My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
041901
ConejoRPD
>
Public Access
>
Archive
>
Board Meetings
>
Minutes
>
2001
>
041901
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/11/2016 10:03:24 AM
Creation date
8/11/2016 10:02:59 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board
Document Type
Minutes
Date
4/19/2001
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
April 19, 2001 <br />Page 4 <br />Tom O'Neill, of Thousand Oaks, said that efforts should be made to <br />retrieve the $8 million taken from the District by the State, questioned how <br />the District has managed to provide services in spite of the loss of the $8 <br />million, said that land developers should be assessed fees for parks. He <br />said that his family has enjoyed the parks. <br />Leon Palkin indicated that the measure was not adequately promoted, any <br />assessment should be placed on a general ballot, the work done in front of <br />the Goebel Senior Adult Center and the disabled access ramp was not <br />necessary and funding should come from the State not the local people. <br />Written statement cards were received from the following: <br />Marion Dickinson wrote in opposition to the assessment and wrote that <br />because of the recent refund of money to the District, there is no need for <br />the assessment. <br />Paul Studer questioned why the public hearing was not held earlier in the <br />ballot process. <br />Anonymous wrote asking if the fee would be assessed to apartments, and <br />indicated that apartment dwellers are the primary users of parks. <br />Gerard van Steyn of Shilts Consultants, Inc. was present and answered <br />questions from the Board and the public about the methodology used for <br />the proposed District Assessment. <br />Jacobsen solicited anyone present to cast ballots. Four people cast their <br />ballots. <br />In response to questions posed by Suzanne Duckett and Paul Seader, <br />Ward discussed the State Park Bond Act, and noted that the $1.1 million <br />grant is equal to only one -ninth of the ERAF shift (Educational Revenue <br />Augmentation Fund), and that only capital expenditures are allowed and <br />said that 27 out of 107 District jobs were eliminated at the time of the shift in <br />funds, staff has looked at ways to augment District services, and a <br />determination of the casting of District's ballots has not yet been <br />determined. Lange stated that the District has utilized Prop. 218. Holt said <br />that staff has worked vigorously to retrieve lost funds. Jacobsen reiterated <br />District efforts to retrieve lost funds from the State and to involve people in <br />the assessment process, and he noted the important role of volunteers, and <br />said that no additional testimony was being accepted at this time. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.