HomeMy WebLinkAbout~Master - Special Meeting of the Ames City Council 01/08/2010 01/09MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING
OF THE AMES CITY COUNCIL
AMES, IOWA JANUARY 8, 2010
The Ames City Council met in special session at 5:30 p.m. on the 8th day of January, 2010, in the
Parks and Recre ation Act ivity Room, 1500 Gateway Hills Park Drive, pursuant to law with Mayor
Ann Campbell presiding and the following Council members present: Davis, Goodman, Larson,
Mahayni, Orazem, and Wacha. Ex officio Member Keppy was also present.
Mayor Campbell introduced Donna Gilligan, who facilitated the goal-setting session. Ms. Gilligan
stated that the desired outcomes from this work session were:
1.To increase the understanding of the style, personal approach, decision-making preferences, and
expectations for giving and receiving feedback of all Council members
2.To understand what each other would like to accomplish as an Ames City Council member
3.To clarify the role of the Mayor and the Ames City Council in relation to the public, each other,
and the staff
4.To come to agreement on the goals and tasks for the coming years
Prior to this session, Ms. Gilligan had met or held a telephone conversation with the Mayor and each
Council member. From these conversations, she stated that she had made the following
assumptions:
1.The City Council needs to be an effective governing body – that is what community members
want; they want leadership.
2.Each Council member comes to the Ames City Council with good intentions with a desire to
serve.
3.The City Council members need each other to be effective as individual members.
4.Teamwork is essential. The Council members must identify and agree upon clear expectations,
goals and objectives, share leadership, demonstrate effective communication, manage resources
effectively, and create a safe environment. The members must establish trust and be
trustworthy.
Council members shared their viewpoints on Ms. Gilligan’s assumptions. Several topics surfaced
that needed additional time for further discussion and were put in the “parking lot”:
1.Creating a community vision
2.Definition of effective governing body
3.Perception vs. reality
4.Methodologies for engaging the public
5.How did past Councils do with level of discussion and contribution from individuals
6.Development bench marking (data, reality, perception)
7.How to balance what you believe is the right decision and the voice of the people standing in
front of you
2
Ground Rules. Council members shared behaviors that they expected of each other in order to be
an effective governing body, namely:
1.Be respectful
2.Be amicable
3.Listening; really hear what others are saying
4.Willingness to compromise
5.Willingness to decide
6.Good sense of humor
7.Strong open dialogue
8.Obligation to voice opinions
9.Look at the collective whole, not just the projects you support
10.Don’t pull surprises
Ms. Gilligan shared ten themes that she had heard during interviews with the Council members. To
qualify as a “theme,” at least four members had to express the same idea.
1.Need to increase tax base, economic development, and jobs
2.Indicated excitement for the coming years
3.Hopeful that members will be able to work together effectively
4.Shift in direction from the past Council
5.Government should serve as an “enabler;” Council should say “why not” and be easy to work
with
6.Policies and procedures that allow people to work well with the City
7.Anticipate moving closer together, i.e., voting
8.Be policy-makers, not micro-makers
9.Do not really know each other very well
10.Do not want to monopolize the conversation
The meetin g recess ed at 7:15 p.m. and rec onvened a t 7:27 p.m.
A team-building activity was conducted.
Ms. Gilligan asked new Council members what they learned when they were “knocking on doors.”
She also asked the returning members for their perspectives. Comments that had been heard by the
newly elected Council members (Peter Orazem, Tom Wacha, and Jeremy Davis) during their
campaigns were shared. The returning members summarized their City Council experiences.
Mayor Campbell talked about the role she plays, specifically di scussing making appointments to
Boards and Commissions. She sought constructive criticism from the City Council members on the
way she runs meetings. Council Member Davis asked the Mayor if she was more of an empowering
or enabling person. Mayor Campbell said she sees her job as making sure that everyone gets heard.
In preparation for tomorrow’s session, Ms. Gilligan reque sted tha t the Coun cil members contemplate
the role of the Mayor. She also asked that the members review the Council’s current goals and come
prepared to discuss what is an effective governing body.
The meetin g adjourn ed at 9:23 p.m.
3
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING
OF THE AMES CITY COUNCIL
AMES, IOWA JANUARY 9, 2010
The Ames City Council met in special session at 8:00 a.m. on the 9th day of January, 2010, in the
Parks and Recreation Activity Room, 1500 Gateway Hills Park Drive, pursuant to law with Mayor
Ann Campbell presiding and the following Council members present: Davis, Goodman, Larson,
Mahayni, Orazem, and Wacha. Ex officio Member Keppy was also present.
Facilitator Donna Gilligan showed a video entitled “Brain Power,” narrated by John Houseman. The
video discussed principles of perception. The Council members shared their thoughts on the skill
sets used to get to the facts. It was agreed that they have to get beyond their perceptions; the ability
to ask relevant questions and truly listen is key. It was noted by Ms. Gilligan that, with three
incumbents and three new members, the make-up of this Council allows for continuity as well as
new perspective. An exercise was conducted to help the members understand the diversity of the
group’s approaches to problem-solving and decision-making. Ms. Gilligan provided an analysis of
the results of the exercise.
Discussion ensued on how to get all viewpoints out in the open in a timely manner. Possibilities
shared by the members were:
1.Make the agendas shorter. It was suggested by Council members that staff presentations are not
always necessary, and staff members do not need to read the Council Action Form during the
meeting. City Manager Schainker noted that staff makes the presentation for the public’s
benefit. Council members concurred that staff should summarize the report and the City
Manager should re-emphasize the most important points.
2.A Council member should not monopolize the discussion. If the points have already been made,
they do not need to be made again. It was suggested that the Mayor could recognize when that
is being done and recommend that the discussion end. If Council members wish to continue the
discussion, a member or members will request that the discussion continue. Council Member
Goodman suggested that the Mayor ask if the Council members feel all viewpoints have been
aired.
Ms. Gilligan added that, in the individual interviews, the majority of the Council members told her
that they wanted strong leadership from the Mayor. Mr. Goodman shared that approximately 10%
of the time, he did not feel a sense of neutrality from the Mayor. Mayor Campbell stated her desire
to be procedurally consistent, e.g., not accept ing public input on second and third readings of
ordinances, unless new information would be revealed. Council Member Larson said that Council
members should not take it personally if the Mayor feels that no new information is being given and
ends the discussion on a topic. City Attorney Marek read an excerpt from the Iowa Code regarding
what is within the purview of the Mayor. Council Member Mahayni said he believes that there
needs to be a le vel of trust in the Mayor fro m Council me mbers. He sees the Mayor as being the
“face” of the City; the fact that the Mayor does not have a vote does not mean that there is no power
associated with the position. He also noted that community members form perceptions from
watching Council meetings. Council Member Larson concurred. He said the percept ion of some
would be that the Mayor’s sole job was to conduct an expeditious bala nced meeting fr om a
parliamentary point of view. He personally believes that the Mayor is the leader of the Council and
should have the right to weigh in on issues. Mr. Larson asked the City Attorney for an opinion. Mr.
Marek confirmed that the Code places no limitations on a mayor advocating a position; the
4
limitation is only on voting. Council Member Goodman clarified that he had talked to the Mayor
on how his perception of her lack of neutrality affects him. Council Member Orazem expressed his
opinion that the Mayor has the right to offer input on issues; there is no statutory pr ohibition. Ms.
Gilligan encouraged each Council member, individually, to offer comments regarding this issue to
the Mayor.
Discussion then moved to Council referrals to staff and how items get placed on an agenda. City
Manager Schainker emphasized that every referral requires an amount of analysis and follow-up
by staff. He wants to make sure that staff time is directed towards the issues that the collecti ve
Council wants resolved. In summary, the Council needs to define priorities in order for the staff to
direct energy towards those.
The meeting recessed at 10:30 a.m. and reconvened at 10:40 a.m.
Goals. Facilitator Gilligan asked for consensus as to what the Mayor and City Council expectation
was regarding goals, specifically, if they wanted to continue discussi on of the goals set by the past
City Council. Mayor Campbell noted that some of the goals remain, but were not listed as they had
been “institutionalized,” e.g., had already been included i n the City budget.
The goals previously set or reaffirmed at the last goal update held on January 12, 2008, were
identified as follows:
1. Rejuvenate Campustown
2. Go “Green” to Minimize Impact on Global Climate Change
3. Neighborhoods
4. Promote “One Community”
5. “Brand” Ames [explore comparables (advantages in other cities to advantages in Ames)]
6. Define Desired Growth
Ms. Gilligan shared comments about the current goals that had been made by the Council members
in the pre-meeting interviews. She specifically noted that the majority of the Council members
placed more emphasis on expanding the City’s tax base, economic development, and job
development.
Attempts were made to get consensus as to which goals should remain, which resulted in the
following.
1. Rejuvenate Campustown: Should continue (Unanimous)
2.“Go Green:” Continue (6-1). Council Member Wa cha noted that all tasks listed had been
accomplished. Council Member Orazem also questioned the benefit of the City conducting a
Global Warming Emissions Inventory. It was concurred that the goal would continue with
modifications.
3.Strengthen Neighborhoods. Should continue: 4-4. Council Member Davis saw this goal as
being a subset of others. Council Member Larson would like to wordsmith it slightly. Council
Members Orazem and Wacha cited issues with the tasks listed.
4.Promote One Community. Should continue: 3-4. Those not giving support felt that this was
a subset of other goals, and more discussion was needed.
5.Brand Ames. Should continue: 3-4. It was agreed that more discussion was needed.
6.Define Desired Growth. 3-4. It was concurred that the title needed to change as did some of the
5
steps to achieve the goal.
The Mayor and Council members were asked to identify new goals that did not fit under
“Rejuvenate Campustown” or “Go Green,” which were the two current goals that received the most
support. Ideas were as follows:
1.Streamline and improve government process.
2.Encourage private sector growth.
3.Strengthen, protect, and preserve City neighborhoods through community initiatives.
4.Create a common community vision.
5.Increase cooperative ventures with Story County, Iowa State University, and other regional
entities.
6.Work towards a “united” Ames.
7.Promote economic development.
8.Undergo a visioning and branding process.
9.Enhance Ames.
Attempts were made to arrive at consensus on which ideas to include as goals. The following goals
were ultimately set:
1.Rejuvenate Campustown.
2.“Go Green.”
3.Strengthen and protect neighborhoods for a United Ames.
4.Further streamline and improve government processes.
5.Promote economic development.
6.Create a community vision.
The meetin g recess ed at 12:1 0 p.m. and re convened at 12:20 p .m.
The Mayor and City Council members began listing the tasks necessary to be accomplished in order
to reach each goal, as follows:
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
1.Increase available shovel-ready land for industrial development in six (6) to 12 months
“GO GREEN”
1.Collaborate actively with ISU to promote “Go Green” efforts for community
2.Collaborate with community groups to actively educate community on sustainability efforts
(what the City is currently doing)
3.Promote sustainability community-wide (outside of City government)
4.Trail development
REJUVENATE CAMPUSTOWN
1.Intermodal
2.Partnership with ISU and private sector
3.Endorse current redevelopment efforts
4.Establish a cooperative plan for services provided in Campustown (versus on Campus)
It was acknowledged that consensus was not being achieved; therefor e, due to the lateness of the
hour, Ms. Gilligan announced that the City Manager would have the suggested tasks typed and
6
distribute same to the Mayor and Council. This goal-setting session will continue next Saturday,
January 1 6, 2010, at 8 AM, in th e Parks & R ecreat ion Activ ity Room.
A Plus/Delta evaluation was performed on the goal-setting session, with the following results:
[
Good goals
Good dialogue
Getting to know each other
Not rushing decisions
Understanding the complexity of what lies ahead
Postponing final decisions by a week; giving time to think about them
Baklava
•
Improve senses of humor
Break up the “heavy” stuff (goals/exercise/goals/exercise…)
Tried to move too fast on goals and objectives
More discussion on the “why” of goals
ADJOURNMENT: The meetin g adjourn ed at 2:20 p.m.
______________________________________________________________________
Diane R. Voss, City Clerk Ann H. Campbell, Mayor