 |
City Council Study Session Minutes June 1, 1998 |
|
City Council Study Session Minutes June 1, 1998 |
REDWOOD CITY CITY COUNCIL
MAYOR DIANE HOWARD
VICE MAYOR IRA RUSKIN
CITY COUNCIL
COUNCILMEMBER RICHARD S. CLAIRE
COUNCILMEMBER JIM HARTNETT
COUNCILMEMBER JEFF IRA
COUNCILMEMBER MATT LEIPZIG
COUNCILMEMBER IAN BAIN
ADJOURNED REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
STUDY SESSION
JOINT STUDY SESSION WITH
PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION
JUNE 1, 1998
1. CALL TO ORDER - 7:56 p.m., Mayor Howard presiding
2. ROLL CALL
Council Members present: Bain, Claire, Hartnett, Ira, Leipzig, Ruskin and
Mayor Howard
Council Members absent: None
Park and Recreation Commissioners present: Davis, Morton, Slusser, Swope and
Chairperson Truscelli
Park and Recreation Commissioners absent: None
Staff present: Assistant City Manager Griffiths, City Attorney Schricker, City Clerk Jorgenson, Park, Recreation and Community Services Superintendents Centeno and Hover and Supervisor Gibbons, Engineering and Construction Manager Patterson, Cecil Reeves, Facilitator, and Council Volunteer Art Balsamo
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. PUBLIC COMMENT
The following comments were made during the earlier Council meeting and included in this Joint Meeting for the record. There were no other public comments.
"A. Susie Peyton, 3691 Brandy Rock Way, member of the Stulsaft and Stafford Parks renovations committee, asked Council to establish guidelines regarding rest rooms in City parks. Mrs. Peyton said several alternative rest room facilities had been discussed over the course of the joint park renovation project and the committee believed it would be helpful if the Council established a policy that could be applied during the design phase of this project and other projects in the future.
MEMO 6/4/98
B. Nancy Morales, 502 Flynn Avenue, representing the group Redwood City Responsible Dog Owners, addressed the issue of a dog park in Redwood City. She said her group had been going to a park in Atherton, but the members had recently been asked to use parks in their own cities. Mrs. Morales said her group was pleased that the City was considering allowing leashed dogs in City parks. She said that they also supported the dog park proposed for the Redwood Shores Neighborhood, but said dog owners in central or southern Redwood City "would have as difficult a time getting to that new park... as we would to go to any of the parks in Palo Alto or Mountain View that do allow dogs." Mrs. Morales said that the Redwood City area was "large enough to warrant two dog parks" and urged Council to consider converting the old soccer field in Stulsaft Park to a dog park. She said her group had observed the field for over a year and "it is never used by anyone we can see." Mrs. Morales suggested that her group members meet with others who share their interest. She said the cost would be extremely low to convert the field in Stulsaft Park, and her group was willing to work and contribute to establishing a dog park in this venue without additional funding from the City. Mrs. Morales said the members of her group willingly pay taxes for schools and other facilities for children. She said "our dogs are our children, and we feel our concerns are not being met."
C. Al Diaz, 50 King Street, said, "There's been a lot of progress in the design committee for the issues that have circulated around Stafford Park... The revisions the architect has made have gone a long way to address a lot of concerns that were raised. Personally, I would love to take it further, but it is also not my park, either. I think I am at a point now that we are recognizing that. I look forward to continuing working with the design committee to try to keep focus on the budget, and not go overboard... The time has come that both of these projects need to move forward, full force. It is my understanding that the bathrooms are not an issue. It looks like those will be included, sooner rather than later. I would like to piggyback on what Susie Peyton said, that I think it is important that accessible facilities be provided in all of the parks. It is just common sense. I would like to see more emphasis be placed on the Stulsaft Project as well, for a rest room facility."
Mayor Howard thanked Mr. Diaz for working with staff and the renovation committee to resolve community issues."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. SUBJECT
A. JOINT STUDY SESSION WITH THE REDWOOD CITY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION. (There were no Public Comments during this agenda item. The purpose of this portion of the agenda was to discuss improved communications between the Council and the Commission Dr. Cecil Reeves facilitated the discussion
Mayor Howard welcomed everyone and introduced facilitator Dr. Cecil Reeves who outlined the issues and questions to be discussed by the City Council and the Parks and Recreation Commission including: The role of the Park and Recreation Commission and its relationship with the City Council; guidance from the Council; improvement of communication and the planning process; the effectiveness of the Commission; and the role of Council priorities.
1. In response to Dr. Reeves questions regarding the role of the Park and Recreation Commission Mayor Howard read the Commission's mission statement:
1. Act in an advisory capacity to the City Council in policy matters pertaining to the acquisition and development of parks and the formulation of a recreation program to meet the needs of the citizens;
2. Periodically review and make recommendations on the recreation and parks element of the City general Plan;
3. Actively promote recreation and park activities within the City;
4. Review and make recommendations to the City Council on the City Manager's annual proposed budget for recreation and parks from a pure policy standpoint, pertaining only to programs, levels of service, and capital improvements.
Mayor Howard said she believed those objectives were appropriate, and generally describe what she would like the Commission to do. She said that the Council might consider providing more direction to the Commission within the context of those responsibilities. Mayor Howard said the Commission should have been more involved in the beginning of the process for renovating Stulsaft and Stafford Parks.
Park and Recreation Commissioner Hughes said she understood the listed objectives but felt the Commission had not been given the authority to pursue them. She cited examples of missed opportunities to bring the community together, such as the lack of effort for the opening of Marlin Park.
Some Council Members and Commissioners expressed support for the Commission to act independently of the Council and bring its own initiatives to the Council. Other Council Members expressed support for the Commission to act in a more advisory role. Still others said the Commission should act as independently as possible within the context of the stated objectives and established Council priorities, including budget parameters. Some Council
Members suggested that the Park and Recreation Commissioners are the experts in the field and should be the first line of response when issues arise in the community; and after dialogue with the community regarding the issue the Commission should draft recommendations for the Council to consider.
Some Park and Recreation Commissioners described their desire to be advocates for all park and recreation issues in the City and said they were torn between strongly advocating what they felt was good for Redwood City, and the need to be cognizant of Council's announced priorities and limited resources. Other Commissioners said the Council should also be proactive and direct issues to the Commission for consideration and recommendation.
Vice Mayor Ruskin said he would like the Commission to "be the eyes and ears of the Council in regard to park and recreation issues... not only to prepare us for issues that are bubbling, but to proactively evaluate situations, to see what needs are there that we may not see, because we are involved with so many categories."
Dr. Reeves summarized the question of the Commission's role:
Experts; advise on policy in the acquisition of parks and recreation;
Recreation and parks according to the General Plan;
Actively involved in parks and recreation in the City;
Review recommendations of City Manager's proposed budget for the Parks and Recreation;
Interface for the Council with the community; and
Proactive eyes and ears of the Council, evaluating needs.
Vice Mayor Ruskin said inherent in the list above is the Commission's responsibility to "evaluate the General Plan... and begin the formulation of policies... (taking) a very active role."
2. Dr. Reeves introduced the second subject, the relationship between the Council and the Commission, and the appropriateness of its advisory nature.
Some Council Members iterated their support for two independent entities with their own areas of responsibilities irrespective of Council priorities, but others expressed the need for the Commissioners to be aware of and sensitive to the Council's stated policies and budgets. Council Member Hartnett said that if the Council identifies the acquisition of additional playing fields as a high priority, he hoped the Commission would then include that priority in their work plans. He added that common sense should prevail, and when it was abundantly clear that funds would not be available for projects the Commissioners would like, he hoped they would not pursue it. Council Member Claire said he hoped the Commissioners would evaluate the Council's decisions during these changing times and lend their expertise to the evaluation of the Council's priorities.
Dr. Reeves summarized, "Is it safe to say, given the role that you have established and the parameters that you have set, you want the Commissioners to act independently within that role?" Council Member Claire said that the Commission needed to work with Council policies, but if there was disagreement, he expected the Commission to come to the Council and explain the situation. Vice Mayor Ruskin said he also expected the Commission to consider the Council's priorities and policies, and to be specific with the Council when there was disagreement.
Dr. Reeves summarized the discussion of the desired relationship between the Council and the Commission:
Advisory;
Act independently within the parameters of the established role, telling the Council what the Commission thought should be done;
Advocate with passion for parks and recreation;
Interaction with more attendance by Council Members at Commission meetings;
More two-way communication;
Make sure the Commission’s actions support the goals and objectives agreed upon by the Council and the Commission.
Council Members and Commissioners discussed the Commission’s role of advocacy with the understanding that the Council must make final decisions regarding parks and recreation within the context of the Council’s established priorities and budget restraints. Council Members asked Commissioners to keep the lines of communication open especially when the Council has had to say ‘no’.
Council Member Bain said he would like to see more interaction between the Council and its appointed boards, committees and commissions, utilizing the item on each Council agenda set aside for boards, committees and commissions reports, as well as more attendance at all meetings. He said his previous attendance at the Park and Recreation Commission meetings provided an exchange of information that was helpful to everyone, especially clearing up any rumors or misunderstandings. The Park and Recreation Commissioners generally agreed that Council participation would be welcome.
MEMO 6/4/98
Dr. Reeves asked for comments regarding the role of staff.
Vice Mayor Ruskin said that past habits of Council and staff may have run counter to what Council has expected of board, committee and commission members both long term and the day to day process. He suggested that Council and staff should evaluate their procedures to make sure the board, committee and commission members are being included early on in the process which will allow them to accomplish those goals agreed upon by the Council and the individual boards, committees and commissions.
Commissioners said that the staff should be involved in the three-way relationship with the Council and the Commission. Commissioner Davis said staff’s work and support was extremely important, but the Commission needed to be the "pilot of the ship." He said that it was important for the Commissioners not "to feel steered." Council Members agreed that the Commission should feel free to advocate for what it thought was important, and Vice Mayor Ruskin asked the Commissioners to keep the Council updated and to feel free to express any concerns they had in this area.
Commissioner Davis provided examples of some recent park and recreation projects that were developed without fitting them into the larger plan for the City. He said an integrated long range plan was needed for the Commission to be effective.
Dr. Reeves asked for comments regarding short and long term planning.
Commissioner Slusser said the Commission dealt with tactical decisions rather than considering a long range strategic plan. Commissioner Swope provided the history of the long range plan developed in 1989 and the fiscal impacts of the economy and the State’s taking of city revenues.
Dr. Reeves summarized the Commissioners suggestions:
Begin a dialogue with the Council to establish a strategic plan, long and short term goals;
Staff to work and support the Commission without becoming the "Pilot of the Ship;"
Open and forthright communication.
Mayor Howard led the discussion of the Park and Recreation Commission’s Annual Council Tour of the City’s park and recreation facilities. Council Members and Commissioners agreed that the tour was a valuable activity for the participants to get to know one another, highlighting on-going programs and identifying needs. Council Member Hartnett suggested holding more than one Tour and Council Member Bain suggested distributing information about the Tour beforehand. Council Members expressed how deeply they cared about the Commission and its work, and described the unbelievable demands on their time. There was a consensus that the Tour was a very high Council priority and as many Council Members, Commissioners and staff who could attend would make every attempt to do so.
In response to Dr. Reeves questions, Park and Recreation Commissioners discussed the number of participants needed to schedule a tour, and all agreed that if only a very few Council Members attended, it would still be valuable as they would share what they learned with the entire Council.
MEMO 6/4/98
Commissioners rated their work and accomplishments on a scale of 1-7 and averaged around 3+ to 4. Commissioners said that too many items get put on the back burner and they have generally been unable to achieve all the wanted to do.
Dr. Reeves summarized the discussion and listed what the Commissioners would like more of in order for them to be more effective.
More participation in the Park and Recreation Department’s projects;
A strategic plan for the Red Morton Center;
Evaluation of the budget and more influence on how funds are spent;
More participation in the plans for Stafford Park;
Resolution of a dog park and dogs on leashes in parks.
Dr. Reeves asked what the Commissioners would like less of in order for them to be more effective.
Commissioner Davis said the Commission spent too much time on tactical items and not enough on a strategic approach. He said better control of the agenda would be helpful.
Dr. Reeves asked what the Commissioners would like to continue working on or felt passionately about, and the following projects were listed under the title "As Is";
The new Heritage Tree Ordinance;
The Adopt-a-Park Program;
A new Ordinance for dogs in the parks;
A dog run;
Bath rooms in Red Morton;
Marketing Strategy Plan for Red Morton, and cost accounting system, and effective use of resources.
Input on the July is Parks and Recreation Month;
Review the No alcohol in the Park Ordinance and other ordinances
Skate Board Park;
Changing Park Hours;
On-going efforts in strategic planning
Review the Strategic Plan on an annual basis.
MEMO 6/4/98
Commissioners said all the listed projects were part of their current work plan. Commissioner Hughes described the seminar she attended in January at Stanford University which focused on how to improve the Red Morton Center.
Vice Mayor Ruskin suggested the Commission might want to appoint a subcommittee to work with one or more staff members to develop the strategic plan and bring it back to the whole Commission.
Dr. Reeves referred to the list of study session items listed at the beginning of the Study Session and discussed to this point: Issues/concerns; workplans/guidelines; and improving effectiveness.
Dr. Reeves asked for Council comments on the last item, Council concerns and priorities.
Council Members told the Commissioners they appreciated their efforts and would definitely rate them higher than the 4 they had assigned to their own work. Council Member Hartnett asked the Commissioners not to undervalue their work or have unreasonable expectations. He said the Commission was dealing with a great number of issues, and staff time was a consideration. Council Member Hartnett said the Council had the same issues with staff as the Commission did.
Mayor Howard said the agreed with the Commissions interest in establishing annual short and long term goals. She said she read the Minutes of every Commission meeting and the Minutes were excellent, "I feel like I’m there." Staff advised that Parks, Recreation and Community Services Administrative Assistant Denise Monroe did the Minutes. Mayor Howard said she would also rate the Commission higher than a 4, and thanked them for "being out in the community with the neighbors" addressing specific issues. She said the neighborhoods have benefited from Commissioners involvement and the Council has also benefited.
Council Members and Commissioners discussed Commission input into the Reports done by staff to present to the Council at Council meetings. Commissioners described their discussion process and said that by the time staff writes the Report they have a good idea of what the Commission wants. Commissioner Davis said that as long as there are no substantive changes between their meeting and the Council receipt of the Report, they had no problems with the process.
Mayor Howard asked the Commissioners if they felt "their work was separate and independent from other groups in the community who are doing similar things. For instance, the Redwood City 2000 group who are working on after school activities and other youth activities. Do you feel you would like to work more closely with some of these groups?"
Commissioner Hughes said she would definitely like to work with other groups. She said she would like those groups to come to the Park and Recreation Commission and maybe they could help fill some of their needs.
Commissioners discussed their role out in the community and the need to be sure everyone knows that one commissioner does not speak for the whole Commission.
Dr. Reeves listed this subject, working with groups with similar tasks, as an item for future consideration.
Council Member Bain said the Commission knew his feelings on these two issues. He said 18 out of the 20 surrounding cities allow leashed dogs in their parks. He said Redwood City had a very old ordinance that banned alcohol, amplified sound and dogs in the City’s parks. Council Member Bain said those three issues should be dealt with separately. He said this ordinance at the time of its passage did not have Council discussion and he would like to have that discussion now. Council Member Bain strongly urged the commission "to come up with a recommendation on how we can revise this ordinance." He said he had discussed his recommendations with the Commission, and he did not want an ordinance that penalizes law abiding citizens. He said there is a leash law on the books now, but it might need to be strengthened.
Council Members said they would like to hear from the experts, the Commissioners, on this subject and hear their recommendations.
MEMO 6/4/98
Mayor Howard said that when she was a member of the Park and Recreation Commission a survey was done and neighborhood meetings were held on these issues. She said it was hotly debated with strong arguments on both sides. She said there was no final resolution, but they did learn that not every park was suited to having dogs in it, even with leashes. Mayor Howard asked that the public be involved in the Commission’s fact finding process as early and as much as possible.
Commissioner Swope described how the Commissioners have each taken a part of the fact finding process and are gathering information. She said that after all the data is in, the Commission will encourage the public to review it and let the Commission know what they wanted. Commissioner Swope said that after they receive public input, the Commission would bring recommendations to the Council.
Council Member Bain commended the group known as the Shore Dogs, the Commission and the staff for "what they have done in Redwood Shores to bring a dog exercise area there." He urged the Council to consider establishing a dog exercise area in another part of Redwood City as well, as Mrs. Morales had stated earlier. He acknowledged the difficulties involved in such a controversial subject, but thanked the Commissioners for their hard work on this subject. He said, "Don’t give up."
Commissioner Swope thanked Parks, Recreation and Community Services Superintendent Hover and Supervisor Aguilar for their support of the Commission’s efforts.
In response to Mayor Howard’s questions, the Commissioners said they would like to attend the Neighborhood Association meetings to explain the work they are doing.
Dr. Reeves said it was his observation that the Commissioners were much harder on themselves than they should be, and an external evaluation of their activities really showed their good work.
Council Members said they would like the Park and Recreation Commissioners to bring a Report back to the Council with a list of recommendations. Council Member Claire asked that the Report contain alternatives to traditional facilities, such as unisex rest rooms and non-traditional materials. He also asked that the Report contain "a clear identification of which parks the Commission feels, from input they have received from the public" should have rest rooms. Vice Mayor Ruskin asked that the Report contain options, such as closing the rest rooms during certain hours. He said he was not comfortable with the idea of "doing away with rest rooms… I don’t think that is realistic when you are dealing with parents and kids in some of these parks."
MEMO 6/4/98
Council Member Bain said the idea that the Council supported removing rest rooms in the parks had somehow been circulated in the community, and he said he did not believe the Council supported that position, and it was certainly not his point of view.
In response to Dr. Reeves questions regarding the value of this study session, Council Members and Commissioners said it was: a good first step, very helpful, and satisfying. They all agreed that they should meet in a study session at least once a year, along with Reports and updates.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. ADJOURNMENT
M/S: BAIN HARTNETT ADJOURN THE MEETING
CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE AND MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:25 P.M.
Arlyn C. Jorgenson
City Clerk
City of Redwood City
| City CouncilCopyright © 1998. The City of Redwood City. All rights reserved.