07-25-1994 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

iiey are not hearing from citizens or :wS3 to a bsoad range of community, :able franchise systems. Local elected giving cities a voice in the design and 5 being developed by private industry :css to Uiis powcif •! electronic network . govemment, and public progmins and on technologies makes possible, hat city franchising authority will make 1 supcrhigfiway to sene people at the what cost the public will be able to get these systems. There is a role for icity on systems operated by telcos, maiion services for programming dial govemment infonnaiion. lunications providers accountable for t just to the most profitable locations IS protected. It is clear that t by telephone companies must be mtained in the ’92 federal cable act. ors 10 support provisions in S. 1822 1 tax authority and to argue for final it: le a phone company that provides 3perators ill their own service areas; ribute to a universal service fund to* and data) services arc widely [basic) services to all; and interstate tclecomniimicallons iig local rights of way). t1\ \ s REGIONAL BLUEPRINT fvtvi. ii)|> ;«M (vi*M I'.i'fti.iNri .'0.'^ RONALO MOORSE administrator CITY OF ORONO CRTSTAL bay HH 553230066 4A92 0 F^ocyclpd p.ippf Conl.Tns nt Ir.iM SO% po«;i consumof vw.»r.!o r| BLUEPRINT DIRECTIONS AFFIRMED BUT SOME CHANGES NEEDED A competitive regional economy, revitalized neighborhoods, well- planned growth and a healthy environment — all key directions of the Metropolitan Council's proposed Regional Blueprint — received broad support from groups and individuals who commented on the draft action plan in April and May. The Blueprint is an action plan for sha^H the future economic growth an^^Btlo|Mi«en^ the region. ^ ^ Six open houses cosponsored^ the Council and 23 other organiza tions. and a two-day public hearing, brought together Council policy makers and staff, local government officials, business people, the public and others to discuss the Blueprint. The Council’s Community Development Committee will begin discussing the comments July 11 (see calendar) Council action on a final version of the Blueprint is expected August 25 Most people commenting on the draft acknowledged that achieving the Blueprint's goals is necessary for the region to remain strong and healthy. Many urged refinements to the strategies, v/hile others took issue with specific action steps ■ QUALITY OF LIFE AND SENSE OF COMMUNITY UNDERSCORED The Blueprint should put the "public" back in "public policy." some people recommended The Blueprint should emphasize meeting people's needs and developing their capabilities Other people suggested that the Blueprint build a stronger sense of community locally and 'egion-wide through transportation, land use. urban design and community services. STRONG SUPPORT FOR A COMPETITIVE ECONOMY People commenting on the Blueprint strongly supported its strategies to strengthen the region's economy by: © Ensuring high-quality, cost- effective metropolitan systems, like highways, airports and sewers; • Bolstering education and job training; and • Working for a stronger business climate %anv underscored the importance of [proving the skills of the region's litoor force and supporting the efforts existing economic development orMnizations. Some questioned what 7ole the Council should play in graining and education. Others said the Blueprint should emphasize "quality" employment, with decent wages and benefidi and it should put a priority on growing or expanding existing businesses before attracting new ones « Several people urged the Council tc^ address the role of future airport^ development to support the region's • economic grov4h ** ■ REVITALIZING DETERIORATED AREAS; HOW BEST TO DO IT? 1 I I Many comments offered differing 9 views on revitalization strategies, _ even though most people agreed* that maintaining a strong, vital cor^ is essential to the region * The Blueprint proposes 4o strengthen the employment base and livability of target areas bv^ July 1994 • Lowering barriers to economic growth, like cleaning up polluted sites; • Using redevelopment tools more effectively, like tax-increment financing, industrial revenue bonds, rezoning and eminent domain; • Explqggft property • Poss enterpris • Exp options t with jobs Some Council core tf I • . - economic : aeveiopmerit.! >^r,Others urged bafanc rtg the heeds of central- ; cities and suburbs. ' Some supported limiting tax- increment financing to older areas, but others suggested using the program in suburban areas as well. Many people favored not only providing housing assistance in older areas but also using public funds to ensure affordable housing opportunities region-wide. The need to clean up polluted sites for future redevelopment was also strongly supported ■ GOOD PLANNING FAVORED, BUT HOW MUCH IS ENOUGH? Comments on the Blueprint split over how carefully to plan new growth The Blueprint's goal is to meet residents’ changing needs and provide urban services while containing infrastructure costs by: • Encouraging development to occur within on urban service area while discouraging urban development in the rural area; RPGIONAl Bl. UEPR'NT