Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />MEETING OF THE ELK RIVER PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION <br />HELD AT THE ELK RIVER CITY HALL <br />WEDNESDAY. AUGUST 2. 1989 <br /> <br />MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Mike O'Brien. Dave Anderson. Byron Houghtelin. <br />Todd Mixer. Rolfe Anderson. and Marilyn VanPatten <br /> <br />MEMBERS ABSENT: <br /> <br />Clete Lipetzky and Barb Northway <br /> <br />ALSO PRESENT: <br /> <br />Patrick Klaers. City Administrator; Phil Hals. Street/ <br />Park Superintendent <br /> <br />1. Pursuant to due call and notice thereof. the meeting of the Elk River <br />Park and Recreation Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chair <br />O'Brien. <br /> <br />2. Consideration of the 8/2/89 Park and Recreation Commission Agenda <br /> <br />lOLl! ANDERSON MOVED '1'0 APPROVE THE 8/2/89 PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION <br />AGENDA AS PRESENTED. DAVE ANDERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION <br />CARRIED 5-0. <br /> <br />3. Consideration of 7/19/89 Park and Recreation Commission Minutes <br /> <br />BYRON HOUGHTELIN MOVED <br />COMMISSION MINUTES AS <br />THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0. <br /> <br />TO APPROVE THE 7/19/89 PARK AND RECREATION <br />SUBMITTED. ROLFE ANDERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. <br /> <br />4. <br /> <br />Open Mike <br /> <br />There was no citizens present for this agenda item. <br /> <br />5. Consideration of Parks Master Plan Consulting Firm <br /> <br />The City Administrator provided the Commission with an update on the City <br />Council preliminary budget discussion for 1990 expenditures. The <br />Administrator indicated that the City Council concern was that the <br />consulting expenses for a Parks Master Plan. Parks and Recreation survey. <br />and two park focus area studies not exceed $20.000. This amount of money <br />will be financed over two budgeting years with $6.000 already allocated <br />in the approved 1989 budget and $14.000 being added to the proposed 1990 <br />budget. <br /> <br />The City Administrator updated the Commission on the results of reference <br />checks on the two finalist consulting firms. The reference checks on <br />both firms were excellent. In general terms. the communities liked Mr. <br />Sanders personalized and informal approach. while the Dahlgren. Sharlow <br />and Uban firm was much larger and had a wide range of resources to fall <br />back on for park related work. The reference checks also indicated fewer <br />financial concerns with the Sanders firm than the Dahlgren firm. <br /> <br />A general discussion took place as to the pros and cons of the two <br />finalist consulting firms. It was the general consensus that the Sanders <br />firm would give the Commission its best product within a limited budget. <br />