Laserfiche WebLink
STAFF <br />REPORT <br /> <br />ATTACHMENT A <br /> <br />April 9, 1984 <br /> <br />POSITION STATEMENT DRAFTED BY THE SUB-COMMITTEE <br />ANOKA RECREATION ADVISORY COUNCIL - APRIL 5, 1984 <br />JOE ANDERLA, AL ZAHN AND BUTCH BRANDENBURG <br /> <br /> Based on the increasing costs related to the maintenance materials <br />and renovation of the active recreation facilities in our community, the <br />City of Anoka Parks and Recreation Advisory Council representatives feel <br />it justifiable to reclaim some of these costs. A dollar figure could be <br />established by developing a ratio using the number of participants and <br />the number of fields used. These costs would then be assessed to the <br />City where the participants reside. This would encourage neighboring <br />communities to construct and develop their own recreation facilities <br />which, in turn, would answer the long range and short range problem <br />created by shortage of fields and the costs associated with their main- <br />tenance. <br /> <br /> We have learned from these meetings that we are not providing some <br />recreational opportunities to a number of participants because we lack <br />the playing fields. It has been pointed out to us that unless we make <br />some type of commitment to help other neighboring communities to develop <br />their own recreation facilities they will be perfectly happy in continuing <br />to use our facilities as they have done in the past. Last year, while <br />reviewing the proposed park development for Mineral Pond, we were informed <br />by a Ramsey official that they are interested in renting our facilities. <br />Therefore, we feel that assessing the cities tends to offer a better solu- <br />tion to our problem than non-resident fees. We do not believe non-resident <br />fees are the answer to the situation. We believe that non-resident fees <br />for youth programs tend to be restrictive, thus we would not be providing <br />the same recreational opportunities to all youths. <br /> <br /> In reviewing all the information from these meetings and discussing <br />this situation with our Anoka Parks and Recreation Advisory Council Sub- <br />Committee, we feel our best position is the assessment to the Cities for <br />the use of our facilities, until such time that equalization of facili- <br />ties used by participants becomes a reality and no one or two communities <br />carry the financial responsibilities for maintenance and development of <br />all the active recreation centers used by all five neighboring communities. <br /> <br />City of Anokc <br /> <br /> <br />