Resolution - 2007 - 28 - Approve Consulting Services For Eagle Foothills Comp Plan Amendment /Keith Allred - 07/24/2007
RESOLUTION NO. 07-28
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF EAGLE, IDAHO, APPROVING CONSULTING SERVICES
AGREEMENT FOR THE EAGLE FOOTHILLS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY AND KEITH G. ALLRED, Ph.D.; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND
CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE THE SAME; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Eagle, Ada County, Idaho (the "City"), periodically amends its
Comprehensive Land Use Plan pursuant to Title 67, Chapter, 65, Idaho Code;
WHEREAS, the City is authorized to contract for professional services pursuant to Idaho
Code 950-301;
WHEREAS, the City desires to engage the assistance of Keith G. Allred, Ph.D. to assist the
City in facilitating public comments for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment in the Foothills; and
WHEREAS, the Mayor and City council are committed to thoroughly consider long-range
and comprehensive planning in the Foothills and intends to utilize collaborative polling within the
public comment and public hearing process to engage broader stakeholder and public participation to
identifY attendant concerns, conditions and consequences, both legal and physical, in the Foothills
area subject to the pending Comprehensive Plan Amendment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
EAGLE, IDAHO, as follows:
Section I: The Agreement between the City and Keith Allred, Ph.D., substantially in the
form annexed hereto as Schedule A and by reference made a part hereot~ is hereby approved, and the
Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute the same on behalf of the City.
Section 2: This Resolution shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage and
approval.
DA TED this~day of July, 2007.
CITY OF EAGLE
Ada County, Idaho
ATTEST:
~
-~
.,.' \: ,,(;1 r ....
.." L'~ ~ ....... ...
. 0.'.- . e. IIIl .
.... .- -a.... r Ii e. 'T' ":..
.. ,),., I .~r' ..
i . ~o ..0;
=_t-.:.ct' , ~ 0:
. · 0 ' ,. -
: U. ,. - V- :c:
0:. \ U G.'" 'l,' =
0:. .. ~V =
0:. . ? ~5J~
'10. · IItCOf, ,6 ... ~
...... O"..~
........ $T A 1''- ..........
...............
EXHIBIT A
ORIGINAL
Consulting Services Agreement
For the Eagle Foothills Comprehensive Plan - Public Comment Process
THIS AGREEMENT is made between the City of Eagle, whose address is 660 Civic
Lane, Eagle Idaho, 83616 and Keith G, Allred, Ph,D., hereinafter referred to as "Consultant,"
whose office address is 2480 N. Edgewood, Eagle, ID83616,
WHEREAS, the City of Eagle, a municipal corporation duly organized and existing
under the general municipal laws of the State of Idaho, desires to contract for the consulting
services of Consultant pursuant to 950-301, Idaho Code; and
WHEREAS, Consultant desires to act as an independent contractor to the City of Eagle
to assist in facilitating the public comment process for Eagle Foothills Development Plan for the
City of Eagle.
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein,
the parties agree as follows:
1. ASSIGNED PERSONNEL AND DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES: Consultant will
perform the services generally described in Schedule "A" attached hereto.
2. TERMS OF AGREEMENT: The term of this Agreement commenced on or about July
10,2007 and will end when the public comment process on the Eagle Foothills Comprehensive
Plan Amendment is closed. The Consultant will make reasonable efforts to complete such
services in an expeditious manner but no later than September 12,2007, Either party may cancel
this Agreement on ten (10) days' notice to the other party in writing, by certified mail or personal
delivery, Fees incurred up to the date of termination shall be paid to Consultant unless said fees
are in dispute, The parties shall mediate the fee or other dispute under this Agreement prior to
filing any judicial action,
3, PAYMENT OF CONSULTANTS FEE: Consultant's fee for the services to be
provided under this Agreement shall not exceed nineteen thousand, one hundred dollars
($19,100.00), Additional work beyond the scope of services must be authorized by the City in
writing prior to incurring additional costs, Fees for additional services will be negotiated
separately prior to incurring additional fees or costs above $19,100.00.
4, COST AND EXPENSES, All material costs incurred by Consultant in fulfilling its
obligations under this Agreement shall be paid by Consultant.
5, GENERAL CONSIDERATION: The Consultant shall hold harmless City of Eagle
from all claims involving the Consultant or Consultant's associates, employees, agents or
assIgns.
Consulting Services Agreement For the Eagle Foothills Comprehensive Plan - Public Comment Process-I
6, TOTAL AGREEMENT/AMENDMENTS: This is the entire Agreement between the
parties, and no representations of promise not set forth herein have been made by either party as
an inducement for entering into this Agreement. Amendments to this Agreement must be in
writing and signed by both parties.
7, GOVERNING LAW: This Agreement shall be governed by and construed according to
the laws of the State ofIdaho.
8, DELEGATION OF DUTIES: Neither the City of Eagle or Consultant may delegate,
assign, sublet, or transfer their duties or interest in this Agreement without the written consent of
the other party.
9. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR: The Consultant is an independent contractor of the
City and is in no way an employee or agent of the City and is not entitled to workers
compensation or any benefit of employment with the City, The City shall have no control over
the performance of this Agreement by Consultant or its employees or agents. The City shall
have no responsibility for security or protection of the Consultant's personnel, agents, supplies or
equipment.
10. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS: Consultant agrees to comply with all local, state and
federal laws when performing under this Agreement. Specifically, Consultant recognizes that
the City is utilizing public funds and Consultant is required to conduct its duties in a manner that
is neutral in all respects,
11. ATTORNEY FEES: Reasonable attorney fees shall be awarded to the prevailing party
in every action to enforce this Agreement or to declare forfeiture or termination of this
Agreement. The venue for any dispute shall be the Fourth Judicial District for the State of Idaho.
12, TAXES: Consultant is responsible for payment of any local, state or federal taxes,
including estimated taxes and employment reporting requirements imposed by local, state or
federal laws,
13. PROPRIETARY RIGHTS:
a) Consultant agrees that all Work Product created solely or jointly by Consultant, its
employees, associates, students or subcontractors, arising from work performed hereunder, or
previously conceived in anticipation of consulting work to be performed in regard to the City's
engagement, shall be deemed "work made for hire" and constitutes the joint property of
Consultant and the City. Consultant shall cause all of its employees, associates, students or
subcontractors assisting in creating the Work Product to acknowledgment that the Work Product
is "work made for hire" and the joint property of the City and Consultant.
b) "Work Product" shall mean all documents, manuals, teaching material, creative
works, pictures, graphics, electronic data/web-sites(s), data, and information created on behalf of
Consulting Services Agreement For the Eagle Foothills Comprehensive Plan - Public Comment Process -2
the City in whole or part by Consultant and all of its employees, associates, students, drawings,
prints, charts, computations or subcontractors assisting in creating the Work Product within the
scope of this Agreement, whether or not copyrightable or otherwise protectable,
14. RECORDS: Consultant shall keep full and accurate records of all work performed under
this Agreement. All records, sketches, drawings, prints, computations, charts, reports and other
documentation made in the course of the consulting work performed hereunder, or in anticipation
of the consulting work to be performed in regards to this Agreement, shall at all times be and
remain the joint property of the City and Consultant. Consultant shall turn over to the City
copies of such records upon reasonable request of the City. Consultant shall abide by the Public
Records Act and coordinate any requests with the City Clerk and City Attorney.
15, SAVINGS CLAUSE: If any provision of this Agreement, or the application of such
provision to any person or circumstance, shall be held invalid, the remainder of this Agreement,
or the application of such provision to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is
held invalid, shall not be affected thereby.
16. NOTICES: Any notices required under this Agreement shall be deemed given upon the
date of personal delivery or 48 hours after deposit in the United States mail, postage fully
prepaid, return receipt requested addressed to the individuals as the addresses listed below:
City Clerk
City of Eagle
660 Civic Lane
Eagle, Idaho 83616
Keith G. Allred, Ph,D.
Mediation & Consulting Services
2480 N. Edgewood
Eagle, ID 83616
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have cause this Agreement of be executed
as of the date so indicated.
APPROVED:
City of Eagle
Consultant
Keith G. Allred, Ph.D
Mediation & Consulting Services
Consulting Services Agreement For the Eagle Foothills Comprehensive Plan - Public Comment Process -3
Dated this,.t v.)J.. day of July, 2007.
ATTEST:
.............
........ OLE ..,'..
<< ~t'- ........ * ".
~... 't E.. '.
0['" ... ~
;....0 -;.\ 0 0:.
... ;; , ..,~.:I:!
... 0 ,.,."~! < =
U u ,,~,ll$S
\ oL INCO~O~ I
....... ... ~ ....
....,. ST}l.1 ........
f".,.......,.,,'
Consulting Services Agreement For the Eagle Foothills Comprehensive Plan - Public Comment Process -4
EXHIBIT A
KEITH G. ALLRED, PH.D.
MEDIATION & CONSULTING SERVICES
2480 N EDGEWOOD
EAGLE, ID 836 I 6
OIFICI:: (208) 939-3046
MOBILE: (208) 860-8289
E-MAIL: Keith@TheCommonlnterest.org
July 10, 2007
PROPOSAL:
DELIBERATIVE PROCESS FOR EAGLE FOOTHILLS DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Considerable controversy has developed quickly around Planning & Zoning's draft comprehensive
plan for development in the foothills north of Eagle. Given this controversy, the mayor and city
council face a significant challenge as they consider the proposed plan, As these kinds of
controversies develop, the discussion tends to become increasingly dominated by the most extreme
views on the topic and accurate understanding of the underlying substantive issues tends to erode.
This document describes a proposal for a proactive process that the mayor and city council could
convene to address this challenge. The proposed process--collaborative polling-aims to move the
deliberations away from extreme views uninformed by accurate substantive information and toward
representative views of the majority of citizens that are informed by substantive information.
SHORTCOMINGS OF TRADITIONAL PUBLIC INPUT
Polarization: Traditional deliberation processes that involve public input fail to provide an
accurate representation of public preferences because participants are self-selected. It takes time and
effort to engage public input processes effectively. Consequently, those with sufficiently strong
feelings and extreme views about an issue to mobilize around it, tend to be over-represented while the
views of typical citizens tend to be under-represented. Ironically, then, traditional public input
processes tend to give more voice to the more polarized elements on a question, making it more
difficult to come to a reasonable solution that advances the broad public interest of common citizens.
Not only do participants tend to have more extreme views than the public at large, but
traditional involvement processes also encourage participants to express more extreme views than
those they actually hold, Recognizing that the government will likely seek a middle-of-the-road
compromise, participants often stake out extreme positions in the hope that the ultimate compromise
will more closely approximate their true preferences. The more controversy that surrounds a given
policy question, the stronger these polarizing effects tend to be.
Erosion in Quality of Information Underlying Public Opinion: As controversy and
polarization dynamics take hold, the quality of the information on which the public is basing their
views tends to erode. Those with more extreme views who tend to dominate the process often
emphasize their views and conclusions with little regard to the best substantive information available
on the question at hand, News reports then tend to reflect and even emphasize these extreme views
rather than the substantive information, Consequently, the views of the broad public, who are not
actively participating in the process, come to be influenced more by polarized views and less by
accurate, substantive information.
COLLABORATIVE POLLING: A DELIBERATIVE PROCESS DRIVEN BY INFORMED AND
REPRESENTATIVE PUBLIC OPINION
Collaborative polling was designed by Keith Allred to address the weaknesses of traditional
deliberation processes, In this instance, Keith would work collaboratively with the City and
interested groups to develop a brief on the issues surrounding a comprehensive plan for development
of the Eagle Foothills. That brief along with a questionnaire would then be administered to a random
sample of the public.
Collaborative Development of the Brief: Keith would work collaboratively with City staff
to capture the best substantive information relevant to this question, including information on topics
such as traffic impacts and water demand, He would also work collaboratively with interested
parties, including the relevant developers and the North Ada County Foothills Association, in order to
accurately represent their perspectives in the brief. The aim would be to develop a brief for which
there was a broad consensus that it accurately captured the issue. The core brief should be 10-15
pages and take between a half hour and one hour to review. The core brief can also be accompanied
by supplementary information so that the participants can delve deeper into particular aspects of the
question if they wish to.
The brief can also capture various policy options, Presumably, the central policy option
featured in the brief would be Planning & Zoning's proposed Comprehensive Plan, The brief could
also include possible modifications to the plan. For example, the North Ada County Foothills
Association and the developers could each be invited to develop several modifications they would
suggest.
Polling the Public: Once reasonable consensus is developed that the brief accurately
captures the issue, it would be provided to a random sample of the public along with a questionnaire.
The random sampling ensures that the views that are heard are representative and avoids the problem
of being hijacked by extreme views that often comes with self-selected participation in typical public
input processes. The questionnaire asks participants the degree to which they support or oppose a
given policy option represented in the brief,
Using the Results in Making a Policy Decision: The results from the collaborative polling
process would primarily be statistical reports on the percentage of participants who support or oppose
a given policy option. This information would be input that the mayor and city council could draw
on in making their final decision. The mayor and city council can productively frame their entire
decision making process on this issue by signaling early that they are seeking a comprehensive plan
that serves the general public interest, has broad public support, and is based on sound information.
The mayor and city council can also indicate that they see the results from the collaborative polling as
useful information in their effort to identify such a comprehensive plan,
2
ESTIMATED COSTS
Many of the costs typically associated with collaborative polling can be avoided in this case by
drawing on City staff. In particular, the substantive information that has been generated in the
development of the proposed Comprehensive Plan on issues such as traffic and water can be
leveraged for the brief. Additionally, there are sensible ways of drawing on City staff in the random
sampling process that could reduce costs significantly compared to traditional sampling methods.
The most significant cost component is Keith's time and it is also the most difficult to estimate
accurately. The work with the interested parties is particularly time intensive and difficult to
anticipate exactly how much time it will take, Nevertheless, I estimate that the whole collaborative
polling process could be conducted for $19, I 00 assuming the assistance of City Staff.
Phases of Collaborative Cost Items Costs
Pollio!!; Process
Development of substantive . Keith's time working with City staff: 2 y:, days $5,000
information portion of brief ($2,000 per day)
Development of interested parties' . Keith's time working with interested parties to $10,000
perspectives portion of brief accurately capture their perspectives in the
brief: 5 days ($2,000 per day)
Posting brief and questionnaire . Costs of designing web pages for brief and for $1,500
online questionnaire that can capture participants
responses (would be subcontracted and would
adapt web design work already done for
similar projects Keith has done in the past)
Drawing random sample and . If drawing on City staff to do the clerical work, $600
sending mail notification to direct costs for postage, paper, envelopes and
selected participants; follow-ups to printing would be approximately $1.00 per
increase participation. participant. Recommend sample of 600. Keith
would work with the City Staff in drawing an
appropriate scientific, random sample.
Analysis of polling results . Keith's time: Y:, day ($2,000 per day) $1,000
Presentation of results . Keith's time: Y:, day ($2,000 per day) $1,000
Total Estimated Costs $19,100
3
About Keith Allred
Keith Allred taught and conducted research on leadership, particularly in the areas of
negotiation and conflict resolution, for seven years as a professor at Harvard's Kennedy
School of Government where he was also a faculty member of the Program on Negotiation at
Harvard Law School. Before joining the faculty at Harvard, he was a professor in social and
organizational psychology at Columbia University. A fifth-generation Idahoan who grew up
in Twin Falls, Keith and his family returned to his home state in 2003 where he pursues his
applied interests in consulting and mediation. Keith also continues to teach leadership and
management topics in executive programs at Harvard and Oxford and in the new Executive
MBA program at Boise State University.
In addition to publishing in the leading academic journals, Keith has significant experience in
applying his scholarly knowledge to real world challenges. As a professional mediator, he
has helped manage and resolve many disputes, He has recently mediated the jurisdictional
conflict between the Nez Perce Tribe and local governments and a conflict concerning
management of 600,000 acres of federal lands in Utah's red rock country. He also recently
advised the City of Nampa in how to reorganize its development services to better deal with
the demands of rapid growth. He is currently mediating one dispute over a series of
hydroelectric dams in the Northwest and another over a major proposed development in
downtown Boise.
As a consultant and trainer he has worked for Dow Chemical, Chevron, Hughes Aerospace,
Santa Fe Railway, the Forest Service, the Department of the Interior, and the IRS. He is the
founder and president of The Common Interest, a non-partisan, non-profit organization that
works in the Idaho legislature to put common sense solutions ahead of special interest and
partisan politics.
Keith earned a B.A. from Stanford and a Ph.D. in organizational behavior and social
psychology from UCLA, He loves skiing, backpacking, fly-fishing, and snow machining.
Having grown up working summers on the family cattle ranch, Keith has competed
successfully on cutting horses, going to the national championships twice. He now enjoys
training horses. He is married to Christine Edwards Allred. They are the proud parents of
Anna (4) and Dan (3).
4