My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Study Session Summary 2012 02 13
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
STUDY SESSIONS (45.010)
>
2010-2019 City Council Study Sessions
>
2012 City Council Study Sessions
>
City Council Study Session Summary 2012 02 13
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/6/2019 11:49:08 AM
Creation date
6/8/2012 1:34:07 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITYWIDE
Supplemental fields
Test
SSSUM 2012 02 13
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City Council <br />Study Session Summary <br />February 13, 2012 <br />Page 2of 4 <br />Space Divisions or cuts in the general fund to maintain the existing level of <br />service. <br />Mayor Muckle asked if there was consensus on when to ask voters for an <br />extensionof the tax.There was consensus to ask in 2012 so that if it failed in <br />2012 the City could go back to the ballot in 2013. <br />The Council discussed options for the sunset of the tax should it be extended. <br />Those options includea 10-year sunset as the existing tax does, a 20-year <br />sunset, or no sunset provision. No consensus was reached on this topic. The <br />Council would like to see what the Citizen Survey results are on this question and <br />will decide what to put on the ballot based on that information. <br />The Council discussed the ideaof adding to the ballot language additional items <br />on which the funds can be used, including using it for Golf Course improvements <br />or a Recreation Center expansion.The consensuswas to not add any additional <br />items. <br />The Council briefly discussed what kinds of outreach could be used to get more <br />information out to voters about the ballot issue. <br />Discussion –Public Access Channel Contract <br />Public Relations Manager Muth reported that the Public Access contract will <br />expire in May and staff is asking the Council to discuss the options for either <br />signing a new contract or ending funding for Public Access.Staff will ask the <br />Council to give direction on this matter at the February 21 City Council meeting. <br />CCTV54,the current contract holder,was represented at the meeting by John <br />Schwartz, Lori Laingor, and Kathy Metzger. <br />Mayor Muckle asked if CCTV54 is now in compliance with the contract. Muth <br />noted that they were, but to do so they reduced the size of their board to four <br />memberswith two of the members being Louisville residents thereby meeting the <br />50% requirement. <br />Council members Dalton and Loo asked why Public Access Television is still <br />relevantin 2012 when anyone can post videos and shows to the Internet with <br />relative ease and with very little equipment. <br />Mr. Schwartz stated that Public Access offers an educational benefit to anyone <br />interested inusing the equipment, high quality of productionat their studio, and <br />local programming. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.