Laserfiche WebLink
REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 26, 2013 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Councilmember Schey reiterated what she had said earlier that her main concern is this creates <br />what could be perceived as a lack of transparency in spending. For an example when these <br />budget transfers come before us identifying areas where there are budget surpluses and budget <br />shortfalls there are situations where the first line item here for example for $70,000 for some of <br />these consulting and professional services like the AECOM Century Center study, these sorts of <br />things I think should probably deserve a little bit more discussion before they appear on a budget <br />transfer bill, so my issue with this bill is less the process of budget transfers and what might be <br />perceived as a lack of transparency with some of these expenses. <br /> <br />Mark Neal stated that they are working extremely hard to be transparent with these requests. We <br />would be happy to have a conversation on any of these items when they do come up. We <br />perhaps to our detriment we try to put in as much detail as possible knowing that it would raise <br />questions which they are happy to address in terms of the decisions that department are making <br />in terms of their use of resources. He apologizes for not seeing it in that fashion and we will <br />endeavor to make sure that we are as transparent as we can be. <br /> <br />Councilmember Varner wanted clarification as to one of the bond issues, the one was related to <br />support for a master plan which was going to have a partial match from the Zoological Society, <br />the second was potential spending for a potential bond issue and could you give some more <br />detail on that. <br /> <br />Mark Neal advised that there are two (2) master plans; there is an overall Parks Master Plan, <br />which we would be very community driving exercise and would take approximately six (6) <br />months to review all the park assets to get input from the community, to get input from the <br />Council and other concerned individuals about our parks in the future. That Master Plan <br />becomes a blue-print as we go forward in making capital decisions including the spending of any <br />bonds money. Separately we have put in a transfer request to provide what they estimate to be <br />half the cost of Zoo Master Plan and that Zoo Master Plan is critical as part of the AZA <br />Accreditation but more importantly to make sure that we are providing a public asset that is what <br />we hope to be the best that it can be in our community as a professional zoo. <br /> <br />Councilmember Varner asked if the reference to the bond issue then was a passing reference to a <br />potential bond issue not set aside for money. <br /> <br />Mark Neal stated that the Park Master Plan because that would be an essential part to a bond and <br />a part of the 2014 budget that we have a parks bond in there. <br /> <br />Council President Dieter asked if he knew the last time they had a park plan. Phil might be able <br />to answer that one. <br /> <br />Phil St. Clair, Superintendent, Park Department, 321 E. Walter Street, South Bend, Indiana, <br />stated that it was five (5) years ago. <br /> <br />Council President Dieter stated that it kind of follows up that we were talking about this earlier <br />of from 5 year plan five years ago it is immediately getting a bang for the buck of doing these <br />studies and commissions, I will send something to the Mayor and the Chief of Staff in the wake <br />of the parameters that we use for that and again we from my knowledge on the Council we have <br />never developed basically a spreadsheet that we are doing all these studies and paid all this <br />money what did we get out of it. And again, I think that was some of Valerie’s frustration of <br />these things being put in there and again the transfers are not new allocations of money, but they <br />are transfers and they kind of different match to that extent. So, I want to get with you later on <br />that thing, because I think that is one of the confusing questions and or answers that we are <br />looking at these studies and why was it lumped in with this, I think it was a transfer and all that, <br />but that is a whole different subject and we will do that later. But that was my question, we are <br />doing a five year plan every year and we are spending all this money why, why are we adopting <br />to what the plan was before, because we are going to do another plan. So, if we are doing it just <br />for the sake of an exercise I think that is a huge waste of money. If we are going to do it, then <br />let’s adhere to what the plan is and go from there. <br /> <br />7 <br /> <br /> <br />