HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 06/22/2005 - Town Meeting APPROVED MINUTES
TOWN MEETING REGARDING PROPOSED PARK REFERENDUM
WEDNESDAY,JUNE 22, 2005 7:00 P.M., CITY CENTER
Council Chambers
8080 Mitchell Road
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS: Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Brad Aho, Ron Case,
Philip Young
PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD: Ian Mackey, John Brill, Jeff Gerst
STAFF: Scott Neal, City Manager, Bob Lambert,
Director, Parks and Recreation, Stuart Fox,
Manager of Parks and Natural Resources
RECORDING SECRETARY: Allison Burr
I. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Councilmember
Sherry Butcher was absent from tonight's meeting.
II. OVERVIEW OF PROPOSED PARK REFERENDUM
Mayor Tyra-Lukens introduced the town meeting by discussing the failed parks
referendum of May 11, 2004. Subsequent research indicated there continue to be wants
among the community with regard to parks and recreation; the proposed new referendum
will have differences from last time.
Bob Lambert initiated discussion of the proposed park referendum by citing statistics of
the previous referendum effort. The referendum called for$22.5 million for acquisition,
development, and improvement of land and facilities for public recreation. The question
failed, with 56 percent voting no and 43 percent voting yes. The City subsequently did
random a sample survey of those who voted to ascertain what they voted and why they
voted that way.
The facts learned from voters on the referendum: 88 percent of the no voters and 77
percent of the yes voters thought a single question was a bad idea. 92 percent of no
voters and 45 percent of yes voters were not in favor of an outdoor aquatic center. 78
percent of no voters and 55 percent of yes voters did not want the City to come back with
a smaller aquatic center. The major reasons people voted against the referendum: 48
percent cited cost; 35 percent, lack of choices; 29 percent, lack of need,particularly for
outdoor aquatic center.
TOWN MEETING REGARDING PROPOSED PARK REFERENDUM
June 22, 2005
Page 2
Survey results showed there remains support for projects voters would support in a future
referendum: 72 percent want bicycle and pedestrian trails; 66 percent want
improvements to the Community Center; 65 percent desire replacement of old warming
houses at skating rinks; 63 percent want park shelters with restrooms in parks; 61 percent
support providing matching funds for other associations to help pay for improvements to
facilities; 61 percent support Flying Cloud ball field expansion; 59 percent support
acquiring additional park and open space land.
Lambert continued, the Council is considering another referendum based on 69 percent of
all voters indicating support for it. The survey suggested the Council should: offer
another referendum within a year or two; hold the referendum in November in a normal
election year;hold it in a year the school district is not also considering a referendum;
give the voters choices on different issues rather than a single question; do not consider
an outdoor aquatic center on the referendum.
The Council is now considering four questions on a new referendum, the first of which is
a $6.65 million addition to the Community Center. The addition would expand the
fitness center and locker rooms, add team rooms, build a multi-use gymnasium, indoor
walking/running track, multi-use room for teens and seniors; improve access to the
facility and expanded concession and lobby areas. The average cost of this portion is $21
per year for the average home in Eden Prairie, valued at$310,000.
The second question on the proposed referendum is a swimming pool addition for$3.33
million. This would create a zero-depth entry warm water recreation pool as well as
deepening the east end of the existing pool for competitive swimming. The tax impact of
this question would be $10 per year for an average Eden Prairie home, valued at
$310,000.
The third question on the proposed referendum is $4.695 million for park acquisition,
development, and improvements. This would include a major renovation of Forest Hills
Park and Edenvale Park. A park shelter was burned earlier this year at Forest Hills Park,
and it has always been the subject of vandalism, so the City wants to move it. At
Edenvale, the two parking lots will be reduced to one; the skating rink will be moved and
a soccer field added. A permanent park shelter will be built at Prairie View Park. The
same expansion of Flying Cloud ball fields will be proposed as was last year.
This question would also provide for the acquisition of lands near Birch Island Woods
Conservation Area. Also provided would be new playground equipment at several parks
around the City. Typically, Parks and Recreation is budgeted $50,000 each year for
improvements to meet safety standards. This referendum could take care of all this at
once. The referendum would also renovate tennis courts at several parks. The tax impact
would be $15 per year on a typical Eden Prairie home, valued at$310,000.
The fourth question on the proposed referendum would provide for $2 million in trail
improvements. There are currently $5 million in trail projects right now. This $2 million
would take the City out three or four years. The City would finish 8-foot asphalt trails
and sidewalks in the downtown Eden Prairie Area. This money could also be used for a
TOWN MEETING REGARDING PROPOSED PARK REFERENDUM
June 22, 2005
Page 3
trail along T.H. 4 north of Purgatory Creek. The tax impact would be $6 on an average
Eden Prairie home, valued at$310,000.
All four questions would equate to a $52 per year, or$4.33 per month, tax increase in an
average Eden Prairie home.
A recommendation will be made on June 27t'to the Parks, Recreation and Natural
Resources Commission. On July 5, 2005, the City Council will make its decision on the
proposed park referendum.
Mayor Tyra-Lukens opened up the floor for public comment and question.
III. OVERVIEW OF PROPOSED PARK REFERENDUM
Geoffrey Ferster, 8056 Timer Lake Drive, commented the Community Center is a great
value but is used a lot by high school kids; a new walking track may have a similar
situation. City people do not have comparable access to the high school facilities. Can
that be changed? Ferster also requested clarification regarding the expansion of changing
rooms and also expressed concern about the abuse of tennis courts by bicyclists. Can
there be a policing system in place?
Lambert responded there is a City/Eden Prairie Schools facility committee with the
purpose of looking at these issues, so both parties have use, and maximum use of all
facilities is achieved. Regarding the new walking track, it is really needed. Eden Prairie
High School is the largest in the state and their facilities are used all the time by students.
But he offered to bring the issue before the joint committee. Regarding the locker rooms,
Lambert explained they will be four times larger than currently, plus the addition of a
family locker room. Finally, Lambert indicated the City has six Park Rangers and a full-
time patrolman assigned to the parks to watch for abuses. He encouraged residents to
report abuses. Call 911 and the police will respond and talk to the kids.
Ferster asked an additional question about the income generated from the Community
Center.
Lambert responded it generates about$800,000 in income annually. It costs $1million to
operate. The ice rinks pay for themselves; the pools do not. With the addition, there will
be no additional operating deficits. Mayor Tyra-Lukens added increasing the locker
room size by four times will get them much closer to being adequate.
Dick Feerick, 13995 St. Andrew Drive, commended the Council on its progress and work
on the issues. He stated there should only be two questions on the referendum, not four,
one for $10 million and one for$6 million.
Roger Person, 6937 Edendale Boulevard, stated there were about six things in the Power
Point presentation that were supported by the voters on the survey. What would the cost
of just those projects be? Also, what are the associated operating costs for these issues?
Person stated the school board never reveals operating costs with bond issues.
TOWN MEETING REGARDING PROPOSED PARK REFERENDUM
June 22, 2005
Page 4
Lambert responded everything except the $3 million pool is supported by the survey
respondents,but the City does have to address the pool issue. Lambert stated Eden Prairie
has the finest competitive swimming programs in the state, and there needs to be a
resolution of the conflict between competitive and recreation users of the pool.
Everything else supported by the survey respondents is on the proposed referendum. The
survey results indicated voters want a choice, and that is why it has been broken into four
questions. Regarding operations costs, depending on what the City Council decides on
whether to move forward with the referendum, the City will provide brochures to all
homes with all the financial details on the referendum including operating costs.
Deb Hetherington, 7252 Sunshine Drive, addressed several comments to the Council
regarding Edenvale Park. She stated the park needs a new playground, warming house
and improved paved parking lot. The current paved parking provides for only four or
five cars, and the gravel portions are used mostly by school buses. Additionally, a
beehive needs to be taken care of. Hetherington commented the park does not need
major renovation, especially when it calls for baseball field removal. Kids use baseball
fields more than anything else in the park. Hetherington asked what is driving the
replacement of the baseball field with a soccer field. She stated if the ball field is
removed, she will vote against the referendum as will others in the neighborhood.
Lambert replied the reason for the change in fields is two-fold: Eden Prairie is in greater
need of soccer fields than baseball fields; and the linear nature of the park lends itself
easily to having a soccer field, not so much a baseball field. The City is providing a
backstop for neighborhood baseball games. Lambert continued he will bring this issue to
the attention of the Parks Commission.
Council Member Ron Case asked Hetherington if providing a temporary backstop would
be sufficient for those wanting to play baseball at Edenvale. Hetherington responded
neighborhood kids play less soccer than baseball, so it does not make sense to spend
money on major renovation when it is currently meeting the needs of the neighborhood.
Council Member Case again addressed Hetherington, stating the city has to look at the
needs of soccer and lacrosse players. He also asked if the neighborhood needs can be
meet with a backstop, will that satisfy her neighbors. Hetherington replied it does not
make sense to destroy a park if it is already functional the way it is. Mayor Tyra-Lukens
added the City does have to consider the growing sport of lacrosse. Parks and Recreation
will have to consider these issues.
Jeffrey Strate, 15021 Summerhill Drive, addressed the Council regarding Edenvale Park.
He suggested the City re-look at the plan since it is heavily used, especially by low-
income families in the area. The City should cater to them as well as others. Strate
encouraged the City to contact residents in the area to ask their opinion, as the park
should serve the neighborhood before serving the entire city. Strate continued, since part
of Edenvale is wooded, the City should consider winding a trail through the wooded area.
Regarding the plan for Forest Hills Park, Strate stated the plan is pretty good, although
TOWN MEETING REGARDING PROPOSED PARK REFERENDUM
June 22, 2005
Page 5
citizens are reluctant to spend money on something that may not be needed, and $300,000
for a warming house is a high price.
Regarding the Community Center, Strate hopes the City has a subsidy plan in place to
open the rink and pool to lower-income families. He also expressed his appreciation for
the survey performed after the last referendum. However, there will be more voters this
November and the City has to figure out what the motivated voting public is in favor of.
Finally, the park improvements are concentrated in north-central Eden Prairie, and Strate
questioned if this plan can be sold to voters throughout the entire city.
Pam Erickson, 16845 Terrey Pine Drive, addressed the Council regarding Round Lake.
She stated it has been a sick lake for many years and has heard a$750,000 investment
could solve the problem. Is this solution being overlooked in the parks referendum?
Mayor Tyra-Lukens thanked Erickson for bringing up the issue and asked Lambert if
Parks and Recreation has looked at this.
Lambert stated two weeks ago the City Council approved a study to see if the $750,000
treatment is the way to solve the problem and to ascertain if there is a cheaper solution.
There is concern about having to add chemicals to the natural resource forever.
Mayor Tyra-Lukens asked Lambert if it is too preliminary to include Round Lake on the
referendum, prior to the study being completed. Lambert responded affirmatively.
Geoffrey Ferster addressed the Council again, asking if this referendum is actually almost
a stealth school referendum. Perhaps the City should use this as a bargaining chip with
the school. Also, Ferster asked if there was insurance on the burned warming house and
if the showers will be expanded in the Community Center as well as the locker rooms.
Lambert, responding to Ferster's comments on a stealth referendum, stated years ago the
School Board sued the City Council. Fortunately relations between the two governing
bodies have improved and new members have decided to look at what is best for
everyone. Round Lake Park is a great campus for the high school as well as a great park
for the City, and there are many other examples of City-school cooperation. The City
thinks it is good that sharing occurs, and it is a good use of taxpayer-supported facilities.
Regarding the warming house, Lambert indicated it was worth $2,500 which was below
the amount at which insurance kicks in. He also stated the showers at the Community
Center will be expanded.
Jeffrey Strate again addressed the Council, stating the voters on the referendum will want
a say as to what the projects will look like and how specific funds will be spent.
Council Member Case stated when the voters approve a referendum, they should know
they will still have a say in how the money is spent. He also addressed a comment to Deb
Hetherington, encouraging her and her neighbors to vote yes on the referendum, and they
will also be a part of the subsequent planning process.
TOWN MEETING REGARDING PROPOSED PARK REFERENDUM
June 22, 2005
Page 6
City Manager Scott Neal added the questions on the referendum will be very general and
will not list specific parks.
Basil Wissner, 8293 Mitchell Road, addressed the Council regarding senior voter
participation on the referendum. He stated there are seniors who did not vote last May
and will be asking him what is on the upcoming referendum. They will want multiple
questions rather than one and believes seniors will support it if they know the details.
IV. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Tyra-Lukens adjourned the meeting at 8:05 p.m.