My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5.3. SR 06-28-1999
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
1993 - 1999
>
1999
>
06/28/1999
>
5.3. SR 06-28-1999
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/21/2008 8:34:19 AM
Creation date
3/3/2005 3:14:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
6/28/1999
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />Community Recreation <br />June 28, 1999 <br />Pag-e 3 <br /> <br />. activities. A park and recreation director would allow the city to better plan <br />its future park and trail system and implement its comprehensive Master <br />Park and Recreation Plan. This park planning and development need in Elk <br />River should not be overlooked in the discussion of Community Recreation <br />options. <br /> <br />In dealing with options for the future, it is very difficult to say with any <br />degree of certainty that one option will work better than another for "x, y, or <br />z reasons." Nonetheless, I sense that going back to the way things essentially <br />were eight years ago with Community Education managing the city's <br />recreation programs is not a step forward for providing services to our <br />residents. This option may be cheaper, but it may not be better in the long <br />run. I sense also that the city will have less direct control over activities and <br />priorities by having school district employees supervise local recreation <br />programmers and activities. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />In looking at the three basic options, it is my recommendation that the city <br />continue to pursue withdrawing from the Joint Powers Agreement and <br />provide its own recreation programming with an offer to contract services out <br />to other local units of government, much like the existing organization <br />operates. If this is not acceptable, then I recommend that the city continue <br />as part of the Joint Powers Agreement even if this means paying slightly <br />more due to the budget concerns of Otsego and the possible withdrawal of <br />Dayton. <br /> <br />. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.