My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2019-8-1_PR Comm Packet
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Parks & Recreation
>
Parks & Recreation Commission
>
Packets
>
2019
>
2019-8-1_PR Comm Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/26/2019 2:33:29 PM
Creation date
7/26/2019 2:33:16 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
51
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
44 Commissioner Arneson noted that an attached map made out of a separate materials may bea <br />45 better option for longevity. <br />46 <br />47 Commissioner Dahlstom added he appreciated the height symmetryof the first two <br />48 renditions. <br />49 <br />50 The Commission discussed that the examples did not have the City of Roseville or Roseville <br />51 Parks and Recreation present on any of the renditions. They felt that this addition may help <br />52 people understand that HANC is a city asset. <br />53 <br />54 The Commission noted that they liked the final (#7) rendition and that it would be a good <br />55 addition to the site. They also discussed that they potentially preferred raised white lettering, <br />56 a replaceable map, varying the animals in the coins and adding City of Roseville or Parks and <br />57 Recreation to the replaceable map. <br />58 <br />59 6) DISCUSS JOINT MEETING WITH THE CITY COUNCIL <br />60 Staff relayed that the omnibus liquor bill, which included the Cedarholm liquor license, was <br />61 not acted on during this legislative session. The Cedarholm liquor bill will be pursued again <br />62 during the next legislative session. <br />63 <br />64 Staff commented that there may be some interest by the City Council for a third party vendor <br />65 to take over the food and beverage operations at the Cedarholm Community Building. An <br />66 outside vendor would be able to provide craft beer and wine. However, a third party vendor <br />67 would more than likely need more history prior to committing as well as a 3-5 year <br />68 agreement and potentially would want exclusivity for food and catering. <br />69 <br />70 Commissioner O’Brien questioned the pros and cons on serving liquor in-house versus <br />71 having a third party vendor. Staff responded that financially it may be more beneficial for the <br />72 city to serve liquor in-house. Whereas, having a third party vendor could potentially transfer <br />73 some of the liability. <br />74 <br />75 Commissioner O’Brien noted that it may be beneficial to wait another year before looking at <br />76 a third party vendor to allow for another year of potential legislative change. <br />77 <br />78 The Commission discussed the pros and cons of in-house versus third party service and the <br />79 challenges of quantifying lost opportunities. They also discussed the importance of the <br />80 quality of the food and suggested a survey to understand user’s opinions on beer/wine and <br />81 food. <br />82 <br />2 <br />5 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.