2005_0620_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

ATTACHMENT 15 Task Force Meetin� Minutes Discussion moved onto the Skate Park. Members talked about the specific community group the skate park serves, many on the committee believe the City cost for the skate park is minimal when compared to the benefit it is providing to the community. Further dialogue included whether the city continues to operate the park in the future as it does now, as a tier two facility. The industry trend seems to be toward tier one facilities. Converting to a tier one facility would result in lost revenues leading to the question of whether the lost revenues could be generated in another manner, a contract provider of some sort. 7. Theme: Charitable Gambling — discussion led by Council Member Maschka • Currently the Community Fund receives approximately $50,000 annually from local charitable gaming. Over the years, Roseville has successfully �sed/managed the endowment fund concept to create a fund that currently provides for a number of community services � Maschka outlined a possible scenario that would create a new endowment fund for the OVAL. This endowment would receive a percentage of the annual gaming funds that currently go to the community fund. The new endowment would include a sunset to ensure a limited time period for growth and development. The establishment of an endowment would support efforts by the Friends of the OVAL to raise funds to support OVAL operations. Theme: Philosophy of Roseville Contribution Miller Briefed Task Force members on budgeting process and provided general overview of a Philosophy of Roseville contribution. Anfang provided Task Force Members with a draft document which outlined current "Cost per Recreation Occasions" for Roseville Parks and Recreation Facilities and a sampling of supported recreation programs. • Task Force recognized there is same local resentment toward the OVAL. � Task Force talked about possibly finding a method to track user residency. Does it make sense to charge a non-resident fee for public skating? Further discussion revealed that tracking residency may cost more than the additional revenues generated by increased user fees for non-residents. � Task Force members agreed there is a reasonable level for the City to be supporting the OVAL ... what is that level? If the Skating Center is a$1 million dollar business and the City is running it a 10% deficit ($100,000 annual contribution).. . what should the new strategy be? What percentage of financial support is the City coi��fortable committing to? • Is there a way to generate an additional $.25 from everyone that walks through the doors ofthe Skating Center? ATTACHMENT 15 Task Force Meeting Minutes