HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-03-24 City Admin. Memo to File & Staff Re 03-21-00 Mtg. with Kathleen Macy-----------------------
O ARK HEIGHT
M0 � Y
To: FAe and Internal Staff
from: Thomas M. Melena, City Adrinistrator
Date: 03/24/00
Re.- March 21, 2000 Meeting with Dr. Kathleen Macy
On Tuesday, the 21 March 2:30 p.m. met with Dr. Kathleen Macy the Superintendent
for the Stillwater area school system. Areas discussed included the 1) Ropes
course 2) Environmental learning center access 3) School police liaison officer 4)
Parking.
First Area of interest was the Ropes course. The concern from the school
superintendent was not enough staff to staff communications as well as a
recommendation from the city planning consultant Scott about the hours of operation
and the days of operation. Last but not least the superintendent was perturbed that
we had scheduled the meeting for April 13 ", which is when she has her school board
meetings.
Comment: The school district is a very high concern for the public relations and
political issues that could be raised on this project. They also point out that it is
unreasonable to have any limitations on this facility and that the City has no reason to
become involved. Furthermore they want to indicate that they do not like the tone of
Scott's letter and that the communication has not been as effective as they would like
to have. I would point out that staff has been in constant communication with the
school district staff concerning the issues that need to be addressed. That second of
all that city staff and the letter from the consultant is a staff to staff report at this point
with nothing yet going forward to the Planning commission. Again I think that the
school district may be looking at once bitten twice shy but also screaming a little bit
before they are hurt. Last but not least we do not have a choice on the meeting date.
The meeting has not been set just to perturb the school district but in fact is our
normal public hearing process. Yet there seems to be this attitude from the school
that we have set the meeting date just to perturb them.
0 Page 1
Item 2 -The Environmental Learning Center. This is based on rumor and the rumor
being that V.S.S.A. will not give access from their property to the environmental
learning center, specifically we are talking about road access to that property.
pointed out to Dr. Macy that that is so much of a rumor that it is almost laughable in
that even V.S.S.A. does not know what their final plans are because they are being
revised almost daily and therefore anyone that is saying that there will not be access
does not know what they are talking about. The City Council has gone on record to
state that there will be access from V.S.S.A. to the school property so that there will
be the capability of having that properly used and not be land locked.
Item 3- Police School Liaison. Again based on rumor it was indicated that Joe Croft
would not be the School Police Liaison for next year. The actual fact of the matter is
that Lindy as indicated to his folks about three months ago that there needs to be a
rotation both for the detective position as well as the school police liaison. Those
positions would be put out to bids for the officers and we would then go from there.
The Superintendent of Schools requested that they be the appointing authority on
something like this. I immediately said no that that belongs to the authority of the
Police Chief. I did indicate to the school that if they so desire could sit in on the
interview board but it would still be the final determination and selection by the Police
Chief.
One additional item that we talked about was the cost of the officer and the amount
of funding provided by the school district. We pointed out that the current costs of
our police officer is $4105 per month plus the 10% education and physical fitness
incentive or approximate $4500 per month times 12 which is $54, 000 a year and
with a normal 30% benefits package shows we have a real cost of about $70,000 a
year. The School District is to supply approximate 75% of that cost which would be
$53.000. We are at about the $40 — 45,000 funding right now which is close enough
from our standpoint for these costs. The School Superintendent did ask me what
would happen if they decided not to have School Police Liaison. We said we would
lay off an officer and start charging for all the service charges that the police would
have going at the school.
Item 4 -- Parking. Again we talked about the parking situation, a little bit about the
articles in the paper which was not totally correct and that we were not banning
student parking. We were only pushing it back by 30 feet at two intersections and
restricting the parking in front of a community driveway. We did point out additionally
that the City will be looking very stringently at the parking situation if and when the
stadium issue comes forward, but until then we are probably going to continue to
monitor the situation as it exists.
"Thomas M. Melena
City Administrator
0 Page 2