Laserfiche WebLink
Special Joint Meeting Roseville City Council <br />and the Roseville Area School Board, District No. 623 <br />Wednesday, June 25, 2008 <br />Page 10 <br />Director Edstrom noted the large senior population in Roseville, their enormous support <br />of the School District, their "ownership" of the Fairview Community Center, and the con- <br />tinued population growth of that senior population as it related to future facility use, ac- <br />tivities, and community needs, including transportation and walkability. Director Ed- <br />strom opined that it was an issue for the City and the School District to address those <br />transportation and facility needs from the "cradle to the grave," using the Carver and Da- <br />kota County concepts as examples in developing "communities for a lifetime." Director <br />Edstrom further opined that if it helped kids, it would help the senior population as well, <br />with both representing huge assets to the community. <br />Additional discussion included the advantage of additional time for the Lake Owasso fa- <br />cility's future use; and how best to proactively prioritize and move forward with tonight's <br />discussion. <br />After further discussion, it was suggested by Councilmember Pust that each organization <br />process tonight's discussion internally, and report back to their respective boards at their <br />next meeting as a specific agenda item for further internal discussion; then to share those <br />discussions with each other, and come up with a joint task force to proceed; with the con- <br />sensus being that the inventory would provide a tremendous amount of information, <br />while not creating a significant financial burden to either entity to achieve. <br />Additional comments and discussion included including tonight's main discussion points <br />with the Imagine Roseville 2025 and EPAC#1 priorities to determine areas of commonal- <br />ity and to structure future discussions. <br />Director Edstrom, with concurrence of the Board and Council, suggested that once a list <br />by each party of five or six (5-6) items, additional input be sought from the community to <br />determine if there were items inadvertently omitted in tonight's discussion. <br />Councilmember Pust noted that by each group refining tonight's discussion at their re- <br />spective public meetings, it would provide a good opportunity for public input. <br />Superintendent Thein noted the EPAC#2 process and ongoing work assignments and <br />commitments, while noting the involvement of each municipality in the School District, <br />and public comment during that process; allowing for shaping priorities, while recogniz- <br />ing limited staff, City Council, and School Board time commitments and limitations, <br />based on current workloads. <br />Mayor Klausing charged City and School District staff with providing a joint list to en- <br />sure everyone was working of same page, and to return with a synthesis of tonight`s dis- <br />cussion. <br />