3/7/2005 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting March 7, 2005 Mr. Jesse asked what was experienced with the fire levy. Mr. Limpert said that the major part was demonstrating a very definite need; that there’s an old building that doesn’t fit new equipment. Again, with the twist that the sewer levy was ending, it wasn’t being seen as an impact on the budget; even though people would have had a tax reduction, they were still getting a reduction, just not as big of one, so it was a little different concept. Mr. Jesse said that made it an easier sell. Mr. Miller asked Dr. Stanic as to crossover issues in the City and schools, is there a possibility as to whoever coordinated this could share with the Rec Commission those issues that might primarily be a city issue. Mr. Stanic said that the Commission would be welcomed to see the survey. The District, over a period of time, has done some smart things. They have done statistically valid surveys for quite some time, and the advantage in doing that is that once you’ve established baseline information you can determine how the community changes over the years. Some of the questions that are asked are asked over and over again, so if one was done in 1990 you can see the different attitudes in 2005. Please take the survey. The alarming thing in the survey for the School Board is that 60% of a random sampling of the voters, truly statistically valid, have no affiliation with the public schools at all. When asked about support for an operating and/or capital improvement issue, only 40% said they are willing to support it right now, which is one of the factors taken into consideration in delaying our efforts until November. In contrast, the same research company asking many of the same questions at the same one in Westlake, right now 65% of the people in Westlake are willing to support their issue. Is it a more enlightened community? This is not a trick question. We have a challenge here, for a lot of different reasons. Mr. Stanic will give the information to the Rec Commission but noted that the Commission should not get upset if people don’t leap forward saying they want a swimming pool or they want the Rec renovated. It doesn’t naturally fall, even though we know, doing it every day, what it takes to maintain it. Mr. Miller said there is a time issue to weave this matter together, but observed that the schools benefit from the Rec Center’s show of support. The Commission have had the problem of talking it to death and never getting it done, and part of the problem is strictly political. The fact that there have been turnovers of mayors, safety directors, recreation facility directors, etc. So, each time there is a turnover there is a new commitment or direction. As example, this room here did not exist many years ago; it was an office rented out to a cable company. Now, when you walk in, the former office is used for rec programs. Now there are long-term maintenance items that need attending and true emergency needs on the verge of breakdown. There are longer term, obvious goals. At one time the City had outdoor tennis courts; not now. The schools do, but the City doesn’t offer them. The City attempted to produce them and had problems with soil, structure and so on, and the money was spent on more important needs at the time. What is needed is a focus from this Commission that, one by one, as people change and move out, each person brought on board and working with other parties such as the School Board so that we are all progressing down the same highway, no matter which car is being driven. We can’t sit still on the highway because we’ll get run down. Page 8