02/19/2002 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Council Minutes of 2/19/02 ,,,~ successive terms appointing interim directors. Further, in the discussion there was a concern raised about the ability of a mayor to appoint muhiple imerim directors back to back without ever making a permanent appointmetrt, which would at least in theory be permitted under the current Ordinance 97-122. Lastly, the issue was discussed as to whether the best way to handle this particular matter might be to simply place on the ballot an amendment to the Charter allowing interim directors instead of passing legislation that may be in conflict with the Charter. This has been put in ordinance form as Ordinance 2002-20. Council agreed to disagree to some extent. But at least two schools of thought surfaced in the proceedings on possible problems with Ordinance 97-122 as is and the attempt to repeal it. First, Ordinance 97-122 is at least susceptible to a challenge as improper and impermissibly in conflict with the Charter in the event that an interim director is discharged in accordance with the provisions of the ordinance and Council does not approve of that. Second, if Council should pass Ordinance 2002-12 repealing the interim directors provision, there was at least a question of what happens to those persons who are currently serving as interim directors. Would they remain interim appointments or would they be something other than that. The committee discussed the matter in considerable detail, and it was suggested that the easiest way to handle this issue was to present it to the voters in the form of a Charter amendment, and that is on the agenda tonight as Ordinance 2002-20. In the meantime, the committee believed that the city should return to the setup that existed prior to Ordinance 97-122 by repealing Ordinance 97-122 through the passage of Ordinance 2002-12. The committee unanimously recommended approval of that course of action. However, after a discussion with Mayor Musial, it has been decided to remove Ordinance 2002-12 from the agenda to clarify several issues in a future committee meeting. Councilman Gareau; chairperson of the Recreation, Public Parks and Buildings Committee: 1) The Recreation Committee of Council met on Monday, February 11, and all committee members were present. On the agenda for discussion was Ordinance 2002-14, which is an ordinance establishing fees for programs and for the use of the facilities of the Parks and Recreation Department and repealing Ordinance No. 96-114. The committee discussed the fact that it had been nearly six years since a fee schedule at the Recreation Center had been modified. Recreation Commissioner Morgan indicated that most of the programs are now being charged at the top of their respective ranges, meaning he is not able to keep up with the market rates charged in other communities. Ordinance 2002-14, had been previously reviewed by the Recreation Commission last year and met with their approval. It was suggested that perhaps the fee ranges should be expanded to give the Recreation Commissioner more mobility in his ability to implement a fee that is consistent with what other communities charge for their similar services. The members agreed that this should at least be explored with Mr. Morgan. The committee did unanimously recommend approval with the caveat that Mr. Morgan's input would be solicited on whether to make the fee ranges larger. At the Recreation Commission meeting held on February 18, this issue was again discussed. It was the consensus of the commission and Mr. Morgan that the ranges should be expanded further. Mr. Morgan increased the maximum range of the fees by 20% on all activities and will present the same to Council in an amended Ordinance 2002-14. It is important to understand that the Recreation Center fees are not being increased by 20% with this ordinance. Rather, it 6