pages: GolfCommission/2010-01-21.pdf, 3
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
GolfCommission | 2010-01-21 | 3 | looking at what the direct costs are for operation of the Mif. The memo was not received well by Ms. Gallant. Ms. Gallant response was "I appreciate your history of of the financial inclusionary policy, but I'm sure you'll remember my comment at the beginning to the Golf Commission when I first met you all as well. Anything that is in the books of the City is public information. You can have any of that in as much detail as you want anytime from my perspective. I've given that information both when I was downstairs and upstairs, including line item details. Staff recommendations and staff work is not public information until such time that the agenda is posted. The City Attorney has made that clear here and it is consistent with the way I have done it and been taught for the past 30 years in government. The idea that a staff recommendation has to be screened by a Golf Commission or any commission, for that matter, before a formal Staff Report is done and submitted to the City Council is absolutely not possible. It is allowed under State law only for Planning Commissions as they have police power, but again the Planning Commission recommendation is not binding on the staff recommendation of City Council. Even with the past practices not the way the business works and conflicts with municipal city manager form of government, everybody gets the same shake on the same profit. As to the length of the meeting and the turnout these things are going to have to be decided in a public forum and people are just going to have to get used to long discussions about it on both sides. If it is important to them, they will have to attend and endure it, and I read the feelings around here, there are going to be many more of these long nights during the next six months. But it sounds as if you are implying if the Golf Commission had given me a recommendation counter to what I made, we at Staff would have succumbed to the Commission's recommendation. I would never do that. Staff work is independent of any Board and Commission may or may not rule. As for being "forewarned" I would hope that you are not threatening us with fear of more long meetings or tax on Staff. I already know that these will come, but I cannot ignore my responsibility or specific direction from a majority of five. We did exactly as the motions told us. Intent is irrelevant. It is what they actually said and that was come back in six months with the data. We did. The motion was not to come back with the data and be sure the Golf Commission sees it and is happy with it. The fact that the golf community disagreed is just part of the deliberative process. That is how our system works, for better or for worse." Chair Sullwold stated she believes that either the Golf Commission or the City Council were deceived by the costs that were provided for the operation of the Mif Albright course for the six month period. Bob Sullwold asked Matt Wisely if he spent 20% of his time on the Mif Albright course for the last six months and he stated he did, and then was asked if Patti spent 20% of her time on the Mif Albright course, which he stated he did not know. Chair Sullwold then asked Matt that if the Mif Albright course had not been reopened, would the management salaries be the same, which he answered yes, but he also stated that when the Mif Albright course did reopen, the salaries were not increased. Bob Sullwold then asked Matt how the labor figure of $5,092 was calculated and Matt explained that the greens were mowed four days a week by a City employee at a rate of $36.00 for four hours. The cups were changed at a rate of $11.00 per hour for 1-1/2 hours per week, the rough was mowed eight hours a week at a rate of $27.00 per hour, the fairways were mowed for three hours a week at a rate of $27.00 per hour. Matt - 3 - Golf Commission Minutes -Thursday, January 21, 2010 | GolfCommission/2010-01-21.pdf |