Loading...
11/19/1996 - City Council Special MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE • EAGAN CITY COUNCIL 00 Eagan, Minnesota November 19, 1996 A special meeting of the Eagan City Council was held on Tuesday, November 19, 1996, at 5:30 p.m. at the Eagan Municipal Center building. Present were Mayor Egan and City Councilmembers Awada, Hunter, Masin and Wachter. Also present were Director of Parks & Recreation Vraa and City Administrator Hedges. The purpose of the meeting was to hold a joint meeting with the Advisory Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission and Park Bond Referendum Task Force members. VISITORS TO BE HEARD Mayor Egan asked if there were any visitors to be heard. There was no one present. GENERAL DISCUSSION REGARDING SEPTEMBER 10 PARK BOND REFERENDUM Mayor Egan welcomed members of the Advisory Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission and those residents who served on the Bond Referendum Task Force for the purpose of discussing the September 10 park bond referendum. He further recognized those present, including Michael Vincent, John Rudolph, Stephen Thompson, Jerry Thomas, Dave Szott, Randall Ahern, Lynn Lewis, Lee Markell, Dary le Peterson and George Kubik. City Administrator Hedges stated that the purpose of the meeting was for the City Council to have a general discussion as to why the September 10 park bond referendum was not successful and how the community can improve upon the process in its evaluation for future capital park improvement programs that might involve a need to consider a referendum. City Councilmember Hunter stated that he was in contact with a large number of residents this past fall while campaigning for public office and concluded that there is no common thread as to why the park bond • referendum failed. He stated that there were a variety of reasons expressed by the community. City Councilmember Masin stated that many residents who approached her were in support of the referendum; however, in those cases where people acknowledged a no-vote, they weren't sure how the City was intending to use the money. She further stated that it may be helpful to hold a community meeting and ask for input. Mayor Egan stated that he was in agreement with City Councilmember Hunter that there has not been a common reason for the denial. APRNRC Commission Member Rudolph stated that people have shared with him a concern that they were unclear how the referendum proceeds would be used. He further stated that there was confusion about Caponi and apathy about any bond referendums given all the recent school bond referendums that have increased property taxes. Commission Member Thomas stated that in retrospect, the parcels that were to be acquired with referendum proceeds should have been specifically identified which in his opinion was a reason for denial and further stated that people have shared with him their concern about more taxes, the confusion around the Caponi issue, lights for parks and overall, an expression of a general no to the City. City Councilmember Hunter stated that he did not recall including lights as a part of the referendum. APRNRC Commission Member Szott stated that there were a number of proposals, including lights, which were originally proposed for the bond referendum, however, dropped before the recommendations were presented to the City Council. City Councilmember Hunter expressed frustration that a great effort was made to present information through the newsletter and newspapers preceding the bond referendum and yet, people have commented that they were uninformed and not aware of the facts surrounding the referendum. Commission Member Ahem stated that the negative literature distributed prior to the referendum was damaging, using words such as reckless, foolish, etc. He felt the organized "no" effort was misunderstood by the voter and greatly contributed to the unsuccessful referendum. APRNRC Member Szott again commented, stating that the purpose of the referendum should have been more specific and presenting a referendum during a national campaign when there are many issues at the state and federal level competed with the merits of the referendum. APRNRC Member Thompson stated that he was surprised there was no strong support on the City Council for the referendum,further commenting that one Councilmember came out in opposition. APRNRC Member Vincent stated that there was so much deliberation during the summer months regarding a date and amount for the referendum that time was limited to present reasons for the referendum to the community. City Councilmember Wachter stated that there is still concern throughout the community about proceeding ahead with the civic arena without a bond referendum. He further stated that he wrote a letter to the editor to clarify City Councilmember Awada's request which suggested that the City guarantee purchase of a portion of the Caponi property prior to the September 10 bond referendum. Page 2/Eagan Special City Council Meeting Minutes 00`- '�-�1 • November 19, 1996 Commission Member Ahern felt the date of the referendum was wrong, that being the primary. Mayor Egan stated that the referendum question would have been lost on the long ballot at the general election which was one of the reasons the ballot was included in the primary election in September. City Councilmember Awada clarified , stating the issue was a stand-alone election held at some time different than the primary or the general elections. Commission Member Ahern felt a cross-section of the people were left out by holding the bond referendum during the primary election. Mayor Egan stated that the statistical data analyzing the September 10 election indicates that many people voted only for the referendum. City Councilmember Wachter raised a question as to whether it would have actually been better to have held the election on an odd year rather than an even-year. Commission Member Thomas stated that the task force tried very hard to present a need for the additional parks based on the fact there is limited land left for the community to include as parkland. He further stated that maybe the case was not presented well enough as to how the existing parks are currently developed and what impact the additional land would have on those parks. APRNRC Member Vincent stated that he appreciates the ability to reflect on the referendum and suggested that the discussion include opportunities for the future, such as a pool that was given strong support in the recent Wallace survey. City Councilmember Masin stated that it is her opinion that people want a water park facility for the community. Mayor Egan stated that he is in agreement with Councilmember Masin. The challenge is how do we accomplish that objective with respect to other capital needs. City Councilmember Wachter stated that he would like to see the pool designed and built on the current municipal site with a two-story parking lot on location. He further stated that the Council needs to unite and proceed with a clear direction on these capital needs. City Councilmember Wachter further stated that our staff cannot chase a variety of issues without a united position by the Council. APRNRC Member Vincent asked if the City Council will continue to give consideration to central park sites that could include a number of community events, such as fireworks. City Councilmember Awada raised a question as to whether the City could support a park that is used only for fireworks and other special events. APRNRC Member Kubik stated that in his opinion the bond referendum regarding the open space was considered a soft issue. He further stated that any further bond referendums need to include a message with reference to the cause and effect of a bond referendum. APRNRC Member Thompson stated that it is time to move on and agreed with City Councilmember Wachter that the City needs to focus on a use like the aquatic facility and present the value of the project to civic organizations, churches and other community groups. APRNRC Member Markel) stated that the community survey listed the need for open space as the number one objective for enhancement of City parks. He further stated that there should possibly be a further survey of the community. APRNRC Member Kubik stated that a survey response is not always definitive, reflecting the attitude of the person surveyed at the moment. Commission Member Lewis stated that she would like the City Council to at least reconsider a future bond referendum for open space. City Councilmember Hunter stated that he is convinced the City did not do anything wrong. This type of referendum is considered discretionary by many people and at this time,they were not willing to spend the additional money for park enhancements. In any event, the City needs to move on and evaluate other capital needs. City Councilmember Masin stated that she has appreciated the discussion, finding the comments of value so the City does not repeat any mistakes in the appropriation and presentation of future referendums. APRNRC Member Vincent agreed with City Councilmember Masin, stating that something must have gone wrong when the Wallace survey ranked the desire to acquire more open space as the highest park objective of the community and support was received by the APRNRC and by the City Council to hold the referendum. APRNRC Member Szott stated that it could be that people see open tracks of land, such as the Bieter parcel, and feel there is more open space than actually exists in the community. City Councilmember Awada stated that she feels there were some problems with how the City Council coordinated the process and approached the recent referendum, which hopefully can be eliminated in the future. Mayor Egan stated that the goal to purchase open space was never an issue; the objective to accomplish the goals was not fulfilled. He thanked everyone for the many months of hard work and officially acknowledged that the Bond Referendum Task Force has completed its tasks as directed by the City Council. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business,the meeting was adjourned a 6:30 p.m. 1 November 1 9, 1 996 Date \ City Clerk TLH