Someone has to be blamed when plans go awry, right? So with Homer's comprehensive plan setting some goals which now seem unachievable, Homer City Council members raised concerns this week as to who would take the fall when things outlined in the plan don't happen at all or don't happen according to schedule.

At Monday's work session on the comprehensive plan, the problem for the council was not the goals as much as it was how and when those goals would be accomplished.

The implementation plan needs retooling or someone will be pointing the finger at the council sooner rather than later, said council member Beth Wythe.

"There are members of the community that will hold this up and say that this is what we said we're going to do and we're not doing it. I fear that we're setting ourselves up and setting our staff up to look like they're failing to do what is outlined in the implementation plan," Wythe said.

For instance, building a new city hall and plaza is one of the plan's near-term goals, but voters last year soundly rejected a bond issue to help finance a new city hall and town square project.

"I could see things in the near-term section like building a new city hall that could just blow up in our faces," said council member David Lewis.

The comprehensive plan is a flexible document that outlines the direction, but not always in exact steps, that the city will take to develop Homer.

In the same spirit, the accompanying implementation plan is supposed to explain how the city will move forward with the plan, but uses vague timeframes like near-term, mid-term and longer-term instead of more concrete terms like five-, 10- or 20-year goals.

Despite the leeway allowed, the implementation seemed flawed to Wythe.

"When you know that there are things that aren't workable, it doesn't seem appropriate to put that out there," she said.

Things have changed since the first draft of the comprehensive plan was released in 2007, including voters rejecting a new city hall.

One of the challenges of any comprehensive plan is keeping the goals and information timely.

One solution offered at Monday's work session was doing away with the implementation plan altogether.

Council member Barbara Howard suggested the comprehensive plan and the implementation plan be separated into two documents allowing each to be voted on separately.

However, a full review of the implementation plan, on the same scale as the comprehensive plan, would cost the city at a time when it faces substantial budget cuts for other city programs, said City Manager Walt Wrede.

"I don't see us hiring any new consultants any time soon and I don't see us hiring any new staff any time soon in the planning department.

"We could certainly aim for those things in the implementation plan as it is," said Wrede.

A comprehensive plan does not directly establish policies, but it is supposed to guide future policymaking.

"Not every single paragraph or every single thing is enforceable but it is still a part of the framework that helps you make decisions," said Wrede.

So why is a comprehensive plan necessary?

The plan is a prerequisite for many grants and other funding. Projects included in a comprehensive plan are often given priority.

A comprehensive plan provides a roadmap and accountability. It will be referred to in future planning and zoning decisions, as well as land use and transportation planning. Plus, a citizen can challenge city actions if they do not fit with the comprehensive plan.

The plan also provides a checklist for the city and a meter of progress toward overall goals.

The comprehensive plan is scheduled for a second reading and final vote at the Nov. 23 council meeting. The comprehensive plan will then be sent to the Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly for final approval.

Ryan M. Long can be reached at ryan.long.@homernews.com.