5 - Summary information from the August 24th Retreat
September 28, 2004
TO: Tracy Winfree, Jim Rettew and members of the Transportation Advisory Board
(TAB)
FROM: Molly Tayer, retreat facilitator
th
RE: Summary Information from the August 24 Retreat
I want to report back to you on what I heard during your retreat discussion evening. I
have three areas where I hope to provide input for your consideration;
1) An overview of the actual retreat effort
2) Action Items
3) Information to share with City Council
This information comes from my flip chart notes and observations during and after the
retreat. It is provided as reflective feedback. If it helps – please use it!
1) THE RETREAT OVERVIEW
Please note that the flip charts are attached for your verbatim reference. These overview
notes are a bit interpretive and I welcome you to “steep” on my interpretation or piggy
back upon it and build your own.
WHAT IS WORKING:
The list of recorded comments from this section demonstrates that the:
staff support and the administrative organization of the TAB meetings serves the
TAB’s performance well;
staff is very professional, dedicated, above par;
meeting format and public input is well organized;
field trips are helpful;
pattern of the briefing at one meeting and public hearing at one of the next meetings
is very helpful;
respect and preparedness as additional working attributes on behalf of the board
members; and
board members are impressed with the TMP, and debate whether it is your success or
staffs.
This sounds like a good infrastructure for your board. The foundation for you to get
materials and perform your review and advisement role is sound.
WHAT NEEDS TO BE FIXED
A number of the comments in this list were later identified as requiring administrative
fixes, such as…
Member orientation;
1
Characterizing informal polling at public meetings to better serve the TAB members
understanding of where the affected community is on an issue – polling is just one
element of information and may not be a scientific, representative sampling of
opinion;
Limiting presentations of items that have been in discussion or in the TAB
information packet for a length of time;
Being sure that the two meeting format tracks with the public’s need for time to
comment or participate;
Creating ground rules for the public comment period that clearly states “No personal
attacks.”
ISSUES OF DISCUSSION
The issue/interest kept in play during the retreat discussion was … how and when you
discuss. There were threecomments regarding quality/quantity of discussion.
1—Do we have too much of a mutual admiration society?
2---Chair would like to see more discussion between TAB members.
3--- Adding solutions when issues are coming up for decisions…
“Engineering on the fly”
Board members may need to consider if they are attempting to add in new solutions as a
way to avoid making a tough decision. A specific example to illustrate this is the Darley-
Grinnell median decision.
You discussed that there also may be times when, as the TAB has progressed through the
public process and analysis of staff information, you may have new information and may
want to test other solutions or ideas. This prompted all of you to query if there is a way
to identify decision-points where there is still open-area for evaluation or decision-points
where the TAB may be asking additional questions as a form of avoidance.
This may sound too simplistic, but I would offer that you can begin by ‘living in these
questions for awhile’ as you gather more data about the behavior/practice. When you are
under a deadline, any avoidance behavior may become more obvious. But as the quality
of a particular solution set is ultimately the measurement of your success, versus how
many meetings it took you to arrive upon the “right solution,” it makes sense for all of
you to chew on this question a little.
2
THE BIG PICTURE
Jim expressed his interest in affecting big policy issues and some frustration at the
amount of time spent on curb cuts and small-system repairs. The group noted that these
are important too, and often come to the TAB from City Council as more strategic
evaluation is required to make a decision about a particular treatment of remedy.
The group did agree that there are larger issue areas you would like to influence or
champion, should the opportunity be presented. These include:
TMP implementation
.By the close of the meeting, most if not all of the TAB
members agreed that this would be the best placement and organizing theme for
a number of “big picture” level initiative
Getting in front of Council.
Consider what issues will be important to bring to
Council’s attention and consider how to communicate with Council.
th
Being involved in land use discussions.
Comp Plan Update – 30 Street Transit
corridor/area; Transportation Network plans may be good avenues.
Downtown Parking issues.
TAB raised the issue of the Downtown Parking issue
and feeling the need to have a voice in that discussion.Tracy spoke up to this
comment informed TAB that there will be a Downtown Parking Study coming
up with “the dust settles” from recent redevelopment projects and parking
structure construction. The TAB requested that they be involved in such a
study. Tracy committed to making that request on TAB’s behalf.
Concern for lack of TAB involvement in the Airport Master Plan.
One board
member expressed interest in being involved in the Airport Master Plan as a
way to track staff work on the study. Tracy suggested that this is an area that is
NOT a part of the Transportation review obligation of TAB. The Airport serves
a recreation and business function, not a transportation function.
2) ACTION ITEMS
These are summary lists of identified action items for staff and TAB members:
MEETING LOGISITICS / STAFF FOLLOW-UP
Characterizing correctly the use of informal polling in community meetings,
Checking to assure public participation needs are met in the two-meeting structure,
Improving new board member orientations and information,
Creating ground rules to help TAB chair control personal attacks in meetings from
public.
BOARD:
Focus on the “big picture” of the TMP and develop goal statements that tie the
interests of the group to the priorities of the TMP implementation. Add a periodic
agenda item to check in on TMP implementation and consider how the TAB is
implementing the TMP.
3
Learn to facilitate conversation across the group while issues are still forming in
front of the board. Live in the interest of revisiting solution options versus
“decision avoidance.”
Present some of the TAB work plan interests to Council; to assure they too are in
tune with the TMP objectives.
3) Information to share with City Council
There is some interest in the group to have a sense of connectedness to City Council; for
whom you serve. In many communities, this is done through a regular joint study session
or dinner gathering where there is a casual discussion of Transportation interest of
concern to all.
If this kind of time is not available on the City Council schedule, perhaps you could
supply the City Council members with a semi-annual report on the big picture items
which guide TAB initiatives and a board action update detailing issues in review.
If there is a consensus to place some of the group’s concerns and interest in front of the
City Council, this may be a process best managed by having the chair and the
Transportation Director determine which approach to use.
4
Appendix:
Tab Retreat flip chart notes
Intros- ideas that make a difference
o
2003 Debrief – what worked, what needs to be fixed; done better, what does not
o
work and could be jettisoned
Charter: role of TAB
o
Big Picture/Small Picture
o
What do we need to stay focused? … to advise and influence? …to
o
communicate?
Outcomes and Next Steps
o
Introductions: something you were a part of, an idea you had, something that made you
feel really effective – able to shape things and make a difference.
Mike S on exit: making the TMP into a document that would speak to the average
citizen; have meaning to the users.
Jim R: The ‘Volunteerathon.” Raised 50k hours of volunteer time for non-profits in
Boulder. Great experience in “social entrepreneurism.”
Bill: Process engineering… keeping an engineering work group focused on the needs of
a client when people were pushing to provide and go to work on solution.
Krista: walking the neighborhood to build a neighborhood Eco-pass program. Lessons
learned about the rich and poor in our community and the barriers to addressing transit
costs for those who need it.
Robin: directing a play and getting people to come together in the roles. Providing
clarity and communicating my vision…
Tracy: tough family intermediary work when father-in-law was dying. Getting
siblings/children to let go of their expectations for his life decision and see the common
interest of love and what “life with dignity” meant to Dad.
Lynn: Chairing a board during a time of staff and board transition. Assuring people
stayed engaged during a challenging year and the organization got what it needed.
Brandt: “building world peace with charm and $100 bills.” … and shared meteorological
data.
Molly: learning the importance of “listen to learn.” Putting the vision of others before
my own.
5
What is working?
Lots of respect between board members; board and staff
o
Meetings are very organized. Handling public input well. Input from public is
o
well organized.
Staff working with board really well. Keep us well informed, work with us all
o
around the issues.
Even when staff has some ownership/investment in a particular
o
solution/outcome… willing to open it up and rethink it with us.
Staff is VERY professional, way above par…
o
Two meeting format: briefing and then the public hearing.
o
The TMP is an award winner! TAB lead the TMP update and it was well done.
o
Effective work with study committee, great work with City Council – study
session was great.
Members of board felt that staff really led this.
Randall is wonderful.
o
Board is prepared for meetings and ready in advance. Jim finds people have
o
looked at their packets when he calls around before the meetings.
Times on the agenda- visual barometer of time needs and how it is going.
o
Agenda setting- chair and staff doing a good job.
o
Field trips.
o
What needs to be looked at; fixed?
How can we be sure that the two meeting format tracks with public participation
needs? Does public nee to come two times? It is good to vet out where greatest areas
of public concern.Come back to later
Too much of a mutual admiration society. Concern that we are not challenging
one another enough.See “discussion” information
Adding in solutions when the issue is coming up for decisions. TAB members
making last minute recommendations – “engineering on the fly.”
Orientation of new members. Need to review how it all works.
Informal polling at public meetings makes JR nervous. Is there a fix for this to
make it more useful? Staff will explore other ways to do this.
Chair would like to see more discussion between TAB members at meetings.
Items that are really well research, that have been seen in the packets 2 or 3
times... do not need lengthy presentations. Some Tab members are sensitive to the
public’s need for these presentations.
Should we have an upfront groundrule that tells people who are speaking at the
meetings - “No personal attacks”?
More maps when possible.
6
What needs to go away?
NTMP process needs to be revisited. The super-flow chart process needs to go away!
Charter info from Tracy
“Big Picture” - Jim explains his feeling that a lot of time gets invested in curb cuts and
small picture issues, and he would like to be able to work on larger policy issues. More
exciting for him.
[Can the TAB use the TMP as a tool for hands-on check in on big picture goals?
Alt fuels interest in public transit….
Other time to do this? ]
“Big Picture”
TMP implementation- 4 specific areas
Can we be more proactive? Get in front of Planning Board and city council regarding
Trans impact issues? Advise council more
? Why is the Transportation Study group off line from TAB?
? How to be more involved in land use discussions?
th
? Comp Plan Update – 30 Street Transit corridor/area
? Transportation Network plans?
? Downtown Parking is looming
? Why are we not engaged in the Airport master plan?
“Small picture”
Tends to be “all projects assigned for Tab review by City Council.”
Can we look at process for improved transit network in North Boulder?
7
MEDIUM PICTURE ISSUE:
How do we get poor people bus passes?
SUMMARY DISCUSSION
Re: Discussion needs during meeting
Ways to generate some more discussion
Questions from staff to help facilitate thinking out loud?
Chair would like people on TAB with differing perspectives to challenge one
another
Chair could facilitate this more
? Is discussion always needed? When and why?
Re: “Engineering on the fly”
Are we challenging solutions because they need it, because as community reps we
should?
Are we avoiding a tough decision?
Problems to explore….
When is there needed discussion?
When is generating new solutions good?
When is generating new solutions avoidance?
Ideas to jog the discussion—
Questions from staff to ask for more input…
Could we invite community interests to address us early? Bring their thoughts to
group before solution is on the table?
Can we get people on the board to challenge one another?
MT recommends all read “Leadership Without Easy Answers” by Heifetz
Prob Statement: How can we assure we are operating EFFECTIVELY/EFFICIENTLY
in our advisement role while still offering challenges and alternative approaches to
improve the solution set?
8
TAB FOCUS for 2004/05
BIG PICTURE:
SMALLER GOALS FOR THE NEXT YEAR
ISSUES OF CONCERN: