|
Northwest
Indiana Public Work Groups - Marinas,
Public Access, & Recreation
As
mentioned in the mission statement of the work groups, the
function of the groups was twofold: to identify the issues
facing the shoreline of Lake Michigan and those who use this
valuable resource and to recommend courses of action to address
the issues identified. The Marinas, Public Access, and Recreational
Uses work group achieved these results through two phases.
The first phase involved the identification of all issues
related to marinas, public access, and recreational uses.
A combination of brainstorming and the nominal group technique
(NGT) was employed during this phase. The second phase involved
the recommendation of courses of action to address these issues.
Again, brainstorming and the NGT were used. The meeting results
were recorded on flipcharts and summarized by the recorder
for distribution prior to the following meeting. The issues
identified during the meetings were not necessarily recorded
upon actual consensus but recorded due to the importance of
the issue from the perspective of the author of the issue.
The Marinas, Public Access, and Recreational Uses work group
met eight times to accomplish their mission. During the first
phase, seventy-seven issues were identified that related to
the work group topic. The group consolidated these issues
into thirteen major issues. Issues could only be consolidated
if the author of the individual issue permitted the use of
his or her issue. Next the group ranked the thirteen issues
in order to identify those issues which the group wanted to
discuss first. The ranking was accomplished by members placing
post-it notes on issues they felt were the highest priority.
Each member had five post-it notes numbered 1, 2, 3, 4, and
5 representing their lowest priority to highest priority issue.
The total points placed on an issue were multiplied by the
number of people placing a number on it, to determine the
ultimate rank.
During the second phase, the group was encouraged to be creative
in their recommendation of resolutions to the issues. The
following suggestion was made to the group to further manifest
this encouragement.
"The solutions you suggest should reflect your vision
of what you want your community and the Lake Michigan shoreline
to be. Since we will not have the time to analyze the solutions
put forth, make them on the premise that "anything is
possible." They should be framed in the context of satisfying
the issue (need) regardless of the existence of, or lack of,
programs and/or authorities to carry out any particular solution
at the present time. In other words, bring your ideas (no
matter how "far out") on what needs to be done to
satisfy or correct the problem (issue)."
The group addressed eight of the thirteen issues before the
meeting process concluded. A total of 216 resolutions were
recorded. Again, the resolutions were achieved through the
nominal group process which does not necessarily reflect a
consensus by the work group. The resolutions were recorded
due to the importance of the resolution from the perspective
of the author of the resolution. It was agreed by the group
that members who had recommendations regarding remaining issues
that had not been discussed due to lack of time could submit
these items to the recorder to be included in the report if
done in a timely manner.
A brief description of each meeting is included below. Copies
of each of the meeting summaries can be obtained from the
Indiana Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water,
Room W264, 402 West Washington Street, Indianapolis, IN 46204.
February 13, 1995 - The group gathered after a brief orientation
meeting and introduced themselves. Each member of the work
group present recorded their individual expectations of the
potential results of the meetings. Future meeting dates and
times were scheduled.
February 27, 1995 - The group established ground rules under
which to operate the meetings and discussed goals for the
group to achieve.
March 13, 1995 - Instead of setting goals, the group set a
preliminary schedule to be followed regarding the number of
meetings designated to talk about issues. The group identified
seventy-seven issues.
March 27, 1995 - The group began the consolidation process
of the identified issues. Ten major issues were formed by
combining individual issues. Individual issues were combined
only with permission from the author of the issues.
April 10, 1995 - The consolidation process was completed and
the thirteen major issues were ranked.
April 24, 1995 - Through use of the NGT, the group recommended
sixty-six resolutions for the first issue.
May 8, 1995 - By consensus the group decided to move forward
with identifying the resolutions to the remaining issues using
the NGT even though there was a possibility all issues would
not be discussed before the work group meetings came to a
conclusion. The group recommended resolutions to three more
issues.
May 22, 1995 - The group concluded the work group process
by recommending resolutions to four more issues. It was agreed
that the recorder would prepare the draft report of the work
group results and that the group would meet one last time
to review the report and discuss the future use of the report.
Written recommended resolutions for issues the group did not
have time to discuss were to be accepted by the recorder for
inclusion in the report if submitted in a timely manner.
June
6, 1995 - At the final work group meeting, the group made
corrections to the draft report and recommendations for the
future use of the report.
Through a series of eight meetings, the Marinas, Public Access
and Recreational Uses work group identified several issues
facing the shoreline and its users and have generated recommended
courses of action to address some of the identified issues.
The results of the meeting have been achieved through an open
and organized manner using a facilitated process. Although
the issues recorded in the report do not necessarily reflect
a consensus by the group, each issue and resolution has been
recorded here due to the importance of the issue to its author.
|