Loading...
05-21-1997 PR MIN - SPECIAL . . . SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ELK RIVER PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION HELD AT THE ELK RIVER CITY HALL WEDNESDAY, MAY 21, 1997 Members Present: Chair Dana Anderson; Commissioners Kuester, Dave Anderson, Huberty, Rolfe Anderson (7:20 p.m.) Members Absent: Commissioners Olson, Madsen, and Westrum Also Present: Council member Thompson Staff Present: Phil Hals, Street/Park Superintendent and Pat Klaers, City Administrator 1 . Call Meetina to Order Pursuant to due call and notice thereof. the special meeting of the Elk River Park and Recreation Commission was called to order at 7: 1 0 p.m. by Chair Dana Anderson. 2. Decision Resources Presentation on Community Survey Bill Morris of Decision Resources reviewed the results of the Community Survey that was conducted in late April/early May. The study contains the results of a telephone survey of 400 randomly selected residents. In an overview statement, Mr. Morris indicated that it was a big surprise to see the support for a community center in Elk River. This support is counter to the metropolitan trend which is moving away from supporting community centers. Mr. Morris also indicated that there is strong support for outside recreation issues and that a bond referendum could be successful on this topic. In comparing the two issues. the support was higher for a community center, but there are some concerns that need to be looked at with this community center proposal. Mr. Morris indicated that he would comment on some general statistics, but would concentrate on the park and recreation and community center questions and leave the balance of the survey results to be presented later in a more comprehensive manner to the City Council. It was noted that what the residents liked best about Elk River is its location and "small town" feeling, and what the residents liked least about Elk River is its growth (Le., traffic and crime). The high number of "nothing" responsesto this like least question is unusual and it was noted that taxes are a low priority issue. The overall rating of the Park and Recreation facilities in Elk River dropped 14 percent from the 1989 survey and the total who found the facilities to be either good or excellent (66 percent) is very low in comparison to metropolitan area communities. The city received especially low rankings from new residents. Special Meeting/Park & Recreation Commission Mav 21. 1997 Page 2 Regarding usage of city facilities, a drop in the usage of Orono Park was noted. The Commission felt that this was due to the deteriorating water quality. . In response to what facilities were missing in Elk River, the highest response was bike paths, followed by a pool. The response for these two issues were of a significant level. Facilities of a lower concern were a community center and playground equipment. Regarding playground equipment it was noted that it is not more equipment that is wanted, but better equipment. Bike paths were strongly supported and it was noted that even if a property tax were required for bike paths, they were still supported in significant numbers. Mr. Morris stated that a tax increase would be supported by the public for the following facilities: permanent restrooms and shelters; neighborhood parks and equipment (swingsets, hardsurfaced courts, and playground equipment); an outdoor pool that could be used by the entire family; and the downtown riverwalk. Combining the neighborhood parks with a trail system generated a high level of support from citizens. Mr. Morris indicated his surprise at the Elk River response against an interpretive center as this was the first community he has experienced that did not support expenditure of funds for this type of facility. Mr. Morris also noted that the public would not support a bond referendum that contained anything having to do with ice skating, a skateboard park, or a mountain bike trail system. The support for an outdoor recreation bond referendum in Elk River is very good news compared to what is happening in other communities. The fact that approximately two thirds of the citizens were undecided whether or not they would vote for or against a bond issue was viewed as a good statistic due to the fact that these individuals can be "sold" on voting for an appropriately structured bond referendum. Mr. Morris noted that the public will only support spending about $20 to $25 per year for a bond referendum and that the expenditure of funds needs to be justified to the two thirds that are undecided. In response to the question on how much of a tax increase people would pay for park and recreation facilities, the 20 percent "nothing" answer was very small in comparison to metropolitan communities and was also seen as a positive for a possible bond referendum. . It was the consensus that a mid September date for a publiC bond referendum was a good time, especially when considering the school referendum in November. The statistics support the fact that a referendum can be sold to the public if it is the right type of issue and does not include any of the big negative concerns identified in the survey. Additionally the city has to be very careful with the amount of money being requested and has to clearly identify how the funds will be spent. The referendum can be sold based on the fact that the facilities will help kids and that it is a community pride issue to improve the facilities. Discussion took place on the outdoor pool issue. The Commission agreed that this issue should be a separate (second) question and the bond should be structured so that the pool could only be approved if the first park and recreation issue was also approved. . . . . Special Meeting/Park & Recreation Commission Mav 21. 1997 Page 3 Mr. Morris noted with surprise, the strong support for a community center. He noted that the public will support almost any facility in a community center with the exception of the strong opposition to a community theater. Facilities of the highest support level from the public include a teen center, a gymnasium, large community rooms for banquets, parties, meetings, and other rental purposes, an aerobic exercise and fitness room, an indoor pool, a senior center, and an arts and crafts room for instructional classes. The support for an indoor pool jumped significantly since the 1989 survey as did the support for a teen center. Mr. Morris indicated that the people liked a "grab bag" list of facilities, but would not support a theater. The big increase in support for a gymnasium was also noted as compared to the 1989 survey. Discussion took place regarding why the citizens in Elk River would be supporting a community center and a lot of the discussion centered on the Becker facility and how well received it has been by the public. Discussion took place on whether or not the public would support a community center with user fees and it was noted that this question was not part of the survey. Mr. Morris spoke to the wide gap between what people want in a community center and what they are willing to pay for. The citizens were willing to pay only $20 per year in increased taxes for a facility and this would generate slightly more than $2 million based on today's tax rates. The type of facility that could be constructed for $2 million is uncertain, but clearly could not contain everything desired by the public. An education campaign and very clear plans of a facility need to be in place before any referendum would be approved by the public. A community center issue appears to be as valid today as it would be in a number of years after an educational campaign took place. The Commission thanked Mr. Morris for the presentation and indicated that they are looking forward to the formal presentation before the City Council some time in June. 3. Adiournment There being no further business, the meeting of the Park and Recreation Commission was adjourned by consensus. ~ctfUIlY submitted. . ;,! -aWCuA..S L J <- PatriCK D. Klaers F..... City Administrator