My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
9.3. SR 01-17-2017
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2011 - 2020
>
2017
>
01-17-2017
>
9.3. SR 01-17-2017
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/17/2018 6:07:12 PM
Creation date
1/13/2017 11:03:49 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
1/17/2017
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Referendum Outcome <br />Didn't need a referendum to bond for improvements <br />Council direction to add Park Improvements and <br />turf/dome option to increase interest <br />Stated improvement expenditures would occur without <br />recommended course and referendum <br />Huge turnout, 12,528 votes cast — 593 registered voters <br />didn't vote. <br />Lost by 818 votes (small percentage <7%) <br />Lost nearly every precinct (8 of 10) <br />What did Referendum outcome mean? <br />Didn't want turf/dome space? <br />Didn't want additional $2M in previously planned park <br />improvements? <br />Saw/understood little value in added space, amenities, <br />or programming opportunities <br />Saw little value in multipurpose facility <br />Not enough time or commitment to get out the vote? <br />Not enough commitment from stakeholders? ER <br />resident participation not consistent throughout orgs. <br />Bitterness over city policies, YMCA, and Pinewood <br />What did stakeholders say? <br />Consistent social media discussion <br />Need more details\Want more input <br />Often asked questions that were too detail -oriented, <br />beyond scope of study <br />Why only hockey? <br />Want swimming pool/rock climbing wall/workout <br />rooms <br />1+e .3 _&nd,% <br />nl0a-7 <br />Location concerns <br />seniors didn't want to move far <br />displace ballfields <br />not on east side of town <br />traffic <br />Stakeholder Discussion information <br />Youth turf groups, excluding football have competing <br />community interests <br />ERYHA didn't understand the issues with ice arenas <br />Seniors didn't understand facility issues and upcoming <br />investments <br />Task Force Recommendation <br />Multipurpose facility best bang for buck <br />Considered individual facility improvements that meet <br />stakeholder expectations ($23M) <br />Did not consider building band aid improvements <br />taxpayer friendly <br />Post mortem <br />Continue with Option #2 — updating 292 Design Group's <br />ice arena improvements; and <br />- Contract for design on Activity Center and Lions <br />Park Center; or <br />- Design on Activity Center and demo Lions Park <br />(school space trade); or <br />- Design on Lions Park for enhanced <br />community/senior space and demo Activity <br />Center for sale for private development. <br />Take proposed designs back to stakeholder groups via <br />community engagement? <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.