The Quick and Dirty About Prosperity That Fits (Part 1)
November 15, 2009 20 Comments
Why do you care about Prosperity That Fits?
Because you believe that staying like we are is the last thing Corvallis/Benton County ought to do. And you believe that we need to have a plan for developing the economy in the region.
There is a plan for Prosperity That Fits?
Yes. The plan was first shared in 2006. The entire PTF plan is 52 pages long. The good stuff is condensed into 4 focus areas, 14 strategies and 49 action items. The PTF focus areas include:
- Strengthening and Expanding Existing Business and industry
- Recruiting Targeted Business Icons
- Developing Human and Physical Infrastructure (stuff like housing, workforce development and training programs)
- Integrating Sustainability and Economic Development
*My observation: Given #4, where is the Corvallis Sustainability Coalition the list below?
Who is responsible for Prosperity That Fits?
The Economic Vitality Partnership (EVP) is responsible for PTF. The EVP partners include:
- Benton County
- Business Enterprise Center
- City of Corvallis
- 509J School District
- Corporate Round Table
- Corvallis-Benton Chamber Coalition
- Corvallis Independent Business Alliance
- Corvallis Tourism
- Downtown Corvallis Association
- Linn Benton Community College
- Oregon Natural Step Network
- Oregon State University
- Software Association of Oregon
- Willamette Neighborhood Housing Services
The PTF Committee includes representatives from each of these partner organizations plus a member at large and minus a representative for the 509J School District. Committee members include:
- Elizabeth French, Chair – Corporate Round Table
- Curtis Wright, Vice Chair – Member at Large
- John Hope-Johnstone, Treasurer – Corvallis Tourism (John recently left his position with Corvallis Tourism)
- Alan Fudge – Linn Benton Community College
- Annabelle Jaramillo – Benton County
- Bob Baird – Corvallis Independent Business Alliance
- Bruce Hecht – Oregon Natural Step Network
- Ilene Kleinsorge – Oregon State University
- Jerry Gross – Downtown Corvallis Association
- Jim Moorefield – Willamette Neighborhood Housing Services
- Kathleen Hutchinson – Business Enterprise Center
- Mark O’Brien – City of Corvallis
- Michael Laport – Software Association of Oregon
- Pat Lampton – Corvallis-Benton Chamber Coalition
*My observation: John Sechrest who many of us know for his efforts towards regional economic development does not have a seat at the table.
Initial community support for Prosperity That Fits.
Just creating a plan that was supported by the community was a huge milestone. The PTF plan was extremely well received when it was initially shared with us in 2006. Th GT published “Hundreds Turn Out to Praise Local Plan”. Everything seemed to be in place for success.
Where is Prosperity That Fits now?
Jason Robertson, the specialist hired to lead the planning process warned that staying focused on the goal and maintaining the sense of shared purpose would be challenging. “This is always the hardest part and where a lot of communities fail,” Robertson said. “The most important thing to remember about this plan is that this is a public plan. It’s a community plan.” *My observation: I feel like Mr. Robertson jinxed us.
Some recent observations of Prosperity That Fits:
- A business license fee designed to provide PTF funding was rejected by the community. The fee was publicly opposed by PTF partner organizations.
- The working relationship between the Mayor and the Chamber, who both have key roles within PTF, appears strained (see GT article “Chamber, county vie over economy booster”).
- Collaboration and investment within PTF committee appears to be an issue. Notes from the September 2009 PTF minutes include:
- Stop talking about the demise of the PTF
- Stop saying we haven’t accomplished anything
- Stop sniping at others
Some steps in the right direction for Prosperity That Fits?
There are two things that encourage me about PTF right now. 1) I still think the plan as it was initially presented has value and 2) I see acknowledgment that there is a problem and a desire to address it by the committee. My observations include:
- “It is my belief that we need to come together to re-energize the effort, communicate about our expectations and priorities, and commit to the success of the Plan.” ~ Elizabeth French (from the September 2009 PTF minutes)
- A call for improved communication including transparency, the web and social networks. (from the September 2009 PTF minutes)
- Community outreach here at www.WeLoveCorvallis.com from two committee members, Curtis Wright and Mark O’Brien.
- “Nothing is going to move unless we can do something concrete that the community at large can get behind. We need to create jobs.” ~ Pat Lampton (from the September 2009 PTF minutes)
*My observation: Those are some honest and courageous things to say (pseudo-publicly). I can get behind that.
I will try to delve into more detail regarding action items and progress for Prosperity That Fits in a Part 2 follow up post. You can also visit the Prosperty That Fits website for information. What questions do you have about PTF? Do you believe it is something that our city and county communities should get behind?
Business, City Leadership, Community, Economy, Loyan Roylance
Loyan,
Thank you for taking the time to put this series of posts on PTF together.
Getting the PTF back on plan seems to be our best hope for some meaningful progress in the short run.
I’m curious to see the ideas around the integration of sustainability and economic development. There continues to be a lot of confusion as to what “sustainability” really means. It will probably be the most challenging of the focus items, IMO.
Regarding Business License Fee:
It was my understanding that the PTF consultant Jason Robertson recommended a business license fee for the purpose of creating an inventory of all the local businesses and companies. Something in the $5-$15 range per company.
Somewhere along the way, that was changed into a revenue generator for the PTF plan and failed to get buy-in from the business community.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Loyan Roylance, Chris Nordyke. Chris Nordyke said: Prosperity that Fits? http://ow.ly/CT7Y #WeLoveCorvallis [...]
Loyan,
Good summary of the PTF efforts, although I think it is also worth noting that in addition to the defeat of the business tax, the urban renewal district was defeated. The PTF “team” needs a communications strategy and plan to ensure the community really understands what they are trying to achieve and why.
I also would like to see an agreed upon business definition of “sustainability” and how that applies to economic development. I suspect there are different agendas at play in this regard.
We need to find ways to get moving on this thing and quit talking about it, issuing reports, and replicating the Riverfront Park process. With a shrinking tax base due to job loss, we need to create new jobs in our market or risk losing government jobs and services. Without a strong private sector tax base you can’t maintain the government infrastructure in our community.
By the way, I am not saying the PTF folks aren’t doing anything, I am saying there is a propensity in Corvallis in general to spend an awful lot of time vetting everything before taking action. It doesn’t have to be that way all the time.
Just sayin’.
Thank you for your comments Marcy. I’d like to take a shot at adjusting the communications strategy for PTF that you offer.
PTF needs a communications strategy to ensure that 1) PTF really understands what the community wants and 2) demonstrates to the community that PTF is acting on behalf of community wants.
I think we understood what PTF was trying to achieve with the business licnese and why. As a community, we basically told PTF, “You are not acting on our behalf.”
I am a big fan of the “fail fast” approach to business. I agree with Marcy that Corvallis may be guilty of “analysis paralysis” at times.
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by WeLoveCorvallis: New post: The Quick and Dirty About Prosperity That Fits (Part 1) http://bit.ly/3sSXPA
#welovecorvallis…
I think it needs to be strategic two-way communication and right now it feels like we are passing notes in class.
2-way communication FTW!
Chris: The PTF does not need to “get back on plan.” The plan that was created by the community, and approved by all the EVP partners, including the governments of Benton County and the City of Corvallis ,at year end 2006 is the plan that is being implemented.
In years 1-2 of the plan, there were 25 action items calling for “implementation to begin.” All 25 of them – plus 2 others – were started. Some of them were completed, many are such that they are continuing. By my count, 27 versus 25 – that means we’re actually ahead of plan. Bravo!
We are now in the early months of the years 3-5 phase, which calls for 21 more action items with “implementation to begin” before year end 2011.
Are we prosperous yet?
Are we more prosperous than we were when the community was coming together to craft the plan?
Will we have prosperity that fits when all 48 (not 49) action items have been implemented?
My answers are:
Don’t think so.
For sure not, because no one saw that recession coming.
and
I have no way of knowing, because at least one thing the plan lacks is quantified goals and a means of measuring our progress toward achieving them.
But the PTF plan is on plan. Can some things be done sooner? Or better? Can some things be dropped? Are there other things that we should be doing? “Yes” is undoubtedly a good answer for all four of those questions. And the plan includes a process for getting community support for any changes to its plan.
Come participate. Come take action in support of the action items you see as most vital. Come take action to modify, delete, add acton items you see as needing that. Because whats needed is less “conversation” about what’s wrong and more work to get the right things done.
Thank you for adding to this discussion Curtis. May I ask which actions items are considdered completed? I would love to have your input for Part 2 of this post.
When Chris expresses, “Getting the PTF back on plan seems to be our best hope for some meaningful progress in the short run”, is it useful for PTF to understand why he feels that way? Chris may be representitive of at least a part of the commuunity.
What options do interested people have to get engaged in PTF? Is this an acceptable forum for us to provide input on items we think need to be modified, deleted or added? Is that kind of input valuable?
Loyan: PTF meetings are the last Monday, every month, 5:30 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. in the Madison Avenue meeting room, across from City Hall. The meetings are open to the public, and there is time on the agenda at the beginning and end of every meeting for public comment.
Further, if anyone wished to submit anything in writing for the PTF committee to consideration, it can be mailed to (or emailed to) Lynn Roylance, EVP Coordinator, c/o the Chamber Coalition.
Further, if someone wishes to make a presentation to the PTF committee, Lynn can connect them with Elizabeth French, PTF Committee Chair, to discuss opportunities to be on a meeting agenda.
I think any of the preceding avenues would best serve Chris, or any other concerned citizen, in communicating his/their concerns about the PTF plan or any aspect of its implementation to the folks who are most concerned abut PTF – the citizens volunteering their time and effort to serve on the PTF committee. These individuals, acting collectively, are in the best position to answer questions, correct misassumptions, accept criticisms, listen to new ideas, and engage in meaningful conversations about achieving prosperity that fits.
Loyan: The PTF Annual Report for FY08-09 should be available after the November 30 meeting of the PTF committee. The report will be posted to the PTF blog site: http://www.prosperitythatfits.us. It should give you the status of all action items that were begun in years 1-2.
I have been attending city council meetings for the last year. during that time the Sustainability Coalition has made numerous reports and updates. I see the PTF people much less often. The council faces many issues. If PTF wants their concerns to be top priority they need to show up at the council meetings. They need to talk to people who are not in the business community. If you wait for people to come to you, you will have a long wait. When I served on the city council, we talked a great deal about how to communicate our concerns to the public. I said then that the way to reach people is to go where they are. I walked my ward; I went to meetings of different organizations. It is a time consuming job which is why most people don’t do it. However, the ones that do have the greatest long term success. Coming to council meetings is not going to bring jobs to Corvallis. But showing up keeps your issue on the front burner of the council. In the future, I hope to see more citizens attending council meetings, talking with their councilors and learning how the system works.
I think it is great to learn how the system works but I also believe it is even better to learn when the “system” isn’t working and getting together and trying to figure out ways that the system can be changed for the better. Too often I find that over time the common sense thing has fallen by the wayside as the system creates the best solution for most cases and is applied without thought for the individual case. It is not easy to write codes, overlays and rules to protect everyone most of the time while still building into the document enough flexibility to allow common sense decision making. Is this what has happened with the Bald Hill Farm case out by the Fair Grounds? I wonder and do plan on attending the city council meeting on December 7th.
I have heard Stewart’s concerns expressed by others for many years. The structure of City Council meetings can make it difficult for people to attend. There are noon meetings, then evening meetings. Issues of interest often aren’t reached on agendas until late in the meetings. If you are employed or own a business, that commitment to your work and your employees can make attending these meetings difficult.
Is more emphasis placed on “rumps in seats” vs. written testimony? There’s an old antidote about legislators where votes are determined based on who talks to them last. I would hope the collective voice of a community carries more weight than packing an audience.
We live in a community that is highly dependent upon public employers. Between OSU, the City, the County, State of Oregon, and Federal employers in our region, the “business community” is in the minority. It isn’t hard to talk to those not in the business community because it seems we are almost outnumbered.
In answer to one of Bill’s comments, the way common sense gets put into the Land Development code is at the public hearing when it is being revised. Another reason to stay on top of what is happening. Also, the Planning Commission and City Council can make decisions on appeals that clarify the language of the code. Sometimes the only solution is to revise the code. To err is human. At the moment, city staff has identified almost 60 items that need to be changed in the code. No one from the business community has come and testified as to which of those items should have priority. Another item to work on.
Marcy is right about the business community not being heard as much as other groups. When I was on the council, I brought up the question of how to reach out to that group. Many do not live in the city limits and may not receive the city newsletter or the GT. My concern was that the merchants and other business people in Corvallis need to part of the process and I wanted to find a way to make it easier for them to follow what was happening. Hopefully, my comments on this blog will help.
I hope a number of business people attend the next council meeting when they take up the Bald Hill appeal. I believe that people do not understand how to appeal a land use decision and the comments being made about Bald Hill are a good example. Councilors and planning commissioners have to follow the code- that is the law. Land use cases have to be decided on what the law says and not what the majority thinks it should say. When the council doesn’t follow the law, the Land Use Board of Appeals steps in and reverses the decision. Often I had to vote for something I didn’t agree with. I did so because it meet the criteria set forth in the Land Development Code.
Stewart,
I thought the Blue Ribbon committee, organized as part of the PTF and the Chamber Coalition annual plans, led by Lyle Hutchins, gives the city a prioritized list of Planning code changes that business perceives as needed, and in that function speaks on behalf of the Chamber Coalition… What is your take on this?
Katherine,
You bring up a good point and I stand corrected. The committee does give the city a list. However, compared to what other groups have done the business community doesn’t appear that active. Now they may be active somewhere I don’t go. However, at council meetings I don’t see or hear their concerns as much as I do the concerns of other groups such as historical preservation or sustainability. So the question is how to get those priorities in front of the council on a regular basis. Showing up and talking to them is a good way to start. Think of them as customers to whom you are trying to sell a product.
[...] Corvallis City Councilor Stewart Wershow honestly shared his experience regarding Land Use hearings. “Councilors and planning commissioners have to follow the code- that is the law. Land use [...]