My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05/31/2006
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2000's
>
2006
>
05/31/2006
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/28/2022 11:21:20 AM
Creation date
10/1/2015 6:01:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Special Joint Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
05/31/2006
Archived Roll/Disk#
3123
Book and Page
130, 812-829
Supplemental fields
SmeadsoftID
311
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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).
View images
View plain text
<br />Administrator Baird responded that the County has probably 10 times the acreage of any of <br />the cities that utilize its parks; and., all the cities’ residents utilize County parks. In 2002 when the <br />County decided to separate its recreation department from the City, they were looking at service <br />and they budgeted for it. The County always funded its parks, not all of it, but a good portion of <br />park maintenance from the General Funds. <br /> <br />Commissioner Wheeler posed another question. “If all cities provide for their parks why <br />wouldn’t we be taking our parks out of the MSTU and not taxing any of the cities out of the general <br />funds for things that they provide? For instance, they provide their own police protection, so we <br />don’t charge them for that, theoretically we cut them a percentage; they don’t provide their own <br />jail so we charge them for that.” He thought it would be logical, that for the things that the City <br />provides, and where they duplicate, County should have them under the MSTU and not under the <br />General Fund. <br /> <br />Administrator Baird responded that the County has about 2800 acreage in parks that it <br />maintains and all the residents utilize them. <br /> <br />Commissioner Wheeler discussed how the County should fund this and what funds this <br />could come out of based on level of service to be provided. <br /> <br />Administrator Baird did not have a problem with it if a true cost allocation was done where <br />County bills all the cities for what it gives them and cities bill us for what they give us. <br /> <br />Chairman Neuberger interjected that it was not an across-the-board thing and all the cities <br />were paying county taxes too. He thought the County might owe them something back on that and <br />there was room for some compromise. He thought if they could get a feeling of what they could <br />spend, and where to get it from, that they might be able to want to do something. <br /> <br />Commissioner Bowden could not support the City’s request. She said, it would be very <br />difficult “for us to fund money and tax county residents and then turn it over to another taxing <br />May 31, 2006 <br />7 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.