Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/01/1996 Park Board Packet CITY OF LINO LAKES PARR BOARD MEETING MONDAY, APRIL 1, 1996 6 : 30PM ***AGENDA*** 1 . Call to Order and Roll Call 6 : 30pm 2 . ✓Approval of Minutes from March 4, 1996 6 : 35pm 3 . Open Mike 6 :40pm 4 . Updates and Old Business A. Survey Update 6 :45pm B. Projects Update 7 : 00pm �C. Recreation Update 7 : 15pm D. Friends of the Park Update 7 : 30pm 5 . Other Updates and Old Business 7 :45pm 6 . New Business 8 : 00pm 7 . Schedule Next Park Board Meeting 8 :25pm 8 . Adjourn 8 : 3 0pm All times are approximate. Please call Sandie at 780-1885, Ext . 176, if you cannot attend this meeting. LA City o-f Lino Lakes Park Board Meeting s-� March 4, 1996 The March 4, 1996, City of Lino Lakes Park Board meeting was called to order at 6 :35pm by George Lindy, Chair. Roll call was taken, members present were George Lindy, Betty Piper, Amy Donlin and Joe Schmidt . Also present were Marty Asleson, Park, Recreation, and Forestry Coordinator, Barry Bernstein, Recreation Program Supervisor, and Sandie Wood, Recording Secretary. Not present were Pam Taschuk, Sharon Lane, and Ken Johnson. APPROVAL OF FEBRUARY 5, 1996 MINUTES: Betty Piper made a motion to approve the minutes as written. Amy Donlin seconded the motion and the minutes were approved. OPEN MIKE• There was no one present for open mike . UPDATES AND OLD BUSINESS: Survey Update: Marty told the board that money had been budgeted this year to do a resident survey. He said he agreed that between the Park Board Goals, the Comprehensive Plan and the 20/20 vision goals the city residents have spoken concerning the needs . The survey should address the priorities of these goals and the willingness to fund these priorities . We should also take this opportunity to address the quality issues . He attached a memo written to Dan Tesch concerning the people who have been involved in the setting of future city goals . These people are from the Park and Recreation Board, the 20/20 Vision Committee, the Comprehensive Parks Planning Committee, the Recreation Focus Committee, the ADA Committee, and a few who have stepped forward with special interests . He also included liaison to the City Council, Chris Lyden and Mayor, John Landers . Since this has turned into a multi-departmental effort, he suggested to sequester the groups for a "brain-storm" meeting with Decision Resources separately. Marty said the options were to accept the list of participators and process for the survey or make changes and refer back to staff . Marty' s recommendation was to accept the first option. 1 City of Lino Lakes Park Board Meeting March 4, 1996 Park Board members had several questions and comments on the survey. They wanted to make sure that we moved forward with the survey and did not keep hashing it over. There was also concerns about doing the survey with other city departments rather than doing one only for the Park and Recreation Department . It was asked how the questions would be generated and by whom. They also wanted to make sure the right questions and concerns were addressed in the survey. George asked each member to write down their questions and concerns and fax, mail, or drop them off at the Park Building. George asked Marty or Sandie to contact each member when a time frame has been established. Trail Committee Update: Marty said a goal of the Park Board for 1996 was to establish a trails committee to help steer the city in trail initiatives . He included a memo that he wrote to Dan Tesch recommending members for this committee in the members packets . He ask the members that if this looks all right, it should be accepted by the board and forwarded to the City Council for approval . The options were to accept the list of trail committee members or refer back to staff for further consideration. Marty recommended the first option. George asked Marty if he had talked to Brian Bourassa. Marty' s response was he called him but he was out of town. However, Brian had shown interest and said he would like to be on the committee. MOTION: Joe Schmidt made a motion to accept the trail committee members list that Marty put together. Betty Piper seconded the motion. Motion was approved. George asked Marty to attend the meetings . Projects Update• Rice Lake Estates - Marty told the board that Jeff Schoenbauer is going to take a year sabbatical to do some projects with the National Recreation and Parks Association, as well as travel with his wife. Jeff has indicated that if there are any projects that the city planned for 1996, he would like to work on them for us 2 City of Lino Lakes Park Board Meeting March .4, 1996 and will place a high priority on the projects . Marty said Jeff' s partner George Watson will be available in Jeff' s absence . Marty said one project he would like Jeff to work on is the Joint Park in Rice Lake Estates with the City of Circle Pines . Michael Krech is presently working on the base-mapping for this plan. Jim Keinath, Circle Pines city Administrator has indicated that we still do not have language from their attorney. The question Marty pose is does the park board want to proceed with the park plan hope that this stimulates a quicker response to an agreement . Marty said he is starting to feel this is the missing link to further progress . Marty stated he would like to proceed with this approach, or have the park board address the concerns of this neighborhood. He believe that there will be very angry residents if nothing is accomplished this year. He went on to say that since Jeff Schoenbauer has been involved with both cities, in the comprehensive plan process, he would like Jeff to master-plan this park. Jeff knows the issues and personalities on both sides . The options are to proceed with master planning, notify neighborhood of time frame, or refer back to staff for other course of action. Marty would prefer option 1, however, it is a risk. Joe asked if the people that have been calling him are upset and are they aware of what has been going on. Marty said yes . George asked if he wanted to get the neighborhood involved in the process . Marty again responded yes . Marty said he would like a sketch plan done and then go back with a final plan to get residents input and approval of the plan. MOTION: Joe Schmidt made a motion to proceed with the master planning process, not to exceed $2 , 500, for Rice Lake Estates . Betty Piper seconded the motion and it was approved. Forestry Department - Marty said the Forestry Department is going to do contract planting this year. This will release staff to do 3 City of Lino Lakes Park Board Meeting March 4, 1996 other things in the spring. He said staff is currently doing some tree trimming. Country Lakes Park - Marty explained that there is approximately $2, 000 left in the budget to finish Country Lakes Park. Staff will be seeding this spring. They will also move some trails . He has asked Kate Drewry to come to the park and look at the wetland areas . Recreation Update: Barry told the members the warminghouses are closed. He said it was about a 55 day season which is about 15 days shorter than the last two years . He hopes to have a report completed for the board next month. The weather was a factor in these numbers . He received good comments on Lino and City Hall Park. The spring brochure has been sent to the residents and the members should be receiving theirs soon if they have not already gotten one. The next brochure will be going out in June. Marty said they will have to budget more money for the brochure next year because they are running out of room to publish programs and other issues that should be included in the brochure. Barry went on to say that softball is about 2/3 full . He hopes to have the program completely full by the second or third week of March. Softball starts the first week of May. Soccer is also filling up. He hopes to have 16 teams this year. Barry asked members to call him, at the office, if they had any questions or suggestions . Marty added the Earthday celebration is scheduled for April 20 at the Wargo Nature Center. Kim Sullivan and Jackie Constant are co-chairs this year. One Arbor Day Celebration is at Lino Elementary School on May 31 . ADA Update: Marty said the minutes from the last ADA meeting are included in the members packets . The next meeting will be in Blaine He will continue to bring information to the park board. He said some of people, at the meeting, wanted this issue defined more so they can take it to their government agencies to inform 4 City of Lino Lakes Park Board Meeting r..� March 4, 1996 them what the exact cost for this program will be. Janet Bona is working on narrowing down what the cost will be. He has been talking to some of the North Metro people about the possibility of doing joint programming with the Lino Lakes Park and Recreation Department . They will be discussing this at their next meeting. Marty 'said he and Barry attended a Centerville Park Board meeting and they may also be interested in contracting with Lino Lakes to do their recreation programming. George asked if it would not be more cost effective to do joint scheduling. Barry said this may be a way to do some of the things we have wanted to do but did not have the time. Barry thought there would be a lot of advantages to doing this . George thought the way the communities are geographically intertwined it makes sense to do this . It was suggested that Hugo be brought into this joint effort too. Marty said he has talked to Hugo about this but they do not have a park board yet, but will look at this when they do. Marty said he brought this to the board to see how the members feel about doing joint efforts with surrounding communities . He will put this issue on the agenda each month to keep the park board informed. Friends of the Park Update: It was reported that the Friends golf tournament is going ahead very well . Marty said Gary Uhde donated money to the Friends . This will be used to pay for the brochure . Martha Walmsley called Marty last week to let him know they had received a $1, 000 check from the S . Reshanau Estates Home Owners Association for the trail stub. Aqua Lane Trail: Marty was going to take this off the agenda because the Engineering Department is working with Anoka County on this and he is not sure of the status of this now. He will bring it back to the park board when he has more information. 5 City of Lino Lakes Park Board Meeting March 4, 1996 Other Updates and Old Business: Thank You Letter - Dan Anderson - Marty read the thank you letter that was sent to Mayor Landers thanking the Park and Recreation Department for the excellent job that the Park and Recreation Department performed this winter on the area ice rinks . Marty told the board that he forwarded this letter to all staff involved. Ulmer Drive Trail Issue - Marty said there is a home owner that wants to turn property over to the City so it would not just be an easement the city would own the land. Marilyn Anderson is working on this issue . Park Board Liaison - Chris Lyden has been appointed liaison to the Park Board. John Bergeson was reappointed liaison to the Friends of the Park. NEW BUSINESS• Grants' - State Outdoor Recreation Grant: Marty said he made pre- application for a State Outdoor Recreation grant . This is the same as the one submitted last year for the A-3 Athletic Complex. The grant itself will be modified in response to discussions with the Natural Resources Grant Manager for this area. No money has been appropriated yet for this grant program. He said we would know more about this after the pre-applications are received. LCMR (Legislative Commission on Minnesota Resources) Grant: Marty explained that he had attended a joint meeting between Hugo, Centerville, and Lino Lakes . A grant proposal has been written and submitted to LCMR for a greenway from the state trail in Hugo, following Clearwater Creek to the south through Hugo, Lino Lakes, and Centerville, and into the Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Regional Park. This would make a connection into the Rice Creek Regional Trail (a Metropolitan Council Trail Corridor) . Marty feels this grant proposal has strong possibilities . ISTEA Grant: The third grant is for a trail connection on the f west side of Lake Drive and Elm Street as part of the new school need. Safety and a crossing point along Lake Drive to the school was addressed at the last Park Board meeting. We would like to 6 a City of Lino Lakes Park Board Meeting �. March 4, 1996 work with the School District on cost matching their dollars for these trail segments . Park Board members had a few questions and there was a brief discussion on these grant proposals . OTHER NEW BUSINESS: Natural Resources Inventory: Marty talked about Michael Krech working on GIS for a natural resources inventory. Amy asked if this would recognize areas where new or endangered species are in Lino Lakes and if staff would be able to input information into it . Marty thought this would be possible . Tree City Award: Included in the packets was a copy of the letter Marty received from the Department of Natural Resources notifying the city they had received a Tree City USA award An awards luncheon is scheduled for March 21 . He asked members to please fill out the registration form and return in to the Park and Recreation office if they were interested in attending. n SCHEDULE NEXT MEETING: The next meeting will be April 1, 1996, 6 :30pm at City Hall . ADJOURN: Betty Piper made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Amy Donlin. The meeting was adjourned at 8 : 16pm. 7 RECEIVED DECISION RESOURCES, LTD. 1 ,19� SHOREVIEW RESIDENTIAL 3128 Dean Court MAR - QUALITY OF LIFE STUDY Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416 December, 1994 ov OF LINO SAKES Hello, I 'm of Decision Resources, Ltd. , a nationwide polling firm located in Minneapolis. We've been retained by the City of Shoreview to speak with a random sample of residents �1 about issues facing the city. This' survey is being taken because (� the City is interested in your opinions and suggestions . I want to assure you that all individual responses will be held strictly confidential; only summaries of the entire sample will be reported. (DO NOT PAUSE) 1. Approximately how many years have LESS THAN TWO YEARS. . . .8k you lived in Shoreview? THREE TO FIVE YEARS . . .20% SIX TO TEN YEARS. . . . . .28% ELEVEN - TWENTY YEARS.23t OVER TWENTY YEARS. . . . .21%- DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% 2. How would you rate the quality of EXCELLENT. . . . . . . . . . . . .53% life in Shoreview -- excellent, GOOD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44%- good, only fair, or poor? ONLY FAIR. . . . . . . . . . . . . .3t POOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0k DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% 3 . Thinking back to when you moved to Shoreview, what factors were most important to you in selecting this community? NO ANSWER, 3%; SCHOOLS, 28%; LOCATION, 24;r; SAFE, 61r; HOUSING STOCK, 12s; RURAL AMBIENCE, 7t; LAKES - PARKS, 4k; ALWAYS THERE, 4%; JOB RELATED, 2%; SENSE OF COMMUNITY, 4t; FAMILY HERE, 3%; SUBURBAN, 2%-. 4 . What do you like most about living in Shoreview? NO ANSWER, 3t; PEOPLE, 9%; LOCATION, 31%; SAFE, 10t; SCHOOLS, 7t; QUIET, lit; LAKES - PARKS, 10t; SUBURBAN, 8%; COMMUNITY CENTER, 4%; NEIGHBORHOOD, 6t; OPEN SPACE, 3k. 5 . What do you like least about it? NO ANSWER, 16t; NOTHING, 21%; NOTHING TO DO, 8*; TRAFFIC, 10t; TAXES, 15%; GROWTH, 10%; LOCATION, 3*; CITY GOVERN- MENT, - 5%; PEOPLE, 4%; CITY SERVICES, 3%; SCATTERED, 4%. 6 . In general, what do you think is the most serious issue facing the community today? NO ANSWER, 20%; HOUSING INCREASE, 9%; TAXES, 25%; CRIME, 9k; TRAFFIC, 7%; ECONOMY, 3%; SCHOOLS, 71C; "SUBURBAN SPRAWL, " 10%; PRESERVING OPEN SPACE, 4t; GOVERNMENT, 2t; ^ MAINTAINING QUALITY, 6%. 1 7 . All in all, do you think things in RIGHT DIRECTION. . . . . . . 84* Shoreview are generally headed in WRONG TRACK. . . . . . . . . . .10-C the right direction, or do you DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .6%- feel things are off on the wrong track? IF "WRONG TRACK, " ASK: ' 8 . Please tell me why you feel things have gotten off on the wrong track. [N-42] NO ANSWER, 45- GROWTH, 7%-; TAXES, 5°s; CRIME, 19*; SPENDING, 19k; CITY GOVERNMENT, 19%; OTHER, S;C. So far, we have discussed quality of life issues impacting the entire community. I would now like to shift gears somewhat and ask you a question about your personal quality of life... 9. What do you want most in your life? NO ANSWER, 15-t; HEALTH, 22%-; HAPPINESS, 14.%; OVERALL SECURITY, 16%-; GOOD EDUCATION, 3%-; PEACE OF MIND, 9%-; FINANCIAL INDEPENDENCE, 9%-; LEISURE TIME, 0; SUCCESSFUL CHILDREN, 0; JOB SECURITY, 3k; NICE HOUSE, 2g . 10 . While a resident of Shoreview, YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3ro have you perceived that you have NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97!k been discriminated against on the DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0* basis of your race, religion, age, 'v or gender by any establishments in the city? 11. And, have you perceived that you YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2%, have been discriminated against on NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .98%- the basis of your race, religion, DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% age, or gender by city policies or city staff members? 12 . How would you rate the general EXCELLENT. . . . . . . . . . . . .48% appearance of your neighborhood GOOD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48-t -- excellent, good, only fair, or ONLY FAIR. . . . . . . . . . . . . .4%- poor? POOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0t- DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .0%- 13 . Other than voting, do you feel YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .73;; that if you wanted to, you could NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21% have a say about the way the City DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 6%- of Shoreview runs things? 2 . t 14 . How would you rate the sense of VERY STRONG. . . . . . . . . . .I8k community identity among residents SOMEWHAT STRONG. . . . . . . 60* in Shoreview -- would you say it NOT TOO STRONG. . . . . . . .17% is very strong, somewhat strong, NOT AT ALL STRONG. . . . . .4V not too strong, or not at all DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .2* strong? 15. Thinking about your ties to the CITY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .351- local area, do you feel most SCHOOL DISTRICT. . . . . . .29* closely connected to the City of SOMETHING ELSE. . . . . . . .28k Shoreview, your school district, NOTHING (VOL) . . . . . . . . . . 6-1 or something else? (IF "SOMETHING DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .34 ELSE, " ASK: ) What is that? Let ' s discuss recreational opportunities in the community. . . . 16. How would you rate park and rec- EXCELLENT. . . . . . . . . . . . .61%- reational facilities in Shoreview GOOD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32-1 -- excellent, good, only fair, or ONLY FAIR. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 6V poor? POOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .I% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .19c The Shoreview Park System is composed of a number of facilities . For each of the following, please tell me if you or any members of this household have visited that facility during the past year_ For those household members who have visited, would you say they use the facility frequently, occasionally, or rarely �., during the appropriate seasons. NOT FREQ OCCA RARE DK/R 17. Bucher (BOOK-ER) Park 57%- 12%- 15k 13%- 4k 18 . Lake Judy Park 71* 8& 6g lilt 3%- 19. McCullough Park 46%- 18k 224; 11!k 21k 20 . Shamrock Park 59s ilk 16* 3%- 21 . Shoreview Commons 26k 32* 28V 11-1 3%- 22 . Sitzer Park 55"s 15% 14* 12%r 4%- 23 . Bobby Theisen (TIE-SON) Park 54V 13%- 15* 14V 5-1 24. Wilson Park 55% 10v 16%- 15V 4t- 25 . How would you rate the upkeep and EXCELLENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . 37%- maintenance of Shoreview City GOOD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56%- Parks -- would you say excellent, ONLY FA.IR. . . . . . . . . . . . . .2V good, only fair, or poor? POOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0-t DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 6V 26. Do you feel that the current mix YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9it of recreational facilities in city NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6!k parks meets the needs of members DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .4V of your household? IF "NO, " ASK: 3 27. What additional recreational facilities would you like to see the City of Shoreview offer residents in its city parks? [N=221 NO ANSWER, 18%-; BALLFIELDS, 9%; ICE ARENA, 5%; MORE FOR PRESCHOOLERS, 9t; TRAILS, 22t; PICNIC FACILITIES, 13 k; SOCCER, 14%; OTHER. 14-C. 28 . Would you favor or oppose the de- STRONGLY FAVOR. . . . . . . . 18& velopment of an outdoor athletics FAVOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29V complex in Shoreview containing OPPOSE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18% baseball, softball, football, and STRONGLY OPPOSE. . . . . . .24t soccer fields? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . lit Do you feel strongly that way? 29. How much would you be willing to NOTHING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51t see your yearly property taxes $10 .00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13!k increased to fund the development $20 .00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .lot of an outdoor athletics complex in $30 . 00. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8* the city? Let ' s say, would you be $40 .00. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3t willing to pay $ per year? $50 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3. (WAIT FOR RESPONSE;. MOVE UP OR $60 .00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5k DOWN DEPENDING ON ANSWER) How DON'T KNOW. . . . . . . . . . . . . 8t about $ per year? (REPEAT) REFUSED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1%- There has been some discussion about providing permanent restroom facilities in city parks. Currently, the City places portable restrooms -- porta-potties -- at each location. As an alterna- tive, the city could construct bathrooms with flush toilets in the park buildings. These permanent facilities would be open while the park is open -- generally from sunrise to sunset. The latter would require more funds due to upkeep and maintenance. 30 . Would you support or oppose the STRONGLY SUPPORT. . . . . .24°s placement of permanent flush SUPPORT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26t toilets in each park building? OPPOSE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22a (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) And do you STRONGLY OPPOSE. . . . . . .20* feel strongly that way? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .7!V 31. How much would you be willing to NOTHING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45% see your yearly property taxes $2 .00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9V increased to fund permanent flush $4 . 00. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lot toilets in each park building? $6. 00. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6's Let ' s say, would you be willing $8 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7%, to pay $ per year? (WAIT FOR $10 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8t RESPONSE; MOVE UP OR DOWN DEPEND- $12. 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .lit ING ON ANSWER) How about $ per DON'T KNOW. . . . . . . . . . . . . St- year? (REPEAT) REFUSED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1% 32. In the past year, have you or any YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .sit members of this household partici- NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49% pated in any city-sponsored park DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .it and recreational programs? 4 IF "YES, " ASK: ' In which of the following city-sponsored programs have you or members of your household participated? (ROTATE) YES NO DKR L 33 . Aquatics programs? 281 23:k 0°k 34 . Fitness programs? 21! 30% 0t 35 . Gymnastic programs? 141 37% 0%- 36 . Pre-school programs? 9%_ 42% 0!k 37 . Senior programs and activities? st 46"s 0%_ 38 . Adult sports leagues, such as softball, volleyball, and basketball? 17% 33V 0%- 39 . Playground programs? 23% 27%- Oa 40 . Teen programs? 164; 35* 0%- IF "NO" ON ALL PROGRAMS, ASK: 41. Could you tell. me one or two reasons why you haven' t participated in any city-sponsored park and recreation programs during the past year? [N=1991 NO ANSWER, 15*; NO TIME, 34�; NO INTEREST, 29k; AGE, 14k; GO ELSEWHERE, 4-V; NEED INFORMATION, 4;;; INCONVENIENT, 2s. 42 . Are there any other city-sponsored recreational offerings or programs that you or members of your household would like to see established? NO ANSWER, 85%; SKATING, 2k; RACQUETBALL, 2*; BIKE PATHS, 3*; SKIING, 2k; TENNIS, lg; SENIORS, 1*; OTHER, 5s. 43 . Does the current mix of city-spon- YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 914; sored recreational programs meet NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5! the needs of members of your DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .4k household? 44 . Are the senior programs currently YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34°s offered sufficient to the needs NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .lo* of members of your household? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . .56% 45. How about teen programs -- are YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34!k current offerings sufficient to NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9t. meet the needs of members of your DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . .58k household? 5 46 . How likely would your household be VERY LIKELY. . . . . . . . . . .10% to use an all-day summer recrea- SOMEWHAT LIKELY. . . . . . .17k tion program for children if the NOT TOO LIKELY. . . . . . . .16* City of Shoreview were too develop NOT AT ALL LIKELY. . . . .55$ and offer one -- very likely, DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .3%- somewhat likely, not too likely, or not at all likely? , 47. In general, how well informed are VERY WELL INFORMED. . . .20k you about the Shoreview park SMWHT WELL INFORMED. . .58$ system and facilities? Would you NOT TOO WELL INFORMED.19% say you are very well informed, NOT AT ALL INFORMED. . . .4%- somewhat informed, not too well DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .0l- informed, or not at all informed? The City of Shoreview has been actively constructing a comprehen- sive trail system for its residents. So far, approximately thirty miles of trails have been constructed. 48 . Do you support or oppose the con- STRONGLY SUPPORT. . . . . .57% tinued development of the trail SUPPORT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32%- system within Shoreview? (WAIT FOR OPPOSE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3°s RESPONSE) Do you feel strongly STRONGLY OPPOSE. . . . . . . . 5k that way? DON'T IC`iTOW/REFUSED. . . . .41 49 . Would you like to see the City of LESS MONEY. . . . . . . . . . . . .7! Shoreview spend less money, more MORE MONEY. . . . . . . . . . . .24-: money, or maintain the present PRESENT AMOUNT. . . . . . . . 62%- amount of money on the further de- DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 7!k velopment of the Shoreview trail system? 50 . How would you rate the City ef- EXCELLENT. . . . . . . . . . . . .22%- forts to maintain trails and side- GOOD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .57!k walks this past winter -- excel- ONLY FAIR. . . . . . . . . . . . . .8%- lent, good, only fair, or poor? POOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1%- DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . 13* 51 . Do you or members of this house- YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .784; hold use the trails in Shoreview? NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .Gt IF "YES, " ASK: Which of the following trails in Shoreview have you and/or members of your household used during the past year? (ROTATE) YTS NO DKR 52 . Lexington Avenue? 49V 29% 0-t 53 . County Road J? 31t 48s OTC 54 . County Road I? 361c 42%- 0t 55 . Tanglewood? 30* 40 3sk 56. Snail Lake Boulevard? 46k 334; 0%_ 6 YES NO DKR 57. Victoria Street? 30 431- 1t 58 . North Owasso Boulevard? 22-t 57k 0k 59 . Trails along Highway 49? 34* 44$ 0* 60. Are there any other trail locations in the local area that your household uses? [N-3151 DON'T KNOW/NONE, 72*; POPLAR, LAKE, 2%*; SNELLING, 4-V; GRAMSIE ROAD, 41; GRASS LAKE, 4-t; LAKE JUDY, 23c; COMMONS, 41%; SCATTERED, BBC. Which of the following activities do you and/or members of your household engage in on the trails in Shoreview? YES NO DKR 61 . Walking? 74;; 4-V 0* . 62 . Running or jogging? 30;; 49%- Ok 63 . Biking? 64%- 14°s 0!� 64 . Nature study? 27;r 52%- 0t 65 . Rollerblading or rollerskating? 35% 434; 0k 66 . What, if anything, do you think is the most serious problem or deficiency with the present Shoreview trail system? DON'T KNOW/NONE, 66-t; TRAIL SURFACES, 4t; NOT COMPLETE, 17%; MAINTENANCE, 4k; TRAFFIC, 6;;; OTHER, 4!k. 67 . Where, if anywhere, do you feel is the greatest need for off-road trails in the City of Shoreview? DON'T KNOW/NONE, 68k; HWY. 49, 7%-; COUNTY ROAD I, 4;;; NORTHEAST, 2%-; LINKED TOGETHER, 3'c; HWY. 96, 4-t; AROUND THE LAKES, 4%r; PARKS, 2-r; RAMSEY OPEN SPACE, 2t; OTHER, 54; . 68 . Do you support or oppose the City STRONGLY SUPPORT... . . . . .43%- continuing to plow trails adjacent SUPPORT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42!� to streets during the Winter for OPPOSE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-t seasonal recreation use? (WAIT STRONGLY OPPOSE. . . . . . . .4g FOR RESPONSE) Do you feel strongly DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 7k that way? 69 . During the past year, have you or YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82-t any members of your household used NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18k the Shoreview Community Center? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .O!V IF "NO" OR "DON',T KNOW/REFUSED, " SKIP TO QUESTION #79 . IF "YES, " ASK: 7 70 . About how often do you or MORE THAN TWICE/WEEK. .12t members of your household use WEEKLY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .91c the Community Center -- more TWO/THREE PER MONTH. . .20k than twice per week, weekly, MONTHLY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17$ �- two or three times per month, QUARTERLY. . . . . . . . . . . . .13%- monthly, quarterly, or less LESS FREQUENTLY. . . . . . .10% frequently? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .It Which of the following facilities have you or members of your household used during the past year? YES NO DKR 71 . Swimming Pool? 651 16-1 0t 72 . Gymnasium? 42t 39%- 0$ 73 . Running-Walking Track? 39;; 42t 0t 74 . Fitness/Exercise Room? 3 9 t 42% 0%_ 75. Large Banquet Room? 18!C 63%- 0% 76 . Meeting Rooms? 33t 49! 0* 77 . Are there any facilities in the Community Center you would like to see expanded or improved? (N=328) DON'T KNOW/NONE, 80k; LOCKER ROOMS, 2k; WEIGHT LIFTING, 3*; FITNESS ROOM, 9$; TEEN AREA, 2t; POOL AREA, 2V; FAMILY AREA, 4% . 78 . Are there any additional facilities you would like to see at the Community Center? [N=3281 NO ANSWER, 78°s; RACQUETBALL, 9k; ICE RINK, 3$; SAUNA, 1t; SERVICES, 2s; SCATTERED, 5k; IF "NO, " ASK: 79. Could you tell me one or two reasons why you haven' t used the Shoreview Community Center? [N-74) NO ANSWER, 1° ; GO ELSEWHERE, lOg; NO INTEREST, 34t; NO TIME, 37t; AGE, 7V; COST, 5k; NO INFORMATION, 7V. I would like to read you a list of facilities that have been proposed for inclusion at the Shoreview Community Center. For each one, please tell me if you would strongly support it, some- what support, somewhat oppose, or strongly oppose it. If you have no opinion, just say so. STS SMS SMO STO DKR 80 . A sauna? 9% 30V 24* 19k 18k 81. Adult locker rooms? 12's 39% 20V 12V 17t 82 . A children's outdoor water playground? 14V 35t 18& 14V 18* 83 . Expanded exercise equipment? 19%, 33t 17% 12$ 19k 8 STS SMS SMO STO DKR 84 . Indoor playground equipment? 9V 34V 22V 15V 20"s 85 . An indoor climbing wall? 7* 19V 24t 28V 22V 86. Would you support or oppose the STRONGLY FAVOR. . . . . . . .41V City operating a teen center in FAVOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35g the Community Center? (WAIT FOR OPPOSE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9?k RESPONSE) Do you feel strongly STRONGLY OPPOSE. . . . . . . .4k that way? DON'T KN0W/REFUSED. _ . . 113k Now, let' s talk about the Ramsey County Parks in the Shoreview Area. Please tell me if you or members of your household have visited that park during the past year. YES NO DKR 87 . Turtle Lake Park? 60* 40$ 0%_ 88 . Snail Lake Park? 65%. 35-V 0%_ 89 . Island Lake Park? 64%- 37%- 0%- 90 . Grass Lake? 12%, 86!k 1% 91 . Lake Owasso? 38%- 62%- 1%_ 92 . Saint Paul Waterworks? 30-t 68* 2"s 93 . From what you have seen or heard, EXCELLENT. . . . . . . . . . . . .26's how would you rate the maintenance GOOD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62%- and upkeep of area County parks -- ONLY FAIR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6%- excellent, good, only fair, or POOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1k poor? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 5% Suppose funds were limited. . . . 94 . Which of the following would you make the top priority for future improvements in recreational development? (READ LIST BELOW) (ROTATE LIST) 95 . Which would you make the second priority? (DELETE FIRST CHOICE AND RE-READ LIST, IF NECESSARY) (ROTATE LIST) FIRST SECOND Shoreview Community Center? 16& 12%- Lakes and beaches? 16% 15%. Neighborhood parks? 1st 17%, Trails? 17!k 18%- School P-laygrounds? 11& 131, School gymnasiums? 8t 7%- Athletic fields? 6_V 4t ALL EQUALLY (VOL. ) 7% 4It NONE OF ABOVE (VOL. ) 2t 4% Unsure 3V 7* Changing topics. . . . n 9 I would like to read you a list of a few city services. For each one, please tell me whether you would rate the quality :of the service as excellent, good, only fair, or poor. . . . EXCL GOOD FAIR POOR DK/R 96 . Snow plowing? 32% 54% 9% 5% 0% 97. Police protection? 28% 61% 64; 1% 5% 98 . Fire protection? 27% 604; 2t 0% 11% 99. City street repair and maintenance? 15% 55% 22% 6% 2% 100. Sewers and water? 20% 68% 5% 1% 7% 101. Drainage and flood control? 17V 60% 7% 3% 134; 102 . Animal control? 14% 64% 7% 7% 8% FOR EACH "ONLY FAIR" OR "POOR" RESPONSE, ASK: 103 . Why did you rate as (only fair/poor) ? [N=189J THREE OR MORE COMPLAINTS, 12%; POTHOLES, 39%; LOOSE ANIMALS, 14%; FLOOD CONTROL, 6%; SLOW POLICE SERVICE, 4%; SLOW PLOW SERVICE, 19%; DRAINAGE, 3%; OTHER, 3%. 104 . How much first-hand contact have QUITE A LOT. . . . . . . . . . . ..8% you had with the Shoreview City SOME. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31% Staff -- quite a lot, some, very VERY LITTLE. . . . . . . . . . .41% little, or none? NONE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0-t 105 . From what you have seen or heard, EXCELLENT. . . . . . . . . . . . .17% how would you rate the job per- GOOD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 550 formance of the Shoreview City ONLY FAIR. . . . . . . . . . . . . 12% Staff -- excellent, good, only POOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3% fair, or poor? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . .14% 106 . How much do you feel you know GREAT DEAL. . . . . . . . . . . . .6% about the work of the Mayor and FAIR AMOUNT. . . . . . . . . . . 39% City Council -- a great deal., a VERY LITTLE. . . . . . . . . . .43% fair amount, very little, or NOTHING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lit nothing? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .2% 107. From what you know, do you approve STRONGLY APPROVE. . .. . . . 13% or disapprove of the job the Mayor APPROVE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .59% and City Council are doing? (WAIT DISAPPROVE. . . . . . . . . . . . .4% FOR RESPONSE) And do you feel - STRONGLY DISAPPROVE. . . .5% strongly that way? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . 19t 10 108 . Do you feel that the City is too TOO TOUGH. . . . . . . . . . . . . .2% tough, about right, or not tough ABOUT RIGHT. . . .. . . . . . . .72% enough in enforcing the City Code NOT TOUGH ENOUGH. . . . . .20% on such nuisances as animal con- DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .6% trol, garbage disposal, junk cars, messy yards, and noise? s Turning to the issue of public safety in the community. . . . 109 . Are there any areas in Shoreview YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26% where you would be afraid to walk NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .72% alone at night? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .2% IF "YES, " ASK: 110 . What area particularly concerns you? [N=103) NO ANSWER, 3%; ANYWHERE, 481; PARKS, 25%; TRAILS, 11%; BY ARMORY, 3%; F AND LEXINGTON, 8%; OTHER, 4%. 111 . How about at night in your home -- YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . 96% do you feel safe and secure, or NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4% not? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% 112. Has the fear of crime in Shoreview YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 caused you to invest in a means of NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83"s self-protection? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% I would like to read you a short list of public safety concerns. 113 . Please tell me which one you consider to be the greatest concern in Shoreview? If you feel that none of these prob- lems are serious in Shoreview, just say so. (READ LIST) 114 . Which do you consider to be the second major concern in the city? Again, if you feel that none of the remaining prob- lems are serious in the city, just say so. (DELETE FIRST CHOICE AND RE-READ LIST) FIRST SECOND Violent crime. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6%. . . . . . . . .4% Traffic congestion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30%. . . . . . . .12% Drugs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6%. . . . . . . . . 7% Youth gangs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5%. . . . . . . . . 6% Business crimes, such as shop- lifting and check fraud. . . . . . . . . . . . . . it. . . . . . . . .6% Residential crimes, such as burglary, theft, and vandal- ism. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24%. . . . . . . .22% ALL EQUALLY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5%. . . . . . . . . 8% NONE OF THE ABOVE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21%. . . . . . . .27t DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4%. . . . . . . . .9% 11 115 . Do you feel that crimes against INCREASED. . . . . . . . . . . . .36% property in Shoreview have in- DECREASED. . . . . . . . . . . . . .4* creased, decreased, or remained REMAINED THE SAME. . . . .50% about the same during the past DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . .11V five years? 116. How about crimes against people, INCREASED. . . . . . . . . . . . .270 have they increased, decreased; or DECREASED. . . . . . . . . . . . . .3%- remained about the same during the REMAINED THE SAME. . . . .52t past five years? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . 17V 117. How would you rate the amount of TOO MUCH. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1¢ patrolling the police department ABOUT RIGHT AMOUNT. . . .70%- does in your neighborhood -- would NOT ENOUGH. . . . . . . . . . . . 27t you say they do too much, about DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 3k the right amount, or not enough? 118 . How much would you be willing to NOTHING. . . . . . . . . . . . . 36!k see your yearly property taxes $10 . 00. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23V increased to fund an expansion of $20 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 13%- police patrolling in city neigh- $30 .00. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9!V borhoods? Let ' s say, would you be $40 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4i willing to pay $ per year? $50 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1k (WAIT FOR RESPONSE; MOVE UP OR $60 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5's DOWN DEPENDING ON ANSWER.) How DON'T KNOW. . . . . . . . . . . . ..9* about $ per year? (REPEAT) REFUSED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0% 119 . Are you aware of a neighborhood YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33's crime watch program in your NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67% neighborhood? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% IF "YES, " ASK: 120 . Do you participate in the YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12% program? NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21%- DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0!k IF "NO, " ASK: 121. Would you participate in or- YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36"s ganizing a neighborhood crime NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24k watch program in your area DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 7t under the guidance of the Sheriff' s Department? As you may know, property taxes are divided between the City of Shoreview, Ramsey County, and the local school districts. . . . 122 . For each dollar of property tax LESS-THAN 10%. . . . . . . . .104; you pay, about what percentage do 10-20 PERCENT. . . . . . . . .41% you think goes to city government? 21-30 PERCENT. . . . . . . . .19%- 31-40 PERCENT. . . . . . . . . .4-V OVER FORTY PERCENT. . . . .3"c DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . .23% 12 I � For your information, the City of Shoreview' s share of your property tax bill is approximately fifteen percent. 123 . How do you feel about Shoreview EXCELLENT. . . . . . . . . . . . .15-1 city property taxes in comparison GOOD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62V with the services you receive from ONLY FAIR. . . . . . . . . . . . .17%, the City -- would you say it is an POOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2* excellent value, good value, only DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .4t fair value, or a poor value? 124. How do you feel about Shoreview VERY HIGH. . . . . . . . . . . . . .8k city property taxes in comparison SOMEWHAT HIGH. . . . . . . . .32% with those of other suburban ABOUT AVERAGE. . . . . . . . .47% communities -- do you feel they SOMEWHAT LOW. . . . . . . . . . .3* are very high, somewhat high, VERY LOW. . . . . . . . . . . . .1k about average, somewhat low, or DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . .10* very low? 125 . As you may know, the City has been PAVED SURFACES. . . . . . . .44t planning trails through designated PACKED SURFACES. . . . . . ..13!k open spaces. If you could choose, UNPAVED SURFACES. . . . . .16* would you prefer, in these open ALL EQUALLY (VOL. ) . . . . .2: spaces, trails with- paved sur- NONE OF ABOVE (VOL. ) . . .34s faces, such as asphalt, packed DON'T CARE. . . . . . . . . . . .20!k surfaces, such as crushed lime- DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .2t stone, or unpaved surfaces, such as woodchips, or don' t you care? n Changing topics . . . ' 126 . If the City of Shoreview were to attract more development, what kind would you prefer it to be? NO ANSWER, 36*; PARKS, 2*; RETAIL, 7k; RESIDENTIAL, 13t; RESTAURANTS, 9%; GROCERY STORE, 6%; COMMERCIAL, 15%; LIGHT INDUSTRY, 10-t; SMALL BUSINESS, 2t; SERVICE, 3t. I would like to read you a list of establishments that could be attracted to Shoreview. For each one, please tell me if you feel it would be of great value, moderate value, little value, or no value at all to- the community. . . . GRT MOD LIT NON DKR 127 . A large grocery store? 331; 27% 16% 22k 2t 128 . A quality restaurant? 40% 34% 13-t 11%; 2%- 129 . A family-style restaurant? 40% 35%- 12V 11k 2°s 130. A fast-food restaurant? 84; 22t 28%- 40%- 24; 131. A day care facility? 18k 34% 14t 20% 14% 132 . A full-service post office? 59k 20% 8k ilk 2k n 13 133 . Are their any other types of establishments which you feel might have benefit to the community? NO ANSWER, 84k; HARDWARE STORE, 2*; SENIOR HOUSING, 2!k; �. OTHER SERVICE, 51r; OTHER RETAIL, 4%; ENTERTAINMENT, 3% . I would now like to read you a list .of characteristics of a community. For each one, please tell me if you think Shoreview currently has too many or too much, too few or too little, or about the right amount. MANY FEW/ ABT DK/ /MCH LITT RGHT REFD 134 . the number of people residing in the community? 12k 1 86t 2k 135 . rental units? 13k ilk 664; 10k 136 . higher cost housing oppor- tunities? 32% 5%_ 57% 6% 137. condominiums and townhouses? 20% ilk 6a% 6k 138. racial diversity? 2;; 47% 39% 13%- 139. income diversity? 4% 194; 67%- 10V 140 . parks and open spaces? 6"s 9* 83% 2!k 141. low income housing opportunities? 6% 42%- 30% 22%, 142 . senior housing opportunities? lk 46k 29k 24%- 143 . light manufacturing industry? 5 30°s 49°c 16% 144 . service and retail establish- ments? 6°c 38% 53% 3% 145 . entertainment and dining establishments? 6%- 53* 40%- 2k 146. fulltime job opportunities? 3k 49k 32!k 171; 147. Would you favor or oppose the City STRONGLY FAVOR. . . . . . . .23k of Shoreview offering tax and FAVOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36a funding incentives to attract de- OPPOSE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17k velopment providing employment, STRONGLY OPPOSE. . . . . . .14% services, or significant tax base? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . .10k (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) Do you feel strongly that way? 148 . Would you support or oppose the STRONGLY SUPPORT. . . . . .34% acquisition of additional property SUPPORT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33V within Shoreview to preserve as OPPOSE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16%- open space? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) Do STRONGLY OPPOSE. . . . . . . .9* you feel strongly that way? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 8t 149 . How much would you be willing to NOTHING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41k see your yearly property taxes $20 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31% increased to fund the acquisition $40 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .104; of property for open space preser- $60 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5% vation? Let' s say, would you be $80 . 00. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1% willing to pay $ per year? $100. 00. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1* (WAIT FOR RESPONSE; MOVE UP OR $120 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1* DOWN DEPENDING'ON ANSWER) How DON'T KNOW. . . . . . . . . . . .10k about $ per Iyear? (REPEAT) REFUSED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ik 14 Let ' s talk about several properties. For each one, please tell me if you would strongly support a tax increase, somewhat r� support, somewhat oppose, or strongly oppose a tax increase for its acquisition by the City for open space preservation. STS SMS SMO STO DKR 150 . The Tower Property, adjacent to Grass Lake and Gramsie Road? 15&C 23V 14* 21k 261 151. The University Property, near County Road J and 35W, in the Northwest Corner? 14-t 29% 13V 19%_ 25-1 152 . Heavily wooded areas? 39* 24V 10k 16!k 11% 153 . Properties of historical importance? 23k 35V 12% 16% 14g 154 . Are there any other areas in the City of Shoreview you would like to see purchased for open space preservation? NO ANSWER, 86%; AROUND LAKES, 2t; BY ARMS PLANT, 9;;; WETLANDS, 2%-; OTHER, 2%-. 155 . Is traffic congestion a problem in YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40* your neighborhood? NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .604; DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0t 156. How about speeding in your neigh- YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37& borhood? NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . O-t 157. Would you support or oppose spend- SUPPORT/STILL FAVOR. . .24k ing increased city funds on more SUPPORT/NO. . . . . . . . . . . . 16!k traffic enforcement? (IF "SUP- SUPPORT/DON'T KNOW. . . . .5k PORT, " ASK: ) Would you still favor OPPOSE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .52V it if a property tax increase were DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .4k required to fund it? 158 . Do you leave the City of Shoreview YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .85t on a regular or daily basis? NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15%. DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .0!k IF "YES, " ASK: 159 . Where to? (OBTAIN CITY) [N=342] MINNEAPOLIS, 21t; ROSEVILLE, 17"s; SAINT PAUL, 27%; MAPLEWOOD, 4t; REST OF HENNEPIN, 7%; REST OF RAMSEY, 11*; REST OF METRO, 5%; -ALL OVER, 8%. 160 . What form of transportation do you generally use? (IF "AUTOMOBILE, " ASK:) Is that a carpool? [N=342] CAR - NO POOL, 90*; CARPOOL, 5k; BUS, 4*; OTHER, it. 15 161. Do you work at home in a business YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24% or teleconference or telecommute , No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .75% to work? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .It 162 . Do you feel there is a significant YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34% need for more public transporta- NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61* tion near your neighborhood? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .5t I would like to read you a list of streets, highways, or inter- sections. For each one, please tell me if you think it is a major traffic safety concern in Shoreview, a minor traffic safety concern, or not a concern at all? MAJOR MINOR NOTSR DKREF 163 . Lexington Avenue? 30% 45% 23% 2% 164 . Victoria Street? 164; 46% 29% 9% 165 . Lexington Avenue and the I-694 intersection? 32% 364; 28%- 44; 166 . Rice Street and the I-694 intersection? 47% 27% 21t 6% 167. Highway 49 and Highway 96 intersection? 51t 31% 13% 5% 168 . Highway 49 at the Chippewa School intersection? set- 27's 5% 10% Moving on. . . . 199 . During the past year, have you or YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77% any members of your household used NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23% the Ramsey County Library in DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0s Shoreview? IF "NO" IN QUESTION #169, ASK: 170. Is there anything the Library could change or offer that would induce you to use it? [N=931 NO ANSWER, 89*; EVENING HOURS, 4t; SELECTION, 4%; OTHER, 2%. IF "YES" IN QUESTION #169, ASK: For each of the following characteristics, please rate the public library in Shoreview as excellent, good, only fair, or poor. EXCL GOOD FAIR POOR DK/R 171. Convenience of library hours? 17% 51% 19% 10% 3% 172 . Courtesy of staff? 33% 54% 7V 3% 3% 173 . Adequacy of their books, maga- zines and other materials? 13% 41% 25% 18% 3% Which of the following would be preferred times for you or other members of your household to use the Ramsey County Public Library 16 in Shoreview? YES NO DKR 174 . Weekday mornings? 22% 72%- 6%- 175 . Weekday afternoons? 41%* 54% 6"s 176 . Weekday evenings? 744; 21k 5t 177. Weekends? 6 77% 18%- 64 Changing topics. . . . 178 . How often, if at all, does your EVERY OTHER WEEK. . . . . . 93k household recycle? (READ OPTIONS) MONTHLY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4%, QUARTERLY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . it ONCE - TWICE PER YR. . . .1t NEVER. . . . . . . . . . . . . .2°s DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .11; 179. Are there any changes or improvements in the curbside recy- clables pick-up program you would like to see? (IF "YES," ASK: ) What are they? NO ANSWER, 731. ; MORE INFORMATION, 2k; MORE CONTAINERS, 4k; TAKE PLASTIC, 6%; QUIETER, 2%; MORE OFTEN, 6k; MORE VARIETY, 8%,. 180 . Would you prefer the weekly pick- YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27t up of recyclables instead of the NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .71!k current every other week pick-up? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .2k 181. Last year, did you participate in YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4095 the City of Shoreview' s "Clean-Up NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-V Day?" DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0k 182 . Are there any ways in which the City' s "Clean-Up Day" could be improved or made more useful to you? NO ANSWER, 68$; SHORTER LINES, 10t; MORE INFORMATION, 3%-; MORE OFTEN, 9%; TWO DAYS, 4V; NO COST, 2%-; TAKE VARIETY, 2%; OTHER, 3%. Changing topics. . . . Which Shoreview lakes do you or members of your household use? YES NO DKR _ 183 . Island Lake? 44% 56% 0% 184 . Owasso Lake? — 33* 67% 0%- 185 . Wabasso Lake? 10s 904; 1t 186. Snail Lake? 50% sot 1% 187. Turtle Lake? 53* 47% 0'6 17 188 . Do you own lakeshore property in YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11!c the City of Shoreview? NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89!k DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0%- Which of the following summer activities do you or household members undertake on or in Shoreview lakes, if any? YES NO DKR 189 . Fishing? 46% 54t 0% 190 . Swimming? 67t 33% Oar 191. Canoeing? 24t 761 Ot 192 . Skiing? 20% 80t 0% 193 . Sailboating? lot 90t 0t 194 . Jet skiing? 4% 961; 0% 195 , Power boating? 21t 79* 0t Which of the following winter activities do you or household members undertake on Shoreview lakes, if any? YES NO DKR 196 . Ice fishing? 27t 73;; O!k 197. Snowmobiling? 7& 93_V OAS 198 . Skiing? 20 72%- 0! 199 . Are there any other summer or winter activities you or household members undertake on Shoreview lakes? NO ANSWER, 85t; SKATE, 9t; WALK, 9t; PICNIC, SAC. Moving on. . . . 200 . Do you recall receiving the City YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86t newsletter, titled "The Shore NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13!� Review, " during the past year? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .1k IF "YES, " ASK: 201. Do you or any members of your YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93°s household regularly read it? NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7t DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0t 202 . Do you tend to keep it around KEEP AROUND. . . . . . . . . . . 60%- for later reference or toss TOSS IT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32% it after you have read ABOUT EQUAL (VOL. ) . . . . . 7* through it? - DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . _2t 18 203 . How effective is the city VERY EFFECTIVE. . . . . . . .43% newsletter in keeping you in- SOMEWHAT EFFECTIVE. . . . 39% formed about activities in NOT TOO EFFECTIVE. . . . . .2% the city -- very effective, NOT AT ALL EFFECTIVE. . .1% somewhat effective, not too DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .21k effective, or not at all ef- fective? 204 . How effective is the city VERY EFFECTIVE. . . . . . . .56% newsletter in keeping you in- SOMEWHAT EFFECTIVE. . . .38% formed about city-sponsored NOT TOO EFFECTIVE. . . . . .3% recreation programs -- very NOT AT ALL EFFECTIVE. . . 1% effective, somewhat effec- DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .2% tive, not too effective, or not at all effective? 205 . Does your household currently YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .52%- subscribe to cable television? NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0t IF "YES, - ASK: 206. Would you say you watch the FREQUENTLY. . . . . . . . . . . . .3% local government access char- OCCASIONALLY. . . . . . . . . .31% nel 16 frequently, occasion- RARELY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39% ally, rarely, or not at all? NOT AT ALL. . . . . . . . . . . .27t DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% 10-1 207. Would you say you watch City FREQUENTLY. . . . . . . . . . . . . 5% Council and/or Planning Com- OCCASIONALLY. . . . . . . . . .251; mission telecasts frequently, RARELY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40s occasionally, rarely, or not NOT AT ALL. . . . . . . . . . . .30k at all? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .0% 208 . Would you like to see more YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20% local programming and other NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69% community information on DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . .11°s Channel 16? IF "YES, " ASK: 209. Anything in particular? (N=421 NO ANSWER, 43%; MORE FOR KIDS, 5%; SCHOOL, 19%; CITY EVENTS, 31%; PARK INFORMATION, 20. Which of the following newspapers do you regularly read? YES NO DKR 210 . The Star-Tribune 58% 42% 0% 211. The Pioneer Press? 629c 38% 0% 212 . The Shoreview Bulletin? 82t 17% 1% 213 . The Shoreview. Press? 65% 33% 2% 19 214 . Which of those newspapers is your primary source of information on city government and activities? NO ANSWER, 6%; PIONEER PRESS, 21%; SHOREVIEW BULLETIN, 48*; STAR-TRIBUNE, 13%; SHOREVIEW PRESS, 12%. 215 . In general, how would you rate , EXCELLENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . 10% your level of information about' GOOD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54% city government and community ONLY FAIR. . . . . . . . . . . . .26% activities -- excellent, good, POOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8% only fair, or poor? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .2% Changing topics. . . . Now, just a few more questions for demographic purposes. . . . 216. What is your age, please? 18-24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3% 25-34. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lit 35-44 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36% 45-54. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..28k S5-64 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13% 65 AND OVER. . . .. . . . . . . . . 9$ REFUSED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0% Could you tell me how many people in each of the. following age groups live in your household. Let ' s start oldest to youngest . . . 217. First, persons over 657 0, 91k; 1, St; 2, 5t. 218 . Other adults, including 0, 6% 1, 13%; 2, 73k; L yourself? 3+, 9%. 219 . School-aged children? 0, 58%; 1, 13k; 2, 20%; 3+, 9% . 220 . Pre-schoolers? 0, 81%; 1, 14%; 2+, St. 221. Do you rent or own your present RENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9% residence? OWN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .81% REFUSED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0% 222. Are you single, married, widowed, SINGLE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12% or divorced? MARRIED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77% WIDOWED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4s DIVORCED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6% REFUSED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0% 223 . Are you or is any member of your YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20% household a member of a private NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .80% health club? UNSURE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0% 20 224 . What is your occupation and the occupation of your spouse or partner, if appropriate? [CODED AS HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD) PROFESSIONAL-TECHNICAL, 29%; OWNER-MANAGER, 31%; CLERICAL- SALES, 18%; BLUE COLLAR., 10%; RETIRED, 10&; SCATTERED, 3% 225 . Could you tell me your approximate UNDER $25,000. . . . . . . . . . 6%_ pre-tax yearly household income? $25, 000-$49, 999. . . . . . .24V Does the income lie. . . (READ $50, 000-$74, 999. . . . . . .27% CATEGORIES) $75, 000-$99, 999. . . . . . . 17% $100, 000-124, 999. . . . . . . 6t $125, 000-$149, 999. . . . . . 1% $150, 000 & OVER. . . . . . . . 3k DON'T KNOW. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1% REFUSED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15k 226 . Gender (BY OBSERVATION) MALE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51% FEMALE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49% 21 DE'_ i :� 1 F'c'='_"Jr='_ DECISION RESOURCES, LTD. CITY OF FRIDLEY 3128 Dean Court December, 1995 Minneapolis, Mn 55416 FINAL VERSION Hello, I 'm of Decision Resources, Ltd. , a polling firm located i Minneapolis . We have been retained by the City of Fridley to speak with a random sample of residents about issues facing the community. This survey is being conducted because the City Council and City Staff are interested in your opinions and suggestions about current and future city needs . I want to assure you that all individual responses will be held strictly confidential; only summaries of the entire sample will be reported. I would like to begin by reading some statements about the pro- grams offered by the Fridley Recreation Department and the Springbrook Nature Center. Based upon what you know or have heard, please tell me whether you strongly agree, agree, dis- agree, or strongly disagree with each statement. If you don' t know just say so. . . . STA AGR DIS STD DKR 1. The programs sponsored at the Springbrook Nature Center are interesting and educational . 18% 53t 2 1%- 27% 2 . The City of Fridley offers a sufficient variety of programs for seniors . 9t 4 2 t 39s 1t 44t 3 . The summer playground programs offered in the City are well run. 13t 42t 21; it 42t 4 . The adult sports leagues (i.e. softball and basketball) spon- sored by the City are well-run, lOs 37W l it 5196 5 . The youth sports leagues spon- sored by various youth sports associations are well run. 12* 44t 2%- 096 41t 6 . The City offers a sufficient variety of recreational programs for all ages . 18t 58%_ 4!k it 19t 7 . The fees for recreation programs and services in Fridley are reasonable. 13t 60%, 4t 1%- 23� 8 . The Fridley Recreation Department provides timely and complete in- formation about its programs and registration procedures . 18t 601k 6!� it 16W 9 . Overall, I am satisfied with the recreation programs and activities that are available in Fridley. 18%- 67°6 4% ilk lit I would like you to consider the City water and sewer systems, streets, and parks. Based upon what you know or have heard, please tell me whether you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree. If you don' t have an opinion just say so. . . 1 , ' _,`_,�`„,_�i`- L,E'-I'=;;Ort F'E_r,f_IF'CE'=• Sr,l F'�_�- TAt1 -1 STA AGR DIS STD DKR 10 . I have had no problem with the water pressure in the City of Fridley during the past twelve months . 22W 63W 9%. 41; 2% 11 . Fridley' s drinking water is free from discoloration or sediment. 11% 55% 23$ 9% 2t 12 . The City' s sewer system is free from problems that cause sewer backups. 13* 60% 9W 3* 15* 13 . When there is a sewer backup in Fridley, Cfty employees resolve the problem quickly. 6$ 471 4t 2t 42W 14 . Pavement markings on City streets (i.e. center lines, crosswalks, and turning arrows) are easy to see. 13* 70* 12V 3* 3W 15 . Stop signs, speed limit signs, and other traffic signs are well maintained and easy to see. 17W 77W 4$ 1$ it 16 . Street name signs are well main- tained and easy to see. 18V 77W 4t 0k it 17 . The City streets are in good condition. 13* 68* 14$ 4t 1k 18 . The Street Department crews do a . good job of pothole patching. 13t 64* 10 4t 2t 19 . The Street Department crews do a good job of snow and ice removal on City streets. 19W 69t 10W 3W 1t 20 . The City' s medians and boulevards are well maintained. 12t 78t 5& 1t 4t 21 . The mowing of grass in City parks has been satisfactory_ 13t 73t 3°s 0W lit 22 . City parks are kept free of cans, glass, trash and litter. 14t 68t 7* it lit 23 . There are enough picnic facilities in City parks. 12t 67%- 7t it 13W 24 . There is sufficient amount of children' s play equipment in city parks. 10t 63k 7%- It 19t 25 . There is enough parking available for those using City parks. 10W 68t 9% 2k lit 26 . The Springorook Nature Center trails are in good condition. 9t 60t 3t 0$ 20 27. Athletic fields in City parks are in good playing condition. lit 62t 3t 0t 24t 28 . The play equipment in City parks is kept in good operating condition. 8t 68t 3t 1t 21t I would like to continue your evaluation of City services by reading several other statements about programs administered by the Fridley Community Development Department. 2 t7, '4 9-G l r,r, DES I ?DH PEDDUFl_E =r,1 F'%id R I 724 STA AGlR DIS STD DKR 29 . If I have a problem with high weeds or trash in my neighborhood, I can count on the City to correct the problem. 9% 54t 7t 2% 29t 30 . If someone is using his/her pro- perty for purposes not allowed by zoning laws, the City responds effectively to those who voice complaints. 7t 46% 5V 2% 40t 31. The City'S building inspectors perform capably and reliably in enforcing city and state building codes. 7t 48t 5t It 38% 32 . The City' s recycling hauler has been reliable in picking up my recyclable materials. 20 64$ 3* 0.$ 6% 33 . The City' s program brochures and other advertising about the City' s recycling program have helped keep me well informed. 26W 64% 5t 0t 5% Next, I would like to read you some statements about Fridley' s public safety issues. Based upon what you know or have heard, please tell me whether you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree with each statements. STA AGR DIS STD DKR 34 . Fridley police officers are �... courteous in their handling of people. 20t 61W 5* lk 12t 35 . Fridley police respond in good time to requests for emergency service. 22t 53t 3%- 0% 21k 36 . I am satisfied with the services of the Fridley Police Department. 25t 65t 3* 1$ 6t 37. The City' s firefighters respond very quickly to emergencies. 18t 50%� 2�6 1$ 29t 38 . Our firefighters are very effective in handling emergencies. 18t 48t 1t it 31% 39 . I am satisfied with the services of the Fridley Fire Department. 21% 61W It 1t 171k Moving on. . . . . . 40 . Have you or other members of your YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26k family called 911 during the past NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72W twelve months? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .2% 3 512-92'.-E 1r,r, DEC I'.I Qr1 PE-10UR1i=E, 561 P015 41 . Since you have lived in Fridley, INCREASED. . . . . . . . . . . . . 36* do you feel that crime in your DECREASED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7!k neighborhood has increased, de- REMAIN ABOUT SAME. . . . . 55% creased or remained about the DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .2$ same? 42 . Do you feel the amount of police INCREASED. . . . . . . . . . . . .35%, patrolling in your neighborhood DECREASED. . . . . . . . . . . . . .2!k should be increased, decreased, -or REMAIN ABOUT SANE. . . . .60* remain about the same? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .3$ 43 . Do you think speed limit enforce- INCREASED. . . . . . . . . . . . .19* ment in your neighborhood should DECREASED. . . . . . . . . . . . . .5!k be increased, decreased, or remain REMAIN ABOUT SAME. . . . .74% about the same? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .1t The Fridley Police Department has initiated a park safety program using bicycle patrol and community service officers. 44. Have you or members of your house- YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .544; hold observed them in City parks? NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44%, DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .2$ 45 . To what extent do you feel that GREAT DEAL. . . . . . . . . . . .10 the use of these police personnel SOMEWHAT. . . . . . . . . . . . . .46% has improved the safety of City VERY LITTLE. . . . . . . . . . . .94; parks -- great deal, somewhat, NOT AT ALL. . . . . . . . . . . .2* very little, or not at all? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . .27t The City is also interested in how you feel about its responsive- ness to your inquiries and complaints. After I read you the following statements, please tell me if you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree. If you don' t know, just say so. . . . . . STA AGR DIS STD DKR 46 . The City responds promptly to citizen inquiries and complaints. 10%� 58k 7W 2!k 23t 47 . If and when I want to, I feel as though I can have a say about the way our City officials are running things . 9t 63% 14% 5t 10!k 48 . How would you rate the spending of EXCELLENT. . . . . . . . . . . . .10% your tax money by the City of GOOD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64g Fridley -- excellent, good, only ONLY FAIR. . . . . . . . . . . . .14%- fair or poor? POOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6W DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .5% 4 DEC:ISICIN RE=01_IPC:Ec; 5r,1 PL_tr, Jr'H 24 r. 19: 1 IF "ONLY FAIR" OR "POOR, " ASK: 49 . How should -taxpayer' s money be spent differently? [N=100] `~f NO ANSWER, 23%; TAX LESS, 11%; LESS ON PARK & REC, 9W; ONLY ESSENTIALS, 22$; WATCH DEVELOPMENT, 8%; IMPROVE ROADS, 7%; MORE POLICE, 12t; MORE ON SCHOOLS, 59k; SCATTERED RESPONSES, 3%. 50 . How has taxpayer's money been used poorly? [Nz100] NO ANSWER, 43%; OVERTAX, 15%; STREETS, 12%; REDEVELOPMENT, 10; SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS, 51r; _ SOCIAL CONCERNS, 4%; NOT ON POLICE, 4%; OTHER, 3t. In addition to asking about city services, I would like to ask you some questions about your neighborhood. Please tell for each of the following items, whether you are very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, not too satisfied, or no'c at all satisfied. If you feel the statement does not apply to your neighborhood or you don' t know, just say so. . . . . VSAT SSAT NTOO NALL DKR 52 . The condition and appearance of single family housing in your neighborhood. 38t 50w 4% OW 8% 53 . The condition and appearance of duplexes in your neighborhood. 10w 38t 6k 3w 43* 54 . The condition and appearance of apartment buildings in your neighborhood. 13k 43t 7W 4t 33% 55 . The condition and appearance of your home. 585� 37t 3% it 19k 56 . The safety of your home. 52% 42t 4& 1t 1t 57 . Your neighborhood is a safe place to Jive. 42$ 524; 4W 1t 1%_ 58 . The availability of parks and recreational areas. 40t 54t 3% 1% 2%� 59 . Your confidence in the future of your neighborhood as a good place to live. 37% 52t 6%_ 3%- 2!C 60 . Access and availability to bikeways and walkways. 251; 57%; 9W 3t 6W 61 . Access to bus routes. 27%; 51% 5% 3* 15w 62 . Neighborhood street lighting. 22t 56t 13t 7$ 2% Consolidation of governmental services has been a topic in the State legislature for a couple of years_ Some policy makers feel that several cities could work together or cities and counties could combine certain departments, such as police, public works and fire, to create larger, more cost effective and efficient operations . Others argue that bigger is not necessarily better 5 �•� ��� uluo G12-':D._'_+-G1t7,G DEC-1-ION RE'SO IRf-E= =r,1 F•0 TAH 2-4 and may produce cost in terms of quality of services and lack of ^ responsiveness . 63 . Do you favor or oppose the Con- FAVOR/STRONGLY. . . . . . . .10t solidation of public services with FAVOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22* neighboring cities? (WAIT FOR A OPPOSE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27%; RESPONSE) Do you feel strongly OPPOSE/STRONGLY. . . . . . .30W that way? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . .11!k There have also been discussions among policy makers about the desirability of neighboring cities Combining into one legal entity and dividing services to residents within the combined area. 64 . Would you favor or oppose the con- FAVOR/STRONGLY. . . . . . . . .9t solidation of Fridley with Colum- FAVOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 0 bia Heights and Spring Lake Park? OPPOSE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30* (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) Do you feel OPPOSE/STRONGLY. . . . . . .28* strongly that way? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .9%- A number of area communities have adopted ordinances requiring comprehensive housing inspections prior to the sale of residen- tial property. In some instances, the city requires correction of code-related deficiencies before property is sold. 65 . Should the City of Fridley require YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67W point of sale housing inspections? No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28%- DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 7* IF "YES, " ASK: 66 . Should the City require that YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .89t code-related deficiencies be NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9�k corrected prior to the sale DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .2%- of residential property? (N=3353 Over the last three years, Fridley has joined Columbia Heights, Hilltop, and Anoka County in supporting a community values pro- gram. 67. Are you familiar with the seven YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25W core values that this program has NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .75%- sought to promote? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .1t The City began holding evening hours in October of this year between 5 :00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday nights . 68 . Were you aware that City offices YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2896 were open during this time? NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .711k DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .1t 6 51 - -9-a 166 UEi_t' I Qt I RE=DQURi-E' JAhJ 24 '96 1' : 16 IF "YES, " ASK: 69 . Have you used City Hall ser- YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20% vices during these hours? NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .80% [N=1381 DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0$ IF "NO" IN #68, ASK: 70 . Do you foresee that you will YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .389 take advantage of these ex- NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56% tended hours? [N-365] DON'T KNOW/RBFUSED. . . . .5k The City of Fridley recently conducted a city-wide clean-up program. Please tell me if your household participated in any of the following clean-up week activities . YES NO DKR 71. Placement of brush at the curbside? 61%; 39t 0%; 72. Placement of refuse at the curbside? 51$ 48* 1$ 73 . Transportation of materials to the city' s central drop-off point at Columbia Arena? 38% 621; 0% 74 . Have appliances picked up? 19%- 81% 0* 75 . Have used furniture picked up? 17t 831; 1%� 76 . Dispose of junk cars? 8%- 91t 1t Financial constraints require that future clean-up week activi- ties be scaled back. On a scale of 1 to 3, with 1 being defi- nitely keep and 3 being definitely get rid of, please tell me which of the following clean-up week activities you would keep. 77 . Curbside brush pick-up? 7796 12%, 7% 4%- 78 . Curbside refuse pick-up? 76k. 14$ 6%- 0 79 . Availability of a central drop-off point for lumber, concrete, tires, scrap metal, etc? 70%, 19!5 8%� 4t 80. Curbside appliance pick-up? 50% 27t 19%- 54; 81 . Curbside furniture pick-up? 40 26t 23% 4% 82 . Disposal of junk cars? 32t 24W 37W 6% 83 . How would you improve the City' s clean-up week program? NO ANSWER, 421,; NOTHING NEEDED, 21t; MORE OFTEN, 6*; DO A GREAT JOB, 12&; DID NOT PARTICIPATE, 2t; LONGER HOURS - MORE ON WEEKEND, 2t; TAKE HAZARDOUS WASTE, 2%;; BETTER ORGANIZED, 3t; BRUSH PICK-UP, 2*; NEED MORE INFORMATION, 5%-; TAKE MORE ITEMS, 2W; SCATTERED, 2�k . 7 • -' ' � � - - V L V V DEC I'.10H RE'=:i URI - -- -.� -E�= 84 . How much more in additional pro- NOTHING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23* perty taxes would you be willing $2 .50 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .181 to pay a year to support the cost $5.00. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20% of clean-up week? (SELECT A RAN- $7.50. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6% DOM STARTING POINT) Would you $10 .00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10$ support $ per year. (DEPENDING $12 .50 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0% ON RESPONSE) What about $ per $15.00. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .81; year. DON'T KNOW. . . . . . . . . . . .14% REFUSED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1% The City of Fridley has maintained a standard for street lighting that generally limits the placement of street lights to one every 1,200 feet. 85 . Knowing that an additional street FAVOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47W light costs about $400 per year to OPPOSE. . . . . . . . . .47% operate, would you favor the DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .6%- adoption of a new street lighting policy that reduces the distance between street lights? 86 . Do you feel that additional street YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39k lighting is needed on your street? NO. . . , . . . . . . . . . .60$ DON'TKNOW/REFUSED. . . . .It 87 . Would you be willing to pay an YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48W additional $4 to $5 per year in NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49% '^ property taxes to support addi- DON'T KNOW/RFFUSED. . . . .2$ tional street lighting? The City of Fridley has been spending about $500,000 per year for an annual street reconstruction program, whereby residential streets are systematically upgraded. As part of this program, asphalt curbs and gutters have been replaced with concrete curbs and gutters . Only the cost of the curbs and gutters has been assessed to property owners . The remainder of the cost has been paid for from the city and state funds . 88 . Has the street in front of your YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38% property been upgraded in the last NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54t four years? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 8% IF "YES, " ASK: 89 . Were you satisfied with the YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .914; quality of the work? NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9W [N=191] DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .0% IF "NO, " ASK: 90 . How could the quality of the work been improved? [N=17] .�11 NO ANSWER, 6%�; BETTER MATERIALS, 65%'; KEEP ON SCHEDULE, 6%; SMOOTHER SURFACE, 23t . 8 612-929-61E.F DEC IS110 t KESOURt E'= 561 Fitt JAN 24 '',+r_.. 1S: 17 91 . Do you think it is a good idea YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .771 that the City continues to spend NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15!k about $500, 000 to $600, 000 per DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 8t year of your tax dollars to up- grade residential streets? The City of Fridley is considering building a community activity center that meets the needs of seniors, teenagers, families and people of all ages. 92. Do you feel that Fridley needs a YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62% community activity center that NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29W meets the needs of all age groups? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .9* IF "NO, " ASK: 93 . Do you favor or oppose the FAVOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . .15!k construction of separate fac- OPPOSE. . . . . . . . . . . .77%- ilities for seniors? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .St EN-1471 94. How much would you be willing to NOTHING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39!k pay in additional property tax a $2.00. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1596 month to fund the construction $4.00. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10W and operation of a multi-purpose $6.00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8g community activity center? (SELECT $8.00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4% A RANDOM STARTING POINT) Would you $10 .00. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12% support $ per year. (DEPENDING DON'T KNOW. . . . . . . . . . . .12t ON RESPONSE) What about $ per REFUSED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1% year. 95 . How much would you be willing to NOTHING. . . . . . . . . . . . . .42! pay in additional property taxes $2. 00. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14t to fund the construction and oper- $4.00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11!k ation of a Fridley senior center? $6.00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9% (SELECT A RANDOM STARTING POINT) $8 .00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2!k Would you support $ per year. $10 . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7* (DEPENDING': ON RESPONSE) What about DON'T KNOW. . . . . . . . . . . .13� $ per year. REFUSED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1% I will now read you a last of facilities that could be included in a multi-purpose community center. Even if you do not feel a center is needed, for each one, please tell me whether it is very important, somewhat important, not too important or not at all important to be included in a community center. VIM SIM NTO NAL DKR 96 . Additional gymnasium space for youth and adult recreation pro- grams? 19* 43W 20t 14t 5$ 97 . An indoor swimming pool? 13% 39t 26t 18* 3%- 98. Conununity meeting rooms? 10$ 52* 18t 16% 3� 9 ,1 9 `3-61G.G. DEC P__.1OfI FEE,:-.i_iRCE= 561 P11 rHra _24 VIM SIM NTO NAL DKR 99 . Community facilities for banquets and receptions? 8t 431 25!k 20% 4$ 100 . A drop-in teen center? 24W 51t 10W 11% 41r 101 . Congregate dining facilities for seniors? 17* 52% 13* 13t Et- 102 . Arts and crafts rooms for seniors? 13$ 54* 14$ 14% 4%' 103 . An indoor running track? 8t 35t 28$ 25% 3$ 104 . Rooms for aerobics classes and dance instruction? 9W 30 27% 23* 5t 105 . An equipped exercise area? 9* 38% 26W 23$ 4V 106. Weight lifting facilities? 7* 33% 28% 28% 4% The City of Fridley has operated municipal liquor stores since 1949 . The theory behind the municipal operation of liquor stores is that it helps to better control the sale of liquor from the point of view of location and sales of product to minors . The liquor operations also provide a steady source of revenue that may be used as a source of funding for local government opera- tions. Currently, the City has two stores. One is on Highway 65 near East Moore Lake Drive, and the other at the Holly Center on Mississippi Street. Although our stores have varied in degree of profitability from one year to the next, they have generally been profitable. 107 . Should the City remain in the YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .69%; liquor business? NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 0 DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .7W 108 . Have you or members of your house- YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55!k hold shopped at the Fridley Liquor NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45% Stores this year? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .0$ IF "YES, " ASK: 109 . Are there any improvements to our liquor operations that you feel would add to the convenience and attrac- tiveness of our stores? (IF "YES" : ) What would they be? [N=274] NO ANSWER, 9%-; ' NONE, 72!k; NORE SELECTION, 7$; BETTER LIGHTING, 2t; TOO SMALL, 3t; TOO PRICEY, 2$; POOR LOCATION, 5t. IF AN IMPROVEMENT IS GIVEN, ASK: 110 . Why do you feel that way? (N354] NO ANSWER, 2t; MORE SELECTION NEEDED, 35$; PLACE TOO SMALL FOR INVENTORY, 17*; PLACE HARD TO FIND, 19!k; PRICES TOO HIGH, 18t; POOR LOCATION, 6t. The City of Fridley operates the Springbrook Nature Center seven days a week. 10 6.1_ 92'3—r 166 L,E,_IS IGi i RED—DURCE— TL:,rd .`q ill. Have you or members of your house- YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .241; hold participated in any Spring- NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .76t brook Nature Center programs this DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0t year? IF "YES, " ASK: 112 . What programs did you attend? [N=120] NO ANSWER, 1.5$; HIKING - WALKING, 22W; HALLOWEEN PROGRAM, 16*; SEE ANIMALS, 14%; CHILDREN'S PROGRAMS, 14%; TOUR, 11l;; CLASSES, 5k; SCATTERED, 3% . . 113 . Have you or members of your house- YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39% hold used the Springbrook Nature NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61t Center hiking trails this year? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .0V IF "YES, " ASK: 114. How often have you used them DAILY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2% this year -- daily, several SEVERAL TIMES A WEEK. . .St times a week, weekly, several WEEKLY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8!k times a month, monthly, quar- SEVERAL TIMES A MONTH.22W terly, or less often? MONTHLY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18%- [N=196] QUARTERLY. . . . . . . . . . . . .27$ LESS OFTEN. . . . . . . . . . . .17% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .1$ The Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) has spon- sored a variety of redevelopment projects including the redevel- opment of the area located in the southwest quadrant of the University Avenue/Mississippi Street intersection. We are also working toward the improvement of single family housing and apartment units in the Hyde Park area of Fridley. Additionally, we are providing three different types of rehabilitation loans for single family homeowners throughout Friday, and have acquired about a dozen blighted properties through a scattered site acqui- sition program. As we look toward future redevelopment, we would like to know your feelings about housing needs in Fridley. I will read you a list of possible developments; for each one, please tell me there is a major need, a minor need or no need at all for that type of development. MAJ MIN NON DKR 115 . Single family homes? 33* 44%- 16$ 8%_ 116 . Owner-occupied townhomes? 25% 50t 19915 6% 117. Owner-occupied condominiums? 224; 46g 25& 7% 118. Two and three bedroom apartment buildings? 28%- 35t 31% 7t 119 . One and two bedroom apartment build- ings for seniors? 451k 36% 12% 7%� 11 DEC i`=i Cii i t<:C'_ii]I_l c'= c�. F 1 _ _TA i 4 'Gr, 1 G 1 MAJ MIN NON DKR 120 . One story, owner occupied townhomes for seniors? 41% 3896 1296 8% Under state law, the Fridley HRA may levy a small property tax to support its redevelopment program. 121. Would you be willing to pay an YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55% additional $4 to $5 per year in NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38% property taxes to support these DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .7$ programs? 122 . Are you or members of your house- YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26V hold considering moving from your NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .73%; current residence? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .It IF "YES, " ASK: 123 . Would you consider buying YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .71% newly constructed residential NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . .28% property in Fridley if it met DON'TKNOW/REFUSED. . . . .It your needs? [N=129] There has been some discussion about requiring all property owners that have gravel driveways in Fridley to construct hard surface driveways. 124. If property owners were given FAVOR/STRONGLY. . . . . . . .17W three or four years to improve FAVOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38% their driveways, would you favor OPPOSE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16!' or oppose imposing this as a City OPPOSE/STRONGLY. . . . . . .20t requirement? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . .10t Do you feel strongly that way? Currently, the City has to demonstrate that a vehicle is unli- censed or inoperable before it may be removed from residential property. The City is also required to give the owner up to 20 days to remove the vehicle before the City can remove it . By contrast, the City of Minneapolis will tag and remove vehicles from private property with only three days' notice. 125,. Would you favor or oppose changing FAVOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62% our ordinance in a manner that OPPOSE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35W allows the City Code enforcement DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .3t officer or police to remove junk vehicles with three days' notice? IF "NO, " ASK: r\ 12 612-9 9-r=.1r.6 E1Fi I'=;it 1tJ FF'_, IRi-F= SE-1 P14 JAH .24 ''+ 1:2-t 126 . Would you leave our ordinance LEAVE THE WAY IT IS . . .76% the way it is or adopt a new ADOPT LESS SEVERE. . _ _ .22% notice provision that is less DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .2% severe than the provisions in Minneapolis? [N-1761 The City of Fridley Police Department began "Project Safety Net" during the summer and fall of 1995 . This program has two major elements, a "drop-off" center for curfew violators, and a weekend "drop-in" center for supervised but mainly unstructured teen socializing. 127. Do you believe that our police de- YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .90$ partment should strictly enforce a NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .'7% uniform curfew ordinance? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .3% 128. Do you believe that the City YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62W should dedicate the resources ne- NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34k cessary to provide counselors and DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .4* space for teenagers who have been picked up for curfew violations? 129 . Do you believe it is a good idea YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82%- for the City to support a super- NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15%, vised teen drop-in center on at DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .2$ least one weekend night? A recent study indicates that residents may save about $3 .00 per month on the cost of refuse collection if the City were to change from a free enterprise system, where there are multiple haulers, u to an organized collection system, where there is one hauler for the entire city. 130 . If there are long-term savings SUPPORT/STRONGLY. . . . . .19% from a single hauler system, would SUPPORT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20W you support or oppose a change OPPOSE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27$ from our current system where res- OPPOSE/STRONGLY. . . . . . .21t idents may choose from a variety DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . .13t of haulers to a system where the city chooses one hauler for the whole city? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) Do you feel strongly that way? IF "YES, " ASK: 13 131 . About how much money per NOTHING ADDITIONAL/ month would you need to save CHANGE FOR FREE. .15%, before you would be willing $2 .00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17$ to make this change? (SELECT $4 .00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31% A RANDOM STARTING POINT) How $6 .00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15$ about $ per year? (DEPEND- $8 .00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3%; ING ON RESPONSE) How about $10 .00. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7k $ per year? $12 .00. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4$ [N=196) NO AMOUNT/NEVER CHANGE.2* DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .8%- On another topic. . . . . . . 132 . Do you receive and read the "Frid- YES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .88% ley Focus" on a weekly basis? NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12$ DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .11' 133 . How often do you watch Fridley FREQUENTLY. . . . . . . . . . . . .Or City Council meetings on cable OCCASIONALLY. . . . . . . . . .11%- television -- frequently, occa- RARELY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24sk sionally, rarely or not at all? NOT AT ALL. . . . . . . . . . . .60g DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .1% 134 . How often do you watch cable FREQUENTLY. . . . . . . . . . . . .3& television programming found on OCCASIONALLY. . . . . . . . . .13k the Public Access channel, ETC RARELY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20W Channel 33? NOT AT ALL. . . . . . . . . . . .62k DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .2!. A growing number of local governments are using on-line computer services (the Internet) to establish a city "Home Page. " This "Home Page" serves as a community bulletin board and also provides citizens the opportunity to communicate directly with local officials through electronic mail . 135 . Do you have a personal computer YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29$ and modem that would allow you NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .71% access to the Internet? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0t 136 . If a Fridley "Home Page" were VERY LIKELY. . . . . . . . . . .10k available on the Internet, how SOMEWHAT LIKELY. . . . . . .14$ likely would you be to use it -- NOT TOO LIKELY. . . . . . . .19t very likely, somewhat likely, not NOT AT ALL LIKELY. . . . .44t too likely, or not at all likely? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . .12W Now, for demographic purposes only. . . . . . 137 . Approximately how many years have LESS THAN TWO YEARS . . .14% you lived in Fridley? THREE TO FIVE YEARS . . .17!k SIX TO TEN YEARS . . . . . .15� ELEVEN TO TWENTY YEARS17W 21 TO THIRTY YEARS . . . .17* OVER THIRTY YEARS. . . . .20t DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . .0t 14 r•i�-'+-''+-6165 LEi=I'=iCt! FE'_;OURCE= =r,1 Fi= T17A9J 4 138 . Do you own or rent your present OWN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7196 residence? RENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29%, DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . _ _ . 0W 139 . Would you please tell me what your 18-24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6% age is? (READ THE FOLLOWING CATE- 25-34. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17% GORIES) 35-44. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22t 45-54 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20% 55-64 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17% 65 AND OVER. . . . . . . . . . .18% REFUSED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0% 140. What is your occupation and the occupation of your spouse or partner, if applicable? PROFESSIONAL-TECHNICAL, 17%; OWNER-MANAGER, 19%; CLERICAL- SALES, 15%; BLUE COLLAR, 21$; RETIRED, 20k; OTHER, 8%. 141. How many people under the age of NONE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .65$ 18 live in your household? ONE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14W TWO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13t THREE OR MORE. . . . . . . . . 8W 142 . How marry people between the ages NONE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15* of 18-64 live in your household? ONE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23g TWO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49% TIME OR MORE. . . . . . . . 13$ 143 . How many people 65 years of age NONE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .76% or older live in your household? ONE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14% TWO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10* 144. How often do you vote in local ALWAYS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43%, city or school elections -- al- OFTEN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28$ ways, often, sometimes, rarely, SOMETIMES . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12% or not at all? RARELY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .796 NOT AT ALL. . . . . . . . . . . .11$ DON'T KNOW/REFUSED. . . . . 0% Now for the last question, please keep in mind your answers are strictly confidential. . . . . 145 . Which of the following categories UNDER $25, 00 . . . . . . . . . . 13%, includes your annual pre-tax $25, 000-$35, 000. . . . . . .1.8% household income? Please stop me $35, 001-$50, 000. . . . . . .2496 when I read the right one. $50,001-$75, 000. . . . . . . 1.4% OVER $75, 000 . . . . . . . . . . 10$ DON'T KNOW. . . . . . . . . . . . .3% REFUSED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18t 146 . Gender (BY OBSERVATION) MALE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49* FEMALE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51% 15 �. lr,r, DE:=:I' Ii=IP1 F'E:iA_IRCE' 5r,1 F'17 J iP..! -+ 1�4. 1' '_1 147 . Area of City (FROM LIST) WARD 1 PRECINCT 1 . . . . . .9% ram" WARD 1 PRECINCT 2 . . . . . lot WARD 1 PRECINCT 3 . . . . . . 8t WARD 1 PRECINCT 4 . . . . . . 8t WARD 2 PRECINCT 1 . . . . . .8t WARD 2 PRECINCT 2 . . . . . . 7k WARD 2 PRECINCT 3 . . . . . 104; WARD 2 PRECINCT 4 . . . . . .9% WARD 3 PRECINCT I . . . . . . 8t WARD 3 PRECINCT 2. . . . . 10W WARD 3 PRECINCT 3 . . . . . . 6W WARD 3 PRECINCT 4 . . . . . .7W 16 `!' A .� MEMORANDUM Date: March 25, 1996 From: Marty Asleson To: Lino Lakes Park and Recreation Board Subject: Committees There were two committees discussed with recommendations made at the last Park and Recreation Board meeting. These were the trails committee and the survey committee. The survey committee is still in the hands of the administrative assistant at this time. Dan is communicating with Decision Resources on the timing of the survey. I have enclosed a copy of a recent Decision Resources survey for the City of Fridley, and Shorview. As we discussed at the last meeting, this is a reminder to start thinking about your survey questions. Write them down and bring them to the Park Board meeting, or drop them in our drop box on the parks and recreation building, or fax them into us at 784-7227. The trails committee will go to the next council work-session, '� and the following council meeting for approval. NORTH OAKS HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION RECREATION SURVEY � Dear North Oaks residents: 67-* JT(- kWw, The recreation areas in North Oaks have always been an integral part of the community. As the North Oaks community has grown, the recreation areas and programs have grown to meet the needs. For example, from 1980.1990 the number of North Oaks households will grow from 850 to 1255. The present growth of North Oaks and its future expansion plans call for a reevaluation of our recreational facilities. We are looking to the community for involvement with our recreational planning. In order to determine the recreational needs of the community, we are asking for your assistance by completing the attached recreation survey.This survey is an important tool in developing a comprehensive recreation plan. A good recreation program and adequate facilities is a valuable asset to the entire community. Your completing the survey will be a good start in helping the community. Thank you. Audrey Friedman Andy Carncross RECREATION FACILITY QUESTIONNAIRE In completing this questionnaire, it is important that: 1) All the questions be answered. 2) The questionnaire be completed and returned within one week. Please take a few minutes NOW and answer the questions! 1. How long have you been a resident of North Oaks? 2. How many people live in your household? Please list all members of your family by sex and age. MALE/FEMALE AGE 3. One area of particular concern is the present supply of facilities and opportunities for outdoor recreation activities. Which one outdoor recreation activity do you feel is in the greatest need of additional facilities or opportunities for your enjoyment in the Norib_Oaks--ama 4. Your need for the additional facilities or opportunities is: (Circle one) small 1 2 3 4 5 very great 5. What do you feel is a reasonable distance for you to travel to participate in this activity? mile(s). 6. How do you now travel to this activity? Auto Bike Walk 7. How do your children now travel to this activity? Auto Bike Walk 8. Which outdoor recreation activity do you feel has the second greatest need for additional facilities or opportunities in the North Oaks area? 9. Your need for these additional facilities or opportunities is: (Circle one) small 1 2 3 4 5' very great 10. What do you feel is a reasonable distance for you to travel to participate in this activity? mile(s). 11. How do you now travel to this activity? Auto Bike _Walk 12. Should more play areas — consisting of play structures(swings, slides, climbing structures)and adjacent open grass areas for unstructured play — be developed in North Oaks? Yes No 13. Do you or members of your family go outside of North Oaks for any recreational activities? Yes No If yes, what kind? Where? Sex/Age? 14. Would you like to see any new recreational programs developed? Yes No If yes, what type(s): 15. The adjacent map of North Oaks is to help Location Map NaM� us get a general idea as to where you live. �l✓ ;---J Please shade the general area in which ! „ you live. 16. Below, check the box to the left of the acti vities that you and your family participated 'in during the year of January 1, 1980 to —, 1,98d� UeCenIDCf 31, you iN Nufii�--ks. Bicycling T-Ball Swimming Soccer V Picnicking Football Volleyball Snow Shoeing Sailing Canoeing Tennis Ice Skating Baseball x Country Skiing "! _Softball Other P. -3 /��,z% Arit 14An1t�/hs 17. We would like to know about changes in both yours and other members of your family's personal outdoor recreation activities during the last 24 months. Specifically, we would like to learn about activities either you or members of your family have taken up, quit participating in, increased or decreased participation. 18. During the past 12 months have you or members of your family taken up for the first time, any new outdoor recreation activities? Yes No If yes, please list the activities and indicate the number of times you participated in the last 12 months. Activity Member of Family(Age/Sex) Number of Times 19. During the past 12 months have you or members of your family stopped participating in any outdoor recreation activities? Yes No If yes, please list the activities. Activity Member of Family(Age/Sex) 20. Did you or members of your family increase participation in any outdoor recreation activities in the past 112 month period just ending compared to the 12 months before that period? Yes No If yes, please list your three most increased activities in the blanks labeled A, B, C below. In the space provided to the right of each activity you list, estimate the number of times you participated in each activity in the 12 months just ending, the number of times you participated the previous 12 months, and the number of times you expect to participate during the upcoming 12 months. For activities that take up most o the day, one day equals one participation. Member of Past Present Future Family(Age/Sex) Activity 12 Months 12 Months 12 Months A. B. C. 21. Did you decrease your participation in any outdoor recreation activities in the 12 month period just ending compared to the 12 months before that period? Yes No If yes, please list your three most decreased activities in the blanks labeled A, B, C below. In-the space provided to the right of each activity you list, estimate the number of times you participated in each activity in the 12 months just ending, the number of times you participated the previous 12 months, and the number of times you expect to participate during the upcoming 12 months. For activities that take up most of the day, one day equals one participation. Activity Member of Past Present Future Family(Age/Sex) 12 Months 12 Months 12 Months A. B. C. — --- --- �_�-- _ 22. Do members of your family swim at the Chippewa Middle School Pool? Yes No If yes, please list the number of times you or members of your family use this facility. 23. Do you have a home pool? Yes No 24. If a community pool was in North Oaks would you use such a facility? Yes No 25. Now that the Memorial Day Carnival is a regular event of the Home Owners' Association, would you like to see more community activities developed for different times of the year? Yes No What types? Thank you for your help. If you have any comments, please write them below: If you would like to be involved with any community,recreation projects please list your name and phone number. Please staple or tape and drop in box at gate house or mail. rl North Oaks Home Owners Association No. 1 Pleasant Lake Road "Gate House" North Oaks, Minnesota 55110 C I T Y O F INOLAW PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT DATE: 3/25/96 TO: Park Board FROM: BARRY BERNSTEIN, RECREATION PROGRAM SUPERVISOR SUBJECT: Warminghouse Season Summery I have enclosed the shelter year end report. This report indicates the attendance figures, days closed and a past year comparison. Briefly, the season went relatively well with the exception of the weird weather. The temperatures would fluctuate between -30 degrees to 44 above zero. All shelters saw a rise in attendance from last season. This could be a reflection of the way the Parks and Recreation Department schedules the hockey rinks. It was instituted last season that not all prime time hours (5-8pm) were not scheduled for hockey practice. This left hours open for the recreational hockey players. The biggest complements from residents that were reported to our office came from the neighborhoods around Lino Park and City Hall Park, Lino Park residents seemed to enjoy the newly constructed warminghouse at this park. The residents were very pleased with the way this-shelter looked and the hours we were open. The residents that used City Hall Park were Also very pleased that a hockey rink was constructed on the north side of town. This rink was used by recreational hockey players and scheduled hockey practice. You will notice the improvements to this park had a dramatic impact on the attendance. There isn't any anticipated changes for next season unless the Park Board has any recommendations. If you have any questions feel free to contact my office at 780-3782, Ext. 178. n PARK, RECREATION,FORESTRY,AND RECYCLING DEPARTMENTS 7204 LAKE DRIVE,LINO LAKES,MINNESOTA 55014 (612)464-5562 WARMINGHOUSE SHEL TER YEAR END REPORT • YEAR OF t o n PARK NOTES Total days open Opened on (Date):D(2.C' 1 g4�- ig9�- Closed on (Date): 2-0*) 1 cig(D Total days closed du to weather: 8 A)Warm days B) Cold days — Total season attendance 093 9 Average attendance per day 5z d Attendance on days temp was -10 or windchill fell under-20 dD C.1 Peak time attendance d" A) weekday 3-yesd W B) weekend S�.\)gj.cy Period of low attendance A) weekday B) weekended _ PREVIOUS YEAR COMPARISON %4h Total days open Opened on (Date): /Z 28)�j:yl Closed on (Date): Z/L/Ag Total days closed due to weather: . A)Warm da ys B) Cold days­,.�- Total season attendance 4 -o Average attendance per day U l/ Attendance on days temp was-10 or windchill fell under-20 Pe4tiine attendance-�3i ly weekday 30 o) weekend H.S— Period of low attendance A) weekday B) weekend WARMINGHOUSE SHELTER YEAR END REPORT rt. YEAR OF r1 PARK &rG t Pgrk, NOTES Total days open 55 Opened on (Date): 1OCc V" , IcA Closed on (Date):-", Zoe �g9lp Total days closed due to weather: 9 A)Warm days ,j B) Cold days Total season attendance Average attendance per day I I a Attendance on days temp was -10 or windchill fell under-20 Peak time attendance A) weekday il Q-(56a B) weekend s,)ac1oAj, Period of low attendance A) weekday LA dwl B) weekend A;jjrd a,,�, --------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- PREVIOUS YEAR COMPARISON Total days open Opened on (Date): 1 Z/zs--l5# Closed on (Date): Total days closed due to weather. . A)warm days -5- BJ Cold days 3 Total season attendance 8140 Average attendance per day 242, `e Attendance on days temp was-10 or windchill fell under,-20�_ Peak time attendance--&,ZY weekday 20 weekend 30 Period of low attendance A) weekday B) weekend WARMINGHOUSE SHEL TER YEAR END REPORT YEAR OF % yip PARK NO Total days open 5 Opened on (Date): Closed on (Date): a()H, I qQ Total days closed due to weather: A)Warm da ys 5 B) Cold days 'L Total season attendance C/o/ Average attendance per day j1PDP1e/dct,j Attendance on bays temp was -10 or windchill fell under-20_ = Peak time attendance A) weekday d�lar� B) weekend5aLjjGar, Period of low attendance � A) weekday �WA B) weekend�w_ --------------------------------------------------------------- PREVIOUS YEAR COMPARISON Total days open 3!4 Opened on (Date): 24' 4 Closed on (Date): LL! 3 Total days closed due to weather: _ A)Warm days B) Cold days 3 Total season attendance -5 0 Average attendance per day /e,37 Attendance on days temp was-10 or windchill fell under.-20--,gr- Pegk dine attendance 11,,'l y weekday /O tdf weekend ,cf Period of low attendance A) weekday B) weekend WARM/NGHOUSE SHEL TER YEAR END REPORT YEAR OF 96 -'?to PARK Li n D Pmrk- NOTES Total days open � d S Opened on (Date):-Dec . 116 19g5 Closed on (Date): Eeb-ZO, 1991a Total days closed due to weather: 10 daAAS A)Warm da ys 5 J B) Cold days_ Total season attendance q 0 8 Average attendance per day 1elda)i Attendance on days temp was -10 dr windchill fell under-20 Z Peak time attendance A) weekday iJ ed+n6°Li B) weekend Sc�hJf �d Period of low attendance A) weekday t4oy\dl B) weekend Jnclal PREVIOUS YEAR COMPARISON Total days open Opened on (Date): Closed on (Date): Total days closed due to weather: A)Warm days B) Cold days Total season attendance Average attendance per day Attendance on days temp was-10 or windchill fell under-20 Pe`,ik tune attendance I weekday- s) weekend Period of low attendance A) weekday B) weekend WARM/NGHOUSE SHELTER YEAR END REPORT YEAR OF e15--e W PARK � iJ tY L�Lc�5 PcL,t�1c- NO TES Total days open Opened on (Date): , Closed on (Date): 7n l�ll Ion L9 Total days closed due to weather:_ A)Warm da ys B) Cold days Total season attendance_ 0 Average attendance per day (Q Attendance on days temp was -10 or windchill fell under-20 N f A Peak time attendance A) weekday? Q t 6"-Y B) weekend S Period of low attendance A) weekday n' i6'+ B) weekend 'Su r\ ct� PREVIOUS YEAR COMPAR/SON )oi,01 (111'� Total days open 7 Opened on (Date): /L/Z-1/4 Closed on (Date): Z�2lf Total days closed due to weather: AJWarm days 3— B) Cold days 3 Total season attendance Average attendance per day Attendance on days temp was -10 or windchill fell under-20�_ Peak time attendance— .,- 4) weekday o-2 weekend 10 Period of low attendance A) weekday B) weekend MEMORANDUM Date: March 27, 1996 From: Marty Asleson To: Lino Lakes Parks and Recreation Board Subject: Earth Day Please find a first draft version of the upcomming Earth Day Celebration. Although the list of activities is incomplete I believe we will be offering a great program this year and oppertunity to participate in improving the quality of life issues . This year there will be a ceramony at the Wargo Nature Center with all of the quad cities invited. The cities have participated in the planning for this event . I have also inclosed a copy of the resolution passed by our city n council for Earth Day 1996 . Many of the Spruce-up, Cleanup activities occur in our parks and on our trails and water resource areas . If you can make it to this event it sure would be great ! ,-� QUAD CITY EARTH DAY CELEBRATION APRIL 20, 1996 PRIDE IN THE PARKS-PRIDE IN THE ENVIRONMENT Project/Clean-Up Time: 9:00 a.m. - 11:00 a.m. Fire Station 2 - 7741 Lake Drive Lino Lakes Rice Lake Elementary - Birch Street Lino Lakes City Hall - 1880 Main Street Centerville Fire Station - Lexington FIre Station - Circle Pines Ceremony: 11:15 a.m. ^ Lunch /Entertainment 12:00 a.m. -2:00 p.m. Joseph E. Wargo Nature Center 7701 Main Street Lino Lakes Program: Welcome - Marty Asleson Moderator- Kim Sullivan Flag Ceremony - VFW Post 6583 Proclamation -Mayor Entertainment -Arthur Lee Environmental Music/Interactive Activities Awards - Commissioner Margaret Langefeld honors Quad City Mayors from the State of Minnesota with Award Certificates ,,.•� Following Ceremonv: -Free Lunch -Free Tree Seedling Giveaway -Environmental Exhibits -Face Painting / Kids Nature Class -Endangered Cats Appearances -Lino Lakes Lions Medallion Hunt -Joan Galli (Bat Presentation) -Companion Birds Exhibit -Lino Lakes Hot Air Balloon Display -Anoka County Environmental -NSP Brite Booth -Recycling Booth Spin the Wheel Police Auction: 2:00 - Following Ceremony Lino Lakes Police Department n �-�- QUAD CITY AREA EARTH DAY PROMMTION WHEREAS, Anoka County, the Cities of, Lino Lakes, Circle Pines, Centerville, and Lexington prides themselves on the quality of life for residents and businesses and is interested in working to improve and maintain the beauty of the areas; and, WHEREAS, residents should be encouraged to recognize the environmental impact on our communities in their daily lives by becoming environmentally responsible consumers, conserving energy, increasing recycling efforts, reducing waste, and promoting . environmental responsibility-in our cone nzities; and, WHEREAS, this goal was aided by volunteers of the cities who during Earth Days in past years have collected tons of debris in Lino Lake, Circle Pines, Lexington and Centerville; planted flower beds, initiated other spruce up activities in parks and on trails; and WHEREAS, these efforts show the long term commitment by individuals and groups in Anoka County to building a safe, just and substantial planet; and; WHEREAS, groups of community leaders will work in conjunction with Anoka County Commissioner Margaret LangfeldIs Adopt-A-Highway project to organize a clean-up and beautification project along roads in Eastern Anoka County; and, WHEREAS, this commmmity group needs support and volunteers to successfully complete its projects: NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, THAT I, JOHN LANDERS, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF LINO LAKES, DO HEREBY PROCLAIM APRIL 20, 1995 TO BE EARTH DAY AND SUPPORT THOSE ORGANIZERS AND VOLUNTEERS IN ITS EFFORTS TO CLEAN UP AND BEAUTIFY AREAS IN THE CITIES OF LINO LAKES, CIRCLE PINES, LEXINGTON AND CENTERVILLE. Mayor, John Landers Ref:edpiroc 4D. MEMORANDUM Date: March 26, 1996 From: Marty Asleson To: Friends of the Parks Subject: Information on Activities Please find enclosed a copy of the new brochure for the upcoming charity golf tournament at Chomonix Golf Coarse on August 10 put on by the Friends of the Parks. Our support group has been working very hard on this project. The Friends is now in the process of signing up corporate and hole sponsors. In addition, the Senior Citizens will be doing the cooking for this event. Also please find enclosed a copy of the check received from Target industries for Performances in the Parks. The Friends was one of four recipients of a grant this year. W �„ , O. ' N. G R • T' ' U A T ' --,! ' O.- N ' s E) TARGET 306268 A Division of Dayton Hudson Corporation P.O. Box 1392 *T Minneapolis, Minnesota 55440 ' AY[Ir I 93-516 929 NL UNE %E4C ERr :EP -Tsf-T a'.. ■ 01/19/% III ONE THDJS9 W DOLLARS AND 00 CENTS imiliflimmillf TO THE I DATE AMOUNT PAY ORDER OF FRIENDS OF THE LINO LAKES PARK FOUIN/19/96 Y 1F*.**$1000. 00 MN MUST BE CO-SIGNED IF OVER ONE MILLION DOLLARS '* THIS CHECK NOT VALID AFTER 90 DAYS PAYABLE THROUGH THE L VOID OVER $1000. 00 NORMW BANKS }" �> Autha^iPd Si .`ate. 306 26130 1:09 290 S 4681: 00111 29 311,811' 1:9 • d . F , R .0 M, T A,,,.,R G E,'T T T QR E • a �4 V- 4, it TEAM PARTICIPANTS II 5. .- . INFORMATION I' 5. . ' - I W � A Special Invitation 00 Player 2 I I Ct li z r to All Golfers....... NAME 11 0 I ADDRESS Ij (D PHONE II � Player 3 I o y NAME I! ADDRESS I' PHONE I' II Player 4 I I NAME I; ADDRESS PHONE I j ( To Benefit the i + Friends of the Lino Lakes Parks Foundation PARTICIPANTS AGREEMENTS: I, the partici- pant, in consideration of my being permitted to participate in this activity, do hereby agree to I I hold harmless,the Lino Lakes Parks and Recre- ation, Friends of the Parks Foundation,and their officers, and Anoka County Parks from any and all liability for any personal injury or death which I FRIENDS may occur from my participation in this activity. I of the This waiver includes any injuries which may result from the condition of the facilities and any I , PARKS improvements hereto. I LINo LA_�s li I Participant/Guardian Date I i GOLF ACTIVITIES . . . - I I REGISTRATION FORM., Wearepleased lopr•esent the lstAnnualFriends I First-come, first-served of the Lino Lakes Parks Foundation's Charity FRIENDS OF THE LINO LAKES Golf Classic. PARKS FOUNDATION'S j NAME MISSION STATEMENT I ADDRESS DATES AND TIMES The Friends of the Lino Lakes Parks Foundation, i CITY STATE Saturday, August 10, 1996 anon-profit corporation established in 1992 7:00 am - 9:00 am: Practice Range Open I ZIP PHONE g P provides the means through which the residents, I 9:00 am - 2:00 pm: 18-hole Shotgun Start neighborhoods, and friends of the City of Lino (;olfFormal: Loii�est Team Score Lakes may channel donations,bequests,and other I ENTRY FEE gifts of financial aid(as outlined in the City Parks I Tournament r,ill be held rain or shine. and Recreation Comprehensive Plan)to enhance I Entry fee is $50 per player ($30tcx-deductible). No R�firnds. i the City's parks and recreational programs. All I This includes 18-holes of golf and lunch. Lunch contributions are tax deductible. I only: $20. PLACE SPONSORSHIP Chonionix Golf Course 046 Sandpiper" Orive WHAT WILL THE FOUNDATION I Hole: $200 (sign at each hole you sponsor.) Lino bakes, MN 55014 FUNDS BE USED FOR? I Major Corporate: $3000 (for more infor- 48 2-8484 �, n!' I mation,contact the Friends of the Lino Lakes Parks Foundation at 464-4459, ext. 210.) The Friends ofthe Lino Lakes Parks Foundation's Board will meet regularly. At these meetings,the I Forest 00 Lake Board will try to achieve the Park and Recre- I PAYMENT Hwy.242 Co.Rd.14 ational needs of the community by administering I Mail in your entry fee check and make payable to:� Main St. Exit 3S / and applying the available funding for: I Friends of the Lino Lakes Parks Foundation '35W 35E I I P.O. Box 184 Specifically Designated Projects I Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Central Ave. Hwy 65 0� A4�a<a Exit 316 v` e Accommodating Persons with Disabilities Co.Rd.23 I PARTICIPATION LEVEL Hwy.as Entertainment in the Parks N 694 I Single 2-person 35w 35E Playground Equipment 3-person 4-person Chomonix Golf Course is located minutes from the Programs of Specific Needs Please place the names of your team members on Twin Cities, in Lino Lakes. Take Aqua Lane from I the back of this form. Lake Drive. I F C I T Y O F -� INO LAW March 28, 1996 TO: Park Board Members FROM: Marty Asleson SUBJECT: Tree City USA Once again the City of Lino Lakes has been named as a 1995 Tree City USA. This year the ceremony will be at Lino Lakes Elementary School on May 31 . If you are available we would certainly love to have you there. PARK,RECREATION,FORESTRY,AND RECYCLING DEPARTMENTS 7204 LAKE DRIVE,LINO LAKES,MINNESOTA 55014 (612)464-5562 The National TM Arbor Day Foundation 211 No. 12th St..Lincoln.NE 68508(402)474-5655 March 20, 1996 HONORARY TRUSTEES STEWART UDALL The Honorable Vern Reinert anfir Form Mayor of the City of Lino Lakes Former Secretary of Interior y y EDDIE ALBERT 1189 Main St. Entertainer WILLIAM H.BANZHAF Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Executive Vice President Society of American Foresters DONALD BORUT Executive Director Dear Mayor Reinert: National League of Cities DOUGLAS BEREUTER U.S.Congressman Congratulations to Lino Lakes on being named as a ROGER A.CA 1995 Tree City USA! Special Correspondent ABC TV News DICK CAVETT Entertainer Trees make a world of difference in our J.THOMAS COCHRAN Executive Director - communities . Trees have long been recognized for the U.S.Conference of Mayors MRS.EUGENE A.DAVIDSON beauty and value they lend to our homes, neighborhoods , Great-granddaughter of arks and business areas . At the same time those trees J.Sterling Morton P / _ J.JAMES EXON conserve energy, help clean the air, protect rivers and U.S.Senator _ LADY BIRD JOHNSON streams, and provide a home for wildlife in our towns Stonewall.Texas BILL KRUIDENIER and cities . Executive Director Intl.Society of Arboriculture JACK LORENZ The Tree City USA award indicates that you take your Executive Director Izaak Walton League municipal tree-care responsibilities seriously. A*-NJ.MICHAEL McCLOSKEY Chairman Sierra Club An effective community forestry program is an - MAXINE(MRS.FRANK)MORRISON Former Nebraska ongoing process of growth and renewal--a program of First Lady JAMES C.OLSON planting and care that continues through the years . As J.Sterling Biographerrton a Tree City USA, you have a solid foundation for that ERNEST process of improvement. Executivee Vice President P Nat.Assn.of Conservation Districts - JACK WARD THOMAS Chief Tree City USA is sponsored in cooperation with the USDA Forest Service R.E."TED"TURNER National Association of State Foresters . State Chairman Turner Broadcasting System foresters are responsible for the presentation of the LAURENCE D.WISEMAN Tree City USA flag and other materials . We will forward President American Forest Council your awards to Jonathan E. Stiegler in your state BOARD OF TRUSTEES forester' s office. They will be coordinating the MRS.LEE(CAROLYN)CRAYTON JR Chair presentation with you. It would be especially H IS Vice Chairhair appropriate to make the Tree City USA award a part of Vice LETICIA ROCHE CANO your Arbor Day ceremony. PRESTON COLE TONY DORRELL DR.GARY HERGENRADER Again, congratulations on receiving this national JIM PETER SCHEN recognition for our tree-care program. PETER MVERS g Y p g DR.JAMES O'HANLON PRESIDENT Be egar , JOHN ROSENOW John Rosenow President JR/tk cc: Jonathan E. Stiegler Marty Asleson Americans dedicated to tree planting and environmental stewardship. a. .4