I’ve only been off the council for 7 years, but I find its culture of open whining about how hard it is to be on the council and its focus on itself instead of issues disturbing. But its culture of secrecy is even more concerning. Just look at the the charge of the committee that came up with the “government reform”, and their agendas, and how their minutes are written. None of the meetings had more than 72ish hours notice of the meetings – find out Friday at 4:30 for a Monday meeting for three of them, the other had 30 hours notice. This doesn’t appear to be a council that values the public in way shape or form. And I’m not sure what new leadership can do to fix it, given the ingrained culture of the current elected officials.
CHARGE OF THE COMMITTEE
The group that came up with the proposal to allegedly give themselves more power was charged with doing this:
The CCOC Subcommittee to Develop a Council Strategic Plan and Priorities was created at this meeting. The charge to the committee included:
1. Formalize and clearly communicate the Council priorities identified at the Council discussion August 27, 2015.
2. Develop an implementation strategy with City Staff, especially those working on Outcomes Based Budgeting and the Comprehensive Plan Update.
3. Issue a final report explaining how the Council priorities would be integrated into city processes.
The Subcommittee would meet for up to six months, and upon completion of their work, a report will be sent to the Common Council. If additional time is needed to meet its goals, an extension of this order by the Council President may be sought by the subcommittee.
Members: Ald. Ledell Zellers, Ald. Denise DeMarb, Ald. Mark Clear
Alternates: Ald. Shiva Bidar-Sielaff, Ald. Maurice Cheeks, Ald. Matt Phair
Staff: Heather Allen, Council Legislative Analyst
PRIORITIES OF AUGUST 27th
Uh – legistar says minutes are not available.
This is what I blogged from it.
Equity – 14 votes
Affordable Housing – 11 votes
Big Picture Planning – 5 votes
Economic Development – 4 votesSustainability – 3 votes
Transportation – 3 votesPartnerships – 2 votes (also in order by priority of votes)
Safety – 2 votes
Neighborhood Planning – 2 votesFood – 1 vote
Democracy – 1 vote
Seniors – 1 vote
WHAT TO YOU READ IN THE AGENDAS AND MINUTES
From Michael May’s reports – with my added links:
The Subcommittee met on four occasions: December 14, 2015 (agenda, minutes), February 1, 2016 (agenda, minutes), February 29, 2016 (agenda, minutes), and March 10, 2016 (agenda, minutes). Copies of the agenda and minutes of those meetings are attached to this report as Appendix A. The agendas and minutes of the Subcommittee use broad descriptions of topic areas. Neither the agendas nor the minutes have any reference to a change in the structure of the Board of Estimates or the appointing authority of the Mayor. For that matter, they do not address such minor issues as the renaming of committees. Like the charge to the Subcommittee itself, the agenda and minutes show nothing directly related to the proposed changes announced in the GRI, nor would the average reader think such proposals were being considered.
December 14
Notice of meeting was on a Monday so they couldn’t get the notice out late, because it would be an illegal meeting – 72 hours notice of this meeting
Agenda:
Review and Discussion of Subcommittee Charge
Discussion: Schedule/frequency of meetings
Discussion: Information and other presentations which should be provided to the work group
Minutes: (excuse the bolding, it was too ironic not to point it out)
Review and Discussion of Subcommittee Charge
The group reviewed the August 2015 voting and decision making process. They noted that racial equity received the most votes and should be woven into all of the other priorities since it is a value and priority that impacts all of the City’s work.
The Subcommittee charge was amended to read as follows:
The Subcommittee will seek to achieve the following objectives:
1. Formalize and clearly communicate the Council priorities identified at the Council discussion August 27, 2015.
2. Develop an implementation strategy.
3. Issue a final report explaining how the Council priorities are integrated into city processes.The Subcommittee will report back to CCOC at regular intervals, to ensure the work of the Subcommittee reflects the priorities of the Council.
The Subcommittee members reiterated the goal of aligning priorities and partnering with the Mayor’s Office.
The group recommended the following items as reading:
The 1995 Madison Strategic Planning Document – Anne Monks will share this document.
“A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis: The Eightfold Path to More Effective Problem Solving, 4th Edition” by Eugene BardachThe group also requested a space on the Council Intranet to access documents related to the Subcommittee. Documents will be available at this link to the Council Strategic Plan and Priorities Subcommittee on the
Common Council Intranet.Trainings:
The Subcommittee expressed an interest in organizing trainings in 2016 for the full Common
Council on the following topics:
1) Tools to talk about race and manage difficult conversations and use of the racial equity tool to evaluate policies and decisions
2) Outcome based-budgeting
3) Tailoring equity tools and outcome based-budgeting for the City of MadisonDiscussion: Schedule/frequency of meetings
Upcoming meetings:
February 1, 5 PM City County Building Room 108
February 29, 5 PM location TBDDiscussion: Information and other presentations which should be provided to work group
The Subcommittee requested that Enis Ragland, Dave Schmiedicke, Laura Larsen and Kara Kratowicz be invited to the next meeting for a discussion regarding outcome based budgeting
February 1
Notice of the meeting was on a Monday, so they couldn’t get the agenda out late because it would be an illegal meeting – 72 hours notice of this meeting
Agenda:
Discussion: Strategic Management and Outcome Based Budgeting
Discussion: Racial Equity Training re: Communication and the City of Madison Racial Equity Tool
Minutes:
Discussion: Strategic Management and Outcome Based Budgeting
Dave Schmiedicke, Laura Larsen and Kara Kratowicz presented information regarding a proposed strategic management plan including the elements of outcome based budgeting and LEAN government (see attached PowerPoint). Participants highlighted the following points:
• Strategic Management is the overall goal/the overall framework
• Outcome budgeting is a piece of strategic management. In addition, Madison will need a structure to evaluate programs (LEAN government), and we need to track our data to evaluate effectiveness. In one example, Baltimore is evaluating effectiveness with an annual citizen survey by asking how satisfied they are with services and the priorities of those various services.
• Priority setting will require us to ask new questions. In the future we must consider what should we take away from the budget/what are the tradeoffs?
• Data management will require an effort to establish the process and procedures to manage, share and store data. Ultimately the city wants to ensure we have the proper policies and systems in place. In addition, a new data management team will be developed (including deputy mayors). That team would oversee the data across the city.
• Data management should ultimately help us work better across agencies.
• Outcome budgeting is the one tool that will allow us to sync funding with the outcomes identified with our priorities. We must determine what the Madison brand is for Outcome based budgeting and our priorities?
• The steps in the process include: 1) develop the strategic plan, 2) identify the vision, 3) set
priorities, 4) set specific measurable goals within the priorities.
• The goal is to ensure services are reflected in the ways agencies are organized – the naming/organization should focus on the method/opportunities of interaction.
• Question: this is an aggressive timetable. Do we have the staff resources to implement this? Yes, we are applying for a Bloomberg What Works Cities Grant http://whatworkscities.bloomberg.org/ If we receive the grant we may be able to hire extra staff to implement this workDiscussion: Racial Equity Training re: Communication and the City of Madison Racial Equity Tool.
It is important that the members of our committees are trained on RESJI or learn about our goals. Council relies on the city committees to provide guidelines. There is an assumption that alders apply the equity lens and know about micro-aggressions, but alders have not been trained on these issues as a body.
On Saturday February 6th, the Council will participate in a racial equity and social justice training.
Toriana Pettaway, Department of Civil Rights, Erin Stenson, Human Resources Department and Jordan Bingham, Public Health Madison & Dane County will lead the training. The training will take place at the Goodman Community Center in the Evjue Room at 149 Waubesa Street on Saturday February 2, 2016 from 12:00 PM – 5:00 PM.Lunch will not be provided. Participants should plan to bring lunch and anything else necessary to stay engaged and focused throughout the meeting. Light refreshments and coffee will be provided. The topics discussed may be difficult or sensitive for some participants. Participants are encouraged to take breaks as necessary, be mindful of their own energy and take care of their needs throughout the training.
This training is tailored for Council members and will focus on real-life scenarios. Alders will learn
how to respond to difficult conversations about race using conversational tools and other strategies. Participants will practice framing conversations with a positive shared vision to avoid potential
racialized conflicts. Council members are strongly encouraged to attend
February 29
Notice of the meeting was out on time because the meeting was on a Monday and any later notice and it would have been illegal – 72 hours notice of this meeting
Agenda:
Discussion: Racial Equity Training
Discussion: Chief of Staff
Minutes:
Discussion: Racial Equity Training
The members of the subcommittee discussed the elected official training on racial equity which occurred on February 6, 2016. The members noted that the training was beneficial and has inspired some members to consider interrupting microaggressions when they occur during a Common Council meeting.
Discussion: Chief of Staff
Heather Allen reviewed the information provided in the Feb 26th memo describing chief of staff positions in other cities. The members of the subcommittee discussed the memo and requested further information (namely the size of the budgets of mayoral offices and council offices for the cities reviewed)
March 10
Notice of the meeting came out 30 hours in advance of the meeting, March 9, 11:22 this was added
Meeting: CCOC SUBCOMMITTEE TO DEVELOP COUNCIL STRATEGIC PLAN & PRIORITIES
Date: 3/10/2016 5:30 PM
Location: ROOM 417 CCB
Agenda
Discussion: Future items to be investigated with intent to bring forward to CCOC and the full Council.
a) Chief of Staff
•Current work of Alders
•Council of the future
b) Next steps for promoting racial equity and social justice in city policies and practices
c) Best practices for committees/committees/boards
6. Discussion: Disbanding the subcommittee
Minutes:
Discussion: Future items to be investigated with intent to bring forward to CCOC and full Council.
A) Chief of Staff Position
• Current work of Alders
• Council of the futureThe Subcommittee conferred and determined that Maurice Cheeks would advance the Chief of Staff proposal.
B) Next steps for promoting racial equity and social justice in city policies and practices President
Denise DeMarb noted that she had been working on this issue with the Legislative Analyst and would be bringing something forward to promote racial equity and social justice in city policies and processes.
C) Best practices for commissions/committees/boards
The Subcommittee conferred and agreed that Alder Clear would bring forward proposals to improve Council governance and address commissions, committees and boards.
Discussion: Disbanding the subcommittee
The Subcommittee discussed the proposals and agreed to disband the subcommittee. Alders would lead specific priorities
ALLEGED RESULTS OF THE MEETINGS/WHAT HAPPENED TO THE THINGS THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO BE WORKING ON
So, they blatantly blew off the charge from their own council:
1. Formalize and clearly communicate the Council priorities identified at the Council discussion August 27, 2015.
2. Develop an implementation strategy with City Staff, especially those working on Outcomes Based Budgeting and the Comprehensive Plan Update.
3. Issue a final report explaining how the Council priorities would be integrated into city processes.
Equity, outcome-based budgeting, comprenhensive planning? What happened to those issues?
Affordable Housing?
Economic Development?
Sustainability?
Transportation?
No, instead we got renaming committees and a shitstorm of political infighting between the council and the mayor and a council president that took 15 ballots to get elected.
As a former council member for 8 years, I hate it when they (and we at the time) make themselves (ourselves at the time) look absurd. This looks absurd. The worst I’ve seen.
How can we get them to focus on the issues that are most important, the ones they identified. Where is the council discussion on affordable housing? homelessness? economic development? transportation?
