City of
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
November 21, 2005
Present: Commissioners D. Amarotico, Eggers, Gardiner, Lewis; Rosenthal; Director Robertson; Superintendent Gies; Superintendent Teige
Absent: City Council Liaison A. Amarotico
Gardiner called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM at the Parks office,
Study Session – October 13, 2005
Under “Meadowbrook II Park Plan,” Eggers asked that the phrase “were pleased” be removed from the sentence regarding park maintenance by the developers.
MOTION Rosenthal moved to approve the minutes as amended. Eggers seconded the motion.
The vote was: 5 yes – 0 no
Regular Meeting – October 24, 2005
Under “Meadowbrook II Park Plan,” Eggers asked that the phrase [within the motion] reading “with the following exceptions” be changed to “with the following changes.”
MOTION Rosenthal moved to approve the minutes as amended. D. Amarotico seconded the motion.
The vote was: 5 yes – 0 no
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Open Forum
None.
REQUEST FOR FILMING IN
The commission agreed to include “Request for Filming in
FINANCE AWARD PRESENTATION
Robertson announced that the
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
GOLF COURSE FEES DISCUSSION
Teige reported that the Golf Course Subcommittee met to discuss feedback received by the golfing community over the past several months and revised its proposed fees changes, which she presented to the commission and those in attendance. Gardiner invited the public to speak to the commission.
Public Input
Ronald Corallo,
Ron Tracy,
Ross Rampy,
Jim Hatton,
Mark Kerr, 1506 Pinecrest Terrace, expressed overall satisfaction with the proposed fee increases but reflected that smaller increases would have been preferable, especially for family rates.
Discussion Among Commissioners
Commissioners offered feedback on the proposed fee changes, agreeing that the rates had not been raised for a long time and the new rates seemed reasonable. Gardiner, a member of the subcommittee, reported that the overall intention [of the subcommittee and the commission] was to make the course self-supporting, and the new fee schedule could help them to achieve that goal.
Commissioners thanked Rosenthal, a member of the subcommittee, for his cost analysis. He stated that the retention of the 7-day pass was a compromise based on public testimony and that the new rates were reasonable and responsible.
Commissioners thanked the subcommittee for their work and the public for their input, reflecting that the increased income might increase the likelihood of improvements being made at the course.
Gardiner called for a motion.
Motion Eggers moved to adopt the fee schedule proposed by the Golf Course Subcommittee and to annually review golf course fees. Lewis seconded the motion.
The vote was: 5 yes – 0 no
NEW BUSINESS
RIVERWALK SUBDIVISION PROPOSAL
Robertson introduced the topic, reminding the commission that Bow Seltzer, a citizen residing within the Riverwalk subdivision, presented a citizen petition to the commission at their October regular meeting requesting a redesign of the front of the area known as
Public Input
Bow Seltzer,
Shirley Bell and Jim Simonds,
Richard Jennings,
Charlie West, 446 Briscoe, thanked Seltzer for his design proposal and asked whether it would be possible to offer input to the commission on the design. He reflected that the park would be an ideal meeting place within the subdivision and that the neighbors could provide assistance in making it a success.
Barry Vitcov, 430 Briscoe, asked how he and other neighbors could help implement the new park and thanked Seltzer for taking the initiative to start the process.
Sidney Bonte,
Harry Purslow
Dolly Travers,
Discussion Among Commissioners
Commissioners asked about the history of the park site and Robertson informed them that, when the subdivision was developed, the area was meant to be developed as a park. He reported that the park land was, at the time of development, on the city’s Open Space Plan [as dedicated parkland] and the plat plan showed the developer making improvements. He stated that two stages [for development of the park site] are missing—the completion of the staging area and the completion of the trail.
Commissioners discussed the possibility of turning the land into park space in the future, expressing their interest in providing lawn furniture and additional shrub plantings to discourage people from parking on the site. Robertson stated that those items would have a marginal impact on the budget. Commissioners invited the neighbors to attend upcoming Parks budget meetings and to convey their interest in developing the park area within the subdivision.
Robertson agreed to work with staff to determine costs involved in providing lawn furniture, shrubs, and some barriers to the park site.
BUDGET PREPARATION SCHEDULE
Robertson reviewed his packet memo regarding budget meetings for the 2006-2007 fiscal year, indicating that he hoped to begin the process in December 2005 and be prepared to present the proposed budget to the Budget Committee in the March/April 2006 timeframe. He also expressed that the initial portion of the budget process, during which he hoped to meet with commissioners individually, would be an appropriate time to begin his annual evaluation.
Discussion Among Commissioners
Commissioners stated that they felt comfortable with the proposed budget timeline and process.
PARKS DEPARTMENT LOGO DISCUSSION
Robertson reminded the commission of their 2005-2006 fiscal year goal to review the current Parks Department logo and potentially to find a more appropriate representation of the department. He laid out a five-step plan by which they could proceed.
Discussion Among Commissioners
Commissioners agreed that the swans no longer accurately represent the parks system and that it would be appropriate to move forward in creating a new logo. Rosenthal suggested hiring a professional graphic artist to help create a logo that would clearly represent the department to the community. Other commissioners agreed with the concept of hiring a professional and staying involved with the process. Staff agreed to prepare requisite logo attributes for prospective graphic artists to use in generating price estimates.
REQUEST TO FILM IN
Robertson reported that staff was approached by CWG Films, LLC, about using
Gary Kout, Unit Production Manager for CWG Films, LLC, reported that he approached staff to request the use of
Discussion Among Commissioners
Commissioners asked staff and Kout a number of questions related to the filming, including the size of the filming crew and questions about equipment, how weather might affect the process, and how the park is typically used at that time of night and year. Appropriate answers were provided and Gardiner called for a motion.
Motion Rosenthal moved to approve the filming request at
The vote was: 5 yes – 0 no
SUBCOMMITTEE and STAFF REPORTS
None.
ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS
None.
UPCOMING MEETING DATE(S) and PROPOSED AGENDA ITEMS
§ Study session set for Thursday, December 1 at 7:00 PM—Parks office, 340 S. Pioneer. Topics to include:
§
§ Trail master plan document presentation
§ Employee manual review
§ Regular meeting set for Monday, December 19 at 7:00 PM—Council Chambers, 1175
§ Audit report
§ Trail master plan document request
§ Executive session—Real Property ORS 192.660 (1)(e)
ADJOURNMENT – By consensus, with no further business, Gardiner adjourned the meeting at 9:20 PM.
Respectfully submitted, Susan Dyssegard, Ashland Parks & Recreation Department