041492 PK MINCITY OF SHOREWOOD
PARK COMMISSION MEETING
TUESDAY, APRIL 14, 1992
M I N U T E S
CALL TO ORDER
SHOREWOOD CITY HALL
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
7:00 PM
Chairman Wilson called the meeting to order at 7:16 p.m.
i_Lla�2&1`0a
Present: Chairman Wilson, Commissioners Lindstrom, Laberee, Dzurak,
Mast, McCarty and Andrus; Administrator Hurm and Park Planner
Mark Koegler were also present.
Absent: Council Liaison Lewis
REVIEW AGENDA
Chairman Wilson reviewed the current Agenda for April 14, 1992.
Administrator Hurm had just concluded a meeting with the Tonka Mens'
Club and the Little League, and he asked to address the Park Commission
at this point in the agenda.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Commission did not review the minutes of the April 6, 1992 meeting.
PARK AND TRAIL IMPROVEMENT REFERENDUM
Chairman Wilson introduced Bob Lambert, Eden Prairie Director of Parks,
Recreation and Natural Resources. Lambert discussed Eden Prairie's
recent successful park referendum, as well as a potential Shorewood
referendum. A summary of his comments are attached to and made a part
of these minutes. It was the consensus of the Commission that a draft
plan should be prepared and proposed. Commissioner Dzurak will work
with Administrator Hurm to prepare a first draft.
MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
Shorewood Oaks /Freeman Park Entrances
Commissioner Lindstrom discussed the two entrances to Freeman Park,
both of which access the trails. Referencing the entrance by Shorewood
Oaks between the Little League field and the Babe Ruth field, Lindstrom
suggested the City add limestone to improve the access. The north
entrance by the Hiking and Biking Trail actually accesses the Park
through private property, currently owned by a Mr. Ritz. Lindstrom
suggested that a 30 -40 foot trail be blazed to allow for access to the
Park from the north side.
SHOREWOOD PARK COMMISSION MINUTES
TUESDAY, APRIL 14, 1992 - Page two
Commissioner McCarty mentioned that area residents had suggested using
wood chips in that area.
Administrator Hurm suggested that Don Zdrazil may feel that wood chips
could clog up the path, and he agreed with Lindstrom that aggregate
lime gravel would probably be preferable. Hurm suggested that Zdrazil
look at the site and correct the problem if it could be done for a
reasonable amount.
Silverwood Park - Wood duck house
Dzurak mentioned a wood duck house in Silverwood Park, and asked for
the Commission's opinion on whether an issue of encroachment may exist.
Laberee felt that a small issue such as a wood duck house on park
property should be ignored.
Comprehensive Plan
Dzurak, Planning Commission Liaison, stated that the Planning
Commission had forwarded the section on Parks and Community Facilities
to the Park Commission for discussion related to inclusion in the
revised version of the Comprehensive Plan.
REPORTS
Andrus relayed the information that the City Council had tabled further
discussion of the Silverwood Park improvements until its next meeting,
because they felt it was important to resolve the road issue prior to
discussion of the Park item.
Administrator Hurm elaborated that issues involving the right -of -way
and the possibility of filling a portion of the wetlands and the
required mitigation encouraged the Council to defer their decisions
regarding Silverwood Park until after the issues dealing with MSA road
design had been resolved.
Mast asked for clarification regarding when the Commission was planning
to tour the Parks.
Administrator Hurm suggested that two Parks could be toured in one of
the May meetings, with a tour of another park in the following May
meeting. The Commission members were in agreement.
AD JOURNME N T
Laberee moved, Lindstrom seconded, to adjourn at 8:57 PM. Motion passed
unanimously.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
James C. Hurm
City Administrator
MEMORANDUM
TO: James C. Hurm, City dministrator for Shorewood, ood, Minnesota
FROM: Robert A. Lambert, Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources
DATE: April 14, 1992
SUBJECT: Discussion of Eden Prairie Park Bond Referendum Process
On Tuesday, April 14, 1992, I will be meeting with your Parks Commission to discuss our
recently successful park bond referendum. Upon review of your March 25th letter outlining
your areas of interest, I thought it might be helpful to provide you with a written outline of the
information that I will review on the 14th.
REFERENDUM PROCESS:
During the summer of 1991, the City of Eden Prairie was receiving a number of requests for
additional park facilities. It became apparent that the City would not be able to meet these
demands without a referendum, and the City Council directed staff to provide a report to the
City Council specifically indicating what facilities will be required in 1995 and the year 2000.
• City staff surveyed the Athletic Associations, and using their existing number of participants and
a vision 2001 school survey, the City prepared a report that indicated there would be over 600
children on waiting lists in 1995 and nearly 1000 on waiting lists in the year 2000, unless a
specific number of City facilities were developed as soon as possible.
The City Council also indicated that they did not want staff looking at just park capital
improvement projects, but requested staff to look at the "big picture" and provide a report that
would show how the City intended to fund all of the needs projected between now and the year
2000. These needs included an expansion of the Police Department, a new City Hall, a new
Fire Hall, a Public Works & Park Maintenance Garage, and a variety of park and recreation
needs.
City staff provided a report with the assistance of our bond counsel depicting how each of these
items could be funded from now until the year 2000, with a goal of trying to accomplish as
much as we could within the same tax rate that we were now using to pay for capital bonding
projects. Using projected growth of the community, and considering bonds that were coming
off payment schedules, the bond counsel recommended the use of tax increment financing, lease
revenue bonds, GO bonds and revenue bonds to develop a program projection that indicated to
the City Council how all of the projects could be funded using the same tax rate that now
existed. This plan limited park and recreation projects to 4.5 million dollars in 1992, 2.8
million dollars in 1996 and 4 million dollars in 1998. The City Council adopted that capital
improvement plan as a guideline to planning for funding those projects in the future. Having
S this budget projection was critical in getting a referendum committee to agree to a limited
budget.
r
The City then invited all interested citizens to a meeting to discuss priorities for park
improvement projects for the next ten year period, and to request a prioritization of the projects S
that should be included in a referendum that would occur in 1992. This meeting occurred in
November of 1991.
At that meeting, the citizens listed projects that totalled over 22 million dollars, and while it took
two meetings to pair down the priority listing to 4.5 million dollars for the first referendum, the
committee eventually unanimously agreed upon the items to be proposed to the City Council.
The City Council reviewed the items as recommended by the committee and the Parks,
Recreation and Natural Resources Commission and then hired Bill Morris, of Decisions
Resources, to do a quick random sample City wide survey to determine if the majority of the
residents in Eden Prairie would support these projects in a referendum. The survey indicated
that although approximately 60 % of the citizens approved the items proposed in the referendum,
Decision Resources believed that the referendum would be extremely close and would only pass
with a well organized effort.
City staff then invited all interested citizens to join a referendum committee for the purpose of
planning a park referendum and informing citizens of the needs and what was to be on the
referendum. At the first meeting of the Referendum Committee six individivals were appointed
to chair the following subcommittees:
1. Speaker's Committee •
2. Athletic Association Involvement Committee
3. Neighborhood Information Committee
4. Public Information Committee
5. Finance Committee
6. Yes Vote Committee
The Speaker's Committee is a group of volunteers that are willing to go out and speak to all of
the various interested public service groups, neighborhoods, etc. that wish to hear about the park
referendum. It is up to the Speaker's Committee chair to set up these meetings and contact clubs
and organize these speaking engagements. It is important to have elected officials on this
committee as speakers.
The Athletic Association Involvement Committee was important because many of the projects
on the proposed referendum included facilities that would meet the needs of the various athletic
associations, especially soccer, softball, baseball and football. This committee made sure that
these associations were well aware of what was being proposed and that those associations used
their own communication network to support the referendum, inform people and help raise
money for the effort.
The Neighborhood Information Committee was responsible for obtaining volunteers that would
go out and knock on doors in various neighborhoods, hand out pamphlets, etc. 0
The Public Information Committee was responsible for developing the flyer that would support
the referendum, and obtain names for a newspaper ad. These names were also obtained by the
Speaker's Committee members. Names were gathered at each public speaking event of people
that supported the referendum.
The Finance Committee was simply responsible for getting funding to help pay for the flyers,
newspaper ads, "vote yes" buttons, etc. The Finance Committee raised approximately $4,300
and still had $1,500 remaining when the referendum was completed. This is seed money for
the next referendum committee.
The Vote Yes Committee is critical in that this committee is responsible for finding out who the
yes voters are. This committee used a calling list from a list of names purchased from the
School District listing all households that had school age children. Two weeks prior to the
referendum the committee members called over 8000 households with school age children to find
out who supported the referendum. On the night before the referendum, this committee again
called over 4500 households that they knew were referendum supporters and reminded them to
vote the following day. The committee needed approximately 65 -70 callers to accomplish this
task.
The calling for the 8000 households was done at people's own homes. Each person had a list
of approximately 75 names to call. It took each caller approximately 2 -2 hours to make those
calls. The night before the referendum the committee had two calling locations where there
• were 15 -20 phone lines at each location, and called all of the 4500 households in approximately
two hours.
The referendum passed with a vote of 70% in favor (2880 in favor, 1201 opposed).
FUND RAISING:
The majority of the funds came from athletic associations, also from a few individuals and a few
businesses. No formal campaign was generated for fund raising, it was just a matter of
individuals on the committee asking chairman of the various athletic associations to donate $500
toward the referendum, if their association could afford it.
COST OF THE EFFORT:
The City Council funded approximately $3,500 to pay for public information the Council felt
was necessary to inform voters what was on the referendum, how much it would cost them,
where they would vote, etc. The City staff used this money to develop a brochure that was sent
to every home in the City describing facts of what was on the referendum and why the City
Council was asking them to consider this issue at this time. The City also developed a VCR
tape showing what was on the referendum so that various neighborhood groups, public service
organizations, etc. could see what was on the referendum, where the parks were, and what kind
• of facilities were being proposed to be built, etc.
The committee itself spent money on one brochure that urged people to vote yes. This brochure
was sent out as a flyer within the local newspaper. The committee also spent money on a "vote •
yes" button and on a full page newspaper ad in the Eden Prairie news, and a half page
newspaper ad in the Sailor Newspaper.,
The City also provided information and a reminder to citizens on the referendum in the City
Newsletter that goes out to all citizens, as well as in the Park and Recreation Brochure that is
sent to all homes.
I will answer any other questions commission or staff may have at your April 14th meeting.
BL: mdd
hurm/bob