My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 1995/12/04
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1995
>
Agenda Packets - 1995/12/04
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:51:27 PM
Creation date
7/2/2018 10:33:20 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
12/4/1995
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
12/4/1995
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
87
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
1 <br /> to grow. Perhaps more than any other survey questions these may constitute the essence of how <br /> to target resources and the types of resources that might be most useful. <br /> Working Group Question and Comments: <br /> For each of the following, list the priority you feel should be placed on each of the six topics. <br /> Should all six be treated equally? Should we concentrate on only those which affect the <br /> most firms or perhaps just those with the most likely benefit, or should we attempt to <br /> coordinate efforts on behalf of each area? <br /> • The Working Group ranked the topics in the following order: Capital, marketing support, <br /> additional production, research and development, management support, better <br /> distribution. Capital and marketing garnered the highest priority, with most seeing a joint <br /> role between the Commission wide and the individual city initiatives. <br /> Mentoring <br /> In the survey we asked firms if they might be willing to assist other businesses in some form of <br /> mentoring and received a significant number of positive responses. In the report we suggest it <br /> may make sense to develop a pilot project to explore just how such a system would work, and <br /> iron out methodology etc. <br /> Working Group Question and Comments <br /> Do you think it should be a high, medium or low priority to include the promotion if not <br /> operation of a trial mentoring program in the 1996 WorkPlan by the Commission? <br /> • Opinions varied as the level of priority such an effort should receive. <br /> • Many felt it could be a good chamber project. <br /> • Metro East is supposed to have developed a related project that might bear review. . <br /> Chambers of Commerce <br /> The chambers of commerce have been frequently discussed as possible players in the long run <br /> programs emerging from this process. Not every community is individually represented by a <br /> chamber, and in several cases chambers are in direct competition with each other for <br /> membership. While it is assumed that chambers will be willing to cooperate in these endeavors <br /> many local issues and interests may interfere with their full cooperation. <br /> Working Group Question and Comments <br /> Do you feel that in your situation your city will have enough direct influence with its local <br /> chamber to encourage it to overcome any hesitancy or internal opposition to form a regional <br /> cooperative arrangement with other area chambers to promote regional objectives? <br /> • Working Group members felt there was general support and interest among chambers in <br /> working together and that their could well be the basis of promoting joint efforts by and <br /> between the various chambers to create and sustain projects designed to follow up on the <br /> surveys data. <br /> c:\S2crp\report\wrkgrp.doc <br /> 23 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.