August 13, 2001
Nevada City

Introduction and Morning Presentations

The Speaker's Commission on Regionalism (SCOR) held its 2nd retreat August 13th at the Nevada City City Hall in the Nevada City. SCOR Chair Nick Bollman gave welcoming remarks and discussed the agenda for the day.

Resource Issues from a Sierra Nevada Perspective

Jim Sayer, Executive Director of the Sierra Business Council, gave the first presentation of the morning. He presented the Commission with an introduction to the Sierra Business Council, a snapshot of the Sierra Nevada region, and ways the state can help the region prosper. Mr. Sayer's suggestions included looking at the dynamics played out between regions and exploring ways the state can help compensate for regional actions having inter-regional impacts. He also asserted that the Sierra Nevada does not have the resources for good planning, and suggested that the state establish a source of funding for planning in rural counties. Finally, Mr. Sayer asked that the Commission vote to endorse the Sierra Nevada Conservancy. More information on the Sierra Business Council can be found at www.sbcouncil.org.

The next presenters were Kathleen Eagan, member, and Lisa Wallace, Executive Director, of the Truckee River Watershed Council. They spoke of the Truckee River Watershed, which encompasses 450 sq. miles of drainage and 40 miles of river split between California and Nevada. They stressed that the Sierra Nevada's natural resources are at the core of its thriving recreation/tourism economy. Ms. Eagan told the Commission that protection of the Truckee River Watershed requires regional cooperation and state resources, but does not require additional state oversight.

Kathleen Hrepich, Director of Child Support Services for the tri-county region, gave a brief presentation on the regional consolidation of area child support services. She believes the consolidation was a smart move, and that resource sharing greatly improves the quality of child support services in all three counties. Ms. Hrepich told the Commission that people are more likely to embrace regionalism when they see it as an opportunity for gain rather than more state oversight.

Regional Approaches to Resources

Madelyn Glickfeld, Assistant Secretary of the California Resources Agency, gave a presentation on the California Continuing Resources Investment Strategy Project (CCRISP). CCRISP aims to answer three fundamental questions: What are the existing conditions of California's landscapes and aquatic ecosystems? What are the threats that these resources face? What are the exceptionally valuable areas for the State to conserve? CCRISP uses a scientific approach to assess natural resources values and to predict future threats. The bioregion is a key unit of analysis. The 2001 CCRISP objectives include understanding current conservation commitments and evaluation criteria, developing criteria and weights, evaluating and enhancing existing data, beginning predictive modeling, and developing an approach to asses resource health and conditions. More information on the CCRISP program can be found at www.CCRISP.ca.gov.

Ms. Glickfeld then engaged in a discussion with the Commissioners on the feasibility of the CCRISP goals and how a focus on environmental protection can unite a community better than a focus on growth management. The Commissioners and Ms. Glickfeld also agreed that focusing on environmental issues is the best way to overcome suspicion of regionalism. After thanking the morning's presenters Chair Bollman broke the meeting for lunch.

How We Got Here and Where We Are Going

To begin the afternoon's discussion on the Commission's final report Chair Bollman gave a presentation on what the Commission has accomplished so far, and what it still needs to do before completion and approval of the final report in November. He highlighted the many partnerships SCOR has entered into in original policy research, policy dialogue, and communications. He updated the Commission on the status of their four issue areas of state and local finance, collaborative regional planning, new regional governance, and regional economic growth and workforce investment. Chair Bollman also mentioned the status of issues that have been presented to the Commission but do not fit neatly into the four main areas of focus. Finally, he discussed the need to develop a process for completion of the final report and the importance of including implementation strategies. You may download entire power point presentation given by Chair Bollman as a PowerPoint File or Adobe PDF.

Discussion of Final Report

Chair Bollman then lead the Commissioners in a discussion of the issues involved in producing the final paper, including its content, form, and focus.

He first concentrated the discussion on what the Commission thought should be the audience for the report, and how they should frame the report. The Commissioners agreed that the main audience for the report is the Speaker and other state electeds, including the governor. However, other audiences were mentioned. The media, especially radio, was considered as a potentially powerful medium with which to reach a larger audience. Local and county electeds could also be a target audience. The Commission could also target those involved in Collaborative Regional Initiative (CRI) processes.

The Commissioners then agreed that whomever they decide to target, they would need a good slogan to capture their audience's attention. Commissioner Blackwell suggested that the Commission not write a report that steers people to a specific section. Instead, she asked the Commission to take the slogan idea and find three of four phrases that capture all interests and lead to the reading of the entire paper. Commissioner Perry thought that the slogans should focus on issues that are important to people and link them to regionalism. The Commissioners agreed that to reach their target audience they would have to be provocative. Some catch-phrases brainstormed by the Commissioners included "California is our home," "it takes a region," "living our values," and "recapturing the California Dream."

Chair Bollman then asked the Commissioners to focus on what outcomes they would like to see upon release of the report. He warned the Commission that they must ask the right questions when creating the report because if they thought too narrowly and did not focus on the outcomes of their recommendations, the report could have negative unintended consequences. Commissioner Abel questioned who would make the judgement call on the outcomes of the report. He asked whether the state would have the final authority on whether the outcomes are what were intended. Commissioner Abel criticized the implicit assumption that local governments would have the opportunity to freely create regional cooperatives, but that they may have to report back to the state to make sure they're using their freedom in the right way. Commissioner Morgan agreed, saying that the Commission needed to rid itself of the idea of "state knows best." Commissioner Blackwell suggested that the Commission set the goals for local communities and guidelines for expected outcomes but then leave the strategy to local agencies.

The Commissioners then launched into a heated discussion on the role of the state. Commissioner Abel touched off the dialogue by making the provocative suggestion that the centrist state government of California is the enemy. He stated that local agencies need to take back the tax revenue commandeered by the state. Commissioner Pastor countered by saying that isolating the state might lead to the balkanization of local governments, and that the real enemy are self-isolating local governments. Commissioner Mazmanian then suggested that the Commission could really spark debate by advocating regional government. Commissioner Bacharach proposed a compromise view that the state should frame a vision for the future and then get out of the way. Finally, Commissioner Whiteside wrapped up the discussion by stating that the state ought to decide at what level it will govern, or put another way, on what basis should the government structure rest. She suggested that the state government's insistence on micromanagement is the root of many local agency complaints and inertia.

Commissioner Whiteside brought the discussion back to the report by asking what the Commission is aspiring to do with their work. Does the Commission want to suggest specific quantifiable or numerical state and regional goals (such as increasing affordable housing, reducing traffic congestion, increasing the amount of protected open space, etc.)? If so, it needs to state them in the report. Building on this, Commissioner Mazmanian suggested that the Commission decide on the specificity and time horizon of all recommendations and include them in the report.

Finally, the Commission discussed the issue of handing off of its work when its mandate runs out in the fall. Chair Bollman mentioned that the best handoff would be to the Governor. Commissioner Mazmanian thought that the Commission has both public and private dimensions and so the handoff should go to a philanthropic organization. Commissioner Martin agreed, saying that the work should be entrusted to an organization steeped in the four "E's" of Economy, Equality, Environment, and Engagement. Commissioner Whiteside voiced her concern that the content, which the Commission hadn't finalized yet, should determine the hand off.

Chair Bollman and the Commissioners wrapped up the afternoon by determining that the September and October meetings should focus on writing the final report, to be reviewed and adopted in its final form in November, then edited for style, printed, and released. The Commission agreed to hold the October meeting in Sacramento instead of Fresno. In closing, Chair Bollman promised that with the help of Commissioners' input over the next month he and Christopher will produce an outline of the Final Report for review at the September meeting.

Public comments were heard and the meeting adjourned.