[MissoulaGov] committee update 1-28-09

[Jim McGrath]

The current situation is that if the city does not choose to build the
preferred solution they cannot get any money from the highway department
to build anything else. I cannot speak to the possibility that a peer
review would generate a new preferred solution or otherwise allow the
city to choose another solution. The no-build of course is always
available but very undesirable. 

 

 

________________________________

From: missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com
[mailto:missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com] On Behalf Of Jed Taylor
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 1:43 PM
To: missoulagov at cmslists.com
Subject: Re: [MissoulaGov] committee update 1-28-09

 

A couple things for the list.

 

I think the concept of using a communications tool to better share ideas
and activities can only be beneficial to both the Council and the
public.  As you're probably aware, though, there are better solutions
than SharePoint, a typical M$ product that does nothing well except
provide a revenue stream for Redmond from those who only consider M$
products.  For instance, the City could offer a phpBB-based collection
of forums (see http://www.phpbb.com/) where some areas are view-only for
the public and others are specifically designed for public
participation.  Using such a solution would address any and all concerns
about 'sunshine', allow controlled participation where appropriate,
allow anyone to view discussions, provide an archive of discussions, and
allow for even greater public participation.  Oh, and it's free, too.
And Open Source, so it's modifiable.  As someone who participates in a
variety of phpBB-based forums, it's easy for me to imagine how
beneficial such a system would be to the City in terms of increasing
openness, communication, participation, and documentation.  I would
encourage the Council to look into this, especially since someone's
already investing time and money in SharePoint.

 

And speaking of investing money....  The Council voted on Monday to
spend $186k of the public's money on a peer review of the Russell & 3rd
EIS, right?  So what, exactly, are the citizens of Missoula getting for
this expense?  We already know what transportation engineers (people who
love to build roads) favor, and we already know that there's
considerable public sentiment against so much asphalt as well as its
effect on the neighborhood south of 3rd street.  And we already know
that there's a well-considered counter-proposal (the 3+ plan) available.
Is this expense simply a CYA project to protect the decision-makers from
the public fallout that's sure to result if the preferred solution in
the EIS is actually constructed?  Is there a reasonable expectation that
the peer review is going to produce a recommendation that's different
from the EIS?  Will a part of this $186k peer review include an analysis
of the 3+ plan and a compare-and-contrast of the plusses and minuses
amongst the current EIS preferred solution, the 3+ plan, and whatever
else the peer review consultancy comes up with?

 

I would appreciate it greatly if someone could explain simply and
clearly what $186k is buying that Missoula doesn't already have.

 

Thanks.

 

 

 

 

________________________________

From: missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com
[mailto:missoulagov-bounces at cmslists.com] On Behalf Of Bob Jaffe
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 23:01
To: missoulagov at cmslists.com
Subject: [MissoulaGov] committee update 1-28-09

Greetings,

 

<snip> 

 

 We finished the day with Committee of the Whole.  We had the
administration's legislative update. Ross Best came to the Monday
meeting and he was  here today to complain about the public notice and
involvement for the City's lobbying efforts.  He heard that a SharePoint
system had been developed for us to track bills, get updates from the
lobbyist and comment.  He lamented over how this is all private and
should be open to the public.  He complained that all the public knows
is the two words on the agenda "Legislative Update." There is no other
additional info to know what is going on. Up until a couple of days ago
this is the way it was for us too. We would see the two words on the
agenda and the Mayor would come and give a verbal report. Other than
whatever notes we took we would have nothing.

 

The new system is a little better but it is still pretty clunky. The way
SharePoint has been implemented it is kind of like a really low end
blogging platform. Each bill is like a discussion thread and then there
are some comments. They are working on a way to make it all publicly
accessible. All that is really needed is the list of bills the City is
taking a position on. I haven't really seen a whole lot in the comments
that are valuable. The stuff from the lobbyist is generally comments
like "I met with so and so today to discuss this." Not really any useful
insight into the status or process. I'm hoping there is actually
something going on there for all the money we paid.

 

<snip>

 

Bob Jaffe

Missoula City Council, Ward 3

bjaffe at ci.missoula.mt.us

406-728-1052

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.cmslists.com/pipermail/missoulagov/attachments/20090129/9b0d86ba/attachment.htm>