In preparation for the 2012 budget process, Councilmember Jean Godden is hosting a "Community Conversation" on the Seattle Parks budget meeting tonight from 6:30-8pm at Meadowbrook Community Center (10517 35th Ave NE).
This meeting will give the public an opportunity to provide input on priorities for the Park and to respond to the Superintendent’s proposed response to the City Council’s Statement of Legislative intent.
In anticipation of state and federal budget cuts, Community Center Advisory Teams, Recreation Council and other decision makers are starting the 2012 budget planning process early.
The public is enouraged to attend this meeting to help in shaping the future of Seattle Parks and Recreation. The input received from the community at last year’s budget hearings made a signficant difference in the decision-making process.
"This is your chance to show the Mayor and City Council that Seattle’s citizens rely on Parks now more than ever," the invitation says.
For more information on the budget process, go here. The draft working matrix of potential options of the community center advisory team can be found on Sally Bagshaw's website here.
Two more Parks meetings will be held on June 15th and June 16th at Bitter Lake Community Center and Jefferson Community Center respectively.
2 comments:
Unfortunately for Seattle's park lovers and taxpayers this meeting actually did not have any way of accepting public comments, It seems that it was a sham and a complete waste of time.
The meeting was not very productive. It used a “world café” approach, kind of like speed dating, with groups of 8-10 at each table and then rotating to other tables every 10 minutes with different questions at each table. The questions were very broad—things like how do you use the parks, how would you prioritize parks (about 10 % of the budget) compared to public safety (receives the bulk of the general fund) and human services (receives about 6 %). There was a general question about commercialization of parks phrased in terms of public/private partnerships. Aside from the questions incapable of any real answers, the worst part of the process is that city staff served as recorders for people’s comments. Then, either councilmembers or city staff reported on the comments at the end of the meeting. They seemed to pick and choose comments to report upon. It would have been far better if each table designated a recorder and someone to report to the bigger group.
Post a Comment