Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Community Calendar topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Advisory board backs student project testing a shared Grand Island events calendar
Summary
EDAB members discussed a student project to build a shared calendar for town, school and chamber events; board asked for clarified scope, permissions and point persons and agreed to have the student produce a short feasibility plan.
Cheryl Chamberlain, speaking for the Economic Development Advisory Board subcommittee, outlined a student‑led project to create a unified online calendar that would consolidate town, school and chamber event schedules.
Chamberlain said the student, Sienna, has started the project and ‘‘would like to use Google Sites for this.’’ Board members discussed where the calendar would be hosted, whether the town or the chamber could or should host it, and what permissions would be required to post events from multiple public and private entities.
Nut graf: The discussion focused on feasibility, governance and content scope—whether the calendar would list only official meetings, all community events, or also commercial event promotions—and who would sign off on items to prevent perceived favoritism by a single public body.
Board members and staff raised three operational questions: who would host the site, who would be the point person at each participating organization, and whether town or school rules would limit content. Jose agreed to get clarity from town staff on whether posting a non‑town calendar would create any nexus or legal limitation. Members suggested a model where each organization retains control of its own submissions (a point person at the town, school and chamber) and a shared hub aggregates the feeds.
Chamberlain said the student’s work will be scoped as preliminary research: identify software options, define what types of events to include and propose a governance plan. Board members suggested using school IT for Google Sites integration, and identified Corey as a subcommittee contact who can continue technical coordination. The board agreed Sienna should finish the student research and return with a short list of options; Chamberlain said she would schedule follow‑up work and a small subgroup meeting to refine scope.
Clarifying details raised during the meeting included concerns about promoting commercial businesses, the need for a hosting arrangement for at least 12 months, and the possibility of shared ownership or chamber hosting to avoid direct town promotion of private businesses.
Ending: The group asked the student to return with defined, ‘‘baby‑step’’ goals after summer research; no formal town action or funding commitment was made at the meeting.
