Loading...
CR2002-189 Ord 886 CITY OF December 9, 2002 ~ Council Report 2002-189 . HOPKINS AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE TERM LIMITS AND COUNCIL REPRESENTATION OF THE PARK BOARD Proposed Action Staff recommends adoption of the following motion: Move to approve adoption of Ordinance 2002-886; amendinq Hopkins City Code Sections 200.03 and 335.01. This action will extend the consecutive terms of office allowed on the Park Board from two terms to three terms of office. This action will also reflect the current practice of having a staff liaison on the Park Board in lieu of a member of the City Council. Overview Outgoing board members Mark Kuhl and Patty Schuessler expressed concern over Park Board member term limits at the May 20,2002 Park Board meeting. It was discussed how difficult it is for Hopkins Park Board members to get enough experience with the limit on the length of time that Board members can serve. The Hopkins/Minnetonka Joint Recreation Board has City of Minnetonka representation with longer terms and seem to have an operational edge over the City of Hopkins members with less experience. This item was placed on the September 16, 2002 Park Board agenda as a New Business item for further discussion. At the September 16, 2002 meeting, discussions supported changing the term limits on the Park Board. Actions taken . at the November 18, 2002 Park Board meeting took action recommending to the City Council that Ordinance 2002-886 be amended as written and to be published. Primary Issues to Consider . Will changing the term limits restrict recruitment or opportunities for other City residents? . Will City of Hopkins residents have better representation on the Joint Hopkins/Minnetonka Recreation Board? . Does the Park Board require direct Council representation in lieu of a staff liaison? Supportinq Information . Park Board minutes (May 20, 2002; September 16, 2002; November 18, 2002) . Letter - Dick Niemann (November 19, 2002) . Letter - Patty Schuessler (September 15, 2002) . Ordin ce 2002-886 dt !A;i-<!<~ Ray V tm n, Parks/Forestry Superintendent Financial Impact: $ 0 Budgeted: Y/N N Source: N/A Related Documents (CIP, ERP, etc.): Hopkins City Code Sections 200.03 & 335.01 . Notes: Primary Issues to Consider 0 Will this action restrict recruitment or opportunities for other residents seeking to volunteer . on boards and commission? Past experience indicates that the City has difficulty getting new members on some boards and commissions, such as the Park Board. It is not anticipated that residents will be denied opportunities to serve. Experienced members however, will not be forced off the Park Board. On occasion, lapses in term memberships have resulted in a lack of a quorum and the postponement of Park Board meetings. 0 Will the City of Hopkins residents have better representation on the Joint Hopkins/Minnetonka Recreation Board? Past experience has documented that the more experienced members on this board tend to drive the agenda and the eventual results. Minnetonka Park Board members may serve four 2- year terms. This change will allow for more experienced City of Hopkins representation on the Joint Board. 0 Does the Park Board require direct Council representation in lieu of a staff liaison to be effective? The current practice has been used for about five years. As the duties and responsibilities of City Council members to attend public meetings and hearings increased, it became increasingly more difficult to regularly attend Board and Commission meetings. Having a staff liaison represent the Council and having Board and Commission reports at City . Council meetings has been used successfully. It does not appear that a lack of direct Council representation on the Park Board has negatively impacted Park Board initiatives. . CITY OF HOPKINS P ARK BOARD MEETING MINUTES MAY 20, 2002 . that the Park Board give consideration to creating a dog walk, exercise park within the Hopkins Parks system. Both T. Boarder and K. Boarder were present and reviewed their request. Materials on dog recreation areas within the City of Minneapolis and statewide were distributed. Hopkins staff liaison R. Vogtman indicated that the only park location within our park system that could support such a site would be within Valley Park. The newly acquired 10+ acre parcel on the south end of Valley Park could accommodate something like what the request was for. A discussion on natural boundaries of the site versus fenced boundaries and the associated costs took place. It was then recommended that this item be continued on to the July 15, 2002 meeting. Prior to this meeting, Park Board members will meet on June 27, 2002 at Valley Park. It is planned to have a picnic to thank outgoing members M. Kuhl and P. Schuessler. Afterwards the Park Board will make an on-site visit to that portion of the park that may be used for the dog recreation area. No other action was taken. E. Downtown Park Improvements. Hopkins staff liaison R. V ogtman reviewed the improvements scheduled for Downtown Park. C.LP. budgeted items include the stage, new pavers and associated amenities such as benches, tree grates and trash receptacles. The Park Board was in support of the proposed design and styles of grates, . benches and receptacles. M. Kuhl moved and R. Niemann seconded a motion to recommend that staff proceed with the improvements with the green memorial benches, green trash receptacles and black tree grates. On the vote: M. Kuhl, P. Schuessler, R. Niemann and D. Specken voted yes. The motion was approved 4 - o. F. Park Area Assignment Reports. N one noted. G. Parks Update. Staff liaison R. V ogtman reviewed the status of the spring work load in Parks. An anonymous letter found in Central Park regarding support for the existing tennis courts was reviewed. R. V ogtman indicated that a Mr. Gary Bragg had telephoned to register his disapproval at losing the courts to the proposed public works redevelopment. H. HopkinslMinnetonka Joint Recreation Board. The last meeting was held on May 8, 2002. The next meeting is scheduled for July 10, 2002. It was discussed how difficult it is for Hopkins Park Board members to get enough experience with the limit on length of time that board members can serve. A limit of two 2-year tem1S is felt to be restrictive to successful representation on the joint board. Milmetonka members have . longer terms and seem to have an operational edge with their great experience. Page 2 of3 CITY OF HOPKINS PARK BOARD MEETWG MINUTES SEPTEMBER 16,2002 . Three Rivers Park District Trail Permit. C. Staff liaison Ray V ogtman reviewed the permitting process required by the Park District for cities to use the trails from November 15, 2002 through March 31, 2003. This is an annual requirement, requiring Park Board recommendation to Council and formal City Council action. The permitted activities proposed are walking, biking and pet walking (with leashes). B. Gullickson moved and K. Boarder seconded a motion to recommend to Council that a winter trail permit with Three Rivers Park District for the activities of walking, biking and pet walking (with leashes) be applied for. On the vote: R. Niemann, B. Gullickson, D. Specken, K. Boarder and R. Helgeson voted yes. The motion was approved 5-0. D. Term Limits and Review 0 ark Board By-Laws. Chairperson R. Niemann led the discussion on term limits of the P ark Board. Currently the by-laws allow up to two, 2-year terms. Outgoing members Mark Kuhl and Patty Schuessler (letter - September 15, 2002) support increasing terms and/or term limits. It has been increasingly difficult to recruit citizens for openings on the board. It is also difficult for members to feel productive on the board until the second or third year. It was agreed that permitting a . third term would be beneficial to the City if a member chose to volunteer for a third term. Section 11.1 of the Park Board By-Laws has the Amendment Procedure for the By-Laws. B. Gullickson moved and K. Boarder seconded a motion to amend Article 4.2 Terms of the Park Board Commission By-Laws to strike the word "two" in "Citizen members shall serve no more than -twe consecutive terms of office. " and replace with the word "three". On the vote: R. Niemann, B. Gullickson, D. Specken, K. Boarder and R. Helgeson voted yes. The motion was approved 5-0. E. Dog Park Discussion. The board members had a short discussion on dog parks. It was generally agreed that member visits to existing metro dog parks was necessary to better understand the spatial and physical dimensions. The members agreed to attempt on-site visits to at least two sites before the November 18th meeting. Staff liaison R. Vogtman was asked to include the dogparkcom information with the minutes. No further action was necessary. E. Downtown P ark Improvements. Staff liaison R. V ogtman reviewed the work schedule for Downtown Park capital improvements. Work has been authorized for survey work and stage design. We are anticipating a spring construction schedule, with all work including stage, pavers and benches to be completed by next summer's Music in the Park series. Once designs for the stage are ready they will be presented . to the Park Board for review. No further action is necessary at this time. It was suggested that the two new members get copies of the park 2003-2008 CIP. 2 CITY OF HOPKINS PARK BOARD JvffiETING MINUTES SEP~EllI6,2002 . F. Park Area Assignment Reports. The park assignments were made as follows: Dave Specken: Hilltop, Buffer, Maetzold Katie Boarder: Valley, Cottageville) Park Valley Playground Ron Helgeson: Burnes, Central Bill Gullickson: Harley Hopkins, Shady Oak Nature Area, Oakes, Interlachen Richard Niemann: Elmo, Hiawatha Oaks, Shady Oak. Beach, Downtown G. Parks Update. Staff liaison R. V ogtman gave a brief update on projects in the park system. Maetzold is having some dugout shelters installed. Central Park storm sewer is nearing completion. New archery range butts have been replaced in Valley Park. Solheim Cup television crews are in lnterlachen. H. HoplcinslMinnetonka Joint Recreation Board. The last meeting was held at Shady Oak. Beach on September II, 2002. A relatively small deficit is eA'Pected on this years' beach operations. Attendance. declined from 68,000 to 57,000. Revenues declined from $226,000 to $188,000. Revenues were lower partially because the water play area was never open in 2002. The next meeting of the Hopkins/Minnetonka Joint . Recreation Board is scheduled for February, 2003_ V. New Business Items A Board & Commission Orientation - November 18, 2002. VI. Next scheduled meeting November 18. 2002 Possible location - Art Center VII. Adjournment D. Specken moved and R Helgeson seconded a motion to adjourn. On the vote: R Niemann, B. Gullickson, D. Specken, K Boarder and R Helgeson voted yes. Motion to adjourn at 7:50 P.M. was passed 5-0. ,. ~. Attest. _/ 'ft. - . R Niert{ann: Chairperson J . 3 CITY OF HOPKINS P ARK BOARD MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 18, 2002 -. A regular meeting of the Hopkins Park Board was held on November 18,2002. I. Call to Order Staffliaison Ray Vogtman called the meeting to order at 6:00 P.M. II. Roll Call Present were Park Board members: Richard Niemann, Bill Gullickson, Dave Specken, Katie Boarder and Ron Helgeson. Also present was Hopkins staff liaison Ray V 0 gtman. III. Approval of Minutes for September 16, 2002. E. Gullickson moved and D. Specken seconded a motion to approve the minutes for the Park Board meeting on September 16, 2002. On the vote: R. Niemann, B. Gullickson, D. Specken,1(. Boarder and R. Helgeson voted yes. The minutes were approved 5-0. IV. Business A. Solheim Cup. The Park Board reviewed the Solheim Cup letter (October 25, 2002) and briefly discussed the impact of the event on Interlachen Parle. Comments ;. were favorable overall. The park has been cleaned up and prepared for the winter skating season. This item was informational only, no fom1al action re ulred. B. Tenn Limits and Amending City Code 200.03 and 335.0l. The Park Board reviewed the S. Mielke memo (September 19, 2002) and the J. Genellie memo (October 28, 2002). The Board members discussed the merits of an ordinance to change the term limits of the Park Board and changing the code to reflect the current practice of a staff liaison instead of a City Council member. D. Specken moved and K. Boarder seconded a motion to recommend to the City Council that Ordinance 2002-886 be amended as written and to be published. On the vote: R. Niemann, B. Gullickson, D. Specken, K. Boarder, and R. Helgeson voted yes. The motion passed 5 - O. C. Park DedicatIOn Fee ~ Marketplace Lofts. The Board members reviewed the S. Stadler memo (October 9, 2002). The memo indicated that the Marketplace Lofts development project should result in $29,384.92 to be paid into the Park Dedication Fund. R. Niemann asked for a Park Dedication Fund balance if such a document was available. This item was infonnational only, no formal action was required. . 1 . November 19, 2002 417 Farmdale Road West Hopkins, NUN 55343 Phone: (952) 938-5306 Fax: (952) 988-9978 E-mail: dnieman@isd.net To: Honorable Mayor & City Council City of Hopkins From: Dick Niemann Just a few other thoughts as a result of the fine joint CounciVBoard/Commission meeting held last night. 1. It might be a beneficial thing to have the city newsletter contain a short section from each Board, reporting on past and future projects. This would publicize the Board's work and stir interest in getting more people to serve on boards. It would also let people comment on proposed actions before they come before the Council. 2. 1 do not feel that the Council is close enough to the Boards - I feel "insulated" from them by staff personnel. This is not to criticize the jobs being done by the staff liaison people, but I feel more direct communication between us is needed. The council will soon be asked to vote on an ordinance change to formalize the current practice of not having a Council member also serve on the Boards. I can understand the reason for this, but also feel it hurts the unity we are trying to achieve. One solution might be to have a Councilperson assigned to each Board as a resource and who could be invited to meetings only when major items are to be recommended. On the Park Board, for instance, I would like to have a member present when we prepare our final CIP recommendations in . order to better convey our intent and the reasoning them. I am concerned that a staff person (or anyone person) can adequately convey that infOlmation and may instead convey his or her own biases on the subject. It would also be a means for the COllllCil to convey back to the Boards items that the Boards should be aware of ie, budget limitations, etc.. 3. Another communication means that might enhance unity is to provide feedback to the Boards on the disposition of their reconunendations, so that the Boards know their suggestions were considered and the reasons for their adoption or rejection. I heard some people at the meeting voice their frustration over the lack of such feedback. Perhaps we could use a Board Recommendation Form that would : state the recommendation, the reasons for it, approximate costs, etc. and would also provide for a "Disposition" section wherein the Council could explain their action and reasoning. These forms could be prepared by the Board or the Staff person but would be signed by the Board Chair - assuring us that we knew exactly what the Council was being told. A Board member's name could also be shown for the Council to contact if they wanted to know more about that issue. These are personal observations and opinions and not necessarily those of the Park Board, although I will share this memo with them. . . September 15. 2002 To: Mayor Maxwell and City Council of Hopkins RE: Term limit of Park Board members Dear Mayor Maxwell and City Council members, On June 30th, my term on the Park Board came to a close. I served two consecutive terms of two years, as is the limit of service on this board. The two year time limits of service can mean that more people in the community get a chance to be involved in various boards and commissions. New members means new perspectives, opinions from more neighborhoods in Hopkins. It might encourage people to serve on the board since the terms aren't longer. However, I would also like to see the option of extending service for those who would so . desire. With only 6 regular meetings a year, it can take 2 years to feel confident in understanding how government operations run. I understand that Minnetonka Park Board members serve 2 four year terms. To be more effective in the Joint Recreation board, it would be beneficial to have consistent. long term interest and involvement from Hopkins members. I think a 3 or 4 year term limit with a consecutive second term option would be helpful in better serving the HoplGns Park Board. Thanks for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, f~ S~ Patty Schuessler 4 Manitoba Rd, Hopkins MN . CITY OF HOPKINS Hennepin County, Minnesota . ORDINANCE 2002-886 AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE TERM LIMITS AND COUNCIL REPRESENTATION OF THE PARK BOARD The City Council of the City of Hopkins does hereby ordain: Section 1. The Hopkins City Code, Section 200.03 is hereby amended to read as follows: 200.03 Boards and Commissions. Pursuant to the authority granted the City Council in Section 2.02 of the Hopkins City Charter, the Council has heretofore created certain boards and commission specifically a Zoning and Planning Commission in Hopkins Code 325.01, and a Park Board in Section 335.01. The term of office shall be as defined in the respective ordinances. Members appointed to the Zoning and Planning Commission shall serve no more than two (2) consecutive terms of office. Members appointed to the Park Board shall serve no more than three (3) consecutive terms of office. A member who is appointed to fill a vacancy to a term which is less than half completed shall be deemed to have served a full term of office. If the appointment is to a term which is more than half completed, the appointment shall not be deemed to constitute a term of office for the purpose of calculating the maximum length of service allowed herein. Section 2. The Hopkins City Code, Section 335.01 is hereby amended to read as follows: 335.01. Park board established. There is created and continued a Park Board for the city, consisting of six members to be appointed as follows: one mombor from the Council Staff Liaison to be appointed by the Council City Manaqer for a term of one year; and five members at large, each to serve for a term of two years. Three of the at-large members of the board shall be appointed on July 1 of each odd numbered year and the .ther two at-large members thereof plus the member to be appointod from tho Council, shall be appointed on July 1 of each even numbered year. All appointments, except those othervvise hereinabove provided, shall be made by the Mayor with the approval of the Council. A member of the board may be removed by the Mayor with the approval of the Council for misconduct or neglect of duties. Each member except the City Council mombor Staff Liaison shall have the right to vote on all matters before the board. (Amended Ord. No. 87-582, Sec. 1) Section 3. The effective date of this ordinance shall be the date of publication. First Reading: Second Reading: Date of Publication: By Eugene J. Maxwell, Mayor ATTEST: Terry Obermaier, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: . City Attorney Signature Date