Agenda - 04-26-2004- 7 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

APPROVED 2/17/04 the details of their thinking is to create an environment in which good reasoning dictated which collaborative efforts were advocated by the Commissioners or undertaken or rejected by the school districts. Ms. Carter said that it would be worthwhile for the school districts to try for "intangible" as well as tangible outcomes. In particular, she said it would be worthwhile to try improving the working relationship across the boards. Mr. Pedersen observed that the power among the group members was more balanced in today's and the i/2~/o4 meeting than in meetings with the County he has attended in the past, He attributed this to the equal number of participants from each jurisdiction, the meeting purposes ("we're not groveling") and the presence of a neutral facilitator, He asked the group to consider ways to establish formal structui°es that would allow this balance, and the consequent development of trust and communication, to continue. The group then shifted its attention back to the list of suggestions for collaboration. Perhaps it would be fruitful to streamline the list (delegated to staff) and determine which items were of interest to which group members. Items of interest to the group members of both school districts would be presented to the full boards for their consideration. A reasonable explanation would be provided by the school districts to the Board of County Commissioners for items on the list that one or both school boards are not interested in pursuing, There might be more discussion between the Commissioners and one or both districts regarding suggestions on the list that are not taken. Those discussions would be for the purpose of clarifying the school boards' reasoning. Dr. Carraway said that she would want to know if the Commissioners could not follow her reasoning, and so welcomed such a process. A matrix reflecting the group's first cut at this work follows on the next two pages, Meeting adjourned 345 PM 2