The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutParks And Recreation Board - Minutes - 03/05/2008Call Meeting to Order: Mike Chalona called meeting to order 5:41pm Agenda Review: None Citizen Participation: None Approval of Minutes: Greg Miller Approved, Mary Carlson Seconded — Approved 8:0 (adding date of meeting to heading) Special Note: Michael made note of Resolution to Walt Peeples at the City Council Meeting on March 4. RESOLUTION 2008- OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS EXPRESSING APPRECIATION AND GRITITUDE POSTHUMOUSLY TO WALTER P. PEEPLES, III FOR HIS CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE COMMUNITY AS A MEMBER OF THE PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD Memorial contributions may be made to the Arthritis Foundation or the American Heart Association in care of Allnutt Funeral Service, 650 W. Drake Road, Fort Collins, CO 80526. Carol Rankin will send sympathy card to family of Walt Peeples on behalf of the P&R Board. Guest Speaker: Kelly Ohlson Kelly advised the Board to recommend the Policy Plan Option they felt would be the best plan for Parks O&M, but added that a Park fee may be hard to attain, with the timing of the Council asking the voters for a 1 % sales tax increase. On another note, he asked the Boards' opinion of the new City Logo. The Board felt that the logo needed to be re -thought incorporating a view of the Rockies or Horsetooth. P&R Board Minutes Pagel of 4 Chuck Seest, Finance Director Chuck showed a PowerPoint presentation to show boards & commissions the City's budget & review process. Sales tax is improving but is not sufficient to fund gaps in Parks Maintenance, Police, Fire, Pavement Management & Transportation. Impact of ongoing cost reductions, created opportunities for BFO processes. Please see PowerPoint presentation attached. Updates: Policy Plan Update: Marty recommended to the Board for a build out of parks and funding. Craig had a PowerPoint presentation to help show Policy Plan Options in a concise way, indicating pros and cons for each option. Option 1 — Current Plan Build Every Year — 19 Parks Pros: Every area would get a park Cons: Are Level of Service O&M costs sustainable? Option 2 — Build Out Build Every other Year — Combine Parks to total 14 Parks Pros: O&M Costs would be sustainable Cons: Parks & Areas would be unbalanced in Northeast. Reduced level of accessibility. Option 3 — Austere In addition to those combined in Option 2, the proposed East Community Park, Sidehill Park, & Eastridge Park would be eliminated — to bring the total to 11 Parks Pros: O&M would be sustainable — Aggressively reduce cost. Cons: The community would have lower park access. The level of service would be reduced with no restrooms, playgrounds or shelters in parks. The potential overuse of existing parks increasing O&M at those parks. There would be a need to return fees collected from homeowners. Mike — if economy comes back in 2-5 years can we go back to Option 1, if we select Option 2? Marty — We're in a sustainable mode. I think if your recommend Option 2, you can add in flexibility to re -visit. In Option 3, we lose flexibility because we won't have land or less collected to come back. Jessica — Nine parks in the NE looks like a lot of Park. Marty — It has to do with accessibility. Mark — How are policies for new parks triggered? Couldn't we add in O&M to build park and nothing happens until capital and O&M meet requirement? Marty — Sounds good, but we have other general fund issues with Police & Transportation. However, the general fund should contribute to O&M for Parks, even if we build out parks and don't add any more cost to general fund. Mark — Adjust priorities to maintain current percentage of general fund to Parks O&M because as community grows percentage goes up, but Parks O&M stays same and parks can continue to grow. P&R Board Minutes Page 2 of 4 Current funding needs to be based on existing costs to maintain/build parks. If we took ConTrust funding and devoted it to maintenance of Parks, and funded the power trail possibility (front range trails) through GoCo money, with some ability to get funding from grants, which is not always available, about 56%-Opt 1 -- 45%- Opt2 -- 37%-Opt 3 — of the trails would be complete by 2025. We would have more parks and less trails. However we could have the trails done in 15 years if Conservation Trust money stays at trails and not given to Parks O&M. Marty — This is a big decision. A lot is riding on this decision, all the time you're spending on this Policy Plan will have an impact. The level of service is great and I think we should continue with our current level of service. If council feels money is too much for general fund, then option 2 is okay, but option 3 is not acceptable. The Impact Fee is great, but using ConTrust should not be to the determent of the trails. Let's keep options open so if economy changes we can go back to Option 1. Chris — When presenting to Council the level of service expectation of community needs to be brought out to show community wants parks. Cost to build, good design, equipment to reduce O&M in future, $1,200/per house impact fee currently. Marty — Most of what Chris talked about we're already doing. Mike — I'm concerned about using ConTrust for O&M, and would like to find new source for O&M. Marty — If trails did not build out in 15 years then we could use those monies for other facilities such as Recreation facilities. Greg — I would like to use what Marty said as our recommendation. Mark — A strong message needs to be presented to say 6.38% of general fund needs to stay in place so current level of service will stay the same. Jessica — We need to be present at the April 81h Council Work Session to show a united front in how we feel as a Board regarding our recommendation. Recommendation of Level of Service Option 1. Current (Option 1) — Recommended Option — Best Overall 2. Reduced Plan (Option 2) — Possible Option (short-term) — Ability to return to current level of service if economic forecast changes. 3. Austere (Option 3) — Unacceptable — Not Recommended William moved to accept recommendation as above 1, 2 & 3; Cathy seconded: Approved by Board 8:0 Recommendation of Funding Options 1. Leave General Fund Parks O&M at current level of 6.38% now and through the future. 2. Earmarked Tax for Parks 3. General Sales Tax price of Government increase — add Parks to mix 4. Park Maintenance Fee 5. If 1-4 are not an option for council, 5 would be recommendation but not acceptable by Board. Use of C.T. for O&M — Use impact fee (Library impact fee changed to Parks)/Revised Sales Tax. Jessica moved to accept funding recommendation as above 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5; Cathy seconded Approved by Board 8:0 P&R Board Minutes Page 3 of 4 Election of Officers Greg moved to elect Mike Chalona as President, Ann seconded — Approved by Board 8:0 Mike moved to elect Jessica McMillan as Vice President, Ann seconded — Approved by Board 8:0 Proiect Updates There is a Policy Plan Updates Open House on Thursday, March 13 at the 215 Community Room. There is an Open House at Provincetown on Thursday, March 20`h from 5pm-7pm. Other Business Cathy Kipp presented her verbal resignation to the Board. She will stay on until another member is elected. On February 19 Council adopted a Resolution requiring all board and commission members to attend a training session during their current term. This year the training must be completed by July 1, 2008. Correspondence - None Adiournment — Board adjourned: 9:33pm Respectful submiptted Cr�/1 r/'C L � Carol Rankin Administrative Support Supervisor Parks Department Board Attendance Board Members: Mary Carlson, Ann Hunt, Cathy Kipp, Mark Leuker, Jessica MacMillan, Greg Miller, Michael Chalona, William Pickering Staff: Marty Heffernan, Craig Foreman, J.R. Schnelzer, Carol Rankin, Chuck Seest Guests: Kelly Ohlson, Council Member; Chris Dropinski, Greenplay „ 1_1, UIled . kf Aj d 3 Q00� P&R Board Minutes Page 4 of 4