Laserfiche WebLink
City Council Minutes Page 5 <br />July 2, 2018 <br />10.2 Athletic Complex and Recreation Project Financing <br />10.3 Direct Staff to Prepare Local Option Sales Tax Referendum <br />Resolution <br />Mayor Dietz stated tonight Council will be discussing what projects will go on the <br />local sales tax referendum. He requested this item then come back to Council on July <br />16 for a formal vote with ballot language determined at the special meeting <br />scheduled July 23. <br />Councilmember Wagner noted costs reviewed at a previous Council meeting for <br />high priority trail connections only included actual trail construction costs and not <br />right-of-way acquisition costs. She requested this information be spelled our more <br />clearly for future projects. <br />Mr. Sevcik noted it would be a challenge to know or determine right-of-way costs. <br />He noted the trails may not all be completed at once and sometimes can be based on <br />future available opportunities, such as part of a county project. <br />Councilmember Ovall noted he requested an apples to apples breakdown of the <br />options because the Ballard*King analysis was incorrect. <br />Mr. Pormer stated an apples to apples comparison can't be done because no other <br />community has a field house that compares to the current one in the architectural <br />plans. He stated the one most similar is with the City of Andover. He discussed the <br />many differences and noted Elk River's project is a 30,000 square foot building while <br />Andover's is 20,000 square foot. He stated Andover's revenue in 2017 was $231,436, <br />which is consistent with what Ballard*King projected for Elk River. He discussed the <br />many differences between Elk River and the City of Plymouth. He stated Plymouth's <br />revenue was $413,400. <br />Councilmember Ovall stated he was talking about the economies of scale and <br />efficiencies you would have if the building was a community center. He questioned if <br />this option was off the table. He stated Council had talked about the community <br />center option and, for him, what wasn't presented in that proposal was an apples to <br />apples comparison of the efficiencies you would gain by having all the staffing and <br />programming done under one roof because there wouldn't be the expense of <br />running separate facilities. <br />Mr. Portner stated the single facility in the Ballard*King analysis did include the <br />percentage of revenue over expense. <br />Mayor Dietz stated the analysis projected a negative number. <br />Councilmember Ovall stated it wasn't an apples to apples comparison because we <br />did not have the expenses for the senior center. <br />P��6r/E[ A�`E BDA l <br />f; \t'1 i �1� <br />