Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
City Council Packet 03-13-2007 Special
Agenda City of Plymouth Special City Council Meeting Tuesday, March 13, 2007 6:00 p.m. Medicine Lake Room 1. Call to Order 2. Discuss park referendum and use of funds 3. Set future Study Sessions 4. Adjourn DATE: March 6, 2007 for meeting of Tuesday, March 13th 6:00p.m. TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager FROM: Eric J. Blank, Director, Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: Study Session — Open Space, Park Land Aquistion. Attached for Council review are some of the staff reports and background material that the Council reviewed in 2006 leading up to the November Open Space referendum. I have also included the decision resource questions that were used for the survey and the city open space parks referendum information brochure that was mailed to all households in the community prior to the election. EB/np Agenda plumber. TO: Laurie Abrens -City Manager FROM: Mike Ko xi` r Gal Analyst and Eric Blank, Parr & Recreation Director SUBJECT: Potential Park System Projects and Financing BATE: March S, 2006 1. ACTION REQUESTED: Evaluate this report and place the issue of fixture park system projects and financing oil a future City Council study session agenda for further consideration. 2. BACKGROUND., The Park and Recreation department has prepared a list of projects that they would like to accomplish to finish off the earl: system for the City of Plymouth (see Attaclunent I). Sorrre of these items may change, be added to, or be eliminated as part of the Comprehensive Plan process. However, they currently represent the best menu of potential projects available. In addition, the Park and Recreation and Administrative Services departments have attempwd to estimate revenues that may be available to pay for these projects (see Attachment Il). Once again, these revenue estimates may change significantly based on decisions made in the Comprehensive Plan process. These projections can be compared in total to see if the list of projects is reasonable in total. These projections must also be compared from a tuning perspective to see if the projects can be adequately cashflowed. The figures developed for this report rely heavily on a great number of assumptions regarding land costs, land donation vs. fee collection, part: dedication fee amounts, inflation, ultimate land use, community needs and others. In general we feel the report is fairly accurate with the understanding that the margin of error is potentially in the S 1,000,000 plus range,. 3. DISCUSSION: Elpenditures The list of potential projects (Attachment I) includes items already contained in the CIf' (bold, as well as items which were omitted from the CIP due to timing or cost considerail oils . Thi - items contained in the CIP are I)rojected to cost approxi Inatell- 55,150.000 and it is projected thal these items can be adequately financed with funds on hand; plus projected lurk dedication fees received in the next five year period. The other projects on the list include: development costs for six neighborhood parks (the assumption is that the land -- approximately 40 acres - will be donated); additional cost for acquisition of the 10"' playfield due to rising land prices; possible acquisition of an additional 20 acres for the 10", playfield; development of 15 miles of trails; acquisition of approximately 23 acres of land for the Northwest Greenway Corridor (it is assumed that about 30 acres of trail corridor will be donated); development of the Northwest Greenway Corridor; 10"' playfield development; West Med Park building; Parker's Lake pavilion upgrade; Zachary Parr program building; skate park; and tennis dome. In total, this list represents projects with a cumulative total cost of $38 million. Revenues Attachment II, which projects park dedication fee revenues, consists of three separate tables illustrating three separate scenarios: The first scenario is based on the .Metropolitan Council's estimates on household growth for the City of Plymouth. The Met Council projects that Plymouth will add 6,000 households between 2005 and 2030 with specific targets in 2010 and 2020. Based on this information, a computation of land donation vs. fee revenues, and a projection of fee increases, the first scenario estimates revenues of $5,3 million by 2010, $22.5 million by 2020 and $45.6 million by 2030. If this scenario is correct the City would receive more than enough revenue from the Park Dedication Fund to eventually pay for all the items in the Potential Parks Projects list. The second scenario reflects what could potentially happen if the City of Plymouth chooses to develop at a lower density than desired by the Met Council. This scenario projects a total of 5,000 new households by 2030. Based on this information; the second scenario estimates revenues of $33 million by 2010, $17.8 million by 2020, and $36.8 million by 2030. If this scenario is correct the City would receive just about enough revenue. from the Park Dedication Fund to pay for all the items in the Potential Park Projects list. The third scenario reflects what could happen if the City of Plymouth chooses to develop at an even lower density. This scenario projects a total of 4,000 new households by 2030. Based on This information, the third scenario estilna#es revenues of $2.3 million by 2010_ $14 million by 2020, and $26.4 million by 2030. if this scenario is correct, the City would not receive enough revenue from the Park Dedication Fund to pay for all the items on the .Potential Park Projects list.. A.IJ of these scenarios are greatly affected by a number of assumptions. Onc of the primary assumptions is the park dedication fee, Currently, the fee is $4,000 per unit for residential property. Several other communities have fees that are considerably higher than $4,000, In addition. amodel based on land costs of $150,000 per acre and 6.,000 newunits suggests lhat a fee of up to $6,400 could be justified. LA/bein the model is rniu based o land costs of $200.000 per acre and 4,000 new units it suggests that a fee of up to $1,300 could be justified, The Council tray wish to become more aggressive in raising park dedication fees which would greatly° impact the amount of revenues that would be received. Cllshflows For the..most part, development costs are assumed to increase at the rate ofirrflation (3%0). Land costs are quite another matter. Raw land prices in Plymouth have increased dramatically over the years. The attached table (Attachment I1I) shows the escalation of land prices since 1969. From 1969 to 2005 land prices have gone up an average of 13% per year. However; there has been a recent spire in land prices both inside and outside the MUSA area; and in adjacent areas such as Ivfaple Grove. Land speculation by developers who believe that development will be allowed in NW Plymouth, as a result of Comprehensive Plan modifications, is well underway. Any actual change in the Comprehensive Plan may cause land values to shoot even higher. To provide some perspective; land is currently going for over $300,000 per acre in Maple Grove for property that is served by sewer and water. Other areas of Plymouth are seeing''/2 acre lots served by streets and utilities going for nearly $500,000. Given the rapidly increasing price of land, it is clear that land acquisition should be a priority, if the City does desire to add a 10"' Playfield and create a Northwest Greenway Corridor_ On the bottom of Attachment 1 there is a breakout entitled "Select Land Acquisition"_ This breaks out the cost of land acquisition for the l Ota' Playfield (40 acres only) plus the Northwest Greenway. The cost per acre for the 10"' Playfield has been held at $200,000 per acre since negotiations are currently underway. The cost of land for the Northwest Greenway has been inflated from the current price of' $200,000 per acre by 15% per year and is projected to be acquired in 2007, 2009, and 2009. In total, it is estimated that it will cost approximately $14,000,000 to acquire the 10«' Playfield and Northwest Greenway. Of this amount, $4,000,000 is already programmed into the CIP and is funded by monies currently in the Capital Improvement Fund; Community Improvement Fund, and Park Dedication Fund, as well as park dedication proceeds that will hopefully be received over the next 5 years. This leaves a shortfall of approximately 10,000,000 if only land, and the other- items contained in the CIP, are done. in the 2006-2010 timeframe. Alternatives To solve this cashflow issue the City has only a few alternatives. Most available reserves have already been spoken for which leads to the conclusion that some form of debt must be utilized. There are two reasonable debt alternatives for the acquisition of the l O'' Playfield and Nortbwest Greenway: 1) General Obligation debt backed by a tax levy on the taxable market value of the City (requi.res referendum), and 2) Annual Appropriation Lease Revenue Bonds backed by future parr dedication fees (does not require a referendum). The single most important consideration when evaluating these two alternatives is to answer the question ol . who should be paying to suppori the debt service (and ultimately the land purchase). There are several items to consider inclt_tdirlg: who will use the facilities; hi.st.orical precedents, and the purpose of fees being collected. When evahiating the 10"' Playfield we wotild UOlre that this facility is primarily required to serve the tiew residents who will be moving into NW Plymouth as it develops. Consequently, it would seem reasonable that the new residents should pay for that facility with the earl: dedication fees that they generate vs. usage of a general tax leery paid for by all residenis. including those who Dave alread- pard for playlields located in tether areas of the comimi nitx Park dedication fees are authorized Im tl-,e acquisition, development and expansion of park facilities necessary to serve new development. Therefore, use of these fees to acquire the 10"' Playfield would seem to he a good fit. When evaluating the NW Greenway we would argue that this is primarily open space. that benefits the community as a whole. Consequently, the acquisition of this property should be paid I or by the City as a whole. This has been the City's past practice. The last time the City acquired open space it was paid for by $2,235,000 of GO bonds issued in 1995. When making the decision to issue debt, the City must remain cognizant that this will likely not be the only debt that will be issued by the City in the not too distant future. It is likely that the City may have to issue. some debt for future street reconstruction projects, a fourth fire station, Arid of streets such as Vicksburg Dane, CR 47, and possibly others, SUmmary If the City desires to acquire land for a 10th Playfield and NW Greenway in the near future it may make sense to issue two separate bond issues. The first would be an Annual Appropriation Lease Revenue Bond for the 10"' Playfield. This would enable the City to use future park dedication fees to pay for the purchase of the property. If a portion of the funds currently earmarked for use in the purchase of the 10`x' playfield were used, the bond issue could be bought down to approximately $6,000,000. The remainder of the proceeds could be transferred into the Park Dedicatiou Fttnd to cashflow debt service and other park dedication funded projects. Two examples of caslzflows are attached (see Attachment IV). If this option Is acceptable it could be done fairly quickly without waiting for a referendum in November of this year. This could result in more. favorable sales terms. The second bored issue would be a General Obligation bond issue for purchase of the portion of the NW Greenway not likely to be acquired through land dedication. It has been the City's past practice to purchase open space with GO issues which results in the spreading of the cosi on all taxable market value in the City. If a GO bond is pursued, it would require that the item be placed on the ballot as a referendurn question at either the November, 2006 or 2007 general elections. The date for notification of the County for intent to place an item on the ballot is September 15 of each year. If a GO bond were issued for the approximately 46,000,000 cost of acquiring the NW Greenway Corridor, it would result in an annual levy of $23,14 :for an average valued home of 4356,200 see Attachnac:nt V). This would be at least partially offset by the maturity of the currcrlt open space bored which matures in 2010. This maturity will free up approximately $10.77 of levy from the averagevalued horne fol- other uses (which juay not be parks related). 4. BUDGET IMPACT: Any a.ct:ion t.akYn to increase the authorized costs or change funding sources for acquisMan of the 10"' Playfield and NW Greenway will require an aivendment to the 2006-2010 CIP. 4 5. RECOMMENDATION: The scope and fUi]Clln—g 01 fo'CLffE paTlc 5)'Stell Proects is G c oinpiex issue with potent]ELI l0)iL `LerTO ramifications. Duc to market conditions, and deadlines for submission ofballot reiereridum questions, it is important ilial staff receive some timely direction on which course(s) of action to pursue to ensure the future that the City Council desires. Consequently, staff would recommend that the City Council pla.ce the issue of future park projects and financing on a future study session agenda for more detailed analysis and consideration. 5 DATE: April 7, 2006 TO: Mayor & Council FROM: Eric Blank, Director of Parks & Recreations SUBJECT: Follow-up Information from March 21 Council Work Session on Parks. Mike Kohn has put together a packet of information answering many of the questions that were raised at the study session on parks two weeks ago. One of the questions had to do with the number of teams and percentage of players participating in youth athletic associations. Those statistics are attached in the report. When reviewing this information, please keep in mind that Plymouth both imports players to our community and exports players to surrounding communities. All of the athletic associations that are parent -run use their school district boundary, ie. Wayzata, Hopkins, or Robbinsdale, as the official attendance boundary for their athletic associations. Thus, you have many cities in each of these districts supplying children to each of the athletic associations. You also have a number of cities providing facilities to these athletic assocations, not just Plymouth. Keep in mind that we allocate our facilities based on the number of Plymouth kids to each athletic association, not the total number of kids playing.. I was also asked to talk to the Wayzata School District about the plans at their elementary school site on County Road 47. I spoke by phone with their business manager, Alan Hopenian. Alan indicated that the disctrict has no plans at this time to build another elementary school. However, their planning only goes out about five years, and he certainly would leave the door open for something to change that they are not anticipating at this time. He felt confident that as we have at other locations, we could work out some type of a lease/use agreement of their property as long as we understood that they may still need it for district needs some time in the future. A very quick review of their site, then, would indicate that of the 20 acres they own, it might be possible for us to use in a range of 5-12 acres of this site for athletics. He dict not feel at this time that they would be in a position to sell the site to the city. It was also brought up at the meeting about the property owned by Speak the Word Church. After a recent council meeting, their facility and property manager, Reginald Cammon, and 1 briefly discussed this. I told Mr. Cammon what our needs and our interests were and gave him a business card. He indicated that they would think about this issue and get back to me as soon as possible. The last issue was the possibility of purchasing property in another community. Because I was on vacation this past week, I have not had a lot opportunity to pursue this issue. I will follow up on this issue as time permits. 1 think Medina is probably a more likely joint powers candidate than the City of Corcoran. If there is any other information the Council would like its to research, please send us an e-mail, and Mike and I would be: happy to provide any additional iiifUriifatioii in which you would be interested. EB/ds enclosures Park Dedicati®n ]Fees Sample -- March 2006 Based on 8% of ]and value 0:\Accounting\WRKSHTS1MkohnlComp Planl[Park Dedication Fees Sample - March 2006.xls]Sheetl 2005 2006 Maple Grove (Single -Family) 4,000 5,500 Eden Prairie (Single -Family) 3,400 5,000 Apple Valley (Single -Family) 4,584 4,584 Bloomington (Single -Family) 4,800 5,400 Plymouth (Max Per Unit) 3,400 4,000 Prior Lake (Single -Family) 3,750 3,750 Brooklyn Park (Single -Family) 3,400 3,600 Medina (Single Family) 3,500 to $8,000 Burnsville (Single -Family) 2,288 2,860 Woodbury (Single --Family) 2,000 2,500 Wayzata (Single -Family) 2,500 Minnetonka (Single -Family) 2,375 2,375 New Hope (Single -Family) 1,500 Golden Valley (Single -Family) 1,000 Based on 8% of ]and value 0:\Accounting\WRKSHTS1MkohnlComp Planl[Park Dedication Fees Sample - March 2006.xls]Sheetl 2005 Fuld Usage Numbers of Teams & Players n'—i—fi— TPA m.4 Plavers Plvmouth Plaver % Summer Soccer PSA 200 2,552 75% Wings 104 1,575 48% WSC 30 300 70% Adult 4 77 43% Fall Soccer PSA 33 450 75% Wings 32 437 44% WSC 11 160 fig% Park & Rec 91 874 77% Fall Football Wayzata Youth Football 38 697 71% Armstrong/Cooper 20 320 27% OMGFA Flag 12 140 18% Park & Rec Flag 12 124 70% Adult 4 -Man 12 96 48% yr- •t - - N.A .me. , ->. _ ;; .zee-.ar..., i, 3 1r r.-....,-....- > ,-.:°'' a– s,—"3. "--_ _. ... . Summer Baseball PWYBA 120 1,400 85% RAYB 26 350 22% PNHLL 26 334 65% OMGBA 7 84 23% Park & Rec Evening 6 96 88% AAU 1 12 58% Adult 1 12 50% Fall Baseball PWYBA 17 204 83% RAYB 1 13 57% PNHLL 6 72 66% Summer Softball PWYSB 25 295 75% Cooper/Armstrong 1 14 57% OMGSB 3 40 30% Adaptive 4 52 48% Adult 96 1,381 52% zs e Fall Softball Cooper/Armstrong 1 13 38% PWYSB B 104 73% Osseo/Maple Grove 3 40 30% Adult 46 557 57% Sprinq Ruqby Armstrong Boys Club Armstrong Girls Club 1 21 62% Wayzata Boys Club 2 47 66% ClubWayzataGirlsb 2 a 75%. 9 x rte. Spring Lacrosse Armstrong Boys Club 3 65 50% Armstrong Girls Club/ Var. 2 35 48% Wayzata Boys Club 3 66 61% Wayzata Youth Girls 3 23 83% Wayzata Girls ClubNar. 1 23 65% s - Summer Lacrosse Armstrong/Cooper Boys 3 56 50% Armstrong/Cooper Girls ayzata Youth Boys 6 145 74% Park & Rec Leagues 4 48 86% S_l2rinq Ultimate Frisbee 1 25 44% Armstrong Boys Club Wayzata Boys Club 1 21 73% TOTALS 1,029. 13,531 64% DATE: March 24, 2006 TO: Eric Blank, Park and Recreation Director FROM: Mike Kohn, 1 inancial Analyst SUBJECT: Increase in Park Dedication Fees Per the information contained on the attached "Park Dedication Fee Fact Sheet" it appears that the City of Plymouth could justify a higher maximum per-unit park dedication fee. Land values of $200,000 per acre could justify as maximum fee of 11,346 per unit for single-family detached housing units. In addition, several other communities arc leading the way in terms of setting the standard for fees acceptable to the market. Maple Grove currently has their fee set at $5,500. Eden Prairie has its fee set at $5,000. While Plymouth would have a hard time gaining acceptance of a fee of $11,000, it is not unreasonable to join the ranks of other similar communities by raising our fee from 4,000 to $5,000. This could be done by ordinance at anytime this year. However, a logical break would be to make it effective for the last 6 months of the year. Per state statute the mid -year increase would not apply to applications for final approval that have been submitted to the City. If the City were to adopt a fee increase to be effective 711106 it would have to be placed on the Council agenda for the meeting of June 27"' at the latest. Park Dedication Fee Fact Sheet By statute, cities "...may require that a reasonable pw-tion of any proposed subdivision be dedicated to the public or preserved for conservation purposes or for public use as parks, recreation facilities... playgrounds, trails, wetlands, or open space_". Statute also states that a ..."municipality may choose to accept an equivalent amount in cash from the applicant for part or all of the portion required to be dedicated to such public uses or purposes based on the fair market value of the land...". In order to follow the statute, the City of Plymouth developed a formula for park dedication fees based on a benchmark of land per capita and market value for the land. Based on the 2000 Comprehensive Plan, the City determined that existing parkland and open space amounted to .0183 acres per capita. This amount was adopted as the standard for future park land need, and has since been utilized to determine the amount of land that should be required for donation, or the required cash fee in lieu of land. The park dedication fee (currently $4,000 maximum per dwelling unit) paid in each development may vary. Different housing types have different average household sizes. Single family detached dwellings are estimated to average 3.1 persons per unit. Duplexes and townhomes are estimated to average 2 persons per unit. Multi -family dwellings are estimated to average 1.9 persons per unit. The total expected population in each development is multiplied by the per capita share (.0183) to determine how much land is required. The resulting number the acres of land required for that development - is then multiplied by the current land value to determine the maximum cash donation in lieu of land, up to the maximum. amount per unit established by the City (currently $4,000). The following table shows several examples of the maximum per unit fee for various housing types and land values if the $4,000 maximum were not in existence: Maximum Potential Fee 5,673 3,477 11,346 6,954 17,019 10,431 Since land prices are now in the $200,000 to $300,000 range, it is clear that the City can justify a higher rate than $4,000 based on the need for park land created by residential development. However, there is the practical consideration of how much the market will consider generally acceptable. The following is a list of park dedication fees for Plymouth and other cities: Land Value Single Family 100,000 per acre Multi -Family 100,000 per acre Single Family 200,000 per acre Multi -Family 200,000 per acre Single Family 300,000 per acre Multi -Family 300,000 per acre Maximum Potential Fee 5,673 3,477 11,346 6,954 17,019 10,431 Since land prices are now in the $200,000 to $300,000 range, it is clear that the City can justify a higher rate than $4,000 based on the need for park land created by residential development. However, there is the practical consideration of how much the market will consider generally acceptable. The following is a list of park dedication fees for Plymouth and other cities: 2005 2006 Maple Grove (Single -Family) 4,000 5,500 Eden Prairie (Single -Family) 3,400 5,000 Apple Valley (Single -Family) 4,584 4,584 Bloomington (Single -Family) 4,800 5,400 Plymouth (Max Per Unit) 3,400 4,000 Prion- Lake (Single -Family) 3,750 3,750 Brooklyn Parlc (Single -Family) 3,400 3,600 Burnsville (Single -Family) 2,288 2,860 Woodbury (Single-Fainily) 2,000 2,500 DATE: March 24, 2006 TO: Eric Blank, Park and Recreation Director FROM: Mike Kohn; Financial Analyst SUBJECT: Community Improvement Fund The Community Improvement Fund was created from the arbitrage, and other surplus monies, from various special assessment bond funds. In the past it has been used to finance items such as the following: Development of the Bass Lake playfield Development of the Parker's Lake playfield Construction of the public safety building Public safety building expansion PW building expansion Currently, the Community Improvement Fund has a cash balance of approximately 6,950,000. The 2006-2010 Capital Improvement Plan anticipates the expenditure of an additional $2,323;000 for acquisition of a 10`x' playfield and small portions of railroad crossing improvements. If all projects are done as planned, this would bring the cash balance down to around $5,500,000 by 2008. It has been the policy of the City to maintain a cash balance of at least $5,000,000 in the Community Improvement Fund for emergencies or other unique opportunities that may arise. There are other potential projects which could be funded from this source, such as a 0' fire station. Use of funds from the Community Improvement Fund is regulated by the City Charter and is reflected in the City Code. A copy of the code is attached for your review. Section 321 - Community Improvement Fund Page. 1 of 2 Section 321 - Community Improvement Fund 321.01. Establishment of Fund. Pursuant to City Charter Chapter 7, Section 7.14, there is established a fund to be known as "Comm-ulity Improvement Fund." 321.03. Allocation of Monies to Fund. There shall be accumulated in such Community Improvement Fund (1) surplus money froze, the various special assessment funds that remain after the costs of each improvement project have been fully funded and bonds issued for the project paid or defeased, and which money has not been transferred to another separate improvement fund, (2) collections of special assessments received after an improvement project has been fully funded and bonds issued for the project paid or defeased, (3) investment earnings generated by the money in the fund, (4) any other money appropriated by the Council or donated to the City for the purposes of the find. 321.05. Use of Fund. Subdivision 1. Generally_. The Community Improvement Fund shall be used only when all of the following are met: a) The project has sufficient community wide benefit as determined by its intended uses, addresses a community need or problem, and is consistent with other City goals, programs and policies. b) The expenditure for the project is for an item of a capital nature. c) The Council has conducted a public hearing on the project. d) There has been an estimate prepared outlining the operating expenses and proposed funding sources for the project for a five year period. e) Expenditures for a project in excess of three million dollars have been approved by a majority of the votes cast in a regular or special election. Subd, 2. Expenditures requiring 5/7ths Council Approval. Upon meeting the requirements of Subdivision 1, expenditures from the Community Improvement Fund shall require at least five affirmative votes of the Council, but shall not require voter approval, if the expenditure is for a project that has been included in the Capital Improvement Program for at least the current year or is declared to be an emergency, e.g., an "Act of God" as that terin is defined by generally accepted business general liability insurance policies, and does not exceed three million dollars for any site or project location. Subd. 3. E. enditures requiring M-ajoity_Council Approval. Upon meeting the requirements of Subdivision 1, expenditures from the Community Improvement Fund shall require a simple majority votes of the Council, but shall not require voter approval, if the expenditure: a) is for a project that has been included in the Capital Improvement Program for at least two years; l,th, ll ananv7 pi 7-)lvrnnntl,1 T -.in nT i?/r,i-ry (,nT u:u-,rnr- T-- P)AV)nnc Section 32-1 - C:omnaunity improvement Fuld Page 2 ol' 2 Plymouth City Code :321.05, Srzbd. 3(b) b) is a loan from the Community Improvement Fund and must be repaid or is made with the condition that no further expenditures from the Community Improvement Fund shall be made until the principal is repaid plus ten percent of the investment earnings that would have been generated on the principal at the previous amount; and c) expends a total amount of principal not to exceed an amount equal to the Community Improvement Fund's investment earnings from the previous two calendar years prior to the expenditure, not to exceed three million dollars for any site or project location. Ord. 94-9, 5/16/94) 11ttn://www2.ci.nlvmoiath.mn./nl/cnn/rinr.S/F{1T.T FR/rT'f'V r;r r r; rnnu,ir or» -,,/)A1)fit) ti MAP PROP ID # SELLER BUYER SALE SALE GROSS ACRE DATE PRICE ACRES 1 E 04-22-0001 Seaburg Lundgren Bros. 12/3/2004 3,000,000 20.47 146,556 2 04-23-0001 Scherber Lundgren Bros. 5/4/2005 5,014,162 32.25 155,478 Part o#) 3 04-31-0007 Lavedure Plymouth 12/29/2005 1,700,000 4.98 341,365 Development 4 04-34-0001 Hampton Hills Hampton Hills 12/31/2004 9,000,000 146.42 61,467 04-43-0003 Development 09-11-0001 09-21-0001 5 04-43-0010 Leeper Hampton Hills 1/6/2006 300,840 5.20 57,854 Investment 6 04-43-0011 Leeper Hampton Hills 1/4/2005 1,446,600 12.05 120,050 Development 7 06-13-0005 Lundgren Bros. Scherber Investment 5/4/2005 2,864,048 51.27 55,862 I 8 06-22-0003 Smith Estate MCM Rand 12/8/2004 2,600,000 27.25 95,413 9 07-22-0003 Bendickson Charles Cudd 7/15/2005 1,637,437 21.54 76,018 10 07-22-0003 Charles Cudd Scherber Investment 7/15/2005 2,478, 00 21.54 115,051 11 04-31-0008 Brown Plymouth 10/14/05 1,150,000 5.00 230,000 Development DATE: March 24, 2006 TO: Eric Blank, Park and Recreation Director FROM: Mike Kohn, Financial Analyst SUBJECT: Referendum Dates and Considerations The City could place an item on the ballot authorizing issuance of general obligation debt at either the November, 2006 or November, 2007 general elections. The date for notification of the County for intent to place an item on the ballot is September 15`x' of each year. The November 2006 general election ballot will include elections for federal, state and local offices. It is expected that turnout will be about 80% or about 40,000 voters. The 2007 general election is for school district seats. It is expected that turnout will vary between 5% and 30%, by school district, depending on whether each school district places a bond levy referendum on the ballot. This would mean that between 2,500 and 15,000 voters will likely be going to the polls in November of 2007. Staff has been informed that Robbinsdale and Osseo do plan on placing referendum questions on the ballot in 2007. Wayzata and Hopkins may still choose to do so as well. This means that voter turnout will likely be toward the top end of the range. The following are considerations relating to election date: November 2006 The November 2006 referendum date is only 7 months away. This limits the inflationary increase in the price of land compared to waiting 19 months. The November 2006 referendum date is only 7 months away. This limits the amount of preparation time available for education of voters on the issue. The November 2006 ballot will include federal, state, and local elections as well as a constitutional amendment question. Any City referendum question could get lost amongst the other items on the ballot. The November 2006 referendum date would ensure the largest voter turnout 'Culd broadest community input. November 2007 The November 2007 referendum date is 19 months away. This may result in significantly greater land acquisition cost due to inflation. The November 2007 referendum date is 19 months away. This would allow more preparation time for education of voters on the issue. The November 2007 ballot will have fewer offices and other questions. A City bond referendum will be less likely to be lost amongst the other items on the ballot. The November 2007 referendum would likely experience lower voter turnout. Voter makeup may also be targeted to those persons most interested in school elections. The City would experience additional costs for sharing the schools ballot. The cost could vary significantly depending on whether the City would need to take over or share in the costs of the election. DATE: March 16, 2006 TO: Laurie Ahrens FROM: Eric J. Blank, Director, Parks and Recreations SUBJECT: Study Session — Land Acquisition Northwest Plymouth Attached for Council review is some of the technical information we'll be presenting at the Tuesday night Special Study session regarding land acquisition in northwest Plymouth. Information in the packet relates to what we currently own and operate as our playfield system and why we see the need for future expansion. Because of our limited time on Tuesday night, we will need to move very quickly through this data to allow the Council time to ask questions and give direction to staff on how to proceed. Because we are just in the beginning process of updating the comprehensive plan, there is some technical data that we won't be able to review until the land use guiding has been determined by the City Council. EB/np COMMUNITY PLAYFIELDS Bass Lake Elm Creek La Compte Green Oakwood Parkers Lake Plymouth Plymouth Creek Ridgemount b Zachary ACTIVE RECREATION: 173.4 acres ** '711 AC: iL-r- PASSIVE RECREATION: 9 acres TOTAL AREA: 152.4 acres Refer to Plymouth Creek City Park, page 8-A-5 Acreage of Plymouth Creek Playfield included in Plymouth Creek City Park 8-A-7 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMMUNITY FLAYFIELO Size and Function EXHIBIT I Service area: 1 community (driving neighborhood) approximately 1 to 1.5 mile radius) Spatial standard: 2.5 developed ac./1,000 population (ultimate) Size: minimum 20 developed acres; maximum 65 developed acres Type of usP: intensive, active, formal, programmed Clientele: .-primary emphasis. on ages 8-50 Functional characteristics: almost entirely recreation 7 : X ? A C COMMUNITY PLAYFIELD ACQUISITION DATA Bass Lake 19 1983 $130,000 $6,842 Park Dedication Elm Creek 37 1994 1,216,000 32,864 Park Dedication La Compte 7 1960-1965 NA NA NA Oakwood 19 1980 $0 $0 Lease Parkers Lake 26 1983 $0 $0 Park Dedication Plymouth 19 1980 0 0 Lease Plymouth Creek 18 1975-1980 NA NA State & Federal Grants w/Local match Ridgemount 15 1980 0 0 Lease Zachary 30 1980 277,004 9,100 Park Dedication Greenwood 20 2000 $0 $0 Lease YEAR 2005 YOUTH ASS{3CTAT)ONS 1UMBER OF PARTICIPANTS Baseball — Surmner & Fall 2,469 Football 1,157 Lacrosse — Spring & Summer 413 Rugby 149 Soccer — Summer & Fall 5,474 Softball — Suinmer & Fall 558 Ultimate Frisbee 46 TOTALS 10,266 YEAR 2004 YOUTH ASSOCIATIONSNUMBEROF PARTYCTPANTS Baseball — Summer & Fall 2,300 Football 1,132 Lacrosse — Spring & Summer 373 Rugby 111 Soccer — Summer & Fail 5,863 Softball — Summer & Fall 502 Ultimate Frisbee 0 TOTALS1 10,281 YEAR 2003 YOUTH ASSOCIATIONS NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS Baseball — Sumner & Fall 1,986 Football 1,170 Lacrosse — Spring & Sumner 141 Rugby 73 Soccer — S ummer & Fall 5,205 Softball — Summer & Fall 448 UItimate Frisbee 0 TOTALS1 9,023 YEAR 2000 Baseball — Summer & Fall 1,621 Football 1,195 Lacrosse — Spring & Summer 0 Rugby 77 Soccer — Summer & Fall 4,772 Softball — Summer & Fall 400 Ultimate Frisbee 0 TOTALS1 8,055 Mouth Associations - Number of Participants 2005 nY- R 2004 2003 r 2000 0 23000 43000 60000 89000 109000 129000 GAMES PER FIELD Year All City & School District Fields City Field Only 1995 5,1 1 1 4,801 2005 7,057 5,734 School Distribution K-12 Population District 281 & District 284 Year Population 1995 21,980 1998 22,560 2001 22,9.45 2004 23,206 2006 22,945 2009 22,519 Decision Resources, Ltd. City of Plymouth 3128 Dean Court Park Bond Study Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416 REVISED 2.0 JUNE 2006 Hello, I'm of Decision Resources, Ltd., a polling firm located in Minneapolis. We've been retained by the City of Plymouth to speak with a random sample of residents about issues facing the city. This survey is being taken because your city representatives and staff are interested in your opinions and suggestions. I want to assure you that all individual responses will be held strictly confidential; only summaries of the entire sample will be reported. (DO NOT PAUSE) 1. Approximately how many years have you lived in City of Plymouth? Turning to parks and recreation.... LESS THAN TWO YEARS ..... I TWO TO FIVE YEARS ....... 2 SIX TO TEN YEARS ........ 3 11 TO 20 YEARS .......... 4 21 TO 30 YEARS .......... 5 OVER THIRTY YEARS ....... 6 DON'T KNOW/REFUSED ...... 7 I would like to read you a list of parks and recreation facilities in the City of Plymouth. First, please tell me if you or members of your household use that facility. Then for each one used, please rate that facility as excellent, good, only fair, or poor. NOT VIS VIS VIS VIS DK/ VIS EXC GOO FAI POO REF 2. Small neighborhood parks? 1 2 3 4 5 6 3. Large community parks? 1 2 3 4 5 6 4. Community ballfields? 1 2 3 4 5 6 5. Trails? 1 2 3 4 5 6 As you may know, the northwest corner of the city is the last portion of Plymouth to be developed. As the area is developed the City will need to provide parks and recreation facilities for new residents. In order to provide these facilities, the City of Plymouth is considering a park referendum to fund acquisition of open space for the city's Greenway corridor. The Greenway would consist of a 2.5 mile corridor that preserves Plymouth's natural areas, trees and wetlands. The Greenway corridor will include a public trail that extends between Cheshire Lane on the east and Peony Lane on the west. It would also include a trail around the wetland complex east of Wayzata High School. 6. Do you support or oppose the pur- STRONGLY SUPPORT ........ 1 chase of open spaces and natural SUPPORT.................2 areas to complete the City's OPPOSE..................3 Greenway? WAIT FOR RESPONSE) Do STRONGLY OPPOSE ......... 4 you feel strongly that way? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED ...... 5 7. How much would you be willing to see your property taxes increase in order to fund the acquisition of open space and natural areas? Would you be willing to pay $ per month? (CHOOSE RANDOM START- ING POINT; MOVE UP OR DOWN DEPEND- ING ON ANSWER) How about $ per month? (REPEAT PROCESS) NOTHING.................0 1.00 ...................1 2.00 ...................2 3.00 ...................3 4.00 ...................4 5.00 ...................5 6.00 ...................6 7.00 . ...................7 8.00 ...................8 DON'T KNOW/REFUSED ...... 9 The City would also need funds to purchase land and develop parks and commu.nty ballfields as part of the referendum proposal. The new facilities would include additional athletic fields for baseball, soccer, lacrosse and other activities. 8. Do you support or oppose the land STRONGLY SUPPORT ........ 1 purchase and development of parks SUPPORT.................2 and community ballfields? (WAIT OPPOSE..................3 FOR RESPONSE) Do you feel STRONGLY OPPOSE ......... 4 strongly that way? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED ...... 5 9. How much would you be willing to see your property taxes increase in order to fund the land purchase and development of parks and com- munity ballfields? Would you be willing to pay $ per month? CHOOSE RANDOM STARTING POINT; MOVE UP OR DOWN DEPENDING ON ANSWER) How about $ per month? REPEAT PROCESS) NOTHING.................0 1.00 ...................1 2.00 ...................2 3.00 ...................3 4.00 ...................4 5.00 ...................5 6.00 ...................6 7.00 ...................7 8.00 ...................8 DON'T KNOW/REFUSED ...... 9 The City of Plymouth is considering a $7 million bond referendum to fund both the acquisition of open spaces and natural areas to complete the city's greenway, as well as purchase land and develop parks and community ballfields. It the referendum were successful, the owner of a $350,000 home would see a property tax increase of $2.25 per month, or $27.00 per year. And, the owner of a $500,000 home would have a tax increase of $3.15 per month or $37.90 per year. 10. If the election were held today, STRONGLY SUPPORT ........ 1 would you support or oppose this SUPPORT.................2 referendum proposal? WAIT FOR OPPOSE..................3 RESPONSE) Do you feel strongly STRONGLY OPPOSE ......... 4 that way? average, somewhat low, or very DON'T KNOW/REFUSED ...... 5 IF A RESPONSE IS GIVEN, ASK: 11. Why do you feel that way? 12. In comparison with neighboring VERY HIGH...............1 areas, do you consider total pro-- SOMEWHAT HIGH ........... 2 perty taxes in your community to ABOUT AVERAGE ........... 3 be very high, somewhat high, about SOMEWHAT LOW ............ 4 average, somewhat low, or very VERY LOW................5 low? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED ...... 6 Changing topics.... 13. Do you currently use the Internet NO......................1 at home? (IF "YES," ASK:) How do YES/DIAL-UP AT 28K......2 you connect to the internet -- on YES/DIAL-UP AT 56K......3 a dial-up modem at 28K, on a dial- YES/DSL.................I up modem at 56K, DSL, Comcast High YES/COMCAST HIGH SPEED..5 Speed Internet, or some other way? YES/OTHER...............6 IF "OTHER,- ASK) How? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED...... 7 Now just a few more questions for demographic purposes.... 14. How interested are you in the up- coming November election - ex- tremely interested; very interest- ed, interested, not very interest- ed, or not at.all interested? EXTREMELY INTERESTED .... 1 VERY INTERESTED ......... 2 INTERESTED..............3 NOT VERY INTERESTED ..... 4 NOT AT ALL INTERESTED ... 5 DON'T KNOW/REFUSED ...... 6 15. What is your likelihood of voting ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN ...... 1 this November - absolutely certain,VERY LIKELY.............2 very likely, about half and half, ABOUT HALF AND HALF ..... 3 not too likely, or definitely will NOT TOO LIKELY .......... 4 not vote? DEFINITELY WILL NOT ..... 5 DON'T KNOW/REFUSED ...... 6 From time to time, cities and school districts ask voters to approve referendum proposals... 16. Thinking about past city and school district referendum elec- tions, would you say you always vote, often vote, sometimes vote, rarely vote or never vote? ALWAYS VOTE.............1 OFTEN VOTE..............2 SOMETIMES VOTE ........... 3 RARELY VOTE.............4 NEVER VOTE..............5 DON'T KNOW/REFUSED...... 6 Could you please tell me how many people in each of the following age groups live in your household. Let's start oldest to youngest, and be sure to include yourself.... 17. First, persons 65 or over? NONE....................0 ONE.....................1 TWO OR MORE.............2 REFUSED.................3 18. Adults under 65? 19. School -aged or pre-school children? NONE....................0 ONE.....................1 TWO.....................2 THREE OR MORE ........... 3 REFUSED.................4 NONE....................0 ONE.....................1 TWO.....................2 THREE OR MORE ........... 3 REFUSED.................4 20. Do you own or rent your present RENT....................1 residence? (IF "OWN," ASK:) Which OWN/UNDER $250,000......2 of the following categories con- OWN/$250,000-$350,000...3 tains the approximate value of OWN/$350,001-$450,000...4 your residential property -- under OWN/$450,001-$550,000...5 250,000, $250,000-$350,000, OWN/OVER $550,000.......6 350,001-$450,000, $450,001- DON'T KNOW..............7 550,000 or over $550,000? REFUSED.................8 21. what is yourage, please? 18-24 ...................1 25-34 ...................2 35-44 ...................3 45-54. .................. 4 55-64 ...................5 65 AND OVER.............6 REFUSED.................7 Thank you very much for your time. Good-bye. 22. Gender. (DO NOT ASK) 23. REGION OF CITY LIST: PHONER: DATE: PHONE #: MALE....................1 FEMALE..................2 Article from Nov./Dec. 2006 Plymouth News Open space, greenway, parks question to be on ballot When Plymouth voters cast their ballots on Nov. 7, they will see a ballot question asking them to decide whether the City should issue $9 million in general obligation bonds to buy land for open space preservation and parks. If a majority of people vote yes, it will authorize the City to issue bonds to purchase land for future open space, a community playfield, the Northwest Greenway and parks. A no vote is a vote against the bond issue. Plymouth has a tradition of acquiring land and setting it aside before development occurs. This has allowed the City to build an extensive park and trail system to serve the developed areas of Plymouth. In citizen surveys, residents cite Plymouth's parks and trails as one of the community assets they value most. The City is asking for authorization to issue bonds now because Northwest Plymouth, the last largely rural area of the city, is at a pivotal point as land buyers and sellers anticipate future development. A regional planning agency, the Metropolitan Council, has extended sanitary sewer to the area, making it feasible for significant development to occur in the area. In addition, the City recently adopted a preliminary land use plan for Northwest Plymouth as part of the Comprehensive Plan update. The Metropolitan Council mandates that cities periodically review and, if necessary, update their plans. As undeveloped land becomes increasingly scarce, land prices will continue to increase. By asking voters to consider a bond issue now, the City will maximize the amount of land it can purchase for the greenway, open space, community playfield and parks. Northwest Greenway In 2000, the City Council approved a long-range plan for Northwest Plymouth that included the concept of the Northwest Greenway. The idea is to acquire trees and open space in the corridor and maintain it as public land As planned, the Northwest Greenway is a corridor of land that is about 2 1/2 miles long, and varies in width from 50' to 300'. The land, which is currently privately owned by multiple owners, runs between the large, high quality wetland complex near Wayzata High School on the west to the Lake Camelot area on the east where it will connect to the Three Rivers Regional Trail Corridor. This greenway will preserve trees and open space, enhance wildlife corridors and provide long distance recreational opportunities for people throughout Plymouth as trails are developed and linked to regional trails. Community Playfield If approved, the City will use a portion of the funds from the bond issue to buy land for the City's l Oth community playfield. Another playfield will be needed in the future to meet increased demand for youth athletics facilities as Northwest Plymouth develops. Land Acquisition & Timing If voters approve the bond issue, it will improve the City's ability to acquire substantial tracks of land for the Northwest Greenway, community playfield and parks as appropriate sites become available from willing sellers. Effect on Property Taxes The chart below explains how much more would be collected from Plymouth property owners if voters approve the ballot question. The amounts below reflect the maximum annual and monthly cost to homeowners for the life of 15 year bonds. The amounts below also assume that the City will issue the entire $9 million in bonds at one time. However, it is likely the City will make two separate bond issues rather than one so that the bond issues coincide with land availability. If the City makes two separate bond issues, it will have the effect of phasing in the costs outlined below. As the City continues to grow, the cost will be spread among a larger number of taxpayers than the calculations below reflect. Bond Issue Effect on Residential Homestead Propert Taxable Market Value Annual Increase for Bond Issue Monthly Increase for Bond Issue 150,000 16 1.33 200,000 21 1.75 250,000 26 2.17 300,000 31 2.58 350,000 36 3.00 400,000 42 3.50 500,000 52 4.33 To learn more about the ballot question, please refer to the publication that was mailed to all homes in early October or visit the City web site. Guest Column for the Plymouth Sun -Sailor City to have open space, greenway question on November ballot By Eric Blank Plymouth Parks and Recreation Director When Plymouth voters cast their ballots on Nov. 7, they should be sure to turn over their ballot so they can vote on the City of Plymouth's ballot question on open space, parks and greenways. (The question will be on the same side of the ballot as judicial offices.) The question will ask voters whether the City should issue $9 million in general obligation bonds to buy land for open space preservation and parks. If a majority of people vote yes, it will authorize the City to issue bonds to purchase land for future open space, a community playfield, the Northwest Greenway and parks. A no vote is a vote against the bond issue. Plymouth has a tradition of acquiring land and setting it aside before development occurs. This has allowed the City to build an extensive park and trail system to serve the developed areas of Plymouth. The City is asking for authorization to issue bonds now because Northwest Plymouth, the last largely rural area of the city, is at a pivotal point as land buyers and sellers anticipate future development. As land becomes increasingly scarce, prices will increase. If voters approve the bond issue, the City will be able to buy land as it becomes available from willing sellers, maximizing the amount of land the City can purchase at today's cost. Greenway: The Northwest Greenway Plan adopted in 2000 calls for the City to acquire trees and open space in a 2 %2 mile long corridor that runs from the wetland complex near Wayzata High School on the west to Lake Camelot on the east. The Greenway's width would vary from 50' to 300'. The greenway will preserve trees and open space, enhance wildlife corridors and provide long distance recreational opportunities for residents as trails are developed and linked to regional trails. Playfield: The City would also use a portion of the funds from the bond issue to buy land for the City's I Och community playfield. This playfield will be needed in the future to meet increased demand for youth athletics facilities as Northwest Plymouth develops. Open Space: The City would also use funds to purchase environmentally significant pieces of land as they become available from willing sellers. The Cost: The cost to a residential homeowner for a 15 -year bond issue is roughly $1 a month for 15 years for each $100,000 of taxable market value of his/her home. For example, the owner of a $250,000 home would pay $26 a year or $2.17 a month in increased property taxes. The owner of a $400,000 home would pay $42 a year or $3.50 a month. To learn more,l encourage Plymouth voters to read the publication which the City mailed in early October, read the City newsletter that was mailed the week of Oct. 23 or visit the City web site at www.ci.plymouth.mn.us. CITY OF PLYMOUTH OPEN SPACE &PARKS k REFERENDUM Open space and parks question will be on November 7 ballot Plymouth voters will decide whether to issue 9 million in bonds for open space, parks and greenways Ballot Question Overview Voters will decide on Nov 7 whether the City of Plyrnouth should issue up to $9 million in general obligation bonds to buy land and preserve it for a future greenway, open space and playfield. The City of Plymouth has already acquired land around lake Camelot (pictured). The ballot question will read: Shall the City Council of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota be authorized to issue its general obligation bonds in an amount not to exceed $9,000,000 foi• the purpose of acquia ng laud for open space, g7•eenu ays and pffrks? A yes vote authorizes the City to issue bonds to purchase land for future open space, a conununity playfield, parks and the Northwest Greenway. A no vote is a vote against the bond issue. Public Information Open Houses The City will host two open houses at City Hall, 3400 Plymouth. Blvd., so residents can learn more. Open houses are set for: Tues., Oct, 17, 4 — 6 p.m. Wed., Oct. 25, 6:30 — 8:30 p.m. continued page Published by the City of Plymouth • www. ci.plymouth.mn.us • page 1 Why Now? Historically, the City of Plymouth has acquired land and set it aside before development occurs. This has permitted the City to develop a well-planned and extensive park and trail system to serve people and neighborhoods throughout Plymouth. In citizen surveys, residents cite Plymouth's parks and trails as one of the community assets they value most. In a 2006 survey, 72% of Plymouth residents said that they supported the City acquiring more open space. The telephone survey has a margin of error of plus or minus 5 percent. Maximizing Investment. Northwest Plymouth is at a pivotal point as land buyers and sellers anticipate future development. The Metropolitan Council, a regional planning agency, has extended sanitary sewer service to Northwest playfield is yet to be determined. Plymouth. This makes significant development possible in this largely rural area when it previously was not. In addition, the City Council recently adopted a preliminary land use plan for Northwest Plymouth as part of the Comprehensive Plan update, a process mandated by the Metropolitan Council. The City is placing this question on the ballot now in anticipation of future development that will occur in light of these changes. As undeveloped land becomes increasingly scarce, land prices will continue to increase. By purchasing land sooner rather than later, the City will maximize the investment of taxpayer dollars. Looking to the Future. Plymouth residents have a tradition of planning for Published by the City of Plymouth • www.ci.plymouth.mn.us • page 2 and investing in greenways, parks and open space. By putting this question to the voters now, the City is asking voters to consider preserving land for future generations before it is developed or becomes too costly.. Serving the Entire Community. The City is asking voters to vote on this issue now to ensure that the Iast undeveloped area of Plymouth includes parks, greenways and open space similar to the rest of the city. In addition, the Northwest Greenway will be a unique recreational feature drawing people from throughout Plymouth. Like our current community playfields, the planned 10th playfield will serve recreation enthusiasts from throughout Plymouth. The site for a future tenth a corridor for wildlife. What is the Northwest Greenway? As planned, the Northwest Greenway is a corridor of land that is about 2 W miles long, and varies in width from 50' to 300'. The land, which is currently privately owned by multiple owners, runs between the large, high quality wetland complex near Wayzata High School on the west to the Lake Camelot area on the east where it will connect to the. Three Rivers Regional Trail Corridor. (See aerial photo at left). In 2000, the City Council approved a long- range plan for Northwest Plymouth that included the concept of the Northwest Greenway. The idea is to acquire trees and open space in the corridor and maintain it as public land. This will allow the corridor to be preserved as open space even as Northwest Plymouth develops. Over time, the City will construct recreational trails along the Northwest Greenway: The Northwest Greenway, which includes environmentally -significant sites, will: Preserve trees and wetlands; Enhance wildlife corridors and connections; Link City -owned parks, trails, open spaces, schools and other public amenities; and Provide long-distance recreational opportunities as trails are developed and linked to other City and regional trails. Effect on Property Taxes The chart below explains how much more would be collected from Plymouth property owners if voters approve the ballot question. Bond Issue Effect on Residential Homestead Property Taxable Market Value Annual Increase for Bond Issue Monthly Cost 150,000 16 1.33 200,000 21 1.75 250,000 26 2.17 300,000 31 2.58 350,000 36 3.00 400,000 42 3.50 500,000 1$52 4.33 Plymouth has a history of acquiring and preserving park land such as Three Ponds Park (pictured). City Finances The City of Plymouth has achieved the highest bond rating possible from Moody's Investor Services. Nationally, thousands of jurisdictions are rated, but only about 75 have achieved the Aaa bond rating. In Minnesota, 6 cities have earned the top rating. Plymouth's Aaa bond rating permits the City to borrow money at the lowest rates to finance major capital projects and land acquisition. The City of Plymouth maintains low debt per capita. Plymouth currently carries a property tax -supported debt of $184 per capita. The average amount of debt per capita among Plymouth's peer communities of Brooklyn Park, Eagan, Eden Prairie, Lakeville, Maple Grove and Minnetonka is $429. Published by the City of Plymouth • www.ci.plymouth.mn.us • page 3 Community Playfield If approved, the City will use a portion of the funds from the bond issue to buy land for the City's 10th community playfield. It will be needed to meet future recreation needs as Plymouth continues to grow. The community playfield will be developed in the future as determined by community needs. Land Acquisition & Timing The City has worked over the years to acquire land as it has been available. If voters approve the bond issue, it will improve the City's ability to acquire substantial tracks of land for the Northwest Greenway, community playfield and parks as appropriate sites become available from willing sellers. Significant pieces of open space — those with high quality wetlands and tree cover — will be acquired as feasible for preservation. accommodate multiple sports. rlt.b) City of Plymouth Adding Quality to Life 3400 Plymouth Blvd. Plymouth, MN 55447-1482 the bond referendum would allow the City to acquire and preserve undeveloped land in Northwest Plymouth as the area develops. Poll Locations Polls will be open for the General Election on Tues., Nov. 7, 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. If you need to find out n=here to vote, visit the City web site, xvww.ci.pl«nouth.mn.us, or call 763-509-5000. The Plymouth News, which will be mailed prior to the election, will include poll locations. OPEN SPACE & PARKS REFERENDUM Public Information Open Houses Tues., Oct. 17, 4 — 6 p.m. Wed., Oct. 25, 6:30 — 8:30 p.m. 763-509-5000 a www.ci.plymouth.mn.us PRSRT STD US POSTAGE PAID Minneapolis, Minn.. Permit No. 1884 ECRVVSS** Postal Customer Agenda Number: TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager,/ SUBJECT: Set Future Study Sessions DATE: March 8, 2007, for Council study session of March 13, 2007 1. ACTION REQUESTED: Review the pending study session topics list and set study sessions or amend the topics list if desired. 2. BACKGROUND: Attached is the list of pending study session topics, as well as calendars to assist in scheduling. Pending Study Session Topics at least 3 Council members have approved the following study items on the list) Discuss Metro Transit Planning (GB, BS, SH) Street sweeping — purpose and seivice levels (Council) Special Assessment Policy (Council) Consider organized garbage collection (BS, JW, TB) Other requests for study session topics: Possible ordinance on feeding of wildlife (Black) Discuss sign enforcement (Slavik) OFFICIAL CITY MEETINGS March 2007 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Apr 2007 1 2 3 Feb 2007 S M T W T F S S M T W T F S 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 18 I9 20 21 22 23 24 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 25 26 27 28 29 30 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 6;30 PM YOUTH ADVISORY COUNCIL, Parkers Lake 6:PM SPECIAL COUNCILMEETING: LISTENING SESSION ON HOLLYDALE GOLF COURSE, Councl Chambers 7:011 PM PLANNING COMMISSION, Counca Chambers 4:00 PM PLYMOUTH FIRERECOGNlTION EVENT, Plymouth Creek Center 11 12 13 14 IS 16 17 DAYLIGHT SAVINGS COMMENCES- Set Clocks ahead one hour 6:C0 PM CITY COUNCEL STUDY SESSION - PARK REFERENDUM ANO USEOFFUNDS, Medicine Lake Conference Room 7:00 PM REGULAR COUNCIL MELTING, Council Chambers 7:00 PM ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITYCOMMITTEE EOCj, Council Chambers 8:00 PM BOARD & COMMISSION RECOGNITION EVENT Plymouth Creek Center 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 0:00 PM CITY COUNCILSTUDY SESSION ON LANG USE PLAN, Council Chambers 7:OC PM PLANNING COMMISSION, Council Chambers 7:00 PM HOUSING 8 REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (HRA), Medicine Lake Room A 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 5 OC PM ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY FAIR, Pilgrim Elemenlary 7.00 PM PLYMOUTH ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON TRANSIT(PACT), Medicine Lake Room A 7;00 PM REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING, Council Chambers modified on 3/8/2007 OFFICIAL CITY MEETINGS 1__-_,l nn7I/IY-Il f1r1 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 PASSOVER BEGINS AT SUNSET 7 O PM PLANNING COMMISSIDN. Council Chambers GOOD FRIDAY 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 EASTER SUNDAY 5,30 PM BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, Cauncd Chambers TOO PM Chader Commission Mlg Medicine Lk Rm 7:00 PM PARK & REG ADVISORY COMMEs510N (PRAC), Councl Chambers PRIMAVERA CLYMOUTH ARTSOUNCILSHOW, COUNCIL SHOW, PlyrnouN Greek Cealer PRIMAVERA PLYMOUTH FINE ARTS COUNCIL SHOW Plymoulh Creek Cenler 7A0 PM REGULAR I7;q0GOUNCILMEETING, Councl Chambers PM ENVIRONMENTAL pUALITYCOMMrFrFE EOC), Covncll Chambers 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 6:30 PM YOUTH ADVISORY COUNCIL, Parkers Lake PRIMAVERAPLYMOUTHFINE ARTS COUNCIL S}ioW, Plymouth Creek . Genter PRIMAVERA PLYMOUTH FINE ARTS COUNCIL SHOW, Plymuuth Creek Center 7:On PM PLANNING COMMISSION, Council Chambers 7:00 PM HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT ALL DRILY (HRA). Medicine Lake Room A 6 LID PM YARD AND GARDEN EVENT, Plymouth Creek Center I1 AM YARD AND GARDEN EVFNT, Plymuuih Creek Center 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 5.3u PMOOARPofEOUALIZATIDN RECONVENED). cevrce Chsmb.rs 700 PM REGUTAR COUNCIL MEETING, Councl Chambers 7:00PMPLYMOUTHADVISORY COMMITTEE ON TRANSIT (PACT). Medicine Lake Roam A 29 30 May 2007Mar2007 II30. y 12vv h an Enplvyea Crmcheon S 114 T W T F S S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5123 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 6 7 8 4 10 11 12 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 27 28 29 30 31 modified on 3/8/2007 OFFICIAL CITY MEETINGS Mav 2007 Sunday I Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday 1 2 7:00 PM PLANNING COMMISSION, CouncJ Chambers 3 7:00 PM HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION, Parkers Lake Room 4 5 Apr 2007 S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 6 7 8 7:00 PM REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING, Council Chambers 9 7:00 PM ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE EOc], council Chamhem 10 7.00 PM PARK 8 RFC ADVISORY COMMISSION (PRAC), Council Chambers 11 12 10:30 AM PLYMOUTH HISTORY FEST, Parkers Lake Park 13 14 15 16 7.00PMPLANNING COMMSSION,Council Chambers 17 7:00 PM HOUSINGS REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY(HRA, Medicine Lake Room A 18 19 20 2.1 5:30 PM YOUTH AOVISORYCOUNCIL. Parkers Lake Room 22 I 7:00 PM REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING, Council Chambers 23 7:u0 PM PLYMOUTH ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON TRANSIT (PACT). Metliclne Lake Room A 24 25 26 27 28 MEMORIAL DAY Observed) - City Offices Ciosed 29 30 31 Jun 2007 S M T W T F 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 IS 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 modified on 3/812007 OFFICIAL CITY MEETINGS I 1V -1111 '7 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Till 2007 S M T W T F S 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I1 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 2 MHy 2007 S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 3 4 5 6 7:00 PM PLANNING COMMISSION, Council Chambers 7 8 9 10 11 6:30PMYOUTH ADVISORYCOUNCfL, Parkers Lake Room 12 7:00 PM REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING, Counu Chambers 13 7:00 PM ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE EQC), Council Chambers 14 7:00 PM PARK ® ADVISORY COMMISSION (PRAC), Council Chambers 15 16 Flag Day 17 18 19 20 7:0M PM PLANNING GOMMISSION,Council Chambers 21 7:00PMHOUSINGa REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY(HRA), Medicine Lake Room A 22 23 24 25 6:30 PM YOUTH AAVISCRY COUNCIL, Parkers Lake Room 26 TGG PM REGULAR COUNCIL MEETfNG, Coundl Chambers 27 7:00 PM PLYMOUTH ADVISORY COMMITTEEON TRANSIT {PACT} , Medicine Lake Room A 28 29 i 30 modified on 302007 March 9, 2007 City Council City of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, MN 55447-1448 Re: City Council Study Session -- Park Referendum and Use of Funds March 13, 2007 at 6:00 p.m., Medicine Lake Conference Room Madam Mayor and Council Members: We are submitting this letter and attached information for your consideration during the above - referenced study session. We would like the opportunity to participate directly in the meeting, but are unsure if the format will allow for it. In any case, we would like to state our understanding of the ballot question and the use of the bonded Rinds, and supply you with City -originated information that leads to our understanding. We are asking that the results of this study session reaffirm the citywide use of the voter -approved fiinds in the manner in which they were approved. In the months leading up to the November 2006 election, the concept of issuing bonds to find a more aggressive parks, open space and playfields agenda was discussed, justified and approved through Special Council Study Sessions and the supporting staff reports and memoranda. Throughout this evolution, the Northwest Greenway was clearly the centerpiece of the movement. But depending on which report or minutes you read and which date they originated, the picture becomes unclear as to whether the northwest area was intended as the sole recipient of the proposed funds, or simply one of the many recipients. Thus, the request for this study session seems, appropriate. However, the primary consideration should be the information presented to the public and the voters rather than communications from staff to Council. From the public's perspective, there is no mistaking the intent. Enclosed are copies of several documents directed specifically to the residents of Plymouth. The source of each can be directly attributed to the City. And in none of these can it be in any way construed that the Northwest Greenway, or even the northwest area of Plymouth, will be the sole recipient of these finds. City survey of 400 residents, June 2006 (enclosed): The official telephone survey script, prefaces two questions (6 and 7) with specific mention of the "City's Greenway corridor", but then follows it with "The City also needs funds to purchase land and develop parks as part of the referendum proposal" and goes on to state the sports it is intended to support. The favorable results of this very poll, in which finds were not portrayed as solely for the Northwest Greenway, is what encouraged the City to continue to pursue the funds. A letter to the editor of the Sun Sailor from Ellie Singer, member of the Plymouth Park and Recreation Advisory Committee on October 25, 2006 (enclosed), describes the use of bond funds for open space preservation, playfield construction and greenways, but nowhere mentions the Northwest Greenway. Plymouth News, November/December 2006 edition (enclosed): Both in the headline and in the second paragraph of the article, the Northwest Greenway is listed among the uses of the bond funds. There is no way to read exclusivity in the way this article is punctuated. A letter to the editor of the Sun Sailor (enclosed) from Jim Davis, then member of the Plymouth Park and Recreation Advisory Committee (and current member of the Plymouth Planning Commission) on November 1, 2006 cites the increasing pressure for parks in the City and urges voters to "Vote Yes for Parks on Nov. 7." Again, there is no mention of the Northwest Greenway. A guest column in the Sun Sailor by Eric Blank, Plymouth Parks and Recreation Director, on November 1, 2006 (enclosed) discussed the referendum in detail. In the second paragraph, he lists the uses of the bond funds to include "future open space, a community playfield, the Northwest Greenway and parks." Lastly, the ballot itself (enclosed), with language approved by the City Council at the August 22, 2006 Council Meeting, makes no mention of directing the funds to any specific place. General terms such as "open space, greenways and parks" are used. The language contained in the references above makes sense for garnering the City-wide support needed for passage of the bond funds. If the funds were to be dedicated only for the Northwest Greenway, then the number of yes votes from other areas of the City is surely reduced. Would it have passed? No one can know for sure. But as the voter approval was a result of the ballot language used and the materials presented, the City is obligated to adhere to that language and materials. Neighborhood reactions to recently -proposed changes to Hollydale Golf Course and the Westside Church Parcel have made it clear that when an open space in Plymouth becomes the target of development, the Council will be asked to utilize the bonded funds to acquire the land and keep it as open space. The fact that the most recent requests for use of those funds beyond the Northwest Greenway have been in response to land use or zoning change applications should not dilute these, nor any future, requests. Absent a threat to change the current use of the land, the adjacent residents have no motive to pursue City use of the bonded funds. An officially -proposed change is the only practical catalyst for such a request from residents. It will be tempting for the City Council to put an end to this by restricting fund usage to specific parcel types. It may seem reasonable to restrict their use to the list of potential park projects presented at the March 21, 2006 Special Session, the start of the process that resulted in the ballot question and the resultant funds. Or, it may seem reasonable to restrict the Rinds to be used on only parcels guided for open space, parks or trails by the Comprehensive Plan. But those are the easy routes, and neither adheres to the ballot question the citywide residents of Plymouth were presented in the paper, our mailboxes, over the phone or at the polls. The purpose of your study session is to clarify the use of the park referendum funds. Your discussion will likely delve into things like "intent", "basis of funding amounts" and "guided use", along with setting a precedent for fielding the same question over and over again for every proposed development that will take away open space. Each person involved will have their interpretation of what the funds were for, and the appeal of never again having to make a difficult decision on a neighborhood request for use of the funds will be strong. But in the end, the use of the fiords has always been clear: for parks, open space and trails in the entire City of Plymouth. Nothing more than that, and certainly nothing less. If the Comprehensive Plan was to be the determinant, then that should have been on the ballot. If the uses on a specific list developed prior to the election were to be the exclusive recipient, then that list should have been made public and been included on the ballot. Since neither of those documents were part of the approval, they simply cannot be inserted after the fact as the method of spending the money. We ask that you hold true to the ballot question you presented to voters and that the voters approved, despite the fact that you will lay the groundwork for many future requests to use those funds across the City. The City Council must evaluate each request equally, regardless of the cause of the request or the location of the land. The Comprehensive Plan should be the backdrop to begin site-specific discussion of each request, not the only criterion to reach a verdict. In your study session, please confirm the open accessibility of the bonded funds to all areas of the City; your ability to administer the funds in accordance with the way in which they were approved depends on it. Sincerely, Jupe and Debbie Hale 3210 Fountain Lane Plymouth, MN 55447 763) 208-2437 Enclosures Decision Resources, Ltd. 3128 Dean Court Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416 City of Plymouth Park Bond Study FINAL JUNE 2006 Hello, I'm of Decision Resources, Ltd., a polling firm located in Minneapolis. We've been retained by the City of Plymouth to speak with a random sample of residents about issues facing the city. This survey is being taken because your city representatives and staff are interested in your opinions and suggestions. I want to assure you that all individual responses will be held strictly confidential; only summaries of the entire sample will be reported. (DO NOT PAUSE) 1. Approximately how many years have you lived in City of Plymouth? Turning to parks and recreation.... LESS THAN TWO YEARS .... 6% TWO TO FIVE YEARS ..... 15% SIX TO TEN YEARS....... 21% 11 TO 20 YEARS ........ 35% 21 TO 30 YEARS ........ 14% OVER THIRTY YEARS ...... 8% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED.....0% I would like to read you a list of parks and recreation facilities in the City of Plymouth. First, please tell me if you or members of your household use that facility. Then for each one used, please rate that facility as excellent, good, only fair, or poor. As you may know, the northwest corner of the city is the last portion of Plymouth to be developed. As the area is developed the City will need to provide parks and recreation facilities for new residents. In order to provide these facilities, the City of Plymouth is considering a park referendum to fund acquisition of open space for the city's Greenway corridor. The Greenway would consist of a 2.5 mile corridor that preserves Plymouth's natural areas, trees and wetlands. The Greenway corridor will include a public trail that extends between Cheshire Lane on the east and Peony Lane on NOT VIS VIS VIS VIS DK/ VIS EXC GOO FAI POO REF 2. Small neighborhood parks? 240 29% 430 306 1% 0% 3. Large community parks? 26% 31% 42% 1% 0% 1% 4. Community playfields? 49% 17% 31% 3% 09. 0% 5. Trails? 26% 31% 40% 2% 00-. 0% As you may know, the northwest corner of the city is the last portion of Plymouth to be developed. As the area is developed the City will need to provide parks and recreation facilities for new residents. In order to provide these facilities, the City of Plymouth is considering a park referendum to fund acquisition of open space for the city's Greenway corridor. The Greenway would consist of a 2.5 mile corridor that preserves Plymouth's natural areas, trees and wetlands. The Greenway corridor will include a public trail that extends between Cheshire Lane on the east and Peony Lane on the west. It would also include a trail around the wetland complex east of Wayzata High School. 6. Do you support or oppose the pro- posed referendum to purchase open spaces and natural areas to com- plete the City's Greenway? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) Do you feel strong - Ly that way? 7. How much would you be willing to see your property taxes increase in order to fund the acquisition of open space and natural areas? Would you be willing to pay $ per month? (CHOOSE RANDOM START- ING POINT; MOVE UP OR DOWN DEPEND- ING ON ANSWER) How about $ per month? (REPEAT PROCESS) STRONGLY SUPPORT...... 13% SUPPORT...............64% OPPOSE.................9% STRONGLY OPPOSE........ 6% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED..... 9% NOTHING...............26% 1.00 .................15% 2.00 .................220 3.00 ..................9% 4.00 ..................5% 5.00 ..................60 6.00 ..................1% 7.00 ..................0% 8.00 ..................3% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED.... 140 The City would also need funds to purchase land and develop parks and community playfields as part of the referendum proposal. The new facilities would include additional athletic fields for baseball, soccer, lacrosse and other activities. B. Do you support or oppose the land STRONGLY SUPPORT....... 8% purchase and development of parks SUPPORT...............65% and community playfields? (WAIT OPPOSE................120 FOR RESPONSE) Do you feel STRONGLY OPPOSE........ 70 strongly that way? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED..... 9% 9. How much would you be willing to see your property taxes increase in order to fund the land purchase and development of parks and com- munity playfields? Would you be willing to pay $ per month? CHOOSE RANDOM STARTING POINT; MOVE UP OR DOWN DEPENDING ON ANSWER) How about $ per month? REPEAT PROCESS) NOTHING...............30% 1.00 .................16% 2.00 .................22% 3.00 ..................80 4.00 ..................4% 5.00 ..................4% 6.00 ..................0% 7.00 ..................0°% 8.00 ..................30 DON'T KNOW/REFUSED....14% The City of Plymouth is considering a $7 million bond referendum to fund both the acquisition of open spaces and natural areas to complete the city's greenway, as well as purchase land and develop parks and community playfields. If the referendum were successful, the owner of a $350,000 home would see a property tax increase of $2.25 per month, or $27.00 per year for fifteen years. And, the owner of a $500,000 home would have a tax increase of $3.15 per month or $37.90 per year for fifteen years. 10. If the election were held today, STRONGLY SUPPORT...... 15% would you support or oppose this SUPPORT...............57% you connect to the internee -- referendum proposal? WAIT FOR OPPOSE................10% a dial-up modem at 28K, on a RESPONSE) Do you feel strongly STRONGLY OPPOSE........ 9% that way? High DON'T KNOW/REFUSED.....996 IF A RESPONSE IS GIVEN, ASK: (N=363) 11. Why do you feel that way? GOOD FOR COMMUNITY, 24° MORE PARKS ARE NEEDED, 30; COST IS REASONABLE, 9%; TAXES ARE TOO HIGH, 150; CITY HAS ENOUGH PARKS, 3%; PRESERVE OPEN SPACE, 270; NEED PARKS AND BALLFIELDS FOR CHILDREN, 9%; NEED MORE TRAILS, 3%; GOOD FOR PROPERTY VALUES, 4%; SCATTERED, 2%. 12. In comparison with neighboring VERY HIGH.............11% areas, do you consider total pro- SOMEWHAT HIGH......... 35% perty taxes in your community to ABOUT AVERAGE ......... 38% be very high, somewhat high, about SOMEWHAT LOW ........... 2 average, somewhat low, or very VERY LOW...............0% low? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED.... 15% Changing topics.... 13.. Do you currently use the Internet NO....................20% at home? (IF "YES," ASK:) How do YES/DIAL-UP AT 28K.....4% you connect to the internee -- on YES/DIAL-UP AT 56K....100 a dial-up modem at 28K, on a dial- YES/DSL...............19% up modem at 56K, DSL, Comcast High YES/COMCAST HIGH SPD..45% Speed Internet, or some other way? YES/OTHER..............10 IF "OTHER," ASK) How? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED.....20 Now just a few more questions for demographic purposes.... 14. How interested are you in the up- EXTREMELY INTERESTED -17% coming November election - ex- VERY INTERESTED ....... 35% tremely interested, very interest- INTERESTED ............ 33% ed, interested, not very interest- NOT VERY INTERESTED...110 ed, or not at all interested? NOT AT ALL INTERESTED..4% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED.-...I% 15. What is your likelihood of voting ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN .... 50% this November - absolutely certain,VERY LIKELY ........... 34% very likely, about half and half, ABOUT HALF AND HALF...10% not too likely, or definitely will NOT TOO LIKELY ......... 4% not vote? DEFINITELY WILL NOT. ... 1% DON'T KNOW/REFUSED.....1% From time to time, cities and school districts ask voters to approve referendum proposals_.. 16. Thinking about past city and school district referendum elec- tions, would you say you always vote, often vote, sometimes vote, rarely vote or never vote? ALWAYS VOTE ........... 430 OFTEN VOTE ............ 35% SOMETIMES VOTE........ 120 RARELY VOTE ............ 8% NEVER VOTE.............20 DON'T KNOW/REFUSED..... 0% Could you please tell me how many people in each of the following age groups live in your household. Let's start oldest to youngest, and be sure to include yourself.... 17. First, persons 65 or over? 18. Adults under 65? 19. School -aged or pre-school children? NONE..................80% ONE...................100 TWO OR MORE ........... 10% NONE..................14% ONE...................15% TWO...................620 THREE OR MORE.......... 9% NONE..................590 ONE...................18% TWO...................18% THREE OR MORE.......... 5% 20. Do you own or rent your present . RENT..................20% residence? (IF "OWN," ASK:) Which OWN/UNDER $250,000....100 of the following categories con- OWN/$250,000-$350,000.320 tains the approximate value of OWN/$350,001-$450,000.23% your residential property -- under OWN/$450,001-$550,000..8% 250,000, $250,000-$350,000, OWN/OVER $550,000......5% 350,001-$450,000, $450,001- DON'T KNOW.............1% 550,000 or over $550,000? REFUSED................2% 21. What is your age, please? 22.. Gender. (DO NOT ASK)_ 23. REGION OF CITY 18-24 ..................30 25-34 .................10% 35-44 .................280 45-54 .................230 55-64 .................210 65 AND OVER ........... 16% REFUSED................0% MALE..................50% FEMALE................500 WARD ONE..............28% WARD TWO..............24% WARD THREE ............ 240 WARD FOUR.............25% mNMSUN 44 commurrity newt, a.pors Support the referendum Created: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 1o:51 Pth cmr) To the editor: Page.. - The city of Plymouth is a leader in protecting wetlands, preserving open space and investing in greenways. This planning and investing in the future has given our residents the neighborhood parks, large playfields and 100 miles of paved trails. All of this adds to our quality of life and is a big reason people choose to live in Plymouth. On Nov. 7 a referendum will be on the ballot asking for authorization to issue bonds to continue the preservation of open space, build a playfield and continue the greenways in Plymouth. Passage of this referendum will allow the city to purchase appropriate land when it becomes available. Without this ability, we may lose out on desirable sites or, worse case scenario, not be able to complete the park and trail system in our city. My family has been lucky enough to enjoy the parks, trails and facilities for the past 25 years. I strongly support the referendum so that all residents of Plymouth can enjoy the same quality of life my family has enjoyed. Our city has planned wisely - let's continue that tradition and leadership. Ellie Singer Plymouth Ellie Singer is a member of the Plymouth Park and Recreation Advisory Commission. Also writing in support of the referendum were Kevin Johnsrud (for the Wings Soccer Club) and Jerry Lee Fischer, both of Plymouth. This site and its contents Copyright © 2006. Sun Newspapers Main Office: 9S2-829-0797 suninio@acnpapers.com - a It Voters to elect mayor and council members When voters go to the polls an Nov. 7, they will elect four candidates to the City Council. City Council sears on the ballot are mayor, at large, ward 2 and ward 4. All scats are for fair -year terns. Mayor Judy Johnson is not running for re-election. Three candidates are tying for the mayoral seat. Intvmhenrs Tint Bildsoc and Many Black are muning unopposed for she at large and ward 4 cvnncil scats, respectively. Three candidates are competing for the ward 2 seat currently held by Kelli Slavik, who is mnuiug for mayor. On election night, Channel 12 News will begun coverage of local races in Plymtouth and other northwest cities at 7 p.m. In addition, City Council election remits will be pasted an die Hennepin County welt site, mvw.co.hennepin.tnn.us, as the results are available. Open space, greenway, parks question to be on November ballot when Plynn rth voters cast their halloo on Nov. 7, dheyxill see a hallo[ qurscion asLing them to decide whether the City should issue 99 million in general obligation bunds to buy land for open space presmicion and packs. if a majorier of people vote yes, it will authnriae die City to issue hands to purchase land for finnne cape. spaee, a ennwwuity playfield, rhe Nnnhwtsr C,recnway and parks. A no vote is a vote against the lumd issue. Itapproved by voters, funds [mot the bond referendum would affow the Myto acquire and preserve tannin Northwest Plymoufh. Plymouth has a widhaon of acquirinK land and setting it aside before development occurs. This has illcmcd the City to build on esrensive park and trail system in serve rite developed areas of Plyruouth. In citizen surveys, residents cite Plymouth parks and trails as one of the community assets they value 11105L The City is asking for authorization to issue hands now because Northwest Plymouth, the last largely rural area of the city, is at a pivotal point as ]and buyers and sellers anticipate fihmrc deyclopincut. A regional planning agcney, the hierropolimn Councii, has extended sxainry sewer to die area, making it feasible for significant development to occur. In addition, die City recently adopted a preliminary land use plan for Northwest Plymouth as part of dee Cruiprehe isise Plan update. Thu A4utrupuliehn Council mandates that cities periodically review and, if ncecssnn; update their plants. As undeveloped land hecuuhes increasingly scarce, land prices hill contraire in increase. By asking vnrcm to consider a bond issue naw, the City will maximize the ammmt of land it nn purchase for the Smeenwiy, open space, community playfield and Parks. Northwest Greenway In 26% the City Council approved a Ions -range plan for Northwest Plymouth that included the concept of the Nordatvesr Greenway.'1he idea is m acquire trees and open space in the corridor and maint:hin those areas as public land. As planned, die Northwest Greenway is a cm-ridor of land that is about 2 W utiles lung, and varies in width fimn 56' to 36d'. The land, which is currit dy pritvtely owned by multiple owners, cams henvecn the large, high quality ivednnd complex near FVaymtn High School on the west to the Lakc Camelot area on the east where irwill connect to Coniinoed page 3 vruwci.plyntouth.mn.us Plymouth News Nnvemherfllecember7lfpS-pageI Open space questionar.from page I the Tlnce Rivers Regional Trail Corridor. This green—jr will preserve trees and open spice, enhance wildlife c irridats and provide long distance recreational oppormnitirs for people throughout Plyhnmrth as trails are developed and linked m regi-ral trails. Community Pla yfield If approved, die City will use a pordon of the hinds from the bond issue to buy land for the City 10th communityplay6eld. Another playfield will be needed in the future to meet increased demand for youth athletic fariliti s as Northwest Plymouth develops. Land Acquisition A Timing If voters approve rhe bond issue, it will improve rhe City's ability to acquire subsrantal wicks -f land for the Nordivresr Greenway, community playfield and parks as app-lidite sites beer available from willing sellers, Effect on Property Taxes The chart above explains how much more would he collected from Plymouth property owners ifvuters approve the ballot question. The -norms above reflect the maximum annual and monthly cost on hornmwners for the life of 15 year bonds. The amounts above also assume that The City will issue the entire $9 million in bonds at one time. However, it is likely the City will make two separate h„n I i..m s rasher ih:m Pane sn that the bond issues coincide with land availability if the {Sty makt,s iwo .separate bond issues, it will have die effect of phasing in die costs outlined aline. As the City continues to grow, the cost rill be spread among a larger number of taxpayers than the calculations reflect. Por nmrc infonnation, please refer m the publication mailed to residents in early October or visit the City web site. 2=-112111 1V bond issue to buy land for a future community playhold. Ibis aerial view of Northwest Plymouth shows plans for the Northwest Greenway Budget—from page 2 program and J Y will curer rhe cost of a new pmactive police program, Another A I ')f, is ser aside or cover the cost of state mandates. The rcmainSrg 4,M 96 is for other City seivires. Tire incrcaau in Plymouth% growth and inflation in mor was 8.39x,. Uneler die 207 proposed I ... Igcy rhe tronas -fan average value home of 5347,900 will pay,5901 a year or S75 a month for mmnicipal services. This cgnates to approximately S17 a year mon than the owner of an avenge value home paid in 2001. Please keep in mind that in addition to spending decisions, several factors affect individual prop" tax hills. Chose factors include property type, market vahre changes, limited market—to. phase at and paststate legislative actions- 2007Initiatives By investing in street rrtaintenance and proactive policing, we are arriving to svike a gond balance. PIY.1an h is at an interesting point in in dcwclupmenr. We continue to grow, but we also have many areas of rhe co:mnmdty that are ruamong, We need To continuum expand scnica-a to newly developed areas while making investmutu in infrastructure that is scarring to show its age," said City Manager Laurie Areas. Street hlaincen.mce: Because Plymouth§ infrasvucture is aging, streets will remain an imptnrant focus in 2M7. To protect taxpayer inMlinerrB and respond to citizen concerns, rhe City is proposing art additional 5773,000 for street improvements in 2007. This increase is one step in a Inng-nngeplan to bring City streets up to a higher standard. Proactive Policing The 2007 budger emphasizes proactive Policing by funding a new Pmhlem-Oriented Policing Unit (POP Squad). The POP Squad, coupled rids unproved cTimc analysis, Rall allow the Pulim Deparrimnt to trick and address emerging crime vends and patterns. Tlds will give the police the ability to develop daily neaps for strategic deployhnents of the squad. Statisdeal-Insed policing Las proven effective in reducing crime in loth smali and large cunnnwdrim red iumally. More infonnarion on die proposed budget is postedon the City web sit.. rat t.v t i plymourh.mrr.us Plymouth News - NavewberlDecertrher2906 • page I MN MS d-4 com.munify news,pupera Support referendum Created: Wednesday, November 1, 2006 11:00 Ph1 CST) To the editor: m.Print Page I am writing this letter to urge the citizens of Plymouth to vote yes on the Plymouth Open Space and Parks Referendum. Plymouth has always been recognized as a city that provides numerous parks for its citizens. These parks have many uses, but they are used most especially for recreation. They are used For youth sports, biking, walking, picnics - you name it. Our current park system is under increasing pressure as the population of Plymouth grows. Development of the northwest corner of Plymouth will add to the number of Plymouth citizens. We have a unique opportunity to purchase land prior to it being developed. However, to do this, funding must be available. The Plymouth City Council has developed a prudent financial plan that allows for the purchase of open land as it becomes available. Let's not let this opportunity be wasted. Vote yes for parks Nov. 7. Jim Davis Plymouth Jim Davis is a member of the Plymouth Park and Recreation Advisory Board. This site and its contents Copyright @ 2006. Sun Newspapers Main Office: 952-829-0797 suninfo@acnpapers.com - nrs Pfmt PaganMNOSUN 44 EoM-MU90ey nVw-FP4 Pro Open space, greenway question on November ballot Created: Wednesday, November 1, 2006 11:00 PPS CS'O Eric Blank - guest columnist When Plymouth voters cast their ballots Nov. 7, they should be sure to turn over their ballot so they can vote on the city of Plymouth's ballot question on open space, parks and greenways. (The question will be on the same side of the ballot as judicial offices.) The question will ask voters whether the city should issue $9 million in general obligation bonds to buy land for open space preservation and parks. If a majority of people vote yes, it will authorize the city to issue bonds to purchase land for future open space, a community playfield, the Northwest Greenway and parks. A no vote is a vote against the bond issue. The city is asking for authorization to issue bonds now because Northwest Plymouth, the last largely rural area of the city, is at a pivotal point as land buyers and sellers anticipate future development. As land becomes increasingly scarce, prices will increase, If voters approve the bond issue, the city will be able to buy land as it becomes available from willing sellers, maximizing the amount of land the city can purchase at today's cost. The Northwest Greenway Plan adopted in 2000 calls for the city to acquire trees and open space in a 2.5 mile long corridor that runs from the wetland complex near Wayzata Nigh School on the west to Lake Camelot on the east. The Greenway's width would vary from 50 --feet to 300 -feet. The greenway will preserve trees and open space, enhance wildlife corridors and provide long distance recreational opportunities for residents as trails are developed and linked to regional trails. The city would also use a portion of the funds from the bond issue to buy land for the city's 10th community playfield. This playfield will be needed in the future to meet increased demand for youth athletics facilities as Northwest Plymouth develops. The city would also use funds to purchase environmentally significant pieces of land as they become available from willing sellers. The cost to a residential homeowner for a 15 -year bond issue is roughly $1 a month for 15 years for each 100,000 of taxable market value of his/her home. For example, the owner of a $250,000 home would pay 26 a year or $2.17 a month in increased property taxes. The owner of a $400,000 home would pay $42 a year or $3.50 a month. To learn more, I encourage Plymouth voters to read the publication that the city mailed in early October, read the city newsletter that was mailed the week of Oct. 23 or visit the city Web site at www.ci.plymouth.mn.us. Eric Blank is Plymouth Parks and Recreation director. This site and its contents Copyright @ 2006. Sun Newspapers Main Office: 952-829-0797 suninfo@acnpapers.com - STATE GENERAL ELECTION BALLOT r. HENNEPIN COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA .F_- NOVEMBER 7, 2006 VOTE FOR ONE _ — INSTRUCTIONS TO VOTERS RENEE L. WORKE To Vote, completely fill in the oval(s) next to your choice(s) like this: 4m CITY QUESTION BALLOT JUDICIAL OFFICES 4TH DISTRICT COURT To vole for a question, coni letely'ill in the Oval next to the word "YES SUPREME COURT JUDGE 39 question. To vole against a question. VOTE FOR ONE coni letet IIII in the Oval next to the wordP ASSOCIATE JUSTICE i ALLEN OLEiSKYNOforthatgueation, _ _ _ _ _ _ VOTE FOR ONE Incumbenl CITY QUESTION BARRY ANDERSON VOTE FOR ONE ; GOHDON W. SHUMAKER Incumbent wrile,in, if ally Shall the Cay COuncil of the City of Plym3uli. JUDGE 40 lJOHI ezta 0e eidhomeo w GBue n: geii6ral 5:ue-:n, of any VOTE FOR ONE Ontigalton hands m an amutmr not a eX:EeJ VOTEFORQNE t 5&000 000 tar the purp,)Ae OI acgrannq !anti for COURT OF APPEALS TANJA KOZICKY MANRIOUE yell sl a c. TIO6n:vayi ilia para- Incumbent JUDGE 11 VO i E FOR ONE vane-:n,:t a ry YES DAN GRIFFITH JUDGE 45 VOTE FOR ONE NO CHRISTOPHER J. DIETZEN MARILYN B. ROSEN13AUM Incumbenl Incumbent NOTICE: BY VOTING "YES" ON THIS BALLOT QUESTION, YOU ARE VOTING FOR A PROPERTY TAX INCREASE, The maximum amount a Increased levy as a - parcaniaga of market value Is.010376'a. The amount that will be raisBd by the neer relerendum rax rate In the ftrt year it is to be Ie:ned is SB42.Wo0 wrrt_e:in, it any_____ JUDGE I JUDGE50 VOTE FOR ONE _ — VOTE FOR ONE RENEE L. WORKE BRUCE A PETERSON Incumheni b cum6ent write-in AanY__,...._.. 1 I wrim-in. it Ally ,-'----__---- JUDGE7 JUDGEs2 VOTE FOR ONE -_ VOTE FOR ONE JILL FLASKAMP HALBROOKS FRANCIS CONNOLLY Incumbent Incumbenl write-in. d any _ 3 write-in, it any JUDGEI2 i JUDGE55 VOTE FOR ONE I VOTE FOR ONE ; GOHDON W. SHUMAKER CARA LEE NEVILLE Incumbent 1 Incumbent it any 4TH DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 44 VOTEFORQNE t BEE ROWE PATRICIA KERB KARASOV Incumbant arbe-in, it any. _ JUDGE 48 VOTE FOR ONE KEVIN J KOLOSKY JOHN 0. MCSHANE Incumbent wnlr n, d JUDGE 6 I VOTE FOR ONE - l PATRICIA L. BELOIS Incumbenl i Ivale-in, if an JUDGE 16 VOTE FOR ONE DAVID M. DUFFY iIncumbentI wile -in, JUDGE 17 VOTE_ FOR ONE DENISE D. REll, LY Incumheni zs wme-in- if env JUDGE22 VOTE FOR ONE DEBORAH HEDLUND incumbent