Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident raises concerns over park reservation wording; council to review agreement language
Summary
A resident reported confusion about shelter-house and pavilion reservations and refundable-deposit language; staff said they will review reservation verbiage and consider clarifications in the reservation agreement.
A resident told council a family reunion was affected because reservation language made it unclear whether a pavilion or the entire shelter house was reserved, and questioned whether a $100 refundable deposit implied responsibility for the whole park.
"They couldn't use the city park because WhiteHat said reserved it all...the way it states is, like, we are whoever is reserving that is responsible for the whole park," the resident said, asking staff to clarify wording and procedures. Staff said they can review the reservation agreement verbiage and attempt to better accommodate requests to reserve just the pavilion or a portion of a shelter house.
Council acknowledged the need to clarify the reservation form language and noted staff will bring suggested edits to future meetings, including adding clearer instructions about which portion of a facility is being reserved and how deposits and inspections are handled.
