My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2016_0718
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2016
>
CC_Minutes_2016_0718
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/29/2016 3:26:11 PM
Creation date
7/26/2016 10:10:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
7/18/2016
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
37
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Regular City Council Meeting <br />Monday, July 18, 2016 <br />Page 14 <br />Recreation Department. Mr. Trudgeon reported that the remaining volunteer <br />recognition funding was to provide recreational opportunities with staff- <br />ing/training in several area parks selected to provide segments of the population <br />with recreational opportunities at their location. Mr. Trudgeon noted typically <br />sign up for programs was provided with participants coming to the site; but in this <br />case, staff would be pursuing bringing staff directly to a particular area (e.g. Ka- <br />ren neighborhood) to serve them. Mr. Trudgeon advised that the bulk of that cost <br />would be for seasonal employees to staff those programs and train them accord- <br />ingly; and obviously would be driven by the number signed up as to the number <br />of staff needed by ratio of participant to staff person. <br />At the request of Councilmember Laliberte, City Manager Trudgeon noted the <br />Parks & Recreation Department was very good at communicating with particular <br />neighborhoods to determine their needs and interests, thus indicating a potential <br />need for training in those areas. <br />Councilmember Laliberte noted such programs may attract youth from surround- <br />ing communities as well; and asked how staff was prepared to handle that or how <br />to differentiate residents versus non-resident program use. <br />City Manager Trudgeon stated he wasn't sure such a decision had made yet, and <br />noted the ultimate goal was to provide such opportunities at a low or no cost op- <br />tion; and didn't think there was a large distinction at this time, but would pursue <br />additional detail with Parks & Recreation Director Brokke. <br />Since the Mental Health Liaison is proposed as a pilot program the first year, <br />Councilmember Laliberte questioned staff's funding options if it went beyond that <br />first year. <br />City Manager Trudgeon clarified that the intent for the pilot program was to de- <br />termine the deliverables and what worked or didn't work; after which alternative <br />financing would be pursued; whether via levy funds or via other revenue re- <br />sources. While not having an impact on levy funds in 2017 as proposed, Mr. <br />Trudgeon noted it could very well become a levy factor in the future. Specifically <br />regarding use of forfeiture funds, Mr. Trudgeon reviewed his understanding that <br />the funds could be used for supplemental operational needs, and clarified he was <br />considering this position as an operation need; but further noted he would contin- <br />ue to review that to make sure use of that fund was being interpreted correctly, <br />prompting ongoing conversation and involving the city's legal counsel. <br />Councilmember Laliberte noted she had a similar question regarding funding the <br />Assistant City Manager position from the Communications Fund as an ongoing <br />allotment. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.