2013-08-06_PR_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, June 10, 2013 Page 10 nities building up their own retail centers, creating additional competition for Ro- seville’s retail community. Mayor Roe noted that the Council consensus providing direction to the Commis- sion was to continue looking at the possibility of a community center; however, noting the need for considerable homework yet to be accomplished; and recogniz- ing that moving forward immediately may not be feasible. Specific to the comments of Councilmember McGehee, Chair Holt recognized the ongoing struggle, specific to the Park Improvement Program (PIP) and lack of funding over the years; and asked that the City Council take that into considera- tion as they developed future budgets, to reinstate and continue funding of the PIP to prevent any further deferred and more costly maintenance issues. Commissioner Azer provided a synopsis for the potential of a Park Board (At- tachment B) crediting the report researched and prepared by Commissioners No- lan Wall and Gregg Simbeck, who were unfortunately unavailable to attend to- night. Commissioner Azer noted that the report provide the pros and cons be- tween Parks & Recreation Commission and a Park Board, advising that the Commission sought direction from the City Council. Councilmember Etten expressed appreciation for this report, as well as all materi- als being presented tonight by the Commission, including providing the negatives and positives of issues. Councilmember Etten advised that he was still undecided about a Commission versus Park Board, including questioning the willingness of people to put in the extra time required, if using the Maple Grove model as an ex- ample. Councilmember Etten stated that another concern of his was making sure a Park Board wouldn’t get in the way of day-to-day functions and operations of the Parks & Recreation Department and noted the need for clear job definitions and how department served the community. Councilmember Willmus echoed thanks to the Commission for their reports; and regarding a Commission versus Board, opined that a Board would provide in- creased fiscal transparency for the community. Commissioner Azer opined that her main concern was that she thought this Commission of incredibly dedicated and hard working members, already did the work of a Park Board. If additional authority was added with a Board, Commis- sioner Azer opined that things would change; and suggested that Commissioner Nolan’s rationale for more transparency was based on the City Council and Park Board making decisions, allowing for more awareness of activities. Commissioner Doneen noted that fiscal transparency would include the City Council providing a lump sum with a Park Board allocating those funds. When