Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-06-19 Parks PacketRecap of Parks Meeting with City Council Minutes of June 19, 2006 iThe commission discussed the four questions with the City Council. The commission heard that at this time the City Council is open to all possible options when trying to address problems. Not only the ideas listed but any other ideas that arise. The City Council requests that as we do several things when addressing funding issues. We should always include a comparison to some other comparable communities, like ours, and how they are addressing similar situations. We should list our recommendations with how much is needed, what is needed now, what are the options along with our recommendations of what should be tried first. 118 The commission discussed the on going capital needs of the Community Center. We should have been more active over the years on advocating some kind of fund being set aside each year to address capital items as they wore out. It seems now is the time to start addressing this. To address long-term parks needs we acknowledge that our funding source was originally set up for park acquisition and development. Since that time we now must address the missions that parks have evolved into; community centers, trails, open space and park redevelopment. We need to review our parks comprehensive plan modifying it for projects that are finished, what is left to be done, new things that need to be added and what current priorities should be. The commission should reevaluate this plan every three to five years. As part of the process we need to acknowledge what we have finished and what we have not. This process should list what needs to be done to keep us just at redeveloping parks, add what is needed for community centers, the amount for trails and then the amount for open spaces. Then we need to recommend funding levels and options. Commissioner Frank approved the above minutes, but wants the minutes to reflect that he did not feel there was a discussion with the Maplewood city council and desires that a future meeting be established if possible. The commission indicated as a whole their desire to have a better understanding of council direction and their perspective and vision as it relates to the Maplewood Parks and Recreation Department, parks, open space and trails. 2 MAPLEWOOD PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION . JOINT MEETING WITH THE CITY COUNCIL MONDAY, JUNE 19, 2006 MAPLEWOOD CITY HALL MINUTES The meeting was divided into two parts with the first three hours dedicated to a tour of city parks and future development sites. Following the tour, the commission and city council met in the Maplewood Room to discuss the four questions that were provided to the council prior to the meeting. Attached is a copy of Chairperson Fischer's recap of the meeting with the city council from 9-10 p.m. The official minutes include a copy of the tour itinerary and the questions provided to the city council. The meeting, although not formally called to order, was concluded by Chairperson Fischer at 9:48 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Bruce K. Anderson Director of Parks and Recreation kph/0619.06. min.comm Attachments 40 MAPLEWOOD PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION • 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 651-249-2102 MONDAY, JUNE 19, 2006 6:00 P.M. DEPARTURE ITINERARY 6:00 p.m. 1. Depart City 6:08 p.m. 2. Arrive at Sterling Oaks Park and briefly depart to view new boardwalk and neighborhood trail connection. 6:35 p.m. 3. Board bus and head south to Copar development. Discussion points: a. Park dedication/cash approx. 6-700K b. Possible national park, i.e., Ron Cockriel c. Proposed development role and relationship to park dedication requirements • 6:45 p.m. 4. Head north and stop at Maplewood Nature Center for dinner. a. Discuss status of open space program 7:30 p.m. 5. Depart nature center and pass Lions Park. Discussion points: a. Possible sale of land b. Drainage issues c. Cost for redevelopment 8:00 p.m. 6. Arrive at Joy Park for drive-by and brief stop while staying on bus. Discussion points: a. Past police issues b. Future development c. Regional significance of Joy Park d. Water quality issues regarding Silver Lake 8:20 p.m. 7. Arrive at Legacy Village Sculpture Park. Get off bus and take brief tour. Discussion points: a. Vision of Legacy Village Sculpture Park b. Use of public funds for acquisition of sculptures c. Relationship with Franconia Sculpture Park d. Landscaping e. Discussion of streetscapes relating to city quality of life f. Maplewood library 9:00 P.M. 8. Return to city hall for discussion of study questions 10:00 P.M. 9. Adjournment MAPLEWOOD PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 651-249-2102 COUNCIL/COMMISSIONS QUESTIONNAIRE 1. Funding for park redevelopment and acquisition is a challenge. The city's park system has been funded almost entirely through the use of P.A.C. monies for the past 50 years. Given the city is becoming more fully developed, the opportunity for P.A.C. fees has become less and less. Which of the following funding sources would you favor for future park projects: Parks and Recreation referendum General tax levy Permanent sales tax for Maplewood residents with a portion dedicated to parks, open space and trails Increase of current P.A.C. fees Other 2. Recreation program fees have increased over 40% in the last three years. City staff hears on a regular basis from residents not able to participate in recreation programs because of the high costs given other important life essentials. Do you believe that recreation fees need to be increased in the future as a budget balancing concept? Yes No What alternatives might you consider: Establishment of a tax levy allocation for a city recreation scholarship fund based on the school hot lunch program qualifications Freezing or a reduction of program fees in the future Have staff identify a core number of recreation programs (possibly two per season?) that would be kept at a minimal cost so residents could participate Reduced fees for multiple registrations in a family 3. A permanent funding source for open space development was never established following the successful 1993 open space referendum. All current maintenance and capital improvements for open space are provided through the city P.A.C. fund. Which of the following would you support for funding of future open space programs? City tax levy Open space referendum Dedication of existing franchise fees such as cable t.v. and cell phone antenna fees, a portion of the electric franchise fee or others that might be legally acceptable Other 4. Selling, land swaps and/or modification of city park and open space boundaries have been a contentious issue. The Parks and Recreation Commission supports the concept of no net loss of city parklands and open space. Do you support this concept and what are your thoughts about selling, swapping and/or trading "excess" city parklands? Other things you always wanted to know about Maplewood Parks and Recreation, but were afraid to ask: 0 Thanks—Maplewood Parks and Recreation Commission