2012-09-15_PR_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I ROSEVILLE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION 2 MINUTES OF MEETING OF AUGUST 7, 2012 3 ROSEVILLE CITY HALL —8:OOPM 4 5 PRESENT: Azer, Diedrick, Doneen, Etten, D. Holt, M. Holt, Ristow, Wall 6 ABSENT: Boehm& Simbeck contacted staff with excused absence 7 STAFF: Anfang, Brokke, Evenson 8 9 1. INTRODUCTIONS/ROLL CALL/PUBLIC COMMENT 10 None 11 12 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—JUNE 69 2012 MEETING 13 Commission Recommendation: 14 Minutes for the June 6, 2012 meeting were approved unanimously. 15 16 3. REVIEW JOINT CITY COUNCIL/COMMISSION MEETING 17 • Doneen commented on the Council's interest in gaining more information on Park Boards and 18 the request for the Parks & Recreation Commission to gather the information and share their 19 findings at an upcoming meeting. 20 • Brokke added that the City Attorney is aware of the discussions on Park Boards and has 21 provided a preliminary opinion. Brokke offered staff to work with the Commission to compile 22 information for the Commissions review. Doneen requested that pros and cons be included 23 with the information. 24 25 Discussion of the joint meeting spun off to Commission goals for 2012 & 2013. 26 • D. Holt suggested using a Commission retreat to work on Commission Goals as well as 27 discuss Park Board information. Goal discussions should include identifying, prioritizing and 28 addressing steps to accomplish Commission Goals. 29 • Doneen added that the Civic Engagement Task Force is considering a recommendation to add 30 a FTE to support civic engagement and volunteering. 31 o Holt inquired into the process of recommending the addition of a volunteer 32 coordinator 33 o Brokke spoke briefly on the process 34 • D. Holt mentioned the Mayor was looking for clarification of PIP and CIP vs. general 35 maintenance costs. 36 o Discussion followed on identifying classifications for PIP, CIP and general 37 maintenance along with the need for budget considerations that address community 38 park maintenance needs 39 o The Commission agreed that an action goal addressing PIP, CIP and maintenance 40 costs needs to a higher priority in the annual work plan 41 42 4. PARK & RECREATION RENEWAL PROGRAM DISCUSSION 43 Brokke reviewed process and content for the Renewal Program Lead Consultant RFP. 44 45 D. Holt inquired into what the possibilities were for projects yet this year. Brokke explained that land 46 acquisitions are possible along with work on the County Road B2 pathway and natural resources 47 projects, he also spoke of the significance of trying to package projects to maximize results from a 48 financial and project management perspective. 49 • Potential Natural Resource projects for 2012 include; 50 o Buckthorn removal and shoreline restoration along Langton Lake