Recommendations of Plan to Plan Group: Rationale and Documentation   . . . Moving forward from the Technical Approach outlined in the Small Cities Grant Proposal application: 1. Should the HUD Small Cities Grant application be accepted, conduct proposed technical scope with necessary modifications.  The primary change would be adjustment to the schedule, given the delay in the grant award.  It is expected that delays would be limited to initial phases while adhering to the originally planned schedule of public participation sessions completed by March/April.  The remaining work of consolidating public meetings, interviews and survey results into a final product could slip beyond the very aggressive June completion date, given uncertainties in realistic scheduling for technical sections and/or planner availability. 2. Should the HUD Small Cities Grant application be rejected,  conduct proposed technical scope on reduced scale.  The Plan To Plan group has considered options, assuming the grant fails, and has identified several ways to proceed with reduced funds.  The first place to save lies where the majority of the costs accrue --  the mailings.  The Small Cities grant proposal application identified up to 5 mailings to all town residents at various points of the Visioning process.  These could be reasonably limited to 3 mailings – The 1st to alert the community to the planning activities anticipated, including dates and information access --  The 2nd to distribute the community survey --  The 3rd to distribute the vision statements, points of community consensus and steps forward resulting from the process. Supplementing the two town-wide mailings with routine postings in 10-15 locations, at Town Hall and through the 3 newspapers, should suffice as reminders without the additional cost of further mailings.   The second largest budget item was reproduction costs associated with the mailings.  These are automatically reduced if the 5 mailings are compressed into 3.  The reduction will be counter-balanced by poster reproduction but 11x17 can be reproduced at Town Hall.  Even with these suggestions, it is recognized that neither item exists in the proposed 2004 budget so even these reductions may not suffice to continue as suggested.  [See Recommendation 9.] . . . As soon as practicable:  3. Identify members of an Citizen Advisory Planning Group consisting of targeted members from the business, agricultural, service group and artistic communities in Town, as well as additional resident participation.  Targeted individuals would be selected to achieve balanced representation over town and school districts, resident ages and full-time/seasonal  residents.  As identified at www.geocities.com/planfornb, the purpose of the committee is to provide input, direction and support for the Visioning and Planning processes.  Specific activities would include but not be limited to: Help in arranging and assuring attendance at community planning sessions Review and integration of public input from community meetings Input and review of the data information package and survey Assistance in summary and conclusions from survey Assistance in developing proposed goals and objectives, the outcomes from the Visioning process Recommended Dates Identify/Contact Group Members: 15 JAN 2004 Scheduled First Meeting:  21 JAN [W] 2004 4. Finalize schedule of recommended planning events.  Once the Town Board has approved/authorized recommendations, the Plan To Plan Group will propose a calendar of meeting dates, times and locations for their review and finalization.  Upon finalization, Town will formally announce the process, dates and ways to participate through press release to News Herald, Greenville Press and Daily Mail and first posters.  As it becomes available, the forthcoming Town website under construction will be expanded to include planning information already available at www.geocities.com/planfornb, as developed by Bob Knighton.  Identify ~15 locations within town which are routinely updated with posters [11x17 which can be reproduced at Town Hall].  Pre-view all scheduled meetings of the planning process with what is to be discussed on evocative posters which solicit, cajole, browbeat residents into participating. Recommended Dates Proposed Schedule to Town Board:  22 DEC [M] 2003  Press Release/Distributions:  9JAN  2004 . . . To assure quality and follow-through of the Visioning Process currently scoped 5. Engage Planner Support [Phased].  During discussions of the planning process, members of the Plan To Plan conceded that while there is a lot of community talent and enthusiasm for the process, no individual has yet come forward who has been through a community visioning – planning process before.  Because much of the work is voluntary, it was agreed that advice from a consultant practiced in community planning would improve the quality and efficiency of the New Baltimore planning process and the success of public participation, the key to the process.  Informal discussion with a planner [Nan Stoltzenburg] who has assisted in other local community planning efforts confirmed the general approach taken to-date and identified some areas where engagement with someone trained in the process would be most advantageous.  The extent of engagement would be specified in advance and there are three areas where the Plan To Plan working group considers such expertise would be best applied: identification and interview of critical town players; review/assistance in survey development; and facilitation at the Integration meeting where all the ‘pieces’ from the public participation process will be formalized into the Vision statement.   It is anticipated that something on the order of $2500-3000 would be sufficient to provide the critical review to optimize the likelihood of a successful public participation process.  While recognizing severe constraints on available funding, the Plan To Plan group considers involvement [limited] of a consultant in the predominantly volunteer process a most cost-effective way to improve the likelihood of success and the overall quality of the process for all participants. Recommended Date As soon as possible 6. Identify and pursue alternative funding options.  Regardless of the success of the Small Cities Grant application, the planning process has not been budgeted for either 2003 or 2004.  While there may be unused funds allocated to different but related activities, the Plan to Plan Group recognizes that planning requires funding.  To support the activities and technical advice anticipated, the working group has identified potential sources which might be interested in financially supporting the proposed efforts. The first source is the Greenway.  The group has verified that when communities join, they can access funds for planning which are not available to non-member communities.  The funds are generally on the order of $10,000, available at the time of the Town joining.  There are alternative, competitive grants available from Greenway but their awards are lower and scheduled throughout the year [rather than at the particular time the Town joins].  Additional alternative sources may include other grants and/or ‘sponsorship’ of particular activities by New Baltimore service and community groups and/or local businesses whose interests are served by thoughtful community planning. Recommended Date As soon as possible . . . In anticipation the Public Meetings, as proposed in the Small Cities Grant  application: 7. Proceed with data package development, including but not necessarily limited to: 1990 – 2000 Census Summary 1990 – 2000 Residential/Subdivision/Commercial Development [table & map] Historic - 2003 Aerial photographs of New Baltimore 1990 – 2000 Town Budget Summaries Reproduction of Current Comprehensive Plan The grant application identified data summaries that would be developed for distribution prior to and/or at the public meeting sessions.  The intent is to provide the community with basic information about who we are, how we have or have not changed over recent years and how we function financially as a community.  Reviews are not intended to be exhaustive but rather provide a broad brush view of New Baltimore and the current status of community planning.  If public participation sessions indicate the need for additional, supplementary information, additional evaluations/summaries will be addressed at that time. Recommended Dates Draft packages completed: 13FEB [F] 2004 Distribution:  Public Participation Sessions   8. Develop preliminary survey prototypes.  The New Baltimore application to the Small Cities Grant Program identified a community survey as one of several public participation methods in the Visioning process.  Surveys require diverse inputs and an effective format for ease of response, data capture and subsequent analyses of responses.  The Plan to Plan working group has collected a set of examples.  Arlene McKeon provided 8 community attitude/visual preference surveys from diverse parts of the country, including:  Guilderland NY, Schoharie NY, Romeoville IL, Blacksburg VA, Ossining NY, Rensselaerville NY, Farmington NM and Owensboro KY.   Bob Knighton provided 2 additional surveys from DEC’s Local Open Space Planning Process Guide and the American Planning Association [APA] The Small Town Planning Handbook. While each has its own focus and approach with respect to content and format, there is broad overlap on a number of features.  It is recommended that the Plan to Plan working group summarize the examples and, in conjunction with input from the Town Board, the Planning Board and the Zoning Board of Appeals, develop a draft survey.  The two appointed boards, being actively engaged in the day-to-day ‘issues’ of planning and development in the Town should bring critical issues to the fore which might not be expected from the general public sessions. The draft will be finalized after the public input sessions have been completed.  Any new issues or concerns that are identified will be added prior to distribution to the community. Recommended Dates: Working Group Summary:  5JAN [M] 2004 Boards’ Inputs to Working Group:  23JAN [F] 2004 Final Draft Survey:  27FEB 2004   Survey Distribution:  MidMAR 2004 Survey Return:  1stWk APR 2004 Survey Draft Results: EndAPR 2004 9. Review Draft Public Input Meeting outlines.  Bob Knighton has begun outlines of agendas for the paired public input sessions identified in the grant proposal and a newly-identified meeting type, the integration session[s].  Draft agendas for the three meetings are complete and available at www.geocities.com/planfornb and will be distributed for review and comment at the 8DEC meeting of the Town Board  The first sessions of the paired public participation sessions will include a summary of the planning process envisioned, distribution of the data packages, and presentation of the film Balancing Nature and Commerce in Gateway Communities.  As described in the proposal to the Small Cities grantors, the second meetings of the paired sessions will be more participatory.  Following introduction of the facilitator and description of the planning process and where this meeting fits, a sequence of questions for audience participation and brainstorming will be posed to focus on [1] what about New Baltimore people particularly like, [2] things about New Baltimore people would like to change and/or particular challenges/issues that we need to address as a community and [3] what are things that we could/should do to keep and enhance the things we like and to improve the things we think we need to change.  The sessions would close with thanks and an invitation to further participate. The integration session[s] will be conducted following the public participation sessions and receipt, summary of the survey results and, will integrate results into a cohesive, articulate statement of the community Vision. Recommended Date Paired Sessions:  MAR2004 [Dates to be Finalized] Integration Sessions:  MAY2004 [Dates to be Finalized] . . . In support of the quality and follow-through of the Visioning Process currently scoped:  10. Once the Visioning process is completed, the next steps include active steps to achieve the vision the community has formulated.  That will require formalization of the updates to the current Plan, as identified in the Visioning process, followed by prioritization of actions, modifications to code and/or development of strategies and timelines for specific projects.  While the details cannot be anticipated at this time, it seems reasonable to target 2005 budget funds to allow for finalization of update to Comprehensive Plan and to establish any requisite support for census recommendations from the Visioning Process Recommended Date As appropriate 11. Engage formally or informally with planning groups of neighboring towns.  Both Coxsackie and Athens are currently beginning/expanding their own planning processes.  Both are river towns with a large portion of their residents in rural, agricultural areas.  While there are differences, there are many similarities, including common county resources .  Exchanging ideas and potentially working co-jointly on grant applications and/or community improvement programs could work to the advantage of everyone. Recommended Date As appropriate