HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997 02-18 PRMMINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
FOR THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE
STATE OF MINNESOTA
REGULAR SESSION
FEBRUARY 18, 1997
CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Sorenson called the meeting to order at 6:31 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Chair Sorenson, Commissioners Russell, Ebert, Mead and Shinnick were present.
Commissioners Peterson and Theis were excused. Also, in attendance were City Manager
Michael McCauley, Director of Public Services Diane Spector and Acting Recreation Director
Jim Glasoe.
RECREATION ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
City Manager McCauley asked for Commission input on the reorganization that took place in
1995 placing the Recreation Department under the umbrella of Public Services. He asked if
Commissioners had thoughts on the reorganization and its effect on service delivery.
is Chair Sorenson stated he felt that the financial dimension of the program warranted a
direct line to the City Manager. Commissioner Mead expressed concern the division had
suffered as a result of not having a direct line to the City Manager. Commissioner Russell
thought the "status" of the division was lessened as a result of the change. Commissioner
Ebert felt a direct line to the City Manager would be most effective. Commissioner
Shinnick felt the current structure might allow for things to "fall through the cracks,"
although he was not aware of any examples.
The City Manager thanked the Commission for their input and excused himself to attend
the joint meeting of the City Council and Housing Commission.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES -January 21, 1997
There was a motion by Commissioner Russell, seconded by Commissioner Mead to
approve the January 21, 1997 minutes of the Parks and Recreation Commission. The
motion passed.
PARKS AND RECREATION POLICY PLAN
This item was moved to the April 1997 meeting agenda.
JOINT MEETING PLANNING
Public Services Director Spector introduced a set of questions for the Commission to
consider in preparation for the development of 5 and 20 year plans for Parks and
Recreation.
These questions were:
1) What should be the function of the Community Center? For example, should it
focus on certain specialized activities or have a little bit of everything?
2) Should we continue to offer a full range of activities throughout our park system
or, for example, should we focus our resources for capital and maintenance
intensive facilities on "major" parks.
3) How can we attract more volunteer efforts, and more citizen participation
regarding urban forestry, environmental protection, lake and stream water
quality, etc.?
4) What are the community's expectations regarding recreation programming?
After considerable discussion, the consensus Commission responses were:
1)
• The Community Center should be positioned to provide opportunities for all age groups,
with a focus on youth and families.
• All Community spaces should be non-dedicated and able to accommodate multiple uses.
is • A dedicated Senior Center is not recommended. However, if a space can be designated
during the daytime hours, it may be worthwhile.
• The wading pool is an important amenity and should be relocated or renovated.
• The concession operation is viewed as a positive amenity but should be made more cost
effective.
• Having a large meeting space (Constitution Hall) available for the public use should be
maintained.
Improvements to the fitness area should be considered.
The addition of family locker room space is necessary.
2)
• Appropriate maintenance of the City parks is a priority for the Commission.
• A capital improvements program related to parks should be established and planned
expenditures followed through on.
• Consideration should be given to establishing major parks and refocusing capital
expenditures and programming efforts. For example, those parks would have lighted
pleasure and hockey rinks with warming houses; larger playgrounds groomed ballfields;
staffed summer programming; tennis and basketball courts; biffs; and other more capital
and maintenance intensive activities. The remaining neighborhood parks might have
smaller playgrounds; basketball courts; picnic shelters; and perhaps a ball field for pickup
games.
3)
• Does the City Council feel it is getting appropriate feedback on parks and recreation
related items.
• • Are there areas the Council would like the Commission to work more in-depth on?
4)
• The Commission feels current programming is good. Emphasis should be programming
for youth and families.
• Cooperative agreements with community education and other recreation departments
should be further defined and formalized.
• Changes in the Community Center and/or parks will necessitate programming changes.
SET MEETING DATE
The next meeting was set for March 18, 1997, at 6:30 p.m. in Council Chambers of City
Hall.
MEETING ADJOURNED
Commissioner Russell made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Ebert to adjourn the
meeting at 8:56 p.m. The motion passed.
•
0