Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-09-13 Park Board Minutes 1 EDINA PARK BOARD 7:30 P.M. CENTENNIAL LAKES CENTRUM BUILDING SEPTEMBER 13, 2000 ____________________________________________ MEMBERS PRESENT: Tom White, Linda Presthus, Floyd Grabiel, Andy Finsness, Scot Housh, John Murrin, Karla Sitek MEMBERS ABSENT: Andy Herring, Chuck Mooty, George Klus, David Fredlund STAFF PRESENT: John Keprios, Ed MacHolda, Janet Canton, Tom Shirley, Ann Kattreh, Larry Thayer, Todd Anderson OTHERS PRESENT: Dr. and Mrs. Robert Schroeder, Ann Latham, Rick Latham, Joey Kretzman, Alice Reimann, Nick Sperides, Joan Niemec, Robin Hartl, Bob Marotto, Cliff Swenson, Belinda Davis ____________________________________________ I. APPROVAL OF THE JUNE 13, 2000 PARK BOARD MINUTES Floyd Grabiel MOVED TO APPROVE THE JUNE 13, 2000 PARK BOARD MINUTES. Scot Housh SECONDED THE MOTION. MINUTES APPROVED. II. EDINBOROUGH PARK & CENTENNIAL LAKES PARK; TOM SHIRLEY AND ANN KATTREH Mr. Keprios introduced Tom Shirley, Manager of Centennial Lakes and his assistant Ann Kattreh who manages Edinborough Park. He noted that the reason the two facilities look so great is because of the wonderful staff. Mr. Shirley commented that the big news at Centennial Lakes is that after 10 years they will finally be completing the construction of the park. Within the next two weeks just about everything on the north end should be completed. The south end of the park will be a little bit delayed but is supposed to be largely finished by the end of the year. Mr. Shirley indicated that they are going to be putting maps on signs throughout the park and noted that it is 1.43 miles around the entire park. He stated that at the north end of the park they are putting in a hedge maze with a drinking fountain in the middle as well as putting in swinging benches and other seating areas as well as a large gardens area. Mr. Shirley pointed out that the south area is pretty similar to what you already see in place but that they will be adding a large shade garden which is actually called a living umbrella. It’s basically a gazebo that’s going to be overgrown with vines, flowers, etc. Mr. Shirley indicated that the summer has been very busy at Centennial Lakes, they have already had 26,000 rounds at the putting course. He noted that this is the second season 2 for the amphitheater and there were just under 100 programs held this summer with an estimated attendance of 22,000. He commented that just the general activity in the park has been impressive. Mr. Shirley stated that in the winter skating has still been very popular and last winter there were approximately 32,000 skaters. Ms. Kattreh explained that basically Edinborough Park is the indoor compliment to Centennial Lakes Park. It’s approximately one acre inside with lots of trees and plants. There is a running track/exercise area; a junior Olympic size pool; a 44 by 44 foot ice skating rink; a small playground and a multi-purpose play area. In addition there is the Great Hall, which is a large multi-purpose size space that is basically rented out on Friday and Saturday evenings for weddings, company parties, proms, etc. Ms. Kattreh indicated that there are approximately 70 to 72 special event rentals a year. She pointed out that the Edina Swim Club rents the pool for their practices and that Park and Recreation and the Senior Center also use the gym area for their different recreation programs. Mr. White asked about the amphitheater to which Ms. Kattreh responded that all of their cultural arts performances that are at Centennial Lakes during the summer months move over to Edinborough during the winter months, which is very popular. Ms. Presthus asked how the revenues are compared to other years. Ms. Kattreh responded that they are doing quite well and that they are at least equal if not slightly above previous years. Mr. Shirley replied that Centennial Lakes is up approximately 30%. Mr. Housh indicated that it looks like lawn bowling doesn’t generate very much revenue but it takes up a lot of space and asked if anyone has there ever thought of expanding the golf course into that area. Mr. Shirley replied that they have thought about putting in another nine as well as a couple of other things, it’s a big area to work with. Mr. Keprios commented that there has long been discussions about putting in playground equipment because there really isn’t anything there for the preschoolers. Mr. Keprios explained that one of their long-term challenges now is going to try to break even financially. He noted that Mr. Shirley and Ms. Kattreh have done a magnificent job of pulling it closer to a break even budget. He stated that the people who live in the rental units pay a fixed fee per month which goes toward the operational expenses and that the offices pay a fixed fee based on the square footage. He noted that it’s fixed for life and there is no inflationary figure built in and that’s going to hurt us even more as our costs continue to escalate. Therefore, some new ideas are being looked at for fundraising. Currently we have a financial vehicle to fall back on for the next ten years but when you look beyond that we are going to have to look at some other solutions. Mr. White thanked Mr. Shirley and Ms. Kattreh for having the Park Board at their facility and commented that they both do a great job and commented that his family enjoys both facilities. III. VARSITY HOCKEY LOCKER ROOMS - BRAEMAR ARENA Mr. Keprios explained that he and Larry Thayer, Manager of Braemar Arena, have been approached by some varsity hockey player parents who are interested in having 3 permanent locker room facilities put in at Braemar arena. Therefore, they are here tonight to run through the proper chain of command. Mr. Keprios pointed out to the Park Board that when they hear the proposal to keep in mind that there is always more than one way to get things done. He also indicated that gender equity is something that is of concern. He noted that an area has in fact been set aside for an equal opportunity for the women and our City Attorney’s opinion is that may be sufficient to cover the gender equity issue. Mr. Thayer explained that this group of parents came to him with a proposal to take over the lower lobby area by the west arena and develop it into a locker room for the boys varsity hockey team so that they can move off campus and into the arena. Mr. Thayer commented that his first reaction was that’s fine but what do we do if the girls decide they want one too. He noted that since then he thinks he has found a couple of similar options if they decide to build a locker room as well. Alice Reimann, parent of one of the captains of the Edina Hockey Varsity Team, introduced Joey Kretzman, another hockey parent volunteer and Nick Sperides the architect who is working on the proposed plan. Ms. Reimann indicated that what they are asking for from the Park Board tonight is to approve the plan for the locker room at Braemar Arena contingent that they secure their own private funding by the next City Council meeting. She stated that what makes this project unusual is that they are proposing to fund it themselves because they realize that they probably cannot get any more into the proposed referendum. She noted that they are very excited about the possibilities of this happening and moving ahead. Mr. Sperides explained that the space they are looking at has great potential and then showed the Park Board what they are looking at doing. He indicated that the varsity locker room would hold 17 players and the junior varsity locker room would hold 20 players. Mr. Sperides pointed out that with the current locker room it’s very hard to coach where with the proposed plan everything is opened up. He also explained that most of the hockey players bags are almost larger than the players and therefore the locker rooms have become too small which also makes coaching a challenge. Mr. Housh asked if the lockers are full length for all of the equipment to fit in. Mr. Sperides replied that they are not going to have lockers. All of the equipment fits underneath the benches in cubbies. Mr. Keprios asked if there is a rough estimate on the cost. Mr. Sperides replied that he would guess it would be $100.00 to $125.00 per square foot and that there is roughly 1,100 to 1,200 square feet. However, things can change especially with plumbing under concrete floors. He noted that as an architect he tries not to talk about costs because that’s the contractor’s job. Mr. Grabiel asked who would manage and maintain it and also asked if it would be available to the public. Mr. Thayer replied that it would not be available to the public and for the maintenance of it, he would put it back to the main user of the facility. Ms. Reimann commented that they would be happy to do that. Mr. Keprios explained that the bidding and construction would have to fall on the city’s shoulders because it would have to be publicly bid and by State law we have to accept the lowest responsible bidder. 4 Mr. Grabiel asked why isn’t it available to the public. Ms. Reimann responded that during the hockey season the players will have all of their gear in there and it would be a matter of safety and security. However, after the hockey season is over possibly something could be worked out. Mr. Thayer noted that currently there are enough locker rooms for the three facilities and that this is something that would be above and beyond in that they are looking for their own space. Mr. Keprios stated that it’s really not all that unique compared to other spaces within the arena. The Figure Skating Club has their own room and the Edina Hockey Association has their own room. Mr. Keprios commented that Mr. Grabiel brought up a good question and asked if the thinking is that after the varsity hockey season is over would it become available to the public or would it just be locked up. Ms. Reimann noted that they have been approached by some the parents of the baseball players asking if they could use the facility during their season which does make sense because they also play at Braemar. Mr. Thayer noted that the varsity hockey season never really ends and noted that the captains of the hockey team are in the building at least once a week or more depending on the time of year. Therefore, there is an off-season when they are not skating but in other respects they are still at least there anywhere from one to twice a week during the off season. Ms. Reimann commented that there’s really nothing unique about this space that’s going to make it such that it couldn’t be used by the public when it’s not being used during the varsity hockey season. Mr. Keprios stated that he feels the maintenance would be the city’s responsibility to which Mr. Thayer responded they have not worked that detail out yet. Mr. Murrin asked if the school district pays to use these public facilities to which Mr. Thayer replied that they pay a rental fee for the ice and they currently use the existing locker rooms. What they are hoping for is having a permanent locker room so they can get away from moving from the school to the arena with all of their equipment, etc. Mr. Murrin noted that this is going to be a new maintenance headache for someone. Mr. Thayer noted that with the other areas everyone cleans their own area on a daily basis and his staff gives it a once over on a weekly basis. Ms. Presthus commented that this is not just a cement space with lockers, there is plumbing and things that go with it and asked who will take care of the maintenance on those items. She noted that there will need to be some kind of contingency for plumbing when it breaks down because there are a lot of things that can happen that would need funding that we might have to think about. Mr. Housh asked if the additional costs of maintaining the locker room could be passed back to the school district who are using it for locker space. He noted that they are already reducing their costs by not busing the players back and forth. Mr. Murrin indicated that with the new building proposal that is coming before the School Board next week this is probably not something that’s going to get anyone’s attention for a year. Mr. Murrin noted that he likes the idea of it for the school district and thinks it’s good for the kids, however, he does worry about the janitorial issue. Ms. Reimann suggested that if the proposal is accepted that they track it for a year or two and see what the general maintenance fee is. Mr. Keprios noted that he thinks the operational expenses and what not, staff can take care of internally. He noted 5 that there will be a variety of issues that he feels they will be able to resolve at the staff level. Mr. Keprios noted that this isn’t the first time that staff has thought about this. He noted that when they were building the third rink Mr. Thayer had the vision and foresight to ask if there would be an interest in having varsity locker rooms at this new facility because now would be the time to do it. At that time the school district staff said no, that they had no interest in having varsity locker rooms at Braemar Arena. Dr. Robert Schroeder, resident, indicated that he has a daughter who plays on the girls varsity hockey team and stated that he has heard some really nice things that have been planned out for the boys. Unfortunately, they’ve been dealing with inequality among hockey players for a long time. He noted that he is concerned that a 1,500 square foot plan is being allocated for a single gender locker room without equal facilities being allocated to the women. Dr. Schroeder stated that he is also concerned that it seems like this is a situation where the first one to make the proposal is going to get the optimum space. He stated that Mr. Thayer did note, however, that he has given consideration to other areas if the girls would want to have facilities and bring up funding to create their own space. He commented that this presents quite a challenge and he is concerned about that. Dr. Schroeder pointed out that it’s the manager who should know how this facility can be cut up and used and frankly feels that since Mr. Thayer didn’t specify a certain sector within the three rink area it causes him to question whether it’s truly there. He stated that if this facility is supposed to be used by our varsity hockey team then why aren’t we providing the same capability for the women to store their gear as well. There’s an inequality right there. Ms. Reimann pointed out that both Mr. Kreztman and Mr. Thayer have daughters who play hockey for Edina as well and therefore they are both involved in gender equity. Mr. Housh asked Mr. Thayer about the similar space he referred to for the girls if they were currently to have the funding to do it. Mr. Thayer replied that it would not carry the same square footage but it would have basically the same amenities. Mr. Murrin asked if this is technically a varsity locker room proposal and not a men’s or women’s locker room proposal. Therefore, his question is can women try out for the men’s varsity team? He noted that maybe if a woman makes the varsity team than the JV locker room could be the women’s. Mr. Murrin commented that he personally will not nix this plan because of the issue raised today. He noted that he thinks there should be a plan that would allow a woman to be able to be in that locker room and that he would ask the architect to look at that. He stated that he feels the JV area could in some way be made available to the women. Mr. Grabiel indicated that he is fine with a nice locker room facility for hockey, however, he does have a problem with the idea of a private group raising money and then appropriating public space for that. In other words they are taking space from Park and Recreation and using it for their own purposes. Mr. Grabiel stated that if this is a good idea and the city needs to have better locker room facilities for the hockey program then it seems to him that it’s up to the School Board, Park Board and City Council to raise public money for that because it’s part of the parks. Mr. Keprios explained that even with 6 private donations the facility would still be publicly owned and managed regardless of where the funding comes from. He commented that no one can come in and buy a piece of public land with private dollars, the city will forever hold the right to do whatever they want with it. Mr. Grabiel noted that it was said that during the varsity hockey season it’s going to be exclusively used and locked up. Ms. Presthus commented that it is only for one season. Mr. Housh indicated that it sounds like if the locker room is going to have a real open approach to it and doesn’t see why it can’t be used by someone else in the off-season for other purposes. Mr. Housh noted that from his perspective Braemar is where the varsity hockey team plays whether it’s men’s or women’s. It’s the balancing of a school and public function and commented that he finds it very frustrating that the school district has chosen not to do anything about it. He noted that he has to believe there is a way to do something for both genders. Ms. Presthus indicated that she does like the idea of the varsity locker room but she is concerned about the girls. She noted that she is also concerned about the maintenance in that what if something happens where there needs to be repair work done she would feel more comfortable if there was some kind of contingency in place. Mr. White asked Mr. Keprios if he has a recommendation at this time to which Mr. Keprios responded he doesn’t think there is enough information to accept it as proposed. We do not know how much it is going to cost, we do not know the exact square footage and we do not know where there girls might go in the future. There are a lot of unanswered questions. Mr. Keprios stated that he thinks what this parent group is asking for tonight is whether or not the Park Board thinks this something that is worth their time to carry forward and keep trying to raise money or is it a waste of their time. Mr. Keprios indicated that getting back to Mr. Grabiel’s concern there are some areas at Braemar that we could consider to be privatized. The Braemar Figure Skating Club and Edina Hockey Association both have areas that are not open to the public. Also, the Edina Baseball Association has an area for storage that’s just for them and no one else. Mr. White pointed out that the baseball scoreboard at Braemar has advertising on it that the advertisers pay for and no one else can get that advertising spot. Mr. Grabiel stated that he doesn’t necessarily have a problem with setting up a program for a specific event. He noted that what he doesn’t agree with is having a private group come in and say we will give money to appropriate this and because they are giving us money we go along with it. He indicated that if the city thinks this is a great idea and it’s a great idea for the whole city then lets have the city pay for it. Mr. Keprios commented that we did feel that way and were told no five years ago by school district staff. Mr. Murrin commented that maybe the city would be more inclined to do this if the money was contributed and it wasn’t a taxpayer issue. He noted that the only reason the city hasn’t wanted it to be put in the referendum is because they don’t want to fund it. He stated that he assumes that the money would be contributed to the city treasurer for them to decide what to do with it, it’s a trust relationship and asked Ms. Reimann if they would be willing to do that. Ms. Reimann replied that she thinks they would be. 7 Ms. Finsness asked Mr. Kretzman and Mr. Thayer how they feel about the issue since they both have sons and daughters in the hockey program. Mr. Kretzman replied that it would be great to have it for both. However, the way it’s laid out now it would be real tough to do them both at the same time. Mr. Finsness asked Mr. Kretzman if he supports the one to which he responded he definitely supports the one right now because the initiative has already been taken but he would also do the same thing for the girls. Mr. Thayer indicated that as a parent he would like to see it taken care of for both genders, however, he does feel it’s a school issue that we are trying to accommodate. Mr. Thayer noted that for everything to be equal maybe this would be an opportunity to have new construction along the left side of the west arena. He stated that currently the way the dollar is dictated they are forced to piece meal this together and come forward with this first proposal. He commented that he thinks the win, win for everyone would be all new construction on the side of the facility. Mr. Housh asked how much something like that would cost to which Mr. Thayer replied he would guess around ½ million dollars. John Murrin MOVED THAT THE PARK BOARD ADOPT THE CONCEPT PRESENTED TO US FOR A FAVORABLE REVIEW BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR MORE DETAILS. Andy Finsness SECONDED THE MOTION. Mr. Keprios indicated that the recommendation is saying that you are in agreement in concept assuming that the vote passes but that there are a still a few things that have to fall into place. Mr. Housh commented that they have to get their funding into place as well as have a caveat about having equitable space for the girls program if and when funds become available. He stated that he feels that would also have to be added to the motion. Mr. Murrin noted he would like to make a friendly amendment to add the provision that the proposal is a self-funded proposal we are looking at. We are not looking at a taxpayer contribution, that it is city property and it is a contribution to the city domain. Also, that the concept serve the ability of either sex to use it. Ms. Presthus noted that is not what is being said. Mr. White commented that his issue is he is concerned about the equity as well, but he doesn’t want to kill the deal. Ms. Presthus commented that she agrees with Mr. Housh’s amendment, Mr. Housh noted that the only other thing he would say is that we allow the proposal to move forward to the council with the caveat that there is an understanding that an equitable amount of space be allowed for within Braemar arena for a separate girls locker room. Mr. Murrin noted that he would be happy to add the friendly amendment that the proposal also conditioned by allowing an equitable space for an opposite sex locker room of a similar nature. Mr. Grabiel noted this is the problem you get into when you start allowing private groups to come in and start appropriating city property for certain things. He pointed out that he 8 feels if this is a good idea then it’s publicly funded and the gender issue and everything else is taken care of by law. Mr. Housh also suggested adding the caveat which states that the fundraising be adequately detailed in their report to the City Council so that we have an understanding as to how it will be funded. Mr. Murrin asked to add the words “with detail” after self-funded proposal to his friendly amendment. Final Motion: That the concept be presented to the City Council for review with three caveats: that it’s self-funded with details of how it will be funded; that it’s city property and that there will be an equitable amount of space of a similar nature for the other gender. Andy Finsness SECONDED THE AMENDMENT IN FAVOR - Tom White, Linda Presthus, Andy Finsness, Scot Housh, John Murrin, Karla Sitek OPPOSED - Floyd Grabiel MOTION CARRIED IV. ON-SALE OF WINE - BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE Mr. Keprios indicated that his staff report pretty much summarizes the issue and noted that he has subsequently learned that any increase in the insurance premium due to the sale of an on-sale license would be very minimal and insignificant. Todd Anderson, Assistant Manager of Braemar Golf Course, indicated that from the staff’s view it is felt that there will be a very low volume of wine sold and it should not pose a problem. Mr. Housh asked if this will help with the wedding reception type business to which Mr. Anderson replied that currently weddings are allowed to bring in wine, however, it can only be served and not sold. Mr. White stated that it says you are allowed to serve on-sale wine or strong beer and asked if the Park Board is being asked for a change in the strong beer. Mr. Anderson replied that at this time they are not. Mr. Keprios brought up the point that with the wine license they could now sell strong beer. Mr. Anderson commented that actually he could see more of an impact from strong beer as far as sales volume because they could provide a better selection of beer. Currently 3.2 beer is only available in limited brands. Mr. Keprios noted that currently strong beer can be served at rental functions. Mr. White asked how will this affect the beverage carts to which Mr. Anderson replied that staff’s recommendation would be only to sell wine by the glass in plastic glasses from bulk dispensers at the clubhouse. 9 Mr. Keprios indicated that the only other impact on the golf course aside from some licensing fees and attending classes is that a licensed beverage manager needs to be on site at all times. Mr. Anderson stated that they will have this covered. Mr. White asked if they will be serving wine coolers to which Mr. Anderson responded staff recommends only having the wine in bulk dispensers and no bottles. He added that the other recommendation from staff is that the wine is only sold by the glass and not to have carafes. It was noted that they do sell pitchers of beer at the clubhouse. Scot Housh MOVED THAT PARK BOARD APPROVE THE ON-SALE OF WINE AT BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE. Floyd Grabiel SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. V. OFF-LEASH DOG PARK - 4000 FRANCE AVENUE Mr. Keprios explained that after the last Park Board meeting Minneapolis was sent off on a charge to assure that there is funding for off-street parking, to reduce the number of entrances to one and to address the legal question surrounding enforcement. Mr. Keprios then indicated that the representatives from the Minneapolis Park Board just attended a meeting at St. Louis Park and asked to hear what the outcome was at that meeting. Ms. Niemec indicated that tonight they gave their first presentation to the City of St. Louis Park. She stated that 350 notices were sent out and only 6 residents showed up, so there wasn’t a lot of opposition. They voted unanimously to approve the off-leash dog site. Ms. Davis commented that they also approved to work with their City Council to change their ordinance regarding the off-leash area. Therefore, they are waiting to receive that agreement. Ms. Davis explained that regarding the off-street parking she had talked with the individuals regarding the zoning concerns from both St. Louis Park and Edina. She noted that Craig Larson, Edina City Planner, indicated that we are looking at a conditional use permit or another type permit for just parking. However, at this time they would not have to do anything in Edina regarding this conditional use permit but would probably have to have some type of an agreement. Mr. Swenson stated that they are currently working on putting together the documents showing the entrance, parking lot layout and street crossing. He noted that Ms. Davis and himself are currently working with the City of St. Louis Park to see what process they need to go through because they may have to apply for a variance, they have not received anything in writing yet. It was noted that the parking lot falls within the jurisdiction of the City of St. Louis Park. Mr. White asked how many parking spaces will be in the parking lot to which it was noted there will be 10 to 12 parking spaces. Mr. Housh asked where would overflow parking be located because it sounds like there will not be as many off-leash areas as anticipated and therefore more people may be using this location. Mr. Swenson explained that they are hoping to open all four off-leash dog 10 parks at the same time so as not to put pressure on one particular off-leash recreation area. He indicated that if the 10 to 12 parking spaces are not adequate it’s really hard to say where people will park. Mr. Swenson commented that from a use standpoint he knows there are peak times such as early morning and early evening. He noted that they are hoping that the residents from the Minneapolis side will walk to the site as well as people from the St. Louis Park side. Mr. Swenson pointed out that if there does become a parking issue they will hear about it and it will definitely go back into the review of the site after the first year is over. Ms. Hartl, indicated that she feels during the peak times there will only be around 10 to 12 cars. She also noted that there could actually be six off-leash dog sites opening up this year and depending on the success maybe even more next year. She indicated that the more off-leash sites they have in the City of Minneapolis means less overuse at any one site. Ms. Hartl commented that she sees a lot of people in Minneapolis using the inter- city parks more rather than coming over to the border of Minneapolis, St. Louis Park and Edina. She indicated that she thinks most of the people who will be using this particular site will be the residents in the area and doesn’t think a lot of people will be driving to this site. She noted if people are going to drive they will probably go the Minnehaha Park where their dogs can swim. Mr. Keprios stated that one of the areas that is not clear is the enforcement issue. Even if we come up with some type of joint powers agreement or change in ordinance it still sounds like it would be problematic for the Minneapolis Park Board to do routine enforcement of the site. He noted that he applauds ROMP for their willingness to provide volunteer enforcement of the area, however, for the Edina Police Department’s sake the legal enforcement issue is still unclear. Ms. Davis indicated that they are hoping to have an opportunity to meet with the individuals who are in charge of enforcement and animal control from the different municipalities as well as their legal representation to work out an agreement. She noted that there will need to be a meeting with these individuals to discuss how to monitor and enforce the off-leash area with the three different municipalities. Ms. Davis stated that currently they are talking separately with each group and department which has not been a real viable means of coming to an agreement. Therefore, they would like for everyone to meet at one time and place. Mr. Keprios asked Ms. Davis what they are looking for tonight to which Ms. Davis replied they are hoping that Edina would send a representative from their law enforcement, animal control and Park and Recreation Department along with representatives from St. Louis Park and Minneapolis to discuss this and come to an agreement and resolve this issue. Ms. Hartl commented that the first line of defense is going to be site steward and whatever they cannot handle such as a serious injury than they will call 911 which is what needs to be resolved. Mr. Keprios asked Chief Siitari how he sees this arrangement functioning. Chief Siitari replied that he doesn’t see any changes since the last Park Board meeting. He noted that his primary concern is traffic safety and is glad that the parking lot is in St. Louis Park. He indicated that it is a very narrow roadway and there are going to be cars going in and out of there along with pedestrians and he does have a concern there. 11 Chief Siitari noted that there is reference to a joint powers agreement but he feels Minneapolis is basically trying to push the enforcement off on Edina. He indicated that there are better ways to address these problems such as cost reimbursement. Who is actually going to pay for the extra bodies that are needed for enforcement because Edina doesn’t have the money and Minneapolis doesn’t have the bodies. Chief Siitari commented that if Edina is going to do it we need to be compensated for it. He noted that all of the individuals mentioned can sit down and discuss it but he sees it coming down to who is going to pay for it because he doesn’t see the funding for that existing anywhere. Mr. Housh asked since the sites are going to be monitored on a yearly type basis possibly one of the jurisdictions could take responsibility for the first year with some pre-funding provided. In essence, audit the number of calls or the amount of work entailed so that in future years we would have an idea what the funding cost would be. Ms. Niemec responded that the first year is going to be heavily scrutinized and if it’s not successful there is the possibility of it being closed. Mr. Grabiel asked Chief Siitari if he had a chance to see if Ramsey County has had any problems with their off-leash area to which Chief Siitari noted that he hasn’t done any research. If it does become Edina’s responsibility he will definitely research it. MOTION: John Murrin moved that in concept we support this subject to the condition that it not be a cost item to the taxpayers of Edina. If the funding comes from other sources and they can work it out he would like to offer a motion that we favor it on that basis. Karla Sitek SECONDED THE MOTION. Mr. Housh noted that he would like to see added that the parking arrangements, which supposedly have been agreed to by St. Louis Park, are finalized in a fashion that’s acceptable to Edina. Mr. Murrin stated that he will accept the friendly amendment on the parking and that the three issues that were raised at the last Park Board meeting are taken care of. Mr. Grabiel indicated that it seems to him that it would be nice to approve this in concept. However, what he heard is that Minneapolis would like us to make a recommendation that the Chief of Police and someone with the Park Board get together with the people from Minneapolis and anyone else who is working on this issue and try to negotiate some of these issues. Ms. Davis replied that is what the request is regarding the enforcement issue. Ms. Niemec commented that perhaps this preliminary approval might get the movement going so that they can come to a conclusion. Therefore, she feels a preliminary approval will be helpful. Ms. Niemec then offered another suggestion that the Edina Park Board give their final approval based on the following conditions being met and then you wouldn’t have to keep dealing with us. Mr. White asked Mr. Murrin if he is anticipating his motion as a final approval or as approval subject to the friendly amendment on the three issues. Mr. Murrin noted that 12 approval of concept subject to the friendly amendments. Mr. White asked Mr. Murrin if he would anticipate this be brought back to the board when it’s finalized or not. Mr. Murrin replied whatever the custom is. Mr. White asked Mr. Keprios what his thoughts are regarding this. Mr. Keprios stated that he feels Park Board can give their conceptual final approval now with the stipulation that a couple of things must be resolved before it can go to City Council. He noted that the most critical issue is that of enforcement and availability of resources. He stated that he wants Edina to be a good neighbor and a good partner and sees this as a great opportunity for Edina residents and hopes that we can come to a resolution on the enforcement issue. Therefore, with that caveat he feels the Park Board can give their final nod tonight should those concerns fall into place. Mr. Finsness pointed out that he is going to back the neighbors serious concerns from the last Park Board meeting and therefore will probably vote against it for that reason. FAVOR - Tom White, Linda Presthus, Floyd Grabiel, Scot Housh, John Murrin, Karla Sitek OPPOSED - Andy Finsness MOTION CARRIED. VI. OTHER A. Community Education Services Board Update/Asset Building - Ms. Presthus noted that they are continually talking about the asset building program which is their big concern. She asked if the Park Board is still planning on adding a youth member for the asset building. Mr. Keprios replied that the City Council has received the Park Board’s recommendation and hopes that when the time comes the City Council will accept the Park Board’s recommendation. Therefore, once it is approved and when there is an opening on the Park Board, a youth member may be appointed. Mr. Keprios pointed out that there is going to be a joint School Board and City Council meeting on Monday and the full purpose of that is hear a presentation by Dr. Carl Holmstrom. They will be working on adopting a joint resolution to launch a community effort to develop more assets in the lives of Edina’s youth. Mr. Murrin commented that there are a lot of kids who are not on the athletic teams and asked if there is a program for those kids. Mr. Keprios replied that the asset building is a lot about partnerships and one of things they are working on is the Tri-City skate park project with the City of Edina, Southdale YMCA, City of Bloomington and City of Richfield. This will be a great opportunity for YMCA staff to connect with this targeted population while providing a popular sport opportunity for those who really don’t want to be part of a team sport. She indicated that another one of their concerns is the Kids Club age limit policy. They will be setting an age limit for Kids Club. She noted that it basically deals with special needs because theoretically they can stay there until they’re 18 years old which gets to be a very difficult problem. She noted that everyone was in agreement that a policy needed to be made for this issue. 13 B. Kunz-Lewis Site - Mr. Keprios noted that the Blue Ribbon Committee has its first meeting tomorrow night and noted that the ground breaking ceremony was held today at the Kunz Lewis site where it will be home to the new Library/Senior Center. He indicated that they are making great progress on the design of the senior center and library. VII. ADJOURNMENT Karla Sitek MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. John Murrin SECONDED THE MOTION. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:25 P.M.