Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Parks Supervisor Riverblood questioned if the Council would be willing to add this item to their <br />agenda as a consent agenda item, rather than regular agenda item. <br /> <br />It was the consensus of the Council to add this item to the consent agenda for their next meeting. <br /> <br />Case #2: <br /> <br />Joint City Council/Commission Discussion <br /> <br />Parks. Supervisor Riverblood stated that the purpose of this case was for the Commission and . <br />Council to discuss any items desired but stated that part of the discussion should focus on the <br />2009 CIP and the prioritization of the remaining 2009 projects. He briefly reviewed the projects. <br /> <br />Commissioner Backous left the meeting at 7:10 p.m. <br /> <br />Counci1member Dehen questioned why the amphitheater was not :l1).entioned. <br /> <br />Public Works Director Olson explained that item was not added for 2009 because the ownership <br />of the land had not yet been obtained, but was expected on June 22, 2009. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen questioned why the City was not obtaining bids at this point for the <br />amphitheater. <br /> <br />Public Works Director Olson explained that there was still a possibility that the land could be <br />redeemed prior to the sale to the City. He advised that City staff was working on the project but <br />was not quite bid ready at this point. <br /> <br />Mayor Ramsey commented that although grant funds had been obtained for the amphitheater <br />project, the City would still need to contribute funds. <br /> <br />Public Works Director Olson advised that the grant funds obtained covered part of the <br />amphitheater but would also have to be used to develop two ponds. <br /> <br />Councilmember Jeffery noticed that the new trail connection completed between Lord of Life <br />Church and the school was already heavily used and appreciated by residents. He commented <br />that in the current economy people are staying closer to home and thought projects that would <br />have the biggest impact should be moved forward on the CIP. <br /> <br />City Administrator Ulrich questioned the availability of legacy funds and if they could be <br />obtained to improve parks and install artistic components. <br /> <br />Parks Supervisor Riverblood stated that although the legacy funds were a large pool of money, <br />there would be a lot of competition for the funds. He thought it might be a better choice to <br />pursue options through the DNR for trail funding as there would be less competition. <br /> <br />Park and Recreation Commission/June 11, 2009 <br />Page 5 of 10 <br />