Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-05-15ADJOURNEDThomas Jefferson Venture Meeting May 15, 1997 Minutes Attendine Locality Represented Charlotte Humphris W. James Edd/ns Jodie Webber Peter Hallock Karen Litleleht Sally Thomas Kevin Castner Steve Murray Don Borwhat Ann Taylor Walter Perkins Charles Rotgin, Jr. George Loper Nancy Price for James Gahres Gary O'Connell Vicki Crews Helen Poore Meredith Richards Earl Pullen Deborah Murdock Tom Payne William Thomas Pete Bradshaw Jeffrey Ltmsford Sm Armstrong Frankee Love Robert Spencer Albemarle Albemarle Albemarle Albemarle Albemarle Albemarle Albemarle Albemarle Albemarle Albemarle Albemarle Charlottesville Charlottesville Charlottesville Charlottesville Charlottesville Charlottesville Charlottesville Charlottesville Fluvarma Fluvanna Louisa Louisa Nelson Nelson Town of Scottsv/lle Staff: Nancy K. O~Brien and Bonnie Fronfelter The meeting was called to order by Ms. Thomas. Report from Bylaws Committee: Ms. O'Brien reported that the bylaws committee had met Monday, May 12 at the TJPDC offices and those not attending sent comments via electronic mail and facsimile. Members were given a copy of the draft bylaws that resulted from this committee meeting. Mr. Thomas raised a question about Greene County's participation in the Venture, asking whether the organization should approve the bylaws without Greene County or delay action on adopting the bylaws. Members decided to delay the vote on adoption of the bylaws until the June 26th meeting of the Venture, after Greene County has discussed joining Thomas Jefferson Venture at their June 10th Board of Supervisors meeting. Mr. Spencer asked whether as Mayor of an incorporated town he was an ex-officio member. Ms. O'Brien responded no because the Regional Competitiveness Act does not require that town mayors serve on the reginnal partnerships. Comparison Communities: Ms. Fronfelter discussed the six comparison communities that TJ Venture could use in its regional strategic plan. Regions are as follows: Chapel Hill, NC; Asheville, NC; Columbia, Missouri; Lancaster, PA; Chattanooga, TN; and Boulder, CO. Indicators on each region were presented by Ms. Fronfelter including median family income, employment profile, population and population density, median housing costs and average rent. Several members asked for a narrative on each region before the next meeting. Ms. O'Brien suggested that members decide how they want to use the comparison -- as a community with attributes to strive for or as a community at one time similar to our own that has faltered. Strengths and Weaknesses of the Re,on: Ms. O'Brien presented members with a draft compilation of the strengths and weaknesses developed as a result of the previous week's brainstorming activity. She also added several strengths and weaknesses that had not resulted from the brainstorming activity but were answers on the questionnaires returned by members in the first week of May. Vision for Region: Members divided into small groups and developed visions for the region. Ms. O'Brien was inslructed by members to put together the visions from each group and present the combined work at the next Venture meeting on May 22. Strategies to Preserve Strenghs and Address Weaknesses: Members again divided into small groups to begin listing strategies for preserving strengths of the community and addressing wealmesses effectively. Ms. Thomas asked at what point the members should abandon ¢~pie in the sky" visions and start thinking in terms of real dollars. Ms. O'Brien responded that would be appropriate when the discussion of specific projects takes place on May 22. Mr. Castner commented that members might look beyond addressing items primarily physical in nature and consider issues addressing intrinsic relations, such as race and economic relations. He further stated that the Venture could be proactive with its strategies. There being no additional business~ the meeting was adjourned.