Loading...
07/12/1995 - Downtown Partnership MeetingCITY OF CLEARWATER DOWNTOWN PARTNERSHIP MEETING July 12, 1995 The City of Clearwater, the Clearwater Chamber of Commerce, the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA), the Downtown Clearwater Association (DCA) and the Downtown Development Board (DDB) met at the Clearwater Main Library, Adler Room, 100 North Osceola Avenue, Clearwater, Wednesday, July 12, 1995. The following were present: City of Clearwater: Rita Garvey J. B. Johnson Betty Deptula Mary K. Diana Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA): Sue Berfield Peter Gozza Clearwater Downtown Association (DCA): Joyce Baskin Downtown Development Board: Judy Hackett Kate McCullough Clearwater Chamber of Commerce: Pete Woodham Vickie Crouch Steve Fowler (arrived at 6:44 p.m.) Others: Mary Story, Church of Scientology Rita Garvey called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. She noted the Partnership was not well represented. She questioned whether tonight’s meeting should be rescheduled, as the focus tonight was to be on the recommendations made at the retreat of May 13, 1995. Discussion ensued as to the objective of tonight’s meeting. It was believed the Partnership representatives were to discuss with their boards the conceptual plan outlined at the retreat. It was believed tonight the roles/duties of each board would be voted on. Representatives from the DDB, CRA and the City indicated they had not yet had the opportunity to discuss the proposed plan with their boards. Concern was expressed the roles/duties of each agency had not been defined and/or formalized well enough to be voted on. Discussion ensued regarding no clear direction being given at the retreat as to what would happen next. Joyce Baskin indicated she felt the roles of the Partnership had been set. She said she discussed the conceptual plan with the DCA and reported they unanimously approved the conceptual plan developed at the retreat. Pete Woodham noted promotion was the only role listed for the Chamber. He felt this role needed to be expanded upon before any money could be committed. There was discussion regarding the roles/duties of each agency defined at the retreat on May 13. It was indicated the major roles/duties assigned to each agency should be discussed with the members of each board to see if they are in agreement. It was believed the roles/duties identified for each agency should be more clearly defined before taking them back to the various boards. A question was raised regarding who would be voting on the final plan, whether it would be the five core members of the boards or a group vote. It was noted only the major roles/duties have been identified. It was noted retention was not listed among the roles/duties of the various agencies. It was indicated this issue was brought up under the downtown ambassadors and would fall under the proposed coordinator discussed at the retreat. The agency responsible for retention was not clearly identified. Joyce Baskin moved to continue tonight’s meeting to a future date in order to allow for greater representation from the five boards. There was no second. Discussion ensued in regard to sending out a notice encouraging the members of the various groups to attend the next meeting for their input. It was felt the retreat was only a start in defining each agency’s role in the Partnership in order to create an action plan. It was noted, at the retreat, the issue of having more than quarterly meetings was mentioned in order to provide stability to the Partnership. To develop a sense of what the Partnership is about, it was felt, the meetings should include as many members of the various agencies as possible. A question was raised if it would be more beneficial for the five core members of the Partnership to meet again before they discuss the conceptual plan with their boards. A recommendation was made for each representative to discuss with their boards the outcome of the retreat before the five meet again. A question was raised if a coordinator is agreed upon, would retention, promotion, and advertising be under that position. It was noted the hiring of a coordinator had not been supported at the retreat by the entire Partnership. Discussion ensued in regard to the proposed plan. A request was made that each role/duty listed for each agency be clearly defined and expanded upon. Specificity will allow each board to see how their role ties into the entire picture. Discussion ensued in regard to drafting a Partnership agreement that would be taken back to each board. There was discussion regarding the May 13, 1995 minutes reflecting the DDB being responsible for developing and providing the promotional materials and a marketing plan with input and consensus of the Partnership. Concern was expressed in spending alot of time planning around a coordinator when a consensus was not reached at the retreat on approving one. It was noted the idea of a coordinator was proposed by the Chamber. The DCA has approved the employment of a coordinator and the tentative roles set up. A suggestion was made to leave the decision of employing a Partnership coordinator as the last order of business and to just mention to the boards that one is being considered. It was noted the coordinator would be strictly involved with public relations. Retention is part of the overall plan; however, was not assigned as a major function. Discussion ensued in regard to the retreat being the starting point and the need to continue obtaining input from all the members of the group not just the representatives. The roles of the various agencies defined at the retreat were suggestions and were not voted on. These roles now need to be discussed, defined and conceptually approved by each individual group and brought back to the Partnership representatives to incorporate into an agreement. After this is approved a mission/goal statement regarding the objectives of the Partnership can be written. Discussion ensued in regard to a time line for the action plan. It was indicated more specifics are needed and the Partnership roles needed to be defined. There was discussion regarding coordinating a master calendar of events and it was felt this did not have to wait until the Partnership roles are defined. It was noted there is a monthly calendar in the newspaper listing citywide events. Downtown events could be added for wider circulation. An opinion was expressed there should be a separate promotional calendar on downtown events. C-View was also mentioned as a means of displaying the downtown calendar. Discussion ensued in regard to the Ice House and concerns were expressed even though the building is now in compliance with the city code, it still remains an eyesore. A request was made for staff to prepare a letter, approved and signed by all five Partnership representatives, expressing their concerns in an encouraging manner. It was requested this letter be sent by July 19th. Kate McCullough left the meeting at 6:36 p.m. Discussion ensued in regard to a previous motion made at the July 19, 1994, town meeting that regular joint Partnership meetings be noticed as town meetings. A question was raised if today’s meeting should have been noticed as a town meeting. It was felt the above motion addressed quarterly meetings of the Partnership. Sue Berfield moved to rescind the motion made at the July 19, 1994 town meeting that the regular joint Partnership meetings be noticed as town meetings. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Sue Berfield moved to reconsider the town meeting concept for the regular quarterly Partnership meetings after the Partnership agreement is in place. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Joint Partnership Meetings were scheduled for the third Tuesdays of October, January, May and July. The next meeting will be October 17, 1995, at 5:30 p.m. The Chair will be responsible for selecting the meeting place. A meeting of the Partnership representatives was scheduled for August 22, 1995, at 5:30 p.m. (later changed to 6:00 p.m.) in the City Commission Chambers. Joyce Baskin, Downtown Clearwater Association, to chair. There was discussion regarding displays in empty storefronts in the downtown. Staff was requested to investigate if this is allowed. It was noted a former staff member indicated it could not be done. The City Commission is to discuss the conceptual plan outlined by the Partnership representatives August 3; Community Redevelopment Agency on July 17; and the Downtown Development Board on July 25. Pete Woodham will meet with the Chamber. The Downtown Clearwater Association has unanimously approved the conceptual plan. The meeting adjourned at 7:20 p.m.