My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Study Session Agenda and Packet 2013 05 28
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
STUDY SESSIONS (45.010)
>
2010-2019 City Council Study Sessions
>
2013 City Council Study Sessions
>
City Council Study Session Agenda and Packet 2013 05 28
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/16/2021 2:50:00 PM
Creation date
6/13/2013 11:22:38 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITYWIDE
Original Hardcopy Storage
6C6
Supplemental fields
Test
SSAGPKT 2013 05 28
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br />CITY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION <br />SUBJECT: DISCUSSION – CONSIDERATION OF 2014 GOALS <br /> <br />DATE: MAY 28, 2013 PAGE4 OF 5 <br />staff suggests that each Council member submit their ranking of the objectives using <br />this approach. Staff would then calculate the total of all Council member’s scores and <br />review the results during a regular Council meeting. The result would indicate which <br />proposals have sufficient support to pursue, and which require additional information or <br />do not have the support needed to pursue at this time. <br /> <br />Another approach, also reflected in the attached table, would be to use a matrix <br />suggested by Council Member Loo and classify each objective as: 1) Basic or Core <br />Services (such as police, water and sewer), 2) Maintenance of Effort (such as park <br />maintenance, open space and general administrative services), and 3) Quality of Life <br />(such as library, museum, and golf), and then further define each item as essential, <br />necessary or desirable. Ranking this way involves assigning point values based on the <br />category and whether the objective is perceived to be essential, necessary or desirable. <br />Again, lower numbers reflect higher priority as follows: <br /> <br />Basic Services Maintenance of Effort Quality of Life <br />Essential (1) Essential (2) Essential (3) <br />Necessary (4) Necessary (5) Necessary (6) <br />Desirable (7) Desirable (8) Desirable (9) <br /> <br /> <br />Policy Statements <br />Going one step further, staff also drafted a policy statement to summarize the focus and <br />intent of each goal. These policy statements are intended as proposals for Council to <br />consider and refine and then use to help evaluate the extent to which each objective, <br />and other objectives that may be proposed during the budget process, furthers the <br />Council’s goals. <br /> <br />1. Public Involvement – Enhance the ways in which Louisville residents and <br />businesses can participate in the 2014 Budget, 2104 Council Retreat, and small <br />area/neighborhood plans. <br />2. Economic Development – Pursue opportunities to fill empty retail space, <br />especially at the Sam’s Club site. Facilitate re/development of the Phillips 66 <br />site, Highway 42/South Boulder and McCaslin commercial areas. Create and <br />implement wayfinding opportunities throughout the City. <br />3. Arts and Culture – Consider and prioritize use of Louisville Arts Center and <br />provide additional staffing. Conduct an Arts Master Plan and consider a funding <br />mechanism for public art. <br />4. Historic Preservation – Preserve and rehabilitate historic properties in the City. <br />Conduct the necessary Master Planning to facilitate this goal. Pursue funding for <br />an additional building at the Museum. Consider additional resources to <br />catalogue historic photos and documents held by the Historical Museum. <br />5
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.