Next Steps for Community Meetings on NE Seb

[dsolnit]

Dear folks -
I heard a lot of general agreement at the May 6 workshop, and was encouraged by the positive tone and excellent thinking that emerged. However, we only had two hours, and many attendees expressed the desire for more time to further develop the criteria we discussed. Some proposed that interested members of the community meet outside of the "official" city-sponsored (and costly) workshops. The consultants, DC&E, agreed to accept additional input through June 1, the latest date they felt they could do so and stick to the scheduled June 22 public meeting to present a draft plan before City Council and Planning Commission.

We have only three weeks to pull this off. I don't know if community meetings can be put together in this short timeframe, but in the interest of seeing it happen, I offer the following thoughts about how to get started. These are just suggestions, and I'm happy to see anyone improve on them. However, if we are to do this, we probably have to begin by this weekend. (I am willing to commit a limited amount of time to help with coordination and facilitation, which seems like the way I can be most useful.)

Here are my suggestions for next steps.


NEXT MEETING:
I suggest this Saturday, May 13, from 10 or 10:30am until early- or mid-afternoon.
Meeting on Saturday makes sense, since that is when people showed up for the City-sponsored workshop.
LOCATION: I think Hardcore Coffee (suggested on the EcoVision list) does not make sense - it's not large enough or quiet enough for even a short focused meeting of potentially 20-30 people, much less a long one.
Instead I would suggest the community room at the library, or the space on Industrial Drive that we used for the Friday May 5 evening event, or the big back area behind Coffee Catz (is that still open during the construction?), or ...? Someplace low or no cost, fairly quiet and free of distractions.


OUTREACH:
We should decide on meeting time and place ASAP. I suggest that tomorrow (Wednesday) *someone* (any volunteers?) get the attendance list for last Saturday's meeting from DC&E (and maybe for prior meetings as well?) in electronic form, and that *another someone* write and send an email invitation to all on the list no later than Thursday, and post it to WACCO and other appropriate listserves, and that we then each forward the invitation to the folks we know are interested. I also suggest that several *someones* create and post flyers around town on Thursday.

(Xochi and Lauren, who put many hours into the EcoVision Sebastopol event, are doing what they can, but are both extremely busy. I can only do small bits of this, thus the request for volunteers.)


TIMELINE:
Deadline for input to DC&E is June 1, so I suggest the following working timeline:

May 13, Saturday -
Initial meeting to define scope of work (how much can we realistically do?), and form working groups around 4-8 specific focus areas. (I don't believe that a single large group can deal with all the various aspects in the very short time available.) We should figure out the focus areas together, but the working groups might end up being something like:
Flooding/Fill/Hydrology/Laguna Impacts,
Traffic/Transportation/Walkability,
Energy/Waste/Building materials & techniques,
Housing/Affordability/Density/Open space & Civic uses,
Economics/Green Business/City Revenue/Wages/Social Equity,
Etc.

May 14 - 26
Working groups meet as often as needed, probably several evenings, and maybe on Sat 20th, to draft criteria for their focus. If possible, drafts sent out by 25th or 26th.

Sat May 27 -
Large group meets all day (with breaks!) to review and revise drafts from working groups.

Sun May 28 through Wed May 31 - Revised language finalized and formatted, given to DC&E by June 1.
Copies to be posted to all and given to City Council, Planning Commission, and city staff.


PROCESS QUESTION:
An open invitation to the first meeting is the most inclusive approach. However, if we have a big turnout at the initial meeting, with folks who are not familiar with the issues and various constraints (ecological, legal, zoning, financial, etc), we run the risk of creating large, unweildy working groups that get bogged down and don't produce useful (or any) results.

An alternative would be to hand-pick folks with some background to form small, more effective working groups, quickly create a first draft (maybe with some options to choose from) and bring that to a larger open meeting for everyone to use as a starting point to work from in deciding final criteria. Given time constraints, this might be quicker and more effective, but it might also be less democratic and runs the risk of replicating the sense of exclusion felt in January, which could make the outcome less legitimate.

I can see merits to both approaches, but I generally favor more open and democratic process. Perhaps we could go with option A, but make a point of specifically asking folks with knowledge, experience, or background to come and join a working group.

Your comments, suggestions, and willingness to get involved?

[Deb]

Sorry for the late reply. I am interested in participating.

Is there a meeting today?