Laserfiche WebLink
I ROSEVILLE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION <br /> 2 MINUTES OF MEETING OF AUGUST 7, 2012 <br /> 3 ROSEVILLE CITY HALL—8:OOPM <br /> 4 <br /> 5 PRESENT: Azer, Diedrick, Doneen, Etten, D. Holt, M. Holt, Ristow, Wall <br /> 6 ABSENT: Boehm& Simbeck contacted staff with excused absence <br /> 7 STAFF: Anfang, Brokke, Evenson <br /> 8 <br /> 9 1. INTRODUCTIONS/ROLL CALL/PUBLIC COMMENT <br /> 10 None <br /> 11 <br /> 12 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—JUNE 6, 2012 MEETING <br /> 13 Commission Recommendation: <br /> 14 Minutes for the June 6, 2012 meeting were approved unanimously. <br /> 15 <br /> 16 3. REVIEW JOINT CITY COUNCIL/COMMISSION MEETING <br /> 17 • Doneen commented on the Council's interest in gaining more information on Park Boards and <br /> 18 the request for the Parks &Recreation Commission to gather the information and share their <br /> 19 findings at an upcoming meeting. <br /> 20 • Brokke added that the City Attorney is aware of the discussions on Park Boards and has <br /> 21 provided a preliminary opinion. Brokke offered staff to work with the Commission to compile <br /> 22 information for the Commissions review. Doneen requested that pros and cons be included <br /> 23 with the information. <br /> 24 <br /> 25 Discussion of the joint meeting spun off to Commission goals for 2012 & 2013. <br /> 26 • D. Holt suggested using a Commission retreat to work on Commission Goals as well as <br /> 27 discuss Park Board information. Goal discussions should include identifying, prioritizing and <br /> 28 addressing steps to accomplish Commission Goals. <br /> 29 • Doneen added that the Civic Engagement Task Force is considering a recommendation to add <br /> 30 a FTE to support civic engagement and volunteering. <br /> 31 o Holt inquired into the process of recommending the addition of a volunteer <br /> 32 coordinator <br /> 33 o Brokke spoke briefly on the process <br /> 34 • D. Holt mentioned the Mayor was looking for clarification of PIP and CIP vs. general <br /> 35 maintenance costs. <br /> 36 o Discussion followed on identifying classifications for PIP, CIP and general <br /> 37 maintenance along with the need for budget considerations that address community <br /> 38 park maintenance needs <br /> 39 o The Commission agreed that an action goal addressing PIP, CIP and maintenance <br /> 40 costs needs to a higher priority in the annual work plan <br /> 41 <br /> 42 4. PARK & RECREATION RENEWAL PROGRAM DISCUSSION <br /> 43 Brokke reviewed process and content for the Renewal Program Lead Consultant RFP. <br /> 44 <br /> 45 D. Holt inquired into what the possibilities were for projects yet this year. Brokke explained that land <br /> 46 acquisitions are possible along with work on the County Road B2 pathway and natural resources <br /> 47 projects, he also spoke of the significance of trying to package projects to maximize results from a <br /> 48 financial and project management perspective. <br /> 49 • Potential Natural Resource projects for 2012 include; <br /> 50 o Buckthorn removal and shoreline restoration along Langton Lake <br />