Laserfiche WebLink
6 <br /> ISSUE 5. What"s needed for regional operation and maintenance funding • <br /> ,policies? <br /> In 1984, the Council adopted a position statement on regional 0 & M funding for <br /> parks and declared an intent to seek legislation in 1985 which would authorize <br /> a program of supplementary 0 & M grants to implementing agencies and provide <br /> state funding, therefore the discussion on pages 31-34 of the 1980 Policy Plan <br /> is no longer current. <br /> Policy 22 reads: <br /> The regional recreation open space system should be analyzed and- recom- <br /> mendations formulated to achieve equitable outdoor recreation opportunities <br /> and consistent operating policies throughout the Metropolitan Area financed <br /> by an adequate, stable and equitable revenue source. <br /> By adopting its position, the Council responded to several 1980 policy <br /> questions including: <br /> - The Council determined that there is a need and that a solution lies in a <br /> supplementary program of regional 0 & M funding. <br /> - The goals of the proposed program include: <br /> o Facilitating system plan implementation. <br /> o Meeting acceptable levels of service system wide (a definition is <br /> provided) . • <br /> o Reducing undesirable differences in costs and needs for 0 & M in the <br /> system. <br /> The Council has suggested a stable source of state funds for the program <br /> which it believes will be adequate and fair. <br /> Related Questions: <br /> 1. Do you agree with the Council -s position on 0 & M funding? What do you <br /> recommend? <br /> 2. What policies are needed to guide a regional 0 & M funding program? <br /> 3. How should 0 & M in regional parks be measured? How can one tell what <br /> services and/or levels of service are appropriate? <br /> 4. What safeguards are necessary to a regional 0 & M funding program? How <br /> should they be provided? <br /> ISSUE 6. Is it appropriate and fair to charge fees in regional parks? <br /> The current policy plan does not mention fees charged regional park users by <br /> implementing agencies. Fees charged are primarily one of two types. The first <br /> is fees for special recreational services, product sales, or revenue from con- <br /> cessions for special services or sales. These have not been questioned except <br /> in the appropriateness of the kind or level of activity for some single enter- <br /> prise. Basically, there seems to be agreement that special services should be <br /> paid for by users. <br />