Laserfiche WebLink
r <br />~' <br />May 8, 1980 <br />To: New Brighton City Council <br />From: New Brighton Park Board <br />Subject: Joint Powers Agreement - Long Lake Park <br />In the .summer of 1979, after several months of studying drafts <br />of an agreement for joint powers operation for the Long Lake/ <br />Rush Lake Regional Park, the New Brighton Park Board recommended <br />the following: <br />-Funding for development of the Long-Lake/Rush Lake <br />site be obtained through Metro Council <br />-Ramsey County be responsible for 75% of the mainten- <br />ance and operation costs of the regional facility <br />-New Brighton be responsible for 250 of the mainten- <br />ance and operation costs of the regional facility <br />-New Brighton retain complete operational control. over <br />the Long Lake portion of the regional park site <br />The New Brighton Park Board is concerned about the recommendation <br />to the City Council from Dennis Zylla, City Manager, that the <br />Council suggests a lease of the Long Lake property to Ramsey County. <br />Ramsey County having been designated as the implementing agency <br />would have primary responsibility for development, maintenance <br />and ultimate operation of the Long Lake Regional Park. <br />It is our feeling. that. the proposal to lease to Ramsey County, <br />though it may be financially sound, compromises the residents of <br />New Brighton and undermines the credibility of the Park Board and <br />Council personnel. The Park Board and Council have worked with <br />New Brighton residents through the years since the passing of the. <br />park bond issue in 1967 collecting data, soliciting input, en- <br />abling preparation of concept plans, and development of water sur- <br />face use regulations to ensure a regional park facility accessible <br />to, meeting the needs of, and acceptable to New Brighton residents <br />and neighboring communities. <br />By leasing Long Lake to Ramsey County, we run the risk of losing <br />the local control which the Park Board has promised residents, in <br />good faith, during this period of time. Although it would in all <br />likelihood, be possible to retain veto power during the develop- <br />ment phase of the regional site under a lease situation, we have <br />