Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/06/1991 Park Board PacketCITY OF LINO LAKES PARK BOARD MEETING MONDAY MAY 6, 1991 AGENDA 1. Call to Order and Roll Call 2. Consideration and Approval of Minutes of April 1, 1991 3. Open Mike 4. Old Business A. Parks Updates 1.) Birch Park Land Purchase 2.) Comprehensive Park Planning 3.) Recreation Agreements with Centennial School District a. Land Use b. Recreation Programing 4.) Forest Lake School District B. Other Old Business 5. New Business A. Summer Programs 1.) Discussion of user fee policies for Recreation Program 2. Update of Recreation Program B. Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Park Committee Review C. Other New Business 6. Adjourn PARK BOARD MINUTES April 1, 1991 Park Board Meeting April 11 1991 The regular April meeting of the Lino Lakes Park Board was called to order at 7:02 PM on April 2, 1991 by Chairman Ray Johnson. Roll call was taken, members in attendance were George Lindy, Ken Johnson, Ray Johnson, John Baumann and Candi Toffoli. Members absent were Bob Williams and Bill Nissen. Staff in attendance were Don Volk, Director of Public Works, Marty Asleson, Superintendent of Parks, Recreation and Forestry, Barry Bernstein, Recreation Supervisor, and Carole Kohler, Parks Secretary. There were no corrections or additions to the minutes of the March 4, 1991 meeting. They were approved as mailed. Open Mike: Bill Hawkins, City Attorney appeared at this time to explain the City Code of Conduct to the Board. He explained that this "Code" is intended for all employees, elected and appointed officials, board members and/or commissioners, and they are expected to adhere to it. Mr. Hawkins asked the members to sign the agreement attached to the Code and return it to Marilyn Anderson, City Clerk. Beth DeMooth, a new resident to Black Duck Drive also appeared under open mike to ask about a park that may be going in behind her house. Marty Asleson explained that what she's probably referring to is the Lakecrest Park Land purchase that the Park Board is currently considering, and will be addressed further on in this meeting. Ray Johnson asked Mrs.DeMooth if she is in favor of a park in her neighborhood. She replied "yes," if the City will try to leave the naturalness of the area rather than make it look like a "city park." No one else appeared under "open mike" OLD BUSINESS• Recreation Update - Marty explained that the agreement the city is working on now with the School District is almost the same as the original that was drafted when Lino Lakes was going to be part of the North Metro Recreation Commission. Ken Johnson questioned the agreement with reference to the compensation received from the School District, he pointed out that the other cities would probably be going to the School District for compensation also. Marty agreed and explained that the monetary compensation is open to negotiation. Marty also noted that these cities will be looking to use the same facilities as Lino Lakes, this could work into a joint program arrangement. Don Volk and Marty Asleson will be attending the meeting scheduled for April 15 with the School District. Marty informed the board that the cities represented by the North Metro Recreation Commission 1 PARK BOARD MINUTES ,.� April 1, 1991 will be attending the same meeting. Marty Asleson introduced Barry Bernstein , the new Recreation Supervisor, to the Park Board. Barry explained the types of programs he has planned for the summer playgrounds for children's activities, and also the programs he is working on for adults that include men's, women's, and co-rec softball, sand volleyball. Soccer and football will be offered in the fall. Some special projects he has planned are for Leo Lewis from the Minnesota Vikings, to give a football clinic in July and a bus from the city to the Metrodome for a Twins baseball game also in July. John Baumann questioned the cost of these special events with concern to low income families, will they be able to get a discount? Marty Asleson explained that because these programs are just in the formative stages, some details such as the price breaks haven't been addressed, but low income families would definitely be a consideration. He says that we certainly do not want to discriminate , we may have to look at subsidizing open playgrounds. Ray Johnson questioned how Barry would be handling the teams who have always used Lino Lakes ball fields in the past, but this year they were told that either there was no room to accommodate their league, or that they would be charged to join one of the leagues Barry has put together. Marty explained to Ray that Youth Groups have a priority on the ballfields. The plan is to get fees from other special user groups that impact the facility, such as adult softball leagues. Church Leagues are sanctioned with the USSSA so they would be eligible for tournaments through our program and would be considered a special user group and charged for the use of their fields. Barry explained also that he told those leagues he would try to accommodate them as much as possible. Ray Johnson again expressed his concern about the conflict. Marty commented that this will be a learning process for all parties, but he feels the end result will be a good one. John Baumann asked if Barry has any plans to coordinate use of the facilities at Lino Lakes Elementary School with our programs. Don Volk said that that's the next step, as Lino Lakes Elementary is in the Forest Lake School District. comprehensive Park Plan Update - Marty Asleson explained that he is still in the process of putting the committee together. At this point he has a list of approximately 10 volunteer "lay" people besides those from the various City Boards. A tentative meeting date is set for April 9, 1991. Lakecrest Development Park Land Purchase Update - Marty Asleson explained that the option to purchase will expire on June 10, 1991. By then he expects to have a recommendation from the Comprehensive Park Plan Committee concerning the purchase of the land available. Marty thinks the purchase �. will most likely be the 7 acre parcel previously discussed. E i"1 PARK BOARD MINUTES April 1, 1991 Birch Park Update - Marty Asleson explained that the closing had been planned for last Thursday, March 28th, but was postponed until April 5th. Evidently Mr. Whitcomb's attorney had a last minute detail to clear up. The check is made out, however, and ready to go. The purchase price was $7500.00 per acre, a total purchase price of $11,250.00. So we can expect to see work start at Birch Park soon. Pineridge Development Update - Don Volk showed the board a plat of the Pineridge development, and explained that Rick Carlson, the developer would like to change the area and the park dedication that was originally approved by the park board last June. At that time the Park Board accepted Mr. Carlson's plan for park dedication that was a 3.16 acre parcel within the outlot located in the southeast section of Pineridge. Then the park board would purchase the remainder of the outlot (approximately 2.3 acres) at the price of $8000.00 per acre. This purchase would allow for a temporary tot lot and possibly a temporary ballfield, until the Barott property, directly east of Pineridge would be purchased by Carlson and developed. Then the City would trade that parcel of land for another that was originally considered which is located in the southwest part of the development. Mr. Carlson's plan now, is for a whole new development in the same area, but it would change the park dedication plan. This new plan is not park dedication at all, but rather a fee titled to the City for 3.7 acres out of the 40 acre parcel that the Barott's own. Don Volk's recommendation was that the park board would be farther ahead by accepting this 3.7 acres at this time instead of looking to move the proposed tot lots, etc. later on down the line. Also, if the park board's decision is to not develop it later on , it would be a profitable sale. Ray Johnson expressed some concern as to what the comprehensive park plan might recommend. Candi Toffoli made a motion that the Park Board recommend acceptance of the title to the 3.7 acres in place of the original park dedication. George Lindy added to the motion that if the parcel is sold, all proceeds go to the park board. The motion was seconded by John Baumann, all were in favor. Motion carried. Wenzel Farms Development Update - Mr. Kirk Corson of Hokanson Development appeared before the park board. He was asking for park board's acceptance of a new plan he has to expand the proposed park area in the development in order to make the plan more feasible and lower the park dedication fee. The new proposal varies in size from the original concept of .7 acres to approximately 3 acres. This plan would include filling in of wet land to prepare it for park use. Mr. Corson explained that the plans are to further enhance the area with wood chip trails and bituminous walk ways. He commented that he is 3 PARK BOARD MINUTES ,..k April 1, 1991 willing to go along with the recommendation the park board comes up with tonight as they are anxious to get started. Candi Toffoli asked Don for his opinion. Don said that council is waiting for the board to make a recommendation tonight. He thinks that there is a need for a larger tot lot. John Baumann made a motion to recommend to the council to leave the park dedication for the Wenzel Farms Development at .7 acres, seeing that Sunrise Park is no more than 1/4 mile away. Motion was seconded by Ray Johnson. A discussion followed, after which Ray Johnson called for a vote. Those in favor of the motion were John Baumann and Ray Johnson. Opposed were Candi Toffoli, Ken Johnson and George Lindy. Motion did not pass. George Lindy then made another motion to recommend the council accept the new proposal, approximately 3 acres for park land if the existing swamp land south of the proposed park can be moved to the west, squaring off the parcel. Also that the filling in of the swamp land, and the excavating expense not be borne by the park board. The balance of the park dedication to be paid in cash. The motion was seconded by Candi Toffoli. Ray Johnson called for a vote. Those in favor were Candi Toffoli, Ken Johnson and George Lindy. Opposed were Ray Johnson and John Baumann. Motion carried unanimously. Other Old Business - There was no other old business. NEW BUSINESS• Arbor Day/Earth Day - Marty Asleson explained to the board that Earth Day will be on Saturday, April 27, 1991. This event will be held at Lino Lakes City Hall, and will be held in conjunction with the cities of Lexington, Circle Pines , Centerville and Blaine. Area clean-up will be from 9-11 AM. Lunch and Ceremonies will be from 11:00 AM to 2:00 PM. The Mayor will read a proclamation and receive a Tree City Award for the City. The theme this year will be "Energy Efficient Landscaping" and Global Releaf and Minnesota Releaf. Other New Business - Ray Johnson asked for an update on park dedication fees. Don Volk explained that this issue has already been to the council for a first reading. At that time the council discussed increasing the fees, but nothing had been changed from how it was presented so far. Council recommended that the multi dwelling unit fees should be addressed in the Comprehensive Park Plan. There was no other new business. Meeting was adjourned at 8:50 PM. 4 BIRCH STREET SCHOOL PARK AGREEMENT ---i This Agreement made and entered into this day of , 19 , by and between the City of Lino Lakes, State of Minnesota, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "City") and the Independent School District No. 12, a political subdivision (hereinafter referred to as "District"); WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the District has certain park facilities located at the Birch Street Elementary School within the City of Lino Lakes; and WHEREAS, the City and the District wish to enter into an agreement concerning the joint use, improvement and construc- tion of certain facilities located upon said. Birch Street park facility. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY STIPULATED AND AGREED: 1. The District will construct the following improve- ments upon the park property at District expense: three softball/baseball fields, two soccer fields, irrigation for such f ields, and grading and graveling of all trails located on District property and new trails as necessary directly connected to the District property. Costs for such facilities shall be paid by the District and shall be according to the plans and specifications approved by the parties hereto and made a part hereof. -1- 2. The City of Lino Lakes will construct and apply the bituminous surfacing to all walking/biking trails located and directly connected to the Birch Street Elementary park property. 3. The City of Lino Lakes will be given first preference by the District for scheduling youth and park facilities. Such preference shall not apply to any scheduling during normal school hours. 4. The City of Lino Lakes agrees to maintain all athletic facilities and open areas directly adjacent to the athletic facilities, all trails located on or directly connected to District No. 12 Birch Street Elementary School, all trees located within the aforementioned areas. It is the City's responsibility to purchase and provide all supplies necessary to perform maintenance for the above mentioned facilities. All of such obligation shall be done at the sole expense of the City. 5. The City of Lino Lakes will provide liability insurance covering any activities which relate to activities under the direction, control and supervision of the City. The City of Lino Lakes agrees to name the School District as an additional insured on such policy. The School District shall carry insurance to cover any liability claims during all other times the park is used by individuals. The District shall name the City of Lino Lakes as an additional insured on such policy. 5. That the District and City shall promulgate rules concerning the use of the facilities by the City and individuals -2- in such programs. Both parties shall be responsible to see that such rules are adhered to during the time that they are utilizing the park facility. 7. This Agreement shall continue and be automatically renewed annually commencing on January 1, 1991, unless either party is served written notice at least thirty (30) days prior thereto that it intends to terminate this Agreement. 8. The City and the District mutually to indemnify and hold harmless each other from any claims, losses, costs, expenses or damages resulting from the acts or admissions of the respective officers, agents or employees relating to the activities conducted by either party under this Agreement. CITY OF LINO LAKES By Mayor Clerk INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 12 By Its By Its Wa STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF ANOKA ) On this day of , 19 , before me, a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared Harold Bisel and Marilyn Anderson, to me known to be respec- tively the Mayor and Clerk of the City of Lino Lakes, and who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same on behalf of said City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF ANOKA ) On this day of 19 , before me, a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared known to be the and , to me and of Independent School District No. 12, a political subdivision under the laws of the State of Minnesota, and that they executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same on behalf of said political subdivision. Notary Public This instrument was drafted by: Burke and Hawkins 299 Coon Rapids Blvd., #101 Coon Rapids, MN 55433 -4- TO: All Park Board Members FROM: Marty Asleson, Supt. Parks, Rec and Forestry DATE: May 1, 1991 RE: User Fees 10"N Enclosed are a few philosophy statements regarding user fees and policies for playgrounds, etc. We will open this up to discussion. r Fees and Charges A Legitimate Source of Revenue We are experiencing a park renaissance, which, is directed properly, will result in more and better public services that have ever existed. To accom- plish this we must continue to evaluate and modify many of our traditional operating policies, practices, and procedures. We have now come to a semi -awareness not only of our opportunities, but also of our obligations with respect to sources of revenue in public parks and recreation areas. Indicative of this awareness, this change in thinking, is the attention given on a national scale to fees and charges to provide additional means for operating and maintaining recreational facilities and programs. A system of fees and charges would more nearly assess on an equal basis the people who enjoy the facilities. This does not mean that every man, woman, and child who enters the park must pay an entrance fee. Certainly, no one advocates the fee -and -charge system as the only method of financing operation and maintenance costs, but everyone wants to make facilities available to the largest number possible. This desire can become a reality through the assistance of a well -planned, equitable, program of revenue producing activities. All of us have read on innumerable occasions, that, "Participants appreciate those activities for which they are expected to pay, much more than those which are offered without charge," People feel more responsible toward an activity or a privilege if scme direct cost is involved. A token fee or small charge distinguishes the special activity from the park, per se. As a result of this additional appreciation, it is often easier to control the discipline of the patron or participant. Many of those who object to fees and charges for recreational activities in public parks contend that public properties are provided by taxation and the patron should not be "taxed" again in the form of a fee for the privilege of use. If this is true, then we should abolish all public fees which might be classed in this category: the parking meter - a charge to keep your car on a public street; the toll bridge - a charge to use a public bridge; the toll road- • charge to use a public road; the hunting license - a charge to hunt on public land; the fishing license - a charge to fish in public waters, etc. These user fees provide a means of keeping taxes down. The argument has been advanced from time to time that if a park or recreation agency imposes a fee or a charge for a_:y of its activities, that agency loses its government immunity with respect to _public liability. This is not true... The argument has been advanced from time to time that if a park or re 9 ,0-1%k contd. All park and recreation functions and activities are provided primarily as services for the park patrons. If a fee or charge is made and if the activity shows a profit, such profits are incidental and do not change the government status. The belief that the park patron should pay a proportional share of the operating cost is fast becoming universal. Any system of fees and charges must first consider the following policies as a general guide in the administration of their recreation programs: 1. Fees and charges should supplement tax appropriation as a source of funds. There is a real danger of losing tax supported dollars through completely self-supporting activities. 2. General parks and recreation programs must be made available to all socio-economic levels within a given municipality. 3. Special recreation programs should be supported by fees paid by the participants. We have come to realize that to install revenue -producing activities in our parks and recreation areas is a service to the patron. t FEE POLICY SUGGESTIONS 1. No single governmental agency can, by use of public funds, afford to serve all the recreation needs of all the people; therefore, charging aids in the providing of activities of a special interest nature that extends the program beyond the normal operation. 2. Fees, for services, help the community meet maintenance, staff and equipment expenses. 3. The amount of money from all sources will determine the extent and depth of services. Taxes, alone, cannot sustain an entire program, unless taxes are increased, which we are determined not to do. ram, 4. Those who benefit to the exclusion of others should pay something extra for the privileges enjoyed. 5. Adult programs requir6 fees to meet costs of the program, leadership, organization and equipment. 6. Without adequate revenue, programs cannot expand nor can they be properly maintained. 7. If a fee represents double taxation, then we should eliminate the parking meter, tolls on bridges, hunting license, fishing license; all of which help keep taxes lower and the people not using these privileges do not have to pay. B. Adult groups should be charged an athletic franchise fee to cover the cost of officials, supplies and -� services. m" 9. Public funds should be used for acquisition of lands, improvement of property, management, children's activities, maintenance and basic services. 10. A fee will expand activities for all people, with the least possible cost to masses. 11. A fee will increase assets without increasing liabilities. 12. Supplemental fees stretch dollars and broadens programs. 13. Exclusive use of facilities demands a user fee and a fair portion thereof. 14. As the public demands more activities, more services and less taxes, fees must be assessed. 15. Fees or revenues offset the budget and supplements needs: programs will not expand and demand will exceed supply. Government, today, cannot justify full program support or justify tax increases for esoteric groups. 16. Lack of revenue continues the status quo. 17. Exclusive use of facility and/or programs must carry a fair -share support.