My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2019-6-4_PR_Comm_Min
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Parks & Recreation
>
Parks & Recreation Commission
>
Minutes
>
2019
>
2019-6-4_PR_Comm_Min
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/9/2019 4:03:48 PM
Creation date
8/9/2019 4:03:47 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
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
Commissioner Arneson noted that an attached map made out of a separate materials may bea <br />better option for longevity. <br />Commissioner Dahlstom added he appreciated theheight symmetryof the first two <br />renditions. <br />The Commission discussed that the examples did not have the City of RosevilleorRoseville <br />Parks and Recreation present on any of the renditions. They felt that this addition may help <br />people understand that HANC is a city asset. <br /> <br />The Commission noted that they liked the final (#7) rendition and that it would be a good <br />addition to the site. They also discussed that they potentially preferred raised white lettering, <br />a replaceable map, varying the animals in the coins and adding City of Roseville or Parks and <br />Recreation to the replaceable map. <br /> <br />6) DISCUSS JOINT MEETING WITH THE CITY COUNCIL <br />Staff relayed that the omnibus liquor bill, which included the Cedarholm liquor license, was <br />not acted on during this legislative session. The Cedarholm liquor bill will be pursued again <br />during the next legislative session. <br /> <br />Staff commented that there may be some interest by the City Council for a third party vendor <br />to take over the food and beverage operations at the Cedarholm Community Building. An <br />outside vendor would be able toprovide craft beer and wine. However, a third party vendor <br />would more than likely need more history prior to committing as well as a 3-5 year <br />agreement and potentially would want exclusivity for food and catering. <br /> <br />Commissioner O’Brien questioned the pros and cons on serving liquor in-house versus <br />having a third party vendor. Staff responded that financially it may be more beneficial for the <br />city to serve liquor in-house. Whereas, having a third party vendor could potentially transfer <br />some of the liability. <br /> <br />Commissioner O’Brien noted that it may be beneficial to wait another year before looking at <br />a third party vendor to allow for another year of potential legislative change. <br /> <br />The Commission discussed the pros and cons of in-house versus third party service and the <br />challenges of quantifying lost opportunities. They also discussed the importance of the <br />quality of the food and suggested a survey to understand user’s opinions on beer/wine and <br />food. <br /> <br />2 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.