[38:12] which is pretty open. The legal

[38:15] requirement is just to have some public

[38:17] participation and open discussion and

[38:19] communication programs. It doesn't it

[38:23] doesn't say that we have to do all these

[38:24] things. So if we don't do them, we're

[38:26] not in any kind of detriment. We just

[38:30] But we m we've got our ideas down on

[38:32] paper of things that we should can be

[38:34] doing and we have a timeline which is

[38:37] maybe tells us whether we're behind or

[38:39] ahead of schedule. So I see personally I

[38:43] see no problem with this.

[38:45] >> Yeah. So, we get to August, which isn't

[38:47] » Yeah. So, we get to August, which isn't

[38:47] very far away, and we we need to pencil

[38:50] in who's doing what and when, you know,

[38:54] for each of the components of the comp

[38:55] plan, but also all of these other issues

[38:57] that we're talking about, when we get to

[38:59] August,

[39:01] could we at least have an understanding

[39:03] that some of these items, the email

[39:05] list, the website, etc., if we don't

[39:07] have a volunteer or someone penciled in

[39:10] that we reduce that list and update this

[39:12] document because if we hit August, which

[39:15] is when we're supposed to hit the ground

[39:16] running on updating the comp plan, if we

[39:19] don't have people penciled in, then we

[39:22] should shorten that list in this

[39:23] documents. I agree with what Lisa said.

[39:26] I've read things like that and you know,

[39:28] it creates the impression that there's

[39:30] going to be a bunch of stuff going on.

[39:31] And yes, the word may is in there, but

[39:34] you know, you can only not do so many

[39:36] things that you say we may do this, we

[39:38] may do that without leaving a sour taste

[39:41] with the public. I would rather have a

[39:43] shorter list that we're committed to and

[39:44] have the people and the resources to do

[39:47] and then do that, you know, pencil it in

[39:49] and be committed to that. But we had

[39:51] August. We need to pencil names and

[39:54] dates and commitments in. So, I'm okay

[39:56] with leaving it to August, but if we

[39:58] don't have names in August, then I think

[40:01] We have no choice but to shorten the

[40:03] list.

[40:04] >> I guess I see we got to we can't really

[40:08] » I guess I see we got to we can't really

[40:08] make those are good things to keep in

[40:09] the back of their head till we actually

[40:11] have the meeting with NWRPC.

[40:14] That's what we're waiting on, right? See

[40:16] what exactly the the disposition of

[40:18] duties is going to be. So to try to

[40:20] pencil stuff in now,

[40:23] it might not be just go out the window

[40:26] when we actually have the the meetings.

[40:29] So Well, is Emily on the call right now?

[40:33] >> Emily, you want to chime in?

[40:40] » Emily will be coming back in just a

[40:43] second here. She'll be able to hop on

[40:45] and give some answers. But um I guess

[40:51] our situation that we're in right now is

[40:54] we're not technically under contract um

[40:58] yet to be coming to like attending

[41:02] meetings in person and things like that.

[41:05] We don't have a contract set in stone

[41:07] right now. Um so that would be something

[41:10] that we could talk about once that scope

[41:13] of work gets approved and um the

[41:15] contract is approved. Um public

[41:17] participation plans are important to

[41:20] have that prior to doing any work on a

[41:24] comp plan. Um it is statutoily required

[41:28] before um any work to a comp plan is

[41:32] done that that public participation plan

[41:34] is approved. So that would kind of be

[41:37] your first step on anything would be to

[41:40] get the public participation plan nailed

[41:42] down and approved by the county board.

[41:46] >> Thank you.

[41:49] » And I am back now. This is Emily.

[41:52] >> Go ahead, Emily.

[41:53] » Go ahead, Emily.

[41:53] >> So we would have um just a ma like a

[41:57] » So we would have um just a ma like a

[41:57] general outline. Northwest Regional

[42:00] Planning's responsibilities

[42:02] would be to make sure that all of the

[42:05] statutory requirements are met for the

[42:07] comp plan update. So that would include

[42:09] the adoption of the public participation

[42:11] plan by the county board before we start

[42:14] any sort of planning committee meetings

[42:16] that are facilitated.

[42:18] We'd also make sure that the draft plan

[42:21] is properly distributed

[42:23] to all of the required entities. So that

[42:26] would be neighboring jurisdictions

[42:29] and then we help prepare the materials,

[42:31] the draft plan for county board

[42:34] adoption. We'll be the ones responsible

[42:37] for updating the tables, charts, maps,

[42:40] any narrative content that's affected by

[42:44] any new data. We would draft updated

[42:46] narrative content and revise the plan

[42:49] chapters for review by this committee.

[42:52] And then for actual facilitated

[42:55] meetings, the current scope of work

[42:58] includes eight meetings of this

[43:00] committee as well as one facilitated

[43:02] public open house. So that's different

[43:05] than the required public hearing that's

[43:07] a part of statute. The open house would

[43:09] be on the preliminary draft

[43:11] comprehensive plan before it moves into

[43:14] the formal um adoption process to get

[43:17] some input from the public on a

[43:18] preliminary draft.

[43:22] And then we would also provide digital

[43:23] copies of the draft and final plan in

[43:26] both Microsoft Word and PDF formats. We

[43:29] do the the mapping and develop the

[43:32] updated existing land use and the future

[43:35] land use maps.

[43:37] We would support the county in the

[43:39] preparation of the public hearing.

[43:42] That's the statutory requirement that is

[43:44] the with the 30-day notice of the final

[43:47] draft plan. And we would also assist

[43:49] with the uh information you need for

[43:52] plan final plan adoption by the county

[43:54] board.

[43:56] And then the current scope of work also

[43:59] includes the assistance with a digital

[44:01] public opinion survey. And then we would

[44:03] have the summary analysis for that as

[44:07] well as um any hardcolor copy printing

[44:11] of the final plan that the county might

[44:13] want to have that would be at an

[44:15] additional cost. So for Russ County, for

[44:18] this planning committee, the main things

[44:20] would be to review and provide timely

[44:22] feedback on all the draft materials that

[44:25] we provide

[44:28] that the county board adopts the public

[44:30] participation plan according to

[44:33] comprehensive planning law requirements.

[44:36] You would be the responsible for

[44:37] conducting and coordinating any of the

[44:40] additional public outreach engagement

[44:42] activities. So that sounds like what

[44:43] you're talking about right now within

[44:44] this public participation plan that's

[44:47] above and beyond the statutory

[44:48] requirements. And this public

[44:50] participation plan is um based on one

[44:53] that another county that we worked with

[44:56] um did. So these are things like that

[45:00] another county um had as their

[45:03] priorities and maybe those priorities

[45:05] are different in Ashlin County. So, I

[45:07] heard you talking about the community

[45:09] display, and what that county did was

[45:12] had a display with some of the

[45:16] survey results as well as some of the

[45:19] background information, population, and

[45:21] housing data, and they had that

[45:23] displayed at the entrance to their

[45:26] government center.

[45:30] And then we'd also assist with uh

[45:33] organizing the public hearing for plan

[45:35] adoption as well as approval of the

[45:37] final plan and related ordinance with

[45:40] the county board. And I see one hand up.

[45:44] >> Yeah, this Emily and Autumn, this is

[45:46] » Yeah, this Emily and Autumn, this is

[45:46] Gary Merdict. I have a question. You uh

[45:49] Autumn, I think you said you didn't have

[45:50] the contract. I got an email over 10

[45:54] days ago saying that that contract had

[45:56] been approved. Is it something that

[45:59] >> you haven't uh

[46:00] » you haven't uh

[46:00] >> the contract with for the grant has been

[46:04] » the contract with for the grant has been

[46:04] approved? So the state and the county.

[46:07] >> Okay.

[46:08] » Okay.

[46:08] >> So now that that has been approved, we

[46:10] » So now that that has been approved, we

[46:10] can and I today you also have

[46:14] >> um the scope of work on your agenda at

[46:17] » um the scope of work on your agenda at

[46:17] the this committee level. Then we can

[46:20] look at the contract between Northwest

[46:23] Regional Planning and the county for

[46:25] this plan update.

[46:27] >> Okay. Thank you.

[46:28] » Okay. Thank you.

[46:28] >> Contract was specific to the grant.

[46:30] » Contract was specific to the grant.

[46:30] >> Okay. Thank you very much.

[46:32] » Okay. Thank you very much.

[46:32] >> Yes.

[46:34] » Yes.

[46:34] >> Any further discussion? Uh see Eric, did

[46:38] » Any further discussion? Uh see Eric, did

[46:38] you have Okay, Charlie, go ahead.

[46:40] >> Okay. Sorry. I I don't want staff to

[46:43] » Okay. Sorry. I I don't want staff to

[46:43] think that I don't support them 100%.

[46:46] Perhaps a a uh

[46:50] an amendment stating

[46:52] uh that the uh points in this plan are

[46:56] subject to change uh may may change

[47:00] based on the August meeting.

[47:04] Would would something like that give you

[47:06] comfort?

[47:07] >> Other discussion, Lisa?

[47:09] » Other discussion, Lisa?

[47:09] >> Something like that gives me more

[47:10] » Something like that gives me more

[47:10] comfort because it reduces expectation

[47:13] levels. Um maybe there should be a

[47:16] statement in the beginning that says

[47:18] this is what's required by the statute.

[47:20] What follows is a checklist of ideas

[47:23] that we may pursue. Make sure everyone

[47:26] in the county gets the news as staff and

[47:28] resources allow

[47:31] because there's a difference to me

[47:33] between like a wish list and an action

[47:35] plan. you know, an action plan. I am

[47:38] saying I'm doing this and then um

[47:41] whether that's a Chevy or a Cadillac

[47:43] plan, maybe it's two things, maybe it's

[47:45] 20 things, but it's a plan of action

[47:47] that I'm going to do a a guideline or a

[47:51] checklist to me is is a little bit

[47:53] different. Whereas the idea that we're

[47:55] calling this participation plan to me

[47:57] sets up expectations and I'm not sure

[48:00] that a lot of people will read it at

[48:02] all. Um but the word and and whether

[48:06] they zone in on the word may

[48:10] um you know that's a separate question

[48:12] but if if we're clear about what the

[48:14] expectation is to do this work or just

[48:17] say these are our great suggestions.

[48:19] We're going to try and get to it. You

[48:21] know nice statement like that. This is

[48:24] what's required that will get done.

[48:26] We've hired a contractor to help us. If

[48:28] I may, uh, if you look at the second

[48:31] page of the public participation plan,

[48:34] uh, paragraph two, it says, um, we'll

[48:37] use due diligence to ensure the spirit

[48:40] and intent of this public participation

[48:42] plan is upheld. The spirit and intent.

[48:46] However, it should be expected that

[48:48] deviations from this plan may be

[48:49] warranted. It's right in there.

[48:52] >> Okay. I didn't read that part. Did you

[48:54] » Okay. I didn't read that part. Did you

[48:54] do you agree with that then, Charlie?

[48:56] I'm

[48:56] >> because that's what you're getting at as

[48:58] » because that's what you're getting at as

[48:58] well, right?

[48:59] >> Yeah. I I think we're all getting a

[49:02] » Yeah. I I think we're all getting a

[49:02] little wrapped up with what may or may

[49:05] not be a final and that's not going to

[49:07] happen till we meet with NWRPC. Then

[49:09] then then

[49:11] we got to make sure that we're dotting

[49:13] and crossing

[49:15] te's and eyes that we can do before we

[49:18] say yes. So these are all just may now

[49:20] in preparation for that meeting. And so

[49:23] I'm comfortable with it the way it is.

[49:27] So if I go to page two of the document,

[49:32] it's there's a section called public

[49:34] participation plan by method and then

[49:38] there's a paragraph or two, then there's

[49:40] a bunch of bullets, but then when you

[49:43] get to page three of the document, now

[49:47] it starts with community

[49:48] display/exhibit. It doesn't really

[49:50] there's this other language in front of

[49:52] that. And what I'm wondering is before

[49:54] the community display/exhibit

[49:57] if we could add a sentence that says

[50:00] Ashlin County is considering some or all

[50:02] of the following for public

[50:04] participation.

[50:06] Then that very clearly in one standalone

[50:08] sentence is says considering some or all

[50:11] of the following. It's by no way

[50:14] promising and it doesn't say may which

[50:17] can be interpreted various ways.

[50:21] So, for simplicity sake, if this

[50:23] committee agreed on inserting that

[50:25] sentence above the community

[50:27] display/exhibit as a standalone

[50:29] sentence, then tomorrow at the board

[50:30] meeting, a board member could make a

[50:33] motion to change the public

[50:36] participation plan by adding that

[50:38] sentence there and it would save you all

[50:39] of this. You know,

[50:43] >> Ashlin County is considering some or all

[50:46] » Ashlin County is considering some or all

[50:46] of the following for public

[50:48] participation.

[50:51] Yeah. So, thanks that I think I would go

[50:54] along with that. That's what I've been

[50:55] trying to say is like let's cert some

[50:57] clarifying language so that we don't set

[51:00] unrealistic expectations.

[51:02] >> And then in August, we have to be

[51:03] » And then in August, we have to be

[51:03] prepared. If somebody wants a certain

[51:06] thing in there like email or website, we

[51:09] need to pencil somebody in

[51:11] or take it off the list.

[51:12] >> Y

[51:13] » Y

[51:13] >> yeah, we're we're likely to be resource

[51:15] » yeah, we're we're likely to be resource

[51:15] thin. So, um I think we could take that

[51:19] as amendment today and then it would be

[51:21] in the the presentation tomorrow to the

[51:23] county board if we amended it today.

[51:25] >> I'll make move to make that amendment.

[51:27] » I'll make move to make that amendment.

[51:27] >> Well, hang on.

[51:29] » Well, hang on.

[51:29] I Well, I'll second it for purpose of

[51:32] discussion. Now, we're going to have to

[51:33] vote, but I'll second it, but then I'd

[51:34] like to speak

[51:35] >> now. So, there's an amendment on there's

[51:36] » now. So, there's an amendment on there's

[51:36] a a motion on the floor to amend the

[51:39] public participation public

[51:41] participation plan as previously

[51:43] approved at the past meeting to say at

[51:46] the beginning of the listing of

[51:51] options for public participation on page

[51:54] three that we should have a header that

[51:56] says Ashlin County is considering some

[52:00] or all of the following for public

[52:03] participation. That would be the

[52:05] amendment as I understand it. Is that

[52:08] correct?

[52:09] >> Well, it it is. Um but logistically

[52:12] » Well, it it is. Um but logistically

[52:12] speaking, the board meeting is tomorrow.

[52:13] If we pass this today, we're changing

[52:15] the plan the board has asked to

[52:17] consider, which would mean you would

[52:19] need to send the administrator an

[52:20] updated copy of this plan today. They

[52:23] would then need to modify what's on the

[52:26] county website for the packet tomorrow.

[52:28] And for those board members who get the

[52:30] packet in print, they would need to

[52:32] print copies to give to them. If we

[52:35] agreed as a committee on this change

[52:37] today, a board member tomorrow could

[52:41] make a motion to modify the plan with

[52:43] the sentence that you just said and then

[52:45] say that the committee supported making

[52:47] this change yesterday, but we're not

[52:49] going to go through the logistics of you

[52:52] and Dan and others having to update the

[52:54] packet.

[52:55] >> So, would you like to propose? Would you

[52:57] » So, would you like to propose? Would you

[52:57] be prepared to make that amendment

[52:59] tomorrow?

[52:59] >> I I would as long as this committee is

[53:02] » I I would as long as this committee is

[53:02] in support of making that. Um,

[53:07] » I support.

[53:08] >> So, you want to withdraw?

[53:09] » So, you want to withdraw?

[53:09] >> I'll withdraw my amend withdraw my

[53:11] » I'll withdraw my amend withdraw my

[53:11] amendment proposal and support the

[53:12] course of action that Pat submits it

[53:15] tomorrow at the board meeting.

[53:16] >> Are there any objections to the proposal

[53:18] » Are there any objections to the proposal

[53:18] by Mr. Kenny?

[53:22] Then so be it.

[53:23] >> And we move on to the next agenda item.

[53:30] the

[53:31] uh

[53:33] work

[53:35] this this would be used this is what's

[53:37] going to be used in discussion with land

[53:40] as to what the job is to be done

[53:43] so this must becomes the foundation of

[53:46] the contract

[53:47] I believe will be set up

[53:55] Um, I don't know exactly who sets it up.

[53:58] I know that, you know, Dan and Gary will

[54:01] need to sign it as it is a contract, but

[54:04] I would guess that you, George, are also

[54:06] involved.

[54:08] >> Uh, so I mean, probably it's going to

[54:11] » Uh, so I mean, probably it's going to

[54:11] take legal review. It' be my

[54:13] understanding, but I'm not sure how it

[54:14] was done last time around, so we have to

[54:16] look into that. But anyway, as I

[54:18] understand it, the scope of work

[54:20] document becomes the basis for the

[54:22] agreement with Northwest Regional

[54:24] Planning as to who's going to do what

[54:26] and how much they're going to contribute

[54:27] within the amount of funding that we

[54:29] have available to them. And I have a

[54:33] concern. Okay, I'm I'm pretty good with

[54:36] all of this that's in this document.

[54:40] um you know the plan elements will

[54:43] include at least these nine elements

[54:45] which means there could be more which

[54:47] was Charlie's problem and like in

[54:49] transportation these are we looking at

[54:52] proposed things for the future they're

[54:55] not definite commitments that you can do

[54:56] that I don't think I highlighted there's

[54:59] some other things I highlighted that

[55:01] we're looking at you know future risk

[55:03] and opportunities and we want to promote

[55:06] diverse sustainable economic case and

[55:09] that land use is proposed land uses and

[55:14] that implementation is policies,

[55:16] programs and actions to achieve plan

[55:18] goals.

[55:20] Uh so we will need in the end reasonable

[55:23] parties and strategies but my concern is

[55:25] this.

[55:27] I look at at what we have in terms of

[55:29] resources among ourselves to do work. I

[55:32] mean, some of us are professionally

[55:34] committed and have an overload of work

[55:38] probably already and the rest of us are

[55:40] essentially volunteers who receive a

[55:43] predeem for going to a meeting, but

[55:44] essentially so there's a lot to be done

[55:47] here and we're going to need a lot of

[55:48] help from Northwest Regional Planning.

[55:50] But I what I'm seeing is probably the

[55:54] need from each

[55:57] subcommittee team leader to be able to

[56:00] draw upon the advisory skills of the

[56:04] consultant.

[56:06] So, it seems to me that if Charlie's

[56:09] working intergovernmental or Pat's

[56:11] working agriculture or Gary's working on

[56:13] economic development,

[56:15] they may need the advice and guidance of

[56:20] experts at Northwest Regional Planning.

[56:22] And I strikes me that it would be

[56:24] constructive for us to establish that

[56:27] you would have all subcommittee

[56:29] chairpersons would have access to

[56:32] drawing upon that expertise. And I don't

[56:34] know what other people think about this.

[56:37] Charlie, go ahead. I

[56:38] >> I think if if my

[56:42] » I think if if my

[56:42] perception of what they're doing is

[56:44] correct that they're going to be looking

[56:47] at each they're going to be eyeballing

[56:49] my element and then coming back and I

[56:52] get to review that. So I think I feel

[56:55] like I have the access to that expert

[56:57] already and that they're going to be

[56:59] applying an expert eye to my element. If

[57:03] that's wrong, they'll tell me in August,

[57:05] I suppose.

[57:07] >> I guess what I'm thinking of is if you

[57:10] » I guess what I'm thinking of is if you

[57:10] have questions, if you need help.

[57:13] >> Yeah.

[57:13] » Yeah.

[57:13] >> You have authority. Do you have

[57:14] » You have authority. Do you have

[57:14] authority to call Emily or Autumn and

[57:18] ask them some questions and get some

[57:20] advice that right now with the farmland

[57:22] preservation plan?

[57:24] >> So, that's what I'd like to make more

[57:25] » So, that's what I'd like to make more

[57:25] clear in the scope of work. And so just

[57:28] what I wrote here is that the scope of

[57:31] work should include a section on

[57:34] advisory services. It doesn't spec

[57:36] explicitly say that. And I would write

[57:39] it this way. Advisory services to the

[57:41] planning committee as a whole.

[57:44] Individual committee members as leaders

[57:45] of sub subject element subcommittees.

[57:50] county administration and county board

[57:52] in addition to the work and processes as

[57:55] prescribed herein and otherwise agreed.

[57:58] I'd like to make it very clear that

[57:59] there's access to advisory services for

[58:02] the people that are doing the work. I

[58:04] don't know if you think that's I don't

[58:05] know if you think that's necessary and

[58:06] I'll be interested in Emily and Autumn's

[58:08] observations. Pat, do you have a

[58:10] comment?

[58:11] >> Well, when we get to August and we start

[58:13] » Well, when we get to August and we start

[58:13] penciling things in that ties into the

[58:15] question of how do we work with each of

[58:18] these sections? So if I have the egg

[58:20] section, I need to somehow coordinate

[58:22] with Northwest Regional Planning on how

[58:25] we do that. So implicitly we have to

[58:28] have some access to them um to

[58:31] coordinate this without question. But

[58:35] given there's a limit to the budget,

[58:37] there's a limit to their time and

[58:38] access. So somewhere in there if we add

[58:40] a sentence or a paragraph um as time and

[58:44] budgets allow so that we don't have say

[58:47] a member just asking for endless hours

[58:50] that then push the budget outside of the

[58:53] scope of what we have. So there's got to

[58:55] be as time and budget allows and

[58:57] Northwest Regional Planning would have

[58:59] to talk to individual committee members

[59:01] and say, "Look, you know, I can give you

[59:03] a certain amount of time, but if

[59:05] someone's start sucking up 40, 50, 60,

[59:08] 80 hours, that's probably not going to

[59:10] work so well."

[59:13] So my I thought about that problem and I

[59:15] thought that the way to deal with that

[59:17] is that when we do our subcommittee

[59:19] reports at each of our committee

[59:21] meetings, one of the things that the

[59:22] committee members would be asked to

[59:24] report is time

[59:27] time on calls to Northwest Regional

[59:30] Planning if if at all. And that would,

[59:33] you know, if some if you if we had a

[59:35] committee meeting and you someone said,

[59:36] "Well, I spent 10 minutes on the phone

[59:38] with Emily and I asked a question, but

[59:41] somebody else says,"Well, I was on the

[59:42] phone with Autumn for 3 hours." You

[59:44] know, then we can see that we're bumping

[59:46] up against limitations if we have a a

[59:48] monthly reporting process. Pat,

[59:51] >> I think for the August meeting, it would

[59:53] » I think for the August meeting, it would

[59:53] be helpful if Northwest Regional

[59:54] Planning would tell us what they

[59:57] typically um have as guidelines when

[1:00:00] working with counties to update comp

[1:00:01] plants, how this process works to set up

[1:00:04] meetings, sharing files, back and forth,

[1:00:06] updates, and how much time outside of

[1:00:09] meetings is reasonable for the scope of

[1:00:12] work that they envision for what they're

[1:00:14] contracted for.

[1:00:18] I don't see how we can do this without

[1:00:19] having access to them. So, I think

[1:00:21] that's implicit that they could tell us.

[1:00:25] >> Gary, if you're there, do you have any

[1:00:27] » Gary, if you're there, do you have any

[1:00:27] observations on this?

[1:00:31] » No, not in addition to what's already

[1:00:33] been said. I think uh we need Northwest

[1:00:35] Regional Planning to basically give us

[1:00:38] the lead and and then we'll follow

[1:00:45] » if it goes anything like the farm plan.

[1:00:47] They're going to come back to us with

[1:00:48] their ideas on each element and then

[1:00:50] we'll all get to ask their expert. We'll

[1:00:53] we'll input. We've had three meetings

[1:00:56] now with farm planning and that's what

[1:00:58] you've just described is what's been

[1:01:00] happening at those meetings. We we input

[1:01:02] to them. They take notes. They tell us

[1:01:04] what they think and then we oh what

[1:01:06] about this? What about that? What about

[1:01:08] this? So and it and it's so it also

[1:01:10] triggers those they they present it in

[1:01:12] such a way that gets you thinking

[1:01:16] uh it isn't it isn't like calling them

[1:01:18] afterwards but it's definitely a long

[1:01:22] process. I say long but it's like an

[1:01:24] hour meeting where you go over that

[1:01:26] element and you might do that element

[1:01:28] three times. Who knows? But I like I

[1:01:31] also agree that we should be able to

[1:01:33] call them if something strikes us. So I

[1:01:36] I I agree in theory with what you're

[1:01:38] saying is provided it doesn't add $10

[1:01:40] million to the bill.

[1:01:43] >> Thank you.

[1:01:45] » Thank you.

[1:01:45] >> Yeah. So I I think there needs to be in

[1:01:48] » Yeah. So I I think there needs to be in

[1:01:48] order to get things done and to be not

[1:01:50] get tangled up with a lot of

[1:01:52] communication that there needs to be

[1:01:54] empowerment of the sub subcommittee

[1:01:56] chairpersons,

[1:01:58] you know, not to have to call Dan or

[1:02:00] come to come to me or, you know, just

[1:02:03] within reason be able to go directly

[1:02:05] with your questions to to Emily or

[1:02:06] Autumn. So Emily, do you have an

[1:02:09] observation on this uh chain of thought?

[1:02:13] I would say that based on

[1:02:18] experience from other counties that

[1:02:19] we've worked with that have had

[1:02:20] subcommittees for individual chapters,

[1:02:25] we have

[1:02:28] Northwest Regional Planning staff would

[1:02:30] first

[1:02:32] update the chapter

[1:02:36] with information that we have available

[1:02:38] to us. And once that draft is updated,

[1:02:42] we would share that maybe on SharePoint

[1:02:44] or whatever platform that the county

[1:02:47] prefers. Sometimes we'll even include it

[1:02:49] on our uh web page and those can be

[1:02:53] downloaded by the committee members and

[1:02:55] that's available to review by the

[1:02:58] committee. So typically we've had you

[1:03:01] start with uh reviewing the background

[1:03:04] information

[1:03:05] and making those revisions and then

[1:03:07] moving to the visioning and the action

[1:03:10] plan and implementation and doing it in

[1:03:13] that sort of sequence and sharing those

[1:03:15] documents as we go through the plan

[1:03:17] update process. So, it works, I think,

[1:03:20] best if Northwest Regional Planning does

[1:03:23] the first round of updates

[1:03:26] and um provides that first updated draft

[1:03:30] to the subcommittee for their um

[1:03:33] expertise and additional revisions and

[1:03:36] any additional information that they

[1:03:37] want to include in that updated chapter

[1:03:40] as a sort of a basic general

[1:03:43] update process.

[1:03:47] My question back then

[1:03:49] my question back then Emily is um are

[1:03:53] you talking about the background data

[1:03:56] >> or are you talking about the goals and

[1:03:57] » or are you talking about the goals and

[1:03:57] visions because I'm talking about the

[1:03:59] goals and visions

[1:04:00] >> all of the above but it wouldn't occur

[1:04:03] » all of the above but it wouldn't occur

[1:04:03] all at once. First, we would share the

[1:04:06] background information that we have

[1:04:07] updated and then you can use that

[1:04:10] updated background information to help

[1:04:12] inform the update of the visioning and

[1:04:15] the actions.

[1:04:17] >> Yeah. Okay. So, we we're in a parallel

[1:04:20] » Yeah. Okay. So, we we're in a parallel

[1:04:20] process already of trying to draw from

[1:04:24] the public and from our departments and

[1:04:26] committees

[1:04:28] their ideas about how what they would

[1:04:30] like this the future to look like.

[1:04:34] And so it occurs to me that a committee

[1:04:37] subcommittee may be working on a set of

[1:04:40] data. Is it out of bounds for them to

[1:04:43] send you an email with a question?

[1:04:46] >> Definitely not. that would be

[1:04:47] » Definitely not. that would be

[1:04:47] appreciated because I know that there

[1:04:50] are certain things that this

[1:04:53] um committee has expertise on that

[1:04:55] Northwest Regional Planning might not

[1:04:57] have access to certain information or

[1:04:59] data or plans or ideas that you might

[1:05:02] have that should be incorporated in the

[1:05:04] update.

[1:05:07] So from my position here as chair,

[1:05:11] I would want all of the subcommittee

[1:05:14] chairpersons to be empowered, feel

[1:05:16] empowered that they could submit

[1:05:17] questions, you know, I send an email or

[1:05:19] a short conversation

[1:05:21] uh if necessary to go after the contract

[1:05:24] is signed because we don't have that yet

[1:05:27] and that we would monitor that

[1:05:29] utilization by in our

[1:05:32] reports at our monthly meetings. So when

[1:05:34] we go around the table and say each

[1:05:36] subcommittee's reporting, that's where

[1:05:39] we we collect a little understanding of

[1:05:41] how much utilization or underutilization

[1:05:44] we would be uh drawing upon. And if if

[1:05:47] if Emily or thought that we were uh

[1:05:50] using up too much time on you know long

[1:05:53] conversations that she could also let us

[1:05:55] know. Does that sound amendable to the

[1:05:57] group?

[1:05:59] >> Because if not maybe we just move on.

[1:06:01] » Because if not maybe we just move on.

[1:06:01] Maybe we any other discussion on the uh

[1:06:03] scope of work.

[1:06:07] » Um I actually want to go back to the um

[1:06:12] proposed comp plan public participation

[1:06:16] and then because I might end up coming

[1:06:17] back to the scope of work and and on

[1:06:20] page five of the participation plan if

[1:06:23] someone can explain to me it's the

[1:06:25] bottom of page five the focus groups.

[1:06:27] There's two lists there both one through

[1:06:29] seven and the first list

[1:06:33] the second item is trends and issues and

[1:06:36] then the second list you know is largely

[1:06:38] a reorganization of the first seven but

[1:06:41] what is missing

[1:06:43] is in the second grouping

[1:06:47] um

[1:06:49] issues is missing

[1:06:53] the trends and issues what happened to

[1:06:55] that and then if we go back to the nine

[1:06:57] required items. There's issues and

[1:06:59] opportunities. So we went from in the

[1:07:02] comp plan nine elements we went from

[1:07:04] issues and opportunities on the focus

[1:07:06] groups. Number two is trends and issues

[1:07:08] and then it is not seen in the second

[1:07:11] group of seven which left me with

[1:07:13] question.

[1:07:16] >> This is Emily. Issues and opportunities

[1:07:18] » This is Emily. Issues and opportunities

[1:07:18] is the name of the element

[1:07:22] uh as written in the comprehensive

[1:07:24] planning law.

[1:07:25] >> Right. But a lot of you Ashlin County

[1:07:28] » Right. But a lot of you Ashlin County

[1:07:28] must refer to that as trends and issues

[1:07:30] and it was not a part of the element

[1:07:33] focus groups for this public

[1:07:35] participation plan because that county's

[1:07:38] trends and issues or issues and

[1:07:40] opportunities was only a list of the

[1:07:43] issues and opportunities.

[1:07:45] So it was a full committee exercise of

[1:07:49] updating the list of issues and

[1:07:50] opportunities in the county and it was

[1:07:52] not at the subcommittee level. It was a

[1:07:54] full committee level meeting that that

[1:07:56] occurred.

[1:07:58] >> So for the sake of clarity, would it be

[1:08:01] » So for the sake of clarity, would it be

[1:08:01] helpful if we train change trends and

[1:08:03] issues to issues and opportunities

[1:08:06] for consistency?

[1:08:08] >> I'll leave that up to the committee, but

[1:08:10] » I'll leave that up to the committee, but

[1:08:10] it's for consistency with the

[1:08:12] comprehensive planning law. It might be

[1:08:14] reasonable.

[1:08:17] >> Okay. So, I'm going to

[1:08:21] » Okay. So, I'm going to

[1:08:21] make a motion that at the board meeting

[1:08:24] tomorrow, the following change is

[1:08:25] supported. In focus groups number two,

[1:08:28] we change trends and issues to issues

[1:08:31] and opportunities so it's consistent

[1:08:33] with the element from the requirements

[1:08:36] for the comp plan.

[1:08:39] >> Well, okay. So, I need you to write that

[1:08:41] » Well, okay. So, I need you to write that

[1:08:41] down on paper so Karisha would have it

[1:08:42] specifically.

[1:08:45] So, at the board meeting tomorrow, I

[1:08:47] would make a motion that in the

[1:08:51] um public participation plan on page

[1:08:55] five

[1:08:58] under focus groups number two, trends

[1:09:01] and issues

[1:09:06] is changed to

[1:09:13] issues. and opportunities

[1:09:19] so that it is consistent with the

[1:09:21] language used in one of the nine

[1:09:23] required elements of the comp plan.

[1:09:37] So it I interpret that as needing no

[1:09:40] action at this time because that's going

[1:09:41] to be brought as a motion tomorrow.

[1:09:44] >> Yeah.

[1:09:45] » Yeah.

[1:09:45] >> Okay.

[1:09:51] » Are there further comments or discussion

[1:09:53] on scope of work?

[1:09:58] Um,

[1:10:02] I'm just going to make a note that on

[1:10:05] lower part of page three in one of the

[1:10:08] bullets, second to the last of volume

[1:10:10] two, it says issues and opportunities.

[1:10:12] So, we we see it there. Now, the

[1:10:14] language is consistent.

[1:10:16] Excuse me.

[1:10:22] » Could you repeat that, please, Pat?

[1:10:25] Um

[1:10:27] under volume two second to the last

[1:10:29] bullet is issues and opportunities. So

[1:10:33] now the proposed change for tomorrow

[1:10:36] changing trends and issues to issues and

[1:10:38] opportunities will occur

[1:10:42] um in the comp plan required elements in

[1:10:44] the previous document and it's

[1:10:46] consistent with issues and opportunities

[1:10:48] shown here. And so it's consistent then

[1:10:51] which makes it simpler for those of us

[1:10:53] who are easily confused.

[1:10:56] » Erica,

[1:10:58] >> I have uh a few suggestions just for

[1:11:02] » I have uh a few suggestions just for

[1:11:02] consistency and clarity of word choice

[1:11:06] across documents. But since this does

[1:11:08] not need to be finalized today, I think

[1:11:11] we should probably just do that as we

[1:11:14] talk with Northwest Regional.

[1:11:17] >> Uh okay. So I I agree with Erica's

[1:11:19] » Uh okay. So I I agree with Erica's

[1:11:19] comment. This is

[1:11:21] this is input document for

[1:11:25] preparation of a a contractual document

[1:11:29] and if there'll be rewarding and better

[1:11:32] wording of things I imagine in the

[1:11:33] contract and it'll be subject to a back

[1:11:36] and forth and discussion between

[1:11:39] our representative and Northwest

[1:11:41] Regional Planning. So this basically

[1:11:44] sort of represents intent.

[1:11:46] And so the only thing that I thought I

[1:11:48] needed to add for intent was that idea

[1:11:51] of that I I need my committee these

[1:11:54] committee members to have access to the

[1:11:58] consultant with if they have if you have

[1:12:00] questions or need advice. That's the

[1:12:01] only thing I really wanted to add.

[1:12:03] Anybody else?

[1:12:06] Yeah. I really just want to express

[1:12:08] support for Erica's desire to have

[1:12:11] consistency of language. When I see

[1:12:13] language that's different, I can spend a

[1:12:16] lot of time trying to figure out why is

[1:12:18] this language different? Is it the same

[1:12:19] thing or not? And if it's stated

[1:12:23] differently or different words chosen,

[1:12:25] why is it different? Um, so I really

[1:12:27] appreciate the consistency of language

[1:12:29] and any extent that Erica, Alyssa, and

[1:12:31] others can make that language

[1:12:33] consistent, I really really appreciate

[1:12:35] that. So I don't go down rabbit holes.

[1:12:42] » Are we going to do that?

[1:12:44] >> Are we going to do that? Suggest that or

[1:12:47] » Are we going to do that? Suggest that or

[1:12:47] should we give um are we going to talk

[1:12:49] about that language changes? Because in

[1:12:53] the public participation plan on page

[1:12:55] five, it says focus groups, trends, and

[1:12:58] issues, which is what you want to change

[1:13:01] to issues and opportunities to be part

[1:13:04] of the um scope of work. Is that what

[1:13:08] you're saying?

[1:13:09] >> Yeah. In fact, that's a good point. If

[1:13:11] » Yeah. In fact, that's a good point. If

[1:13:11] it occurs in more than one place, we

[1:13:13] should make changes to the entire

[1:13:14] document

[1:13:15] >> and the public participation.

[1:13:17] » and the public participation.

[1:13:17] >> Yeah. because it it says trends and

[1:13:20] » Yeah. because it it says trends and

[1:13:20] issues in

[1:13:20] >> so I should I mean if the committee is

[1:13:23] » so I should I mean if the committee is

[1:13:23] okay with it replace trends and issues

[1:13:25] with issues and opportunities in the

[1:13:27] public participation plan and then

[1:13:29] someone could do a search and catch them

[1:13:31] all that would be good. Yeah.

[1:13:36] And does that mean that because and

[1:13:40] Erica you you've done a lot of planning

[1:13:42] to me trends, issues, and opportunities

[1:13:46] are all different perspectives,

[1:13:50] but it sounds like what we're suggesting

[1:13:52] is we don't talk about trends

[1:13:54] necessarily.

[1:13:56] We talk about issues and then

[1:13:59] opportunities arising, but not

[1:14:01] necessarily trends. Like we said,

[1:14:04] housing,

[1:14:05] you know, is becoming perhaps more and

[1:14:08] more um owned by seasonal residents. So

[1:14:11] that's a trend is do we want to just

[1:14:14] give instruct since I'm doing the issues

[1:14:16] and now opportunities group

[1:14:20] >> in sorry in the scope of work or in the

[1:14:22] » in sorry in the scope of work or in the

[1:14:22] public participation plan

[1:14:24] >> in in the whole participation plan. If

[1:14:26] » in in the whole participation plan. If

[1:14:26] we're taking out trends, are we we we

[1:14:29] are we're still going to want to talk

[1:14:30] about trends, right? We're we're

[1:14:32] changing language

[1:14:36] that changes the discussion.

[1:14:39] >> Uh if I may, if is there any reason we

[1:14:41] » Uh if I may, if is there any reason we

[1:14:41] can't just say trends, issues, and

[1:14:42] opportunities?

[1:14:43] >> That's what I'm asking. I mean,

[1:14:45] » That's what I'm asking. I mean,

[1:14:45] >> I don't see they all seem to go

[1:14:47] » I don't see they all seem to go

[1:14:47] together. Trends in give uh insight to

[1:14:51] issues which open up discussion of

[1:14:54] opportunities. It's kind of a sequential

[1:14:56] thing.

[1:14:57] >> That's what I'm asking. So I would

[1:14:58] » That's what I'm asking. So I would

[1:14:58] prefer the language trends, trends,

[1:15:00] issues and opportunities.

[1:15:01] >> And the definition

[1:15:03] » And the definition

[1:15:04] of the issues and opportunities element

[1:15:06] is that it includes background

[1:15:08] information on the county and a

[1:15:10] statement of overall objectives,

[1:15:12] policies, goals, and programs of the

[1:15:14] county to guide future development and

[1:15:16] redevelopment of the county over a

[1:15:18] 20-year planning period. Background

[1:15:21] information includes population,

[1:15:23] household, and employment for CRA Cass.

[1:15:27] that the county uses in developing its

[1:15:29] comprehensive plan and demographic

[1:15:31] trends, age distribution, education

[1:15:34] levels, income levels, and employment

[1:15:37] characteristics that exist within the

[1:15:40] county.

[1:15:41] So within the definition, it does

[1:15:43] incorporate the housing and population

[1:15:47] trends and projections.

[1:15:51] So when I have those public

[1:15:53] conversations or however we do those,

[1:15:55] we'll make sure that we're going to

[1:15:57] bring up those three things and then

[1:15:58] they'll be fact checked by trends that

[1:16:01] have been identified in volume one.

[1:16:05] Does that sound right?

[1:16:08] >> Yeah.

[1:16:10] » Yeah.

[1:16:10] >> So if we may, we could move on to item

[1:16:13] » So if we may, we could move on to item

[1:16:13] 5e, which is our working relationship

[1:16:15] and scheduling with Northwest Regional

[1:16:18] Planning.

[1:16:20] Uh Emily, are you sort of able to give

[1:16:22] us the outline of how we proceed with

[1:16:25] you folks from, you know, development of

[1:16:28] contract and our first steps forward?

[1:16:31] >> The next step would be to

[1:16:35] » The next step would be to

[1:16:35] develop a contract based on the scope of

[1:16:37] work and the county board to approve

[1:16:40] that contract with Northwest Regional

[1:16:42] Planning.

[1:16:45] And typically, I think what we've done

[1:16:48] with other counties is have a more

[1:16:49] condensed version of this scope of work,

[1:16:53] like sort of a one page for the

[1:16:55] contract,

[1:16:56] and then we internally have this longer,

[1:17:00] more comprehensive document to work with

[1:17:03] um between the committee and the staff

[1:17:05] members at Northwest Regional Planning.

[1:17:07] If that sounds reasonable,

[1:17:13] » that means to me that we'll need this

[1:17:14] contract approved at the county board

[1:17:16] meeting next month.

[1:17:18] >> Otherwise, we'll have be delayed.

[1:17:20] » Otherwise, we'll have be delayed.

[1:17:20] >> So,

[1:17:23] » So,

[1:17:23] I think we have an expedited process. Uh

[1:17:26] there'll be an amendment to the already

[1:17:27] approved public participation plan at

[1:17:30] the county board meeting tomorrow. And

[1:17:32] either an amendment will pass or not

[1:17:35] pass. and then either the public

[1:17:37] participation plan will pass or not

[1:17:38] pass. Hopefully the county board will

[1:17:40] approve it and then we'll be able to

[1:17:42] move forward with the contract based on

[1:17:44] the scope of work and hopefully in

[1:17:46] August the county board will approve

[1:17:48] that contract. Erica,

[1:17:50] >> quick question just as to timeline. Will

[1:17:53] » quick question just as to timeline. Will

[1:17:53] we meet with Northwest Regional to talk

[1:17:56] about the scope of work at least as a

[1:17:59] subgroup of us to actually delineate

[1:18:02] verbiage and requirements

[1:18:05] and then bring it back to this committee

[1:18:09] as a whole to vote yes or no and then

[1:18:11] take it to the county board.

[1:18:14] >> I think that's I would prefer not to go

[1:18:17] » I think that's I would prefer not to go

[1:18:17] that route because I think it takes too

[1:18:18] much time.

[1:18:20] I think I would be looking to the county

[1:18:22] administrator to determine how it would

[1:18:26] be most expeditious to put the contract

[1:18:29] in place so that the work of the

[1:18:30] committee with boardwise regional

[1:18:32] planning can go forward. If we become

[1:18:35] too legalistic and bureaucratic, we're

[1:18:37] just not going to move forward.

[1:18:40] participation.

[1:18:41] >> Go ahead.

[1:18:42] » Go ahead.

[1:18:42] >> Would it be reasonable for me to send

[1:18:45] » Would it be reasonable for me to send

[1:18:45] the scope of services in a contract form

[1:18:49] for that smaller group to review?

[1:18:54] So, it talks about what Northwest

[1:18:56] Regional Planning will be responsible

[1:18:59] for, what Ashlin County will be

[1:19:01] responsible for, and is that certain

[1:19:05] that the county is interested in doing

[1:19:07] the public opinion digital survey

[1:19:11] with a um summary report of key

[1:19:15] findings? Should that be included?

[1:19:19] Why don't you send that to

[1:19:22] >> You could send that to

[1:19:24] » You could send that to

[1:19:24] um Dan Grady,

[1:19:28] Gary Merte,

[1:19:31] George Buset

[1:19:34] and we will take a look at it and I will

[1:19:36] disseminate it to the rest of the

[1:19:38] committee for comment and we will

[1:19:41] integrate our comments. uh and

[1:19:44] I think the focal point subject to his

[1:19:47] agreement will have to be the county

[1:19:48] administrator for the preparation and uh

[1:19:52] legal review to get legal review of the

[1:19:54] contract. So yes, that'll be fine.

[1:19:56] Please do so.

[1:19:58] >> All right, we'll plan to do that.

[1:20:03] » Okay.

[1:20:04] >> The other the scope of work you're

[1:20:05] » The other the scope of work you're

[1:20:05] talking about today at this meeting can

[1:20:08] be a working document as well.

[1:20:11] >> Thank you.

[1:20:13] » Thank you.

[1:20:13] So moving on, uh the next agenda item is

[1:20:16] to discuss um 5F which is township

[1:20:20] inputs to planning.

[1:20:23] So the question is how we're going to

[1:20:26] how would we do that? The idea was to go

[1:20:29] out to the towns

[1:20:33] and ask them to include this in their

[1:20:35] town meeting agendas.

[1:20:38] And I don't know.

[1:20:40] I think we're not doing that quite yet.

[1:20:43] Listen, have you had any progress on

[1:20:45] that?

[1:20:47] >> Um, no, not yet.

[1:20:49] » Um, no, not yet.

[1:20:49] >> So, that we'll have to figure out who's

[1:20:51] » So, that we'll have to figure out who's

[1:20:51] going to do that at our I think our

[1:20:53] August meeting is going to have to be

[1:20:56] nuts and bolts. Figure out who's going

[1:20:57] to do what meeting

[1:21:00] and that would be part of it.

[1:21:02] So if there's nothing on township

[1:21:04] inputs, then we move to um discussion of

[1:21:07] communication vehicles,

[1:21:10] anybody?

[1:21:16] Paul, how about your computer, Charlie?

[1:21:19] I I guess I kind of thought that would

[1:21:22] be

[1:21:23] that Northwest Regional will tell us

[1:21:25] what they're where they're going to have

[1:21:27] these documents and how we can feed back

[1:21:29] on them or just look at them cuz we're

[1:21:33] not going to have them somewhere. Right,

[1:21:37] >> Erica?

[1:21:38] » Erica?

[1:21:38] >> So, we have a SharePoint site set up and

[1:21:42] » So, we have a SharePoint site set up and

[1:21:42] Emily referred to it. I assume that

[1:21:44] Emily's referring to our SharePoint

[1:21:46] site. Um, are people able to access that

[1:21:50] yet? I have talked with Dan about this

[1:21:53] many times and I don't know how many

[1:21:56] times he's contacted it about it, but I

[1:22:00] mean there is already a lot of documents

[1:22:02] on there, surveys that Lisa has done,

[1:22:06] surveys of staff that I have done, um,

[1:22:09] old documents, other input, it's all

[1:22:12] there and it should be accessible to

[1:22:15] everyone. Um, I think last time George

[1:22:18] you said you couldn't access it. There

[1:22:22] was at least once that Dan himself

[1:22:24] couldn't access it on his iPad or on,

[1:22:28] you know, whatever other technology

[1:22:31] other than his desktop. So I I just need

[1:22:33] to know and if I need to go straight to

[1:22:35] it and like somehow figure this out

[1:22:38] because we have that set and I'd really

[1:22:41] like for people to be able to get to it

[1:22:43] cuz I have put many many hours into it

[1:22:46] already. Um yeah I mean I think the

[1:22:49] other things here we should definitely

[1:22:51] talk about but I think as like as a

[1:22:53] clearing house of information for us we

[1:22:56] have that.

[1:23:00] » Okay. And this is Emily from Northwest

[1:23:02] Regional Planning. I don't believe we've

[1:23:04] seen or have access to that SharePoint

[1:23:06] either.

[1:23:07] >> Okay.

[1:23:12] » What's the address to it?

[1:23:14] >> Uh, it was sent to everyone on the

[1:23:16] » Uh, it was sent to everyone on the

[1:23:16] committee at least twice.

[1:23:18] >> Okay.

[1:23:18] » Okay.

[1:23:18] >> I can send it again. I do need to double

[1:23:22] » I can send it again. I do need to double

[1:23:22] check though, Emily,

[1:23:25] if the county will add Northwest

[1:23:27] Regional to it. um because it it is

[1:23:31] within the administration drive and so

[1:23:34] then you would have access to kind of

[1:23:36] >> a bunch of other documents that you

[1:23:37] » a bunch of other documents that you

[1:23:37] probably shouldn't have access to.

[1:23:40] >> Um so I'll

[1:23:41] » Um so I'll

[1:23:42] >> if that's the case we could utilize

[1:23:44] » if that's the case we could utilize

[1:23:44] Northwest Regional Planning SharePoint

[1:23:47] for any sort of draft materials.

[1:23:49] >> Okay. I'll talk to Dan about that

[1:23:51] » Okay. I'll talk to Dan about that

[1:23:51] tomorrow and see what the best course of

[1:23:53] action is.

[1:23:55] >> Okay.

[1:23:59] uh comment on that is that um Erica did

[1:24:02] send me that I wasn't I've haven't been

[1:24:03] able to get into SharePoint yet, but

[1:24:05] Erica sent me copies of all the county

[1:24:08] departments inputs and it's terrific

[1:24:11] material. We all have feedback from all

[1:24:13] of the county departments

[1:24:16] on their views of input to the the

[1:24:18] comprehensive plan and it's it's great

[1:24:20] stuff. See, we just really all need to

[1:24:23] be able to get into SharePoint and look

[1:24:24] at this stuff because when we start

[1:24:26] getting the feedback from the towns,

[1:24:28] that'll be in the same location and a

[1:24:31] lot of our committee work will be in the

[1:24:32] same location. So, Charlie, you had to

[1:24:34] come in.

[1:24:35] >> Yeah, but I have a different one now.

[1:24:37] » Yeah, but I have a different one now.

[1:24:37] Uh, so the when we say feedback from the

[1:24:40] townships, are we looking for that in

[1:24:42] their updates to their plans or their

[1:24:45] direct input to this plan

[1:24:48] or both? Well, I think we're looking for

[1:24:50] their input to the county's perspective,

[1:24:52] but obviously that's going to have a lot

[1:24:54] to do with what they think about their

[1:24:56] own townships.

[1:24:57] >> Yeah.

[1:24:57] » Yeah.

[1:24:58] >> But they they may have comments about

[1:25:00] » But they they may have comments about

[1:25:00] county roads, things that they aren't

[1:25:01] responsible for that, but that that

[1:25:03] affect them.

[1:25:04] >> Okay.

[1:25:05] » Okay.

[1:25:05] And then the SharePoints, I I assume

[1:25:08] that

[1:25:11] our SharePoint is for inputs to their to

[1:25:16] NWRPCs. will then add them to that do

[1:25:19] their document or not or somehow and

[1:25:22] then that that'll be on the the rewrites

[1:25:26] going to be on on the NWRPC share points

[1:25:30] right the actual

[1:25:31] >> we have not figured that out yet that's

[1:25:33] » we have not figured that out yet that's

[1:25:33] what I'm going to try to figure out okay

[1:25:35] tomorrow for the fourth

[1:25:37] >> all right thank you

[1:25:42] okay anything further on communications

[1:25:45] Pat

[1:25:45] >> this is Liz I got to leave. I'm going to

[1:25:48] » this is Liz I got to leave. I'm going to

[1:25:48] work. All right. Thank you everybody.

[1:25:50] Byebye.

[1:25:51] >> Take care, Liz.

[1:25:52] » Take care, Liz.

[1:25:52] >> Bye.

[1:25:52] » Bye.

[1:25:52] >> Bye. You too.

[1:25:54] » Bye. You too.

[1:25:54] >> Yeah.

[1:25:55] » Yeah.

[1:25:55] >> You know, it occurs to me from um from

[1:25:58] » You know, it occurs to me from um from

[1:25:58] when I was teaching and we started

[1:26:01] putting lots of stuff online. I taught

[1:26:03] lots of online and ITV courses is I

[1:26:06] always tried to keep things really

[1:26:07] organized and not be redundant. Um and

[1:26:11] so there was a logical place to find

[1:26:13] stuff. I would keep those documentes

[1:26:15] those documents updated and current and

[1:26:18] I wouldn't have a bunch of what I call

[1:26:20] clutter that people had to wade through.

[1:26:21] I wouldn't have the same thing in

[1:26:23] multiple places. Some instructors say,

[1:26:24] "Oh, they can always find it here. You

[1:26:26] can find it there." And what I think

[1:26:28] about is when we get to this time of

[1:26:30] year and we started preparing for

[1:26:32] semester,

[1:26:34] um some people would say, "Oh, I got to

[1:26:36] update this and that." It was like, "Why

[1:26:37] do you have in so many places?" And of

[1:26:38] course, they don't remember to update

[1:26:40] everything. the more stuff you have out

[1:26:42] there, the more vehicles of

[1:26:43] communication, the more things that have

[1:26:46] to be updated, the more things that you

[1:26:48] have to take data information from one

[1:26:49] place and then stick it somewhere else.

[1:26:51] If you're saying, "I'm going to make all

[1:26:52] this available." So, the more places you

[1:26:55] have stuff and the more it has to be

[1:26:56] coordinated and transferred to and the

[1:26:58] more it has to be updated, not only is

[1:27:01] it a lot of work and it's what I call

[1:27:04] self-inflicted wounds because people

[1:27:05] have too much in too many places

[1:27:07] because, oh, I'm going to do it on

[1:27:08] social media. I'm going to do it all

[1:27:09] these other places. It sounds great

[1:27:12] until someone has to coordinate and do

[1:27:13] the work and keep it current, but it

[1:27:15] also means it's harder for, you know, in

[1:27:18] this case, the public to find stuff

[1:27:19] because now they're waiting through in

[1:27:21] different places looking for stuff and

[1:27:23] it all can't be current and updated at

[1:27:25] the same time because, well, somebody's

[1:27:27] got to do that. So, I actually think

[1:27:29] there's a lot of merit to to

[1:27:32] being concise both with the

[1:27:36] types of communications and how it's

[1:27:39] stored, how it's organized, how it's

[1:27:41] presented, you know, as we go through

[1:27:43] this process because too much in too

[1:27:44] many places. And then somebody might

[1:27:46] say, "Oh, I've seen three places I could

[1:27:48] give input, so I'm going to give input

[1:27:49] in all three places." Well, that isn't

[1:27:51] really statistically valid either

[1:27:53] because it's the same person doing it

[1:27:55] multiple times just because they can.

[1:27:57] So, you know, all these ways that we're

[1:28:00] going to engage the public have bearing

[1:28:02] on how many ways we're going to

[1:28:04] communicate and who's going to do the

[1:28:05] work of organizing synthesizes and

[1:28:07] keeping it up to date. They tie

[1:28:09] together. And it's nice to be ambitious,

[1:28:12] but that doesn't always translate to

[1:28:14] clarity and ease of use.

[1:28:18] >> Other comment, Erica?

[1:28:21] » Other comment, Erica?

[1:28:21] >> Sorry, this doesn't refer to Pat's

[1:28:23] » Sorry, this doesn't refer to Pat's

[1:28:23] comment. Just going back to the township

[1:28:25] inputs. Oh, just just wanted to ask I

[1:28:28] mean at what point are you imagining

[1:28:33] this George? Is it is it that we should

[1:28:36] take the first draft of the full comp

[1:28:39] plan to each of the townships

[1:28:42] or

[1:28:44] make efforts at the subcommittee level

[1:28:46] to include township feedback within

[1:28:49] their sections? Or is that what we're

[1:28:53] figuring out today? I'm just trying to

[1:28:55] >> Yeah. I know I'm against

[1:28:58] » Yeah. I know I'm against

[1:28:58] We're going to attempt to do with the

[1:28:59] townships the same thing we did with the

[1:29:01] county departments. That was as simple

[1:29:03] as that.

[1:29:09] Moving on.

[1:29:11] Is there anything more on communications

[1:29:13] to discuss

[1:29:21] » which is review of progress versus

[1:29:24] calendarized work plan which is

[1:29:25] basically laid out in

[1:29:30] I kind of check whether

[1:29:35] we're behind schedule or not behind

[1:29:38] schedule. This is at the end of the

[1:29:39] scope of work in a grid format.

[1:29:42] Going there you go.

[1:29:47] So in this layout which is just a

[1:29:50] typical kind of 18month scenario that

[1:29:54] was provided in the Bernett County

[1:29:57] example basically. So, Northwest

[1:30:00] Regional Planning provided us a c uh

[1:30:02] Paul a copy of another county's planning

[1:30:06] and the scope of work basically comes

[1:30:08] out of that. So, in our scope of work,

[1:30:11] there is this timetable. It's kind of a

[1:30:14] checklist of whether we're keeping up or

[1:30:16] not, and it's an 18-month cycle. So,

[1:30:21] if we're going to be done by the end of

[1:30:22] 2026, this would be the first month of

[1:30:24] the cycle.

[1:30:26] It'd be July. And uh so month one would

[1:30:29] be established steering committee

[1:30:32] um and internal plan review to identify

[1:30:35] content and revisions. I don't know that

[1:30:38] we've all really done that, but

[1:30:41] hopefully each uh subcommittee element

[1:30:45] is looking at their individual elements

[1:30:47] and reviewing it and taking that as

[1:30:49] input.

[1:30:51] And as far as I can see, that's where we

[1:30:53] are right now. And then in pre-planning

[1:30:56] month two here is revise and adopt

[1:30:59] public participation plan. So I think

[1:31:02] I'd say we're on schedule. And then in

[1:31:04] month three which would be August.

[1:31:07] No should be actually September would be

[1:31:10] you know set up plan update web page.

[1:31:12] Maybe we'll be able to do that maybe

[1:31:13] not. Engage local units of government

[1:31:17] and to issue press releases. So if we're

[1:31:20] get the public participation plan in

[1:31:23] place uh as of August, I think we're on

[1:31:26] target and then if on month three we

[1:31:28] have some some objectives to work for.

[1:31:30] Is there discussion?

[1:31:36] I mean to me looks to me like we're all

[1:31:38] doing okay.

[1:31:41] Being no discussion, we move on to the

[1:31:43] question of publicity

[1:31:46] because right now I don't think the

[1:31:48] public has any sense that we're doing

[1:31:50] this at all. I don't know what people's

[1:31:53] ideas might be.

[1:32:05] » Any thoughts, comments, conversation on

[1:32:07] on publicity?

[1:32:10] If not,

[1:32:11] >> I do.

[1:32:12] » I do.

[1:32:12] >> Oh, Charlie. Okay, good.

[1:32:13] » Oh, Charlie. Okay, good.

[1:32:13] >> Didn't we just talk about that earlier?

[1:32:17] » Didn't we just talk about that earlier?

[1:32:17] And we were worried about the

[1:32:22] throwing out too many ways to get that

[1:32:25] publicity for it. Is that what you meant

[1:32:28] by this or not? Uh what I mean is

[1:32:32] raising public awareness that there's a

[1:32:34] comprehensive plan review going on and

[1:32:35] they're invited to provide input and I

[1:32:38] don't think the public has has a clue

[1:32:40] that we're doing this and we have to

[1:32:41] talk about ways of informing them that

[1:32:43] we're doing it.

[1:32:44] >> That's what I thought we're going to

[1:32:46] » That's what I thought we're going to

[1:32:46] address that we the Cadillac plan that

[1:32:49] isn't aren't those all ways we were

[1:32:52] going to try to generate publicity and

[1:32:53] we're just not there yet.

[1:32:56] >> Those are ways that we can engage but

[1:32:58] » Those are ways that we can engage but

[1:32:58] there could be other ways and other

[1:32:59] ideas. Okay, Erica.

[1:33:01] >> All right, I got you. I don't have any

[1:33:02] » All right, I got you. I don't have any

[1:33:02] additional, but thank you for that

[1:33:04] clarification.

[1:33:05] >> So, one thing I' uh we talked about this

[1:33:07] » So, one thing I' uh we talked about this

[1:33:07] really briefly last time, but I would

[1:33:09] like to say I I would be very happy to

[1:33:11] write a press release for us. I think

[1:33:14] maybe the best timing for that. So, it's

[1:33:16] in the pre-planning. It's in the month

[1:33:18] three, the next month thing. It's is

[1:33:20] listed. Um, but I think it would

[1:33:24] probably be good to have a signed

[1:33:28] uh agreement with Northwest Regional so

[1:33:30] that we announce that that we have the

[1:33:34] website fully operational with actual

[1:33:36] information on it and an email so that

[1:33:39] we can refer people. If you're

[1:33:41] interested in a subcommittee, if you're

[1:33:43] interested, then let us know through

[1:33:45] email, right? so that there's like one

[1:33:47] one portal to the county for um that uh

[1:33:52] but then I would also suggest that we

[1:33:54] use some sort of photo right we it it's

[1:33:58] people don't sort of focus in on a story

[1:34:01] if you don't include at least one image

[1:34:03] I think so if there are suggestions for

[1:34:05] photos if or if we want to do the tree

[1:34:07] planting before that you know I just

[1:34:09] think the the timing maybe needs to come

[1:34:12] just slightly later because we need to

[1:34:14] have things to declare there and places

[1:34:16] for people to go within that press

[1:34:19] release.

[1:34:35] Other thoughts and comments?

[1:34:38] Well, if you're going to plant a tree,

[1:34:39] you know, you can plant them spring or

[1:34:41] fall, but in the fall when things have

[1:34:43] gone dormant. So, don't, you know, in

[1:34:44] the middle of August, plant your tree

[1:34:46] because that would raise eyebrows, at

[1:34:49] least among some.

[1:34:52] >> So, the best time to plant a tree is in

[1:34:53] » So, the best time to plant a tree is in

[1:34:53] the spring.

[1:34:55] >> Most trees get planted in the spring,

[1:34:56] » Most trees get planted in the spring,

[1:34:56] but you can plant in the fall, too.

[1:34:58] Depends on the species to some extent

[1:35:00] and the size, but but certainly not in

[1:35:03] August.

[1:35:04] >> Okay.

[1:35:06] » Okay.

[1:35:06] Uh it strikes me that a pressure release

[1:35:09] at the time of the signing of the

[1:35:11] contract with Northwest Regional

[1:35:12] Planning would be a good announcement

[1:35:15] that county is as is launching his

[1:35:18] comprehensive plan effort and is uh

[1:35:20] contracted with Northwest Regional

[1:35:22] Planning to to assist with this work

[1:35:24] that worthy of a press release and and

[1:35:28] then other things could follow. I don't

[1:35:29] think we have to do it all at once.

[1:35:31] Other ideas, comments?

[1:35:41] Item six on the agenda is the scheduled

[1:35:43] next meeting, which I have tenatively

[1:35:45] put down here for uh Monday, August 18.

[1:35:50] That's agreeable to folks. I think we

[1:35:52] just stick with that date

[1:35:56] and then we get to our second public

[1:35:58] comment period. I don't see anybody

[1:36:00] online for public comment. I don't see

[1:36:03] anybody present for public comment. So

[1:36:06] then

[1:36:07] we're down to item eight.

[1:36:09] >> George, I might have something August

[1:36:10] » George, I might have something August

[1:36:10] 18th, but I don't have my calendar here,

[1:36:12] so don't be surprised if I email you.

[1:36:14] >> Okay. Um,

[1:36:17] » Okay. Um,

[1:36:17] >> this is autumn at Northwest Regional

[1:36:19] » this is autumn at Northwest Regional

[1:36:19] Planning.

[1:36:20] >> Go ahead.

[1:36:21] » Go ahead.

[1:36:21] >> U, we have a standing meeting every

[1:36:22] » U, we have a standing meeting every

[1:36:22] third Monday at one. We actually me and

[1:36:26] Emily had to step out of that meeting

[1:36:28] today to attend this one. Um so that

[1:36:32] normally would provide a conflict um at

[1:36:37] 1:00.

[1:36:41] » Uh how about 2:00?

[1:36:48] » No. Hello. Uh potentially um our

[1:36:53] standing um meeting is actually out of

[1:36:56] the office. We normally would return

[1:37:00] on those at about 3:30.

[1:37:05] >> Okay. Maybe you could look at um at how

[1:37:07] » Okay. Maybe you could look at um at how

[1:37:07] flexible your your your operations are.

[1:37:10] It's very difficult to schedule this

[1:37:12] committee meeting

[1:37:13] >> and a lot of conflicts here. So, um, I

[1:37:16] » and a lot of conflicts here. So, um, I

[1:37:16] will look at alternatives, but for right

[1:37:18] now, I'm going to have to hold this date

[1:37:20] because it's very, very difficult to get

[1:37:22] this committee together.

[1:37:25] >> Okay. No.

[1:37:26] » Okay. No.

[1:37:26] >> Mhm.

[1:37:27] » Mhm.

[1:37:27] >> And so then, no public comment. Uh, and

[1:37:31] » And so then, no public comment. Uh, and

[1:37:31] there's committee review of public

[1:37:33] comments because we're required to do

[1:37:34] that. And then there's other business

[1:37:37] and future agenda recommendations.

[1:37:39] Anybody have an agenda item they want to

[1:37:41] put down for next time?

[1:37:46] And final round robin of comments.

[1:37:49] Anybody want to do a summary comment?

[1:37:54] Pat,

[1:37:56] >> you know, Bayfield County kind of kept

[1:37:58] » you know, Bayfield County kind of kept

[1:37:58] theirs shorter and they had some kind of

[1:38:00] nice display in materials and whatever

[1:38:02] that seemed to have caught people's

[1:38:04] attention more than the usual comp plan

[1:38:06] updates. There's something to be said

[1:38:08] for brevity. Um, I think Bayfield County

[1:38:12] benefited from that.

[1:38:14] You know, I grew up in Bayfield County,

[1:38:16] still have land there, so I actually saw

[1:38:18] more of what they did than what Ashlin

[1:38:21] County did. Um, people don't read long

[1:38:24] documents.

[1:38:27] Revity is

[1:38:29] >> Yeah, I concur with that observation.

[1:38:30] » Yeah, I concur with that observation.

[1:38:30] I'd really like to the city of Ashlin's

[1:38:32] comprehensive plan. It's much uh

[1:38:34] shorter, easier to read. So when we get

[1:38:37] to boiling things down, we might might

[1:38:39] consider that.

[1:38:41] Other summary comments. If not, a motion

[1:38:44] to adjurnn, please.

[1:38:47] Charlie moves to adjurnn. Second.

[1:38:52] Is that Gary?

[1:38:54] Oh, Paul. Paul seconds. Okay. Second.

[1:38:58] Okay.

[1:39:00] >> And all in favor of adjournment I post.

[1:39:04] » And all in favor of adjournment I post.

[1:39:04] I

[1:39:04] >> thank you everybody.

Planning Committee Meeting

Transcript