Vermont Council on Rural Development
PO Box 1384, Montpelier, VT 05601-1384
802-223-6091 www.vtrural.org
Board Meeting Notes - DRAFT
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Attendance
Federal: Colleen Madrid, Robert Paquin
State: Deb Markowitz, Lawrence Miller
Local: Greg Brown, Catherine Dimitruk, Steve Patterson, Ruth Wallman
Non-Profit: Paul Bruhn, Monty Fischer, Thomas Hark
Private: Bob Ackland, Marie Houghton, Tom Leavitt
Non-Voting Liaisons: Pat Mendini (in for Tricia Coates), Jenny Nelson, John Tracy
Staff present: Paul Costello, Margaret McCoy, Helen Labun Jordan, Phil Petty, Sean Sheehan
Unable to Attend: Molly Lambert, Doug Racine, Chuck Ross, Hal Cohen, Michael Dupee, Joseph Fusco
Minutes: Margaret McCoy
Next Meeting: June 15, 2011 9-4
Welcome & Introductions
Approval of Minutes of January 26, 2011.
Ø Motion to approve: Catherine Dimitruk; second: Tom Hark. All voted in favor of approving minutes.
Board Development Report
Election of Private Sector Representatives
Ø All voted in favor of electing Tom Leavitt as a new Private Sector board member.
2011 Governor’s Summit
Paul overviewed the VCRD history of hosting Governor’s Summits which are a fundamental process to fulfill our federal charge. The most recent one we did was 2003. The VCRD board and executive committee met earlier this year and voted to offer one this year. Paul has spoken with Jeb Spaulding who expressed interest and had an idea of topic “Vermont as a green innovation state.”
We would look to bring someone in to set the tone for the meeting and stimulate visionary or policy-level thinking. Look for the things everyone agrees on that ought to be done and still isn’t implemented and build an implementation plan.
Board discussion of Summit Options to Present to Jeb and Bill Lofy:
§ Former Head of Innovation and Technology at IBM is a visionary speaker around green economy.
§ Strategic economic development plan in the jobs bill might be a good way to jumpstart the process. This could be soon enough for that purpose.
§ How do we get the public on board with whatever the decisions are as there is controversy on green energy products and what is “green.”
§ What role will the state play in setting a green example?
§ Balance competing interests of protecting natural resources and at the same time stimulating the economy.
§ Doing a lot of expensive little things that will effect economic development and municipalities. Good to have that conversation about what it means for growth and our communities:
o a new TMDL for Chittenden County and soon one for the CT River and Lake Willoughby which will require infrastructure investments.
o Overlay that with the storm-water permit that EPA is rolling out with no funding source.
o The Clean Water Act is in its second phase which creates new requirements.
§ Don’t know what’s coming down the pike from DC.
§ How do we turn a challenge into an opportunity around water, the environment and the cleanup of Lake Champlain?
§ Can we do something comprehensive that looks at the different pieces and how they fit together? How can we be creative in getting people to work together?
§ The Green state topic has synergy with the forest service that has just finished their report.
§ The Summit could provide opportunity to think through a priority list of tasks or directions or policies to purse in relation to green economy or connections with green economy related to water quality and a larger policy. The administration will need to take a breath and slow down after the legislature adjourns and take a more comprehensive look – what can we do in 1 ½ years remaining in the term and the 2 years after that. Look also at what should we stop doing.
§ Action Steps:
Ø Paul will type up what we have suggested as potential Summit Topics into a one-pager to present to Jeb Spaulding and Bill Lofy for a decision by the Governor’s Office.
Ø Paul Bruhn, Colleen, Catherine, Deb, Greg volunteered to help Paul with planning.
Ø Shoot to have a decision from the Governor within a month and an agenda within 2 months so can nail down good speakers.
Ø Schedule Summit for late May after the legislature adjourns. Tend to do them at Basin Harbor if before June 15th.
Executive Director Report
Morrisville Community Visit Day ~ March 29th
The Community Visit Day is both a celebration of the community and a strategic process to get all ideas on the table that we then help them organize to set priorities. We bring a sterling leadership team. Board members are encouraged to come. You get to see the heart of what goes on in a community and the role VCRD plays in facilitating action.
Community Visit Prospects
We’re looking to select the 2nd community for the process this year. We are talking with several communities. We look for those that are ready to rally together and get things done.
§ Maybe Vernon where there’s a lot of concern about loss of jobs. Paul will go down and talk with people in Vernon.
§ Maybe Brattleboro?
§ Look at Alburgh town and village. It’s a sad town right now that is entirely defeated. Catherine is priming them for a CV in a couple of years.
§ St. Johnsbury isn’t ready yet but at some point, the potential is there in a couple years.
§ Williamstown in a year.
§ Also Randolph and Chelsea. Now the public school is fabulous and people have pride in the school and the town.
§ Action Steps:
Ø Paul will bring a recommendation to the board.
Smart Growth VT
§ The Executive Committee has discussed the possibility of partnering with SmartGrowth VT as they consider their options (going out of business, or continue as best they can, or look for a partnering organization who would adopt them including Law School, VNRD, us, others). There are several efforts of Smart Growth important to VT. It’s the reverse side of the coin of Working Landscape conversation but it’s hard for us to adopt a particular agenda and there are no dollars that come with adoption. They see VCRD and community development work as a potential place for them to land. The Law School and VNRC are more aggressive in trying to adopt them. SmartGrowth needs to look at their fiscal realities to sustain a leadership position to move forward.
§ Discussion:
o Their board is at the end of its rope in terms of wanting to raise funds to maintain it.
o There are 3 staff now. It worked best when there were 4: Admin, FR, ED, Planner. When they lost the planner they suffered. They could carve up pieces of the org and how they might be dispersed to a batch of different orgs. Will make a decision on April 5th. If we’re interested in some piece of it, it’s important to be aggressive to let them know so the option is on the table.
o They are interested in the work continuation more than keeping the name.
o Look at their funding sources and if in fact a piece or two would come over to VCRD might benefit us.
o VCRD has credibility with the communities and if it could work financially it could enhance the capacity.
o The evangelism has been largely successful. Well accepted centrist way.
Addison NWSU Unification process
§ The Governor has made a clear position that he’s in favor of local control. There’s a huge opportunity here. There needs to be a statewide conversation that asks people rather than tells them – we need a new vision for education but the process can’t be top down. VCRD could play a role (with funding and leadership) in helping communities in their visioning. Or build a unifying council to help set a statewide vision and action plan. It could be a major direction for VCRD in 2 years. Could talk more about the opportunities at our retreat this summer.
§ Could be a topic for the Governor’s Summit as well.
§ Education is at the heart of so many issues that we face. It’s a terrific topic for us to engage in.
§ Has huge impact on education as well with our tax structure. No one wants to see anything different than what they have and people are stuck with what they had 100 years ago but also want to look forward to the 21st century.
Fiscal Report
VCRD’s financial condition is tenuous most of the time but e-Vermont has given us cash flow that we don’t normally have. When we talk of expansion or going into other things funding has to come. The budget is in good shape despite the negative figures in the report. That’s due to a timing of funds being requested by not yet received. Paul walked through each functional category related to the security of the funds as budgeted. M&G is the least certain.
Ø Motion to approve: Catherine; second: Tom. All voted in favor of accepting the treasurer’s report.
2011 Fund Development and Membership Campaign
§ Our membership mailing went out to 2,500 people.
§ We have a list of key leaders that could build $5,000 gifts for a few years. We are looking for more that could make 3-year commitments.
§ We are sending “Leadership Letters” asking for $500 and “Championship Letters” that ask for $1,000. It’s great to have board support in calling those folks after we send the letters out. We will send talking points along with the giving histories to board members making calls.
§ We have a lot of relationships we haven’t tapped due to time limitations and the limitations of the makeup of the board. A number of people on the board can’t fundraise but they could help open the doors.
§ Paul is sitting down with B&J to talk about the capacity building grant. Maybe a 3-year capacity grant to support a development effort on our part.
§ Discussion:
o Paul is the best fundraiser the organization has. Might think about how Paul can spend more time fundraising. Maybe it’s programmatic help we need more than fundraising.
o Paul doesn’t know all those on the prospect list we’ve built, and in some cases just needs an introduction.
o Everyone can be involved in the process even if they can’t fundraise. Board members can call and chat with funders to let them know they are on the board and help to educate people on VCRD and what it does.
o Add to list on foundation side on multi-year grants for national foundations. Probably a dozen national organizations would greatly appreciate hearing about VCRD.
o WL as an example of building a campaign around long-term identity that could look at multi-million dollar long term grant to carry the work forward.
o A number of funders on the list could be partners in opening the doors to the national level funders.
e-Vermont, VT Broadband Policy & VCRD Next Steps
E-Vermont Update (Helen)
§ The e-VT partnership is starting to talk of bigger picture content evaluation as we look at next steps.
§ What’s the vehicle for sharing lessons learned, what are the next steps for partners and the partnership?
o We’re looking at where e-VT is building models; what are we doing that no one has before; what can we share with the rest of the state; what are the core areas where we’re serving “but for” and providing models; best ways to integrate technology into curriculum.
o Small rural businesses have a lot of basic needs. VSC is delivering basic skills training. How do we deliver these skills with rural challenges and continuous help? How to make human services applications and connections available to people who don’t know how to use computers or don’t have one?
o There’s a large demand for public access that need 2 things to succeed: fixed location (libraries) but also need wireless zones (not tied to hours of a building).
o We’re looking at the State’s online interface with the public, where the average Vermonter meets the information that’s online. i.e., Bristol in the context of human services. Pownal presenting the info for the biomass race-track energy park future – making facts accessible so the public can make informed choices. How to make the virtual town green succeed – FPF.
§ We are continuing to develop and test models. We’re having a retreat this summer facilitated by Steve Sheppard to look at this further.
Overview of Potential VCRD Next Stage Direction (Paul)
§ E-Vermont is funded through May 2012. This 2-year funded process is designed to increase take rates. VCRD has a history with broadband work. In 2000, we set a goal for universal access; no other group was talking about it then.
§ With e-Vermont we are building models and trying to be viral in sharing those models so they are available to communities beyond the 24 communities. The 24 communities will have follow-up needs but we don’t have funding to support that. Some of the partners in e-VT are designed to be statewide entities:
o FPF has used our relationship to jump out into 24 new communities and are working to go statewide.
o Looking at needs that might apply universally to towns across Vermont, like a community calendar widget.