The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About01-30-86 Agenda & Packet likk 4 1 i . 4 41 G= y it 1 k NI( I I' .4 • ,,, , 0,‘,4 ,4 00 . of S IQ NJ RAMSEY COUNTY,MINNESOTA GATEWAY TO THE NORTH 2401 HIGHWAY 10 MOUNDS VIEW,MINN. 55112 ,EPAH'IWIENTOI PAH' 784-3055 FIE CHEATt)N AND FORE S I IlY January 22 , 1986 Dear Parks and Recreation Commissioners : Based on a preliminary phone survey, we will not have enough commissioners for a quorum on January 23. Consequently, we have rescheduled our next Park Commission meeting for Thursday , Janu- ary 30, 1986 . The meeting will be held at 6: 30 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers, and a full packet of information will be provided on Tuesday, January 28, 1986. I have enclosed a copy of the special community-wide park refer- endum results broken down by precincts for your edification and we will be reviewing this issue as well as how to "pick up the pieces" at our January 30 meeting. Should you have any specific questions regarding the referendum or have items that you would like placed on the agenda, feel free to contact myself directly at 784-3055 , ext. #20. •• -rely, Bruce K. Anderso , Director Parks, Recreatio an orestry BKA/sll Enclosed K s, • of kilsVIQW" RAMSEY COUNTY,MINNESOTA GATEWAY TO THE NORTH 2401 HIGHWAY 10 MOUNDS VIEW, MINN 55112 784-3055 January 28 , 1986 Dear Parks & Recreation Commissioners: Enclosed is your packet of information for the January 30 , 1986 Parks and Recreation Commission meeting at 6: 30 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers. The major items that we will be discuss- ing are the community park referendum to determine what direction we should go from here , as well as set an agenda topic for the 1111 February 11 joint Park and Recreation Commission meeting. In addition , we will be discussing the Long Range Facility Usage Task Force report which could have major impact on future Park and Recreation Department programs. Should you have any questions regarding the enclosed information , feel free to contact myself directly at 784-3055 , ext . #20 . Sincerely, 410150" Bruce K. Anderso t jirector Parks, Recreati. and Forestry BKA/sll Enclosure 4111 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION • Thursday, January 30 , 1986 AGENDA 6 : 30 p.m. Mounds View City Hall Council Chambers I . CALL TO ORDER 'II . REVIEW OF DECEMBER 5 , 1986 JOINT MEETING MINUTES III . CHAIRPERSONS REPORT JIV. COUNCILMEMBERS REPORT 1111 V. GENERAL DISCUSSION REGARDING JANUARY 21 , 1986 COMMUNITY PARK REFERENDUM VI . LONG RANGE FACILITIES USAGE REPORT ✓VII . DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED TOPICS FOR FEBRUARY 11 , 1986 JOINT PARK BOARD MEETING VIII . STAFF REPORT IX. ADJOURNMENT 1111 • MEMO TO: Mounds ViewyPark & Recreation Commissioners I 1 ,,FROM: Bru9 .{ derson, Director Par edreation and Forestry i1 DATE: January 28, 1986 RE: Park Referendum Staff enclosed a copy of the Community Park Referendum results as part of the January 22 letter which indicated that both issues on the referendum were unsuccessful . Staff would like to propose that a general discussion of the referendum be held to determine what direction we might go from here . And, to determine what we might have learned from our most recent set-back . Staff will be providing a verbal report regarding our thoughts on this issue at Thursday evening ' s meeting. Should you desire any additional information regarding the Community Park Referendum prior to Thursday ' s meeting, feel free to contact myself directly 4110 at 784-3055, ext. #20. BKA/sll MEMO T0: Mounds View Park & Recreation Commissioners FROM: Bruce K. Anderson, Director Parks, Recreation and Forestry DATE: January 28, 1986 RE: Long Range Facilities Usage Task Force Staff has enclosed a copy of the Long Range Facilities Usage Task Force report, which is a 51 page document outlining the proposed recommendations from the School District appointed Task Force regarding. future school facilities. The reason this item is on the agenda is that the impact of reverting Edgewood Community Center to a K-12 school facility will have major impact on our department. I have enclosed a copy of a draft letter that will be forwarded to John Benham from the Mounds View City Council in reaction to the Task Force report, as well as a position statement staff is proposing to the Community Education Advisory Council . Our department would be directly impacted , not only through our aquatics program being cancelled during the day, but also through the extensive utilization of the Community Center in other park and recreation programming areas. • Staff ' s position is fairly clear in both the letter from the City Council and to the Community Education Advisory Council , and I would encourage some input and discussion regarding the Long Range Facilities Usage Task Force report, and any additional action or position the Park Commission feels should he taken on behalf of the department or the City in general . In conclusion , I would like to recommend that if you do not have time to review the entire report, that you read pages 26 through 29 which talks about the specific recommendations to the School Board as well as the assumptions and limitations that were deter- mined by the Task Force . One last item on this issue is that the School Board formally received this issue from the Task Force on Monday, January 27 and they will he reviewing it at a public 3 at the Edgewood Community Center, hearingon Monday, February9 and aublic hearinghas been scheduled at Thursday, February 6 P at Mounds View Senior High School . Should you have any questions regarding this issue or require additional information prior to Thursday evening ' s meeting , feel free to contact myself directly at 784-3055 , ext. #20 . BKA/sll Enclosure 41/1 MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PARKS FUNDING ALTERNATIVES TASK FORCE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA December 5 , 1985 Mounds View City Hall Council Chambers 7 : 00 p. m. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order informally at 7 : 05 p. m. ROLL CALL Task force members present : Linda Pa?ek , Neal Valley , Fred Kaiser , Barb Depew Park & Recreation Commissioners present : Diane Wuori , Frank Silvis , Ed Letendre , David Long and Chairperson Wayne Burmeister Councilmembers present : Mayor Jerry Linke , Councilmember Gary Quick Staff present : Parks and Recreation Director Bruce Anderson INTRODUCTIONS Introductions were made aro'ind the room 4110 including community service groups and/or agencies that each individual might represent as well as a brief review of each individuals family background . COMMUNITY CENTER/ NATURAL ICE RINK Staff reviewed a memorandum that was distri- buted on December 4 , 1985 regarding the feasibility of constructing a recreation activity center at Silver View Park at a dol- lar amount not to exceed $750 , 000. The potential plan proposed by staff was a 33 , 000 square foot shelter building which would house a natural ice arena, public restrooms , genera/ seating area, pro shop , kitchen facilities and concession area. Staff had met with two representatives from pre- fabricated buildings ; one representing Cedar Forest Products , and the second representing Butler Building , a steel structure . Both representatives indicated that a building similar to staff ' s desire could be construct- ed within the dollar amount allocated . 1111 -2- There were a number of questions raised by each of the individuals in attendance ranging 1111 from the need for such a facility as well as possible programs that might occur at the facility. Staff elaborated , indicating that the facility could serve as a year round facility with the sides coming off , thus becoming a open air picnic shelter in the summer time . At this time , an extensive com- munity survey had not been completed regard- • ing the demand for the facility other than informal meetings with representatives from Lake Region Hockey who indicated they would be very supportive of such a facility. Possible programming activities includerent- ing the facility out to large community organizations , exhibits , arts and crafts shows , community festivals such as Festival in the Park , band concerts , roller skating , roller hockey , .i door tennis , indoor floor hockey and community fitness areas . Staft indicated that at this time , he did not have all the answers but rather was looking ' for conceptual approval with additional detail information to follow as time permit- 410 ted . Staff further stated that he also had some hesitance regarding construction of such a large facility as no architect had been consulted at this time and he recommended that some dollars be allocated for a consul- tant to review the renderings as they were prepared by Cedar Forest Products and Butler building. The group provided a strong general concen- sus to the pfoject and directed staff to con- ' tinue getting information on the project . GENERAL PARK IMPROVEMENTS Staft reviewed a list of proposed park improvements totaling $796 , 000 and indicated that it would be staff ' s desire to reduce this amount by a minimum of $300 , 000 so that the park referendum would not exceed $1 . 25 million. There was lengthy discussion on this issue , with the following items being cut or reduced : A. The auxilliary building at Siiver View Park was reduced to $30 , 000. B. Tree and landscaping in the amount of $50,000 was eliminated. C . Picnic tables were reduced to 70 tables at a savings of $10, 500. . _ D . The security lighting on the trail sys- tem was eliminated at a savings of 4111 $60, 000. E. The VITA trail at City Hall was eliminat- ed at a cost of $10 , 000. F. The two multi-purpose courts at Lambert and Woodcrest Parks were eliminated at a savings of $40 , 000 . G . The archery range was eliminated at a cost of $8 , 000. H. The cost for the building structure was also reduced to $650 , 000 or a reduction of $100, 000. Total proposed reductions are $308 , 500. Staff indicated that they would provide a formal list of items to be considered for referendum at the December 12 Commission • meeting. PERMANENT PARK MAINTENANCE LEVY Staff proposed that a permanent one mill levy be dedicated for park maintenance to operate and maintain existing park lands and related 1111 public recreational facilities including the proposed improvements . Staff indicated that this would raise an additional $56 , 000 and • double our existing manpower which consists of two full-time individuals . It was the concensus of the group that this also made logical sense and should be "wrapped" into the entire park question if possible . GENERAL DISCUSSION It was the general concensus of the group that the referendum should not exceed $1 . 25 million and that a target date of January 21 , 1986 should be agreed upon for the proposed park referendum should the City Council con- cur with the task force position . NEXT MEETING DATE It was agreed that one additional meeting would be scheduled for Thursday, December 12 , 1985 at which time we would review the final figures as well as discuss any updated items regarding the recreation activity facility. ADJOURNMENT • 1 The meeting was adjourned at 10 : 20 p. m. •eIpPtful1Psubmlt!ted , f. --4. Sr ,c/ k: Andexson tDirector Parks , Recra'ation ' and Forestry , C fiv UoudtAed ‘ • iclk -.4"//0 RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA GATEWAY TO THE NORTH 2401 HIGHWAY 10 MOUNDS VIEW,MINN. 55112 784-3055 January 27 , 1986 • Mr . John Benham, Chairperson e Task Force Facilities Usage Long Range g 1507 Knoll Dr . Shoreview, Mn 55126 Dear Mr . Benham: The Mounds View City Council would like to go on record indicat- ing our strong support to ensure that adequate facilities are provided to accomodate the existing community education , recrea- tion and community based programs. As I am sure you are aware, 72 percent of the households in School District #621 do not have school age children . There currently exists a myriad of commun- ity organizations, municipal recreation programs, and community education program offerings that provide services to not only the 28 percent of families with school age children , a well as the remaining 72 percent of the households. The Edgewood Community Center currently provides services for not only Mounds View residents, but the School District on a whole . it is my understanding that you have already received a copy of the Edgewood Community Center usage report, but I would also like to update the School District data to include the City usage of the facility. The City of Mounds View currently manages the pool facility at Edgewood from 7: 00 a.m. - 10 : 00 p.m. , Monday - Satur- day and is a primary user of the gym faci l i ties . Our current pool usage on a district-wide basis is as follows ( based on final 1984 figures, see enclosed report) : 1 . The City of Mounds View currently offers aquatics instruction in 14 different areas ranging from waterbabies to arthritic exercise . 2. Total swim lesson participation in 1984 involved over 1 , 300 participants . -2- 3 . In addition to the 1 , 300 participants in the lesson program, 410 the City offers an extensive open swim program which averages 150 participants per week or a total of over 6 ,000 indiv- iduals annually. 4 . In addition to our aquatics program at Edgewood , we currently offer a variety of recreational programs ranging from adult volleyball , youth basketball , gymnastics, jazz exercise, tumbling , open volleyball , open basketball and floor hockey leagues at Edgewood Community Center . Total participation in the gym activities at Edgewood are over 300 individuals per week. As can be noted , the school usage by our community and the dis- trict has some very large numbers and strong community based support. A major study was prepared by the Community Education Advisory Council regarding the closings of schools and the impact that the school closings would bring about inn 1981 . I have enclosed a copy of two charts which outline the potential usage versus the actual usage of the four middle schools as it originally existed and a second chart which compares the actual usage to the exist- ing usage forboth two and three middle schools being available. Although the data was prepared in 1981 , some of the conclusions are still valid: 1 . On a year round basis, the current actual week day usage will exceed the potential week day usage of Chippewa and Highview by 173 hours, assuming optimal school usage which is not feasible. 2 . The actual Saturday usage of 1 ,573 . 5 hours could be met assuming the optimum usage of Chippewa and Highview with a balance of 82 . 5 hours, which again is probably not realistic. 3 . By reviewing the peak six month period for gymnasium space, from October - March, the School District will be short approximately 912 .5 hours during the weekday. 4 . Potential Saturday usage during the peak period shows a deficit of 413 . 5 hours. 5. Total shortage of gymnasium space including weekday and Saturday is 1 , 326 hours during the six month period. 6 . With the addition of a third secondary school , i .e . Edgewood, it would be feasible to meet the actual weekday and Saturday usage throughout the year . 410 -3- In addition to the data and the figures that I have provided you, the City Council feels very strongly that there has been a strong • identification with the Edgewood Community Center by the Mounds View residents, as well as increased usage due to the Community Education Center. We strongly encourage the Long Term Facility Usage Task Force to ensure that the following issues are considered: Recommendation #1 - We recommend that a minimum of 16 classroom spaces be allocated for existing community education programs currently operating within the School District to include general office space, senior citizens center, computer center, adult literacy, and early childhood programs. Recommendation #2 - We recommend that a feasibility study be pre- pared relating to the concept of establishing a community educa- tion center within the School District to accomodate the existing 6 ,000 School District residents per month that attend Community Education Center programs. Recommendation #3 - We recommend that the School Board be cogni- zant and aware of the influence and importance of the 70 - 74 percent of the School District households that do not currently have children participating in the K-12 program. And , that the role of these households is imperative to the success of the K-12 program and should not be considered as a secondary issue. • We appreciate the time and energy that you have shared in the preparation of your report and look forward to responding to any questions or concerns you may have regarding the City ' s position . Should you have any specific questions, or desire a tour of the Edgewood Community Center facility, please feel free to contact our City' s Park and Recreation Director Bruce Anderson at 784- 3055 , ext. #20 . Sincerely, CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW Jerry Linke , Mayor JL/sl Enclosure cc: School Board Members Dr . Burton Nygren , Supt. Paul Donley, Director Comm. Ed . Mounds View City Council Don Pauley , City Clerk-Administrator Bruce Anderson , Director Parks, Rec. & Forestry MEMO TO: Mounds View Communit. Ed ation Advisory Council 410 FROM: Bruce K . Anderson, l a c Parks, Recreation alp \ fe3tr�DATE: January 28 , 1986 RE : Long Range Facilities Usage Task Force Having had the opportunity to review the recommendations that will be passed on to the Mounds View School Board from the Long Range Facilities Usage Task Force I would like to propose the following statements be taken by the MVCEAC: 1 . I feel one of our main purposes is to represent the 70-74 percent of families within the School District that currently do not have school age children . 2 . Community education currently provides services to those households through programs such as ABCE , enrichment class offerings, senior citizen programs, computer training center , and early childhood/family education programs . • 3 . The Edgewood Community Center is currently serving over 6 , 000 resident visits per month to attend programs not directly related to the School District or community education , such as the emergency food shelf , commodities program, RAP , WIC , Ramsey County Health Center , Alcoholics Anonymous , cable TV access , Wilder Child Guidance branch and the NW Suburban Youth Service Bureau . 4 . Community education programs are currently funded through the State community education levy and early childhood levy along with program fees, and receives minimal support from the School District general fund . In reality, the community education programs currently subsidize the general fund in the amount of $220 , 000 - $240 , 000 for rental space at Edge- wood Community Center . 5 . Community education largely serves as the public relations tool for the School District, especially for those non K-12 families and plays an important role by in directly influenc- ing the K-12 curriculum. -2- RECOMMENDATIONS : 41/0 Rather than endorsing one of the three specific strategies out - lined by the Task Force Committee, it would be my thoughts that we would ask for three additional recommendations to be cans ill ered by the School Board. Recommendation #1 - We recommend that a minimum of 16 classrool , spaces be allocated for existing community education program currently operating within the School District to include generdi office space, senior citizens center, computer center, aduif literacy, and early childhood programs. Recommendation #2 - We recommend that a feasibility study be pre- pared relating to the concept of establishing a community educa- tion center within the School District to accomodate the existin.; 6,000 School District residents per month that attend Community Education Center programs. Recommendation #3 - We recommend that the School Board be cogni - zant and aware of the influence and importance of the 70 - 74 • percent of the School District households that do not currently; have children participating in the K-12 program. And , that thf role of these households is imperative to the success of the K-1 :'. program and should not be considered as a secondary issue. It should not be the Community Education Advisory Council 's posi- tion to adopt strategies, but rather to ensure that existing pro-- grams and services that are currently being offered are main- • tained when developing any strataqies for long range School District uses. BKA/sll • MEMO TO: Mounds View Park & Recreation Commissioners 4111 FROM: Bruce' K,y • w. - , Director Parks, Re r - titin and Forestry DATE: January 28, 1986 RE: Joint Meeting with New Brighton Park Board Staff forwarded a letter in the January 22 correspondence which indicated an invitation from the New Brighton Park Board to hold a joint park board meeting with the City of New Brighton on Tues- day, February 11 . One of the major topic items will be Long Lake Regional Park, which will be presented by the New Brighton Park and Recreation Board , but they have also asked each of the other. Park Boards to provide an issue of discussion for the group at large . To that end , I would like to propose that the Park Com- mission hold a general discussion on items that could be reviewed and suggest the following items as possible topic areas : Long Range The FacilitY Usage e Task Force would be a current • relevent topic which I feel might be appropriate for Mounds View to provide the impetus in this discussion since the Edgewood Community Center is located in our City. 2. The Cities of Mounds View and New Brighton have entered into a number of joint powers agreements including forestry, pup- pet wagon and potentially aquatics, for joint staffing . Possibly some discussion could be generated regarding poss- ible joint powers agreements with other park and recreation agencies to improve services at a lower possible cost. 3 . The concept of developing a School District-wide recreational survey to determine what recreational programming needs should be reviewed and analyzed on a distict-wide basis. This an area that has never been accomplished other than a community education survey that was done approximately two years ago , and a possible study on the recreational opportun- ities on a School District-wide basis would be of interest. -2- 4. Possibly printing a School District-wide brochure combining; • community education , as well as the surrounding parks and recreation department would be of interest, not only to save money, but to provide School District residents a Netter overview of existing programs and services available . This concept might be extended to include booklets and brochures outlining park facilities and existing recreational facilities besides just quarterly program reports . 5. You may have the desire to discuss general Park Commission issues, as to how agendas are prepared, items that are brought before Park Commission, relationship between staff and commission , relationship between Park Commission and City Council and how each of the different cities ' Park and Recreation Commissions function in general . These are just a few brief suggestions by staff of topics that might be of interest, and I would certainly welcome and encourage any new ideas or general discussion on these proposed items. BKA/sll 1111 • 411/1 MEMO TO: Mounds View Park & Recreation Commissioners FROM: Bruce K . Anderson , Director Parks , Recreation and Fore r 1)1)( DATE: January 28 , 1986 RE: Monthly staff update - January, 1986 The following issues and programs are outlined to provide the Commission with a better overview of our department' s day to day operations. Each of the listed items are strictly informational and not intended for formal Commission action . 1 . City compost funding - The funding for the City compost pro- gram has been transferred from Ramsey County to the Metropol- itan Council through the Land Abatement Act . The City recently received its optimal funding in the amount of $2 , 267 which will fund the program for 1986 . 41111 2 . Conferences and training - I will be attending two - one day seminars during the next two weeks ; the first being on the status of liability insurance and how it is affecting the recreation profession . The City recently experienced a 108 percent increase in our City ' s liability insurance and Park and Recreation Agencies across the metropolitan area are experiencing similar , if not greater , increases . The second one day seminar will be held on Tuesday , February 11 which will part of the State Horticulture Conference , and I will be attending the one day session on turf maintenance . 3 . Aquatics position - Staff has been meeting with the City of New Brighton to review the feasibility of a joint aquatics position between the Cities of New Brighton and Mounds View. We are hoping to have a proposal before the Park Commission at your February 27 Commission meeting , which you could review and discuss. At this time , it appears that we would be sharing the position with the City of New Brighton on a 60/40 basis, with the future status of Edgewood Community Center being a major factor . i -2- 4 . Cross Country Ski By Candlelight - Recreation Supervisor 1110 Saarion coordinated a Cross Country Ski By Candlelight special event on Friday, January 24, 1986 at Silver View Park . The event involved approximately 60 Mounds View resi- dents which not only enjoyed the skiing festivities, but also the food and fellowship that followed the ski evening. Mary is to be commended for coordinating an excellent community- wide special event. 5. Energy Week - The schools will be closed the week of February 17 - 21 for what was once called energy break and now is referred to winter break. We will once again try to maintain ice during this period , so that the winter skating rinks will be open . Unfortunately, during the past two years, the weather has not cooperated and we have been unable to have good ice during this time. 6 . Annual Report - Staff is currently immersed in preparing the 1985 annual report and hopes to have it completed by the February Park and Recreation Commission meeting. Should you have any changes for the 1984 and previous reports, please contact myself directly so I can make sure those changes become a part of the 1986 annual report. BKA/sll 1. f 0 0 ' l IQUS RAMyEY[[)t Nir MINNf5 7i4GATEWAYTOTHENORTHznoiHIGHWAVo MOUNUSVIFW,MiNN hbtl? 1tl43055 January 28, 1956 Dear Parks & Recreation Commissioners: Enclosed is your packet of information for the January 30, 1986 Parks and Recreatian Commission meeting at 6:30 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers. The major items that we will be discuss- ing are the community park referendum to determine what direction we should go from here, as well as set an agenda topic for the February 11 joint Park and Recreation Commission meeting. In addition, we will be discussing the Lonq Range F`acility Usage Task Force report which could have major impact on future Park and Recreation Department programs. Should you have any questions regarding the enclosed information, feel free to contact myself directly at 784-3055, ext. #20. Sincerely, y. Bruce K. An e n, Director Parks, Re ati n and Forestry BKA/sll Encicsttre CITY OE t10UNDS VIEW PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION CALL Zt) ORDER Thursday, January 30, 1986 A G E N D A 6:3U p.m. Mounds View City Hall Council Chambers IT. REVIEW OF DECEMBER 5, 1986 JOINT MEETING MINUTL•'S I I. CHAIRPERSONS REPORT IV. COUNCILMEMBERS REPORT GENERAL DISCUSSION REGARDING JANUARY 21, 1986 COMMUNITY PARK REFERENDUM I.. LONG RANGE FACILITIES USAGE REPORT VII. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED ZOPICS FOR FF.BRUARY 11, 1986 JOINT PARK BOARD MF.ETING VIII. STAFE REPORT IX. ADJOURNMENT P 1 CALL TO 0&DER ROLL CALL 4INUTES OF THE PROCEEDLNCS OF THE 2K5 FUNUING ALT6RNA'fIV65 TASK FORCE ` CITY'OF M011NDS VIEW CO NTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA December 5, 1985 Mounde View City Hall Council Chambere 7:00 p.m. The meeting was called to order inEurmally at 7:05 p.m. Task force members present: Linda Pavek, Neal Valley Fred Kaiser, Barb Depev Park b Recreation Commissioners present: Uiane Wuori, Frank 5ilvis, Ed Letendce, David Long and Chairperson Wayne Burmeister Councilmembers present: Mayor Jerry Linke, Councilmember Gary Quick Staff preaent: PaCk and RecCeation Director Bruce Anderaon INTBODUCTIONS Introductiona were made around the room including community service groups and/or agencies that each individual migh[ represen[ se well ae a brief review of each individuals family background. COHMUNITY CENTEx/ NATURI L ICB &INK Staff reviewed a memorandum that war distri- bu[ed on December 4, 1985 regarding the feasibility of constructing a recreution activity center at Silver VieW Park at a dol- lar amount not to exceed $JSU,000. The potential pla proposed by atafE was a 33 OOU sq-uare foot ehelter building vhich would house a naturaf iee arena. pu611c eeetrooma. genera2 aeating area pru shop kitchea facilitias end coneession area. StafF had met with two c predentativee from pre— fabTiCetad 6uildiogs; one repreaenting Cedar Foceot Producte and the secnnd representing 8utlec building. a eteel scructure. Both repTeeentAtivas indicated that a building eimtlee to Htaff'e deeire could 6e construct- d vithin thu dollar amount allocated. 2- There were a number of questions raised by each of the individuals in attendance ranging from the need for such a facility as well as possible programs that might occur at the facility. 5taff elaborated, indicating that the facility could serve as a year round Eacility saith Che sides coming oFf, thus becoming a open air picnic shelter in the summer time. At [his time, an extensive com- munity survey had not been completed regard- ing the demand for the facility other than informal meetings with repreaentatives from Lake Region Hockey who indicated they would be very supportive of. such a facility. GENBRAL PARK IMPROVEMSNTS F ..: ... Possible programming activities includerent- ing the facility out to large community organizations, exhibite, ar[s and ceafts shows, community festivala such as Featival in the Park, band concerte, roller akating, roller hockey indoor tennis. indoor floor hockey and comm inity fitneas areas. Staff indicated that et this time, he did noc have all the anr wers but rather was looking for conceptual apµrovel with additional detail informatlon to follov ers time permlt- ted. Staff fur!her etatod that Ne also had eome heeitance regardin conetructton of euch a large facility r e no erchitect had been consulted at thte tlm and hr rerommended that some-dolJare be allocnted tor a consul- tant to review Che renderinge Ue they were prepared by Cedar ForeeC Producte and utler Ruilding. The group provided a etcong general concen- sus to the projecc and directad etaEf to con- tinue getting iaformation on the project. Staff revieved r. liet of proposed perk improvements t taling $796,UU0 and indicated thac ie vould be etaEE'a d airn to reduce Ct is amount by a miniinum of $30U UUU eo that the park reEerendum wuuld nut exceed $1.25 million. There wae lengthy dtsc xaton on thia ieeue, with Cl e fnlloaing iteme being cut oc reduced: A. The auxillia y buildt g at Silver Viev Park wae reduced Co $3U,ODU. B. Tree and landscaping in thi• amuunt nf SO, ODO was eltminated. C. Picnic tablea were reduced to 7U tabtes at a savings of S10,SUU. 3- D. The security Lighting on tem was eliminated at 60,000. E. The VITA trail at City Hail ed a[ a cost of $1U,000. the trail sys- a sav3ngs of was eliminat- F. The two multi-purpose courtb at Lambert and Woodcrest Parks were eliminated at a i; savinga of $40,OOU. i t. , i E i.,; t 9 t PERMAN6NT PARK HAINTENANCE LEVY 4,. GSNBgAL DISCUSSION G. The archery range wns eliminated at a cost of $tS,UOU. H. The cost for Che building structure was also reduced to $650,000 or a reduction of $100,U00. Total proposed reductions are $308,500. Staff indicated that they would provide a formal list of items to be considered for referendum at the December 12 Commiesion meeting. StafF proposed that a permanent one mill Levy be dedicated for park maintenance to operate and maintain existing park lands and related public recrea[ional facilities including the proposed improvements. StafE indicated tha[ this would raise an additional $56,000 and double`our existing manpower which consists of two full-time indivfduals. It was the conceasus of the group that this also made logical sense and should be wrapped" into tae entire park question if possible. It was the general concensue of the group that the referendum should not exceed $1.25 millton and that a target date of January 21, 1986 ehould be agreed upon for the proposed park referendum should the City Council con- cur with the task force position. NSXT HSSTING DATE It wae agreed that one additional meeting would be acheduled for Thursday. December 12, 1985 at which time we would review the Einal figures as well as discuss any updated items regarding the recreation activity facility. Y8LK1 BNM*!? `1 The meeting was adjourned at 10:20 p.m. tfu l u,t i ted, tI it: tle,reon Director Recr'Btiop and Forestry Y4. . ' '., : p' MEMO 'IC): Mounds View Park & Recreation Commissir n•rs 1 FROM: Bruc t.l 'riderson, DirecCor Parlt ? e reation and F restry rf l , r DATE: Januarry 28, 1986 RE: Park Referendum Staff'enclosed a copy of the Community Park Referendum results a>; part oE the January 22 letter which indicated that hoth issues on the xeferendum were unsuccessful. Staff would iike to pro ose that a general discussion of the reEerendum be held to determin what direction we might go from here. And, to determine what we might have learned from our mast recent set-back. Staff will be providing a verbal rerort reqardinq our thouqhtn on this issue at Thursday evening's meerinq. Should vc u ciesire an additional information regarding the Community Park Referenciu prior to Thursday's meetinq, feel free to contact mys lE directiv at 784-3055, ext. #20. BKA/sll 1 MEMO'70: t4ounds View Park 6 Recreation CommiSSi nc r:. FROM: Bruce K. Anderson, Director Parks, Recreation and ForestrY_. ., - DATE: January 28, 1986 RE: Lonq Ran 1e Facilities Usaq Task Fnrce Staff has'encTosed a copy of the Lonq Ranqe Facilir.ies Usage Task Eorce ceport, wh'ir_h is a 51 pagn document utlininq the proposed recommendations fr m the School Distrirr a oinrcrri Task Forr• regarding future 5chool Eacilitics. "1'h r.rs,n rlii>: ir.rm i the agendd is that the impact of ceverting Edgewc od (:ammunity Center to a K-12 school facility will have maj r impact on our department. I have enclosed a copy of a draft letrer that will be forwardea to John Benham frnm the Mounds View City Council in reaction t the T.sk Eorce rc rort, as well as a p sitinn st:tement staEE i proposing to the Community Fducar_ion Advisury 'uuncil. our depar:tment would be directly impacted, not only thrnunh our squatias program bc ing cancelled durinq the day, bur. also throu: the extensive utilizati n of the Cnmmunir.y Center in or_her park and ecreation prc ramming areas. Staff's position is fairly clear in both the letr.er frnm the Cir_y Council and to the Community 6ducatian Advis ry Cnuncil, and 1 would encourac e some input and lisc ssi n re arriing the Lon t Range'FaciYities` Usaqe Task Force report, and' any additional action or position the Park Commiss'ion feels should he taken on behalf of the dep rtment or the City in general. In conclusion, I would lik.e to recommend that if you do not have time to ceview th entire report, that you read paqes 26 throuqh 29 which talks about the speciEic recommendations to the SchoolTrv 8oard:as we1T as-the--assumpt_ions and limitations that were deter- mined'by the Task Force. One last item on this issue is that the School Board formally received this issue Erom the Task Force on Monday, January 27 and they will be r.eviewinn it at a public hearfng on Mond y, February 3 at the F.dqewood Community Center, and a public hearing has been schedul d at Thurs iay, February G at Mounds View Senior High School. Should you have any questions reqardinq this issue r requir. additional inEormation prior to Thucsday eveninq's meetinq, feel fcee to contact myselE directly at 784-3055, ext. #20. BKA/sll Enclosure 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Copies of Final Reports of the Sub-Corr¢nittees ... 5 Criteria, Assumptions and Delimitatians ...... 26 Sumnary of Recomnendations to the School Board .. 28 Appendices A. List of Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 B. Schedule of Task Force Meetings and Agendas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 C. Minutes of Task Force Meetings ....... 41 r" PREFACE At its regular meeting of September 9, 1985, the School Board of District #621 directed the formation of a task force for the purpose of studying District enrollment and faciiity usage problems. Those problems centered around the student population imbalances in the District and addressed several major issues, including: Northeast Student Population Problem Population Trends Citizen Expectations Community Education Cost Effectiveness Surplus Space Building Capacities Staffing Ratio Neighborhood Schools Concept Transportation Grade ')rganization Long-Range Capital Outlay Kindergarten Centers Two High Schools of Equal Size Feeder 5ystem, K-12 Facilities for 5pecial Education Students As a result of `he School Board directive, the Long-Range Facilities Usage Task Force was convened on November 7, 1985. The unusually large (36) Task Force membership was selected from a broad base of schaol and cormnunity representation. It was intended that input be provided from as diversified a constituency as workable within the parameters of the charge. From the beginning it was agreed that the Task Force would focus its efforts on student-centered needs, looking back only to learn and looking ahead to provide for improvement, realizing that we cannot change the past and can only'provide for adaptation to the future. As a result of initial brainstorming sessions the Task Force was divided into four sub-r,ommittees: 1. Additional Space Availability 2. Alternative Concepts 3. Boundary Co siderations 4. Grade Re-Organization After a brief initial meeting the Boundary Considerations and Grade Re-Organiza- tion groups merged into one sub-cortrtnittee. 1- In addition to hearing reports on District population trerds and use of the Edgewood Comnunity Center, the sub-committees have studied a wide range of issues and options, some of which have been effectively used previously in District #621. Some'of these include: Consolidation Cooperative'Building Usage Split'Scheduling Kindergarten Alternatives Magnet 5chools Open Enrollments Night Schools Non-graded Classrooms Changes in the Feeder System Available Classrooms in the West Side Elementaries Local Churches Oak Grove School Leasing of Commercial Real Estate Portable Classrooms Use"of Part or All of Edgewood Camnunity Center Variety of Grade Structure Changes We have been constantly aware that it is not our responsibility to make decisions, but to provide recomnendations for possible solutions to the problem of student housing within *.he District. We recognize that it is entirely possible that, while the recommendations in this report may provide the answer to student housing needs, it is also entireiy possible that they may provide only the seed for a long-range`;solution (so desperately needed to cement constituent relationships within the District). Above all, we have come to appreciate the complexity of the situation. We want to thank you for the opportunity to serve in the process of insuring continued excellence in the educational opportunities of District #621. 2- In addition to hearing reports on District population trerds and use of the Edgewood Comnunity Center, the sub-cor nittees have studied a wide range of issues and options, some of which have been effectively used previously in Oistrict #621. Some of these include: Consolidation Cooperative Building Usage Split Scheduling Kindergarten Alternatives Magnet 5chools Open Enrollments Night Schools Non-graded Classrooms Changes in the Feeder System Available Classrooms in the West Side Elementaries Local Churches Oak Grove School Leasing of Commercial Real Estate Portable Classrooms Use of Par or All of Edgewood Community Center Variety of Grade Structure Changes We have been constantly aware that it is not our responsibility to make decisions, but to provide recomnendations for possible solutions to the problem of student housing withir the District. We recognize that it is entirely possible that, while the recormnendations in this report may provide the answer to student housing needs, it is also entirely possible that they may provide only the seed for a long-range solution (so desperately needed to cement constituent relationships within the District). Above all, we have came to appreciate the complexity of the situation. We want to thank you for the opportunity to serve in the process of insuring continued excellence in the educational opportunities of District rb21. 2- fINAL REPORTS OF THE SUB-COMMITTEES ADUITIONAL SPACE SUB-COMMITTEE Donna Mody. Chairperson ALTERNATIVE CONCEPTS SUB-COMMITTEE Debbie Tessar, Chairperson GRADE RE-ORGANIZATION/BOUNDARY CHANGE SUB-COMMITTEE Dan Maguire, Chairperson 3- 1 MEMBERS: ADDITIDNAL SPACE SUb-COMMITTEE REPURT Wayne Saiher- Chippewa Kintlergarterr Mary Cecconi- District 5tudy & Aavisor-y Gam. ir da Reider- T_r tle Lake Susie Kaiser-- Camrnunity Ed_+catic r ACv. Cc uncil K thy F ick.ering - N n-Par-enis Hea Sinwa- Snail Lake A ir ria M dy- Island Lake and Mc unds View Hioh AREAS STtJD?ED: Dur-ing seve:^al rneetings, this sub eon mittee studied tne f-llc wing p ssibilities far finding additianal classr om sP c= tc+ help saive the fa ilities shat tage in tne District's E st-side sch ols: Available classraoms in West-side elernentary seho is. Churches Oak Grave 5chaal Leasing c mmer ciai re l estate easing or buying portable classroorns tSsiny all or- p rt af Edgewaad Community Center to h ase additianal K-12 st_dents. FI!tDiN6S: SNace in the West-side - here is sarne additianal classrc oni space available at Rike Lake and Bel Air schaols. Churches- There is very litt?e space available in area churches that cauld benefit crur senaol distrir_t. 7_z: ^urove Scrit+al- There may be space in st me c f the Oak 6rc ve cc tLages ir tFe future th t may be suitable f r affices, but nat{ing is avai lable Y1ext year. Leasing commericial real estate- comraittee n ernbers were unable to find any s usabie cammertiai real estate that could he leased far- school purp ses. Lea ing or buyir g por-tahle classraams - Fof•tables such as thc se at Turtle Lake, Island Lake and Vrlpntine Nills lease fcm abouL ffi112UZ IZ per manth. In additian to the m ntly rentai, there are one time casts for dPlivery, eler_tr-icai cakuo ana canstructian of link, which cauld run .p o $2, Z O per double wide unit. To pu*•chase a t?urtabl uf thp earne si e costs ab ut 55, 00@-60, Q O. 5- US:;-,n xl i r par•t ,# agewn:?d f_r• mc r e K-1: pragramming- rpser t:y appt^axirnately i alassrc ms anc the portable ai: E c+gewc:d ar•e used to ht:use s_icli progr•an s as: English as a FCr r}d L:a n u ge, r udent SEr•viaes Coc rdinator, Audio-Visual Iris,tr.ir:ient Re,r, .inter°•Distr ict Media Center tIMC), Speci l d.icabi_n Oxfice, High 5chaai Alterr atives, PREF, V:catic:nal Piacer ier t and Occupati-n l Ser^vices Vacatianal Wa2.i ti r an Assessr ient, and the Summer 5chc al Office. A Nr n:irn tely 139 K-12 studer ts use these pragrams cail r- it r ay' be di'fficult and expensive ta mave the A.,i-r'J s tai zr d Distr•ict IMG. Edgewr_,d is a convenient Iac:ai;,:. f-r the' higti schc c l students who are bussed back and far h ta hath M ur ds View and Ir+ndale. entl n_gh ver 1/4th'uf Edgewcad `is usetl by'K-12 pr_5r,7is, ` T e Gc r xnur,ity Educatinn Depar•tment assumes th rr.r,irc• ec st fa+ the care ar d rnair tainance of the building. r_f r•-:ovati g Turt1 Lake- It .z es.tirnated t!at tc add at least six classraams, a gyrcna+siur, a rneaia cer ter, and additianal bathraam i7it•i: _}.ld c st appraximately 1.5 milliar dallars. 2T71 TTiFS: F.atic nal facilities should be equaliaed ni l-rir_t-•w:cie. Sfahili:y is r eeded in our District as soon as p ss? ble. l.any ter rn salutians shauld be faund and implemented as seon as passible,ta salve the District*s space inequities and r-ing about stability. If .here is rac rn the Cammur ity Educati n Rragram shauld rernair' t Edgewc+e d. CCNCL'JSI NS: cving students aut af their'avercrowded home schools ir tc tne nearest availa_ble spaae far the short term promotes sratability and dges r at 5ucceed in equalizing educatianal facilitias far a11 nistrict'students. Wit` the present buur daries the West-side f the District wili alw.ys havr: a larger• capaaity then the E t-ide. E..r:d ry char ge are inevitable in order ta bring space-er uity" L•a Yhe Di tr•ict. PRELIMINFlRY RECGIMMENDATIONS: 1. Red•aw Dis rict bc underies ta equalize educational ft r_i:ities'Distr•ct-wide. Tt appears that a NarthlScuth Civi;iar s.uh as th,t• cmiginally planned when Irandale High Sr.F-r,l wa Uuilt,; uff rr the mast flexibility iri a orar,,r,i dat i•g p tiau 1 at i ar prc wth. yye 3t ic r `-a easir,g intc, a Oi5trict-wide bCUndary _ cha nge inc:i.idi?s 6- a) Rresent K-6 students attend schc al in r ew boundary next schaal year: Seventh gr^ade rem in in same Jr. High. Eighth gr de att nd new High Schac l. 3th-iith grades graduate fram present-high schaal. 6) If (a> d esn't wc rk, adapt a duo-high schaal plan s saon s is feasibie. F r ex mple Mounds View might house Crades'9-10 and Irar dale w auld hause gr des 11-12. c. Mave Early Irtiterventian Rrngram frc m Pike I_ake intc, Edgewaad. s. Ds e to the success f the Chippewa Kinderg rten Cent r, the creatir;n af additional Kindergarten Centers should be given`pricrity in solvinc pcpul tior ad ustments.. 4. As long'as there is space in c ther schcols, Edgewaod should remair a Cc mmurrity Center far the fallowing reasaMS: a) Since 7S X f all District residents do nr t have children ir the public schoals a s ---ng community p^ogram is importan in fostering publit support for our schools. b) 5in.re the CG mmunitK dt catinn fund presently underwrites cver- 10Q, 0@Q in cc+sts ta maintain the K-•ic a•oyrams';naw at Edgewaad keeping part af Edgewaod as a Cammunity Center- will help the Gener-al Fund. If Edgewoad i currverted ir ta "schoc l" again, the General Fund wauld have t take over the entire expense cf c peratirg the building tap rc xim tely 25, S0 L1 . c) Edgewaod s lacatiun is well suited for a Cc mmunity Cer ter. 5. Turtle Lake is a sub-standard building. In c+t^der t pravid equity to the residents of the Turtle Lake r_ _ _.. _ camrnunity -somethir g must eventually 6e dane'to improve theW facility. Suggestians`'include adding:'at Yeast six- classroams, a gymnasium, a media center,`_and additional bathraam facilities to:bring the'building p to par with c+ttter D:stT•ict 'elementary schaols. 6. A'namp change .f tha two high sahoala might be advantageeus. 7. Have an -n-going Facilities Useage Task Force ta eval ate and monitor facilities, and to make necessary recam;nendat iar s. SF'ECIFIC RECOMMENAATION: M.aintair a Narth/Sc uth 6c undary with: Nc rt'he Turtle Lake, FinewvaG, S annyside, and Pike Lake #+. feed Chippewa and Irandale. ke, Valentine Hi11s, and Hel tidg View. if urne ' L Elem nt ry-atte tidance bt+undrry changes Y,indergartan Centers'wt Chippewa and Edg woad. 3. Comr 7unity Educetian Center in part af Edgewoad. Elementary Orsdes 1-6. Sugqest a gr•d.al easing in c f baundary changes s descrihed 8. :... . . g_ ALTfRNATIVE CONCEPTS 5U8CONM17TEE DF TIIE IONG RANGE PACILITIES USAGE TASK F RCE 11-20-85 Members present: John Ilurley, Gwen Barthany, Debbie iessar, Susan Hagstrum Chairperson appointed: Debbie Tessar John Flurlay's concerns: l. Magnitude of the problem -- how erowded is crowded? How many classroom spaces do we have? Need a !"Pdrock conmio i denomtnator." 2. 5hould use moderate '(yellow sheet) or high (blue sheet) classroom projectiens -- not 10-15-85 projections. Must be able to accouunodate "blue sheet' .•mbers. 3. •Do we have a specific number oP ciassrooms to work with? The eomnittee then diseussed th alternative cancepts brainstormed at the last task force meeting. • Consoildation with another school district -- Ruled this one out. isadvantages: too much [ime to implement. ''' tbo many political factors mitigating against. Adva tages: Seems logical - w: Oeveloper/Coop.',buiiding use co zep[-- Aerliaps,liold this option as a possible long-term solution_ Disadvantages: too much time to implement difficult to-have variety of uses for buildings built for school use. pe haps some legal complications . prfvate`sector may necd space'when we are not ready to give it up. Advantages• aitractive because of;patential flexibility. access Eo genernl phlination financing by schooi dis[rict - attractive. 9- I1-20-85' Alternative Coneepts 5ubcorrunittee oF'the Lony Range Facilities Usage Task'Force Split scheduLtng ° we were con used about 6 days 12 nwnths -- one oF inare vfable alternatives. Oisadva tages: may,not be practical. may not meet may not make eighborhoods as att actjve because schedule is undesirable. violates traditional sunrner off: Advantages: better util'ization'oT space. would'lneet tiuie 7 imi C iieeds or implementation. can be impleu ented s"dis-hnplemented" n,ore easily. The task force should give this alte native careful consideration. P.M. kindergarte at high schools Dis dvantages: • problems with proximity to dinner hour problems with space and materials having different use during the day. Advantages: could'move ail ki dergartners to afternoon at high schools Suggestion: establtsh another'kindergarten center like Chippewa. Three-shift kinder arten -- this aiternattve has been implemented before in the distr ct. Di3advantages: _ teachers may not Ilke tliis alternative. teachers having to share eiassrooms. -- Adva tages: kindergarten ofCers urore flexibie possibilities. less 'impact for segregating students communi ty may not. Magnet"Schools -- another iscue outside space issues. i sadvaf iages : what wouid it i,e7 wh:i mqr ms7 won't'solve-ui IJit i r.• F problem vnless generates new space. unpredietahTlily „f „,Ilweut. 10- I1-2o-85 r°ti f l LP.rIVf C iv, fql r,elrt ; :;ilh o n ii 1 (,rr• . .... ..... . o{ lhc Luuy Ranye, F cililies Us ye f.isl: for:e F c{vantaqd,s; .. eoncept cryul l he d velo d ld include prograws wliieh woulcl drat• pr ople back to lhe sr.,y ol system. Open enrolln enls --' liicr ngnet sr.i ools, anoU er issue - thi;s doesn'c solvc spacc problem. y pisadvanta;yes: planning for spic. violates coi crpl of n i4lil,orliuod schr nl -- this is n impqrt nt founcliti n iii tt m ifs for school board anrt adurir istration tb y in communiiy supporC. Night 3thuol5` -- clo sn'C Secm Co be an appropri te solution for students under age 10. Non-g-aded ciassrooms -- rhi. IteriiaCive dor.sii't snlve our space prabtein. • Change in feeder SysCem -- fhis alternative doesn't solve ovr space probiem. Bes["alternatives as seen by subcomnitlee: Sliiftii g of kindergirlen studehts Split scheduling an/or year-row il use of buifdings Long=terin -- Other a'Iternatives don't ap ear to genei-ate space or solve Rroblem. O e alternative not discussed -- leasing space or a buitd ng from anotAer district or a church. Perha s a magnet (small) school could be established in a cl urch frnw whnw we rented space. A ! J -,J,f S i ..t/i Hagstrum 3er-° 11-, LDNG FANC.,E FA ZLII'fiES TASFc FORGE REPORT OF THE 6RADE REOh'Gr1NIZAT20N/HOLJNDAFY C4AN6E5 U&COMMITTEE i JANUARY, 1?86 1/17/86 12- t ZNTRODUCTIQN ihe Grade Fieorgani ationfBoundary Changes ubccmmi*_tes of the Long Range Faci2iti s TasF; Farce was formed on Noveml er 14,198. The objec*_ive of this aroup was t pre are recommen ations on how to resolue the'overcrowding situationiin thz elementery schools located i:t the eas rn"pact of our schcol dist;ict. This suhcammittee was direc}e.tailimit';it' scope co the development ar.d review of candidate solutions involviny grade reo:^gatti atian nd/or`boundary changes. Two camaanion subcommittees were also'esta6lished to mak recommendatiuns ir. the areas'of alternative methods of delive ing ,' educat:cr, 3nd the use of ade itianaF s ace for educational purposes. he onem ers of this subconmitts and the organization they represented rare: Carnlyn 9asterash Finewood en Brumbaugh Hel.Rir Susan Cathey Chippewa Mary Chatfield Fike Lake koward Dahl Frincipals, Oak Grcve Laurie ohnson Superviso s, DSC - MiKe Keenan Sunnyside Dan'Maguire Irondale _ haFran Murphy Aides. Turt_e Lakke lson Teachers, Turt2e L3k,e s n L'SAC, Turtle . ake Tzachers, Mounds View fhcrn VaSentin Ni is x.._. __, i __ : . _ 13- A°UMFT?ON8 In order to proceed tn deveYop and evaluate potential soiution=_ ta the problem_`des ribed''earlier the Suhcommittee fzrst defined as=_umotions and solutian criteria. The assumptions are those it ms thet the Subc mmittee oresupposed ta be true and hence cansidered only potentiel solutions that could be achieued within thei"r 5cope. If, f,r scme reasan, "these assumptians r ..-. , in;"the future are deemed inva:id the list of potent_al sal ttions, anc there=ore recammendetion=_,,may reauir= revisior.. The assumption_ use were: The school'uildinq caoacity'and student enrcl3msnt cfata Frovided by the school district, is tompiete, accurate. and r=rl cts not ony current, but also future, building student capacities and studertt enrallments'(through 1?89-29?O). 2. The 1485-1986 staff ratio allocations (and averace c?ass siz=s? wil! rema.n c nstant over the next Tcur year=_. Beea se class si e=_ signi#icanfly affect building capacitizs, this item r=c=ived a significant'amaunt of diecusaio^,'primarily becs=e c= the f_=rge average cla=_s si es that'our district current2y has re2ative te other metropolitart school distritts. In a meeting of the entire l.ong Fange Faci3ities Task Force thi=_ item io s d=scus=_ed and es a result o4 a close vete taken at tha*_ m ting the suh cmmittees r ere direc=ed to use the IS85-1?B6 staff ratic allocaticns. distric*_ th'i inding will''remain corisistent with`that availat:e ojected, as af Novem6er 1995, uy'th: schoci uture y ars. C rtainiy severali'pc ential' ivailabie if adeitional or unlimited funds ea:^e e=ause of the =undir.a scenerio of'our dfst:^ict in " esrs, and becausz ef unc=rtaint:as oi stats ure, it was cansi ered prudent and respensible t icnsithat fit within cur current fsndird o tleek. if funds that da nat e:c-ist were assumed, it was we wouid run a significant ri_5k o f defining_a not'be imple nentabl= or would res lt in severa2 icant changes from year to year, le± alone I.ck tance. 6iven the n ed for stabi2i v within the nut done. 14- v.) LUTIQN G ETE 2 The c iteria wera choeen as those stan ards against which pctential solut'ior.s should be evaluated. In theory, if the criteria are proper2y defined, the "Ferfect" salution woul be that selution hich adheres to'the assumptians and fu12y satisfies al! the critetie. Becausz few, if`any,,potential soluticns ever ful2y achieve all defined criteria, solutions often beceme the "best" alternative and rtot neces5arily a perfect soluti n. The-c iteria defined by the Subcemmittze weretnot in any priority order): 1. Minzmi:e disruptians t stsdents---This implie5 the need to minimi e the.numher of students that=are invoYved in boundary shifts, the need to'consider boundary shifts made in aur district irt the past, and the need to mi'nimize the effect of any solution on our students.' . 2. linimiae educationa2 program disruptions--Each soiution should be mnsidered in:terms af the degree to which it modifies or disrupts eur current educatianal-programs. 3. Community Acceptance°-This c iteria refers ta the acce tability of a potential so ution to ths students and community. Tt e desire is to have'a solutian that can be fully backed and accepted by the students and community. 4. Transportatian costs artd distances---The solutions are desired to minimi e the distances that students°must travel to get to.schoal'. and ths transportation casts. S.,Genara2!csts---ihe`costs`oi any change need to be fuZ2y exami ed with a ooal of not incurri^g any new:additianal costs or at least tolminim:e any new costs. b Addre=s-'facility needs through 19B4-149-- A1! alternatives aee to be`evaluatetl far the degree to which ttcey wi21-resolve aur schools hottsing Qrobl ms through the S?-4J school year. Thi=_ :year;was ehesen 6ecause it is as far as:the data we used c t.ac urate2y predict student enrollments. The intent is to impFement a len term solution. Inciuded in the'Ta::i:ity'ne=ds, but nat inc2uded in the a minisfr_t:nns student enrel,ment data, is the need to provide five elzmentary classrooms st rtina in S6-E7 for handicapped st:d r.t•. Thesa Mounds View stadents are current y heing educated by S16 „ViI an will be retur-ned to Nlounds llieiu per 910 rzquirements. The recommended solutions must he a61e to be implemented fnr the 1986-19H7 school year or -to begin a phase in such that it addresses the distri::ts `i?86-1987 hausing pro6'lem. _ 15- i r;LTE,.tSFrT.:c= CON I ERcD ' The foilc:wing alternatives we e def9ned, and considered, by the subcommiEtee. Ti e -irst fcur alternat:ves are considered in mare depth in follewing sectians. The remaining alte:-natives were not consieiered further e:ther b=cause they lacked support an the subcommittee ar were n t =easi l'far t}7 F 3SO:15 statzc. The alternatives are not list d in priaritp cr-der. l. Open dgewood as a third jurtior high end move si:cth grade st dents ta the junior hiah schoals. pen E geY ocd as a third junior niah and mave fifth and si:ath arade students to the junior high =_choals. 3: Mods?y,the distric s current eastlwest fe c er system ta a northlsouih,ae er 5ystem. C nve t the east side elementar schoa!s to grade 6:- schoe2s, fiouse east side grac+=s 4- at Edgeweod, and move ea=t side si::th grade students t ChipFewa. 5. .Make no thances ta graae raorqani ation or boundary chang s---Jnless the ottter subcam it s define a feasible solution, *_he lacY, of change wi12 imply an intolerab2e leve2 of ov crcaiding'beginning'ir. ??B6-1?87 and ther=fore ihis alternat:ve was not cansidered further. 6. Medify our cu rent h:gh school 4-! structur= to have ene 4-!O school and one ±±-12 schoo2---This alternative, Hhi?e of interest and.perhaps.af,sorne alidity does net address the prphlem of evercrowding;at o r elementary schaols and was'nat sansider d further. 1 ,. ;. Cany rt n= haiL of Edoewocd into a si:;th grade cent=r far =t dents i in the eastsrn art of aur distri=t---This optz'en was not consi iered i`n depfih. 5?a e special:_educ tion prcgrams cr other non regular` clsssrcom p:^o r m= int availabLe`h.gh schaal`space---Thi s was n t cansi dered n depth because a* *_he pu2lout'natur of most o= thesa praaram=_ and [herefcre the need to have them housed in the building where the stud nts rer,uler classrcems are heT. Use E:gewc d as a disteict wide kinder.;arte center---This wa=_ not consider=d in3e th dss't the i creased ost of t.an5portatia, the nee to move !: students lcnq'di5t2 n es, 3nd the e!:tremeiy hiyh ccst invclve in _or.verting the 5 hooZ ?r 1: use inCluc+inq the z::pansi tt of phvsical classroam si es to me=t state guide2i es. 1c:. Convert Edgewuod i to an lementary schopl---Not canside^ed in depth: t : 16- r _ . _ t7 PLTERNATIVE3:APJALYSIS 1 T FtNAT I VE_ONF` 5.1.1 ALTERNATIVE ONE DEFINITION This 3lternative would modify our school sYStem as follows: a. Reopen E gewood a=_ a junior high school. b. Move al-1 si:<th ,grade classes to-one o+ khe then thr e unior high schools." e. Modify the feeder system s tallows: 1.)'Finewood and Sunnyside students woulc! attsnd Edgewood far junior,high. Pike .ake, Hel Air, and Valentine Hills students wnuld at_=nd Highview for; junior high. 3.)'St4dents at TurtLe Lalce, Snai2 Lake, and Isl nd Laie wouzd continue ta attend Chippewa. 4.) The feeder system with students S:ing 4rom unior high to senior hiqh will raGuire revision end baurtdary changes becausa three junior highs would f=ed two senicr higt schools. d. The,,Chippewa Kinderqartan Center would continue t be neede t - house the-K"s'from Turtle Lake. Is13nd Lake, and 3na1I Lak:e. e. The special needs students returning from 416 would be housed at schools on the west side f the district. f, S me programs currently hcused at Esigewood, but not all, cou1C rem in there. ,. i. RLTEr NATI'JE' OfJE ADVAMFAGE°_ i'. There would be iittla ch nce in over,il tran=_portati_n cos=s wath ome -5tudenfs ,being bussad :ang r d:=_tances and some shor-ter distanc s. .. Can`.be implemertted for 1 E8-i?8' hcwever will"nqt te -ullv implemented try then because af curric lum mo ifications needed s± the junior hi hs. Creatas.middle`-schocls nd allaws mcre tnntinuitv ior its stu ent= due to attending the mi dle schools fur *_hree years xnstaad o= t:+o. Futzntial-e.:ists fur better student ider.t.t, w:th scnaol. 4. All ws si:ith gradars access to unior high facilitiescif the s_::th gr3de program"is integrated w:th "-3) and counselers. 5'i solyes the d:strict;housiny needs e::cluding a singie location commuriit•y'educaticd csnter, thrcugh -1484-9n. 6. C+7ange in elementary bu.ndaries wr.uld mare evenly di trtbute 17- opuiation t uti?e tui'la:nc _3 ac:: _. ame. but net:all, pr c ms ttrr=ntly a*_ °_=aeevood te rema:n rhe _::ac*_ nsmber or vnich pr^cra:ns ha•e L i°°n identi cee. 5. i..: =LT.:ii+JATI'.'E QSvE 2:=C:-IL VF::LTHG.. i. Ther='wculd e disru tz n t cur currer.t e uc_t:nal prograr=_ as a resul t af =reat i ng a 6-8 mi ddl e sc:-:ool . There wi11`!^e a diticna? costs r-eGuire te coen ar.±her s h cZ within *_he'dist:-ict. While 'gewood is curFentiy heina us d, its costs ar harced t the Com nunitr •L:L tion Tun. A7 re:u? ar schocl i t"s costs wi I l 6= . charge t t!e O I"t F3F f und. There are further additiona3 costs that will o cur'beLau=_e f cewe+ is ree ene as mici.dle school and because of rzvi=ing it's a:-e structure to 6-@..Ex3mples af items Lonst:mir.g a+di ienad _sts are c rriculum modi4ication, teach r in-_r'=ice training; additi nal perspnneltcounsa ors, an as=_istant princi al, certified laeha:•ier man2aer),'.inst uct:onal supp3ies, and added program costs far sixt g:-aqers includinq such items as hsome ecanomics end inCustrial a-ts in lud.ng four ac diticnal teachers. 4. Moves si::th graders out of the e ementary sch ols which sc<eral parents have strongly objected to on e ucatienal aro:ends in the z past`. 5. nec'uces the e#fectiveness nf speciaissts time due to t!:e nea to split.the?r time 6etween che elemzntary and mid?e =chools. S. Can-,not be fullv implemented 1°8e-1"?fi'due t r=uired c rri u31:.^. modiri ari'ans. Wil? requirm a ph s in per:ad. reates ree er sy=_te:n where =t:.idents at mid lz schools wc:i end senior hig? wit: different studentsithree mictdle schavls tasi:c:g two senior highs? S: Raquires signir'icar.t baun ary changes.' Prt narily i.^.v l•;es meye•r.e::t or' scme Turtle La:e stu ients tc :newc d and son e Jal nt.:e 4'.ill=_ etudents to 3ai air- . assibiy ii:n.ts acc ss of =_i::th gra e :n ,edia c nte, s i r.c_ laCs, and;_amputer labs. 1•?. Gr wi ng Turtl Lake er.ro? : ment nr.y cranpt future acun:ary chan s- 18- ALiE=TlRTI:E TW _ i..2 r1LTE NATIVE Tl iO DEF2IVITIrJ'N A2ternative two is 6asical?y the same as a2ternative one exce t in a,dc i.t:,on.to the sixtn gr de moving ta the junior high schools, the fi=th"gratle.would also be moued to the middl'e schoois. The feeder system descFitred in a?ternat:ve or.e`also a plies to alternative two. RLTcRNAiIVE TSJD AI?VANTAGcS uaniages 1!isted under`al*ernative one,also apply. uI resu_Y in a more complete and even use of all district 3 i'ngs. v=ng fifth.arsd sixth grade clasees as a cur icularly 5eparat= i t •ntn tho ;,n;`nr-hi ni,= .=hould .not reauire curriculum cteanqes. 5.2.3. ALTERNATIVE TWO DISADVANTAC-E5 ili a ian of Rel'Ri rowding of High`vie:, tne aecaae. ng fifth and ',sixth" g ade iools an placed in the ne would also apply. and Fi ke Lal;e. usd -Chippewa bX_ the end of 19- °' U . .. 5. . ALtEF1 ATI VE_THREE - 5.:3.1' ALTERNATIVE THREE DEFINITION 1. Change the feedet system from an east-we=_t oriencation tc a north-south rientation. r^.. M I:e Chippewa a K-b n rth elementary schooltabscrtrinS Turtle Lal:e plus other area student=_). Make Edgewood th2 north 7-B junrcr high-schoo2 feeding Irnndale. 8choo2s f'eeding Edgewood would 6e Chippewa, Fik•e Lake, Sunnyside, and Finewood. ' 4. Make Highview fhe south 7-8 ;un r high school =eeding Mounds View. chools feeding Highview would be Valentine Hills, Snail Lake, Island Lake, and BeI Air. 5. Turtle tal z would tre available ior cammunity educati n activit:e=_ and as reserie-educational sRace, 5.3.2 ALTERNATIVE THFEE ADVaNTAGES 1. Presents a long term solution fer e!ementary and secondary education in our distr:ct. Present grade structure and urriculam would nat c:ange. 3. Fermits standardized curriculum ar_russ the istrict. 4. Maintains the cemmunity school concept. S:,Coiomunity'Educ3tion ac*_ivi:ties can 6e conti ued an ne bui2dir.a. b. Maintaine balanced high school populations. 7. Utili es the e:eisting hipFewa ti: c=nter. There would be 2ess trave! time and distance=_ for most area=. 9. neplaces the currently inrerior physiCa! faLil-tie=_ far Turt?e ke students<e.g. lac: of zdequete 5ath-eoms,g•/mnasiums,etc.). iQ. Provides additi nai elementary space :n the area where it is nost critically needed. r , 11.5Fec:-al needs..studEnts returning frem 416 AVTi could'be housed at" a we t si de school: t` .' i. Maintains full tili ation of elementary.specialists. •' v. .., Z -20- y ALTERNATIVE THFEE DISADVANTAGES 1. Fossible lac'r: of auGlic ac eptante due t majer changes in the schooT feeder system. w.. . 4lould require a_phase in period at the high school level. W uld a11aw studenfis currently in hign'school to c mplete hign schccl a the school they`are currently attending. 3'. Minimal building construction ar modification casts will be required. 4. There may be additional personne3 costs, currently unidentified. associat d with running a larqe e3ementary schaol(Chippeaa). 21- 5.4 ALT=FiMATI lE_F JU ff t , -- - - 4.1 `ALTERr1ATIVE FfluR DEFZNSTION This alternative w:ld do the follawino: 1. TuFtle Lal:e, na11 Lal;e, and Island LaE:e would become 4;-= scheeis. E gewood wauld housz'grades 4 and 5 fcr *_he above *_hree scho l=_. 3. The remainin9 elementary hools would house grade=_ r:-5. 4. Highview and Chippewa would 6ecome S=8 middlz =_choo3s. The s3 th grade would be self -contained and not curric lnrly irttagrated with grades 7-8: 5.4'.2 AL7EfiiNATIVE FflUR ADVANTAC-=5 1. Allows kindergarten classes cn east side to return to their heme school's. Retains current overall fee er system. 3. Having si:<th grade as a separated group =_erves as a transit-or.a1 year to ]unior high yet st:ll utili e=_ the capacity of the u.^.ior high buildings. , 4. Special needs students returning from 916 could 4e hLU=_e 3t :l: Lal:e,! el'Hir, or Sunnyside.' 5. Aaditicnal Edqewoad spac could be use tor west sid'kir.d r..cten or grades 4- if or when west side overcrowdino occu s. 6. Transpa tation .costs=end distanc s dzcrease fL kindergartener=_. 7. Majority ef changea are ir. the areas wher= the evercrowding proq2ems are the worst. 8. Could be implamentad by ta:: I°26. 5.. ALTEfiPJATIVE OLJR DISriDVAP1TraGES 1.- Wili be discuptive to students in grades 4 and 5 on the east side of" the district: ; lJill lil;eiy require construction of ad itional spa z on the east side of the tlistrict io meet long term needs. 22- 4 3.. Additiqnal cos s to reopen Edgewood a=_ an elemEntary s hocl. 4. Additianai costs reGuired to house s::th r de at the lunior hi h schools. 5. fiossi6le i ck of Community ac=eptance at having si::th graders at jt:nior :hi hs. 6. Ad iti,nal transportaticn costs for east side gracles 4-5. plit of elementary specialists time hetween elementar;• and junior high schools. E. FossiE!'e.problems in access of siecth grade ta media center, sczence 2abs, computer 2abs. S. Inconsistent'grade st-ucture throuqhout the district. 10.:Will recuire scme boundar, changes ( e.g.east side e2ementary stucfents moving to west side elementery schools?. A ...:.. ,r .. w „ P 23- _ tai{. i.0 LIMITflTZON5 DF 5EJ6COMMITT E STUDY r Fhe-subcommi*_tee h3d an ext-emely short time pe icd in which t accomolish their worl: lbasically two months: and this time fel! ove.- b th the Thani;sgivin and Christmas ho!iday p=ric s. E!ec use or' this there were several areas that the subc mmittes fa? should have be=n addressed that were not. c::amp2=s of the=_e items ar=: 1. The'educatiana2 3i=ec_s of e ucatir.g fifth 3nd s:::*_h 4rade stu+=nt=_ in:an elementaFr versu=_ mi a2 s hool. An analys3s af.required'boundar; chenges r=quirsd by each af the alterna'ti:es cansidzred. An analysi5 of--current and e::aected popu at:on trar.c s in crde ±a assess the canfi iencs level that sho:'! he placed in the administrations future student er.rollment tj3t3. 4. An analysis of current 5tL'[ent special proarams to Getter understand their phy sical space req irements. 5. A school by school lareut of capacities versus e::pected enrolZment, over time, for each of the alternativ=s cortsi+ered. o. A thorough review an ident:fication of ALL the e::cte cos! changes of each a?ternative. 1 24- 4' RECQMMEPJDATIONS Because of the limitations discussed in section ?.0 the sulacommittee does not feel that it is reasonable or appropriate at this time to make a speci=ic recommendation on which ef the above alternatives shou2 7 be implemented by the district. It was the judgement of the cammittee, hawever, that alternatives one and thre= have more merit than the ther alterrtat::ves discussed. Accordingly, the following recommendRtions are made; 1. The schco! district shou2d more thoroughly review the feasibi2ity oi: a. Revisinq its" fesde:^ syst=m t a north south ori ntatian as deiined in alternative three. b. Maving to a F, 5 and 6-8 middle scheol cancept as discussed in alternatiVe one. Includzd in the feasi6ility study must be a thorough identificatic and documentation, to the community, of the boundary changes necessary, student enrallment projections and e::pecte.+. i dividual school enreilments versus capacities throuqh 1990, an i entification of a12 direct and indirect costs involved, and possible phasing ir. plans. importance that this study include a;current u and identification of the effects of either af the ernativ s'an the educat:on o= our distriLts any decisians'n this issu the schocl board should iti.^. it ;is consideri,ng and haid`forma2 public se ptxons. Fubiic 3war ness at-this time is not iust be strongly sought out and heavi?! consid red in ikir.g precess. 25- CRITERIA, ASSUMPTIONS AND DELIMITATIONS ASSUMPTIONS/CRITERIA: NOTE: All recommendations and options included in thc Task Fc rc reoort arc based upon data provided by the School District administration, incTuding 6uilding capacities and current and projected student enrollment. 1. Atldress current (Fall of 1986) and long-term needs (5 years). 2. Staff ratios, Capital Outlay Fund and General Fund viill remain at their• current ievels. 3. The shifting of school attendance boundaries •ithin the District is inevitable. 4. This is a problem viiich atfects the entir•e :,:•ol District community. 5. There will be no single solution which will please the entire constituency 6. Equalize the student enrollment/building capacity ratio throughout the District. 7. Minimize long-term disruptions to students. 8 1 T. Minimize disruptions to educational programs. Minimize transportation costs, travel time and distances. Maximize community acceptance. The District must;provide for allocation of the needs of housing as related to'pre K-12 Special Education Programs in cvoperation with Distr'l t 976 to ensure stabitity in housing those programs. 12. Retain the concept of a Community Education program. DELIMITATIONS: 1: The Task Force recognizes that due to the timitation ot time, vailabte information and the innereni-un rtainty of predicting long-te n popula- tion fluttuations, combined with the difficulty of forecasting changes in state funding formulas and mandated programs, making definitive recommendations is difficutt. 2: The Task Force has not addressed the issues of educatiunal phiJosophies re atetl to grade re-organization. 26- 3. The Task rorce has not done detailed analysis related to the specific needs .,, of special programs, alignment of`required boundary changes, or school by school space'allocations related to student housing. 4._ The Task Force has nat studied in detail the cost factors related to its recommendations. 5. The Task Force recognizes that the final solution may be a combination of recommendations provided by this group and other options that the Board may consider. z- M SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE SCHOOL BOARD r- NOTE: The Task Force does not wish to establish any priorities to the various options; consequently any number or order present in the recommenda- tions is a matter of convenience and/or organization.) 1. We recommend the expeditious adoption of a long-term solution which provides for the equalization of District space facilities and stability within the school community. 2. We recommend that the Schoot Board address the issue of substandard facilities at Turtle Lake if it is to continue its use as a student housing center. 3. We recortenend that the Board examine the feasibility of adopting a North/South feeder system. 4. `We recommend that the Board examine the feasibility of changing the structure of current grade organization. 5. We recommend that 6efore a final decision is made, detailed study and analysis be done on those items listed under "Delimitations." 6. We recommend that prior to making any decisions on this issue, the School Board should document the options it is considering and hold formal public hearings on these options. 7. We recommend the establishment of a standing Facilities Usage Task Force to evaluate and monitor facilities, and to make necessary recommendations. The following are three suggested implementation strategies provided for your tonsideration and further study.' (Refer to individual sub-camnittee'reports for detail.) North: Turtle Lake, Pinewodd. 5unnyside, and Pike Lake to feed Chippewa and Irondale. South: Snail Lake, Island Lake. Valentine Hills, and Be1 Air to feed Highview and Mounds View. Assumes: L Boundary changes 2. Kindergarten centers at Chippewa and Edgewood 3. Cammunity Education Center at Edgewood 4. Elementery Grades 1-6 28- STRATEGY: NQRTH/SOUTH FEEDER SYSTEM —. North: Chippewa (K-6 elementary school), Pike Lake, Sunnyside, and Pinewood feed Edgewond and Irondale. South: Bel Air, Valentine Hills, Island Lake, and Snail Lake feed Highview and Mounds View. Assumes: „ L Edgewood becomes h#+b junior high 2. Turtle Lake becomes Comnunity Education Center 3. District=wide K-6 concept, with Chippewa becoming a targe K-6 elementary 4. West side school/s houses 5pecial Education programs being transferred from 916 STRATEGY: EAST/WEST FEEDER SYSTEM Pinewood and Sunnyside to feed Edgewood Pike Lake, Bel Air and Valentine Hills to feed Highview Turtle Lake, Snail Lake and Island Lake to feed Chippewa Assumes: 1. Grade re-organization with Edgewood, Chippewa and Highview as three Middle Schools (6-:8) 2. Maintains a form of the East/West feeder system 3. High school attendance areas will need to be determined according to independent boundary adjustments 29- October 29, 1985 Revised: November 7, 1985 ' Revisedc November 12, 1985 MOUNDS VIfW PUBLIC SCHOOLS Lon -Ranc e Facilities Usa9e Task Force MEMBERSHIP Parent Advisor,Committees L+e i R i:• i, Islmrd Lake Pike Lake M11ember Ken Brumbaugh 563 - 17th Avenue NW New Brighton, 55112 Home: 633-8977 Work: 481-3500 Donna Mody 4292 Brigadoon Drive 5horeview, 55126 Home: 483-0316 htary Chatfietd 1267 Ptississippi Street New Brighton. 55112 Home: 636-4394 Alternate Don Rawitsch 250 - 23rd. Avenue NW New Brighton, 55112 Home: 631-9678 Bill Obbereit 4465 Arden View Court Arden Hi11s, 55112 Home: 636-6411 Fi ier ovc? Carolyn Basterash Judy Herr.ian 8000 Greenwood Drive 8273 Eastwood Road Minneapolis, 55432 Minneapalis, 55432 Home: 786-4540 Home: 784-5299 SnaiZ Lake Dea Sinna Margot Brooks 5305 Hodgson Road 473 Lorinda Lane ShorPView, 55126 Shoreview, 55126 Home: 484-3576 Home: 484-6582 sun»side Mike Keenan -- Steve Kovacs 5092 Rainbow 2654 Louisa Avenue Mounds View, 55112 Mounds 1 iew, 55112 Home: 786-6399 Home: 784-2366 T rtZe Lal.'r Valentine llil-7. Linda Reider 4762 Anderson Lane Shoreview, 55126 Florie: R3-8033 ar aret Thorn lr rlenhill oad Arden Hills,-55112 Home: 631-2743 31- Dave Stimpson 775 Lakevfew Drive Shoreview, 55126 Home: 482-9631 Jill Peterson Sue Anderson 1465 Skiles Ln. 1700 Chatham Ave St. Paul, 55112 St. f ul, 55112 Home: 633-5041 Nome: 631-2319 04ER Member Chipper,a Rindergarten Wa;lne Sather 1137 Hunters Court Chipper a Jasnior High Higltview duraior Xiak IronduZe Senior High Mounds Viem Senior Hir h Arden Hills, 55112 Home: 483-8661 Susan Cathey 3170 Asbury Street NE 5t. Paul, 55112 Home: 633-0449 Wayne Sether 1743 Ruxanna Lane 5t. Paul, 55112 Home: 636-8279 Dan Maguire 1737 - 20th AvenuP NW New Brighton, 5511c Home: 633-6975 Work: 482-3222 Donna Mody 4292 Brigadoon Drive Shoreview, 55126 Home: 483-D316 ommittee Mary Peterson 1515 Kno11 Drive Shoreview, 55126 Home: 786-1030 Mary-Cecconi 469 Catherine Lane Shoreview, 55126 Home: 481-0912 Aide Sharron Murphy Turtle Lake Work: 484-2150 C1erk Gwen Barthany Valentine Hills Work: 631-0737 Custodian Joe Doncits istrict 5ervice Center Work: 63b-3fi30 32- Alternate Mary Kay Bumblis 541 Elaine Avenue Shoreview, 55126 Home: 482-1525 P1ary Rertm ers 3160 Ridgewood Road 5t. Paul, 55112 Home: 636-79?6 Bonnie Anderson 1720 Va7erie Lane St. Paul, 55112 Home: 533-5387 Yvonne ohnson 1874 Fredeen Court New Brighton, 55112 Home: 633-9473 Jon Thomas 8040 Gro eland Raad Mounds Yiew, 55432 Home: 784=5205 Margot Brooks 4730 Lorinda Lane Shoreview, 55126 Home d8d-5 u Judy ) :?!";j3 Turtie LaKa Work: 484-2150 Princiaals` Howard Hass Island Lake r` Work: 484=5553 Howard Dahl Oak Grove Work: 484-2057 Director Susan Hagstrum Muffy Tiede Director of Special Serv. Uir. of Curric. & Staff Dev. District Service Center District Service Center Work: 636-3650 Work: 636-3650 Teachers Sharon Nelson Turtle Lake Work: 484-2150 Don Segner Mounds View Work: 633-4031 Supervisor Laurie Jahnson John Ostlund District Service Center Oistrict Service Center Work: 636-3650 Work: 636-3650 Food Service Lucilie Pallow Edgewood Community Center Work : 784-9600 Parent of Handicapped Student Debbie Tessar John DeNoma 180 Dennison 91 Bridgewater Drive Shoreview, 55126 Vadnais Heights, 55110 Home: 482-7953 Hone: 483-6365 5enior High Students IrondczZe , James Zemlin_ ' 2234 Bicentennial Court New Brighton;.55112 Nome: 633-5570 Mozozda Viera Lisa Czeck 4786 Kent Way Shoreview, 55126 Home: 483-0561 Non-Parents Kathy Pickering 2407 Mounds Avenue New Brighton, 55112 Home: 633-;50C nu avr.v ;' VuunV.,. ... Susie Kaiser 8275 `Pleasant Vie v Drive Mounds View, 55432 Home: 786-0695 33- OVER Vocational Education Advisory Council Rodney Tooley 2124 Thorndale Avenue New Brighton, 55i12 Home: 633-8762 Community Relations Council John Hurley 3420 N. Dale 5treet Shoreview, 55126 Home: 483-9642 Hlork : 779-4535 Dave Clough` Deputy Superintendent District Service Center Work: 636-3650 Marv Wendorf 5085 Longview Drive New Brighton, 55112 Home: 784-6332 Paul Doniey Director of Community & Support 5ervices District Service Center Work: 636-3650 John Sedey Director of Vocational Fducation & Student Services District Service Center Work: 636-3650 Janet Folsom Administrative Assistant to the Superintendent and School Board District Service Center l•lork : 636-3650 Chairman ohn Benham 1507 Knoll Drive Shoreview; 55126 Home: 786-5299 Work: 631-8820'or 633-6479 NOTE: Ei`aine'Hanson, Pike Lake, vii11 receive 5 copies of all materfials distributed for the'Problem-5olving Team. 34- Format uf Meetings: Introduction Appoint subcommittees, chairs; time for subs;to meet Initial reports from subs; reactions Pubiic hearing; committee interaction on what they heard Intermediate reports rough draft; reactions Fina7 presentation of subs; rough draft of Board report, including recommendation and/ or options Presentation to Board Open `Nli ke 35- November 7 November la December 5* anuary 4 anuary 16 January 20 JdnUdry 27 1. 2. 3. 4. MDUNDS VIEW PUBLIC SCHODLS Long-Range Facilities Usage Task Force November 7, 7:00 p.m. Oistrict Service Center Board Room Introduction of Members P rpose of the Task Force Problem to be Addressed Process to be Followed 5. Adjournment AGENDA 36- Jahn Benham Dave Clough John Sedey John Benham r MOUNUS VIEW PUBLIC SCHOOLS Lon9-Range Facilities Usage Task Force November 14, 1985, 7:00 p.m. Edgewood Cortmtunity Center 5100 North Edgewood Drive Mounds'View' AGENDA 1. Review the Problem: a) Crowding at Snait Lake, Turtle lake, Island Lake 6) Need for additional Special Ed. space in 1986-87 5 elementary classrcoms 2 junior high classrooms) 1 senior high classroom c; Inadequate facilities at Turtle Lake 2. Brainstorming: What are the solutions to the student housing problem in District 621? 2a. Enroll ent' Break -- 3. Define Major Components to be Studied 4. 5uC-tommittee Assignments a)- Select sub-committee chairs and recorders b) Begin discussion of issues c) Decide nn future sub-committee meeting dates d) Develop ir.itial requests for additional data 5. Reconvene Repori to committee at large, request any additional data needed from facilitators 6. Adjourn MOUNDS VIE4J PUBLIC SCN00 5 Lonc-Range Facilities _Usa e Task Force December 5, 1985, 7:U0 p.m. District Service C?nter Board Roo^ AGENDA 1. Ooen Plike 2. Edgewood Lommunity Center How It is Presentiv Beiiin Uc d 3. Sub-Committee Reports Next Meeting: Januar,V 9, 7:00 p.r. Edgewood Gymnasium i Attached dre reprint5 of articles -in- the t•iinnetonka Schael News.' The issues they are dealing with are sirnilar to Mounds View. 38- f.;.t . . , . . .. . . . i MOUNDS VIEW PUBLIC SCHOOLS Long-Range Facilities Usage Task Force January 9, 1986, 7:00 p.m. Edgewood Community Center Gymnas i ur 5100 N. Edgewood Drive f Mounds View AGENDA 1, Introduction - John Benham 2. Public Hearing 3. Co nittee Interaction 39- There were no printed agendas for Janua•y 16 or January 20, 1986. r.. . r . _ ._., t — 40- MOUNDS VIEW PUBLIC SCHOOLS Long-Range Facilities Usage Task Force November 7, 1985 MINUTES peputy Superintendent Dave Clough welcomed members and introduced Chairman John Benham. Benham asked task f rce members to introduce themselves and indicate the constituency they represent. Clough read the resoTution presented to the School Board by the District Study and Advisory Comnittee which requested development of a process for addressing problems related to enrollments and student housing. Clough revi wed subsequent Board attion whicn called for formation of a task force to study all pertinent data, reteive student input, receive pu6lic input by means of a hearing, provide interim reports to the Board, discuss alternatives, and provide final recortenenda- tions and timelines for Board consideration. Clough stated that he felt the role of individual task force members was to represent their constituencies; be communicators; determine what is best for District students; and keep their alternates informed of all infonnation received. nal Education &'Student Services, presented ained how projections are arrived at; stated ate, depending or education programs and'ratia wed the`enrollment history at Turtle Lake Ele- mentdry School over the past year, Benham stressed that: 1. Members should'make sure they understand the terminology 2. Any idea may have merit 3. Primary focus should be on student issues, at least in the early meetings 4. There-are no "sacred cows" 5. History has,particular meaning in this Districi and we should learn from it, but'we must look ahead, not back 6. The task force wi11 deal with hot political issues 7.. Th t w111 h8 short and long-range issues (attached is a list of issues Board mem6ers' reviewed on eptember 23i O1T:R 41- Future Meetin9s: November 14 at Edgewood Co nunity Center Brainstorm; appaint sub-comn9ttees and chairs December 5 at the District Service Center Open mike at beginn9ng of ineeting to hear public input) Initial reports from sub-cananittees January 9 at a place to be designated later Public hearing; task force interaction on what they heard January 16 at the District Service Center Intermediate sub-canmittee reports in draft form January 20 Final sub-comnittee reports; prepare draft of repart to Board January 27 Presentation of report to Board Some task force members indicated their concern that the timeline for the task'force is too short. -6enham stated that as the work of the task force progresses, a determination •ill be made as to whether the group could meet`Board expectations in regard to the long-range plan. 42- MOUNDS VIEW PUBLIC SCHOOLS Lon9-Range Facilities Usage Task Force November 14, 1985 MINUTES Chairman Benham reviewed the problems t.`,e task force has beer, asked to address: a) Crowding at Snai1 Lake, Turtle Lake, Island Lake b) Need for additional Special Education space in 19E6-87 a c) Inadequate fatilities at Turtle Lake The task force brainstormed issues and solutions to the prob]em: Brainstormin 1. is r c -wide problem 2. Edgewoc.d community resource concept 3. Tnpact of staff ratio o facilitv nee s 4. Turtle Lake gym space 5. rade organization 6. East/West population 6alance 7. Neighborhood schools concept 8. Unity (history) 9. Classronm space for elementary specialists 10. Temporary space li. Expansion of buildings - Turtle Lake 12. Split schedules 13. Saturday classes 28. ' 29.- 30: ; 31: 2 . .. School education philosophy nomic family!balance -- . _ ysis/efficiency Housing all'`students ool PTO fund-raising for portables ewood'as eleme;itary site, a]ternatives kindergarten in other (Districts, private schools, churchesj ool d school nge feeder system Kindergarten at high schools after 2 p.m. g-term need 1 ,needs - uni ty 4-6. etc. _. 34. Triple shifting,kindergarten 35: E]ementary school options - traditional, open, etc. 36. Edgewood K-8 magnet school 37. Preserve'Edgewood programs 38. Flexible'boundaries 39. Drastic cha ges.- long-term solutions 40. Distri'ct consolidation 43- OVER 41. High schaal fesd r (9/10 -'11/12) 42. Aveilebl4 bu11d1ng pace 43. develaper coop schools 44. Mave Internetional schoat from NW to SE 45. Fac111ti s prablems (all 621) 46. Community r$lations P 1G1tiC 1. Perents who want children to go to neighborhood schools 2. Hlstory mistrust ap thy'` lgnorance rustration - eng r 4, I.4vy reterendums =' past/future 5. Clear and-understandahle statistics 6. S1m11ar problem ukher pistricts r. taff marate 8. Policy lnconri tency 9. S, lp. U1 o} CapiEal OuElay Funds 11. Mi un erstanding of budget lZ. Cam unl y-wlde affects la. te t 1mpe t 14 I.yally of per nts nd studants to school system 15, Infiiatinn 18 ede l and st te pollcy ly. 5tud nts vs, adult-centered mentatity 1. U1V1d4d School Board 19 Rum4r milla fueled by srecial interest 0. G tting ett ntion John Sedey direttor of Vocational Education data ont qisLrtct and building capacities using di trlct and buitding capacities using i eetlmute pf prn,jected enrollments groups Ssudent Services, distributed current ratio ECSU "average" ratio An e tlm te of enrollment pro,ections by school Tha breinstorming ideas were categorized as fotlows: Facllitiea Avallable building space Spec1 11sL space Tampor ry'space Exp nding buildings Turtle Lake gymnasium e itity problems (District-wide) Speclel Educatian housing M hite.cla srooms Ed wood - Ca nunity Education preserve programs and concept K-B magnet ' Us as site' aa- Grade Re-Organization (solution) High school feetler K-3, 4-6, K-5, 6-8, 9-12 K-8 magnet Open enrollment H.S. 9-10, 11-12 6-8 middle school S Edgewood Boundaries (solution) Flexible boundaries Population balance Neighhorhood schools 5 Change feeder system Alternative Concepts Consolidataan Developer/coop. building use concept Split scheduling (6 day, 12 months) P:M. kinderg rten at high 5chools 3 shift kindergarten Magnet schools Open enrollments N1ght schools Non-grAder ctassrooms Chenge in feeder system Qmnuni tY- Issues OrdstiC concerns long-term snlution Un1ty - District wideness Miatory Tax lmpacts Neighborhood schoals C4mmunity relations Long-term needs 5oc10-eeonomlc balance Cost ' ocel"PTO S for additional space personnel changes Policy inconsistencies Mlsunderstood budget Dlstrict loyalty and transience 45- OVER Staff/5tudent Ratio Reduction Impacts Elementary options - tradit ional. open Educational philosophies -°- Non-graded classrooans °` Discussion follo ved on whether this was the proper pr•ocess to be used in arriving at recommendations. There was not agreement among task force members to change the process. The task force wi11 divide into the Following sub-committees; 1) Additional space {p10TE: Atl sub-corm ittees will also focus on 2) Alternative concepts the facilities category) 3) Boundary considerations/Grade Rc-organizatlon Merged`because not enough task Porce mem ers chose to serve on the Soundary Considerations sub-committee. The sub-committees wi11: i) Report their membership nnd chairnen to Janet Folsem 2) Hotd individual sub-committr.e meetings prior to December 5 to begir discussion of issues 3) Request needed additionbl information from facilitators 4) Report to committee at large on December 5 The next meeEing will be on Oecember 5, 7:00 p.m.,at the District Service Center, 2959 North Hamline Avenue. Janet Folsom, Recorder 46- f MOUNCS VIEI I PUBLIC SCHOOLS Long-Range Facilities Usaqe Task Force December 5, 1985 MINUTES The meeting was called to order by Chairman Benham. The followiog persons spoke during the Open Mike portion of the meeting: Lee hlcfJiesh - Wants lona-term solution. If Hamline is used as a boundary, Pinewood would become another Turtle Lake 6ecause of crowding. Ideal solution would be to build on to Turtle Lake. Consider all alternatives carefullv, taking°into consideration kids, not money. John Munson - Have heard that people are battling to keep Edge:vood. Children are more important than a community center. Do v hat's best for children first, then make it compatible afterwards. Put grade school at Edgewood. John DeNoma - The District presently farms out handicapped kids through 916. Oon't like transportation system (length of trip, process). Asked to be a member of task force, but was appointed alternate. Present facility son attends is poor. Should have integration with students in regular classes. Consider the needs of the handicapped. Provide aopropriate space in District. Paul Donley, Director of Cormnunity Education and Support Services, descrihed present usage of Edgevaood by Community Education, agencies and District K-i2 programs. If used as a school, Edgewood could house about 1,000 students. Present leases can'be cancelled by either party with 90 day notice. Community Education pays all utility and custodia] costs at Edgewood, 4200,OQ0 - 5225,000/ year. Rentals add 427,000 to General Fund. Donley v ill determine how many rooms would he needed-elsewhere for K-12 programs if Edgewood were converted to a school. Sub-cortonittee reports were presented as follows: Additional Space (Oonna Mody) Sub-cortmiittee discussed need to look at existing space. Will research: present space, how it is used and how much will be needed next year; use of Oak Grove, churches, and co mnercial space; use of Edgewood. A member will put data base as supplied by John Sedey on personal computer to use for "what if?" purposes. The sub-committee may check use of space with principals. Alternative Concepts (ebbie Tessar) Sub=cormnittee wonders at what point schools are full, or realty full. Which alternatives;generate additional space, i.e., magnet schools? The best short- term alternatives would be triple-shifting kindergarten, moving kindergarten to other buildings, solit scheduling and/or year round use of buildings, renting church space. 47_ OVER Grade'Reorganization/Qoundary Considerations (Dan Maguire) Defined criteria for solutions: 1) Minimize transportation a) cost b) distances 2) Minimize educational program disruptions 3) Use building capacities, less special progra s 4) ;htinimize student disruption 5) htaximize community acceptance 6) Cost factor 7) Assume existt g capital outlay and general fund 8) In place by Fall of 1986 9) Address facility needs through 1989-90 The group has asked for additional data from the administration. 5everal preliminary solutions were discussed, including use of Edaewood, grade organizatibn schemes, specific program placements. Mo evaluations were made af any of these. There is still concern about meeting Board timelimes for long-range plan. The meetii was adjourned, the membership dividing to meet in su6-cormnittees Janet Folsom, Recorder 48- MOUNDS VIEW PUBLIC SCHOOLS Long-Range Facilities Usage Task Force OPEN HEARING Edgewood Community Center January 9, 1986, 7:00 p.m. Chairman Benham called the meeting to rder, made introductions, and reviewed the formation and work of the Task Force. About 75 citizens attended the Open Hearing which vas field for the purpose of hearing concerns of citizens. Sixteen citizens were present to express their views. The admim stration announced there would be an inrormational meeting (the 20th one to be held) to again review enrollment data and projections on January 21, 7:00 p.m. at Edgewood. Following the Public Hearing, sub-committees met separately to continue their work. e anet Folsom, Recorder 49- i'r. g ,/ @: MOUNDS VIEW PUBLIC SCHOOLS Long-Range Facilities Usaqe Task Force January 16, 1986 h1I NUTES Chairman Benham called the meeting to order, reminded members of the Task Force meeting on January 20, and invited members to the Board meeting on January 27. 5ub-committee reports were presented, outlining tentative solutions to the student housing problem. Initial re orts indicated some a reenent by task force members that the District be divided on a north/south boundary confiqura- tion, rather than east/west, and that the plan should be for a lonq-term solution. The Task Force also sees a need for a standing Facility Usage Committee. Chairman Benham will draft a capy of the report to the Bnard so that members can review it and make necessary chanyes at the next meeting. Janet Folsom, Recorder i ' . - ; < 50- r,-. ; MQUNDS VIEW PUBLIC SCHOOLS Lonq-Ranc e Facilities Usage Task Force lanuary 20, 1986 MINUTES Chairman Benham called the meeting to order. He presented a draft he had prepared of the Task Force report to the Board. Task Force members reviewed the report and made suggestions for changes. The final draft of the report will be mailed to the membership as soon as it is printed. Janet Folsom, Recorder 51- l i I f or , us RAMSE Y COUNTY, MtNNESOTA • GATEWAY TO TNE NORTH zap H Hyypy p MOUNPS VIEW, MINN. 5511 784 055 January 27, 1986 Mr. John 8enham, Chairperson ' Long Range Facilities Usage Task Force 1507'Knoll Dr. Shoreview, Mn 55126 Dear Mr. Benham: The Mounds View City Council would like to go on record indicat- ing our stronq support to ensure that adequate facilities are provided to accomodate the existing community education, recrea- tion and communit based 4- y programs. As I am sure you are aware, 72 percent of the households in School Ristrict #621 do not have school age children. ThexF currently exists a myriad of commun- ity organizations, municipal recreation programs, and community education proqram:offerings that provide services to not only the 28 percent of'families with school aqe children, a well as the remaining 72 percent of the households. The Edgewood Community Center currently provides services for not only Mounds View residents, but the School Pistrict on a whole. It is my understanding that you have already received a copy of the Edgewood Comnunity Center usaqe report, but I would also like to update the School District daka o inc2ude the City usage of the facility. The City of Mounds View currently manaqes the pool facility at Edgewood from 7:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m., Monday - Satur- day and is a primary user of the gym facilities. Our current pool usage on a district-wide basis is as follows based on final 1984 figures, see enclosed repc rt): 1. The City of Mounds View currently offecs aquatics instruction in 14 different areas ranging from waterhabies to arthritic exercise. 2.' Zbtdl swim lesson participation in 1984 involved over 1,300 pa:icip3nts. 4.- , a- 3. In addition to the 1,300 participants the City offers an extensive open swim 150 participants per week or a total iduals annually. in the lesson program, proqram which averages of over 6,000 indiv- 4. In addition to our aquatics program at Edgewood, we currently offer a variety of recreational programs ranging from adult volleyball, youth basketball, gymnastics, jazz exercise, tumbling, open volleyball; open basketball and floor hockey leagues'at Edgewood Community Center. Total participation in the`gym activities at Edgewood are over 300 individuals per week. As can be noted, the school usage by our community and the dis- trict has some very large numbers and strong community based support. A major study was prepared by the Community Education Advisory Council regarding the closings of schools and the impact that the school closings would bring about inn 1981. I have enclosed a copy of two vharts which outline the potential usage versus the actual usage of the four middle schools as it originally existed and a second chart which compares the actual usage to the exist- ing usage forboth two and three middle schools being available. Although the data was prepared in 1981, some of the conclusions are still valid: 1. On a;year round basis, the current actual week day usage will exceed the potential week day usage of Chippewa and Highview by`173 hours, assuming optimal school usage which is not feasible. 2.' The actual Saturday usage of 1,573.5 hours could be met assuminq the optimum usage of Chippewa and Highview with a balance of 82.5 hours, which again is probably not realistic. 3. By :reviewinq- the peak six month period for gymnasium space, from octobe - March, the School District will be short approximately 912.5 hours during the weekday. 4. Potential Saturday usage dur.ing the peak period shows a deficit of 413.5 hours. 5. 7bta1 shortaqe of gymnasium space including weekday and Saturday is 1,326 hours during the six month period. 6. With the addition of it would °be ,feasible usage throuqhout the a third secondary school, i.e. Edgewood, to meet the actual weekday and Saturday year. r 3- , In addition to the data and the figures that I have provided yQU, the`City Council feels very strongly that there has been a strong identification with the Edgewood Community Center by the Mounds View residents, as well as increased usage due to the Community Education Center. We strongly encourage the Lonq 17erm Facility Usage Task Force to ensure that the following issues are considered: Recommendation l l - We xecommend that a minimum of 16 classroom spaces be allpcated for existing community education programs currently operating within the 5chool District to include general office space,;`senior citizens center, coruputer center, adult ' literacy, and early childhood programs. Recommendation 2 - We recommend that a feasibility study be pre- pare re ating to the concept oE establishing a community educa- tion center within the School:District to accomadate the existing , 6;000`SChool District residents per month that attend Community Education Center programs. Recommendation #3 - we recommend that the School eoard be cogni- zant and-aware of the influence and imporCance of the 70 - 74 `: percent of the School District households that do not currently : have children participating in the K-12 program. And, that the role of these households is imperative to the success of the K-12 program and should not be considered as a secondary issue. We appreciate the time and enerqy that you have shared in the preparation of your'report and look'forward to responding;to any questions or concerns you may have regarding the City's position. Should you have any 'specific questions, or desire a tour of the Edgewood°Community'Center "facility, please feel free to contact our' City's Park and Recreation Director Bruce Anderson at 784- 3055, ext. $20. Sincerely, CITY"OF MOUND5 VIEW Jerry Linke, Ptayor JL/sl Gnclosure cc: School Board Members Dr. Burton Nygren, Supt. Paul` Donley, Director Comm. Ed. Mounds View City Council uon--Pauley, City Clerk-Administrator Bruce Andersan, Director Parks, Rec. & Forestry p. . MEMO 7: Mounds View Communit Ed ation Advisory Council FROM: Bruce K. Anderson, c Parks, Recreation a e try DATE: January 28, 1986 RE: toncl Ranye Facilities Usage Task Force Having had the opportunity to review the recommendations that wi'll be passed on to the Mounds View School Board Erom the Lonq Range Facilities Usage Task Force I would like to propose the following statements be taken by the MVCEAC: 1. I feel one oE our main purposes is to represent the 70-74 percent of families within the School District that currently do not have school age children. 2. Community education currently provides services to those households through pragrams such as ABCE, enrichment class offerings, senior citizen programs, computer training center, and early childhood/family education programs. 3'. The 'Edgewood Commun`ity Center Ys` currently serving over 6,000 resident visits per month to attend programs not directiy related to the School District or community education , such as`the emergency food shelf. commodities proqram, RAP, WIC, Ramsey County, Health Center, Aleoholics Anonymous. cable TV access, Wilder Child Guidance branch and the NW Suburban Youth Service Rureau. 4. Commuqity education programs are currently fundec; through the State community education levy and early childhocd levy along with proqram Eees, and receives minimal support from the School District generel fund. In reality, the community education proqrams currently subsidize the general fund in the amount of $220,000 - 5240,000 for rental s ace at Edqe- wood Community Center. 5.` Community edur.ation largely serves as Che public relations tool'for thP School District, especially for th se non K-12 Ea flies and pTays an importaht role by in directly influenc- ing the K-12 cu riculum. z- RECOMMENDATIONS: Rather than endorsing one of the three s eciEi• 5trater i s c u lined by the Task Force Committee, it would be my th uqhts th.. we would ask for threc additional recommendatinns tu he c nsi ered,;by the Sch c 1 Board, Recommendation Nl - We recommend that a minimum f 16 classr spaces .be'allocated for existing community education program curiently operating within the School District ' include qe:ner. office space, senior citizens center, computer center, adul literacy, and early childhood rograms. Recommendation #2 - We recommend that a feasibility study be pr•- pared relating t the concept nf estahlishing a community educr- tion Cen er within the School District to accomodate th: existi•: 6,000 School District residents per month that attend Communitv Education Center ragrams. Recommendation 113 - We recommend that the School B ard be cogni- - zant and awar of the influen e and impnrtance of the 70 - 74; should e school Vistciet :househnlds that .t, n,r- c urr nt i, i participating in the K-12 program. And, that t1.• households is 'imperative to the' success of the K-1: hould not be considered as a secondary issue. be the Community ducation Advisory Council's posi- strategies, but rather to ensure that existing pro- rvices that are currently beinq oEEered are main- ained when developing any strataqies for long range Scho 1 istrict uses. BKA/sll 4¢, MEMO Rns Mounds View Park & Recreation Commissioners FROM: BruGe`K. n, Director Parks,• Re r ti n and Eorestry DATE: January 28, 1986 RE: Joint Meetinq with New eriqhton Park Bnard StdFf Eorwarded a letter in the January 22 correspondence whici indieated an invitation from the New 8righton Park Bnard t holrt a joint park nard meeting with the City of New Brighton on Tues- day, February ll. One of the major topic items will be Long Lakr Regional Park, which will be presented by the New Briqhton Park and Recreation Board, but they have also asked ear.h of the other Park Boards to provide an issue of discussion for the group at large. To that end. I would like to propose that the Park Com- mission hold a general discussion on items that could be revieweci and suggest the following items as possfble topic areas: 1. The Long Range Facility Usage Task Force would be a curren! relevent topic which I feel miqht be appropriate for Mound>. View to provide the impetus in this discussion since th EdgewoodiCommunity Center'is located in our Cir_y. 2. The Cities of Mounds View and New Brighton have entered int-, a numher'of joint powers aqreements incTuding Earestry, puP- pet wagon anci potentially aquatic, for jqint skaffinq. m _. Possibly some discussion 'could' be generated regardinq poss- ible joint powers aqreements-with--other_park and recreation agencies to im rove services at a lower pnssible cost. 3. The-concept of devel p.ng a School District-wide recreational survey to determine what recreational proqramming needs should be reviewed and analyzed on a distict-wide hasis. This an area that has never been accomplished other than a comnunity education survey that was done a pr.oximatety tw years ago, and,a possi.ble=study,on the recreational opportun- ities on a School District=wide basis would be of interest. 2- '> 4: Possibly printinq a School Dtstrict-wide br,.•hur. comhtn t,. community education, as well as the surroundinn parks an: recreation derartment would be of interest, no[ nnly tr, sav money, but t prc vide Scho l Distric.t r'::i.f•ni:; ,i h rtt.• overview oE existing progr.ams and services available. Thi- concept might be extended to include booklets an i brochurer. outlininq nrk facilities and exisr.in recr.eationa facilities besides just quarterly proyram reports. 5. You may have the desire to discuss qeneral Park Cc mmissiu. issues, es to how agendas are prepared, items that arr brought 4efore Park Commission, relationship between staEf and commissinn, relationship hetween Park C mmissi n and Ciry Council and how each of the different cities' Park an,i Recreation Commissions function in general. These are just a few brief suqgestio s by stafE «E topics tha might be of interest, and I would certainly welcome and encouraq• any new ideas or n•neral discussion on these pro nse 9 irems. BKA/511 MEMO 11D: FROM: t4ounds View Park & Rer.reation Commissinners Bruce K. Anderson, Director, Parks, Recreation and Fore r DATE: January,28,, 1986 RE: MonthIy staff update - January, 19$6 The f llowinq issues and programs are outlined to provide the Commission with a better overview of our department's day to day operations. Each of the listed items are strictly informational and not intended for formal Commission action. 1. City compost funding - The funding for the City compost pro- gram :ias been transferred from Ramsey County to the Metropo]- itan Council through the Land Abatement Act. The Cirv recently received its optimal funding in the amount of $2,267 which will fund the program Eor 1986. 2. ConferenCes and training - I will be attendinq two - one day seminars durinq the next kwo weeks; the first being on the status oE liability insurance" anci hr w it is affecting th• recreation profession. The City recently experienced a 1UH percent 'increase in our City's liab'ility:insurance and Park and Recceation Agencies`across the metropol'itan area `are experiencing similar, if not greater, increases. Th se onci one day, `seminar will be held n 1Uesday, February 11 which wil part oE the State Horriculture Conference, and I will be atEending the one day session on turf maintenance. 3. Aquatics pasition - Staff has been meeting with the City of New Brighton to review the feasiDility of a joint aquatics position between the Cities of New Brighton and Mounds View. We are hoping to have a proposal before the Park Commission at your February 27 Commission meeting, which you coul i review and discuss. At this time, it appears that we would he sharing the position with the City oE New erighton an a 60/4t) basis, with the futi.re status of Bdgewood Community Center beir.g a majot. facto_. z- 4. Ccoss Cnuntry, 5ki By Can llelight - Recreation Supervisor ' Saarion coordinat d a Cross Countr•: Ski ey Candlelight special event on Friday, January 24, 1986 at 5ilver View Park. The event involve approximately 60 Mounds View resi- dents which not only enjoyed the skiinq festivitiey, but also the food and f.ellowship that followed the ski eveninq. Mary is to be commended for coordinatinq an excellent community- wide special ever t:' 5.; Eneryy Week - The schools will be closed the week of February 17 - 21 for what was once called energy break and now is referred to winter break. We will once again try to maintain ice durino this period, so that the winter skating rinks will be qpen. Unfnrtunately, durinq the past two yea s, the weather has not cooperated and we have been unable to have g od ice ducing this time. 5. Annual Repor.t - Staff is currently immArsed in preparinq the 1965 annual report and hopes to have it completed by the FebruarV Park and Recreation Cc+mmission meeting. Should you have any changes for the 1984 and previous reports, please conEact myselE dieeotly so I can make sure those chanqes become a part of. the 1986 annual report. BKF/sll ;