My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2010_0809
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2010
>
CC_Minutes_2010_0809
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/17/2010 1:41:29 PM
Creation date
8/17/2010 1:41:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
8/9/2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
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
Roseville Park and Recreation System Master Plan Update <br />Community Advisory Team <br />Meeting I1: Moving forward <br />NOTES <br />5 August 2010 <br />Page 4 <br />work that we've accomplished through this process. <br />• We need to go on record as the CAT, which we've done with the <br />motion. When is the next time this could be put to a referendum? <br />It was suggested that the typical election date could be pursued, or <br />a special election could be held for this issue. <br />• We need to look at what else is going on in the city, and the other <br />competing needs for dollars (fire station, schools). <br />At this point, the discussion returned to the referendum. As no one <br />indicated support for pursuing this, the question was how the CAT's <br />feeling would be shared with the City Council. Lonnie noted this would <br />be on the City Council agenda for 9 August 2010, and that he would bring <br />the CAT's recommendation forward. <br />Discussion then continued: <br />• Who is the best person to bring this to the City Council? It would <br />likely be Lonnie with Jake Jacobson, but participation (presence) of <br />the CAT would be useful. <br />• In the last parks and recreation referendum, staff conducted a post- <br />election evaluation that noted the lack of a community survey and <br />lack of political buy-in; they needed unanimous City Council <br />support, but didn't have it. <br />We should be focused on implementing the master plan, and <br />reconstitute the CAT for the implementation stage, possibly with <br />members added (more commission leaders and Parks and <br />Recreation Commission representatives). <br />Focus on 2011 as the date for a referendum, with a further <br />definition of costs. <br />Questions were asked about the motivation for moving forward as <br />posed in the memo to the City Manager, particularly with regard to <br />the position of City Council members, and what would happen if <br />they are supportive of a referendum. <br />If this fails because the CAT hasn't completed its work, it doesn't <br />matter if the City Council supports it. <br />Questions <br />• There were no questions addressed. <br />6 Public comment <br />There were no comments from the public. <br />7 Adjourn <br />Upcoming meetings <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.