Open Space Advisory Board Agenda and Packet 2014 03 12

Home Browse Search

Open Space Advisory Board Minutes th February 12, 2014 Page 4 of 6 Fund itself, leading the board to wonder if it needs to be more proactive in monitoring the use of this fund. 3)The need for public transparency. Ember provided the board with hard copies of text of the tax ordinance itself. Mike wrote the original letter and the board discussed the comments provided in the agenda by Spencer, Helen, Mike, and a citizen, Joel Hayes, 187 Harper Drive. Mike and Linda both stated Open Space tax, not a parks tax, despite the parks-inclusive language in the ordinance itself. Spencer was of the opinion that we should not presume to guess what the citizens know. Tom suggested that we should vote whether or not we, as a board, believe that the fund is being used in alignment with the intent of the tax. Specifically, he believes that paying parks employee salaries is not in alignment with the intention of the tax. Helen suggested that rather than our making a statement about the intent of the voters, we limit ourselves to providing anecdotal evidence from people who attend our meeting who did not realize, or were concerned that, the fund could be used for parks operations. Mike suggests that there needs to be clear guidelines as to the proper expenditures of the fund and there needs to be a mechanism in place to maintain a baseline fund balance to be preserved in readiness for large land purchases expenditures from the fund that have directly supported open space activities talk more about proportionality or percentages than absolute amounts. The board also discussed the suggestions Ember spoke with Joe Stevens and he has suggested having two board members speak to the Mayor and the City Manager about the issues in the bo that could improve the letter. The board has agreed to nominate Helen and Mike to represent the board. Tom made a Helen and Mike to bring this letter, as currently accepted, to the meeting with the Mayor and the City Manager for their suggestions and revisions. The board would then revise the document, if needed, at a future meeting before submittal to the City Council. Linda seconded the motion and the motion passed unanimously. X. Discussion & Action: Trail Open House- Public Recommendations & Development of OSAB Recommendations. Ember presented a map with all the trail and crossing suggestion from the OSAB andPark & Recreation Department looked for any trails or crossings that were accidentally omitted. Then the board identified the six trails, connections, and corridors for staff to create basic cost estimates and a list of pros and cons for. Some of these included: a north-south corridor in Old Town, an east-west corridor in Old Town (possibly along Spruce Street), a trail parallel to Highway 42, a trail parallel to 104th Street, rerouting of 5