Laserfiche WebLink
ways and would like them to have the words from the meeting on Thursday, which was <br />an official session; and have an understanding that we know how much money we have <br />and what we think we can afford. They could look at the picture, and we may be able to <br />design it and afford more than we think. The optional is a concern there and the <br />statement of fact at the top is her concern. <br /> <br />Mr. Munkel asked Mr. Moton where the master plan concept for the recreational facility <br />stands, and Mr. Moton responded that he would check with the City Manager for an <br />answer. <br /> <br />Mr. Wagner asked the question, "Why are we doing this tonight?" This meeting was <br />scheduled over a year ago. When we formed the Proposition Committee, you (Ms. <br />Welsch) and I were in on day one, we had a whole litany of things we were going to do: <br />public hearings, City Council meetings, joint meetings between the Park Commission <br />and the Proposition K Committee. In April they were going to have a study session on <br />what the Proposition K Committee recommended for the pool. We did that. And then <br />shortly after that we approved the concept to go ahead with the pool. On August 23rd, <br />2003, we had the study session where we had a thorough debate, I thought, among the <br />City Council members of what the concept was going to be, and I thought, we pretty <br />faithfully, went though the report we got from the Proposition K Committee. And the <br />short-term projects we adopted. And they happened to be the four functions that we <br />already do in our facility down there. We do not do any of them very well. We do <br />soccer. We do fitness center. We do a running track, a walking track and basketball. <br />None very well. This concept that we all agreed at the study session, well maybe you <br />didn't. Many of us agreed that this made sense for the priorities recommended by the <br />Proposition K Committee; that we were going to improve the four functions we already <br />do there. Many of us knew a year ago, and I know I expressed this to many Council <br />members, we are not going to be able to do everything everybody wants. We just <br />weren't going to have the cash flow to do that. I think what we decided to do makes <br />sense. Is it what everybody wants? Is everybody happy? Of course not. Does it make <br />sense to do this? Yes, it does. <br /> <br />Mr. Sharpe agreed, basically, with Councilman Wagner in his assessment, and also <br />with Mr. Moton. It is now time to contact engineers and architects, to advise them of <br />what we want, of the space available, and to ascertain what they can do for us with the <br />concepts developed. We need to know how much they can do, if not all of it, so we <br />have an idea of how to proceed and of what we can afford. <br /> <br />Ms. Welsch agreed with both of her colleagues on that. Her concern is with the way the <br />concept statement is written. She thinks we are issuing to the design firms a biased <br />concept statement. She would have preferred the language to be a little less specific at <br />the top and "kind of, maybe it's going to happen" at the bottom. She knows we were <br />going to approve this and she thought we did at the last meeting. She just doesn't like <br />this wording. <br /> <br />Mr. Lieberman asked Mr. Moton about the words in the concept, and if they are going to <br />Page 7 <br /> <br /> <br />