HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-03-13 Park Board Minutes 1
EDINA PARK BOARD
7:00 P.M.
BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE
MARCH 13, 2001
_____________________________
MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Damman, Floyd Grabiel, David Fredlund, George Klus,
Linda Presthus, Karla Sitek, Ardis Wexler, Tom White
MEMBERS ABSENT: Andy Finsness, John Murrin
STAFF PRESENT: John Keprios, Ed MacHolda, Janet Canton, Todd Anderson
_____________________________
I. APPROVAL OF THE FEBRUARY 13, 2001 PARK BOARD MINUTES
George Klus MOVED TO APPROVE THE FEBRUARY 13, 2001 PARK BOARD
MINUTES. Linda Presthus SECONDED THE MOTION. MINUTES APPROVED.
II. BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE PRESENTATION - TODD ANDERSON,
ASSISTANT MANAGER
Todd Anderson, Braemar Golf Course Assistant Manager, gave the Park Board a tour of
the locker rooms, clubhouse and pro shop. He also showed the Park Board the architect’s
current drawings of the remodeling that will take place in the fall.
Ms. Presthus asked if there are any predictions on how much the weather is going to
affect the revenue this year. Mr. Anderson replied that the last couple of years they have
had early season starts and late season finishes. Ms. Presthus asked how many rounds
Braemar usually has in a year to which Mr. Anderson responded that for the whole
complex it is somewhere between 140,000 and 145,000. He noted that revenue could
definitely become an issue this year. Mr. Damman stated that typically Braemar leads the
Twin Cities in number of rounds to which Mr. Anderson added that actually they lead the
whole state by far in the number of rounds for a public golf course.
Mr. Keprios pointed out that the golf business is very big in Edina. The staff at Braemar
is responsible for 45 holes which include 27 championship holes as well as 9 executive.
In addition they are also responsible for a driving range, golf dome, practice greens and
rental of the clubhouse, which is a year round business. He added that the Braemar staff
does a wonderful job.
2
Mr. Grabiel asked Mr. Anderson if they are seeing the kind of usage at Fred Richards that
they had expected. Mr. Anderson replied that the numbers are growing, however, it’s not
where they would like it to be. Therefore, they have been more proactive in promoting
the Fred Richards Golf Course than Braemar basically out of necessity.
Ms. Presthus asked how the golf dome is doing to which Mr. Anderson responded they
are having a big year, especially because of the weather. It hasn’t been this busy in March
in a number of years. He indicated that the high school golf team just started practicing
on Monday so it is busy all of the time. Mr. Anderson pointed out that there are a lot
more golf dome facilities in the area than there used to be and therefore we have a lot
more competition. Ms. Presthus asked if anyone has ever thought of doing anything
different with the dome. Mr. Anderson responded that they have run a soccer program in
the past, however, it is not as profitable because of competition from other domes in the
Twin Cities that cater to soccer.
Ms. Wexler asked if any other teams use the golf dome to which Mr. Anderson replied
there are approximately 8 to 10 other teams that use it as well. Mr. Keprios pointed out
that Braemar offers the Edina High School free use of the dome as well as free tee times.
He noted that in return the city receives free use of all gymnasium time. However, the
free use of gymnasium time will change if the referendum passes because the school is
going to need to start charging us for gym time to help cover their new additional
operating costs associated with the new gyms.
III. RECREATIONAL FACILITIES REFERENDUM UPDATE - JOHN KEPRIOS
Mr. Keprios informed the Park Board that the City Council has voted to have a special
election for voters to decide on a $35,800,000 recreational facilities referendum that will
take place on Wednesday, May 16th.
Mr. Keprios informed the Park Board of what will and will not be in the referendum. He
noted that the bubble will not be part of the referendum. However, the City Council still
has the option to approve bonds without voter approval to fund construction of a bubble
in the future. We may study the dome further and maybe put it at another location
sometime in the future. He noted that they also took out the resilient artificial turf
proposed for the middle field between South View and the Community Center. Instead,
the plan is to renovate that grass field. As a result, the City will be guaranteed access to
the field, and noted that it would be used primarily by smaller kids.
Mr. Keprios explained that the total referendum package shows that it is over 40 million
dollars, however, 6.1 million of it is going to be paid for by the school district. He noted
that a portion is being used for building classrooms and other educational purposes. He
stated that there are some savings to the school district by doing this in cooperation with
the referendum.
3
Mr. Keprios indicated that also in the referendum will be a 25 meter by 25 yard pool with
a connecting diving area with a removable bulk head at Valley View Middle School. He
stated that the Edina Swim Club has submitted a letter to fully support this proposal and
will rent all pool time available in Edina first before going outside of the community.
Mr. Keprios handed out information regarding what the impact on property taxes which is
based on assessed property values.
Mr. Keprios noted that tomorrow is the first meeting with the Joint Powers Organization
Board, which consists of; Mr. MacHolda and himself from the city staff, Mike Kelly and
Linda Masica from the City Council, Jay Willemssen and Doug Johnson from the School
District staff and Peyton Robb and Colleen Feige from the School Board. He explained
that their job as a board, should the referendum pass, is to build everything on school
property. The $9.3 million proposed for improvements on park property is not the JPO’s
responsibility. He indicated that the JPO’s first charge is to hire a construction manager
and after that they will start hiring architects. Mr. White asked if an architect will have
been selected before the referendum occurs on May 16th to which Mr. Keprios replied
yes.
Mr. Keprios pointed out that he has scheduled a meeting for next Thursday to which he
has basically invited everyone who is interested in the referendum to attend to see a
presentation. After the presentation if people want to form a “Vote Yes” committee they
can certainly do so. He explained that legally he cannot orchestrate one or spend any City
resources to support a vote yes effort.
Mr. Keprios stated that Decision Resources suggest that people need to get out and sell
this otherwise it’s not going to pass. Ms. Wexler asked if the School District is officially
going to be part of the “Vote Yes” committee. Mr. Keprios explained that Gordon
Hughes, City Manager, has asked that the School District assist with the vote yes
initiative because the City cannot.
Mr. White asked if John Murrin is still going to be the liaison from the School Board to
the Park Board. Mr. Keprios replied that he hasn’t heard anything from the School Board
regarding the liaison position. Mr. White noted that he will call John Murrin to find out
what the situation is because it would be helpful if a school board member were present
to find out a little more what their perspective is on this.
Mr. Klus asked what the Park Board’s role has been in the past regarding referendums.
Mr. Keprios replied that first he would like to know what, if any, public meetings the
Park Board feels need to be held regarding the proposed projects. He indicated that he
would suggest sending out notices to the residents of the Pamela Park neighborhood
because he is concerned about their reaction to the lights that are being recommended for
the softball fields. He stated that he will also be talking with Rotary Clubs, League of
Women Voters, etc. Mr. Keprios pointed out that, if the referendum passes, then the Park
Board will become very involved. He noted that he will be bringing in plans and asking
4
for input. Mr. White commented that it’s his understanding that individual Park Board
members could be on the “Vote Yes” committee and could go out and try and sell the
improvements that are part of the referendum. Mr. Keprios replied that as an Edina
resident anyone can do that but it is not a Park Board required duty. Mr. Keprios
indicated that, due to State law, he cannot be involved with the “Vote Yes” committee.
Mr. Keprios stated that there are people who publicly oppose the referendum. Mr.
Fredlund asked on what basis are people wanting to see this fail. Mr. Keprios replied that
one of the biggest concerns is they don’t believe the school is going to be able to meet
their operating expenses. He noted there is another group of people who live in Edina but
are in a different school district and feel they shouldn’t have to pay for these
improvements. Mr. White commented that he has heard that a lot of people feel that the
schools are somehow unfairly benefiting from this because everything is being built on
school property. He noted that he doesn’t think people understand that it’s public
property either way.
Mr. Damman brought up the point that some of the issues that have been raised are valid
issues and we need to be sure that we have answers to these questions. He noted that the
issue about the school district not having enough money with users fees to cover the costs
of the new facilities is a valid point. Currently the school district can barely afford to
cover their textbooks how are they going to run the facilities, where is the money going to
come from. We need an answer for that. Mr. Keprios replied that his answer to that is
the “Facilities Use Agreement” states that they have the right to charge whatever they
need to make up their incremental additions in operating expenses. He noted that the
school district has also informed him that they have budgeted for what they see as their
share of the incremental additions.
Ms. Wexler asked what would happen if the referendum passes and the school district
can’t hold up their end. Mr. Keprios replied that his guess would be they would have to
charge higher rates to facility users or perhaps they might decide to charge for fields that
they never charged for before.
Mr. Klus asked what percentage of voters are expected to vote on the referendum to
which it was noted approximately 8% of the registered voters. Mr. Keprios stated that he
thinks it’s going to be a close vote. According to Decision Resources, if a “Vote Yes”
committee doesn’t get organized and get information out to the residents, the referendum
will fail.
Ms. Wexler asked if Decision Resources has looked into the total number of seniors
(people over 65) who have voted in similar referendums across the country. Mr. Keprios
explained that, with regards to the senior population, $400,000 has been set aside for
furnishings for the new senior center scheduled to be complete early next year. He
indicated that the Senior Citizen Advisory Committee is trying to organize and get the
seniors behind this to support the referendum. He commented that he recently had a
question from a senior who stated he didn’t like the idea of the referendum because it is
too youth oriented and there is not enough for the seniors. He indicated that his response
5
to the gentleman was that the community did inform the Blue Ribbon Committee of what
they wanted to see in the referendum. He pointed out that there are a lot of things for the
seniors in addition to the furnishings for the new senior center such as walking paths, a
new small performing arts theater, renovation of the ECC auditorium, expansions to the
Edina Art Center, and numerous other general park improvements. Mr. Keprios pointed
out that the community of all ages has told us what is needed. He also noted that not
everyone realizes there are greater participation numbers now because kids are starting
organized sports at a much earlier age and there are also more females playing in
organized athletics. That is the reason the third sheet of ice was built at Braemar.
Mr. Grabiel indicated that he agrees there is probably too much emphasis on organized
youth athletics and so on and so forth but that’s the way it is. The fact of the matter is 20
years from now the seniors will be selling their homes and unless Edina continues to be a
premier community the way it is now people are not going to be moving into Edina and
buying homes. This is important for both now and for the continued growth of the
community.
Mr. Klus asked Mr. Keprios if the Pamela Park neighborhood is the only neighborhood
who should have a special presentation to which Mr. Keprios replied at this point in time,
yes. Mr. White asked that he thought for the last referendum that all of the
neighborhoods were given a presentation. Mr. Keprios explained that he learned a lot
from the last referendum and feels that the number of presentations was overkill and
potentially counterproductive. Mr. Keprios stated that in this case he thinks he would be
very remiss if he didn’t have a meeting with the Pamela Park neighborhood group.
Mr. Keprios thanked Mr. White for writing such a wonderful letter to Mayor Maetzold.
IV. PRIORITY ACCESS TO PUBLIC FACILITIES
Mr. Keprios asked the Park Board for their feedback on the rough draft policy of the
“Guidelines for Priority Use of Edina’s Public Facilities”. He added that this is going to
become an even bigger issue as these facilities are developed if the referendum passes.
Mr. Keprios noted that even if the referendum doesn’t pass this has been and always will
be an important issue that needs to be formalized. He indicated that at the April Park
Board meeting he would like to invite the athletic association presidents to attend so we
can hear what their responses are to this draft. He explained that this really does a couple
of things for us. It will tell us who will have first, second and third priority to these
public facilities as well as list some stipulations to which some are new and some are not.
Mr. Fredlund asked what the current policy is to which Mr. Keprios replied there is no
written policy. It has been the staff who has determined who is first, second, etc. He
stated that they have put their own teams before the school teams and whether that’s right
or wrong is a debatable issue. Mr. Grabiel asked if the draft pretty much states what is
currently being done to which Mr. Keprios replied that as far as the priority list he would
6
say it’s pretty accurate to what is being done now. As far as the demands on the athletic
associations, there are definitely some new demands.
Ms. Presthus noted that one of the requirements listed is that coaches need to go through
a training program and pointed out how that can become quite costly depending on
exactly what it is they need to have training in. Mr. Keprios responded that this has never
been required before and he isn’t so sure that it necessarily needs to be a certified
program. Mr. White suggested that the city attorney look over this issue because if
somebody does something wrong because they weren’t properly trained the city may be
held responsible. Mr. Fredlund asked isn’t that why there is liability insurance. Mr.
Keprios explained that the State of Minnesota offers some immunity, however, it’s
somewhat limited but it avoids the associations from having to take out enormous
liability policies. He indicated that he has always felt that coaches need to go through
some kind of training for the health and safety of the kids. Ms. Presthus indicated that
she thinks the language needs to be more specific.
Mr. Klus asked if all the athletic groups in Edina are non-profit to which Mr. Keprios
replied they are all non-profit but not all have the 501C3 Federal IRS tax status. Mr. Klus
asked Mr. Keprios who he is trying to keep out by using the word non-profit. Mr.
Keprios responded that he wouldn’t use the term keep out as much as prioritize. He
noted that we may not tell the public that they can’t use the facilities but we can prioritize
their access to the facilities. Mr. Klus stated that he feels there is no reason to use the
word non-profit because every athletic group is basically non-profit. Mr. White indicated
that is not necessarily true. For example if someone has a gymnastics club that is their
primary income and is for profit as opposed to the hockey association or baseball
association where no one is getting any money out of it. Mr. Grabiel stated that there are
groups that could be profit oriented and they are going to have a lower priority than a
community based non-profit group. However, they are not necessarily going to be
prohibited from using the facilities.
Mr. White indicated that priority #7 is for private schools and churches located in Edina
during the designed primary season. Applicable tournament, league fees and guidelines
will apply. Therefore, if for example OLG has a little league team with 100% Edina
residents they get priority #7. He stated that there may be a problem saying that because
you are a catholic school you get priority #7. He noted that he feels the city attorney
should review that one as well.
Ms. Presthus asked about the requirements of organizations that are authorized to receive
permits to hold tournaments on municipal park property. She asked if Edina were to host
an AAU tournament as a fundraiser for them would they be able to do that because it is a
tournament. Where would that fall to which Mr. Keprios replied he doesn’t have an
answer for that because it is a debatable issue.
Ms. Presthus asked if municipal park property excludes basketball courts. Mr. Keprios
replied that they don’t promote renting out basketball and tennis courts. However, the
7
school district in the past has reserved some of our outdoor basketball courts for some of
their programs. Ms. Presthus pointed out that a basketball coach has used them for profit
situations i.e., basketball camps. Mr. Keprios noted that is an issue and there is no
current policy for that type of situation. He indicated that the courts are designed for the
general public at no charge and are considered a public good, not a revenue generating
facility.
Mr. Grabiel asked if he understands correctly that once a group schedules their facilities
they cannot come back at a later date and take something away that has been scheduled by
a different group that has a lower priority. Mr. Keprios replied that is correct and he will
add some language to that effect about the inability to pre-empt once a group has
scheduled their programs.
Ms. Presthus commented about the point that no more than one major tournament or
special event will be scheduled at any one time and asked if that means someone couldn’t
run a tournament at Van Valkenburg and one at Braemar at the same time. She asked if it
means per site or per what? Mr. Keprios replied that a lot of this language was taken
from the Roseville and Eden Prairie’s policies and commented that he will revisit the
language to better reflect the intent.
Mr. Grabiel stated that it’s his understanding that this policy is to provide guidance on
how to set priorities. However, it’s not going to bind staff from exercising their
discretion on how to schedule certain things. Mr. White suggested putting some language
in the policy to that effect as well.
Ms. Presthus asked what it means where it states no organization will be allowed to
sublease City facilities without City approval. The City will not authorize subleasing for
profit, or for programs that compete with City programs. Mr. Keprios explained that it
means the city didn’t build these facilities for the primary purpose of allowing groups to
make a profit by having non-residents use them. Resident participation would take
precedence over a sublease for profit. Ms. Presthus noted that it states it will not be
allowed ever to which Mr. Keprios replied that the language can be changed if the Park
Board so desires. Mr. Grabiel asked Mr. Keprios if the PGA wanted to run a major
tournament at Braemar you would figure out a way to do it to which Mr. Keprios replied
yes.
Mr. White asked Mr. Keprios if a new draft will be ready for the April Park Board
meeting. Mr. Keprios indicated that he will have a revised draft ready for the next Park
Board meeting and noted that the athletic associations will receive a copy of it as well
before the Park Board meeting. He stated that he will explain to the athletic associations
that this is a rough draft and that we basically just want to get their feedback so that a fair
and equitable policy can be formed that is acceptable to everyone. He noted that
ultimately it will be the Park Board’s decision. Mr. White asked if the Park Board needs
to make a recommendation stating they are in favor of developing some guidelines and
that they realize that the current draft does need some work and that we want to get some
8
feedback from the athletic associations. Mr. Keprios commented that staff is willing to
continue on without a formal policy if that is the Park Board’s position. Mr. Grabiel
pointed out that he thinks there needs to be a policy because it sounds like there have
been problems in the past and there will continue to be problems.
Floyd Grabiel MOVED TO RECOMMEND THAT BECAUSE OF THE POTENTIAL
FOR INCREASED DEMAND ON PUBLIC PARK FACILITIES THE PARK BOARD
DIRECTS THE STAFF TO DEVELOP A POLICY TO PRIORIZE USAGE OF THE
FACILITIES.
Mr. White added an amendment THAT THE PARK BOARD WILL DISCUSS THIS
WITH THE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATIONS AT THE APRIL PARK BOARD MEETING
AND BRING THIS BACK FOR FINAL APPROVAL BEFORE THE PARK BOARD
BEFORE THEY ARE FINALLY ADOPTED. Linda Presthus SECONDED THE
MOTION.
Mr. Klus commented that he doesn’t think a motion is needed as long as it’s on the
agenda and brought back to the Park Board. Mr. White commented that he would like the
athletic associations to know that the Park Board would like their input on the policy
before it is adopted in its final form.
Ms. Presthus indicated that she is not aware of any of the athletic associations charging a
non-resident fee. She noted that she didn’t think non-residents were even allowed to
participate in the programs. Ms. Sitek stated that perhaps some things should not be in
the policy because we may be stepping on some of the athletic association’s feet. For
example, non-residents who don’t attend an Edina High School will have to pay a non-
resident fee. She pointed out that the Hockey Association and Basketball Association
don’t allow non-residents to participate at all. Mr. White suggested rewording it to say
that the associations can develop their own rules regarding resident and non-resident fees.
All in favor: Tom White, Andy Finsness, Karla Sitek, Floyd Grabiel, Ardis Wexler,
Linda Presthus, Mike Damman
Opposed: George Klus
MOTION CARRIED.
V. OTHER
A. Bandy - Mr. Keprios informed the Park Board that Mr. MacHolda submitted the
bandy players an invoice for their ice time this year. He noted that the bandy players
indicated that they felt they should only have to pay a portion of the bill because there
was snow on the ice a couple of times and they had trouble with the nets one night. Mr.
MacHolda commented that in November when the bandy players came to him with their
facility request he billed them $120.00 per hour for their games. However, instead of
9
paying the invoice in November they sent in a deposit and indicated that they would pay
the balance at the end of the season because you never know what is going to happen with
mother nature. Therefore, at the end of the season he received a very small portion of
what was due along with a letter. The letter basically stated how much they felt they
should have to pay, which in essence was about 50% of what they were invoiced. Mr.
MacHolda indicated that in the last paragraph of the letter they stated that they were very
sorry this long-term relationship, call it 22 years, needed to come to an end. Therefore, he
feels that the bandy club knew about the referendum on the table and the plan to
redevelop the Lewis east field. Mr. MacHolda stated that in a sense that is why he thinks
they stiffed the City approximately $2,000 to $2,500, not because the ice wasn’t worth
$120.00 an hour. Mr. MacHolda noted that if the referendum were to fail then he knows
most definitely they will be knocking at his door. Ms. Sitek asked Mr. MacHolda if he
would say no to which he replied that he and Mr. Keprios discussed it and decided that
they would create a general skating rink just short of what the bandy rink is.
Mr. Grabiel indicated that he has been supporting keeping the bandy program and not
turning that field into an exclusive soccer field because it’s an adult activity and he feels
it’s a good thing. However, if they are going to shoot themselves in the foot he feels they
should go find another place to play. Mr. MacHolda pointed out the bandy players have
paid less than what the Edina residents pay because every person that steps foot on a field
or ice pays $7.00 per participant. He also noted that the majority of the bandy players are
non-residents and therefore do not pay taxes in Edina.
B. Dog Park - Mr. Keprios indicated that the City Council has directed him to study the
feasibility of off-leash dog parks. Therefore, he has hired a consultant to go out and study
the whole city and meet with the animal control officer. He stated that he will make a
recommendation with his findings at the April Park Board meeting. Mr. White clarified
that this is for a different dog park than the one that they have been discussing to which
Mr. Keprios replied yes. This dog park would be owned, operated and maintained by the
City of Edina.
Mr. White noted that several people have asked him if they could have people parks that
don’t allow dogs so people don’t have to watch so closely where they step to which Mr.
Keprios replied he gets that phone call about once a week during the spring and summer
months. Mr. Keprios replied that it’s a serious issue.
VI. ADJOURNMENT
George Klus MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 8:40 P.M. Karla Sitek
SECONDED THE MOTION. MEETING ADJOURNED.