Minutes - 20020909 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Commissioner Brown said that she did not see it this way. She said that the Intergovernmental Parks Work Group started out with the MOU being a goal and they worked on it a great deal. They discovered that we had these parks at different stages and each one of them needed to be looked at separately. She does not think that a blanket MOU will be functional or necessary. John Link said that if we commit to funding this project and we disagree then we continue to fund it, it is not right. He said that# 1 should be taken away. Chair Jacobs said that what he meant to say was that he had no problem with a basic template for this, but this project and the aquatic center are already far enough advanced and we realized that there was no template. He said that these are not ideal projects for having some kind of basic process. Out of this, we can glean what works and what does not work. Commissioner Carey said that he thinks we need an MOU, if the MOU means that everybody agrees on the process. He said that if you want money then you have to agree with an MOU in the future but not with these particular projects, since they are already so far in the pipeline. Commissioner Gordon said that she thinks that we need this MOU for the long term. On the short term, there is a template — it is a town park and they will run it and all we have to work out is the details. But for the future, it would be helpful to have an MOU. Dave Stancil said that the proposal from the Intergovernmental Parks Work Group was kind of a hybrid. He said that the Town's proposal could be done under the Intergovernmental Parks draft because that proposal actually suggested that there be a template that could turn into an MOU. Commissioner Gordon asked John Link if he was suggesting that we use the school's model. John Link said that after you agree on the project, this is the point where you execute whatever final budgetary document that conveys the money. He said that it appears in #1 is that the County agrees that it will commit to making the proceeds of the bond available for this project on a given schedule, irregardless of whether the County agrees with the final outcome. This is what he disagrees with. This may not be the intent, but if it is, he is saying do not do it. Commissioner Carey asked if the County approval of the final design of the project was before or after the special use permit. Dave Stancil said that the special use permit should result in something that would turn into construction drawings. So, the Town would like the County to commit before the constructing drawings. Commissioner Brown would like to ask the staff to write up what they think the financial calendar piece should be. John Link said that bonds are sold and are available by a certain time and then the Board decides when it is comfortable to give out the funds. Commissioner Brown said that on this project there is not even a budget as such. There is a concept plan, which had a general budget that used up all the money. She thinks that we need to go back and look at the project in terms of what it might really cost if given a budget. John Link said that Gwen Harvey, Rod Visser, Dave Stancil, and Donna Dean would work together to come up with the language and run it by the Chair and Commissioner Brown. Chair Jacobs said there is some perception that the County slows everything down and having two boards makes everything go slower. He understands that there is some of that sense of frustration that is reflected. He said that we do have a policy separate from this that in any of these new projects, if it is within a town, they have to match funds with us. Commissioner Gordon said that this captures the concerns. Chair Jacobs said we did informally tell them that we would give a response by Christmas Break.