HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-09-25-2020-min Town of Lexington
20/20 Vision Committee Meeting
September 25,2020
Remote Meeting
7:45 a.m.—9:00 a.m.
Members Present: Fernando Quezada, Dan Krupka, Bhumip Khasnabish, Margaret Coppe, Peter Enrich,
Robert Peters,Joe Pato, and Mark Manasas
Members Absent: Carroll Ann Bottino,Alan Wrigley, Peter Lee,Andrew Dixon, Kathleen Lenihan
Guests: Marian Cohen, Cindy Arens, Candy McLaughlin,Jyostna Kakullavarapu
Professional Staff Present: Katharine Labrecque
The meeting was called to order: 7:58am
The Remote Meeting Opening Script was read by the chair, Fernando.
Minutes:
• The minutes from the August 28, 2020 meeting were approved by a roll call vote.
Handouts/Documents:
• Lexington 2020 Vision Themes, Goals, and Recommended Actions
• History of the 20/20 Vision Committee,Activities 1998-2020
Action Items Summary:
• Mark and the ECiL subcommittee will continue to work with Sean Dugan, the Public Information
Officer,to implement the recommendations of the ECiL report.
• Dan and Candy will add Peter Enrich's feedback to their document.
Meeting Highlights:
Enhancing Communications in Lexington Subcommittee Report- Next Steps
Fernando congratulated the ECiL subcommittee's work and the development of their report. Mark
commented that the next step is to figure out how to implement some of the recommendations that
came out of the report. Mark mentioned that he talked to Joe about the best way to go about it, and
Sean about how to tackle the simple things, such as committee members not acknowledging emails.
Mark also added that is hasn't been decided who will actually write the communications plan for the
Town. Fernando asked if the committee is still together and if they will continue meeting. Mark
responded that there is certainly more work to be done. However, he wondered if it is part of the 20/20
1
committee's mission to do that. Fernando responded that it needs to be looked into and turned to Joe
for guidance on whether this is for the committee or specific individuals to tackle.Joe responded that he
hasn't given it much thought, but Mark was correct that it goes beyond the charge of the committee.
Joe added that nonetheless,the subcommittee can continue to meet to discuss and respond to these
action items. Mark responded that the group is willing, but he wondered if maybe it's a spinout and
something more like citizen communication committee that supports Sean is the outcome.Joe
responded that it certainly could be, and should be explored with Sean's help.Joe added that should
you come to that conclusion (ECiL subcomittee), 20/20 would want to submit a recommendation to the
Select Board in support of creating this new committee. Margaret added that she received an email
from a Precinct 9 Town Meeting Member,Tom Shiple,who read through the report and commented
that there is no mention of TMMA having some sort of network or communication platform with their
constituents. Margaret added that the group looked at three avenues:the Town communicating with
citizens,the citizens communicating with the Town, and the citizens communicating across the Town.
Margaret noted that the group determined that the third avenue was just way beyond their capacity at
the time, but it raised a question of where does the TMMA fit into the Town citizen structure." Margaret
followed up that it's something to consider if we continue to look at these things as a group. Dan
commented that he thinks the idea of developing a communication plan is really important. We would
have to consider what it entails,what channels does it use, and who determines what goes in it?
Further, is there some kind of editorial board and how frequently does it get updated.There is a
tremendous amount of work to be done. Dan added that one thing we might consider doing the same
thing that was done for the demographic study and create a scoping group,with Mark and others
drafting a charter for a follow-up committee to create a communications plan. Fernando asked Mark if
he would take the lead on this and with the committee's help, create a recommendation to the Select
Board to take the necessary steps to formalize what was discussed even if it means to form an
independent committee. Fernando added that although the conversation and recommendations have
been around a communications plan, he asked that maybe the subcommittee would consider a
communications policy, or a few policies. Fernando further added that a plan might be going too much
in one direction. Fernando asked Marian for her input due to her involvement with this report and the
subcommittee. Marian commented that there were a number of policy issues that came out of the
subcommittee's discussions, such as what is the response time on the part of the Town to citizen
inquires. However, she wondered if that might be part of an overall plan. Fernando asked if this report
was posted on the website. Mark commented that it was.
Town-wide Survey Planning Update
Peter Enrich provided an update on the technical working group's progress.The group met last week
and will continue to meet on a bi-weekly basis to get things underway.The group has developed a
timeline, including having a finished version of the survey in about a year from now in order to roll it out
in February/March of 2022,which would keep us on our five-year iteration cycle. Peter further
mentioned that the group has been spending a lot of time talking about the process of getting feedback
and any additions or subtractions to the survey questions. Peter added that the one thing the working
group wanted to bring to this committee was if we should be looking to expand the survey or use a
more common or nationally used citizen survey.The widely-used citizen survey serves some of the same
purposes the previously used survey served. Peter asked the group if we would we perhaps be better
served with a survey that is widely used across the country, and can provide broad comparisons to other
communities, or is it better to continue the path of the Lexington specific survey that we used in
2
previous years to have continuity. Peter said in his personal opinion,we have done a lot to develop a
survey that is particular to our concerns and are sense of our future and that may be the better choice
for us. However,that may be a decision the committee or the board we report to should consider. He
added that if we go with the national survey it would make our process a lot simpler. Peter wondered if
the committee members had any thoughts or opinions about the matter. Fernando asked for Marian's
input. Marian asked for clarification about the national survey being discussed. Mark responded that it's
the National Citizen Survey offered by the International City/County Managers Association (ICMA)
developed in 2001.They use a preferred administrator and have used it for over five hundred surveys.
Mark added that as Fernando mentioned, our survey is more visionary,whereas this one seems to be
more of a citizen satisfaction survey. Mark also pointed out the Town Manager,Jim Malloy, is now
president of ICMA and perhaps he can provide some more information about its usefulness. Marian
responded that I think it will come down to what is the purpose of this survey. If what we want to use
the goals and vision developed by Lexington citizens, and we want to know how we are doing,then the
local survey is the way to go. However,there is no reason why we wouldn't do the local survey and then
look at what other communities have found in similar areas. Although,that gets into benchmark and
comparing issues. Marian added the bottom line is we need to identify what it is we are looking for.
Peter agreed with Marian, and asked whether it is better to benchmark with Lexington 15 years or go or
comparable communities,which requires different approaches and methodologies, both which are
useful. Marian agreed and added that our original goal was to do this survey every five years and see
what the progress or lack of progress looks like, adding one more data point to determine how we are
doing.This is not to say these goals cannot be altered or changed. Marian suggestion would be to
continue using the local survey to have one more data point and then also consider beyond that, looking
at what these other surveys have to say and what are other communities are doing. Cindy Arens, a
guest, added that she commends the group for their work, but asked if the group might consider
updating the survey to get the community's sense of what they are worried about,what kind of
leadership do they want, and where do we need to go from a climate change or social justice
perspective, because a lot has changed in the world. Cindy added that she knows Mr. Pato is here and
that the Select Board is looking really hard at that. Peter responded that the things that came up in our
meeting last week,was how much has changed and how that needs to be reflected in the additions to
the survey, although it may require subtracting some questions. Peter added that the three issues that
came up were regarding public health, social and racial justice, and issues around climate change.There
were some questions added to previous iterations of the survey regarding these issues, but it is
particularly sensitive and prevalent topics right now, and the working groups welcomes your input from
you and the committees as the group continues to develop the questions. Cindy commented that she
can bring this to Sustainable Lexington Committee's attention as well.
Reflections on 20/20 Vision Committee Areas of Focus and Continuing Attention
Dan kicked the conversation off, underscoring the importance of reviewing what the committee has
done in the past and recommending that we use that insight to inform the steps that we might take to
ensure that we continue to bring value to Lexington as a committee. Dan asked that we take some time
to look back and reflect on what worked for us and what didn't,where we got the ideas for our studies,
what kind of relationships we had with Town Managers and our relationships with the various elected
boards. Dan added that by going back to 1998, we might identify the things that worked and didn't
work. Dan noted that he has only been on the committee since 2010 and turned to Candy to help fill in
3
the gaps. Candy prepared a history of the 20/20 committee that will useful as we continue these
conversations. Dan displayed a timeline from 1998 to 2010 on the Zoom Screen. H explained that in
1998, there was some interest for strategic planning.There was a need for some dynamic process that
looked out twenty years to see what kind of environment we wanted to live in and set goals for
Lexington. Supposedly,the Board of Selectman at the time, and in consultation with the other elected
boards, created an Initiating Committee. Dan noted that the initiating committee included Fernando,
Peter Lee, Peter Enrich and other represented groups in Town, who were tasked to help figure out how
to begin this process. Candy added that in 1993,Town Meeting passed an article that included some
strategic planning, and from there a Strategic Planning and Implementation Committee was created.
That group created a report, and a survey was completed at that point as well. Candy noted that process
developed some core values that carried forward in future work.The Implementation Committee was
charged with making the process a broader and more community-based effort. Dan added that the
survey that was sent out received a large and robust response, indicating an interest in goal setting.
From there it was determined that the next step was to establish a Steering Committee,which included
some members from the Implementation Committee.The Steering Committee did an enormous amount
of work, including a Town-wide forum and corresponding workshops. Core participants created the
initial vision or narrative of Lexington at that time. Candy noted that the core participant group's vision
was an important output of the Steering Committee. However, more importantly the six working groups
that focused on the six different subject areas, reflected some of the work on core values.The working
group reports and topics have been carried forward or dropped off along the way.The working groups
report can be found on the Town's website. Peter added that the basic motivation for doing some sort
of long-range visioning started outside of Town government back in the mid-1990s. It was a time when
there was a lot of controversy about what the town's priorities should be. It was believed that town
government was controlled by a relatively small group of people who were connected closely to one
another. Peter continued that there were really two motivations for the desire for there to be a new
process of Town government. It was perceived that boards were preoccupied with short-term projects
and the lack of inclusiveness and that Town government wasn't open to the broad voices of the
community.These goals led some of us to run for the Board of Selectman at the time. Peter noted that
these two goals were: are we providing a long-range context for short-term decisions, and are we
including a broad range of people in the decision-making process. Dan and Candy both agreed to
incorporate Peter perspective in the final document. Fernando commented that even though she wasn't
there at the very beginning, Marian was very involved early on. Fernando also added that Marian
chaired a group related to dialogue and looking at divisiveness in the Town. Fernando noted that the
committee had some early involvement with sustainability, helping push for the creation of what is now
Sustainable Lexington.The group also looked at our neighbor,Arlington and their 2020 vision process.
Dan continued talking about the timeline. Dan noted that the work of the Implementation Committee
involved taking the twenty-seven goals that came out of the Vision for Lexington, and conducting nine
public meetings in each precinct.This process narrowed the goals down to fourteen.The committee
then facilitated a discussion with the three elected boards, and there emerged five goals,where the goal
of sustainability turned up.Those goals and work was turned over to some scoping groups,which
narrowed all that down to three task forces. During this time the Implementation Committee was
renamed the 2020 Vision Committee in 2003. Candy added that the divisiveness that was talked about
during that time can be attributed to the pay-as-you-throw program that had residents pay for their
trash even though the bylaw says differently.There was also a failed budget override, so there was a
sense in the community that things weren't going well.The boards couldn't meet all together, so it was
decided that one representative of each board would meet. A facilitator had the members go through
4
the fourteen goals giving a thumbs up and thumbs down. Five goals were then determined to be
followed up by 2020 Vision. Candy continued that although the five goals were not more important than
the others, these goals could benefit from the examination and input from the committee more. Peter
added that during the period of divineness was whether there should be a creche on the Battle Green
during Christmas time which also generated a lot of anger. Dan continued that three task forces
included:the budget process and communication,forging constructive discourse, and the economic
development task force,with their reports had a big impact on Lexington. Candy added that there were
initially scoping groups were set up to look at these three topics to see if we should pursue this, and the
scoping groups all said yes. From there,task forces were set up and they all dug in and did a lot of good
work. Candy continued that the Economic Development task force was not able to come up with a
report that had any recommendations. Further, economic development was reintroduced as a topic
later and how we need to look at the Hartwell Ave area for future commercial development. From there
a new task force was developed. A consultant worked with them and a new report was published that
led to the rezoning of the Hartwell Ave commercial district. Fernando commented that Peter Enrich was
heavily involved in budget changes and process as a Town Meeting Member. Peter noted that he started
thinking about the budget process beginning in 1995 through his involvement in various capacities. Dan
continued to review the timeline and history of the committee. Dan noted that in 2007,the first survey
was administered for which Marian was involved with. Marian was also involved in Citizens'Academy
which was prompted by Carl Valente. Carl also asked for some demographic projections that led to the
Demographic Change Task Force that filed their report in 2010. At that time,we also held the first
Futures Panel event. Dan noted that if you look back on these twelve years, it was an enormous effort
on the part of committee and involvement of three boards and the Town Manager. Peter noted that
Carl, Candy, and others are appropriately receiving a lot of credit, but Rick White is also due some credit.
Rick White was unfairly dismissed as Town Manager, but he provided a lot of leadership and was a
powerful partner working through the complicated politics, and we should give him some credit.The
group agreed. Dan continued and noted that in 2010 the Demographic Change Task Force was created
and subsequently gave birth to two subcommittees: Demographic Change and Asian Communities.
Those two groups coasted on Carl's ideas.Then later in 2011 or 2012,focus groups were held. Dan
continued that we added the five year surveys,whereas the 2017 survey led to the creation of ECiL. Dan
commented that if you look at these last ten years and compare them to the first twelve years,you
don't see as much activity.This may be something we want to think about moving forward to ensure we
get the kind of support from Jim Malloy as we did with previous managers, and engage more with the
three boards, and perhaps we ourselves become more active in suggesting more issues or topics to be
considered. Candy also noted that in the last ten years, you really don't see any engagement or outreach
with the community or working sessions like you did within the first twelve years. Fernando noted that
the thing to keep in mind is that things happen in cycles. Fernando said he circulated the twenty seven
goals recently and they are just as relevant now as they were then, rather things have evolved.
Fernando added that Jim Malloy has been very supportive of this committee, and he currently has his
hands full of a lot of issues at the moment, but will continue to be supportive. Marian noted that Dan
and others observations of the activity of the course of the committee is interesting. What has
happened is that instead of having many activities like in the beginning,we have had more focused
activities. Peter noted that every time the group has done something really meaningful and effective,
there has been one, two, or three key people who have taken leadership. What we can take away from
this is we need to be reaching more broadly to find people who have the drive,talent, and commitment
to take leadership roles and to bring them into positions where they can have a real impact on the work
of the committee and the life of the community. Fernando noted that we reduced the size of the
5
committee so that we could have a quorum, but at one point we had a much larger group. At one point
we even tried to get some high schoolers involved. Cindy commended all the work the committee
members have done over the years. Fernando thanked Cindy for joining the meeting.
Next Meeting Date
• 7:45am, October 30, 2020
Meeting ended at 9:09 a.m.
Minutes submitted by Management Analyst, Katharine Labrecque
6