CITY OF LACONIA
FIFTEENTH MEETING
May 20, 2004 City Hall
Conference Room 200A
(DRAFT UNTIL APPROVED)
Members present: Peter Brunette (Chair), James Joyal (Vice Chair), Linda Peary, Brenda Schmucker, Rick Heinis and James Baird
Members absent: Sharon Fleischman (Secretary)
The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by the Chair, who offered no report but remarked that he has been forced to redo the first draft of the Final Report from memory due to a computer failure.
James Joyal made a motion, seconded by Rick Heinis, to table approval of the Minutes of 4/28/04. Motion carried by unanimous voice vote.
The called for reports from the Subcommittees:
1. Public Safety and Infrastructure (Rick H., James J.) Mr. Joyal distributed a chart that sets forth certain examples of actual vs. potential permit fees for selected vendor sites. He also distributed a copy of a specific vendor site, explained that he had prepared these documents to demonstrate how the City loses revenue due to the current rule allowing for vendors to pay $100 for each additional site and the merger of sites into one. The consensus of the committee was that the current fee structure should be changed to eliminate these losses.
2. Laconia Rally & Race Association Liason (Linda P., Brenda S.). Linda Peary reported that she attended the most recent meeting of LRRA, and learned that the Association is currently working on the Vintage Race and a Bike Show to be held at Opechee Park, the proceeds from which will be donated to the City. She also delivered a report that LRRA filed with the Division of Travel and Tourism, containing demographic and lodging data pertaining to the rally.
3. Local Businesses and Landowners (James J., Rick H.) Rick Heinis reported that he and Mr. Joyal spoke recently with several Weirs residents and business operators and received a number of comments, which he summarized and will distribute to the committee members by email.
4. City Council Liason (Brenda S., Linda P.), State and County Government (Peter B., Sharon F.), Vendors, Exhibitors and Non-local Businesses (Sharon F., Jim B.) and Event Model Research (Jim B., Peter B.): No report.
There was no old business.
Under new business, the Chair initiated a discussion
regarding the Mission Statement for the purposes of assisting him in preparing
the draft report. Some members expressed concern that some items are ambiguous
as to the Council’s intent, and other members suggested that perhaps the
committee was merely expected to set forth the data collected for presentation
to the Council without recommendations. The consensus of those present was that
the committee should attempt to respond to each of the items in the Mission
Statement to the best of its ability, and to that end, each member was asked to
address them individually. These
comments are summarized as follows.
1. Look
objectively at the event and its impact on the city public relations and
infrastructure. The members
agreed that the rally had an impact on the city’s public relations and
infrastructure, but were divided as to what these impacts are. The committee
will be presenting, in its final report, comments and data regarding the fiscal
and other impacts on City departments and public safety. It was noted that many
City employees look forward to the overtime, and that negative fiscal impacts
could be minimized or eliminated by changing the permitting fee structure to
ensure that such fees cover the City’s entire cost of regulating and hosting
the event.
2. Determine whether or not it is in the city's best interest to
assume responsibility for the event. The committee members were uncertain
as to how to answer this, based in part on the ambiguity of the phrase, “assume
responsibility.” The consensus is that the City is already primarily
responsible for public health and safety, but to the extent that the question
implies that the city should assert a managerial or ownership interest, the
committee was inclined to the negative.
3. Determine whether or not the length of the event should be changed.
The consensus is that the length of the rally should not be changed, as no
clear benefit to the City could be shown by doing so.
4. Examine ways to create a better working relationship with business
involved in the event. To the extent that this item refers to the relations
between the City and the businesses involved, the committee takes no position,
as there is no evidence that the current relationship is flawed. Regarding
relations between local businesses and the rally businesses, it was noted that
the Chamber of Commerce and other such organizations should take a more active
role in coordination and planning.
5. Examine funding alternatives for costs associated with city, county
and state agencies involved in the event. The committee has already voted
to recommend amendment of the permitting fee structure and that the City engage
in Bike-Week–related commerce to produce revenue.
There was no other business and no members of the public present to comment.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:50 p.m. Next meeting is scheduled on June 3.
Respectfully submitted,
Date: May 21, 2004 Peter R. Brunette, Chair