My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
02/28/2001 Env Bd Packet
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Environmental Board
>
Packets
>
2001
>
02/28/2001 Env Bd Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/30/2014 4:09:12 PM
Creation date
7/30/2014 11:02:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Environmental Board
Env Bd Document Type
Env Bd Packet
Meeting Date
02/28/2001
Env Bd Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
130
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).
View images
View plain text
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JANUARY 31, 2001 <br />C. Environmental Board Goals 2001— Chair Lanyon stated that the Board should be <br />proactive, not reactive. He explained many times the project review takes considerable <br />time, but if it could be reduced, it would leave more time for environmental education. <br />Trehus asked if there were other cities with checklists of the criteria. <br />Asleson stated with the timelines, the Board could be more proactive. <br />Chair Lanyon suggested to have specified roles for each person, then the specified person <br />comments on that subject for every project review. O'Connell agreed and added if <br />another has comments on that topic they could be E- Mailed to the designated person. <br />Trehus asked if they were to pick tonight from a list of categories. Asleson stated it <br />should focus on the review process. <br />Chair Lanyon agreed to make the process more effective. There were nine points on the <br />guidelines, so each person should pick two points. <br />Mach mentioned that through the specialization, the Board could educate itself by sharing <br />what each is learning. Trehus noted it would be beneficial to inquire what other cities <br />were doing. <br />Asleson indicated he could bring inforrnation on what other cities are doing to the Board, <br />and mentioned that Blaine was putting together an Environmental Board. Lanyon added <br />that it would be beneficial to get people from other cities together and informally discuss <br />issues. <br />O'Connell noted that the to <br />Environmental Boari <br />went on none of the cities represented had an <br />Chair Lanyon suggested that the goals needed to be prioritized, to streamline the review <br />process. Donlin pointed out #3. <br />Grundhofer identified #2. Chair Lanyon urged the Board to choose a different goal <br />because #2 would be too nebulous; it needed to be identifiable. O'Connell stated part of <br />#1, specifically to continue with the City Council with the property adjacent to the <br />elementary school, find a way to protect and celebrate the area in 2001. <br />Chair Lanyon indicated that there should be 3 -4 specific goals, not necessarily written, as <br />the 2000 goals were to be used as guiding principles. Asleson mentioned that a website <br />could be created as an ongoing educational aide. <br />Chair Lanyon suggested an agenda item for next time to build a list of goals. <br />Mach pointed out that a pilot site should be built for a local example to show developers. <br />9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.