Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08.09.10 Work Session MInutes Council Workshop Minutes August 9, 2010 Mayor Larson called the workshop to order at 6:30 p.m. Present: Larson, Donnelly, Fogarty, May (arrived 6:41 p.m.) Parks & Recreation Commission - Mike Haley, Dave McMillen, Charlie Weber, Karen Nea~ Dawn Johnson Planning Commission - Doug Bonar, John Franceschelli, Steve Kuyper Absent: Wilson, Rotty, Vanderbeck Also Present: Peter Herlofsky, City Administrator; Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director; Tony Wippler, Assistant City Planner; Cynthia Muller, Executive Assistant MOTION by Fogarty, second by Donnelly to approve the agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Mr. Ron Vine, Leisure Vision, presented the results of the Community Survey. The survey was based on usage, customer satisfaction, needs, unmet needs, and priority questions. The goal was to complete 400 surveys, and there were actually 623 surveys returned for the same amount of money. The results have a 95% level of confidence with a margin of error of +/- 3.9%. Each question was broken down by demographic factors. Highlights include: 74% of residents use neighborhood parks and trails. 50% use community parks. 93% of residents use at least one of the facilities. The national benchmark is 72%. Ofthose using the facilities, 60% state the Rambling River Center is in excellent condition, 36% indicated it was in good condition. This shows the dollars were well invested for the improvement project. Of all the facilities, 40% considered the Rambling River Center to be in excellent condition. Over 50% say the parks are excellent or good. This means staff needs to decide if a good system is good enough or if you want a combination of excellent and good. This is a lower rating than is normally seen for a parks system. Over 50% use trails and neighborhood parks the most. Of households with just adults, trails were the most used facility. For households with children under 10 years of age, neighborhood parks and playgrounds were the facilities used the most often. Trails cover more demographic users than any facility. Of the facilities used, 25% rate the quality of the facilities as excellent and 54% rate the quality as good. In an average community the benchmark is a 30% rating. The seasonal brochure is used the most at 76% to find out about the system. The benchmark average is 52%. The brochure is distributed door to door. This method of delivery gives the highest percentage. (Councilmember May arrived). 11 Council Workshop Minutes August 9, 2010 Page 2 Regarding the parks system, 19% are very satisfied, 38% are somewhat satisfied. This is a little lower than the national average. Only 8% are dissatisfied. 600 households returned the survey. They are saying this is how I use the parks system today, this is how satisfied I am, and this is my vision for the parks system for my household. It was asked if they have a need for a specific facility and listed 26 facilities. 85% said they had a need for paved walking and biking trails, 71 % small neighborhood parks, 51 % natural areas, 53% playgrounds. A lot of outdoor, passive activities rise to the top. Youth baseball at 25% is very good as this is the population that has children 13-15 years of age. The typical household has a need for 5-7 types offacilities. As far as unmet needs, 1400 households have unmet needs for natural areas, next is off leash dog areas, nature center, outdoor pool, paved walking and biking trails, municipal golf course, camp grounds. These are the top categories for unmet needs. Unmet needs are more important to look at than needs that are met. As far as priorities, 65% say paved walking/biking trails are the most important, 50% say neighborhood parks are most important, and then it goes to playground equipment 28%, natural areas 24%, and large community parks. The senior center does not have as high a need, but for those who feel it is important, they rate it as very important. Neighborhood parks are fIrst and second priorities in all demographics. Paved trails are most important in all demographic groups except for households with children under 10, of which playgrounds are one of the fIrst priorities. The survey also looked at programs. This showed 73% had a need for the Farmer's Market, next was special events, adult fitness, youth sports programs, youth learn to swim programs, etc. The unmet needs for programs showed at the top is special events, then adult fitness, Farmer's Market, nature trails, adult continuing education, water fitness, golf lessons, etc. Highest priorities for programs showed 50% for a Farmer's Market, next is youth sports programs, adult fitness, and special events. Youth sports programs and youth learn to swim programs are the most important for households with children under 10. The Farmer's Market, youth sports programs and teen programs are the most important for households with children 10-19. It is unusual for youth sports to be that high for households 10-19. The Farmer's Market, adult fitness and wellness programs are the most important for households without children. The survey then looked at how people participate in the facilities. 40% use the Farmer's Market, 26% use youth sports programs and youth learn to swim programs. The Farmer's Market is a program for households with or without children in which people participate the most. Youth sports is the second most used program. Comparing how the City programs match up compared to programs most important to residents, 28% say youth sports programs are the most important and 26% utilize the facilities. The City is matching up the needs as far as usage. The Farmer's Market, youth learn to swim programs, preschool programs also match up well. Programs not penetrating as well were 28% adult fitness was most important and only 9% use adult fitness facilities. The City should determine if they want to get into this market or let others fill this need. Also for adult programs 14% say that is most important and 6% utilize the facilities. Next the survey looked at fmancial support for what residents would like to see. For existing systems, 59% would support maintaining trails and neighborhood parks. 50% said they have no 12 Council Workshop Minutes August 9, 2010 Page 3 use for outdoor sports facilities. For support for new facilities, at the top was to complete connections for existing trails, pedestrian bridges, underpasses, neighborhood parks, install new playground equipment, outdoor aquatic facilities. These are also the items they are most willing to fund, with 66% saying they would put some dollars in, 34% said they would not put money in. The highest percentages were $3-$5 or $9-$I1/month. When asked if they actually paid the amount they stated how would they vote, 27% said they would vote in favor, 30% said they might vote in favor, 22% said they would vote against, and 21 % were not sure. Mr. Vine stated it would be extremely difficult to pass a referendum today. You want to see vote in favor at least 2: lover vote against. In this case vote against and vote in favor are about equal. He has rarely seen vote in favor being lower than 35% be successful. With 22% voting against, that is a high number. Usually you get 40% of those who say they would vote in favor. Because of this, it would not pass an election today. The bond referendum would be for new facilities. There is strong support for investing more money in what we have today before we start building new. The excellent ratings are not that high, and with 90% using facilities, they are saying a lot of people use the system and think it is good, but not excellent. We should look at the existing system and move it from good to excellent. This could be funded more from operating dollars. Councilmember Fogarty clarified we do not have answer to the question if they would be willing to fund through a bond referendum maintenance and improvements on existing structures. Mr. Vine explained we did in a third ofthe question. The question was acquisition, development and repair. Two of the things were about new - acquisition and development. Repair is existing. Mayor Larson asked if they are asking us to maintain and repair with existing dollars. Mr. Vine stated they do not know how many dollars the City is spending, but he felt it would be existing dollars because they are not in favor of a bond referendum. Councilmember Fogarty asked why we have such a high usage of trails and parks. Mr. Vine stated it would be hard to speculate. He would have rated the system as good. The City has done an excellent job of being good across the board. On his tour of the City, from the outside the ice arena looked pretty bad. The pool is old fashioned. It was good and clean and looked inviting for swimming, but most people who use water don't swim. Most kids play in the water. Walk in pools and water slides are popular with children 10 and under. Mr. Dave PritzlafT, 20255 Akin Road, stated regarding the need for maintaining rather than building more and being able to afford to maintain the infrastructure as far as extending and expanding it, he asked what ratio would be used for funding vs. maintenance. Mr. Vine stated if we looked at the budget and how much is being invested for maintenance and repair and how that compares to an average community, the public looks at repair and maintenance as most important before we build new. The public knows there are millions of dollars invested in the system and they want to make sure those dollars are used wisely. Anything beyond that would be policy decisions. Mr. Pritzlaffstated Council approved this survey. He noted question 14 has very supportive, somewhat supportive or not supportive of each item. But in the 20 items listed below it only says very supportive, somewhat supportive, supportive, not sure. Not supportive is not shown as an option, and Mr. Pritzlaff asked how that affects the validity of the survey. Mr. Vine stated that question should have said that, but it does not impact the validity. People look at what is most important based on what they are very supportive of. If there would have been a difference 13 Council Workshop Minutes August 9, 2010 Page 4 between what they are very supportive of and what they are willing to fund, then it would have showed the question was not understood. The correlation between what was very supportive and what they are willing to fund matched. Mr. Pritzlaff stated the bond question was broken up into three sections. He asked why wasn't there a question just for maintaining facilities. Mr. Vine stated the question stated for acquisition, development and repair because that is how it was requested to be asked. Sometimes Cities will put money from a bond election into maintaining what they have. They have no way of knowing what will be the most important. They did separate maintaining existing facilities and developing new in the questions. Councilmember May stated a lot of the comments are about the trails and the parks. Her question is related to the programs. She asked if the commission will look at the importance of the facilities vs. the programs. It is evident the taxpayers are not willing to support a levy, so we are dealing with a defined pot of money. She asked ifthe commission will discuss programs vs. putting the money more towards maintenance of the trails which is top on many of the questions. It needs to be determined where the programs fit in vs. trails and parks. Ifwe have a defmed amount of money, how are we going to spend that money because some ofthe trails do need attention. It also needs to be determined what is the cost of replacing a trail vs. maintenance. We need to have a maintenance schedule. Many taxpayers think the maintenance is part of the budget. Mr. John Franceschelli, Planning Commission, asked why does the survey stop where it stops? The survey covers when we have green grass and no snow. We don't do anything in the winter? We don't have an opportunity to go cross country skiing? We don't use our facilities outside? This survey does not go far enough; it does not do us justice. It is suspect. We wasted our money. We need something for seasonal use too. Our people do not sit inside when the snow falls. They are snowmobiling, cross country skiing, snow shoeing, they are using our facilities. Here we are talking about summertime usage. We are not fmished. Not by a landslide; not by a miniscule part. We have not fmished our job. When are we going to? Mr. Jerry Ristow, 516 Lower Heritage Way, stated 12-14 years ago we had the same question and the survey came back the same; to maintain what we have, so we funded more for playground equipment. His biggest complaint would be the Rambling River trail. There has never been any maintenance. He felt the survey was good. You don't know if you don't ask. Councilmember Fogarty noted he stated they increased park and rec money for maintenance. Mr. Ristow stated the Council compiled everything and said to maintain the park and rec budget and that is how we got the park facilities. Councilmember Fogarty asked where the funding source came from. She recalled the building permits were up at that time and that is where the funding was coming from, so at some point money coming from the general fund to park and rec was increased and somewhere along the line that was eliminated out of the general fund. There was a line item in the general fund that gave money to parks and rec to maintain facilities. Mr. Ristow agreed, the same as any department. Mr. Vine stated one of the most difficult things with a survey is having enough questions to make decisions, but not have it too long for people to respond to. This survey was shortened 14 Council Workshop Minutes August 9, 2010 Page 5 because there where other questions that were not park and rec specific. Mr. Vine felt this information should be extremely helpful in decision making. During the next year, as a client, if the City would like additional analysis ofthese questions, that is offered at no charge. Mr. Mike Haley, Parks and Recreation Commission, stated the survey was done to learn what our citizens want. We did learn a lot and it was very clear that trails are very important and that we need to repair, maintain, connect and build new. The citizens do not want to spend a lot of money. The commission needs to determine the minimum we can do with what we have and see if there is something that will cost them $1 or $2 rather than $10 or $12 and sell that. MOTION by Fogarty, second by May to adjourn at 7:37 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, Cynthia Muller Executive Assistant 15