Laserfiche WebLink
5.01: Trail Maintenance Policy – Status Update <br />Parks and Assistant Public Works Director Riverblood reviewed the staff report and stated that <br />staff requests feedback on the content, scope and tone of the Trail Maintenance Policy language. <br />Councilmember Olson commented that he likes the direction/style of the policy thus far. <br />Chairperson Musgrove stated that she would have preferred to have the draft policy in the case to <br />review before the meeting. She believed that it is a bit wordy for a policy and suggested that the <br />introduction be reduced with some of that information placed within the policy. She stated that <br />while this would be helpful information for residents, it does not seem similar to other City <br />policies. She asked that the full policy be drafted for the September meeting, noting that there has <br />already been delay in this process. <br />Parks and Assistant Public Works Director Riverblood stated that he spoke with administration <br />staff to find out if there was a standard format for policies and was told that there was none. He <br />stated that if that is the desire, perhaps that policy format should be developed. <br />Councilmember Howell commented that she felt that this would be helpful if it was instructional, <br />which lets the public know what is going on but is not something necessarily just for the public. <br />She also agreed that it would have been helpful to have the draft prior to the meeting. She agreed <br />that the full policy should be prepared for the September meeting. <br /> <br />Parks and Assistant Public Works Director Riverblood agreed that if the intent is to be <br />instructional, the policy can then be more concise. <br /> <br />Councilmember Howell asked if there was a table discussed at the last meeting showing the trail <br />maintenance schedule. <br /> <br />Chairperson Musgrove commented that she did make the statement that she likes that element for <br />tracking, but did not think that would need to be part of the policy itself. <br /> <br />Councilmember Olson stated that he is not exactly clear who the audience is intended to be. He <br />stated that if this is meant to be posted on the website for public consumption, then this style seems <br />to be good as it clearly communicates the information. He stated that if it is intended to be <br />procedures, that would be directed at the staff. He stated that for a policy and narrative for the <br />public, he thinks this is good. <br /> <br />Chairperson Musgrove commented that type of communication may be something that is <br />communicated to residents in a newsletter. She stated that a policy should be more concise as it is <br />an internal document. <br /> <br />Councilmember Howell agreed that a policy is intended for internal use and is meant to <br />communicate the process, although the public may be interested in reading it and could still be <br />informed. <br /> <br />Public Works Committee / August 20, 2024 <br />Page 2 of 5 <br /> <br />