My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2014.04.08 EDA Agenda Packet
Hugo
>
Community Development
>
EDA
>
EDA Agenda/Packets
>
2014 EDA Packets
>
2014.04.08 EDA Agenda Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/11/2016 10:55:29 AM
Creation date
1/11/2016 10:16:43 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commissions
Meeting Date
4/8/2014
Document Type
Agenda/Packets
Commission Name
EDA
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
45
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
La <br />Vill, Appendices <br />of <br />The following information is designed to summarize for the County Board the five most <br />important themes and information learned from the community engagement process. This <br />information is meant to inform, update and educate the Board on the insights of key stakeholders <br />in Washington County. This summary does not attempt nor is it designed to provide every <br />particular insight or opinion shared during the community engagement process. <br />The information is organized into five overall themes. <br />Expand the County's Involvement in Economic Development <br />Washington County's expanded involvement in economic development is encouraged and highly <br />anticipated. The stakeholders believe that Washington County should expand its role in <br />supporting the economic development efforts of the cities. There are some lingering doubts about <br />the County's historical role and past actions, but this perception can be overcome. <br />The County's Diverse Qualities Requires Thoughtful Planning <br />Washington County's stakeholders recognize that the county is very diverse geographically, <br />politically and organizationally. It is well noted that the County Board is challenged to find an <br />equitable and/or a simple economic development plan that can address everyone's interests. <br />Although optimistic and certainly excited about an expanded role for Washington County, the <br />stakeholders are realistic and do not anticipate or expect miracles. This is best stated by Craig <br />Waldron, City Administrator in Oakdale who is on the record noting that, he advises the County <br />to be deliberate and methodical in its approach, or as he states, "walk before you run". <br />Stakeholders Have Distinctive Opinions <br />Washington County's specific role in economic development — and ultimately its strategic plan - <br />requires more deliberate discussion. Testimony at the community engagement meetings was <br />generally more philosophical and strategic. Although opinions exist on matters of policy, priority <br />and structure, we do not offer any trend, indicator or community reflection that leads or points the <br />County Board to any easy answers. Even at the municipal level the testimony of cities differs <br />largely along the lines of cities with experienced personnel and cities that do not have a strong <br />economic development support base within the staff. Business interests also varied in their <br />testimony and input. <br />No Consensus Exists on a Clear Organizational Model <br />Washington County has already identified five different organizational models to deliver <br />economic development programs and services. Throughout our testimony we heard various <br />opinions about what is the best way for the County to organize. We offer to you that no clear <br />consensus -based organizational model came forward from our community engagement process. <br />We discuss structure and roles in greater depth in Section V. <br />13 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.