My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 1980/06/26
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Parks, Recreation & Forestry Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
1980-1989
>
1980
>
Agenda Packets - 1980/06/26
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/31/2025 1:35:57 PM
Creation date
3/31/2025 1:33:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
Parks, Recreation & Forestry Commission
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
6/26/1980
Description
Regular Meeting
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
133
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
G/TEWAY <br />C f of Mo ds e <br />RAMSEVCOUNTV.MiNNESOTA <br />1401 HIGMWAY IO <br />MOVNDSVIEW,MINN.5511R <br />Btr'OSS <br />1 <br />MEMO TO: Parks & Recreation Commission <br />FROM: Bruce K. Anderson, Ditector, a <br />Recreation and Forestry <br />DATE: July 24, 1980 <br />RE: Park Bond Referendum <br />To facilitate the Commission's discussion regarding the potential . <br />of park referendum during the Fall of 1980, Staff has met with <br />Mr. Gary Tushie, Mr. Frank Kampel and Mr. Phil Chenowith to review <br />their perception and perspective on park referendum. To that end, <br />I hereby state Staff's general feelings and recommendations regard- . <br />ing a park referendum: . <br />The ideai date for a park referendum would be September 23, <br />1980, approximately 8 weeks away. But due to the excess <br />costs, budget schedule, and attempting to run 3 elections <br />in a 2 month period, Staff would recommend the bond issue <br />be held on Tuesday, Septemher 9, which would also be the <br />State Primary Election. 1he reason for this recommendation <br />is twofold: 1) It would be most cost effective for the <br />City, and 2) The November election would be competing with <br />the General Election and would not allow the City to See <br />the bonds prior to the election and prior to the adoption <br />of the 1981 Budget. Staff has reviewed the State regula- <br />tions with the Finance Director, Don Brager, regarding <br />timelines and it appears that we must file our intent for <br />the election prior to au J+ist 12, 1980. <br />St is Staff's feelings that the park referendum should be <br />one question for a grand total of $1,606,937. Staff has . <br />reviewed the project estimates Saunders-Thalden at qreati <br />lengths and although there was not complete agreement by <br />either Gary, Frank or myself, I am forwarding my personal . <br />recommendations and rationale as to how I arrived at the <br />1.6 million figure: <br />a. Buildings and park ahelters - The oriqinal esti:mate <br />was $282,100 and Staff recommends $256,100:Liy'.deleting <br />the boncension atand at Greenfield Park [otali-ng . <br />26,006. <br />b. Treea and general landscaping - The original projec- <br />tion was $528,900. Staf£ would recommend this be <br />reduced to $478,900 to a tdtal of $50,000. Thia i. <br />the most major cut Staff purposes anol.StaAf would <br />further recommend that a Vermeer Tree SQade be
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.