Norfolk Daily News

Tuesday – January 22, 2008

A little more time, please.

That’s what is being asked of Norfolk Mayor Gordon Adams in response to his setting of a Tuesday, Jan. 29, deadline to receive information about shared office facilities for the city and other interested entities.

“Our Shared Facilities Workgroup discussions are ongoing and interest continues to build. I respectfully request you to withdraw the deadline of January 29, 2008, from your request,” wrote Tom Schommer in a letter Tuesday to Adams. “I simply feel that putting a January 29 deadline, which comes even prior to the public hearing on the matter, to receive the details, does not allow for proper dialogue to occur between the city and potential partners.”

Schommer has served as the facilitator of meetings between several Norfolk agencies and public entities that have expressed interest in the concept of a multi-agency office facility with the city or an office campus-type development.

“The real challenge and opportunity for Norfolk’s community leaders and local officials is identifying public entity partnering possibilities and bringing them to fruition,” Schommer wrote. “Myself and many others sincerely believe we possess the resources in this community to do that. We simply need the adequate amount of time to work on bringing the stakeholders together and engage in responsible discussions to determine the feasibility of such an idea.”

Norfolk officials have been considering options for new city offices. The city has an option on the former First Christian Church on Highway 81.

But interest also has been expressed by several Norfolkans in keeping the city offices in downtown Norfolk and possibly partnering with other agencies, such as the Norfolk Public Schools, Norfolk Area Chamber of Commerce and Norfolk Area Recruiters.

Late last week, Adams sent a letter to representatives of all the potentially interested partners and requested as specific of information as possible about what space needs they would require and what financial support they would be able to provide. He set a deadline of Jan. 29 for their responses.

Schommer said he also would like to see city officials and representatives of the other entities meet in private, rather than a public setting, at least initially.

“During the early stages, these meetings should be held in a private setting in order to encourage open and genuine dialogue,” he wrote.

Adams, when contacted Tuesday, said he hadn’t yet seen Schommer’s letter and declined to respond immediately on the request for an extension of the Jan. 29 deadline.

But Adams did say that he believes it’s important for discussions on an issue involving public entities and as important as this one to be held in public.

“There are times when discussions need to be held in private, but, generally speaking, I believe this needs to be an open discussion with the public,” he said.