HomeMy WebLinkAboutPark and Recreation Advisory Commission Packet 06-29-1982Plvuth, Park and Recreation Advisory Commission
Regular Meeting for JULY, to be June 29, 1982 - 7100 p.m.
Plymouth City Center Counctl Charmers
PLEASE NOTE, THIS. MEETING BEGINS AT 7.00 P.M
AGENDA
1.. Call to Order
2 Approval of Minutes
3, Visitor Presentations
a. Athletic Associations
bF diary Patterson and Rick Busch
c,. Others
4. Report on Past Council Action
a. Hennings 1st Addition
S., Unfinished Business
a. 1983 LAWCON/LCMR. ,rant Application - update
b. Funding Task Force Jim Rice
c, 1983-87 CiP
6... New Business
a, New Plats
b. Plymouth Land Trust
7. Commission Presentation
8*, Staff Ccrimuni cation
n. Adjournment
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Park and Recreation kdvisory LOMMISS1011
June a, 1982
Paw 13
Present: Commisstoners Chesebrough, Dv rak, Edwards, Mullan and Threinen;
staff member Blank; Planning Contnission member Magnus; Council.
member Moen, and Damian McElrath of Hazelden/Pionee*r House
Absent: Commissioners Berg and Rice; staff members, Helgeson, Busch and
Patterson
1. CALL TO ORDER
the CouncilThemeetingwasinformallycalledtoorderat7:1 4t. 3 p.m. in
Chambers Conference Room.
Z. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissione- Chesebrough moved and Commissioner Mullan seconded a motion.
to approve t`li# minutes of the May meeting. The motion carried with all
ayes.
3. VISITOR PkESENTATIONS
a. Athletic Association Representatives. None were present,
b. Mar Patterson and Rick Busch. Both were absent, but Mr. Busch
submitted a report, on playfield scheduling.
c. Others, Damian McElrath of Hazelden/Pioneer House explained the
per!
a—nned Jun{ 26 "Easy Does It" race.
4. REPORT ON PAST COUNCIL ACTION
None.
5. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a. Funding Task Force. Eric Blank reported on the Task Force in Jr
Rice's absence., Mr., Rice has drafted a paper on the Task Ford
philosophy. July 4 is the target date for its completion.
b. Henninqs_1st Addition. Eric Blank met with St. Mary's leasing
committee and administrators. The reception was favorable.
willChurchwilldiscussitattheirJuneboardmeetiig. Eric, will meet
again with the church in late June.
c, Joint Meeting with Planning Commission. Blair Tremere has not yet
g5en a date to Eric. The Planning Commission has been under heavy
pressure recently. Perhaps a vieeting in Septe*,er or October would
be better. Clark Magnus will take this information back to the Planning
Commission.
d. 1983 LAWCON LCMR Grant Application, Our grant was given a good score
and Eric is optimistic.
e. 1983-87 CIP, PRAC members were asked to prioritize each year. For the
nexrig, Eric will present iz reconciliation of each fund - balances
by year, with activity between each yeas, --end. Eric reported that he has
considered citizen requests within the CIP. Some have been included,
some have not.
PRIG: Minutes of Jure S, 198
Page 1&
NEW BUSINESS
i. New Plats, A Lundgren Bros/Minneapolis Workhouse plat is being
neve opede
7. COMMISSION PRESENTATION
The next meeting will he Tuesday, June 29 at 7-00 p.m. This, is the regular
meeting for July.
8.. STAFF COMMUNICATION
Eric reported on the Oa',,vlood Playfield concession.
9. ANOURNMENT
Commissioner Chesebrough movedand Commissioner Edwards seconded a motion
to adjourn at 9:29 p.m. The motion carried with all ayes.
NEFERRALT(; 3;10 Tetro Square Building
CRY MWGER IZ Seventh and Robert Streets
CITY COUKH: ,, -- Saint Paul. 'Minnesota 65101
Pui3tW WORK OIREC1OR . _.. _ +6121281.6401FINANCENRECTOR --.--.-
FUSLIC'M M DIRECTOR --- June
Al IAN- 11SNRATIVE AsaGS-T •---.L
PARk t040tr5%
CIr" ATTQRt,'EY
VATE
PUBLIC MEETING NOTICE
Dear LAWCt: N/LCMR park Grant Applicant:
On June 8, Parks and Open Space staff and staff from the Dept, of Energy,
Punning and Development jointly ranked Fiscal Year 1983 LAWCON/LCMR grant
application's. !Enclosed.for your information is a copy of those staff
rankings, This is a pre_liminary staff ranki„g because recreation criteria
scores for applications sponsored by Washington County, Chanhassen, White Bear
Township and Plymouth are undergoing a special review by the Metropolitan
Cot:mvil w4iich will be completed on June 24. Changes to their recreation
criteria. score would affect the overall ranking: of projects in the Area of
Planned Urbanization and: the Rural Service Area. Please read the enclosed.
memorandum entitled "Implementing New LAWCON/LCMR Grant. Criteria. on
Communities' Support of the Regional Recreation Opr'n Space System” for ftarther
detai.lsa (Memo only enclosed in packets to comsnunities in the Area of Planned
Urbanization and the Rural Service Area.
Once: the Metropolitan Council completes its special review of these
applications, on dune 24 a final staff ranking will be prepared and that.
rankinq will be the subject of a public meeting on June 28,; at 4 pm. in the
Metropolitan Council Chambers:. Since the overall, staff ranking, of applications
ire the Area of Planned Urbanization and the RuraT Service Area won't be
determined until June 24, Parks and Open Space staff will contact the
sponsozring communities in those policy planning areas by telephone on June 25
or June 28 to notify them of any changes in their ranking.
If you wish to make a presentation at the June 2.8 public meeting, please
contact Deborah Peine, ph, 291-6401, to be placed on the agenda. Due 4o the
number of applications --- 53 from 43 communities. we must ask that you limit
your presentation to 10 minutes or less. Making; a presentation is purely
optional. Those who do not will not he penalized.
Sincerely,
Elliott Perov i c,h
Chairman
EF idlmp
Established by the Minnesota Legislature
as an ageney of the Nictn-)polita7n Council::
4
r.:
SF -00006-01
DEPARTMENT Ener Planning & Development
STATE OF MINNESOTA
tfit
rice Memorandum
TO Metro Parks and Open Space Commission. DATE. June 10, 1982
FROM Louise Jimbois, Asst. Grants Supervisor PHONE 2.96-1567
Parks and Recreation Grants Section
SUBJECT,. Temporary Reduction in Available LCMR
Grant Funds for FY183
At its meeting of June 7, 1982 the Legislative Ca mission on Minnesota Resources (LCMR)
adopted a motion that resulted in a "temporary reduction" of $999,10.0 from the amount.
of LCMR grant money (Laws of '.81, Chapter 356, Section 31, Subdivision 3 (c) and (d))
available to local units of government for FY 1983 park projects. This action will
reduce the current available funding for the Metro Area to $ 400,000.00 The
reduction came as a result of the LCMR's desire to cooperate with the Governor's
budget cutting pr' --gram.
It was the initial intention of the LCMR to abandon (eliminate) an unexpended portion
of the. outstate SMSA regional park bonding grant.program and not reduce the funding
from what most of us refer to as the LCMR grant program. Unfortunately, the LCMR
discovered that they didn't have the authority to abandon the SMSA bonding program
without legislative action. Consequently, the. LCMR chose to cut the statewide local
government outdoor, recreation grant program. The action is termed. a "temporary
reduction" because the LCMR intends to request that the legislature reinstate the
999,10 when it convenes in January, 19$3 and the abandonment of the SMSA bonding
program has been completed. In. effect, the $999,100 reduction in LCMR funds is
being used as a.substitute for the SMSA bonding funds in order to alleviate a cash
floc problem and: to demonstrate a commitment to budget cutting; now, When the SMSA
bon.:ing abandonment is complete that will be sobstituted for the LCMR reduction
and the $999,100will be reins`bated. If all of this maneuvering actually occurs,
the reinstated $999,1.00 would be available for park projects around March of 1983,
pas
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPEii
b
FISCAL YEAR 1983 LAWCON/LCMR GRANT RANKING
Final and Preliminar Staff Rankin s b Metropolitan Council
and Minn Department of Ener2y, Planni,ng artd Deva opment.
on June 8, 1982 staff from the Metropolitan Council (MC) and the Minn. Dept. of
Energy, Planning and Development (DEPD) met to rank the. FY 1983 LAWCON/LCMR
Park. Grants. The attached sheets contain their rankings. The ranking sheets
show four columns of rankings!
1. The "MC/R" column indicates the ranking of applications based on the
Metropolitan Council's "Criteria for Review of Local Park Grant
Applications - FY 1983." As noted in the cover letter from the
Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission, several projects from the
Area of Planned Urbanization and the Rural Service Area are undergoing a.
special review by the Metropolitan Council. On June 7, the; Metropolitan
Parks and Open Space Commission (MPOSC) began that review process which
will be completed when the Metropolitan Council takes action on June 24,
The MC/R rankings presented here are based on the recommendations of the
MPOSC (see cover letter for more details).
Z. The "MC/H" column indicates the ranking of applications, based on the MC/R
ranking (two-thirds weight) and one-third weight of the sponsor community's
performance in providing low and moderate -income housing.
3. The: "DEPD" column indicates the ranking of applications by ,the Dept. of
Energy, Planning and Development.
4. The "Final column represents the combined rankings in the "MC/H" and
DEPD"' columns.
The. Legislative. Commission on Minnesota Resources (LCMR) allocated $1 million
for FY 183 metro area projects in the 1981 legislative session. However,
funding cuts have temporarily reduced this amount (see enclosed letter from the
DEPD). The amount of federal Land and Water Conservation (LAWCON) funds for
this program have not been determined yet for FY 183. As you know, there were
no LAWCON funds allocated to state and local governments for FY 182. The
Reagan administration has proposed the same cut. for FY 183, subject to
Congressional consideration this summer. Due to the tentative nature of both
LCMR and LAWCON. funds, staff cannot develop a funding cut-offlite for projects
at this time. In7ormation on this matter will be provided by staff from the
Minn. Dept. of Energy, Planning and Development as decisions are made by the
LCMR and Congress.
Rosevi le's project, acquisition of school district property for Langton Lake Park
Ref. No. 10492-1) was not. ranked. Fee acquisition of property from one local
government by another is not eligible fora grant under LCMR policy.
Bloomington's project, development of a trail around the Long Meadow Lake unit of the
Lower Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge (Ref. No 10504-1) was not ranked..
This project is a part of the designated Minnesota.Valley State Trail. It, is not
eligible to receive agrant under this program since state trail funds should finance
this project.
FY '83 LAWCON/LCMR GRANT RANKINGS
Final Staff Recommendations for the Fully Developed Area
m,UUMaximum Grant, 50% LCMR, z57. LAWCON
S opnsorPropectCostRef. No MG/R ' MC/N DEPO Final
Mpls. Park Board Gluek Park 514,362 10431-1 4 2 1 1
South St. Paul Airport Playfield 5161,100 10502-1 2 3 2 2
Mpls. Park Board Marshall Terrace 368,629 10462-1 1 1 7 3
St. Paul West 7th Center 126,500 10499-1 10 7 3 4
Crystal North Lions Park 181,374 10484-1 6 7 4 5
Richfield Richfield Lake 300,000 10513-1 7 6 5 6
St. Paul, Hayden Heights 58,000 10501-1 4 4 9 7
Fridley Riverview H2igh:ts 405,800 10472--1 3 5 12
Robbinsda.le Humphrey Park 28,100 10479-1 9 11 6 9.
St. Paul Iris Park 169,000 10500-1 10 7 11 10
Lauderdale Bieck Woods 57,463 10494-1 7 10 10 11
Brooklyn Center Central Park 80,000 10506-1 12 12 8 12
Rosevi le's project, acquisition of school district property for Langton Lake Park
Ref. No. 10492-1) was not. ranked. Fee acquisition of property from one local
government by another is not eligible fora grant under LCMR policy.
Bloomington's project, development of a trail around the Long Meadow Lake unit of the
Lower Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge (Ref. No 10504-1) was not ranked..
This project is a part of the designated Minnesota.Valley State Trail. It, is not
eligible to receive agrant under this program since state trail funds should finance
this project.
DM266B
FY 183 LAWGON/LCR GRANT RANKINGS
Final Staff Recommendations for Freestanding Growth Centers
1100,050 Mauimum rant, 5O LCM , Zb7. LAWC N
S Qr Project Cost RefNo. MC/R, MC/R DEPD Final
Stillwater Lowell Park $157,600 10512-1 2, 3 1 1
Anoka Sunny Acres $ 80,14; 10491.,1 1 1 4' 2
Belle Plaine Prairie Park $ 53,530 10505.1 2 2 3 3
Chaska McKnight Park. $ 80,000 10460-1 4 4 2 4
Prior Lake Athletic. Park S 58,500 10511-1 5 5 5 5
Shakopee's project, trail development in Levee Drive Park (Ref. No, 10475-1), was not
It is not eligiblerankedbecausetheprojectisonadesignatedstatetrailcorridor,
this since state trail funds should finance thistoreceiveagrantunderprogram
project.
FY 183 LAWCON/LCMR GRANT RANKINGS
Preliminary Staff Recommendations for the Rural Service Area
Ibu,000 Maximum _ rant, RRV, LTACON'
S opnsorProectw ^Cost-- Ref. No. MC/R MC/4 DEPD Final
Wdshingtonl Pt. Douglas Beach 54064000 16476-1 1 1 1 1
County
Lake Elmo Redd Park $ 35,500: 10482-1 2 2 2 2
Carver Campgrounds & Launch S 97,000 10454-1 3 3 3 3
Watertown Tennis Courts S 35,000 10465-1 4 4 4 4
Stillwater Twp. Township Park S 38,500 10458-1 6 6 5 5
Bethel Civic Park $ 58,120 10507-1 5 5 6 6
1 MC/R ranking which directly affects the final
the Metropolitan Parks and
ranking of this project
Open Space Commission
is based on a
and subject to
recommendation from
change by the Metropolitan Council on June 24.
DM266B
Suite 300 Metro Square Building, Saint. Paul, Minnesota 55101
MEM0RANDUh! June 21, 1982
TO Michael Polehna, Washington County
Paul Webber, White Bear Township
Francis Callahan, City of Chanhassen
Eric Bunk, City of Plymouth
FROM: Ar n Steff rud Parks and. Open Space Staff
a Dev o merit Commutea Report on implementing NewSUBJECT.: Phys c 1 p P
LAWOONILCMR Grant Criteria on Communities' Support of the
Regional Recreation Open Space System
Attached is the report of. the Metropolitan Council's Physical Developr nt
Con ittee on the above-named subject. In sumnary, the Committee is
recommending that the 30 bonus point criteria he dropped. The Metropolitan
Council will take action on this recommendation at its June 24 meeting. The
Committee's report explains how your project is affected under this
recommendation. If you have questions, please contact me at 291-6360.
attachent
DMO14A
M E T R 0 P 0 L I T A N C0UNC1L
Suite 300 Metro Square Building, Saint. Paul, Minnesota 55101
MEM0RANDUh! June 21, 1982
TO Michael Polehna, Washington County
Paul Webber, White Bear Township
Francis Callahan, City of Chanhassen
Eric Bunk, City of Plymouth
FROM: Ar n Steff rud Parks and. Open Space Staff
a Dev o merit Commutea Report on implementing NewSUBJECT.: Phys c 1 p P
LAWOONILCMR Grant Criteria on Communities' Support of the
Regional Recreation Open Space System
Attached is the report of. the Metropolitan Council's Physical Developr nt
Con ittee on the above-named subject. In sumnary, the Committee is
recommending that the 30 bonus point criteria he dropped. The Metropolitan
Council will take action on this recommendation at its June 24 meeting. The
Committee's report explains how your project is affected under this
recommendation. If you have questions, please contact me at 291-6360.
attachent
DMO14A
For Release: 6/24/82 Bus, Item B-5
4.00 p.m.
METR0P0LITAN COUNCIL
Suite 300 'Metro Square Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101
June 18, 1482.
REPORT OF THE PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE'
TO: Metropolitan Council'
SUBJECT: Implementing New LAWCON/LCMR Grant Criteria on Communities' Support
of the Regional Recreation Open Space System
Introduction and Background
At its June 17 meeting the Physical Development Committee considered the
attached memorandums regarding the awarding of up to 30 bonuJ points for
LAWON/LCMR park grant projects which are consistent with the sponsor
community's comprehensive plan, and where applicable, the community has
supported acquisition/development of the Regional Recreation Open Space
System. The basis for the criteria is that communities should by willing to
support the regional park system if they also wanted grant funds for their own
local park system through the LAWCON/LCMR park, grant program. It was,
originally adopted by the Council on March 11 (Business Item No B-12)..
The Committee discussed the effect of implementing this criteriz), especially in
regard to the project submitted by Washington County (Point Douglas Beach,
Referral No 10476-1). The Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission
MPOSC) had recommended that the project receive 20 out of 30 bonus points for
the County's partial' support of the regional' park system. The Committee was
concerned that implementing the criteria was a negative approach in trying to
get cooperation from local governments. to support the regional park system.
Parks and Open Space staff were directed' to prepare two project ranking lists
indicating the effect of using and not using the 30 bonus point criteria. The.
results are as follows:
1. There would' be no changge to the ranking of projects sponsored by
communities in the Fully Developed Area or Freestanding Growth Centers
whether or not the 30 bonus point criteria is applied. All projects
initially received 30 bonus paints.
2. If the bonus point criteria is _applied as, recommended by the MPOSC
awarding 20 i5istead of 30 points) to the Washington County project, it is
ranked, first among five other projects in, the Rural Service Area. The
bonus point criteria had no negative effect in this case since the project
had the highest recreation score (334 out of 400 possible points) of the
projects it competes with. The project still ranks first when the criteria
is not applied.
3. If the bonus point criteria is used as recommended by the MPOSC and White;
Bear Township fails, to meet the conditions required of it to get th- full
30 points (in this case giving approval to the Otter -Bald Eagle Lake
Regional Park master plan by Sept. 1, 19812), their project (Columbia Park,
Referral No. 10474-1) would drop from the 8th to 11th place among the 21
projects ranked. That would effectively place it too low to receive a
grant.
If the bonus point criteria is not used, White Bear Township's project
would be ranked 8th. It might receive a grant at this ranking.
4. The MPOSC recommended the full 30 bonus points be awarded to the City of
Plymouth on their project (Referral No. 10490-1). It is ranked first of
all projects in the Area of Planned urbanization. If the criteria is not
used, the project still ranks first.
5. Two- boat launch projects eligible for top -priority grant status sponsored
by the city of Chanhassen (Lake Lucy, Referral No. 10488-1 and Lake Ann,
Referral No. 10489-1) were also reviewed using this criteria. The MPOSC
recommended that by August 1, later amended to October 1, 1982, that the
City remove a discriminatory regulation in its conditional use permit for
Lake Minnewashta Regional Park which limits boats launched from Minnewashta.
Regional Park to have 15 horsepower or less motor size. Removal of this
restriction is a sign of supporting the regional park system. If the bonus
criteria is not applied, the City will have until Dec. 31, 1983 to remove
the restriction instead. This new date is based on the MPOSC conditional
approval of Lake Minnewashta Regional Park Master Plan at its June 7
meeting. (The Metropolitan Council has not reviewed the park master plan
recommendations yet at the Physical Development Corrnittee.)
Recommendation
That, the Metropolitan Council eliminate the following criteria in evaluating
Fiscal Year 1983 LAWCON/LCMR park grant projects:
Project is consistent with the local comprehensive plan and where
applicable the community supports acquisition/development of regional
recreation opn space within its border. (Bonus awarded at discretion of
the Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Comniss,ion and the Metropolitan
Council.)"
Respectfully submitted,
Alton, Gasper
Vice Chairperson
MB/AS/dlmp
1,
SUMMARY OF REVENUES
19E3-1987 CAPITAL MOVEMENT PROGRAM
TOTAL,
YEARPark`Dedication Fund
Y Piayfl iorhood Parks Public Works Reserve
Federal
Reserve Sharing
State, County and
Federal Grants GO Bonds
3051000 1983 78,000 52,000 100,000 75,000
75,000 1984. 90,000 60,
1000
25.000 175,000 225,000
3.775,000 1985 90,000 60,000 25,000 25,000 . 75,000 3,000,000
350,000 1986 90,000 60,000 25,000 100,000 75,000
175,000 1987 90,000 60,000 25,000
Mims
Notes:
1) a means Fund Increase.
means fund: Cecreass
1983-19.87. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PRI1CRAO (X) Fund balance
3) Federal, reveMK sharing funds
YEAR 1982 (L Starve sower tax district
S) Public: wit reserve fwW
2).
a
JTILE
t li 1 i3!l 1LY wt c;t:tl
i:1 r,,L. ® i 1'1 1 1 1 1 / 111
So
f!S'Ifi !• XM® T sI+III :
I ago=!+
I
r rr r r t•
2).
a
Notes.
11 + aeaes r"A lncmv
1983-1987-
MOOR: Fund OOcreaks
CAPITAL 104PROVEPIENTS rROGRA t xl ywd:!ralaRtt
J? federal mv~ sMriiy fah
YEAR 1986 i41 Ston sewr tax district
S) PiAlic worms reserve (v
Et:_=i#.•:i 3ti: • r r -r r r O r r O r i 1
Irt+r tt r!?Yk t«lr:lt .. , 'l1rilt, .
H:.'3±TT•®1i®:![:r:dl 1 rtlrpl<c!•lirJrsl
i w[r ft r t t r wie r n a.
WAN E1t ft'i tat: trltj`2iti wr:1
t it rti,
re
r.mw r. #111 fi`r1 1
nr we t it t.r[tr
tt=1 t•t tt
1
TOTAL YE4"
Park.'Dedication fund
P NO is Works, Reserve
Federal
Reseeve,Sharing;
State, County and
Federal Grants G0 Bonds
305,000 1983 78,000 2,700 100,000: 75,000
575,1100 1981 90,000 60,M-0 255,000
25,000
175.000 225,000
3t27S, OM 1985 90,000 60,000 25,000 75,000 3,000,000
3K, AM 1986 90,000 50,000 25,000 100,000 75,000
175,000 1987 90,000 60,000 25,;000
N4 nu
l) t .rags F+RA1*cres54
wills FW4 Dacmasa,
1482wI981 CAt x2'AL 1"ROVE"I Ts F4040ANiY1 Fwd Dalwwce
J)) Federal ravwt ! %www
YEAR 1982 i} Stem, sawr tart (iistrio
s) hAllr carts mwwl [ww
iRon
all
tMVL
i'As. tl
Urn
r iii: 11 1i®.Ti .
rtt rr
t3
2)'
M_U
in
T It .4,14 3.10
Hada nal Recreation,
and Parr
Association
At erica tt Park,
ted mminin eghtIlon AL0010ty
NAfloNALRECREA TION AND PARK ASSOCIATION 3101 PARK CENTER DRIVE M ALEXANDRIA. VIRGINIA 22302 • 7031820
E ra
O Y WAW
I CITY ODLWL -----.
ttaLIC WW DIRECTOR
FINANCE DIRECTOR----..
E 4 'bOQ DIRECTOR
SA,M DIRECTOR
SURVIVALSTRATEGIES u't MSTRATIvE ASSISTAN
PARK COMMISSION
Sondra Kirsch:
pCiyiY
cl i
By8`ty ..
GT11Cfi.: -..l ii •tib. w t'.... v f r' ^
r<._
THTNK?NG AND ACTTNG LIKE ENTREPRENEURS: `iRsr ORDER OF MSTNFSS'
it won't do any good to examine techniques for survival in the 80's until ark and
recreation professionals ''mentally" climb out of their bureauc-ratic molds and become
entrepreneurs Executives, ndddle--managers, entry level ,?ersonnal and even educators;
are all going to have to enter into, entrepreneurial thiul ing proc%,jses too often alienn
to government and private. organizations. If thinking, processes and action: are not
to be changed, leisure services employees will continue to maintain } xe systers that have
contributed to the present financial dilemma, and new awareness and uadetstanding of
survival, strategies will only proviOe. te,,norary solutions.
Becoming park and recreation entrepreneurs means directing resources fxom less
productiya to more pvodu:tive investments, and 'helping organizations adapt to rapidly
changing environments. To accomplish these objectiv- the entrepreneur must, be zon--
stantly conscious of revenues and costs.
Parks and recreation personnel are working in rapidly changing environments, and have
suddenly become accountable for financing as 'well, as providing recreational services. They
must now-Iedirect thein resources and identify 'new sources of'funiing
it isn't easy to change thinking processes overnight, but the future depends on a new
breed of, managers, more flexible and responsive to meeting community needs. How can
park and.recreaticn professionals become entrepreneurs, building new ideas and resources?
C. W Mills once said, that old entrepreneurs operated in a Vorld opening up like a row of
oysters under steam. So much for the past! The new entrepreneur must: operate in a world
where: all the oysters already have opened and most of the pearls have been grabbed up
Here are five, suggestions for today's park and recreation entrepreneur in a world of
diminishing resources.
1) Poke holes in the ol3 ways of doing things - but be prepared: to face a hostile
work environment. Reviewed existing strIf patterns, for example, may provide
insight into possible changes such as leasing out employees, encouraging 9
month jobs, better, utilizing volunteers or adopting flexr -time. Consider con-
tracting to private enterprise traditional programming or maintenance services,
Your must be rear to take risks with your reputation and become a stranger in
your own organization
2) Examine: the fringes of your operation while others; mainstream business -as -usual.
U ready to invest time and energy on ideas that `won t bear fruit until the
future, ideas that can't even be evaluated today. Your colleaxgues and staff
will see the results: of their labors next season but they won't see your results
until next year. bevelop corporate: giving strategies. Conduct energy savings
studies.. pursue. less -than -fee "simple land, acquisition tethniques. Seek bequests..
3) Twoheads are better than one or "Hever go pearl, diving in shark infested waters.'`
Team up with other individuals, agencies, corporation., or coalitions. Figure
out what is in it for others to get involved Wien you) schemes. You take the
initial risks anc`i let them share the publicity --- along with, their resources.
Soft drink and beer distributors are willing; partners$ and so are small businesses
and private agencies. Expand public agency cooperative efforts to share vehicles,
egvipment, office space and personnel, it isn't a question of who provides the
service, but who can do it best. The taxpayer does not recognize turf designated
boundaries. They are interested in the BEST plate to recreate and most often
they don't care who offers or conducts the prograi., .
4) When you run out of gasoline, use a goat as an energy efticicnt mower.
or putting it in the, context of pearls once again, hen pearls get scarce or
expensive figure out a way to make prune pits fashionable,` Learn to recycle
old programs,buildings, supplies, equipment and even people. Make rose, gardens
out of old stone and gravel pitsi golf courses from iand fills; sculptuta gardens
from swimming pools. Scrounging is becoming respectable, especially in govern-
mental and private organizations. Don't 'let people tell you scrounging isr,'t
worth the effort - but it does take effort. Each Year, for example, the
federal government deul:ares N 4 billion:dollars worth of goods as excess, a
figure 50% more than all the foundations give in grants each year. Through
General Services Administration, $400 million in goods tnds its way to local
public and other non-profit organizations.
t Be Prepared for failure. Entrepreneurs occasionally fail, and so will the park
and recreation entrepreneur.. Know how to bounce back,, pick up the pieces and
move forward to another scheme involving new edeas and redirected resources.
Strive to stretch available resources,. Learn to work smarter, not harder.
SEARCHING FOR NEW PRIVATE SECTOR ALTERNATIVES
Recognizing that there will never be enough money in the public treasury to adequately
provide for this country's growing recreation wants, and after stretching available re-
sources until there. is nog more stretch left, the entrepreneur has no alternative but to
seek. out new money and new approaches to delivering recreation opportunities. This means
playing an aggressive role in the private and busin-ss communities because these sectors
of our society will, not offer their resources voluntarily. ^aye park and recreation
entaapreneur must identify the private and buaiaess sectors' elements, analyze their
potezlti&l for assistance, develop a plan of action, and then design strategies to approach
them. The effort will be considerable but the promising rewards are great.
1. Fred Fisher; "Nev Entrepreneurs", Public Management, dune, 1981.
2
What aree the private sector elements ant.vhat do they offer? Large land owners,
industries, businesses, service clubs, youth groups, churches, foundations and professional
societies offer future development sites, tools, forklifts, graphio,s, closed stores,
abandoned factories,, parking lots,, flood plains, money, expertise, plant materials, lumber,
facilities, office eiquipment, labor, leadership, transportation and even rights. -of vay.
Where do you, find these entities? V iends and; board members will know them.
Colleagues and staff attend their club. '.The Small Business Administration, the Chamber
of Commerce and the Better Business Bureau have them onrosters. Dirt.tories like Standard
and Poors Registcr of Corporations, Directors and Executives; Fortune Double 500 Directory
and The Foundation Grants. Index offer assistance,
What methods can be used to tap these resources? Advisory Councils, gift cataloguesp
park, and recreation foundations, fund raising, volunteer projects and adopt -a -park or adopt:
a -program programs have all been successful methods tG involve and utilize private sector
resources. The following methods are. examined in more detail.
1) Advisory Councils can be the traditional board appointed elected officials to
provide overall .uidance to park and recreation agencies or they can take a new
form and have as their members, business; and corporation. leaders who serve at
their own pleasure.. An example cows tar =mind. In Dos Angeles, California,
business leaders, from banks, law firms, construction companies, distributors.,
manufacturers, public relation firms, to name but a few, have formed the Council
for Community Ccncern whose members come together once a *`nth for a luncheon -
business meeting. Their primary concern is the quality of I',tfe in L.A. county.
This group represents a growing movement, toward cooperation between government
and the private sector in this country.,
Executives with the desire and ability to work synergistically ,formed the Cou=ncil
in recognition,of the importance of leisure activities and the physical. en-
vironment. Their goals include bridging, commu'nicatiPns between the business
community and the Parks and Recreation Department, increasing citizen awareness
of the recreational opportunities, encouraging innovation in public recreation
and assisting the Park and Recreation Depti to more quickly respond to public
recreation needs. They established a non-profit rax exempt foundation to further
their goals and arranged an. agreement with United Way so that 'United Way
donaticns crn be designated for the foundation. Their immediate efforts have
culminated in donated trucks, visual aids, an Apple 11, computer and,rmaller
promotional projects. They are also exploring the sharing of their expertise,
services, and talents via executive personnel and, training exchanges; conducting
efficiency analysis and energy conservation studies, utilizing corporate facili-
ties adjoining parklands and other opportunities for partnerships such as sharing
computer time, loaning equipment, joint purchasing/bulk ordering:, p;.oduct testing
and special employee recreation programs.
2) Gift Catalogues like Houston Warks: TheirFuture is Our Responsibility,
offers citizen opportunities to purchase plants, benches, trail markers, tables;
and landscape lighting fixtures, using, their gifts as charitable contributions.
Clubs might want to go in: together to buy fountains, pools, gazebos or shelters.
Tulsa Oklahoma's Parks_ Need Friends Too offers the public $150 litter receptacles
or a $40,000 playground unit with dozens of items in the price range between the
two. Albuquerque had the: entire catalogue printed free through donations of
cash, the talent of a graphics artist, and the services of a print{r.g company.
3 -
3) Adopt -a -nark or Adopts - Pro ta!n concepts have dozens of examples. Here are
two very different adopt -&-park: programs. in 1979 Hast Bay Regional Park
District in Oakland, California signed an agreement with. Kaiser Aluminum and
Chemical Corp., Kaiser pledged W,000 cash and in -kind -services for the first,
year of a 3 year period to adopt a park near the homecommunity of Kaiser
employcesi. The total contribution provided new play equipment (installed one:
weekend, by 70 Kaiser employees), solar heating for the swimming pool, and free
summer bus transportation for low income residents., in cooperation with the
Transit Authority. The President of Kaiser followed up this success story by
bringing together 40 other Fast. Bay corporation executives at a luncheon where
he urgedeach one to adopt a parka
Another case. example comes from Olympia, Washington, Capital Hill High School.
One -hundred students in ADistributive Education Class of America (DELA), a
leadership club,, adopted several parks in the Thurston County Park & Recreation
Dept. They performed functions: of litter control, brush and grass cutting,
vandalism inspection, and day-to-day grounds and restroom maintenance;. Future
plans include the malnte!uit ce of trails and playgrounds.. Without DECD., those
parks could have been closed for lack of funds.
4) Est°bushing trust ands, foundations or non-Pr-Ofit or anizations whose purposes.
include improving park and recreation s, terns is a rapidly growing phenomenon in
the United States. Sometimes re"erred to as ret,ipent foundations because they
are concerned with securing resources exclusively for parks and recreation, these
non --profit entities can receive cash, or persor,.al and real property under a
corporate status established under Internal Rexrenue Service 01 (c) (3)
provisions. Excellent vehicles for generating funds, the public is more
willing to donate property or cash to a non-profit organizationwhich is
managed outside governmental interference and red tape. Collectivelyo2
Havingindividualscontinuetogive84% of all philanthropy in America today.
a local organization whose purpose imrroves the local, quality of life is an
attractive incentive for individuals to part with their money, in addition to
the bonus of ai charitable deduction off gross income at tax time.
There are numerous,, active examples of these entities.Zoological and botanical
gardens have utilized# this. vehicle for deo.ades,, as have the performing arts,
museums and galleries. Who hasn't heardof the, National Endowment for the;
Arts, Nature Conservancy or the. Trust for Public Land?
The Minneapolis Parks Foundation, establ.ishod•i.n 1977 to fight Dutch Elm
Disease, and reforest Minneapolis parks, has taken an active role in soliciting
private gifts and gran" and sponsoring activities for the park systema
Wheeling, West. Virginias, Trust Fund, Texas Conservation Foundation and the
National Park Foundation are all also examples of recipient: foundations.
Nowa many small communities are. establishing their own community foundations
or trusts;. Whether in trust or corporate form, the governing body is made up
of folks representing the community, and in many instances includes the chief
administrator of the local park and recreation department. SempPrvirons Funds
was one of our country's earliest efforts at utilizing this kind of private
secto`, vehicle. Hstablished in 1900 in the. Santa Cruz Mountains, California,
it offers tax incentives for land contributions or gifts of cash, opportunities
for memberships and
iissthhetprotection.iofothe navturavarybeauty
ofetheeto
mounta ns,
decade but their goal p
trees and wildlife of the Santa Cruz Mountains.
2, Giving USA, 1980 Annual Report
4
5) Corporate Giving amounts to 1.35 billion dollars a year, an impressive but
inadequate figure. " In 1935 the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) permitted
contributions to be deducted from federal corporate taxes up to 5Z of the
corporationst net income, and in 1964 a,revision in the law permitted de-
ductibns in any one year to be. distributed over a 5 year tax peti-od. The,
Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 has increased a corporation's, deduction
for charitable. contributions to 10% of taxable incom. This new law provides
corporations with an attractive alternative to paying federal taxes, while
strengthening their public image and making importer.-- contributions to
society. The Conference Board, an organization promoting and monitoring
corporate social responsibility and philanthropy, states that only 20% of
America's corporations ever gave, 5% of the allowable deduction. The national
average for corporate giving was alittle over 1%. The 4%balance, of the
allowable deductiwi represents an untapped potential for fund raising. Now
that indu;,tries can jive 10%, the incentive to pursue corporate philanthropy
looks even more attractive.
There appears to be no standard pattern for corporate giving, which makes it
admittedly difficult for the park and recreation entrepreneur to design a
model stregegem., useful for all businesses.
One national corporation has written corporate giving objectives which
are explai-ncNd to grant seekers, It pre furs to fund new pro jents with
larger grants.
A small business in California likes to identify with local program
and has been known to take out ads in local papers extolling the
virtues of organizations it funds.
other corporations will funnel their giving through corporate
foundations. Corporate foundations are requited to file an IRS
990 -AR annual report listing every grant given. This makes it easier
for the park and recreation grantsman to identify and track down
prospective corporate givers.
In Skokie, Illinois, a 4th generation family -owned -business makes $500
neiChborhood grant awards on the request of employees.
Av-thcT corporation pays for all architectural fees for public buildings.
only 1 in 5 corporations mentions its philanthropy in annual reports and few
corporations designate specific persons responsible for philanthropy. If
corporate foundations have assets less than 1 million dollars and giVe grants
less than $51000 (and hundreds of torporate, foundations fit this category), they
are not listed in the Foundation Directory. If they are listed, the names of
the corporation and the foundatio,,l may not be the same. Furthermoreo corporations
are NOT required to divulge specific contributions to 4
stockholders, the
general pdolic, or the Securities Exchange. Commission,.
Elusive World of
ter, Los Angeles, CA 1977:
to Giving by Jack Shakely
Elusive World of Corporate
5-
APPROACH THE CORPORAMN
Partnership between industry and recreation requires: investigation, strategy
development and then a person-to-person approach.: Here are some suggestions to reek
corporate gifts or assistance:
1) Develop a Marketable Program
a. Start with the park and recreation department. Have goals stated in simple
concise words. Objectives should be tangible. Develop a case statement,
a BRIEF document stating agency purpose, goals, objectives, organization
chart, and brief history.
b. Examine areas where the agency needs help, List items, sites ,s, programs
MOST needed by the agency. Is the policy -making -board fully committed
to this list? What are. the alternatives or mix -and -match funding, sources
to corporate. giving?
c, Calculate cost for the items, slates or programs costs. Eow mangy* personnel
are required to operationalize the programs, maintain the sites,, or use
the items? Are these persons already on staff?
d. Assign a qualified person already on staff to raise funds from the
private sectors. if one: isn,'t available, are volunteers in the community*
or from the policyy-making=board willing to act as consultants,, contact
persons or provide the required leadership?
2) Identify Potential Private Sector Resources
a. Inventory all.businesses and industries, and; then match the agency's
list of needs with known interest, products, services, and skills of
the: corporations. This matching of their "knowns" with agency "need:"
is important. Tho 41fficult task, a determining,corporate giving
interest and previous phlantbropy..
b, Most states have; foundation directories,, obtained from the state's
Attorney General's Office. The Attorney General's office will also
have on file corporate foundation trustees, purpose of grants, grant
recipients and the amount of the grants.. Copies are also available
on file at the Foundation Center's 55 regional offices, their two
national offices in Washington, DC and New York City, and the rational
IRS office in Cornwells Heights, Pennsylvania.
A more direct approach is to simply call the corporation and ask for
the: public affairs department. In 25% or more of the cases, corporate
giving is handled, through this department. Ask about previous
philanthropy, inquire about known social -community interests, and
ask for the nam of the person to contact within the corporation If
the contact peroOn is the president$ and 25% of corporate giving is
channelled directly through that office, try and identify some facts
about him/her through community leaders, associates, or Vol. 2.y
Standards and Poors Register of Corporations, Directors and Executives.
Vol. 2 gives biographical data on key executives. If the president
is a dogging buff then the chances of his funding a new fitness trail
is good.
6 -
3) Design, Approach Strategy
Design a-strate&v before approaching the corporations for giving, be
sensitive to both their needs and limitations,, The contact person at
the corporation might not be an executive on payroll, the president
at the som,-one in public relations, Whomever it might be, it is best
to do, some research about the person, if possible, prior to the meeting.,
There is an old corporation adage, "the system rewards conservatism,"
Lower level managers are paid to say "no" while upper-level executives.
are paid to say "yes". Therefore,, identify your contact, and know where
in the organization he functions. Make inquiries among board members
or community leaders.. Also, decide who will make the contact on behalf
of the park and recreation agency, Oneuniversity development officer,
successful in making his university first in the state and the 20th in,
the nation, in generating corporate gifts, emphatically argues, the
best research, case statement, and proposal aren't worth a damn
without the 'people to people' contact". Also decide where the initial
meeting will take place. Lunches, parties! golf games, lodge -meetings
or offices are all possibilities.
Next prepare both an oral and a written presentation but NEVER use the
written material during the presentation, or give the written documents
to the contact. He can't read, and listen to the presentation at the
sane time. The written text is for him to review after your meeting.
Use facts and use logic and be specific. Don't resort to emotional
appeal. Remember, businesses fund for tax purposes, benefits to
their own employees or public image. Keep the oral presentation brief
and tailor it to the corporate or contact person's interest* Use
visuals, and: include budget projections and time frame for project im-
plementation.
The written presentation should include the case statement, specific
projects and their objectives, why those projects should be funded,
projects' budgets, future plans and accountability back to the corporation,
Indicate what the corporation might get from the giving besides taxrelief,
recognition, more employee reoreation, a better community, etc. Know
how many of their employees use, or live near the parks and recreation
facilities.
Some corporations want NO recognition, however. One corperate president
wrote an article for the Grantsmanship Center entitled,, "I Hate Charities",
in response to the dozens of little leagues,, city symphonies and girl
scouts hounding his office for money. It seems,a well intentioned and
happy recipient developed a high visibility recognition campaign to
thank the donor. The press releases brought every other fund raiser
to his door.
2 -
Recognition is important but have alternatives to public accolades.
Letters:, plaques and private ceremonies are,just as effective for the
shy" corporate giver. Several years apo the National Recreation and:
park Association (NUA) honored Mt. Dupont for his outstanding support
to conservation and generous gifts. of parkland to the, state. of Delaware.
When Mr..Dupont failed to appear in Boston at the NRPA Congress to receive
his award and publ:.c recognition,, the Associations called to establish
w convenient time and date in Wilmington when the press, Mr. Dupont and
other political, figures could be present. Mr. Dupont, however,, was
adamant. He called back to say that a quiet luncheon. with the local
county park and recreation,director, an NRPA staff member and himself
WITHOUT fanfare would be adequate.
4) Making the Presentation
Accoriiing to some grantsmen, corporations, unlike, grant aiding foundations,
feel more comfortable with the personal approach "hands on" to giving.
They prefer tc see, listen to and observe the seeking recipient. The
agency contact should be assertive and not hesitate, particularly in the
presence of a power intimidation environii*ent: such as tl raised desk of
the president, thick carpets, or spacial voids between chairs and
meeting participants.
Dress is important. Clothes and the way they are worn give impressions of
success,, attention to detail and awareness of appropriateness.
ae prepared to negotiate, Accept services in kind such as free legal
counseling, computer programs, construction crews or er.,gineering, help.
The Conference Board. reports that 92% of corporation presidents: do
philanthropy work on company time, up to S hours per week. Xerox, IBM
and Bank of A;;erica all have maned executive programs. One marketing,
manager at Xerox was given a 7 month lewre to establish a Scottsdale,
Arizona foundation. Xerox allocates 264 months of leave for voluntary
purposes per year for mid -managers who continue to receive benefits and
jab -return guarantees. As park foundations spring up all across the
country, and the need for experienced fund raisers increases, corporate
executives on loan could be a valuable asset.
Acce t articles like vans or equipment. American Honda donated 10,000
mihibikes to the YMCA ict: ase as a counseling tool with delinquent youth.
Use one gift. to obtain a match with another. J -Haul transported the.
10,000 Hondas on. special trailers.; Use the. art services tom, one, the
paper from another and, the printing sources from another to print:
promotional materials.
Accept ad space :from trucks, buses, banks and shopping centers. Acce t
dollar matching gifts. Accept inventory item gifts. The 1976 Tax,Reform
Act makes it attractive. Accept hij1h.-riak loans where the corporation
can write it off as a gift IF the agency couldn't pay back.
CONCLUSION
The first order of business for the park and recreation professional, in today's.
apidl,y changing social and political environment, is to think and act like an
entrepreneur. This means re -directing resources, examining internal efficiency,
stretching available resources until there is no stretch left, and seeking help from the
private and business communities. The erierging park and recreation entrepreneur is
entering into an era of partnership, out of necessity, with the private sector. It is
up to the new entrepreneur to challenge those corporations claiming social responsibility,
Where better to enhance the quality of life than in the leisure: movement. The corporate
money tree of giving; is growing, thanks to new tax incentives. It but awaits the, aggressive
entrepreneur with the right program and the right approach to pluck away the fruit of
survival for the park and;recrea,tion field.
About .the, AuthoA.-
Sandha Koch t6 an ASst6.tant PAD 6e6A0&, in Recx.eati.on.
Reaouhcc Admi AttAation at Nob fh. Cah.o£ina State Ufttvetc ity aw d.
a APRS Boated Mwbek.
z1 t y tis
t
V, "
sc4L+tl
NQIt% rntiIDuc227Nk w ti* a t E
eo w Dl
REVIEW & OUTLOOK
r qTheSilent Scandal
i•: sit
t1A:dml4lsirttim hu'*
ma
h
Suppose the U,S. Army were buy-
In a lot of land and asked to ngras,
TAe threat has becone reality to
the tltyahapi Valley. a moderately
way to stop at siert the conn
tai p1pellne the SON let t
W111 !relic' for $100 Million when It knew tlee real Mk, seml•suburban Area. Park, OM,
it" stberla to
u.a4 eyes, the tine wmidvt
C*WW be closer to M 111111!011. cials pramtsed to take only So homes rAher of t•tfuable ttr;d c
Suppose K wed arbitrary power' to but actually, have condemned NO, cost- P sustain the Itren
clear ramberta, retirees and surrow retreat the area Into a strange, seedy
haneowmfs ort: tat land, Supptxae If latsdscapt of boardedIl* decaying tut evert as this ante t
D" am* people tares raw w vas homes, w0krown lama sad tumble Iaie rd o"alwl s, wme tate0is;
cat#, and sent armed officttrs along down roadside :trends, an arptln that the V.L t,
btwderlodt Savtct1UteAppraisers, A few homes were spa*, t eX4 at ther
vkw, try *0 trisSupposetrthennot , It coulda't
land
paw'" dwell l t was occupW by a uy, shah
hkt way the West, tin taut d, tteet all the It wanted at talr ftu-
it value because of its grossly wom
park dklal4 it area encompasses
the home of Congressman John F; Sol- rtow eamttnas from SoNlet !4
estimated budget and so arrastgsd her*, chairman of the Parks sub. m 1 ` ewer t,
with sympathetic local offklals to slap oommitta at tae House Interior and nento parYr w store the stnsawningchanges, building r#ettictiaea Insular Affairs Cornmittee, and one of energy develaptmt, In ad, and tielike an targeted; parc#is to
force landc*mers Its
tl•e proponents 0t rk expahsiasI It OWL", the smieu art Ou
to sell at price, Usot ccadetnn#d. Ikpssttttent r14S rsprndm at their Imiltmaurl
And suppose that the bo"ry t#veal. that the Cxtgreasman also suc- tem, This txM%I t MA en.
linea on these Army ranges kept
changing to Include some people, at
c#tded in savtng the homy of salt# f
his Wilttbots,
planters to switch soviet Iwk
ural to fawn oil. The w1a
twr lou, and exclude others, at tach Tiles# exemptloana were made pos.-for export, helping ltcrp SbAt
p un" considerable gain. That an Internal In. sibk, by "act easements," wblch e R
vesuption, after noting that a set*
Of preliminary boundary maps were
allow, owners to keep their land if they
agree not .o make char kf ,d west,
mluiq from the Ates, otfered tlw alit -amt tete " fit, u II . - ' 0 '
lw1
4
haler this with,
Mu treed tMestcrtt epulFttunt. clal conclusion that it could AM as lr4t4 has encourated Per aiy to bem t><wopflin" to
documentary evidence of wrongdoing,
And, to lop it off, that all the land•buy
chase sneak easements rattle¢an
land. The unwill%j toss of park, ado
las Rstem, a$ cfampin dart
and lairs of this K
Ing served no overriding natlanal par~
pose, Wt think there tr11ght be some
istratas to accept this guidance
has been mai* reapondbie totut
whe"m aaa ru arve, tit'
totet the Soviets to cat unw V.
public outcay on the situabo114 chase cast ovrrrru ts, Congress &U=c
lntemauy4 tree tarot: `lett
netato saner energy export. Nell, on 11ytjor tedtral bursau- ised itsi million for tat Santa hooka taloMaa ovebe roe+ thtm*
cracy has Deva tharged with )m this project; tae Park Service stat! Cid-
pattern of behavktt4 It's not tits Army,
but that motherhood and apple pie out-
mat" coats could to to rm mllHon4
Tie Coshop acquisition wt*, hmn
atlktala amt t ,ta,
lite adrt WAtratloa atwedor;
tit, tate; National, Park Snevke, 0 tnillim to M million and thelat"t, to iv
e4 tt+
his
t
Evidence has been 11roueft for estimte, matiy three years oke, calls sainta the jut % me,
years that ao wdtink' is very wrong is for $too million more, aopt next moth4OUk%ls say,
the way the Park Service sat b#e11 7% pattens is consistent mow u, lact"Aingiy It kehs a
takingprlvatt property to add to tit wide, However tae depart MM'S land is so far slams ar roar• c,
vast federal land boatel labout die- grabbers feel about birds and tree",
third of the U. -P-1 load arta!, Toe U.&they seem to have taut regard be
General Accounting Ottice has issued
eight thick audits set trely critklslif Yate personal anguish. occuiotrsd
Parks and the interior Mparttrtent, by Paris Service takings played a
Interior's own Inspector General re•
cantly lnvestlp
111tge role In Interior $ecrttary Watt's
declaim to placeampletedamajor a htorstortum os
tion, Parks personnel, citing the auto land acqulsltlon !ori year, Loud lnvi- ley rows* Flu"
maty, claim they were 41002rat4 trnm"tand outcries forced hh to Two1stbutWthardlyholdsupwhenyottloan.
at the main baly of the legate
rmd ad Ids action, Just a few days
age, he Wood a new directive to field
tlarbttta hym are an inchIlItas. specie
tAre & ;
prat
In the Santa 1K1 tairts go, to de•emphastae aaquisitlaa fa
y ,, dud 4 tnia4
tstl gnetkh tsttddk cuss, A41BariofMalibuandInthetltyaaopfavorofkucostlymeam, like kvo k Anttku, of which rbc writer, t
Valley bet**" Akron and GIeXelad, easements, of ackItyin z at }calves. it appeaM "Jamesand Prj&XI
Ohio, the Park Service has been as. remalwt to be seen how that ww Play m PAM, SUM), aid now curt
sembltng "natiaatal recrtatirx; areas" rsiih his bureaucracy and Its norw sullabY ., ohm sl" (t)uttaa,
by meant particularly vd"mbk to
attack, isndostwen is tae Santa latah-
mentalist constituents, It alas retrsalr
to be sem how! muck relict wredy
WAM,
v e w M
lea MwNtalns atj" kart bsM raid tirtrted hartfentv11#n wi11 ttortds berretta trAt and'tsst4 L
na edraace ttstitnatiow of dtt; V park 010claln an the rtar11# twat
their property won't be take, yet til"
have diskoverw it lora
The scandab of the lull!Catuty f11
volved large private interests exploit•
leer pa ujw rejected her set
sic was so saattend that Atte t
as acquMids11 ng puwk land:. Today, the reverse is
filed ht. Waahingtai4 The local part rah true, Powerfw public ageocks expioh rj'he Btaolp#rviaor hat t11aottlagld Co11lefrratioar ky otsmer Mmy Ia V; ,
ltldomUlated local boanfr b lmpwe t' ory# fast 3!11# ends jttttly9E"bultland•use restrictions on thrix, hwd*
r
adding to their nxl*, to ;tr it hots 110 pre!- let her scone Is ars, tM*
wre
ynto
gssia`M aanndd ttom, rMY eptiated
rIYm of thtm. 'lmm lit:
Voices of '+ mstmases Past
ON of her dutinctka occurttd i
w she t, prgductnt A
QuartsIr AWtltnt" 11911l.
F vt lomwr T"ASUry %K*mtart" to decade ago that the budget oras Dred" talb1.1w. ' ;`
and ante Iomwr Q*w&mt Secretary
have emerged from relative obscurity gc+ 9 00 of control, suets critics might
he tttnpted to complala,
sac 4W M Jaxusty, arta, it
qty ` rlei` " to d,mand that the President and Coal.
get the budlott Under at least a 1.hesumabty, the answer to that
mlolmisilmnl nntnunr of control. As, tend• w old bt that It Is a lot easitr to tit hi
R
CITY CSF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
TELEPHONE (612) 559-280
MEMO
DATE; June 9 198•
TAS Eric Blank, Director of' Parks & Recreat.Aon
FROW Prank Boyles, Assistant. City Manage'
aUP,).ECT: rLYMOUTH, LAND TRUST
As, you know; the City Council considered a draft policy creating
a Plymouth Land Trust at their July -7 meeting, At that time the
Council, directed that the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission
reviev the proposed policy prior to final City Council ,approval.
Please place this item: on the agenda for the next Park and
Recreation Advisory commission agenda to receive their comments
wail, submit all Park and Recreation Advisory Commission recom-
mendations to the City Council when the policy receives final
City Council consideration currently scheduled for the duly 12
meeting.
FB jm
attach
1•
s
POLICY RELATING TO THE
PURPOSE., CREATION AND OPERATION'
OF THE PLYMOUTH PARK AND RECREATION. LAUD TRUST
Resolution No. $2_
Oune 7, 1982
WHEREAS, the City desires to provide parks and facilities for the recreational.
use of Plymouth residents in accordance with the Park and Recreation element of
the Plymouth Cimprehensive. Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City- has historically purchased, land and capital: items for such:
park facilities; and
WHEREAS$ periodically Individuals and corporations; render donations to the city,
for park: purposes; And
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to establish a formal procedure for the.
review, acceptance or rejection of such donations; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 465.05 empowers the city to accept a grant or devise
of any real or personal property and maintain; such property, for the benefit of
its citizens in accordance with the terms prescribed by the donor;
NOWt THEREFORE* BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Ply-
mouth that this policy shall establish a Plymouth Park and Recreation Land Trust
and govern the purpose and operation of said trust.
1. Establishment
a. The Plymouth Park and Recreation Land Trust is hereby estahlished.
Z. Purpose
a. The purpose of the land trust shall: be to accept cash or real or
personal, property donationsfor park land purchases improvements or
con3tructlon of facilities for park purposes..
b. This policy shall; not govern donations made for recreation
programming, tree planting, or rather municipal purposes.
3. Operation
ai. All proposed park donations shall be initially 'received and review-
ed by the Plymouth Park and Recreation Director.
b. If the proposed donation is land, the Park and Recreation Director
shall prepare a graphic showing the proposed parcel overlayed'
against the current park/trail component of the Comprehensive
Plan. He shall also prepare a report identifying the characterts
tics of the proposed parcel, its conformance with the pack compon
ant of the Comprehensive Plan, any conditions upon which the dopa.
w ICY RELATING TO THE
PURPOSE, CREATION AND OPERATION
OF 1'NE, PLYNoVTH, PARK AND RECREATION LAND TRUST
Y,
Page Two
tion is contingent, any anticipated costs including taxes$ assess-
ments, or reclamation cost which the city would incur by accepting
the parcel, and a recommendation on whether .or n.ot or under what
conditions the donation should be accepted.
c. if the proposed donation is money or personal property, the Park.
and Recreation Director shall prepare; a report identifying the
nature and magnitude of the donation, the conditions upon which the
donation is contingent and recommend a proposed disposition of the
donation.
d. The Park and Recreation Director shall submit his report to the
Park and Recreation Advisory Commission. The; commission shall
consider the report and the criteria set forth in #4 below and
recomanend that the City Council accept, reject, or otherwise dis-.'.
pose of the proposed donation.
e. The City Council shall, be the final approval authority for all pro-
posed donat.aons to the land trust. The Council shall, among other
things, base its opinion regarding the disposition of a proposed
donation upon the Park and Recreation Director's report, recormen
dations of the Parr and Recreation Advisory Commission and the
criteria set forth in #4 below.
f. The City Attorney shall review, approve and prepare ail necessary
donation documents, including a written declaration of the property
value donated to the city. The donation transaction shall not. be
deemed final until all documents have been approved by the City
Attorney, executed, and/or recorded as may be necessary.
4. Review Criteria
In reviewing donation offers, the Park and Recreation Advisory
Commission and City Council shall consider at Yeast the following:
a. The proposed donation is consistent with the park component of the
Comprehensive Plan. Preference will be given to those donations
which involve park or facility improvements contained in the cur-
rent 5 -year Capital Improvement Program.
b. The physical -',lar, acteristics of the proposed land to be dedicated
are such that it is useable for park or trail purposes without sub-
stantial reclamation.
c. Donor conditions far parcel or personal property donations are: not
restrictive.
d. Costs to the city in terms of land reclamation, lost revenues,
special assessments, liability exposure, etc., in accepting the
donation are minimal.
r
a1 CLAYTON L...WiLV911.0
FI[R CRT R ICFLe*
J,ORNNIO 010111tN
JON0 9,OAAwl
OAVIO. J. NCNNCQY
JONN O.O=AN.
OI.CNN C.IWROUE
COA111E.90. L IEFCV.&OM
KnecRt " LULCR.IC;
JCFrRCV J. 6TRAND ,
JAM &* R 0*"AAA
WAARY J. OJOIiKwwo
JOHN e. K"CosCL
OAYLc NOLAN
CINDY L.LAVORATO
LAW OMCCI
LeFEVERE, LEFLER, KENNEDY, Q'BR EN & DRAWZ
CJ ATICNAPgbFCbOIONAkA
41140bKLY14 CENTER OMCC
41000 ITINST OANk PLACIL WCOT 103 OROOKLTN LAW CENTER
INNtArOLIS, MINNCOOTA 00402 56.37 OROOftLYN BOULEVARD
IROCALYN CENT ER,MINNESOTA SS419
TCLCRFIONC tOlti ]iA.p^A', !(412)530.41037
April 23 1982
Mr.. Frank Boyles
Assistant City Manager
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
RIcNAmb j. scN urci1 ,
R
1
Re Establishment of a Land. Trust
for the City of Plymouth
Dear Frank:
You have asked our office to check into the possibility of
the City of Plymouth establishing a land trust which would
be similar in form to "the Jackson dole. Land Trust". It is
my understanding that the purpose of this trust would be to
encourage individuals to make gifts of land or of conserva-
tion easements to the City or to make donations of money
with which the City could buy land, easenwints or options on
land within the City of Plymouth.
My research indicates that it would probably not be necessary
for City to establish a separate entity to perform this
function. Minnesota. Statutes S4,65.03 provides that "Any
city, county, school district or town may accept a grant or
devise of any real or personal property and maintain such
property for the benefit of ,tts citizens in accordancewith
the terms prescribed by the donor. . ." Therefore, I would
think it would be unnecessary to -establish a separate non-
profit corporation to hold title to this property; I think
that should the City Council determine that this is some-
thing that they wish to do, one procedure they may wish to
consider would bi the adoption of a resolution designating
the Park and Recreation Department of the City of Plymouth
or'a subcommittee thereof as the agency which would be
responsibi.le for reviewing proposed dedications of gifts of
land to the. City and administering a fund which would
consist of the donation of funds from citizens for acquisi-
tion of park land and conservation easements. l would also
suggest that their review autbority specifically exclude
land which is dedicated to the. City for street, utility or
i LAW OIrFiGti
t
hO'r-YERE LEFLER,KENNEDY, O'ORIEN & DRAW
t` Mr. Prank Boylea
April 23, 198
Pace 2'
other specific non -park purposes. As I see it, the purpose
of this review wo-t l d :be to inaure that the proposed dedica-
tion of land wr.-ti*U C%t into the. City's overall park scheme
and that the l Ad ,hich is bung donated was suitable for
the purpose for which it was being donated. It would be
unfortunate if to City became the dumping ground for all
the unusable low land in the City of Plymouth. After the
Park and Recreation Department or a subcommittee thereof
analyzed the proposed gift, the next step would be for them
to make: a recommendation. to the City Council as to whether
or not the City should accept the gift which was being
offered. In thecase of expenditure of money donated to the
City for the express purpose of acquiring land or conserva-
tion easements, the Park andRecreationDepartment, upon
viewing their park land needs, would make recommendation to
the City Council concerning how this money should be spent.
Further, the Park and Recreation Department might be authorized
t:,:) enter into a, publicity campaign which would promote the
dedication program to interested persons within the City.
If such a program were to be established, care should be.
tAken to avoid several problems that could arise.
1. A well conceived plan now exists to assure, that
the City's park and recreation areas grow as the City itself
develops. Care should be taken that any supplemental program
does not jeopardize the master plan.
2.. qt is interesting that the. City is presently
seeking ways to divest itself of small parcels of land which
have no use to the City but which burden: the City's main-
tenance budget. Would the proposed program acid to this
burden?
3. Neighborhood pressures; arising from knowledge of
such gifts or donations might make administration of such, a
progr;,m more difficult. While some groups might wish the
donated land developed for use at once, others might well
resist any development at all.
4. The whims of donors as to the use to be made of
the property given could become a probl::m. Care should be
taken to accept only unrestricted', w',ts or at least thole
with inconsequentit,l restrictions.
t"
LAW 0MCKS
LeFIEVERE, LEFLER, KENNEDY O'SRIEN DRAWZ
Mr. Frank Boyles
April 23, 1982.
Page
None of the above concerns are insurmountable. They do,
however, merit careful consideration in setting up such a
program. In aAy event, the City Council must be the ulti-
mate decision making body and have the ultimate responsi-
bility.
I.hope this satisfactorily answers your questions. Should
you have any other questions concerning this matter, please
do not hesitate to contact me.
Yours very truly,
I
Herbert. P. Lefler III
HPL:np
DATE:
T0:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD„ PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
TELEPHONE. (612) 559-2800
MEMO
June 2, 1982
James G'. Willist City Manager
Frank Boyles, Assistant City Manager'
ADOPTION OF POLICY CREATING THE, PLYMOUTH LAND
TRUST
SUMMARY: Mayor Davenport has expressed an interest in establishinq a
land trust for Plymouth park and recreation purposes similar to the
Jackson Hole Land Trust. Attached is a proposed City Council policy
which would establish and govern the purpose and operation of the
Plymouth, Park and Recreation Land Trust." The proposed policy was
drafted following the receipt of the attached opinion from the Assis-
tant City Attorney. The proposed policy is consistent with that
opinion. The Park and Recreation Director has had the opportunity to
review the policy and concurs with its contents. The proposed policy
is drafted in resolution format so that the. City Council may make
whatever mod!fications it deems appropriate and adopt the amended'
policy if it so chooses.
FB: jm
attach
POLICY RELATING TO THE
PURPOSE, CREATION AND OPERATION
OF THE PLYMOUTH PARK AND RECREATION! LAND TRUST
Resolution No. 82-
3une 7, 1382
WHEREAS the City desires to provide parks and facilities icor the recreational
use of Plymouth residents in accordance with the Park and Recreation element of
the Plymouth Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City has historically purchasedland and capital items for such
park facilities; and
WHEREAS, periodically inidividuals and corp—,rations render donations to the city
for par' -z purposes; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to establish a formal procedure for the
review, acceptance: or refection of such donations; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 465.05 empowers the city to accept z grant or devise
of any real or personal property- and maintain such property for the benefit of
its citizens in accordance with the terms prescribed by the donor;
NOW, THEREFORE, 8E IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Ply-
mouth that this policy shall establish a Plymouth Park and Recreation Land Trust
and govern the purpose and operation of said trust.
1. Establishment
a. The Plymouth. Park and Recreation Land Trust is hereby established.
2. Purpose
a. The purpose of the land trust shall be to accept cash or real; or
personal property donations for park land purchase, improvements or
construction of facilities for park purposes.
b. This policy shall not govern donations made for recreation
programming, tree planting, or other municipal purposes.
3. Operation
a. All proposed park; donations shall be initially received and review-
ed by the Plymouth Park and Recreation Director.
b. If the proposed donation is band, the Park and Recreation Director
shall prepare a graphic showing the proposed parcel overlayed
against the current park/trail component of the Comprehensive
Plan. He shall also prepare a report identifying the characteris-
tics of the proposed parcel, its conformance with the park compon-
ent of the Comprehensive Plan, any conditions upon which the dona-
POLICY RELATING TO THE
PURPOSE, CREATION AND OPERATION
OF THE PLYMOUTH PARK AND RECREATION LAND TRUST
Page Two
x
tion is contingent, any anticipated costs including taxes, assess-
ments, or reclamation cost which the city would incur by accepting
the parcel and a recommendation on whether* or not or under what
conditions the donation should be accepted,
c. if the proposed donation is money or personal property, the Park
and, Recreation Director shall prepare a report identifying the
nature and magnitude of the donation, the conditions upon which the
donation is contingent and recommend a proposed disposition of the
donation.
d. The Park and Recreation Director shall submit his report to the
Park and Recreation Advisory Commission. The commission shall
consider the report and the criteria set forth in #4 below and
recommef)d that the: City Council accept, reject, or otherwise dls-
pose of the proposed donation.
e. The City Council shall be the final approval. authority for all pro-
posed donations to the land trust. The Council shall, among other
things, base its opinion regarding the disposition of a proposed
donation upon the Park and Recreation Director's report, recommen-
dations, of the Park: and Recreation Advisory Commission and the
criteria set forth in #F4 below.
f. The City Attorney shall review, approve and prepare all necessary
donation documents, including a written declaration of the property
value donated to the city. The donation transaction shall not be
deemed final until all documents. have been approved by the City
Attorney, executed and/or recorded as may be necessary.
4. Review Criteria
In reviewing donation offers, the Park and Recreation Advisory
Commission and City Council shall consider at least the followings
a. The proposed donation is consistent with the park component of the
Comprehensive Plan. Preference will be given to those donations
which involve park or facility improvements contained in the cur-
rent 5 -year Capital Improvement Program.
b. The physical characteristics of the proposed land to be dedicated
are such that it is useable for park or trail purposes without sub
stanti,al reclamation.
c. Donor conditions- for parcel or personal property donations are not
restrictive.
d. Costs to the city in terms of land reclamation„ lost revenues,
special assessments, liability exposure, etc., in accepting the
donation are minimal.
LAW orricCs
LF FE1tERE LEFLER, KENNEDY, O'BRIEN & DRAWZ,
A. ROFt6sIOMAI. ASSOCIATION
CLAYTOK L"WILVCRc BROOKLYN CENTER OFFICE
11944164T t LCrLCR 2000 FIRST BANK PLACC WICST IOy 6ROOKLYK LAW CENTER
J. OCNNIs. O'IRRi[M
JOHN c.DRAWZ MINNs/RCL1s, M11NNssOtA s4O!' s637BROOKLYN BOULEVARD
DAVID J. KCNIICOY BROOK LI'N CC NTCR.MINNCSOTA SS420
JON- s.:DCAN TCLC NONC (012.)»3+0643 (si2)530.003?
sLCNN C': rlJA01J[
CNARLCs L.11rcVCRC
NCRRCRT IR LCFLCN.W
JCr R[w J. f,TRAND
JAMES, M *'M,CARA
14ART J., DJOMKLUND
JOHN 4..11I111tsscl.
OAYLC NOLAN
CINDY L.LAVORATQ
April 23, 1962
Mr. Frank Boyles:
Assistant City Manager
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
Re: Establishment of a Land Trust
for the City of Plymouth
Dear Frank:
RICHARD J. SCN.i2.IC(CR
You have asked our office to check into the possibility of
the City of Plymouth establishing a land trust which would
be similar in form to "the Jackson Hole Land Trust". It is
my understanding that the purpose of this trust would be to
encourage individuals to make gifts of land or of conserva-
tion easements to the City or to make donations of money
with which the City could buy Land, easements or options on
land within the City of Plymouth.
My research indicates that it would probably not be necessary
for City to establish a separate entity to perform this
function. Minnesota Statutes S465.03 provides that "Any
city, county, school district or town may accept a grantor
devise of any real or personal property and maintain such
property for the benefit of its citizens in accordance with.
the terms prescribed by the donor. ." Therefore, I would
think it would be unnecessary to establish a separate non-
profit corporation to hold title to this property. I think
that should the City Council determine that this is some-
thing that they wish to do one procedure they may wish to
consider would be the adoption of a resolution designating
the Park and Recreation Department of the City of Plymouth
or 4a subcommittee thereof as the agency :which would be
reaponsibile for reviewing proposed dedications of gifts of
land to the City and administering a fund which would ,,
consist of the donation of funds from citizens for acquisi-
tion of park land and conservation easements. I would also
suggest that their, review authority specifically exclude
land which is dedicated to the City for street, utility or
LAW OFFICES
L[FEVERE, LEFLER, KENNEDY, 0'130RICN' i DRAWZ
Mr. Frank Boyles
April 23, 1982:
Page 2
other specific non -park purposes. As I see it, the purpose
of this review would be to insure that the proposed dedica
tion of land would fit into the City's overall park scheme
and that the land which is being donated was suitable for
the purpose for which it was being donated. It would be
unfortunate if the City became the dumping ground for all
the unusable low land in the City of Plymouth. After the
Park and. Recreation Department or a subcommittee thereof
analyzed the proposed gift., the next step would be for them
to make a recommendation to the City Council as to whether
or not the City should accept the gift which was being
offered. In the case of expenditure of money donated to the
City for the express purpose of acquiring land or conserva-
tion easements, the Park and. Recreation Department, upon
viewing their park land needs, would make recommendation to
the City Council. concerning how this money should: be spent.
Further, the Park and Recreation Department might be authorized
to enter into a publicity campaign which would promote the
dedication program to interested persons within the City.
If such a program were to be established, care should be
taken to avoid several problems that could' arise.
1. A well conceived plan now exists to assure that
the City's park and recreation areas grow as the City itself
develops. Care should be taken that any supplemental program
does not jeopardize the master plan.
2., It is interesting that the City is presently
seeking ways to divest itself of small parcels of land which
have no use to the City but which burden the City's main-
tenance budget. Would the proposed program add to this
burden?
3. Neighborhood pressures arising from knowledge of
such gifts or donations might make administration of such a
program more difficult. While some groups might wish the
donated land developed for use at once, others might well
resist any development at all.
4. The whims of donors as to the use to be made of
the property given could become a problem. Care should be
taken to accept only unrestricted gifts or at least thoge
with inconsequential restrictions.
0
LAW OFFICE!
LCFEVERE, LEFLER, KENNEDY, O'BRIEN A DRAWZ
Air. Frank Boyles
April 23, 1982
Page 3
None of the above concerns are insurmountable. They do,
however, merit careful consideration, in setting up such 8.
program. In any event, the City Council must be the ulti-
mate decision making body and have the ultimate responsi-
bility.
I hope this satisfactorily answers your questions. Should
you have any other questions concerning this matter, please
do not hesitate to contact me
Yours very truly,
Herbert" P. Lefler III
HpLanp
4