HomeMy WebLinkAboutJack House Committee Members' Memo to PRC_FinalMEMO
JACK HOUSE COMMITTEE
DATE: October 10, 2022
TO: Parks and Recreation Commission
CC: Meghan Burgher - Recreation Manager
FROM: Chuck Crotser - JHC Chairperson
RE: Jack House Committee reorganization
Due to ongoing difficulties in recruiting new members and a lack of clarity of our specific advisory
expectations, our Committee feels that it is a good time to reconsider the role of the Jack House
Committee. City staff and myself have spoken with the City Attorney's office, which has concluded that there are no legal barriers to proceeding in the manners proposed below.
Our Committee members feel that moving most of the responsibilities outlined in the original deed to
the Parks and Recreation Committee makes good sense, but may take different forms while
maintaining the intent of the original “gift”. As such, we would like to offer several suggestions for your
consideration:
ALTERNATIVE #1 - Reduce the size of the JHC to 5 members: One member with historical
architecture experience, One member with landscape design experience (preferably historical
landscapes), One member from the History Center, and two members at large. The architecture and
landscape positions need NOT be filled by Cal Poly faculty.
This Committee could meet quarterly, or as needed to advise the PRC or City Council (similar to the
Construction Board of Appeals).
The purview of the JHC would be primarily to support educational programs and the docent
group. They would also continue to advocate for improving on-site facilities to support these
programs such as a secure storage facility, rehabilitation of the Carriage Barn and Wash House
for display or educational purposes; improving the kitchen/prep area to better accommodate
events, etc. They would also be consulted regarding the access and use of existing resources,
currently stored off-site. They would also be consulted on issues of accession and de-accession
of historic resources.
ALTERNATIVE #2 - Dissolve the JHC and move all responsibility to the PRC. However, of the 7
members on the PRC, designate one member with historical architecture experience, one member with
landscape design experience (preferably historical landscapes) and one member from the History
Center OR the docent group.
ALTERNATIVE #3 - Dissolve the JHC and move all responsibility to the PRC. Issues surrounding
historic architecture and gardens could be handled through consultation with the ARC and CHC, as
needed. Perhaps one position on the PRC could be reserved for a JH docent member to help advocate
for the concerns outlined in Alternative #1, above.
As a footnote, . . when the original deed was accepted, the ARC was in its infancy and the CHC had not
yet been created, thus the oversight needed at the time was really not in place.
We believe that Alternative #3 would be the most efficient model and would provide the oversight that
the family intended in 1975. Ultimately, we rely upon the wisdom of the City Council to make a timely
and necessary adjustment to the Jack House Committee.
Thank you, . . .