Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-10-2011 Recreation and Parks Advisory Board Minutes Recreation & Parks Advisory Board Meeting Minutes, November 10, 2011 Meeting was called at 7:05pm by Jared Nelson. Present: Sandy Hodge, Ron Dingman, David Cook, Sue Henning,Thomas White, Lucia Stewart, Jared Nelson Minutes: 13 October 2011 minutes were unapproved, due to being short of a quorum Public Comment:Jeff Krauss, Mayor of Bozeman.There were three comments: #1: Changing SWAT:The City is not interested in making money,just to change incremental costs. #2:The upcoming School Board meeting may be of interest to the RPAB.They are discussing the option for developers,who have to donate to parkland, to donate to schools OR parks.The City needs to approve this, but it will come up and is in discussion. #3: Lights on the Softball Field complex: they are NOT dark skies compliant. MSU works with city to turn down the lights due to complaints.The softball field lights may be questioned. Shelly Elniger, a member of the Bozeman Tree Board.They are creating a series of tree walks, to include: historic, park, trail, and cemeteries.They'd like to incorporate input from all the boards that are involved in this list to create this official Bozeman walk. Mike Babcock, a sweet pea festival attendee, Vice President of the Sweet Pea Board of Directors (see letter submitted to the City Commission from the Sweet Pea Board). He's concerned with the proposal to increase the costs of public rental of the parklands. A 600 percent increase of expenses to rent the park will significantly impact a stable event. It costs $2,500 to rent now, and it looks like it will increase to $16,300.This is either 1. Increase ticket costs 2. Decrease in quality Subdivision Committee: (Sandi Dodge) Noted the Beautification Board Awards: 1:TO the Northeast Depot Park 2:The RPAB board, mentioning David Cook as an recipient of the award due to his dedicated work on the park. GLVT Report(see attached report. No one from GVLT was in attendance.) Update from the Bozeman Parks& Rec Dept.: (see attachment) Jamie:The Beacon Park is set to open, in partnership with GNFAC.They are beginning work on the Lindley Center deck. And they are working increasing Adult Programs. Dan:The Gas line at the swim center was replaced.The increase in whooping cough is affecting the swim center, but they are managing it well.There is an increase in swim lessons, due to the community asking for it.The Feasibility Study is underway,with RFP's received, and currently going in front of a full committee.June 2012 is still the goal,with a solid timeline and community meetings to be scheduled upon hiring. Ron Dignman noted: If there's any interest from someone on the RPAB Board (Julie Zickovich mentioned),they would be happy to have someone on the committee to discuss the RPAB interests. Parks Department Report(see attached report)—No motion was made due being short of a quorum. Thom:They are underway with their winter schedule with maintenance of the park amenities, park signs, placing potassium-based fertilizer on grasses, removing leaves and hockey boards. There has been much assessment put on the user-fees and the user agreements.Thom's spent much time canvassing other cities in the region on how they handle user fees, including Loveland, Helena, Spokane, Missoula, etc. Every city is unique in how they handle it, but the quality, size and number of participants affects the rental. But they have recommendations from their cities'to find revenue streams in their parkland rentals. Bozeman's user fees are currently all over the board. It's based on the impact of the user=an estimate amount of time of the Parks & Recreations Department on garbage, mowing, maintenance, etc. It's a very arbitrary number. It's stated in the PROST Plan:There needs to be a "partnership"with recreation programs and special interest groups to provide the facilities to support their needs and uses.This is where we lack.The Parks and Recreation Department needs to redefine they way they operate.They take on the cleanup and upkeep but the money to do so is lacking.They need to redefine their partnerships under the tight budgets that are placed on them. This is where the$1 per participant (or equivalent to 10%of the user groups budgets)for all user groups across the board. The only way we get infrastructure improvements is from the people and the community, and this is currently not providing the funding to keep up the infrastructure that the community wants/needs.There is failing irrigations, old facilities, lacking improvements, NO new facilities, etc. that are not being attended to.The Parks and Recreation Department cannot keep up with the facilities demand. The Parks and Rec Dept. are proposing this because they cannot afford to provide what the community needs/wants.They answer to the taxpayers, since this is where the financial burden eventually lies.The Dept. needs to be able to say they are responsibly charging the correct fees to the users in order to cover their costs and NOT transfer the burden to the taxpayers.They are accountable to the people. The money the Parks & Rec Dept. does collect from the user group's fees does go into the general fund, and is not designated towards the facilities that the user uses. Maybe it should be earmarked to that particular facility/park. Maybe this should be part of the conversation?The decision eventually comes down to the City Commission. The Parks Dept. is a highly subsidized department, so it will help when asking for improvement monies to be a little bit more responsible in provide back to the city's general fund. The drafted idea is everyone would be 10 percent of the operating budget as a fee for the use/rental of the facility. For the one-time users, it would be a 10 percent of gate fees/ticket sales. This would be assessed by the financial reports from each user group. The Parks and Rec Dept. is not trying to generate money, but to create user fees that are fair across the board in order to operate, maintain and provide facilities and parks to meet the needs of the community's demands.The current expenses are not meeting the needs of the mowing, staffing, reseeding, maintenance, repairs, etc.They feel they've been more than generous in the past, but it's to the point now that so many things are falling behind.They need to reduce their subsidies in order to not only repair and replace the facilities, but also provide facilities that are comparable to others in the region, if not generate a regional draw for users to choose Bozeman for their events/recreation over others. Ron Dingman added: We can't put a price on variables. We need a simple formula. Jamie added:This is the way other Recreation Depts. do it. Comments: David Cook: State law states the city schools could be granted land instead of parkland or cash in lieu, although this does need to be approved by the City Commission. On Nov. 28t", there is a work session to discuss this with the City Commission and the School Board. IN small towns in Montana,there is cooperation between the parks and the school that happens frequently, due to the lack of green grass. But that is not traditional in Bozeman, as most school comes close to all but locking up their fields and facilities in the summer. Maybe this is an opportunity for a new spirit in town. In this new era of diminishing budgets, we can identify opportunities to share our Public Park and school facilities. Meeting adjourned at 8:34 p.m.