CC_Minutes_2010_0809 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Roseville Park and Recreation System Master Plan Update Community Advisory Team Meeting 11: Moving forward NOTES 5 August 2010 Page 3 A referendum for parks and recreation failed in the past that followed nearly the same path this process is following; it is too fast, and we shouldn't waste the process that was pursued in the assembly of the Master Plan; don't truncate the process; timing is everything, and this doesn't seem to be the right time. Don't rush to do something that might fail; what will be missed if a referendum is not pursued at this time? Lonnie explained that the costs of money and construction are advantageous at this point. While the cost of money might be opportune, the communication and momentum may not be there for the things that are on the list; we need to recognize those items that will spur interest if we want success in a referendum. If we use the examples of the shelters from the Master Plan, there seems to be a recognition that each one needs to be different; this proposal for a referendum seems to be too much of one size fits all. We need a more airtight estimate, and don't stray from the path we've been following; if we do this, will we be able to get the rest of the improvements funded-the things we really need or want? If this fails, will we get another chance? Participation in the master planning process has been good, but primarily engaging that part of the community that is most interested in parks and recreation; election timing is critical, and may speak against a fall election for this referendum; let momentum continue to grow. • This referendum short circuits the process; keep CAT involved during an implementation phase; continue the fine path we've been on, and keep focusing on CAT and community involvement. At this point a motion was made and seconded recommending that, while the advice of the city manager is respected, the proposal to put the phase one implementation actions to a referendum this fall should be dismissed, and that the CAT should continue to refine the implementation actions during an implementation planning stage. While there were questions about the CAT making motions for its actions, the direction was unanimously supported by the CAT. Further discussion follow the motion: • Does staff feel the implementation is premature? It still feels like there is a lot left to do, and the process should be continued. • What could be done without a referendum? In the last parks and recreation referendum, we weren't prepared; we need to take the time to do this right, and the amount .requested in the memorandum won't do it, we need to keep the momentum going by continuing the process. We can't go back easily to ask for more money if this passes, so we need to be cautious about what we request. If this doesn't pass, it might be seen as a referendum on parks and recreation, and that would not be a good position for any of the