Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> REVIEW OF JOINT MEETING WITH CITY COUNCIL <br />4. <br />Commission Chair Stark provided Commissioners with summary notes from the June 7, 2010 joint meeting <br />between the Roseville City Council and the Roseville Parks and Recreation Commission. The notes <br />highlighted discussions and direction from the following topics; Master Plan Implementation, Budget and <br />Funding Options, Natural Resource Health and Other Related Topics. <br /> <br />Doneen commented that it seemed clear that the Council is looking to the Commission to make strong <br />o <br />recommendations in regards to the Master Plan Update. <br /> <br />Ristow commented on his disappointment that during his time as a Commissioner there has been a lot of <br />o <br />talk and not much action due to budget reductions. Ristow also mentioned the need to sell a local sales <br />tax to support parks and recreation growth. <br /> <br />Azer mentioned the Council recommendation to look to neighboring communities for shared resources <br />o <br />and cooperative opportunities. <br /> <br />Willmus questioned how there can be talk of implementation at this time when the planning process is <br />o <br />still going on. We need to see the planning process through to the end before we start talking <br />implementation. <br /> <br />Doneen commented on the forestry and the local tree inventory. He inquired into whether Roseville <br />o <br />forestry staff might be available to talk at an upcoming meeting and if the Commission would like for <br />him to arrange for an Urban Forester to update the Commission. <br /> <br />Commissioners were asked to forward additional comments onto Chairman Stark so that he can <br />o <br />incorporate those comments into the joint meeting notes. <br /> <br /> DISCUSS COMMISSION RETREAT (SATURDAY, SEPT. 18) <br />5. <br />Brokke briefed the Commission that the annual retreat is scheduled for Saturday, September 18, 9am-2pm. <br />The agenda was discussed and it was agreed that, as time allows, the topics will be as follows: <br /> <br />Presentation on Parks and Recreation Master Plan by Michael Schroeder <br />o <br /> <br />Review and comment on Master Plan <br />o <br /> <br />Clarify purpose, role and responsibilities of the Commission <br />o <br /> <br />Tour of park sites developed as concept plans for the Master Planning process <br />o <br /> PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN UPDATE <br />6. <br />Brokke briefed the Commission on the process for finalizing the Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update. <br /> <br />The latest information includes an implementation consideration for the November 2010 election: <br />o <br /> <br />Brokke reviewed his letter to the City Manager on some thoughts on process as well as a list <br />o <br />of potential projects that had been discussed during the planning process. <br /> <br />A smaller and scaled back listing was also included fitting into a dollar amount suggested by <br />o <br />the City Manager. <br /> <br />Staff are looking for Commission comments and advice in regards to a potential fall 2010 <br />o <br />ballot question, discussion included the following: <br /> <br />Etten talked about how this is not the time frame that has been discussed and <br />considered throughout the planning process. He is concerned that the Citizens of <br />Roseville do not know what they will be voting for and that a referendum question(s) <br />at this time short circuits the process. He believes that we should be looking at what <br />citizens really want and involve them in the process further and that it is not <br />appropriate to put a referendum question forward at this time. <br /> <br /> <br />Ristow and Azer agreed with Etten’s comments. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />