Laserfiche WebLink
:+'J . ter,,.,, . , <br />T <br />2 <br />In July 1980 the City formally questioned the County's intent to. <br />proceed as the implementing agency for this site. (Attachment 3 <br />is the the City's resolution an the matter). <br />On March 10, 1981 the City Council passed ~ resolution indicating <br />"its willingness to operate and maintain a regional facility <br />consisting of the Long Lake and Rush Lake sites and requests <br />designation as an implemention agency." The City desires to see <br />the park developed now, They acquired the site in the early <br />1974's and feel that 7.tS development fs well, past due. Rather <br />than wait longer for the County which might delay development to <br />.1983, the City is willing to finance any operation and <br />maintenance costs so as to see development proceed during 1981 , <br />(See Attachments 4 and 5.) <br />The Ramsey County Board by resolution supported <br />request on April 6, 1981, (See Attachment 6,) <br />resolution also approves the development concept <br />THE SYSTEM POLICY PLAN <br />the City's. <br />The <br />for the parka <br />The Council adopted revisions to the System Policy Plan on <br />November 20, 1980. The plan declares as policy the Cauncil's <br />intention to have the Counties serve as the primary implementing <br />agencies of the regional recreation open space system. One of <br />the specific objectives declared in the plan is to reduce the <br />number of implementing agencies to include only the county park <br />authorities, the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Roard, and <br />the City of $t. Paul. <br />The Capital Improvement Program adopted as part of the plan <br />includes $250,000 in 1981 to buy out New Brighton's interest. <br />(Similar to the agreement recently approved that transferred Eden <br />Prairie's interests at Anderson Lakes and Bryant Lake to the <br />HCPRD.) The $250,000 was based on a preliminary estimate by <br />Maurice Anderson, New Brighton Park and Recreation Director. <br />Mr. Anderson has since placed this estimate at $650,000 of City <br />funds invested in the site. <br />DISCUSSION <br />The obvious issue here is who ought to serve as the implementing <br />agency for this site. It is a policy question not a legal one in <br />that the Metro Parks Act clearly provides for the Council to make <br />grants to counties, special park districts, or municipalities. <br />The system policy plan declares the Council's intent to reduce <br />the number of implementing agencies and in fact in Policy 8 <br />clearly limits the number to the 10 listed. <br />Alternatives (under the current law) are limited to the <br />following: <br />1. Designate New Brighton <br />2. Wait for Ramsey County <br />the implementing agency <br />to act <br />