Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Park & Recreation Commission Minutes <br />August 9. 2000 <br /> <br />Page 4 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />and size of budget. Chair Kuester noted that Vice Chair Pederson has offered to <br />draft the survey when questions have been determined. <br /> <br />Commissioner Westrum felt it was important to distinguish "built-out" cities versus <br />"growth" communities when determining which cities to survey. <br /> <br />Commissioner Peterson felt it was important to find out from the communities <br />which have separate departments, at what point they made the separation, and <br />what benefits have been gained through the process. <br /> <br />Commissioner Westrum suggested that the survey also ask how the separation of <br />the two departments was funded and at what cost. <br /> <br />Commissioner Huberty suggested that Mr. John Guebar be contacted. She <br />explained that she met Mr. Guebar at an MRP Conference. Mr. Guebar helps <br />cities structure park and park/recreation departments. <br /> <br />Commissioner Peterson stated he would like to know what was the driving force in <br />creating separate departments. Ms. McPherson felt that Mr. Guebar would have <br />this type of information in his data base. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Chair Kuester asked if Phil Hals was comfortable with the Commission pursuing this <br />issue. Mr. Hals questioned what the Commission hoped to gain from creating <br />separate departments. Chair Kuester stated that he felt that at some point the <br />size and rate of growth in Elk River. separation of the departments would be <br />warranted. He stated that he was unsure at what point that change would need <br />to be made; if the city should wait until the street/park department and <br />recreation department became so overloaded they could not keep up, or a crisis <br />situation arose. He questioned how far Mr. Hals felt his department could be <br />stretched to keep up with the demands. <br /> <br />Commissioner Huberty stated that the Commission needs to determine if they are <br />considering a "parks" only department or if it would be "park and recreation" <br />which would include programming. <br /> <br />Commissioner Dana Anderson noted that he was aware the City Council <br />discussed the possibility of a park and recreation department when the changes <br />were happening in the community recreation joint powers structure. He stated <br />that making this type of change in structure would need to be planned into the <br />City's budget well in advance. He did not feel it was fair to the Planning <br />Department nor Mr. Hal's department to stretch them in so many different <br />directions. <br /> <br />Commissioner Sladek indicated that in the City he works for, the parks <br />department works with community recreation, and does its own planning, grants <br />and maintenance. He felt it is more appropriate for a parks department to do <br />their own planning, rather than imposing park planning on the City's planning <br />department. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Commissioner Peterson felt that a full-time parks director would be able to <br />oversee work being done, and to pursue grants. Phil Hals stated that there are <br />very few grant opportunities available at this time. <br />