Thanks Mark, I appreciate your feedback. We have discussed the issue with the head of the Montessori and they are good about our viewpoint but can't comprehend the damage being done by the youth for that one hour a week. I do like that recommendation of adding the City as "Additional Insured" to their policy since they will be out there for the foreseeable future.
Have a great week and again Thank you.
Juan
----- Original Message -----
From: "district 10" <
district_10@lists.cprs.org>
To: "district 10" <
district_10@lists.cprs.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 2, 2019 8:26:12 AM
Subject: [district_10] - RE: Non-Permitted Groups
Juan –
Our general approach is that we would rather have the park being used than empty. Assuming that there is no ordinance/policy that prohibits this specific use and that the use is planned to be long-term, we would take several steps.
(1) Open lines of communication with the Montessori program by approaching and discussing City-end concerns and the Montessori plans for the long-term.
(2) If the use will be long-term and consistent at the existing level, require that the program add the City as “Additional Insured” to their insurance policy.
Given that the group remains this smaller size, allow them to continue to use available open spaces, but be clear that without a formal use agreement (i.e. paid rental use), their space is not guaranteed and City uses will always take priority. Additionally, use of dedicated activity spaces – like a restricted access athletic field – are only allowed per City policy.
There can be countless other factors that only you are aware of (e.g. facility safety considerations; is the group promoting the park use as part of their program; conflict with other users; city policies, etc…), but this is the general approach we would take. Again, we would rather make it easier for people to use the park – especially during times that are less busy.
Mark Flores,
Director of Recreation & Community Services
City of Lynwood
-----End Original Message-----