My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Meetings Steering Committee(Folders 1-2)
>
CS_Courthouse Square
>
Meetings Steering Committee(Folders 1-2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/20/2012 7:37:49 AM
Creation date
8/5/2011 3:34:36 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Building
RecordID
10093
Title
Meetings Steering Committee(Folders 1-2)
BLDG Date
1/1/1999
Building
Courthouse Square
BLDG Document Type
Committee
Project ID
CS9801 Courthouse Square Construction
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
615
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Starr Garland suggested that it would help to have these reports sent to <br />Steering Committee members betore the presentations are actually given <br />so that they can be looked a~ ahead of time. ~ <br />Valerie Volimar was asked again to review her suggestions for format. <br />She recommended that the Executive Summary from each department <br />be limited to one page, and mentioned five other areas of consideration: <br />1) The agency mission statement. <br />2) Current information about functions, staffing, faciliry. <br />3) Future growth and changes being proJected, and why. <br />Staffing, population, _ funding. Factors of change or variation. <br />Basis of assumptions. Matching functions to facilities (like that <br />used for planning of jail). Adjacency requirements. <br />4) Options considered. <br />5) Actual recommendations. <br />Appendix: Personnel, reports, minutes of ineetings. <br />Ken Sherman said he thought that was a great outline. Valerie Volimar <br />said she might want some help on future growth projections. Jack <br />Munro said he might be able to help with that. Maynard Hammer <br />suggested that tables be used when possible so that easy comparisons <br />could be made. Valerie Vollmar agreed that that could be done with <br />square footage and dollar costs, for example. <br />Ruth Johnson asked if resources were to ba included. Randy Curtis said <br />it would be desirable to go back to the consultanYs report in some cases <br />but that information wouldn't be easy to come by. <br />Ruth Johnson asked about reveriue sources and thought they should be <br />identified. Ken Roudybush agreed that they were every bit as important <br />as other informati0n. Valerie Vollmar asked if a summary of that <br />iriformation should be included. <br />Ken Sherman suggested that one alternative would be to bring back a <br />formaY in draft form. It was agreed that time was of the essence here. <br />Fritz Skirvin mentioned that the format should include somewhere a <br />response to the matter of benefits to the public. Ken Sherman agreed <br />that when all the information is in, subcommittees should come back with <br />"a campaign speech." Larry Oglesby thought the Executive Summary <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.