Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 03/07/2005 - Workshop APPROVED MINUTES JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 7, 2005 7:00 P.M., CITY CENTER Heritage Rooms 1 & 2 8080 Mitchell Road COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Councilmembers Brad Aho, Sherry Butcher, Ron Case, and Philip Young COMMISSION MEMBERS: Rob Barrett, Chair; Jeffrey Gerst, Vice Chair; Tom Bierman, John Brill, Tom Crain, Randy Jacobus, Ian Mackay, Michael Moriarity CITY STAFF: Scott Neal, City Manager Bob Lambert, Director of Parks & Recreation Laurie Obiazor, Manager of Recreation Stu Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources STUDENT REPRESENTATIVES: Cole Johnson, Apoorva Shah, Roby Shrestha RECORDING SECRETARY: Lorene McWaters I. ROLL CALL Mayor Tyra-Lukens called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. Councilmember Case, and Parks and Recreation Commission Student Reps Apoorva Shah and Roby Shrestha were absent. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA III. DISCUSSION ON PURPOSE OF THE MEETING This meeting was called to allow the City Council and Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission to provide input on the possibility of holding another referendum. City Manager Scott Neal said they are not being asked to make final decisions on whether or not to hold a referendum. Joint Meeting—City Council and Parks,Recreation &Natural Resources Commission March 7, 2005—page 2 IV. REVIEW OF 2004 REFERENDUM Parks and Recreation Director Bob Lambert reviewed the results of the May 2004 referendum. The referendum consisted of a single question which, if passed, would have resulted in issuance of$22,500,000 in general bonds to fund "acquisition, development, and improvement of land and facilities" for public recreation. The referendum was not approved. A total of 5,435 (16 percent of registered voters) votes were cast, with 43 percent voting "Yes" and 57 percent voting "No." Lambert noted that pre-referendum survey results indicated that 55 percent of respondents would not support increasing taxes for parks and recreation improvements; however, the same survey results showed that more than half of respondents wanted some improvements and expected the City to provide them. V. REVIEW OF 2004 SURVEY OF REFERENDUM VOTERS A City survey conducted after the May 2004 referendum provided the following information: Sixty-nine percent of respondents (all of whom voted in the referendum) thought the City should attempt another referendum within the next two years. This included 46% of those who voted "No" on the referendum. A referendum without a large outdoor water park would have a chance of passing if it is held in November 2005, provided that the School District does not hold a referendum at the same time. Residents prefer separate questions for issues. The primary reasons the May 2004 referendum was defeated were the bundling of projects into one question and the perceived high cost of the total levy. VI. FUTURE REFERENDUM DECISIONS Lambert believes that parks and recreation improvements funded by revenue bonds and which can be expanded through a phased approach will be supported by taxpayers. He gave the example of constructing a revenue-generating wading pool. Profits from this project would be put into a special fund for additional improvements. This way, users are paying for what they get. Lambert suggested having a separate workshop to discuss pool issues. He said while Eden Prairie has top notch competitive swimmers, the community does not have a top notch pool. He noted that competitive and recreational pools are two completely different things. For instance, if the existing pool were to be deepened, it would become less useable for beginning swimmers and for providing swimming lessons for young children. Lambert said a referendum could be structured to ask voters whether or not they support Community Center improvements, and if so, a second question could determine if they support a pool as well. Joint Meeting—City Council and Parks,Recreation &Natural Resources Commission March 7, 2005—page 3 Lambert asked what information Council needs to make a decision on whether or not to hold a referendum and how soon they need the information. Lambert noted that a final decision on holding a referendum must be made by early August at the latest for a November referendum. Mayor Tyra-Lukens asked if the City is restricted on how much it can have out on revenue bonds. Lambert said to issues bonds, a bond counsel would have to be called in to assess projected costs and revenues. Parks and Rec Commissioner Rob Barrett asked where hockey fits into this discussion. Lambert said a consultant has been chosen to conduct an outdoor winter hockey rink study. The City will receive the study results this summer. The Hockey Association has about $250,000 in the bank and another$250,000 in promises —which could pay for ice and a refrigeration system. The next step would be to determine how much revenue could be generated by an outdoor attached rink, and whether or not enough funds could be generated to pay for the construction and operation of this facility without added taxes. Councilmember Aho said it would be helpful to have an understanding of all of the projects on the table and to know the priorities. He said it is difficult to evaluate things fairly when projects are coming in on an ad hoc basis. Tyra-Lukens said she would like to see a grid listing projects with priorities, costs, and funding sources. Lambert said he can provide such a list in six to eight weeks. Aho said he would like to see figures on ongoing maintenance costs for any proposed facilities. Lambert said staff will provide both estimated operating costs and revenue projections. Aho requested an accounting of existing funds, and said he would like to explore association partnerships and corporate sponsorships. Parks and Recreation Commissioner Michael Moriarty agreed that the City should take a look at using park dedication fees now instead of saving them for later use. Aho also asked for projections on future park dedication fees to help determine how much to use for projects now. Lambert said this information is in the Capital Improvement Plan. He also noted that park dedication fees are expected to drop off now that development is leveling out. Moriarty suggested building facilities and having users help pay for them by charging maintenance and user fees. Aho agreed that some sort of user fees might be palatable. Lambert said user fees are being phased in, but noted this is sometimes difficult for people to swallow when they are used to getting these services "for free." Parks and Recreation Commissioner Ian Mckay said stakeholders should be incorporated into the process of deciding on a referendum. He believes some stakeholders were not given enough consideration last time around, with the exception of a few "squeaky wheels." Lambert pointed out that many stakeholders are not members of organized groups, so it is difficult to obtain their input. Neal said the first Council Workshop in May will include a presentation by staff on the Joint Meeting—City Council and Parks,Recreation &Natural Resources Commission March 7, 2005—page 4 City's financial position. Councilmember Young noted that the regular April Workshop schedule is already full,but requested an additional Workhsop be scheduled to go over budget issues. Neal said he will check schedules to see if another meeting can be arranged. Tyra-Lukens said a final decision in August on a November referendum seems like a short timeline. Lambert agreed that it is ideal to have five or six months to get groups geared up for a referendum; however, the education campaign itself should not start earlier than six weeks before the vote, after all of the information on the referendum is provided to the public. Mackay suggested coming back in June after meeting with stakeholders and asking for tentative support from Council with a final decision in early August. Parks and Recreation Commissioner Bierman said all of the Councilmembers and Parks and Recreation Commission members have voted for a referendum in one form or another in the last year, and the post-referendum survey shows support for a reformulated referendum. He believes voters would appreciate the chance to vote on the questions once they are broken down. VII. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:05 p.m. INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 272 - EDEN PRAIRIE SCHOOLS OFFICIAL MINUTES OF THE MARCH 7, 2005 SCHOOL BOARD MEETING I. JOINT MEETING OF SCHOOL BOARD AND CITY COUNCIL The school board and superintendent hosted a joint meeting with the Eden Prairie City Council and several members of the City of Eden Prairie Staff Monday, March 7, 2005, starting at 5:30 p.m. in Conference Room 283, Administrative Services Center. The following were topics of discussion between the two bodies of local government. A. Lelzislative Updates School Board members discussed how they are watching the legislature closely to see if there will be any additional funding for education. Board members are involved in a grass-roots effort, "Citizens for Eden Prairie Schools," (CEPS) that advocates for more education funding. Board Chair Scholtz shared the group's website, www.citizensforepschool.org. She also referenced the recent rally at the Capitol where thousands of citizens, staff and students joined together to encourage legislators to keep education at the forefront of their agenda. City Council members also are monitoring legislative bills on local levy limits, on the market value homestead credit, transportation funding bills, and a bill that would remove non-curricular programs from the schools. The intent of this bill is to have the city run those programs with tax dollars. B. LCTS Fundinlz Update Local Collaborative Time Study (LCTS) funds are given from the federal government to Hennepin County to help run programs through the city and school that help at-risk children. These funds could suffer a substantial decline which would decrease the quality of services provided to students. City and school officials are working together to determine what to do about this possibility. C. Cable Television Although the school district shares a cable channel (14) with several other districts, city officials announced that they operate their own cable channel (16). Starting with Eagle Vision newscasts from Eden Prairie High School, school and city officials are working together to make use of more school-generated content on the city channel. D. City's Potential Referendum Based on feedback generated through a survey after last spring's unsuccessful city referendum, officials have learned the following: • Voters want an aquatics center but are not willing to pay for it; • Voters would prefer to have the referendum held in November rather than May; • Voters prefer to have a city referendum run at a time when the schools are not; • Voters would prefer separate questions when they are asked to vote on city projects. The city staff plans to reprioritize at the front end of their budgeting process as they explore the possibility of another city referendum. E. City/School Boundaries School and city officials discussed the history of city/school district boundaries. Currently, there are Eden Prairie residents in the Minnetonka and Hopkins school districts. Because it would likely take legislative action, city officials agreed to research the issue and work toward having mutual boundaries for both the city and the school district. The next meeting of the two bodies of government is scheduled for Tuesday, September 22, 2005, at City Center. It was noted that the school district and the city have a unique working partnership. In addition to the two joint meetings of the school board and city council, there are quarterly meetings of the superintendent and her district council with the city manager and his administrative staff. The regular meeting of Independent School District 272 School Board began at 7:00 p.m. on the 71h day of March, 2005 in the Administrative Services Center boardroom at 8100 School Road, Eden Prairie, Minnesota.