Thursday night I went to another school facilities committee meeting (with a PTA meeting sandwiched).

First I would like to apologize to any staff or committee member who might read what I am saying and feel insulted. This is not my intention and I know that you all have put in much time on the committee. My thoughts are not intended to insinuate that you have not tried doing some of the things that I am suggesting. I know you are trying. Your time and commitment are honorable. My thoughts are simply a reflection of my personal experience as a citizen trying to understand what the committee is and has done, and my ideas to achieve results in the areas that don't seem to be working to date. They are ideas regarding where the process looks like it is today, not related to what the committee may have done or not done in the past. If I was a committee member, I would want all ideas, even if I felt like we have tried them so that the best solution could be achieved. If they have been tried, at least consider how you might try them again. I think deep thought and creativity will be necessary to find a successful solution. So, please don't be offended, my thoughts are not a criticism. They simply represent my approach to a solution, how I might proceed from this point.

The meeting... the most important part of the meeting for me was when almost all had left. I was having a conversation with a few people and thinking that through has helped me to organize my thoughts. One of the issues for me, as I have heard from others, is that the information necessary to understand the needs of the City's schools is not easily accessible. I realize that there are hoards of documents available if someone has the time to spend at the business offices to find what they need to get up to speed. For me and every other average citizen, this is simply not possible. These realities need to be considered on all projects and issues that rely on citizen involvement. In a 21st Century society, all documentation that has value for citizen evaluation needs to be organized and available on the Internet. This is especially true for a 50 million dollar project like this.

I understand that it takes time and money to make this happen. I also understand there is some information there already, I have looked at it all. Again, in the 21st Century it would be my intent to ensure this happens in a timely manner with all school board issues. A good plan for organizing it and documenting it is key. If we don't have the time or money to get updated for this project, we need to rethink the current priorities. It is costing money to have Harriman working on a project that isn't going to fly in its current state. I would suggest having them stop working on it and use the funds to get someone working on organizing the vital documentation in a way that makes it real to us citizens. As for staff time to gather and organize data... well, I think this is more important than any other work the committee is doing right now. At least that is my perspective after sitting through two meetings (4 hours of observing the committee). So I guess I would suggest the committee stop all other work so the staff is not spending time preparing for another meeting. Instead staff should spend their allocated time getting the public information organized and available on the web. If this means the committee take a three months hiatus (or whatever time they need), then I think they should stop meeting for as long as it takes to get organized.

There are actually some great tools on the web that many municipal governments use for public information. They are database driven with a search by topic and keyword. (Follow this link to see an example http://nystax.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/nystax.cfg/php/enduser/std_alp.php?p_sid ) I am not sure what the costs are, but it would be a valuable tool for the City of SoPo. I was told that the committee had recorded all citizen input at last year's and other meetings and have even used written responses. That is great! Now that information can be put into this type of database and will be an extremely useful tool to get citizens up to speed on where the committee is at and why. If staff is replying and documenting responses, citizens would feel listened to and there would be clear data that can be used for accountability and evaluation. This would go a long way in building a "trust relationship". This is no different than what I am doing on this website. I am making clear statements that people can point to and agree, disagree or help increase my knowledge. When someone else is making a statement, I am requesting clarity or more information before accepting their input as factual. Through the process we are building a trust relationship with each other. Everything we say or do contributes to that trust level.

In addition to the database, there needs to be some primary pages that contain at a minimum the following:
A page that outlines the facility and grounds priorities over the next 10-20 years. The page should have links where you can follow them to drill down into a deeper level of detail, each link leads to a "project" or "facility" page.
Each project or facility page needs to have an overview or outline of ALL the needs of the project organized by priority. You could have some degrees of priority like... showstopper, required, should have, nice to have
Each "need" would then have a link to drill down to more detail that would describe... what is needed; why it is needed (quote any factual regulations or violation letters); what the time frame is; what the options to satisfy the need are; what other needs that may be "opened up" or make sense to address at the same time. On this detail page, I would include pictures or virtual tours of the problem areas (for me, this is the page that will offer accountability. The staff is paid to do a job according to each position. The committee and school board should also be evaluated on their performance. If they classify something as a "showstopper", their job performance is at stake so they better believe it is a showstopper. When this is made available to citizens, they will surely dig into the items they disagree with. This is a great "check and balance" and an effective tool to ensure responsible oversight.
Each "need page" should also be linked to a budget estimate page that places each need in groups with the needs that make sense to address at the same time... phases if you will
There is probably some things I am missing, but you get the idea. A committee could then take this info and put it together like a puzzle to determine a responsible recommendation to the citizens. I am sure there will be staff, board members, committee members and citizens that would say, "there is no time or money to do this". My question to them would be then why are we throwing a bunch of time and money on a project that doesn't appear to be going anywhere? If you believe in something you stick your neck out to do your best to make sure it is followed through and done right. A better system of information is badly needed. It is time we get into the 21st century. In order to save money and time in the long run, we need to spend time and money now.

So, if we have to "lay off" Harriman for a few months and use those funds to get better organized, I believe the savings will come immediately when we go back to Harriman and are able to tell them "this is what you need to provide to us". Right now they are just spending their time on scheme after scheme (no really, this is the terminology they use for each drawing... I think I would choose another word to use). We need to stop coming up with new schemes and figure out what is really needed and when it is needed.

As a final note, after watching and listening to this committee for two meetings, I feel like it would benefit the committee to add some new blood, new ideas and differing perspectives to the process. I will not comment on how that would be done except to say there should be a process where citizens can "apply" to be on the committee and careful selection to ensure differing perspectives are present. This is the only way to ensure a well debated and researched plan is brought forward that has a chance with voters.

Thursday night I went to another school facilities committee meeting (with a PTA meeting sandwiched). First I would like to apologize to any staff or committee member who might read what I am saying and feel insulted. This is not my intention and I know that you all have put in much time on the committee. My thoughts are not intended to insinuate that you have not tried doing some of the things that I am suggesting. I know you are trying. Your time and commitment are honorable. My thoughts are simply a reflection of my personal experience as a citizen trying to understand what the committee is and has done, and my ideas to achieve results in the areas that don't seem to be working to date. They are ideas regarding where the process looks like it is today, not related to what the committee may have done or not done in the past. If I was a committee member, I would want all ideas, even if I felt like we have tried them so that the best solution could be achieved. If they have been tried, at least consider how you might try them again. I think deep thought and creativity will be necessary to find a successful solution. So, please don't be offended, my thoughts are not a criticism. They simply represent my approach to a solution, how I might proceed from this point. The meeting... the most important part of the meeting for me was when almost all had left. I was having a conversation with a few people and thinking that through has helped me to organize my thoughts. One of the issues for me, as I have heard from others, is that the information necessary to understand the needs of the City's schools is not easily accessible. I realize that there are hoards of documents available if someone has the time to spend at the business offices to find what they need to get up to speed. For me and every other average citizen, this is simply not possible. These realities need to be considered on all projects and issues that rely on citizen involvement. In a 21st Century society, all documentation that has value for citizen evaluation needs to be organized and available on the Internet. This is especially true for a 50 million dollar project like this. I understand that it takes time and money to make this happen. I also understand there is some information there already, I have looked at it all. Again, in the 21st Century it would be my intent to ensure this happens in a timely manner with all school board issues. A good plan for organizing it and documenting it is key. If we don't have the time or money to get updated for this project, we need to rethink the current priorities. It is costing money to have Harriman working on a project that isn't going to fly in its current state. I would suggest having them stop working on it and use the funds to get someone working on organizing the vital documentation in a way that makes it real to us citizens. As for staff time to gather and organize data... well, I think this is more important than any other work the committee is doing right now. At least that is my perspective after sitting through two meetings (4 hours of observing the committee). So I guess I would suggest the committee stop all other work so the staff is not spending time preparing for another meeting. Instead staff should spend their allocated time getting the public information organized and available on the web. If this means the committee take a three months hiatus (or whatever time they need), then I think they should stop meeting for as long as it takes to get organized. There are actually some great tools on the web that many municipal governments use for public information. They are database driven with a search by topic and keyword. (Follow this link to see an example [url]http://nystax.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/nystax.cfg/php/enduser/std_alp.php?p_sid[/url] ) I am not sure what the costs are, but it would be a valuable tool for the City of SoPo. I was told that the committee had recorded all citizen input at last year's and other meetings and have even used written responses. That is great! Now that information can be put into this type of database and will be an extremely useful tool to get citizens up to speed on where the committee is at and why. If staff is replying and documenting responses, citizens would feel listened to and there would be clear data that can be used for accountability and evaluation. This would go a long way in building a "trust relationship". This is no different than what I am doing on this website. I am making clear statements that people can point to and agree, disagree or help increase my knowledge. When someone else is making a statement, I am requesting clarity or more information before accepting their input as factual. Through the process we are building a trust relationship with each other. Everything we say or do contributes to that trust level. In addition to the database, there needs to be some primary pages that contain at a minimum the following: A page that outlines the facility and grounds priorities over the next 10-20 years. The page should have links where you can follow them to drill down into a deeper level of detail, each link leads to a "project" or "facility" page. Each project or facility page needs to have an overview or outline of ALL the needs of the project organized by priority. You could have some degrees of priority like... showstopper, required, should have, nice to have Each "need" would then have a link to drill down to more detail that would describe... what is needed; why it is needed (quote any factual regulations or violation letters); what the time frame is; what the options to satisfy the need are; what other needs that may be "opened up" or make sense to address at the same time. On this detail page, I would include pictures or virtual tours of the problem areas (for me, this is the page that will offer accountability. The staff is paid to do a job according to each position. The committee and school board should also be evaluated on their performance. If they classify something as a "showstopper", their job performance is at stake so they better believe it is a showstopper. When this is made available to citizens, they will surely dig into the items they disagree with. This is a great "check and balance" and an effective tool to ensure responsible oversight. Each "need page" should also be linked to a budget estimate page that places each need in groups with the needs that make sense to address at the same time... phases if you will There is probably some things I am missing, but you get the idea. A committee could then take this info and put it together like a puzzle to determine a responsible recommendation to the citizens. I am sure there will be staff, board members, committee members and citizens that would say, "there is no time or money to do this". My question to them would be then why are we throwing a bunch of time and money on a project that doesn't appear to be going anywhere? If you believe in something you stick your neck out to do your best to make sure it is followed through and done right. A better system of information is badly needed. It is time we get into the 21st century. In order to save money and time in the long run, we need to spend time and money now. So, if we have to "lay off" Harriman for a few months and use those funds to get better organized, I believe the savings will come immediately when we go back to Harriman and are able to tell them "this is what you need to provide to us". Right now they are just spending their time on scheme after scheme (no really, this is the terminology they use for each drawing... I think I would choose another word to use). We need to stop coming up with new schemes and figure out what is really needed and when it is needed. As a final note, after watching and listening to this committee for two meetings, I feel like it would benefit the committee to add some new blood, new ideas and differing perspectives to the process. I will not comment on how that would be done except to say there should be a process where citizens can "apply" to be on the committee and careful selection to ensure differing perspectives are present. This is the only way to ensure a well debated and researched plan is brought forward that has a chance with voters.