Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977 01-26 Lack of citizen knowledge could hurt city referendum THE REVIEW cf-4/7 Q?G, /9'11 • THE REVIEW Wed., Jan. 26, 1977 Page 13A Vote is two weeks away Lack ofitiz n knowledgec e hurt cou1d city referendum by Anne Skinner Community Services,has considered that Both questions will have a substantial outlook and noted that meetings will be impact on Maplewood's future. The In a random telephone poll, results conducted, if the referendum passes, to parks,because the city will have more of indicated that there are more Maplewood determine whether the department's them, and improved facilities to coun- residents who know very little or nothing plans are consistent with neighborhood teract its still-growing population; and about the Feb. 8 referendum than there needs. the public works,because the city will be are who have formulated an opinion about He said the parks are for everyone's better able to serve its still-growing the issues. use,whether by the taxpayer or his or her population.It has the equipment,which is The issues are these: future generations.The bond issue would of superior quality, but it needs storage —Should Maplewood issue a bond to pay be split into approximately 65 percent,or and maintenance facilities, to maintain for a new public works maintenance $536,000 for development and ap- the quality of over a million dollars of building,which would house offices,shops proximately 35 percent, or $315,000 for street and park maintenance equipment. and garages for the city's employees and park acquisition. The vote will be taken Feb. 8, 10 days equipment? Both the public works department and from today. The results will determine —And, should Maplewood issue a bond community development say the cost per the city's near, if not distant future to acquire and develop more and im- household will decrease over the bond direction regarding these two issues proved parks throughout the city, to issue period of 20 years. They cite the which are often taken for granted but also further near its goal of a park within continued growth in population as the often utilized by the citizenry. walking distance of every resident in the cause,noting the financial burden will be community. spread over a greater number of people. The annual cost per household, ac- The maintenance for the park cording to market value (which is the development has been designed to be value one would use on a tax statement— minimal. not the sale value) is: for a home worth The maintenance on the public works $20,000, $3.97; for a home worth $30,000, building will be what a building that size $6.53;for a home worth$40,000; $9.09 and would require. But, the public works for a home worth $50,000, $11.65. The department feels the savings on in-house above figures reflect the cost for the shop work and efficiency in activities as public works facility. well as increased production,particularly The cost per household for the parks in the winter with heated storage acquisition and development bond is: for facilities, will reduce the added expense a home worth $20,000, $3.47; for a home substantially. worth $30,000, $5.71; for a home worth The city has sent brochures out to all $40,000, $7.95 and for a home worth the residents explaining the issues. The $50,000, $10.19. city council supports both referendums, Some of those interviewed felt the parks with the exception of Councilman John in their neighborhood need no further Greavu,who takes no stand on the parks development. Eric Blank, director of issue.