My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Study Session Summary 2015 04 14
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
STUDY SESSIONS (45.010)
>
2010-2019 City Council Study Sessions
>
2015 City Council Study Sessions
>
City Council Study Session Summary 2015 04 14
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/6/2019 11:54:12 AM
Creation date
9/18/2015 8:54:57 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITYWIDE
Supplemental fields
Test
SSSUM 2015 04 14
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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 />April 14, 2015 <br />Page 2 of 6 <br />• Expanded Recreation and Senior Center <br />• Outdoor Aquatics Facility <br />• Pedestrian and Bike Connections <br />• Museum Building /Enhancements <br />• Expanded Street Resurfacing <br />Finance Director Watson said the City has kept the tax rate even (steady) during <br />the term of bonds. Revenue derived has increased. Started advanced payment <br />on debt in 2013. <br />Council member Loo asked why attendance at Rec Center dropped during 2003 <br />— 2007? Recreation Superintendent Kathy Martin said smaller studios opened, <br />other facilities opened. Parks and Recreation Director Stevens speculated that <br />people got tired of waiting for equipment. Council member Lipton noted that, <br />over years, there is fluctuation. We need to be conservative and not overextend <br />ourselves. There are upward and downward, cyclical trends. Council member <br />Stolzmann said it seems favorable to expand the Rec Center to a lot of people. <br />She favors seeing what we want and how much it costs then seeing what it takes <br />to fund it. She wants to make sure people know we aren't using "Library" money <br />to fund Rec Center expansion — that is a misconception some people have. <br />Council member Dalton said he does not think we should extend this bond. We <br />should end this bond then get voter approval for a new bond. Extending it <br />introduces confusion. <br />Council member Lipton is concerned about adding streets resurfacing to this list <br />of possible projects. He stated it is not a good idea. It would be a quick fix. He <br />believes the City has a fundamental issue in the budget related to street <br />resurfacing. This is a core service and should be funded by ongoing general <br />fund /capital revenues, not a new capital tax. <br />Council member Leh said that in the past, there was a division in the community <br />regarding the Library vs. Rec Center. <br />Council member Loo said she needs a definition of what an aquatics facility is. <br />Everyone has a different idea of what that means. Council member Keany said <br />in the past it was a full size pool, shallow area, not just a pool but mixed use <br />facilities. He would see a community task force (swim team, sports leagues, <br />dolphins, parents of small kids, seniors, etc.) to scope out what needs are. He <br />would support the expansion of the Museum campus and agrees with Council <br />member Dalton that it is not a good idea to mix too many pieces. <br />Council member Lipton said he is not sure we can do everything to fill every need <br />and every desire in the community. We need outdoor and indoor swimming <br />capacity. The City may not be able to satisfy both. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.