Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutParks and Recreation - 04/25/2000 APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY PROGRAM BOARD TUESDAY,APRIL 25,2000 7:00 P.M., CITY CENTER Heritage Room II 8080 Mitchell Road COMMISSION MEMBERS: Chair Munna Yasiri, Vice-Chair Mary Cofer, Harry Davis,Jr., Dick Brown, Kim Teaver, Harry Moran, and Therese Benkowski CITY STAFF: Chris Enger, City Manager, Natalie Swaggert, Management Liaison, Laurie Obiazor, Staff Liaison, Carol Pelzel, Recording Secretary L ROLL CALLANTRODUCTIONS Board members present included Munna Yasiri, Mary Cofer, Harry Davis,Jr., Dick Brown, Kim Teaver and Harry Moran. Board member Therese Benkowski was absent. Swaggert explained that the agenda for future meetings would be mailed to the Board members a week prior to the meeting to allow them sufficient time to review and study the agenda information. Swaggert distributed various information to be reviewed by the Board this evening, including the organization chart for Boards and Commissions, the organization chart for City service areas, the Community Program Board Charter and the Charters of Citizen Advisory Commissions as well as the City's 2001 Vision and Strategic Plan. Swaggert reported that Therese Benkowski would be absent from this meeting because she was out of town. Swaggert explained that she is the City's Director of Management Services and her areas of responsibility include strategic planning, communications, HR,risk management and facilities. Swaggert said her role on this Board would be to serve as the group's management liaison. Chris Enger, City Manager, explained that he will not be with this Board on a regular basis,however,his role here tonight is to review the strategic plan with the Board and to review the Board's roles and responsibilities. He will also explain how this Board fits in with other Boards and Commissions and the City Council. Laurie Obiazor explained that she is the City's Manager of Recreation Services, which oversees the City's recreation programs and facilities. Obiazor said she would be serving as the Board's staff liaison. The Board members introduced themselves. Dick Brown explained that he is a resident of Eden Prairie that likes to participate in the City. He indicated that he has served as chair of the Parks and Recreation Commission for the last three years. Harry Davis said he is a four-year resident of Eden Prairie and is a citizen interested in the City and is particularly interested in youth activities. Munna Yasiri stated she will serve as the Board's chair and has worked on the Human Rights Commission for several years and has also served on the Housing, Transportation, and Social Services Board. Harry Moran explained that he is a 12-year resident of Eden Prairie and is a representative from the Human Rights and Diversity Advisory Commission. Mary Cofer reported that he has been an Eden Prairie resident for six years and previously served on the Senior Issues Task Force and the HTSSB and is very interested in the City. Kim Teaver said she also is a resident of Eden Prairie and will be representing the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission. She stated that she is looking forward to getting involved and learning about the different issues in the City. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Brown moved, Cofer seconded, to approve the Agenda as published. Motion carried 6-0. III. OLD BUSINESS A. Organization Chart—Boards and Commissions Swaggert and Enger overviewed the Board and Commission organization charts and the City's Strategic Plan. As a result of the City Council's development of strategic initiatives, the City Council decided to Community Program Board April 25, 2000 Page 2 review the organization of its advisory Boards and Commissions. This was the first review in thirty years. The structure the City Council adopted sets up two major Advisory Boards that report directly to the City Council. The first is the Community Planning Board, which works under the City's comprehensive guide plan and has certain authorities under State statute. The Board is comprised of seven to nine members. On the program side, the City Council established the Community Program Board of seven to nine members. Enger stated that this Board's area of responsibility is diverse and that it will make recommendations to the City Council utilizing the City's strategic plan and strategic initiatives to evaluate City sponsored program requests and proposals. B. Organization Chart—City Service Areas Enger explained that the structure of the Community Program Board includes four advisory commissions (two of which are active; Human Rights and Diversity Citizen Advisory Commission and Parks and Recreation Citizen Advisory Commission)under its review. These Commissions will report through this Board. Moran asked clarification as to the roles of the Commission representatives. The way the organization structure is set up, the advisory commissions will present their requests to the Community Program Board with that Board making a recommendation to the City Council. However, it is also his understanding that representatives of those particular advisory commissions don't necessarily have to voice the opinion of or support the advisory commission's requests. Moran questioned how they could represent their commission and at the same time not support their views. Enger responded that this Board has a different role than the individual commissions. This Board needs to look at how a particular request fits into the service and programs the City provides as well as the cost of the request. They also need to look at how it fits with the strategic initiatives. Members of this Board may be on a particular advisory commission, but when their request gets to this Board they would need to balance their request against other service needs. This Board will need to use different broad-based information that may result in an entirely different recommendation than what was originally requested. Representatives of a particular commission will not necessarily be an advocate of a particular request but would bring more understanding from that commission's perspective. Enger explained that requests that have to have action by City Council will come from the commission and then through this Program Board. The Board would then forward a recommendation to the City Council. Items that do not require City Council action would not come before this Board. Swaggert reported that appointed special focus task forces would also be bringing items forward to this Board for consideration. For example, one task force that will be bringing an item before this Board is the Third Rink Task Force. This task force was given a unique charge from the City Council to look at an additional sheet of ice. Yasiri asked for clarification of the dynamics of the Board and Commissions' work. She questioned if there will be interaction back to the Commissions. For example, if this Board sees weaknesses in the requests, can they send it back to the Commission before making a recommendation to the City Council. Swaggert responded that this is exactly what should be done. C. Review Community Program Board Charter Swaggert reviewed with the Board the Community Program Board Charter. She explained that the Board might also receive requests directly from the City Council. Enger stated that the Charter Statement was derived from the Strategic Plan. Working according to the Charter Statement will make understanding the Board's role easier and provide the balance the City Council would like this Board to bring to the process. Enger explained that there are two strategic initiatives that apply most directly to this Board's work and they would be tied to Items 3 and 4 of the Board's Charter. 2 Community Program Board April 25, 2000 Page 3 Brown asked if members of this Board would be asked to serve on other task forces. Swaggert responded that that could be a possibility. In response to a question from Davis, Swaggert explained that the open meeting law does apply to this Board. Enger cautioned the Board members to be very careful of the open meeting law and suggested that the Board members not work individually with members of a commission who has a request before this Board. Yasiri asked how they as Board members can self-initiate a request. Enger explained that self-initiated requests are not included in the Board's Charter. He suggested that should any Board member have an item they would like considered, they present it to the City Council under Report of Boards and Commission or under the Council Forum portion of the Council meeting. Swaggert explained that this Board's responsibility will also be to uphold all of the Value Statements the Council uses to guide decisions. This Board is definitely a balancing group. Responding to a question from Yasiri, Swaggert explained that this Board does not independently generate requests. Enger stated that certain verbs best describe the roles and responsibilities of the various participants. The role of the Council would be to direct, lead and decide. This Board's role would mostly be described as recommend and review. Staff's role would be to initiate, implement, advise and recommend. Cofer asked what resources would be available to assist them in reviewing the various requests. He asked if they would be provided with specific financial information to assist them in determining if a request is affordable or if there should be budgetary concerns. Swaggert explained that this Board would be provided with sufficient information to present the total picture. Staff will also be available to answer any questions this Board might have. D. Review Charts of Citizen Advisory Commissions Swaggert reviewed the Human Rights and Diversity Advisory Commission charter with the Board. Obiazor presented the Parks and Recreation Citizen Advisory Commission and the Arts and Culture Citizen Advisory Commission charters. She explained that the Arts Commission was inactive,however, their charter statement falls under the Parks and Recreation Commission's charter. Swaggert presented the Environmental Education Citizens Advisory Commission charter. Swaggert indicated that the groups that were inactive might be reactivated at a later date. Brown questioned why the Heritage Preservation Commission(HPC)has a dotted line connecting it to this Board. Swaggert explained that the HPC is partially statutory and partially program. Only items involving programming will come before this Board. IV. NEW BUSINESS A. Orientation Materials Swaggert explained that staff resources to this group would include representatives from the Human Rights and Diversity area, Parks and Recreation, Senior Services, and Environmental Management. B. Pending Projects 1. Management/Use Historical Properties 3 Community Program Board April 25, 2000 Page 4 Swaggert distributed copies of the City Council Request for a Management and Use Plan for three historical properties in the City. The City Council developed the concept of what they wanted done and directed staff to work with the Community Program Board and Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) to develop recommendations for the future use of these properties. Swaggert stated that staff completed the research and collected the required information which was provided to the HPC. The HPC will bring forth their recommendations to this Commission along with the original report at our May 23 meeting. Enger pointed out that the HPC recommendation to the Community Program Board will be very specific as to what their interests are. A broader recommendation will be received from staff. This Board will need to review these recommendations taking into consideration estimated costs, etc. and will make a recommendation to the City Council. Brown asked if this Board feels they do not have enough information to make a recommendation, may they continue the item until sufficient information is received. Enger responded that yes they could. Enger said that appropriate staff will be present at the meeting to answer questions. 2. Third Rink Task Force Swaggert distributed information on the Third Rink Task Force including the Task Force Charter Statement. Enger reported that the Council was very careful in selecting the make up of this task force. They created a well-balanced group. A presentation will be made to the Parks and Recreation Commission on May 1. It is proposed that this request will come before this Board on May 23. Enger reviewed with the Board the task force responsibilities. Yasiri asked when considering an item such as the third rink,how do they know what the residents of the City think about the need for a third rink. Swaggert responded that the Board would know if the task force has received citizen support by their recommendation. Obiazor explained that she has worked with the task force and they have looked at the population, other hockey association needs and demands and they have done a comparative study. All of this information will be forwarded to the Board for their review. Enger pointed out that the purpose of these meetings is for this Board to get the information they need and to discuss the issues and to make a recommendation. They are not conducting public hearings. C. Other Swaggert expressed her appreciation to the members for their volunteering to serve on the Community Program Board. Davis said he feels the City Council should be commended because Eden Prairie is one of the most open cities he has lived in. Cofer said he agrees and appreciates the openness and discipline of the elected officials. V. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Brown moved, Davis seconded, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 6-0. The meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p.m. 4