Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgendas/Packets - 1970.03.16 - 39505oakland county service center 2800 watkins lake road pontiac, michigan Frances Clark Chairman March 16, 1970 John L. Carey Vice -Chairman Velma Austin Secretary ® To the Members of the Daniel W. Barry PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION Thomas JDn A.0 Clarence A. Durbin Oakland County, Michigan Sol D. Lomerson James L. Reid Ladies and Gentlemen: E. Frank Richardson Henry A. Schiffer Commissioners A meeting has been called of the PARKS AND ® RECREATION COMMISSION as follows: Kenneth L. Van Natta Director ® TIME................9:30 a.m. Gerard C. Lacey Friday, March 20, 1970 Assistant Director ® PLACE...............Parks and Recreation Office Pauline McCormick Adm. Assistant 2800 Watkins Lake Road ® Pontiac, Michigan 48054 PURPOSE.............Regular meeting The meeting is called in accordance with authori- zation of Frances Clark, Chairman of the Parks and Recreation Commission. Cordially, Kenneth L. Van Natta 338-6196 OAKLAND COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA March 20, 1970 1. Call meeting to order 2. Roll call 3. Approval of minutes for February 20, 1970 4. Concessionaire proposal for use of Davisburg Fairgrounds as a snowmobile race course 5. Leasing or sale of Groveland Clinic Building 6. Status of Recreation Bond money help from State for the development of Waterford -Oaks a. Co-operation with intermediate School District for facilities for the handicapped b. Co-operation with Community Mental Health Services Board for mentally retarded 7. House Bill #2564 - copy attached a. Action to be taken b. Thru Liaison Committee C. Commission action to be forwarded to the Department of Natural Resources 8. Millage renewal 9. New Business 10. Adjourn Next meeting - Addison -Oaks oakland county service center Frances Clark Chairman Clarence A. Durbin Vice -Chairman Velma Austin Secretary Daniel W. Barry Thomas J. Dillon Sol D. Lomerson Carl W. O'Brien James L. Reid E. Frank Richardson Henry A. Schiffer Commissioners 0 Kenneth L. Van Natta Director Gerard C. Lacey Assistant Director 0 Pauline McCormick Adm. Assistant 0 2800 watkins lake road pontiac, michigan 338-6196 April 14, 1970 To the Members of the PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION Oakland County, Michigan Ladies & Gentlemen: A business meeting of the PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION will be held at Addison -Oaks on Friday, April 17, 1970 beginning at 10:30 a.m. Commission members are to meet at the Commission Room at Waterford -Oaks, 2800 Watkins Lake Road, Pontiac at 9:30 a.m. We will leave at 9:45 a.m. for Addison -Oaks. Enclosed is a copy of the proposed rules; please study it so that they may be discussed and any additions added thereto. The meeting is called in accordance with authori- zation of Frances Clark, Chairman of the Parks and Recreation Commission. KLV:slw Enclosure. Cordially, Kenneth L. Van Natta SNOWMOBILE RACE COURSE The concession proposal is as follows: We enter into a five (5) year lease with a group (with the option of their renewing) that have started to sign up manufacturers as race sponsors. The group will construct their own track and what facilities they need - with the possible exception they may utilize the grand stand. We would receive a percentage of the gross (amount not yet determined) of the racing operation and a different percentage of the food sales. Parks and Recreation would establish food quality and prices. The group would be responsible for all insurance, operational costs, security force and any and all other costs connected with their operation. This construction of a track and other costs is presently being estimated to be in the vicinity of $60,000. A considerable amount of research work and preliminary study has been expended. They are now in the area of not wanting to proceed further unless Parks and Recreation have some interest in the proposal. GROVELAND CLINIC We have been negotiating with the County for the past two years on leasing the Clinic at Groveland to the County for a North Oakland County satellite center. We have waited for the district judge for court areas. The judge decided he did not like the location. We next held the building for the Health Department. Finally, Dr. Berman felt he did not have the staff for it. In the meantime, we allowed the Health Department to remove any and all of the medical equipment they could use. The Sheriff's Department then asked if they could use the building for a North Oakland County station. Apparently this request was approved by the Board of Supervisors, who apparently were not aware that they did not own the building. Upon con- ferring with Dan Murphy about this move, he seemed to think there was no doubt the County would want the facility and it was just a matter of detail having it arranged. We were in favor of the move, inasmuch, as the Sheriff's Department being located at a Park gave us fine security. The Sheriff's Department has been in the building close to a year. We have paid all utilities and other maintenance costs until a short time ago when the County took over maintenance costs. The County or Sheriff's De- partment entered into an arrangement with the surrounding Page 2. (Groveland Clinic) townships in which the townships agreed to pay, I believe, $2,500 a year because of the better police protection they would receive. We have never been reimbursed from the County for the use of the building. Recently the Township of Groveland asked if they could have their Fire Department at the location. Because I believed the County was going to take over the clinic, I referred them to the Board of Auditors for a decision. I believe they re- ceived an affirmative one because some remodeling took place and the Groveland fire truck is now stationed there. This also is to our advantage as we now have fire protection at the Park. In the meantime, the O.E.O. people asked us for office space there. Once again they were referred to the Board of Auditors. I do not know the outcome. In the latter part of 1969 I again requested action by the County. Mr. Murphy was directed to negotiate a lease with us for the property. The lease was prepared on the same terms as our lease from the County for Waterford -Oaks. This lease was submitted to Corporation Counsel and to the engineering division for form approval in January. On Monday, March 16, 1970 I met with the County Planning, Building and Zoning Committee. The lease was presented and there was some thought by the committee that they should own the building at the end of the lease. The lease was not Page 3. (Groveland Clinic) approved. A motion was made to have the property appraised by the Equalization Department for possible purchase. I agreed we would rather sell the property than lease same. An appraisal made when we purchased this property was $92,000 for the Clinic Building with the land being appraised separately at a cost of $1,800 per acre. Sale to the County is recommended at this price, with not more than two (2) acres of land included. If this property is not purchased by the County at our appraised price, it would be a recommendation that we place it on the market to be sold to the highest bidder at or above our appraised price. HOUSE BILL NO. 2564 It is recommended that this Commission take a stand against House Bill No. 2564 and to send our legislators copies of this action. It would seem obvious that five (5) and ten (10) year plans, now demanded by all assisting agencies, could immediately become obsolete without continuity of purpose. Our very own Commission action proves the merit of setting goals such as, first acquisition then development. If this entire Commission would have been broken up twice in its entirety, it is doubtful if we could have accomplished only a small part of what has been done. MILLAGE RENEWAL Recommend that our millage be put on the ballot this November to be spread on the 1972 Roll. We must either do it this year at a regular election or have a special election in 1971 - this may be costly. Suggest a resolution be sent to our Liaison Committee requesting this matter be taken to the Board of Supervisors for their immediate attention and action. HIOUSE MLL Flo. 25&6 i March 12, 1969, Introduced by Reps. Stempien, Thomas L. Brown, Clark, Guastello, Stanley J. Davis, Mrozowski, Goemaere, Mrs. Symons, Vaughn, Callahan, Mrs. Elliott, Ogonowski, Kelsey, Wierzbicki, O'Brien, Snyder, Petitpren and Holbrook and referred -to the Committee on Towns and Counties. A bill to establish terms of office for appointees to the county board of supervisors. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ENACT: 1 Sec. 1. Notwithstanding any provision of the law to 2 the contrary, the term of any person heretofore appointed 3 to his office by the.county board of supervisors shall 4 expire on December 31, 1970 or until his successor is . 5 appointed and qualified. Any person appointed thereafter 6 by the county board of supervisors to any office shall 7 serve until December 31 of the next succeeding even numbered 8 year or until his successor is appointed and qualified. 1195 *'69 Analysis of House Bill No. 2564 March 11, 1970 1. Purpose: To establish terms of office for appointees by the County Board of Supervisors. 2. (a) Introduced at Agency's request. Yes: No: X (b) Agency Support: No. 3. Revenue or budgetary implications in the bill:. (a) To the Department: None (b) To the State: None 4. Other principal departments (component units if possible) affected by the bill: Local Government: County Park and Recreation Commissions County Planning Commissions County Road Commissions Huron -Clinton -Metropolitan Authority Regional Park and Recreation Commissions Regional Planning Commissions And other affected boards and commissions 5. Arguments: For: Terms of all appointed members of commissions, boards, authorities and other bodies appointed by the Board of Supervisors would be the same duration - 2 years. Against: 1. Terms of all appointed members of affected bodies would end at the same time, i.e. December 31st of each bi-annual election year. Without the present staggered terms the continuity and stability which these commissions and boards now enjoy would be ended. Under the pre- sent system there is always a sufficient number of carry over members to insure continuity of operations and to help educate newly -appointed members as to their responsibilities. 2.' Due to passage of the $100,000 Recreation Bond Issue and the legis- latures subsequent approval of recreation projects, many counties have recently established park and recreation commissions under Act 261 - Public Acts of 1965. The confusion caused by changing the provisions of this Act at this time would be considerable and would adversely affect counties which are just starting park and recreation programs for the first time. 3. Since under Act 261 - Public Acts of 1965, it is mandatory that at least one and not more than three members of the Board of Supervisors must be members of the County Parks and Recreation Commission, a direct liaison between the commission and the board is assured. This system has proven to be very beneficial to the Board of Supervisors and the Parks Commission. In addition this permits the appointment of lay citizens to the board thus balancing representation between elected and appointed members. 4. Because of the short terms which end soon after the bi-annual elections the likelihood of commissions becoming filled with strictly political. appointees, many problems may arise; for example: (a) Difficulty in recruiting and retaining competent professional personnel in county government at a time when the counties need to upgrade and improve their services to the electorate. Most counties in Michigan, with few exceptions, do not pro- vide any type of statutory merit systems or civil service system which protects the public by insuring continued em- ployment of competent personnel. (b) Difficulty in attracting community and civic leaders to serve on park and recreation commissions, planning commissions, etc., when county government needs to attract and involve such per- sons in county affairs to improve the stature of county govern- ment. (c) Refusal of individuals and corporations to give gifts of lands and monies for park and recreation projects which are admin- istered by politically oriented commissions. 5. Act 261 - Public Acts of 1965, is one of the finest Park and Rec- reation enabling acts for county government in the United States. It is broad in coverage, comprehensive and has the necessary pro- visions required for counties to provide competent professional park and recreation services to the electorate. We feel the changes as proposed in House Bill 2564 will be detri- mental to the goal of county government to provide quality park and recreation services to the public. 6. Suggested Amendments: The provisions of this Act shall not apply to any Commission, Board, Authority or other body which by state law is required to have a county supervisor, or supervisors as a voting member or members of such Commission, Board, Authority or other body. 7. Other background materials: None Michigan Department of Natural Resources