05-21-1997 PR MIN - SPECIAL - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Special Meeting/Park & Recreation Commission Mav 21. 1997 Page 2 Regarding usage of city facilities, a drop in the usage of Orono Park was noted. The Commission felt that this was due to the deteriorating water quality. . In response to what facilities were missing in Elk River, the highest response was bike paths, followed by a pool. The response for these two issues were of a significant level. Facilities of a lower concern were a community center and playground equipment. Regarding playground equipment it was noted that it is not more equipment that is wanted, but better equipment. Bike paths were strongly supported and it was noted that even if a property tax were required for bike paths, they were still supported in significant numbers. Mr. Morris stated that a tax increase would be supported by the public for the following facilities: permanent restrooms and shelters; neighborhood parks and equipment (swingsets, hardsurfaced courts, and playground equipment); an outdoor pool that could be used by the entire family; and the downtown riverwalk. Combining the neighborhood parks with a trail system generated a high level of support from citizens. Mr. Morris indicated his surprise at the Elk River response against an interpretive center as this was the first community he has experienced that did not support expenditure of funds for this type of facility. Mr. Morris also noted that the public would not support a bond referendum that contained anything having to do with ice skating, a skateboard park, or a mountain bike trail system. The support for an outdoor recreation bond referendum in Elk River is very good news compared to what is happening in other communities. The fact that approximately two thirds of the citizens were undecided whether or not they would vote for or against a bond issue was viewed as a good statistic due to the fact that these individuals can be "sold" on voting for an appropriately structured bond referendum. Mr. Morris noted that the public will only support spending about $20 to $25 per year for a bond referendum and that the expenditure of funds needs to be justified to the two thirds that are undecided. In response to the question on how much of a tax increase people would pay for park and recreation facilities, the 20 percent "nothing" answer was very small in comparison to metropolitan communities and was also seen as a positive for a possible bond referendum. . It was the consensus that a mid September date for a publiC bond referendum was a good time, especially when considering the school referendum in November. The statistics support the fact that a referendum can be sold to the public if it is the right type of issue and does not include any of the big negative concerns identified in the survey. Additionally the city has to be very careful with the amount of money being requested and has to clearly identify how the funds will be spent. The referendum can be sold based on the fact that the facilities will help kids and that it is a community pride issue to improve the facilities. Discussion took place on the outdoor pool issue. The Commission agreed that this issue should be a separate (second) question and the bond should be structured so that the pool could only be approved if the first park and recreation issue was also approved. .