City Council Committee of the Whole · Monday, June 10, 2024 · City Council Digest

1. FACILITY TOUR

6:05-6:35 PM: Fire Station 2 hrs. 71, 190 E. Sunset Way approximately 7:15-7:30 PM.* Court, 135 E. Sunset Way COM 0029

packet pp.5–13

Topics: Public Safety

Previously discussed: City Council Regular Meeting · May 8, 2023 City Council Regular Meeting · Apr 29, 2024

Open packet at p.5 ↗

Staff report:

The purpose of this meeting is to provide an in-person tour of the City’s Fire Station 71, Police Department and Municipal Court, and discuss facility functional deficiencies and impacts on operations. This staff report also continues to answer several questions posed at past meetings.

2. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS

Public Comment

packet pp.15–78

Open packet at p.15 ↗

Staff report:

Administration agrees with the proposed recommendations and will start implementing the suggested improvements.

Enhancing Permit Review Efficiency COM 0053

60 min · Minnie Dhaliwal, Community Planning & Development Director Sam Lieberman, Consultant Susan Healy Keene, Consultant

Topics: Land Use

1641 segments .txt ↗

0:05 ↗ hello everyone uh I council president

0:08 ↗ Walsh call the June 10th Committee of

0:11 ↗ the whole meeting to order at 811 p.m.

0:15 ↗ guess technically we went into session

0:17 ↗ earlier to uh do our facility tour but

0:20 ↗ we are coming back to our regular agenda

0:23 ↗ items at this point um as a reminder we

0:27 ↗ continue to have remote aspect to all of

0:29 ↗ our meetings so staff um and members of

0:32 ↗ the public may be participating in

0:34 ↗ tonight's meeting remotely via

0:37 ↗ WebEx um there are multiple public

0:41 ↗ comment opportunities at tonight's

0:42 ↗ meeting so there's going to be a general

0:44 ↗ public comment opportunity at the

0:46 ↗ beginning and then again after um our

0:50 ↗ one remaining agenda item after council

0:53 ↗ is done our question and answer period

0:57 ↗ so um we're going to start with public

1:01 ↗ comment and do we have anybody who's

1:03 ↗ signed up to speak yes yep okay so

1:06 ↗ members of the public May address

1:07 ↗ council at this time in person or

1:10 ↗ virtually those who signed up in advance

1:12 ↗ to make comments will be called on first

1:15 ↗ if you're joining us virtually and would

1:17 ↗ like to make comments please raise your

1:19 ↗ hand um your virtual hand if you're on

1:22 ↗ the phone that's going to be a star

1:24 ↗ three I guess you could raise your

1:26 ↗ physical hand we'll probably see it but

1:28 ↗ if you enjoyed if you you join by

1:30 ↗ computer or smartphone look for the hand

1:32 ↗ icon or you can send our host a chat

1:35 ↗ message and if you're in the room and

1:37 ↗ did not sign up I will go ahead and ask

1:39 ↗ for speakers before I closing that

1:41 ↗ portion of the meeting so um the clerk

1:45 ↗ has already indicated that someone

1:47 ↗ signed up to speak but I will just say

1:49 ↗ anybody who is online if you go ahead

1:52 ↗ and raise your hand we'll get you in the

1:54 ↗ queue um so you're invited to address

1:58 ↗ the council regarding matters that are

1:59 ↗ directly related to isqua's programs

2:02 ↗ projects services or events comments

2:05 ↗ related to political campaigns will not

2:07 ↗ be permitted please direct comments to

2:10 ↗ the whole Council and not to individuals

2:12 ↗ and while this is not a question and

2:14 ↗ answer period um we will contact you to

2:17 ↗ follow up if

2:18 ↗ needed uh when recognized for virtual

2:22 ↗ attendees you'll unmute your microphone

2:24 ↗ for those in person come up to the lect

2:26 ↗ turn and press the button until your

2:28 ↗ microphone turns

2:30 ↗ red state your name address and

2:33 ↗ relationship to the city speak clearly

2:36 ↗ and pause frequently and limit your

2:38 ↗ comments to 5 minutes if you are

2:41 ↗ attending virtually and don't respond

2:43 ↗ when your name or phone number is called

2:46 ↗ the meeting will have to proceed um

2:49 ↗ you're encouraged to rejoin the meeting

2:51 ↗ if able personal attacks obsc language

2:54 ↗ derogatory remarks and disruptive

2:56 ↗ behavior will not be permitted so Clerk

2:59 ↗ can you identify the first person who

3:01 ↗ has signed up to speak yes Carol

3:11 ↗ Simpson good evening uh president Walsh

3:15 ↗ council members the city staff and those

3:18 ↗ watching remotely my name is Carol

3:20 ↗ Simpson I am a new resident of the

3:22 ↗ vineyard's neighborhood of Newcastle

3:24 ↗ Washington and a former city council

3:27 ↗ member of the City of Newcastle from

3:29 ↗ 2008 to

3:30 ↗ 2019 I am here to this evening because

3:33 ↗ King County just last week amended their

3:37 ↗ park rules to allow ebikes on their

3:40 ↗ paved

3:41 ↗ Trails I would like you to remove

3:43 ↗ electric bikes from shared pedestrian

3:46 ↗ Trails my brother-in-law Jim Gordon age

3:50 ↗ 63 was killed by an electric bike on the

3:53 ↗ Marine County Trail in California on

3:55 ↗ August 31st

3:58 ↗ 2022 he was walking home in the early

4:00 ↗ evening after having a beer at a local

4:02 ↗ restaurant his home a nearby houseboat

4:05 ↗ was just yards away from where he was

4:07 ↗ struck and

4:09 ↗ hit and run hit and run electric bike

4:12 ↗ rider Jim never regained Consciousness

4:15 ↗ he was brain dead it was traumatic

4:18 ↗ experience and a huge loss for his wife

4:21 ↗ his father who was aged 94 his mother

4:24 ↗ who was aged 92 his two sisters and his

4:27 ↗ brother his nieces and nephews

4:31 ↗ and great grand niece and nephew his

4:33 ↗ wife is still adjusting to her loss loss

4:36 ↗ of the love of her life her income her

4:39 ↗ companion she still lives in their

4:41 ↗ houseboat which borders the trail their

4:43 ↗ first home ever home purchased that same

4:46 ↗ year she still sees the Walkers and

4:49 ↗ bikes passing by I don't know how she

4:52 ↗ does that the ebike rider was identified

4:56 ↗ a commuter age 40 he sustained injuries

4:59 ↗ and lived ironically he went to the same

5:02 ↗ hospital where the EMS Ambulance took

5:05 ↗ Jim a police investigation did not yield

5:08 ↗ enough evidence to support the

5:10 ↗ prosecutor bringing criminal charges

5:12 ↗ against the

5:13 ↗ bicyclist electric bikes do not belong

5:16 ↗ on pedestrian Trails period I do not

5:20 ↗ want anyone to go through what my

5:22 ↗ husband's family went through the sudden

5:24 ↗ death of a loved one the immense grief

5:27 ↗ loss of a son a husband uncle

5:30 ↗ thoughtful author valued Library

5:33 ↗ employee he didn't live to collect his

5:35 ↗ pension see his home completed publish

5:38 ↗ his novels celebrate more Christmases

5:40 ↗ with his nieces and nephews who love

5:43 ↗ their Uncle Jim he didn't get to spend

5:45 ↗ retirement years with his

5:47 ↗ wife concerns have been raised about

5:50 ↗ children and the elderly on trails with

5:53 ↗ bicycles Jim was a full-grown physically

5:56 ↗ fit adult man who was killed by electric

5:59 ↗ bike obviously electric bikes do not

6:02 ↗ belong with children older adults who

6:04 ↗ cannot jump out of the way I cannot jump

6:07 ↗ out of the way and as a postcript I

6:10 ↗ don't remember when just these last two

6:12 ↗ years I haven't been able to run or jump

6:15 ↗ oh well I'm 74 Jim didn't get the

6:18 ↗ opportunity jump out of the way he he

6:21 ↗ could have please council members adopt

6:25 ↗ a no El electric bikes unshared

6:26 ↗ pedestrian Trails policy in your city of

6:30 ↗ isqua please urge King County to reverse

6:34 ↗ their park rules allowing erec bikes on

6:36 ↗ Urban Trails electric bikes can kill

6:40 ↗ people thank

6:44 ↗ you thank you for sharing your

6:47 ↗ commentary we appreciate the uh

6:49 ↗ perspective on that thank

6:52 ↗ you do we have anyone else who signed up

6:55 ↗ or indicated a desire to speak no and it

6:58 ↗ appears that we only have staff With Us

7:01 ↗ online okay okay well always good to

7:06 ↗ hear from the community and recognize

7:10 ↗ things that are going on um in the area

7:12 ↗ as King County has made that change it

7:15 ↗ looks like we have one item remaining on

7:18 ↗ our agenda which is Comm 0053 enhancing

7:22 ↗ permit review

7:24 ↗ efficiency and that's going to be

7:26 ↗ presented by director Dolly wall

7:27 ↗ Community planning and development

7:29 ↗ director dor along with some of the

7:31 ↗ Consultants who I'm sure you will

7:33 ↗ introduce good evening uh council

7:35 ↗ members um yeah tonight um ref Tellis uh

7:39 ↗ Sam laborman and Susan Hy Keen is with

7:42 ↗ us from our Consulting team uh to

7:46 ↗ present so I'll turn over the

7:47 ↗ presentation to them uh from staff I

7:50 ↗ have James Gray our building official

7:52 ↗ and Emily Appleton uh our engineering

7:54 ↗ manager also online um so this is a

7:57 ↗ culmination of the work that we

7:59 ↗ previously shared with you and um and

8:02 ↗ the work that ra Tellis did for us uh

8:06 ↗ they're here to share their findings so

8:07 ↗ without taking too much time I'll turn

8:09 ↗ it over to

8:11 ↗ Sam thank you Minnie and good evening

8:14 ↗ council

8:15 ↗ members uh just by way of of brief

8:18 ↗ introduction I'm uh Sam Lieberman I'm a

8:21 ↗ manager with h rapis rais is a local

8:25 ↗ government utilities uh management

8:27 ↗ consulting firm

8:29 ↗ I have about 14 uh a little more than 14

8:33 ↗ years of experience as a local

8:35 ↗ government uh consultant and over the

8:38 ↗ last probably half a decade or so a

8:41 ↗ particular focus in the development and

8:43 ↗ review sphere uh before I continue I'm

8:46 ↗ gonna let my colleague Susan Hil Keen

8:48 ↗ also briefly introduce herself good

8:51 ↗ evening Council uh I am Susan hey Kean

8:55 ↗ and I'm a special adviser with ref telis

8:58 ↗ um I uh retired after 30 years in local

9:01 ↗ government uh most recently as community

9:04 ↗ development director for the city of

9:06 ↗ Beverly Hills in California and uh the

9:10 ↗ city of West Hollywood also in

9:13 ↗ California so it's been a pleasure to

9:16 ↗ work with the isqua city

9:19 ↗ team awesome so I'll just uh briefly go

9:23 ↗ over uh the agenda for our presentation

9:26 ↗ I'll I'll say you know at the outset if

9:29 ↗ you have any questions as we are working

9:31 ↗ through this please stop us and ask uh

9:34 ↗ no need to to wait until the end uh

9:36 ↗ though you're certainly welcome to we'll

9:38 ↗ obviously take questions then as well uh

9:41 ↗ we'll we'll talk briefly about the the

9:43 ↗ purpose and the background of this

9:45 ↗ project I'm sure you're all well aware

9:47 ↗ of uh how we went about uh the project

9:50 ↗ our methodology some of our highlevel

9:52 ↗ key findings uh and then we want to talk

9:56 ↗ a little bit about what we heard uh

9:58 ↗ through our

10:00 ↗ discussions with staff and with with

10:02 ↗ customers and applicants and then we'll

10:05 ↗ walk through the recommendations that we

10:07 ↗ are making uh to help improve the permit

10:12 ↗ process so in March the city engaged rap

10:17 ↗ tell us to conduct a comprehensive

10:18 ↗ review of the permit process uh the

10:21 ↗ initiative really driven by you all uh

10:23 ↗ and and your commitment to enhancing the

10:25 ↗ performance and ensuring compliance with

10:28 ↗ uh the new um SB

10:31 ↗ 5290 land use permit timelines uh passed

10:36 ↗ at the state level so as this qu

10:38 ↗ continues to grow you know it's

10:40 ↗ imperative to have a permit process

10:41 ↗ that's not only efficient but

10:43 ↗ transparent user friendly and so the

10:46 ↗ primary objectives of our review uh were

10:49 ↗ to improve the overall efficiency of the

10:51 ↗ process uh reduce delays streamline

10:54 ↗ workflows uh enhance customer service

10:57 ↗ and ensure applicants receive clear and

11:00 ↗ consistent and timely uh

11:03 ↗ information of course ensure Regulatory

11:05 ↗ Compliance particularly uh as we move

11:08 ↗ forward with the uh timelines uh

11:12 ↗ mandated by S SP

11:14 ↗ 5290 and really to reduce the complexity

11:17 ↗ and and some of the unpredictability

11:19 ↗ that um that exists in the current

11:21 ↗ permit process so how did we do that um

11:26 ↗ we started with a a data collection

11:28 ↗ phase uh we reviewed numerous documents

11:33 ↗ at the city that current standard

11:35 ↗ operating procedures um existing permit

11:38 ↗ guidelines workflow diagrams um and and

11:43 ↗ data and performance metrics that we

11:45 ↗ were able to uh retrieve and that the

11:48 ↗ that the uh Department had on hand

11:50 ↗ really helped us understand current

11:51 ↗ framework uh and identify some high

11:54 ↗ level and and initial areas uh to pursue

11:57 ↗ we then conducted

11:59 ↗ 28 uh in-depth interviews with about 35

12:03 ↗ different staff members this is both uh

12:05 ↗ in CPD as well as the community Planning

12:09 ↗ Development Department as well as other

12:11 ↗ relative relevant departments uh in the

12:13 ↗ city such as Public Works Parks and

12:17 ↗ Recreation and these interviews really

12:19 ↗ provided some valuable insights into

12:20 ↗ some of the day-to-day challenges faced

12:22 ↗ by staff uh and their perspectives on

12:26 ↗ what works well and doesn't work well in

12:29 ↗ the current process the staffer in um

12:32 ↗ live the process every day right and and

12:35 ↗ have uh wonderful ideas about what

12:38 ↗ challenges them uh and are sitting on

12:40 ↗ ideas for improvement uh and and lastly

12:43 ↗ we uh well we then conducted customer

12:46 ↗ focus groups excuse me uh we were able

12:48 ↗ to engage with current and former permit

12:51 ↗ applicants uh through a series of focus

12:53 ↗ groups helped us understand their

12:56 ↗ experiences their frustrations their

12:58 ↗ suggest for improvement and really was

13:01 ↗ essential in helping us understand the

13:03 ↗ customer Journey Through the permit

13:06 ↗ process we then conducted a series of

13:10 ↗ process mapping sessions with uh staff

13:14 ↗ that execute various permit processes

13:17 ↗ and brought St from the various

13:21 ↗ disciplines together uh to walk us

13:24 ↗ through in great detail the sort of

13:28 ↗ minutia and the steps that they have to

13:30 ↗ take

13:31 ↗ to carry out their permit processes and

13:36 ↗ deliver on uh and um assist customers

13:40 ↗ with receiving their permits uh really

13:44 ↗ helped us identify through that process

13:47 ↗ uh

13:48 ↗ inefficiencies uh bottlenecks uh and it

13:51 ↗ is a really helpful visual

13:53 ↗ representation of the steps that staff

13:56 ↗ have to go through

13:59 ↗ so through that we we learned a number

14:01 ↗ of things um you know one there's a lot

14:05 ↗ of things that the city is already doing

14:07 ↗ very well um and and a number of

14:09 ↗ strengths in the permit process uh the

14:13 ↗ city already incorporates

14:16 ↗ pre-application reviews um which um

14:19 ↗ really help them help applicants

14:21 ↗ understand requirements and potential

14:23 ↗ issues before they submit their

14:24 ↗ applications and and is a really

14:27 ↗ proactive best practice uh concurrent

14:31 ↗ reviews so simultaneous reviews by the

14:34 ↗ different uh entities that that have to

14:38 ↗ conduct a review as a best practice

14:40 ↗ helps reduce overall review times and

14:42 ↗ improves

14:44 ↗ coordination uh one thing that struck

14:47 ↗ us prior to starting our work and during

14:51 ↗ uh the the work was that esqua is

14:55 ↗ already ahead of the game in having

14:58 ↗ implemented a really robust online

15:01 ↗ system uh for applicants uh we have done

15:05 ↗ quite a bit of this work where we

15:09 ↗ encountered

15:10 ↗ agencies that through the pandemic were

15:14 ↗ forced to move online uh and and tried

15:17 ↗ to fit a square peg and a round hole

15:20 ↗ with paper processes uh quickly turning

15:23 ↗ into a online system and esqu was

15:26 ↗ already ahead of the game uh and U

15:30 ↗ really providing that service and having

15:33 ↗ a process that fits the the digital

15:35 ↗ world that we live in um and and is you

15:40 ↗ consistent for applicants across the

15:43 ↗ region uh in in the way that it's done

15:45 ↗ through my building permit and and

15:47 ↗ frankly the dedication of of Staff the

15:51 ↗ commitment and Technical proficiency of

15:53 ↗ the staff really significant assets to

15:55 ↗ the department but we did find some

15:57 ↗ challenges uh of of course right

15:59 ↗ processing delays exist um you know

16:03 ↗ despite these

16:04 ↗ strengths primarily due to uh incomplete

16:08 ↗ incomplete submissions uh the peer-

16:11 ↗ review processes and um other

16:14 ↗ inefficiencies in process that we'll

16:16 ↗ discuss there's inconsistent

16:18 ↗ communication uh to the applicant um

16:22 ↗ that can lead to confusion and

16:24 ↗ frustration uh while the robust online

16:28 ↗ system system exists and is and is

16:30 ↗ useful and and they received High marks

16:33 ↗ from from applicants um various

16:36 ↗ platforms are used in the process by

16:40 ↗ staff um don't talk to each other not

16:43 ↗ well integrated that can cause workflow

16:46 ↗ disruptions uh it leads to to manual

16:48 ↗ data entry

16:49 ↗ burdens uh and there are a number of

16:52 ↗ outdated standard operating procedures

16:54 ↗ um that contribute to inefficiencies and

16:57 ↗ inconsistencies

16:59 ↗ uh in application processes and so our

17:02 ↗ recommendations really strive to to

17:04 ↗ address number of these

17:06 ↗ challenges uh that exist in the current

17:09 ↗ process I'm gonna have um Susan talk

17:13 ↗ through the feedback that we

17:15 ↗ heard thank you Sam um as Sam mentioned

17:19 ↗ we interviewed 35 Staff members um from

17:23 ↗ the various divisions of community

17:25 ↗ Planning and Development as well as

17:28 ↗ other department dep Ms which included

17:30 ↗ it public works and parks and community

17:34 ↗ services and we were really looking four

17:37 ↗ themes um that we heard and the I the

17:40 ↗ eight items that you see listed on the

17:43 ↗ screen represent themes that we heard um

17:47 ↗ from our staff interviews and I'll just

17:49 ↗ briefly go over what we heard on each of

17:52 ↗ those um we heard on incomplete plans

17:55 ↗ and

17:56 ↗ standardization that acceptance

17:59 ↗ of incomplete plans often hinders the

18:03 ↗ review process and standardizing a more

18:07 ↗ comprehensive preliminary review at

18:10 ↗ intake uh could ensure that all

18:12 ↗ necessary information is provided and

18:15 ↗ appropriately routed based on permit

18:17 ↗ type it's very difficult for

18:19 ↗ reviewers uh to make a complete review

18:23 ↗ of an application or a submittal without

18:25 ↗ all the information they

18:27 ↗ need uh permit coordination we heard

18:30 ↗ from more than one staff member that

18:33 ↗ there is a need to reinstate uh a role

18:36 ↗ to oversee permit

18:38 ↗ timelines and facilitate coordination

18:42 ↗ across Division and um that that would

18:45 ↗ indeed proove overall process efficiency

18:49 ↗ and help with

18:51 ↗ coordination uh checklists and Sops are

18:55 ↗ standard operating procedures um there

18:58 ↗ are updates needed um uh both on

19:02 ↗ checklists um and also um just generally

19:07 ↗ in order to align with the new codes um

19:11 ↗ the especially it was noted that

19:13 ↗ standard operating procedures for permit

19:16 ↗ technicians and Engineering staff uh

19:19 ↗ would be helpful to update in order to

19:22 ↗ streamline processes and to ensure

19:27 ↗ uniformity uh the physical separation

19:30 ↗ impact it was very interesting um as you

19:33 ↗ know um staff is separated physically

19:37 ↗ across several different facilities and

19:40 ↗ it does impact internal

19:43 ↗ communication uh trust and the ability

19:46 ↗ to collaborate with one another um and

19:48 ↗ so that was Ved by

19:51 ↗ staff integration and automation issues

19:55 ↗ um the city um operates with several

19:58 ↗ platform like my building permit track

20:01 ↗ it blue beam and

20:03 ↗ SharePoint and um all of these systems

20:06 ↗ need to work together um there is an

20:09 ↗ absence of automation although many of

20:12 ↗ them are automated there is an absence

20:15 ↗ uh of Automation in systems like trackit

20:17 ↗ and what that necessitates is uh the

20:21 ↗ need for manual data entry um which

20:25 ↗ slows the process and also creates the

20:28 ↗ possib

20:29 ↗ for

20:31 ↗ error uh user difficulties in it support

20:34 ↗ when there is an issue with

20:37 ↗ it there's uh oftentimes uh it support

20:42 ↗ is unavailable to really troubleshoot uh

20:46 ↗ timely uh to resolve any issues um also

20:51 ↗ the selection uh of options for permit

20:54 ↗ types uh on documents in my building

20:57 ↗ permit is limited which can lead to

21:01 ↗ confusion on the part of applicants

21:03 ↗ they're sometimes forced to just uh

21:05 ↗ enter other which makes it uh less clear

21:09 ↗ uh when those projects are submitted

21:11 ↗ exactly what they are

21:13 ↗ submitting inconsistent review times um

21:18 ↗ do exist it was noted um for several

21:21 ↗ reasons one of which um sometimes is

21:25 ↗ that reviewers may not be checking my B

21:28 ↗ my bill building permit and track it

21:30 ↗ dashboards um and to keep that the

21:34 ↗ um submitt moving through the process

21:38 ↗ also um at times Consultants are not

21:41 ↗ being held accountable to deadlines um

21:45 ↗ the consultant peer review process is

21:47 ↗ lengthy and uh often LS Clarity lacks

21:51 ↗ Clarity regarding who who within the

21:54 ↗ city um is is taking the lead on making

21:58 ↗ sure that those uh consultant peer

22:00 ↗ reviews get processed and are

22:04 ↗ timely and then internal processes and

22:07 ↗ Ro Clarity there does seem to be still

22:10 ↗ some confusion uh in some areas um so

22:15 ↗ there is a deeper a need for a deeper

22:18 ↗ understanding of the roles and

22:20 ↗ responsibilities and as well as a common

22:22 ↗ understanding of the limits of

22:24 ↗ discretion um that are now uh allowed

22:27 ↗ under the new code

22:30 ↗ so next

22:32 ↗ slide we also um got feedback from

22:37 ↗ customer focus groups and um we got a

22:40 ↗ lot of positive comments from the the

22:43 ↗ customer focus groups um these eight

22:47 ↗ items uh the top I would say the top

22:50 ↗ four were all very positive

22:53 ↗ um the customer focus groups uh

22:56 ↗ expressed that there was clear they felt

22:58 ↗ there was clear

23:00 ↗ communication and the documentation

23:02 ↗ requirements for submissions were

23:05 ↗ clearly communicated to them and that

23:07 ↗ the myb building permit platform is

23:10 ↗ userfriendly as long as you're

23:12 ↗ experienced uh in using it um then you

23:16 ↗ can count on uh facilitating a smooth

23:19 ↗ navigation through

23:21 ↗ that um there were positive comments

23:25 ↗ about uh the significant improvements

23:27 ↗ that have been made since the new

23:29 ↗ director came on board uh that that the

23:33 ↗ uh organizational structure and

23:35 ↗ efficiency has been improved and that

23:38 ↗ that has contributed to a more

23:39 ↗ streamlined permitting

23:41 ↗ process um there were Kudos uh shared by

23:45 ↗ the customer focus groups about uh

23:48 ↗ inspections um it was noted that

23:51 ↗ inspections are conveniently scheduled

23:54 ↗ and executed and um with the build

23:58 ↗ permit review process um was generally

24:01 ↗ very positive particularly uh noted the

24:05 ↗ performance of contract

24:08 ↗ reviewers um in terms of understanding

24:12 ↗ uh or in excuse me informative resources

24:16 ↗ and positive trajectory um the focus

24:20 ↗ groups uh noted that the zoning maps and

24:23 ↗ uh uses usage notification provided by

24:26 ↗ the city are informative and helpful um

24:30 ↗ and there was General consensus um by

24:33 ↗ the participants that the city is on a

24:35 ↗ positive

24:36 ↗ trajectory uh toward making improvements

24:39 ↗ on the permit

24:42 ↗ processing um there were um of course

24:45 ↗ some not as positive comments and there

24:48 ↗ was concern about the review

24:51 ↗ timelines um that there was a need to be

24:54 ↗ more consistent in achieving the target

24:56 ↗ review timelines and um there was the

25:00 ↗ perception that there was the need for

25:02 ↗ better project management oversight in

25:04 ↗ order to ensure uh that there was timely

25:08 ↗ and coordinated

25:10 ↗ review

25:12 ↗ um understanding requirements and

25:14 ↗ external peer reviews

25:17 ↗ um the the the participants expressed

25:21 ↗ challenges in understanding the full

25:24 ↗ requirements um for what needed to be

25:27 ↗ submitted for land

25:29 ↗ application and um it was also noted

25:32 ↗ that um the external peer reviews are

25:36 ↗ oftentimes very time consuming and quite

25:39 ↗ often exceeded the duration of time uh

25:43 ↗ given for City

25:45 ↗ reviews um also noted was they uh so not

25:51 ↗ specific to necessarily processing but

25:55 ↗ um it was noted that uh High permit and

25:58 ↗ per review peer peerreview

26:01 ↗ fees um disproportionately affect um

26:05 ↗ small or individual applicants

26:08 ↗ negatively uh and create Financial um

26:11 ↗ impacts to that group and then impact

26:14 ↗ fees uh this group noted um they felt

26:18 ↗ were con ex considered excessively high

26:21 ↗ for the value provided um and led to

26:24 ↗ concerns about the affordability and

26:26 ↗ fairness of the fee structure

26:29 ↗ so that's just kind of a note of

26:30 ↗ something to look for uh look to in the

26:35 ↗ future so with all the um input that we

26:40 ↗ received raap Tellis uh came up with a

26:42 ↗ number of recommendations that um we'll

26:45 ↗ go over for

26:48 ↗ you first of all we do need uh we do

26:51 ↗ need to highlight uh that there needs to

26:54 ↗ be an update to the submitt guidelines

26:57 ↗ um as I mentioned incom incomplete

27:00 ↗ submittals um are are are common problem

27:03 ↗ not only in isqua but in other

27:05 ↗ communities at as well but what happens

27:08 ↗ is incomplete submittal lead to delay

27:12 ↗ and multiple review Cycles if if all the

27:16 ↗ information is not present for a

27:19 ↗ reviewer it automatically gets sent back

27:22 ↗ and you've already extended the review

27:24 ↗ time there so providing clear and

27:27 ↗ compreh hensive submittal guidelines

27:29 ↗ will help applicants know that their

27:32 ↗ applications are complete and accurate

27:35 ↗ um it will reduce the need for multiple

27:37 ↗ review cycles and streamline that

27:40 ↗ process and it'll make it a more

27:42 ↗ efficient process with delays reduced

27:46 ↗ and uh a better experience for both the

27:48 ↗ applicants and City

27:52 ↗ staff next slide

27:55 ↗ please um this is interesting it doesn't

27:58 ↗ happen um frequently but when it does

28:01 ↗ happen it's sometimes a challenge and

28:04 ↗ that is in sufficiency review

28:06 ↗ sufficiency review is looking to make

28:08 ↗ sure that everything that is needed um

28:11 ↗ to do a complete review is there and for

28:14 ↗ sufficiency reviews for building permits

28:16 ↗ site work permits and construction

28:19 ↗ permits um those currently occur in the

28:21 ↗ my building permit

28:23 ↗ system however in those cases where

28:26 ↗ permit technicians are unsure about the

28:29 ↗ sufficiency of an application um they

28:32 ↗ will email reviewers um which leads to

28:36 ↗ an informal

28:38 ↗ communication um that is difficult to

28:41 ↗ track um so if you were to eliminate the

28:46 ↗ email process for sufficiency reviews

28:49 ↗ and formalize these reviews in track it

28:53 ↗ without triggering the official

28:54 ↗ acceptance of the application in in MVP

28:59 ↗ uh this approach would then enable um

29:03 ↗ sufficiency checks to happen but also at

29:06 ↗ the same time to have the ability to

29:08 ↗ track that sufficiency review and So

29:12 ↗ within tracking and enhanced

29:15 ↗ communication better followup uh things

29:18 ↗ will move more quickly through the

29:22 ↗ process next

29:27 ↗ slide we're recommending that there be

29:29 ↗ enhanced uh applicant

29:32 ↗ communication um

29:34 ↗ currently when there

29:37 ↗ uh an an a letter goes out to an

29:40 ↗ applicant saying what items may be

29:43 ↗ missing but what is not included in that

29:47 ↗ is the next steps so what we're

29:50 ↗ recommending is that there be a template

29:52 ↗ based

29:53 ↗ letter um that not only highlights what

29:56 ↗ may be missing or if it is complete

29:59 ↗ what's complete uh a letter that

30:01 ↗ outlines the upcoming steps and key

30:06 ↗ considerations um to help the applicant

30:10 ↗ uh so that there are no surprises and

30:13 ↗ there's transparency in what the city is

30:15 ↗ looking for and this proactive

30:18 ↗ communication we feel will help um build

30:21 ↗ a more collaborative relationship

30:22 ↗ between the city and its

30:25 ↗ stakeholders and again reduce delays and

30:28 ↗ improve overall process efficiency so

30:31 ↗ sometimes it's just reaching out to the

30:33 ↗ applicant rather than doing this back

30:36 ↗ and forth um but making it clear to the

30:39 ↗ applicant what the next steps in the

30:41 ↗ process will

30:47 ↗ be as Sam mentioned um there are

30:50 ↗ pre-application meetings now and and and

30:53 ↗ that's a very good best practice um and

30:57 ↗ um but we note that they don't happen in

31:00 ↗ all circumstances we we believe

31:02 ↗ establishing regular pre-application

31:04 ↗ collaboration meetings especially with

31:07 ↗ internal departments um with public

31:10 ↗ works and with um parks and Community

31:14 ↗ Services uh will help improve

31:17 ↗ coordination and ultimately reduce

31:20 ↗ review times um because you can identify

31:24 ↗ then potential issues and pitfalls early

31:27 ↗ in the process

31:28 ↗ and identify them um before they become

31:31 ↗ bigger

31:32 ↗ issues it will improve efficiency and

31:35 ↗ Clarity uh reduce delay and enhance the

31:38 ↗ overall quality and compliance of

31:41 ↗ projects you know what I'll just add

31:44 ↗ Susan we say formalize here because

31:48 ↗ currently pre pre application meetings

31:51 ↗ with internal departments happen on an

31:53 ↗ informal basis sometimes for some

31:55 ↗ projects and when we talked to to those

31:58 ↗ internal departments they all said well

32:00 ↗ when we do those meetings they're really

32:03 ↗ helpful and and really this this

32:07 ↗ recommendation is to to formalize them

32:09 ↗ and require them for uh city capital

32:13 ↗ projects um to really enhance the trust

32:17 ↗ and the team building and uh ensure that

32:20 ↗ everybody is on the same page for these

32:23 ↗ um City cap projects and that in that

32:26 ↗ internal communication

32:29 ↗ uh between departments particularly on

32:32 ↗ City projects um helps move it along so

32:36 ↗ that there are no surprises to any City

32:39 ↗ departments that are doing the ultimate

32:41 ↗ review it later on in the process they

32:44 ↗ have the information early

32:49 ↗ on um so this next item we recommend um

32:54 ↗ to examine the public noticing

32:56 ↗ efficiencies

32:58 ↗ um CPD handles a lot of public noticing

33:02 ↗ um this includes meeting notices site

33:04 ↗ postings mailings and although the city

33:08 ↗ um fairly recently now uses postcards to

33:10 ↗ reduce Labor uh the rising the amount of

33:15 ↗ development activity remains challenging

33:19 ↗ so at times we heard staff may need to

33:21 ↗ process and mail over 700 notices and

33:25 ↗ this of course takes away from their R

33:27 ↗ ability to do uh their other duties

33:30 ↗ including

33:31 ↗ review so enhancing efficiencies by

33:35 ↗ implementing perhaps batch processing

33:37 ↗ for mailings and establishing scheduled

33:40 ↗ mail runs um and um identifying the need

33:45 ↗ for public noticing earlier in the

33:47 ↗ process so it's not a last minute uh

33:49 ↗ hurry up to get it out um could help

33:53 ↗ manage those high volume

33:55 ↗ periods um again it's about making sure

34:00 ↗ that the work that needs to be done um

34:03 ↗ gets done at the earliest possible time

34:06 ↗ but also to free up staff for their core

34:09 ↗ responsibilities while still keeping the

34:11 ↗ community well

34:17 ↗ informed this is uh a very significant

34:20 ↗ one that we feel is incredibly important

34:22 ↗ and that is to hire a permit coordinator

34:25 ↗ um due to some transition

34:28 ↗ uh in staff members over the years um

34:31 ↗ there's a gap in managing the tracking

34:34 ↗ system and that's impacting the

34:36 ↗ efficiency of the permit process so we

34:39 ↗ believe a permit coordinator will be

34:42 ↗ able to ensure system accuracy oversee

34:46 ↗ performance coordinate necessary

34:48 ↗ upgrades develop performance data

34:51 ↗ reports and facilitate relevant training

34:55 ↗ um so this role What in enhance the

34:58 ↗ overall efficiency and reliability of

35:00 ↗ the permit process it's going to

35:02 ↗ streamline the project um guidance

35:06 ↗ because this is somebody that will be

35:08 ↗ able to see where an application is

35:11 ↗ going through the entire process will be

35:14 ↗ able to um communicate with applicants

35:16 ↗ to provide that information so reviewers

35:19 ↗ are not taken away from their duties to

35:21 ↗ respond and again we'll enance the

35:24 ↗ efficiency and reliability of the permit

35:26 ↗ process

35:31 ↗ I'm gonna pause for a moment on this

35:34 ↗ recommendation because I'm I am

35:37 ↗ embarrassed in in realizing that I'm

35:39 ↗ missing a slide uh with a very important

35:42 ↗ recommendation and so bear with me here

35:46 ↗ one of the recommendations we we we made

35:48 ↗ in the report um is to stream streamline

35:52 ↗ the third party review

35:54 ↗ process uh this is the pure review

35:58 ↗ process that Susan

36:00 ↗ mentioned uh when an applicant has um is

36:06 ↗ in a critical area or has to develop a a

36:10 ↗ particular report for their development

36:13 ↗ a geotechnical report or others uh the

36:17 ↗ city requires that those reports get

36:19 ↗ reviewed by a third party uh to review

36:22 ↗ the report developed by the applicants U

36:26 ↗ professional

36:27 ↗ that process uh to get those reports

36:32 ↗ peer-reviewed um is time consuming and

36:35 ↗ inefficient as it stands today uh the

36:39 ↗ and this is where Susan mentioned that

36:40 ↗ that often those third party pre-

36:42 ↗ reviewers are not on the same timeline

36:44 ↗ as the city uh and frankly part of the

36:48 ↗ cause of this

36:51 ↗ is not identifying early enough in the

36:55 ↗ process and and starting the peer review

36:59 ↗ process um as early in the process as

37:02 ↗ possible um staff know when an

37:06 ↗ application is received and uh when they

37:10 ↗ uh get the

37:12 ↗ materials that when that there will need

37:15 ↗ to be a thirdparty peer review of a

37:18 ↗ particular report however staff may

37:22 ↗ not begin to look at a particular

37:25 ↗ application until it reaches is the time

37:29 ↗ that they're ready to in the queue right

37:31 ↗ they've got a list big list of of

37:34 ↗ projects they're working through and it

37:37 ↗ might be 15 days into a review cycle

37:40 ↗ before they get to a particular project

37:42 ↗ you know that's been waiting for them to

37:43 ↗ look at and then oh by the way we need

37:46 ↗ to get this peer-reviewed and now we

37:48 ↗ need to need to understand how much it's

37:50 ↗ going to cost the peer-reviewer we need

37:52 ↗ to understand what the peer reviewer's

37:53 ↗ timeline is we need to get a a um a

37:57 ↗ purchase order completed with that peer

38:00 ↗ review that piece of the process and I'm

38:03 ↗ I'm embarrassed I don't have this in

38:04 ↗ there this is a major recommendation

38:06 ↗ that piece of the process is inefficient

38:09 ↗ and very timec consuming and from what

38:11 ↗ we heard from staff and and applicants

38:15 ↗ can be the cause of going past the

38:18 ↗ review timeline because of the the time

38:22 ↗ that that is taken to wait until the

38:24 ↗ identification of a peer review is

38:26 ↗ needed and the time it takes once once

38:29 ↗ you've identified it's needed to get the

38:31 ↗ peer reviewer to start uh and so one of

38:34 ↗ the recommendations that we are making

38:36 ↗ is to identify that need for a prer

38:39 ↗ review as early as possible at

38:41 ↗ intake and begin that peer review of

38:44 ↗ those technical documents uh almost

38:47 ↗ immediately we're recommending a number

38:49 ↗ of um process improvements

38:53 ↗ to um reduce the need for uh waiting for

38:58 ↗ for purchase orders um and and for

39:01 ↗ getting those out the door at the outset

39:05 ↗ getting that peer review timeline

39:07 ↗ started sooner in in the total

39:11 ↗ process will have a major impact on the

39:14 ↗ overall cycle time for any of these

39:16 ↗ particular projects so I apologize that

39:17 ↗ I don't have a a a slide for this um it

39:21 ↗ is in the the report and I wanted to to

39:23 ↗ pause here as I realized we didn't have

39:24 ↗ it and touch on that um the the process

39:28 ↗ Improvement for peer review uh is is an

39:32 ↗ important recommendation uh and one we

39:35 ↗ made and um and identified through

39:38 ↗ through the process mapping

39:40 ↗ sessions now now I'll talk about

39:42 ↗ performance measurement uh there's

39:44 ↗ currently a lack of of systematic

39:47 ↗ tracking of performance measurement uh

39:48 ↗ in the

39:49 ↗ process

39:51 ↗ really performance measures need need to

39:54 ↗ be established to to track things such

39:56 ↗ as review times and approval rates and

39:58 ↗ customer satisfaction on a on a

40:01 ↗ standardized basis it needs to be

40:04 ↗ regularly monitored uh which can help

40:06 ↗ the city identify their for improvement

40:08 ↗ really make some data driven decisions

40:11 ↗ uh and allocate resources more

40:14 ↗ effectively we found through the course

40:17 ↗ of this work and Susan mentioned it with

40:21 ↗ the IT

40:23 ↗ issues

40:24 ↗ there's one point of contact for for uh

40:28 ↗ obtaining data from the system and this

40:31 ↗ person's uh time is uh at a premium uh

40:37 ↗ their focus is not Community Planning

40:40 ↗ and Development uh and although it used

40:44 ↗ to be and and so we had through our work

40:49 ↗ difficulty in obtaining data part of

40:51 ↗ that the suggestion for the permit

40:53 ↗ coordinator role is that they'll take on

40:56 ↗ um the ability to pull data from the

40:59 ↗ system but really having performance

41:01 ↗ measures that are aligned with what the

41:04 ↗ state develops as they they have not yet

41:07 ↗ but as they do develop the particular

41:10 ↗ measures to align with SD

41:12 ↗ 5920 um to really again make those data

41:15 ↗ decision data driven decisions um

41:18 ↗ performance measurement also provides a

41:20 ↗ basis for accountability right it

41:22 ↗ ensures departments that are involved in

41:24 ↗ the permit process are really working

41:26 ↗ towards common goals

41:28 ↗ uh and we'll provide some clear metrics

41:30 ↗ for assessing efficiency and

41:31 ↗ Effectiveness uh and help ensure that

41:33 ↗ continuous Improvement um and um better

41:37 ↗ service

41:40 ↗ delivery we believe and Susan mentioned

41:44 ↗ it from what we heard through the

41:47 ↗ interviews right that there are a number

41:49 ↗ of outdated or unclear um standard

41:51 ↗ operating procedures and that really

41:54 ↗ leads to inconsistent processes and we

41:57 ↗ heard it in the process mapping sessions

42:00 ↗ when we ask folks how they do things we

42:01 ↗ would hear

42:02 ↗ from two two different people with the

42:05 ↗ same role doing something a different

42:08 ↗ way uh and so updating those standard op

42:11 ↗ operating

42:13 ↗ procedures you know is important it'll

42:15 ↗ help um promote fairness and

42:17 ↗ transparency and efficiency in the

42:19 ↗ process um you know providing clear and

42:22 ↗ updated standard operating procedures

42:24 ↗ can help reduce delays it improves

42:26 ↗ customer service um ensures

42:30 ↗ consistency in the application

42:32 ↗ processing uh and really also helps

42:34 ↗ staff understand their roles and

42:36 ↗ responsibilities better um reduces the

42:38 ↗ likelihood of errors and

42:41 ↗ inconsistencies and as Susan mentioned

42:43 ↗ you know it's really important that the

42:44 ↗ Sops are are regularly reviewed and

42:47 ↗ updated um and and again we see that uh

42:51 ↗ part of the permit coordinator's role as

42:53 ↗ well

42:57 ↗ staff within

42:59 ↗ CPD are are experienced and technically

43:02 ↗ proficient but you know the department

43:04 ↗ structure and this is not unusual in

43:08 ↗ permit processing but really leads to a

43:11 ↗ compartmentalized um expertise and a

43:14 ↗ segmented approach to project reviews

43:16 ↗ and there's sort of a lack of a unified

43:19 ↗ perspective that they're all working

43:22 ↗ towards the same overarching goal uh

43:25 ↗ interviews with staff

43:28 ↗ highlighted existing tensions and and a

43:31 ↗ lack of trust between different groups

43:33 ↗ um which really um discourages

43:38 ↗ collaboration physical separation of

43:40 ↗ team members um you know further in ches

43:44 ↗ this division so really to to counteract

43:47 ↗ these challenges and and to help Foster

43:49 ↗ more integrated departmental culture

43:53 ↗ we're proposing establishing quarterly

43:55 ↗ continuous Improvement process review

43:57 ↗ meetings and to really serve as a

44:00 ↗ platform for staff from all different

44:02 ↗ disciplines within CPT CPD to come

44:04 ↗ together in a in a structured way to

44:07 ↗ discuss and strategize and Implement uh

44:09 ↗ process

44:11 ↗ enhancements we we found in the process

44:15 ↗ mapping sessions and and this happens

44:18 ↗ quite a bit and it's one of my favorite

44:20 ↗ things to do you bring sort of the

44:23 ↗ disparate staff

44:25 ↗ together and and they get a chance to

44:27 ↗ step back from the dayto day and really

44:30 ↗ talk about what it is that they do and

44:32 ↗ what's frustrating them and why and um

44:35 ↗ there's a shared understanding there

44:37 ↗ that didn't exist um you know prior to

44:40 ↗ us conducting those process mapping

44:42 ↗ sessions uh it brought staff closer

44:45 ↗ together um helped people understand

44:47 ↗ certain frustrations and so you know

44:49 ↗ really as formalizing that and

44:52 ↗ establishing a Cadence you know we think

44:55 ↗ is really important and in addition you

44:57 ↗ know the new land use

44:59 ↗ code

45:01 ↗ um allows for for Less discretion which

45:06 ↗ is a departure from the previous code

45:08 ↗ and and so giving staff that time

45:11 ↗ together to to help them talk through

45:13 ↗ the the new code uh in regular

45:15 ↗ face-to-face interactions will again

45:17 ↗ help them get a deeper appreciation for

45:19 ↗ each other and break down those

45:22 ↗ silos uh promote a cohesive team

45:24 ↗ environment um improve communication

45:28 ↗ we really feel strongly about bringing

45:30 ↗ staff together um to help with the the

45:33 ↗ cultural component of of working

45:35 ↗ together as one team towards a common

45:38 ↗ goal which then breaks down those SAS

45:41 ↗ when you have issues with certain

45:42 ↗ permits right and and don't feel um like

45:46 ↗ you're you're bothering someone by

45:47 ↗ asking questions

45:50 ↗ right there's a need for enhanced

45:52 ↗ training and and this goes not only for

45:55 ↗ for staff but also applicants uh

45:58 ↗ you know staff and applicants need

46:01 ↗ training to to navigate the process more

46:03 ↗ efficiently um providing ongoing

46:06 ↗ training opportunities can ensure that

46:08 ↗ that staff remain up to date with the

46:09 ↗ latest regulations and Technologies and

46:11 ↗ best

46:12 ↗ practices um these trainings should

46:15 ↗ include cross training uh to promote a

46:17 ↗ better understanding of various roles

46:20 ↗ within the department again Foster

46:23 ↗ collaboration uh and you know really

46:26 ↗ improve the skill skills and knowledge

46:27 ↗ of Staff but also contribute to a

46:29 ↗ cohesive and effective scheme know for

46:32 ↗ for applicants you know we see it

46:35 ↗ in really the pro providing complete

46:40 ↗ information at the outset maybe it's

46:42 ↗ train maybe it's training videos on my

46:44 ↗ building permit and frequently asked

46:46 ↗ questions uh but giving tools for

46:51 ↗ applicants to um come in ready uh as

46:55 ↗ they are um preparing to submit uh for a

46:58 ↗ permanent

47:02 ↗ application we discussed uh

47:06 ↗ the some of the issues around

47:09 ↗ information technology in the

47:11 ↗ department and uh there was a a former

47:14 ↗ staff member who worked in CPD who is

47:17 ↗ now in it uh who has sort of a laundry

47:20 ↗ list of improvements that uh could be

47:24 ↗ made to the system that that frankly

47:26 ↗ does not have the time to make uh and so

47:30 ↗ we feel that a lot of those automations

47:34 ↗ that Susan talked about that don't exist

47:36 ↗ could

47:38 ↗ exist and hiring a contract software

47:42 ↗ developer not a full-time staff member

47:44 ↗ somebody to come in and make a number of

47:46 ↗ these fixes to the system that are

47:48 ↗ already known by

47:50 ↗ staff uh that you know this would this

47:53 ↗ would be someone that has experience in

47:56 ↗ permitting softare Ware

47:58 ↗ um that can really come in and make a

48:02 ↗ number of of Information Technology fix

48:05 ↗ fixes to improve some of the automation

48:08 ↗ uh and some

48:09 ↗ of reduce some of the manual data entry

48:12 ↗ that that slows the process um and so

48:16 ↗ really hiring a contract software

48:18 ↗ developer um to come in and and sort of

48:22 ↗ work through the L the list of already

48:24 ↗ known issues uh and already known

48:27 ↗ improvements that just don't have the

48:29 ↗ time to make um with the the staff

48:32 ↗ currently available that can really make

48:34 ↗ some improvement to um processing and

48:38 ↗ efficiency in cycle

48:39 ↗ time so really the um you know for us

48:45 ↗ uh there are several strengths a lot of

48:48 ↗ areas for improvement the

48:50 ↗ recommendations that that we make um you

48:52 ↗ know we think will enhance efficiency

48:55 ↗ customer service predictability

48:58 ↗ of the process uh as Susan mentioned you

49:01 ↗ know hiring the permit coordinator role

49:05 ↗ to feel aison with customers and staff

49:09 ↗ ensure that permits are working their

49:12 ↗ way

49:13 ↗ through process in a timely fashion

49:15 ↗ staying on top of uh the review cycles

49:19 ↗ and ensuring that that staff are

49:21 ↗ conducting the reviews in a timely

49:22 ↗ manner ensuring peer reviews are

49:24 ↗ occurring being able to pull data system

49:28 ↗ we see that as a Lynch pin in in our

49:30 ↗ recommendation uh in our recommendations

49:32 ↗ and a needed role um that uh for for the

49:37 ↗ city really the improvements to the peer

49:40 ↗ review process we see as

49:44 ↗ um

49:45 ↗ really Paramount

49:48 ↗ to shaving time off of uh many of these

49:52 ↗ reviews um we see the peer review

49:55 ↗ process as one of the major ISS issues

49:57 ↗ in turnaround time and cycle time uh and

50:00 ↗ frustration both with staff uh and with

50:04 ↗ customers um and then and then culture

50:06 ↗ building and and getting everybody in

50:08 ↗ the city to work as U as one team

50:10 ↗ towards one goal um will really you know

50:14 ↗ help improve the process and so we think

50:16 ↗ the next step will involve sort of

50:18 ↗ prioritizing these recommendations

50:20 ↗ developing an abilitation

50:21 ↗ plan um and uh we look we look forward

50:25 ↗ to questions um about the work that

50:29 ↗ we've

50:32 ↗ done excellent thank you for both your

50:35 ↗ report and findings and the

50:38 ↗ presentation so excuse me we are now at

50:42 ↗ appoint for Council

50:45 ↗ questions anybody want to start council

50:48 ↗ member

50:49 ↗ Hall

50:51 ↗ no sure thank you thank you so much um

50:54 ↗ for the presentation and the detailed

50:56 ↗ report made for fun reading over the

50:57 ↗ weekend um I have just some clarifying

51:00 ↗ questions I hope that's okay so um the

51:03 ↗ fir I actually did have a question about

51:05 ↗ the external peer reviewing process uh

51:08 ↗ and kind of is that really within our

51:10 ↗ our wheelhouse to control and you were

51:12 ↗ getting into that a little bit in terms

51:13 ↗ of what what's available to us being

51:16 ↗ really clear with communication with

51:18 ↗ them about kind of the state mandates

51:19 ↗ and requirements for turnaround time but

51:21 ↗ then also identifying Upstream when

51:25 ↗ we're actually going to need that is

51:27 ↗ there anything else beyond that that

51:30 ↗ because it does seem like your comments

51:31 ↗ at the end really struck a chord with me

51:34 ↗ it seems like that's one of the major

51:35 ↗ points of this is the peer review

51:38 ↗ process so are there any other things

51:40 ↗ that we should be thinking about

51:42 ↗ creatively with regard to peer

51:45 ↗ review council member the major issue

51:49 ↗ with peer review as we see it

51:53 ↗ is one it's not getting identified early

51:57 ↗ enough when it does get

52:00 ↗ identified the current process that they

52:04 ↗ have to go through to get the to

52:07 ↗ identify the the peer reviewer that's

52:09 ↗ going to conduct that review to get a a

52:13 ↗ purchase order completed and signed so

52:16 ↗ that they can then start that review is

52:19 ↗ also taking upwards of you know a week

52:22 ↗ to 10 days and so now like you're in

52:24 ↗ you're in a review um submitted my

52:27 ↗ application on day one you know and it

52:30 ↗ might not start to get reviewed until

52:32 ↗ day

52:33 ↗ 15 now we're looking at day 25 to get

52:36 ↗ the peer reviewer

52:38 ↗ started and so we really feel pushing it

52:40 ↗ all up Upstream identifying it

52:42 ↗ immediately and then we've identified a

52:44 ↗ number of improvements to reduce time it

52:47 ↗ takes to identify and um contract with

52:50 ↗ essentially that those peer

52:52 ↗ reviewers getting I think that will fit

52:56 ↗ it into the needed timeline um you're

52:58 ↗ right you

53:00 ↗ know you know I think within any

53:04 ↗ contract you know another potential idea

53:07 ↗ as you renew sort of these larger

53:09 ↗ contracts with the peer reviewers is

53:13 ↗ building in you know some some some

53:16 ↗ carrots and sticks right and ensuring

53:19 ↗ that there are um cycle times that they

53:23 ↗ agree to meet to right that when they

53:25 ↗ when they are told go they will get it

53:27 ↗ turned around in a certain time and

53:29 ↗ building that into uh contracts when you

53:32 ↗ renew those contracts with a certain

53:34 ↗ those per reviewers um can be another

53:37 ↗ option uh being able to hold them

53:40 ↗ accountable to something because right

53:41 ↗ now as we understand it they're not

53:44 ↗ accountable to a timeline it's

53:47 ↗ essentially how fast can you get it done

53:50 ↗ and they say well we we can get it done

53:52 ↗ this fast and we say well thank you and

53:54 ↗ and and send it off um and and whether

53:58 ↗ they meet that timeline or not you're

54:00 ↗ you know you don't have any um

54:03 ↗ accountability mechanisms and so

54:05 ↗ building those into a new contract could

54:06 ↗ be helpful um but really you know

54:08 ↗ pushing it all up to the front and um

54:12 ↗ and getting them started immediately

54:13 ↗ will really help reduce the overall

54:16 ↗ cycle

54:18 ↗ time okay yeah thank you the contracts

54:21 ↗ building that into contracts is a is a

54:22 ↗ good idea too yeah um

54:26 ↗ so

54:27 ↗ the what's second question the multiple

54:30 ↗ review Cycles this was definitely

54:32 ↗ something that even us as Council

54:34 ↗ identified as a concern when this was

54:36 ↗ like last before us I remember us seeing

54:38 ↗ the big on the screen where like the

54:42 ↗ process map like flowchart essentially

54:45 ↗ and saying it looks like it's going back

54:47 ↗ a lot of time so I was just wondering

54:49 ↗ and maybe this is more for director

54:51 ↗ Dolly wall um when we had previously

54:54 ↗ identified what kind of the process

54:56 ↗ improvements that we'll start to work on

54:58 ↗ in the meantime while we find this

54:59 ↗ consultant did we have something in this

55:02 ↗ space or is this going to be kind of a

55:04 ↗ brand new

55:07 ↗ um is this are we going to be working on

55:09 ↗ the multiple

55:11 ↗ review Cycles how to reduce the number

55:14 ↗ of rounds of review how to reduce yeah

55:17 ↗ so so I think one of the recommendations

55:19 ↗ of having a complete application in the

55:21 ↗ beginning will help reduce the number of

55:23 ↗ rounds of review uh there is still

55:26 ↗ information sometimes you know when when

55:28 ↗ the first uh round first set of comments

55:31 ↗ go

55:32 ↗ out the applicants have to address them

55:35 ↗ and they may change a few things in that

55:38 ↗ iteration so it may still need a second

55:41 ↗ round because the new stuff has showing

55:44 ↗ up for the first time but the but the

55:46 ↗ goal is that if we get a complete

55:47 ↗ application we give a more holistic

55:49 ↗ review of everything which I think staff

55:51 ↗ tries to do it now but if there's

55:54 ↗ missing information they can really

55:56 ↗ produce that that that will help the

55:59 ↗ number of rounds of review um the other

56:01 ↗ I think is more customer service we are

56:03 ↗ encouraging staff to call the applicants

56:06 ↗ and you know have a Comm and better

56:08 ↗ communication tools are the other uh

56:11 ↗ Avenue that can help sometimes it's

56:13 ↗ easier to just put a comment on the plan

56:16 ↗ to send it out for corrections as

56:17 ↗ opposed to calling them up having a

56:20 ↗ conversation understanding what their

56:22 ↗ thought process was because you know

56:23 ↗ staff can sometimes understand what was

56:26 ↗ produced maybe is in you know what what

56:28 ↗ the applicant was thinking and what the

56:30 ↗ code requirements are they can be a back

56:32 ↗ and forth conversation uh so there those

56:35 ↗ are some of the strategies to reduce the

56:37 ↗ number of uh rounds of review and these

56:39 ↗ are strategies that we're already CPD is

56:42 ↗ already mindful of and has has been

56:43 ↗ thinking about since the last Council

56:45 ↗ touch yes is that right okay got it yeah

56:48 ↗ that was my question more is have we

56:50 ↗ kind of started thinking about what to

56:51 ↗ do or is now that we have the

56:53 ↗ recommendation are we're going to move

56:54 ↗ forward with reducing well now we have

56:56 ↗ have more tangible things to do too I

56:58 ↗ think we were working on all fronts uh

57:00 ↗ when we first embarked on process

57:03 ↗ improvements like for the consultant

57:05 ↗ team you know we had a smaller group of

57:07 ↗ Consultants who got really busy during

57:09 ↗ peak times so we did do an RFQ to

57:12 ↗ broaden the bench uh because if if they

57:15 ↗ are on vacation or something we can

57:16 ↗ actually um reach out to more applicant

57:19 ↗ you know more Consultants uh for the

57:21 ↗ same you know if it's Wetland peer

57:23 ↗ review we have five of them as go to

57:26 ↗ just one of them and then we can spread

57:27 ↗ it around so we've done some of those

57:30 ↗ strategies to help um with the peer

57:32 ↗ review aspects of it and then but we

57:35 ↗ need to do more in terms of formalizing

57:37 ↗ the the routing happens early on the

57:40 ↗ contracts get updated at the beginning

57:42 ↗ of the year so that we're not into

57:44 ↗ contract cycle update as we are looking

57:47 ↗ at actually giving them a green light to

57:48 ↗ start looking at the plans so some of

57:51 ↗ those strategies we've started

57:52 ↗ implementing but this will help us kind

57:54 ↗ of focus on and really you know take a

57:58 ↗ look at it from for that for that piece

58:01 ↗ thanks no I'm glad to hear that and I

58:03 ↗ completely agree yeah this should

58:04 ↗ definitely help with Focus forward um

58:08 ↗ and then so I guess back to ref Tellis

58:10 ↗ now um is it okay if I I few more anyone

58:15 ↗ else okay um performance measures it

58:17 ↗ just to clarify is the recommendation

58:20 ↗ to um to wait for the Department of

58:24 ↗ Commerce to create and then align

58:26 ↗ whatever our performance measure should

58:28 ↗ be with however they're measuring

58:29 ↗ success or to adopt or use some of what

58:34 ↗ you've drafted in the appendix or

58:38 ↗ both both um there's no no need to wait

58:41 ↗ for the State uh certainly but um when

58:45 ↗ the state does develop their metrics um

58:49 ↗ you know you all will want to be aligned

58:51 ↗ with those but that I think that's going

58:53 ↗ to be a subset of a large group of

58:56 ↗ performance metrics to help uh Minnie

58:59 ↗ and her team Emily and James I see

59:01 ↗ you're on um you know really help manage

59:04 ↗ their staff and the department and um

59:07 ↗ understand uh throughout you know a year

59:11 ↗ how their team is um how their team is

59:14 ↗ working and and are things getting

59:17 ↗ better or worse uh improving and

59:19 ↗ customer satisfaction is an important

59:21 ↗ one that you know certainly won't be

59:23 ↗ included in in what the state has um

59:26 ↗ that uh that min's team could start

59:29 ↗ working on immediately as

59:31 ↗ well okay that appreciate the uh the

59:34 ↗ clarity there um and then the last one

59:36 ↗ is probably for director Dolly Waller

59:39 ↗ City administrator Bob quits so one of

59:41 ↗ the questions about the quarterly

59:43 ↗ meetings it seemed like the intent in

59:45 ↗ the meeting behind that was really about

59:47 ↗ creating more meaningful like engagement

59:50 ↗ face to face with people to talk about

59:53 ↗ um like roles and responsibilities and

59:55 ↗ and get on the same page

59:57 ↗ um as we considering moving General

1:00:00 ↗ government into new office space CPD

1:00:03 ↗ would be part of that right I mean we

1:00:05 ↗ would have potentially more interactions

1:00:08 ↗ and engagement of CPD staff through that

1:00:10 ↗ action as well are we seeing that as a

1:00:13 ↗ potential solution to this as well to

1:00:15 ↗ compliment council member Hall members

1:00:17 ↗ of the council yeah we are um um we are

1:00:21 ↗ not going to go back to 5 days a week at

1:00:23 ↗ the office though so I think one of the

1:00:25 ↗ things that Min has been working on is

1:00:27 ↗ to try to coordinate best as possible

1:00:29 ↗ when people are here uh so that there is

1:00:32 ↗ overlap so it's not a matter of one

1:00:34 ↗ planner is here each day five days a

1:00:36 ↗ week and they never see each other so uh

1:00:38 ↗ we're doing that um the inspectors are

1:00:41 ↗ at tibit uh manner uh that's not a

1:00:44 ↗ long-term solution so as we look at

1:00:45 ↗ General government we'll have office

1:00:47 ↗ space available for the entire

1:00:48 ↗ department um I think it again I don't

1:00:51 ↗ want anyone to think that this means

1:00:53 ↗ them we're going to have everyone here 5

1:00:54 ↗ days a week uh but uh certainly it'll be

1:00:57 ↗ more and more opportunities to be

1:01:01 ↗ together okay yes very good and didn't

1:01:04 ↗ want to indicate that I think coming

1:01:05 ↗ back five days a week is a good idea

1:01:06 ↗ either so I appreciate your your Clarity

1:01:08 ↗ on that thank you very much um rap Talis

1:01:11 ↗ again for the answers and for the very

1:01:12 ↗ detailed report and of course valy wall

1:01:15 ↗ for all your

1:01:17 ↗ work council member right I I just have

1:01:20 ↗ a couple of questions and and thank you

1:01:22 ↗ council member Hall I I was coming to

1:01:24 ↗ Riff on a little bit of what you were

1:01:25 ↗ talking about earlier so um but one of

1:01:28 ↗ the things I wanted to get some sense

1:01:29 ↗ from you is how significant of a a

1:01:32 ↗ performance barrier was the physical

1:01:34 ↗ separation of staff I me was it a big

1:01:37 ↗ deal a little deal um you know how how

1:01:42 ↗ important is it that they be collocated

1:01:44 ↗ because I mean as council member Hall

1:01:46 ↗ was talking about we're looking at uh

1:01:48 ↗ space and so this is good time to have

1:01:50 ↗ an understanding of what the impact

1:01:53 ↗ is I'm gonna I'm going to ask Susan to

1:01:57 ↗ to speak to that but you know I think

1:01:59 ↗ it's something that we heard through our

1:02:01 ↗ our interviews uh and could feel a

1:02:04 ↗ little bit uh in the process mapping SE

1:02:07 ↗ we conducted Susan I I think that staff

1:02:11 ↗ finds uh workarounds if you will I mean

1:02:14 ↗ obviously they call one another uh they

1:02:18 ↗ email one another and so forth but

1:02:21 ↗ there's it's it's always better if you

1:02:25 ↗ have a definite time when you gather all

1:02:29 ↗ the people that are involved in this

1:02:31 ↗ process Again Sam mentioned this you you

1:02:34 ↗ want to get to a mentality where we're

1:02:36 ↗ all in this process together and the way

1:02:40 ↗ that you help reinforce that is have uh

1:02:44 ↗ designated times when everyone gathers

1:02:47 ↗ it doesn't need to be everybody every

1:02:49 ↗ day is in the same space to make that

1:02:52 ↗ work but it is important to at least

1:02:56 ↗ designate that there are certain times

1:02:59 ↗ when all the people involved in the

1:03:01 ↗ process meet so I I I I think to answer

1:03:05 ↗ your question I don't think it's

1:03:07 ↗ necessary that everybody is all in one

1:03:10 ↗ place I mean prepandemic of course it's

1:03:13 ↗ always easier to walk by a person's desk

1:03:15 ↗ and go hey I just remembered uh I was

1:03:17 ↗ looking at this application that's

1:03:20 ↗ that's all you know those casual

1:03:21 ↗ conversations help but I don't think

1:03:23 ↗ we're there anymore I you know know it

1:03:26 ↗ we're going to have to find specific

1:03:28 ↗ times when people gather to talk about

1:03:31 ↗ projects yeah I think that's I think

1:03:33 ↗ that's interesting and I think that is

1:03:34 ↗ going to actually segue really nicely

1:03:37 ↗ into my next question because I think

1:03:39 ↗ this is where you start doing technology

1:03:41 ↗ mediated um uh interactions instead of

1:03:45 ↗ iners mediated interactions but my

1:03:47 ↗ second question for you is um you

1:03:50 ↗ mentioned the hiring a contract

1:03:52 ↗ developer do you have any idea of how

1:03:56 ↗ much that would be is that one person

1:03:58 ↗ for six months is it one person for six

1:04:00 ↗ years um any any kind of order of

1:04:03 ↗ magnitude on what that would

1:04:05 ↗ involve yeah our our sense is is uh on

1:04:09 ↗ on the former suggestion it it's one

1:04:11 ↗ person probably closer for you know six

1:04:14 ↗ months to a year to work through sort of

1:04:16 ↗ a a backlog of uh Improvement ideas that

1:04:21 ↗ already exist um that that staff have

1:04:23 ↗ come up with that uh the current

1:04:27 ↗ um the current staff member that is

1:04:30 ↗ assisting with with some of the

1:04:32 ↗ technology has um so I don't see that as

1:04:36 ↗ a as a long-term thing um but rather to

1:04:38 ↗ help make some immediate automation

1:04:41 ↗ improvements and uh and others within

1:04:43 ↗ the systems that exist as they are today

1:04:46 ↗ and then I want to follow up on on kind

1:04:48 ↗ of that line and pull on that thread for

1:04:51 ↗ a second did anybody talk to ecdg um

1:04:53 ↗ Alliance about where they're going with

1:04:57 ↗ um my building permit um is there any

1:05:00 ↗ way to um leverage them and and we can't

1:05:03 ↗ be the only one with these problems or

1:05:07 ↗ challenges um yeah so you know there's

1:05:10 ↗ multiple staff from uh from our city

1:05:13 ↗ that uh sits on E City go um different

1:05:16 ↗ committees uh we have our building

1:05:18 ↗ official James Gray on the code

1:05:20 ↗ committee we have Keith Tumi from our it

1:05:22 ↗ Department that's part of the the whole

1:05:24 ↗ whole thing um and we have AUM uh mana

1:05:28 ↗ and that that is actively involved and

1:05:30 ↗ engaged and so is Gus Our IT director um

1:05:34 ↗ they uh eity go had an RFP uh out for a

1:05:38 ↗ consultant uh to um they were seeking uh

1:05:43 ↗ someone to help with the um the MVP

1:05:46 ↗ portal and then the whole um tracking so

1:05:49 ↗ so there's there's work occurring on

1:05:51 ↗ that front as well uh I think that's a

1:05:54 ↗ separate conversation we can brief

1:05:56 ↗ Council on at some point yeah but but

1:05:58 ↗ there there are there's staff involved

1:06:00 ↗ in what's happening in in the eity go

1:06:03 ↗ area great that's all I got for right

1:06:04 ↗ now thank

1:06:06 ↗ you anybody else with any

1:06:10 ↗ questions I'm seeing head shakes so I

1:06:14 ↗ assume there are no public around for

1:06:17 ↗ public

1:06:18 ↗ comment okay then any feedback

1:06:27 ↗ okay council member Hall just really

1:06:29 ↗ quick again thank you R Tes for the work

1:06:31 ↗ I really appreciate it and thanks um for

1:06:33 ↗ all the city staff who participated in

1:06:35 ↗ the surveys uh or in the uh the groups

1:06:37 ↗ and then also of course the customers

1:06:39 ↗ people in the community who who are a

1:06:41 ↗ part of this

1:06:44 ↗ um I think um I just wanted to say that

1:06:48 ↗ there are some policy relevant things

1:06:51 ↗ that we can pull from this that that

1:06:52 ↗ would be important for us to talk about

1:06:54 ↗ at budget so I just wanted to make sure

1:06:56 ↗ to talk talk about that um on the dis

1:07:00 ↗ that if we're not going to talk about it

1:07:02 ↗ this coming budget season that it's

1:07:04 ↗ living somewhere so we know that we

1:07:05 ↗ should talk about this for hire this

1:07:07 ↗ this work that's actually related to

1:07:09 ↗ council because most of these

1:07:10 ↗ recommendations are really more

1:07:11 ↗ administrative and we have all the

1:07:13 ↗ confidence in the world that that you'll

1:07:16 ↗ move these recommendations forward and

1:07:18 ↗ um a very successful outcomes I did want

1:07:22 ↗ to highlight though that there was one

1:07:24 ↗ piece of feedback in the process

1:07:26 ↗ improvements that we received about how

1:07:29 ↗ not all Staff feel that their concerns

1:07:32 ↗ are um understood or or addressed by

1:07:36 ↗ leaders in the city I think that's was

1:07:39 ↗ what it was and so some I'm not sure if

1:07:42 ↗ there's anything that can be done

1:07:43 ↗ differently from a leadership

1:07:44 ↗ perspective but perhaps that's just

1:07:46 ↗ being more mindful about how can we

1:07:48 ↗ create more opportunities to um listen

1:07:51 ↗ to staff when they're highlighting

1:07:53 ↗ concerns or when they're highlighting

1:07:56 ↗ potential improvements I don't know what

1:07:58 ↗ that would look like day today you would

1:07:59 ↗ so I just wanted to make sure to

1:08:00 ↗ highlight no absolutely thank you for

1:08:03 ↗ that um yeah we have absolutely want

1:08:06 ↗ staff to be empowered to make the

1:08:07 ↗ changes uh so I I had the same question

1:08:10 ↗ for refis I think in terms of what what

1:08:12 ↗ exactly does this mean because we would

1:08:15 ↗ love to have uh staff come up with

1:08:17 ↗ Solutions because that there's not

1:08:19 ↗ nothing more joyful than uh than staff

1:08:22 ↗ saying we want to make this Improvement

1:08:24 ↗ this you know like this and so we want

1:08:26 ↗ to give them all the tools uh we can uh

1:08:30 ↗ for that objective for sure and let me

1:08:32 ↗ just add um there's been a lot of change

1:08:36 ↗ in our community Planning and

1:08:37 ↗ Development Department over the last few

1:08:38 ↗ years um and with that change um you

1:08:43 ↗ know is challenge issues there are trust

1:08:45 ↗ issues there are just change issues and

1:08:49 ↗ um as I think we all know everyone

1:08:51 ↗ approaches those kind of situations in a

1:08:53 ↗ different way um you know Min has been

1:08:56 ↗ very forthright she came here with many

1:08:58 ↗ years of experience as a planning

1:09:00 ↗ manager uh understands um the issues

1:09:04 ↗ that we've been facing then we asked her

1:09:06 ↗ to do an entirely new land use code so

1:09:08 ↗ you know the dust is beginning to settle

1:09:10 ↗ on a lot of these things uh change is

1:09:12 ↗ not quite as scary there have been

1:09:14 ↗ opportunities uh where trust has been

1:09:16 ↗ extended and uh people feel good about

1:09:19 ↗ that well this is definitely still a

1:09:21 ↗ work in progress but what we needed from

1:09:22 ↗ Rellis which we got was some very

1:09:25 ↗ specific tangible uh improvements that

1:09:28 ↗ we can make so the commitment mayor

1:09:31 ↗ Paulie has uh to this is to move forward

1:09:34 ↗ with that uh we will do what we can

1:09:36 ↗ without additional budget resources

1:09:38 ↗ right away uh and as we are now working

1:09:41 ↗ on uh 2425 and the timing of this is

1:09:44 ↗ very purposeful we knew we needed to get

1:09:46 ↗ this to you about now as we start

1:09:48 ↗ looking at budget issues come to you at

1:09:50 ↗ the end of July uh kind of with the

1:09:53 ↗ landscape of what we'll be facing this

1:09:55 ↗ is part of that and so we appreciate

1:09:57 ↗ riis's good working making sure that uh

1:10:00 ↗ the results were available to you at

1:10:02 ↗ this time so um it remains a bit in

1:10:05 ↗ progress there's been a lot of change uh

1:10:08 ↗ I think the entire way the department is

1:10:10 ↗ managed the way it approaches uh

1:10:12 ↗ projects you know it was DSD it was

1:10:16 ↗ about development services it was not

1:10:18 ↗ about the community and you know just

1:10:20 ↗ that simple change was the beginning of

1:10:22 ↗ a lot of change as far as focus on what

1:10:24 ↗ we do so so um always will be work in

1:10:27 ↗ progress but I'm feeling very confident

1:10:29 ↗ with Minnie's leadership with her

1:10:31 ↗ management team now with some very

1:10:32 ↗ specific

1:10:33 ↗ recommendations um we'll be able to do a

1:10:35 ↗ lot of good

1:10:40 ↗ work couple thoughts this uh this is

1:10:44 ↗ kind of my hobby horse this this

1:10:45 ↗ particular topic so um bear with me but

1:10:49 ↗ um a lot of the the um recommendations

1:10:52 ↗ make a lot of sense to me but there are

1:10:54 ↗ um a couple I just want to call out one

1:10:56 ↗ is standard operating procedures nothing

1:10:58 ↗ is going to be more effective in moving

1:11:00 ↗ an organization than having standard

1:11:02 ↗ work and a standard way of doing it so

1:11:04 ↗ uh right on there um I think um the idea

1:11:07 ↗ of of continuous Improvement is really

1:11:09 ↗ good I think quarterly continuous

1:11:11 ↗ Improvement is kind of silly um quite

1:11:13 ↗ honestly I think continuous Improvement

1:11:14 ↗ the word continuous is the operative

1:11:16 ↗ phrase here and not it's not sporadic so

1:11:19 ↗ I would look at ways that you could make

1:11:21 ↗ that part of the culture of the

1:11:23 ↗ organization that we are always looking

1:11:24 ↗ for small mental changes not trying to

1:11:27 ↗ do things on a on a timeline when

1:11:29 ↗ because then it becomes forced um I I

1:11:32 ↗ think I like the idea of a contract

1:11:33 ↗ software developer but I'm not 100%

1:11:36 ↗ certain and the one thing I have a lot

1:11:38 ↗ of uh grief with is hiring a permit

1:11:41 ↗ coordinator because whenever I have a

1:11:43 ↗ process and I have to hire someone to

1:11:44 ↗ coordinate that process that process is

1:11:46 ↗ broken so fix the process don't hire a

1:11:49 ↗ coordinator so so that's um kind of my

1:11:52 ↗ my uh my my big Takeaway on that is I

1:11:55 ↗ would have a hard time getting on board

1:11:56 ↗ with that unless I knew that everything

1:11:58 ↗ was done that made those processes um

1:12:00 ↗ absolutely bulletproof and I and I know

1:12:03 ↗ I think if you did that you would need a

1:12:05 ↗ a person to process it or coordinate it

1:12:08 ↗ that's all I

1:12:10 ↗ got anybody

1:12:13 ↗ else okay I will throw in just how

1:12:17 ↗ impressed I am with how specific this is

1:12:22 ↗ and how I can definitely see this um

1:12:25 ↗ these recommendations being something

1:12:27 ↗ that you can take a checklist to and go

1:12:30 ↗ okay these are the things that we need

1:12:32 ↗ to work on that will help make our

1:12:35 ↗ employees jobs easier that will help

1:12:37 ↗ make um the permit process faster that

1:12:40 ↗ will help improve customer service Etc

1:12:42 ↗ so I appreciate that one thing I don't

1:12:46 ↗ think anybody mentioned is all of the

1:12:49 ↗ improvements that have been made thus

1:12:51 ↗ far and the data um being pulled for

1:12:55 ↗ 2024 and even 2023 that shows how many

1:13:00 ↗ days of improvement that you've made to

1:13:03 ↗ building permits and land use permits

1:13:05 ↗ already um so I just wanted to also call

1:13:09 ↗ that out and appreciate that because

1:13:11 ↗ that shows how hard at work you guys

1:13:13 ↗ have been doing the work on the ground

1:13:16 ↗ already as the report and interviews

1:13:20 ↗ have been pulling through so I wanted to

1:13:22 ↗ say that appreciation as well

1:13:26 ↗ okay do you guys have what you need from

1:13:29 ↗ us anything else no I think we've got

1:13:31 ↗ what we need will uh again this is one

1:13:36 ↗ of Mayor Paulie's top priorities for

1:13:37 ↗ 2024 uh it's certainly been the

1:13:39 ↗ council's uh main concern one of its

1:13:41 ↗ main concerns uh and I think we are now

1:13:44 ↗ have the tools that we need just to

1:13:46 ↗ continue our work and as we look at 2526

1:13:49 ↗ budget uh we will certainly be coming

1:13:51 ↗ back with issues but um a lot of this is

1:13:54 ↗ not money a lot of this is as I think

1:13:57 ↗ many of you pointed out it's

1:13:58 ↗ organization it's processes procedures

1:14:01 ↗ and so we will work on that right wi way

1:14:03 ↗ and as we look at budget issues if there

1:14:05 ↗ are appropriate things to bring forward

1:14:07 ↗ we'll do that so thank

1:14:10 ↗ you fantastic well that is the last item

1:14:13 ↗ on our agenda we appreciate you guys

1:14:15 ↗ staying with us and with that I will say

1:14:18 ↗ we are adjourned at 9:25 p.m. thank you

Approved minutes

Extracted from the next meeting's packet, where this meeting's minutes were approved as a consent-calendar attachment.

Open PDF

Attendance

Council / Members (7)

Barbara de Michele

Zach Hall

Victoria Hunt

Russell Joe

Tola Marts

Chris Reh

Lindsey Walsh