New Search
3 Review Draft Communications Plan <br />(ERIC /ALL) <br />Previous discussions confirmed agreement for a two -part campaign <br />• The first focused on firmly establishing the need, the causes and the accomplishments in the <br />minds of the citizens; <br />• The second focused on the bond levy itself —size, intended uses, restrictions on uses, why it <br />will buy, impact on typical taxpayer's property tax bill. <br />4 Review of 2008 PMS Report and New Backlog Estimates <br />(JEFF /ALL) <br />5 Efforts in Progress for Other Components in the Funding Package <br />• Street and lighting fees - What is the expected timeline for returning to council with a discussion <br />about progress in developing new street fees and street/path lighting fees? <br />We Likely will not get back to this discussion w/ Council until after the bond levy vote in No, . <br />Staff should continue to work on methodolo -y development as time perrnits. <br />• Solid waste hauler fee - In what timeframe might council elect to revisit the solid waste hauler fee? <br />What timeframe would we recommend? <br />The council miLht initiate this discussion tiionlseli'es as a result of the bud- hich i i <br />fit p rocess,, vG'(lU�i,i <br />also be an opportunity for us to talk about the loot7111h O &M issues for FYI O. <br />• Proiect to research billing options - Originally, we were shooting to deliver to Council a report <br />before June 30 regarding billing options, in response to their comments and questions at a previous <br />worksession? (caution re impact on January-March negotiating position w/ EWEB) <br />This report will likely not quo out until mid- November. but the work can be done as time allows. <br />6 Other? <br />Staff Assi ng ments <br />2 <br />Who By When <br />3 <br />