Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989 06-01 CCP Planning Session with Facilitator CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF :BYROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE 561-5440 C ENTER EMERGENCY - POLICE - FIRE 911 May 25, 1989 Dear 1989 Planning session Participant: We are looking forward to our planning session next Thursday evening June 1, 1989, at Constitution Hall in our Community Center. Attached is a first draft compiled list of the issues, projects, and concerns we have received to date, from session participants. Between now and next Thursday, we will add any additional suggestions we receive. Thanking you for your interest and consideration, I am, V Splinter ger CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER p� MAU-MMOKAW `� May 25, 1989 1989 PLANNING SESSION ISSUES LIST 1. Earle Brown Farm historic renovation and redevelopment project 2. Economic development study — redevelopment policy - Housing analysis Commercial and industrial analysis - Redevelopment policy 3. Redevelopment plan 69th and Brooklyn Boulevard 4. Lynbrook area redevelopment plan 5. Planned unit development ordinance 6. I- 94/694 improvement project 7. Communication improvement project 8. Drug education and prevention program 9. Residential treatment facilities analysis 10. Senior drop -in center 11. Battered youth program 12. Proactive housing maintenance /rehab program 13. Recycling - solid waste program 14. Crime prevention fund expansion 15. Police master plan study 16. Neighborhood watch program expansion 17. Fire service master plan study 18. Aging population service needs 19. Appoint an ad hoc committee to review city building and park expansion needs (Twin Lake /Kylawn preserve park development and trails, city hall /police -fire expansion, expansion of east and west fire stations, senior drop -in center, community center expansion, ice arena, etc.) 20. Explore development of a public /private partnership between the city and a private and /or nonprofit organization to assist in handling social service activities, such as mediation, battered spouse program, battered child program, etc. v . 21. Complete the "top (A) priorities" projects of the Park and Recreation Commission by 1994 (see attached listing) 22. Complete the "high (B) priorities" and "moderate (C) priorities' of the Park and Recreation Commission between 1994 and 1999 (see attached listing) 23. Establishment of a storm drainage utility (potential of improvement of storm water runoff quality). Could remove from property taxes the costs of storm sewer maintenance, repair improvements and watershed district costs 24. Develop an intra city bus "shuttle" transportation system (use of volunteers as drivers) 25. Develop a residents helping residents program (a bartering system where a person or group would do something in exchange for assistance with his or her problem) 26. Subsidized elderly housing 27. Maintain and improve business climate and diversity 28. Clean -up (maintenance) along major roads (Highway 100 /Brooklyn Boulevard) 29. Clean -up Shingle Creek and Palmer Lake area 30. Develop a low price cable TV access to government and public access channels 31. Make open forum a more inviting and pleasant process 32. Expand city use of newsletter and cable TV to a monthly basis 33. Seek city sales tax and alternative revenue source 34. Develop a cultural center, ice arena, restaurant complex 35. Large capacity convention center (2500 +) 36. Maintenance code for commercial and industrial buildings 37. Improved or expanded public communication on redevelopment, policies, plans, and projects 38. Development of a group home siting process and plan 39. Develop annual city -wide spring clean -up program 40. Televise city council meetings f 1989 PLANNING SESSION ISSUES LIST A. Earle Brown Farm historic renovation and redevelopment project B. Economic development study - redevelopment policy - Housing analysis - Commercial and industrial analysis - Redevelopment policy C. Redevelopment plan 69th and Brooklyn Boulevard D. Lynbrook area redevelopment plan E. Planned unit development ordinance F. I 94 /694.improvement project G. Communication improvement project H. Drug education and prevention program I. Residential treatment facilities analysis J. Senior drop -in center K. Battered youth program L. Proactive housing maintenance /rehab program M. Recycling - solid waste program N. Crime prevention fund expansion O. Police master plan study P. Neighborhood watch program expansion Q. Fire service master plan study R. Aging population service needs S. Committee to review city building and park expansion needs - Appoint an ad hoc committee to review city building and park expansion needs (Twin Lake /Kylawn preserve park development and trails, city hall /police -fire expansion, expansion of east and west fire stations, senior drop -in center, community center expansion, ice arena, etc.) T. Explore development of a public /private /nonprofit partnership /social service activities - Between the city and a private and /or nonprofit organization to assist in handling social service activities, such as mediation, battered spouse program, battered child program, etc. U. Complete the "top (A) priorities" projects of the Park and Recreation Commission by 1994 (see attached listing) I r V. Complete the "high (B) priorities" and "moderate (C) priorities" of the Park and Recreation Commission between 1994 and 1999 (see attached listing) W. Establishment of a storm drainage utility - (potential of improvement of storm water runoff quality). Could remove from property taxes the costs of storm sewer maintenance, repair improvements and watershed district costs X. Develop an intra city bus "shuttle" transportation system (use of volunteers as drivers) Y. Develop a residents helping residents program (a bartering system where a person or group would do something in exchange for assistance with his or her problem). Z. Subsidized elderly housing aa. Maintain and improve business climate and diversity bb. Clean -up (maintenance) along major roads (Highway 100 /Brooklyn Boulevard) CC. Clean -up Shingle Creek and Palmer Lake area dd. Develop a low price cable TV access to government and public access channels ee. Make open forum a more inviting and pleasant process ff. Expand city use of newsletter and cable TV to a monthly basis gg. Seek city sales tax and alternative revenue source hh. Develop a cultural center, ice arena, restaurant complex ii. Large capacity convention center (2500 +) jj. Maintenance code for commercial and industrial buildings kk. Improved or expanded public communication on redevelopment, policies, plans, and projects 11. Development of a group home siting process and plan mm. Develop annual city -wide spring clean -up program nn. Televise city council meetings oo. Use cleaner or less messy sealcoating process IA E VOTE 5,,,9 MOD. HIGH TOP CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF I:BROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE 561.5440 EMERGENCY- POLICE - FIRE C ENTER May 11 , 1989 911 Dear Interested Citizen: You are cordially invited to participate in Brooklyn Center's third annual community planning process. This year we will be conducting our planning session on the evening of June 1, 1989. We will be using a new facilitator this year, Mr. James Brimeyer, and a computer to assist us in establishing our priorities. The evening session will start at 6 p.m. with a dinner at Constitution Hall in our Community Center. The actual planning process is designed to run from 6:30 p.m. and end at approximately 10 p.m. We are attempting this year to do the process in one evening. We believe the use of the computer will allow us to speed up the process and eliminate the need for two sessions as we had last year. As a part of the planning session, we are asking all participants to review the following enclosed materials: 1. A listing of the top and high priority issues from last year's planning session and their current status (Request for Council Consideration form dated 3127189). 2. A copy of a residential survey, City of Brooklyn Center, by Decision Resources, Ltd. (a professional survey of Brooklyn Center residents conducted in the earl S pring of 1989 -- t makes e y p his es int restin readi and will g ive g g g' g you a good idea of how our citizens feel about a wide range of topics). 3. A stamped, self- addressed envelope and a form titled "A Listing of Additional Issues for Consideration in Brooklyn Center's 1989 Planning Process." Please indicate on this form at least three- issues, trends, new services, modification of existing services, or goals you personally believe the City of Brooklyn Center should consider on the enclosed form and return it to my office by May 22, 1989. We will then collate and summarize the items submitted and the will form the basic 'n w w" a lists hick i11 be considered a y g r t our June 1 planning session. We will send out a collated list prior to the June 1 session. Also, please note, at the bottom of the enclosed form are indicators of whether or not you will be able to be with us on June 1 and whether or not you will be joining us for dinner. Should you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me at 561 -5440. Thanking you for your interest and cooperation, I am, Sincerely, Y G plinter City Manager enc . nee�u- uueivan n,r r�2 Council Advisory Staff Other Commissioners Mayor Dean N u' y yq ist Barb Jensen Jerry Splinter Rich y p Theis Councilmember Celia Scott Cliff Williams Paul Holmlund Dolores Hastings Councilmember Todd Paulson Reynold Johnson Brad Hoffman Ralph Hastings Councilmember Jerry Pedlar Louis Sullivan Geralyn Barone Rita Seymore Councilmember Phil Cohen Lorna Seburg Ron Warren Ralph VanBeusekom Susan Larsen Arnie Mavis Doug Rossi Bud Sorenson Sy Knapp Denis Kelly Wallace Bernards Jim Lindsa Julie Vreeland Molly Malecki Ron Boman Ron Christensen Lowell Ainas Mark Seburg Ellamae Sander Bertil Johnson Sarah Pollack Kristen Mann Robert Torres Pamela Frantum Neal Nelson Data fbr Rqure 0.0 -K FRIPIT kaw § J *' Kk %» 2 » . 2) E % £ 2 - 7. R M A I l2 . � � 2 Z116'9AC1 32 «§ C' G MRMMN4 2 2 2< g i PROM §W G MUM a i 2> . a s s-l" § 4 .. 1 mum WO M EN 2 9 3 «& 1 Pot M !% S ; «.,:o, +.vas , og i es ° ept ;w. .� a �z. !m , TOP PRIORITY 128U RS ENTIRE GROW + + + Y 25 + Kqyra 0—onal, .rz Qiote tia-'a Vote riefililds PROW Ali -5 in SUMMARY OF SURVEY OF COMMUNITY NEEDS AND ISSUES RELATED TO BROOKLYN CENTER PARKS AND RECREATION NOVEMBER 1988 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMUNITY NEEDS AND ISSUES POTENTIAL RESPONSES A. Senior population and handicapped Provide seating, either permanent or portable. population attends Entertainment in the Park programs. Seating is a problem. A. People are remaining active as Facilities should reflect increase in they get older. (See H also.) active recreation. Build a fieldhouse. A. There are an increased number Provide a softball complex with four fields of softball teams in recreation with lights and a concession stand. Provide leagues. (See I also.) a concession stand at Central Park softball fields. A. Add trees to provide shade in Central Park near Entertainment in the Park seating area. B. Park shelter storage is inadequate. Improve storage with shelves, equipment bins, and locks. B. Park shelter lighting is inadequate Improve lighting in park shelters. for programs offered. B. Eliminate ointed roofs, fs, P change shape of roofs at buildings in these arks: Orchard rd Lane P , Lions, Firehouse, West Palmer Lake, Evergreen, and East Palmer Lake. B. Install or construct a utility building between softball fields at West Palmer Lake Park. B. Carden City Park - install permanent rubbish receptacle. B. Northport Park - install or construct a small utility building near the ball fields. B' Central Park - construct a concession building between ball fields; install fence along entire east side of park (along walkways); install sprinkler system on ball fields; update playground for younger kids. B. Add bollards for bicycles in parks where needed. B. Kylawn Park - remodel existing backstop - building - lighting, furnace -1- B. Firehouse Park - remodel existing backstop - fire truck play apparatus - picnic tables - benches - trees in picnic area B. Wangsted Park - Trees - "B" ball court overlay - Chrysler Plymouth fence maintenance B. Orchard Lane Park soften slope B. Palmer Lake - South - picnic tables - expand parking - bigger trash containers - drive -up pay telephone B. Freeway Park - wall slope too steep B. Bellview Park - inside lighting problem (Same as Kylawn) - expand park to the east or west B. Brooklane Park - heating shut off by school in winter (independent light switch) - maintenance of playground equipment (determine whose responsibility) B. Brookdale Church and lift station area in Garden City Park - fix up area between B. Replace hockey rink boards eventually; develop small hockey rinks B. Maintenance storage sheds - baseball and softball (bigger than Central - double door ?) C. Softball parking problems at Palmer Expand parking facilities at Palmer Lake Lake parks during the overlap period parks. when successive games are played. D. Shingle Creek trailway safety Install pedestrian crossing signals on problems - trouble spots at 69th 69th. 56th ?? and 56th crossings. E. The population is aging. Provide senior center. In redevelopment of parks, consider more walkways, benches, flowers, flowerbeds, and landscaping. E. Provide more benches around playground areas. E. Install garbage containers along the trail system. F. Community center is not very Build an elevator. Improve parking lot in accessible to the handicapped relation to upper level. Improve bathroom and elderly, facilities. -2- G•. The Palmer lake Nature area Build a small interpretive building; add more could be used more. benches, sundial, weather station, additional landscaping; aeration to provide open water for waterfowl to remain during winter months; add new names for trails, ponds, observation areas with permanent signs. G. Improve looks of Shingle Creek Clear out dead trees (particular problem in north of 69th and Palmer Lake. Brooklyn Park area Shingle Creek thru Palmer Basin), old tires, and junk in Palmer Lake. G • Complete trail system. Add dual trail (for bikes and pedestrians) at Palmer Lake. H. Each year, the recreation Build a fieldhouse. Build more rooms for department receives more facility meetings & classes. Look for alternative cancellations from school districts. facilities. H. People are remaining active as Facilities should reflect increase in they get older. (See A also.) active recreation. Build a fieldhouse. H. The City has a need for a facility Continue the study on a fieldhouse and other to hold a wide variety of events. possible structures. H. Need for fieldhouse facilities. Provide indoor batting cages and pitching machines (softball and baseball). Provide loose weights and Nautilus machines in weight room. I. There are an increased number Provide a softball complex with four fields of softball teams in recreation with lights and a concession stand. Provide leagues. (See A also.) a concession stand at Central Park softball fields. J. Improve use of area around Twin Lake; make more accessible to the general population. K. Build a golf dome. K. Build a tennis court bubble. K. Make money. (Pay for park & rec programs) other recreational outlets. K. Evergreen Park - install lights on ball fields (to absorb heavy use of Grandview Park ball fields); add pathway on east and north side similar to Northport Park walkway. K. Arboretum install two or three path lights; add a bigger well in order to maintain water levels in ponds; provide map plaques and /or brochures showing map /layout and planting scheme; add a sundial; install a bench at the northwest side of the upper pond on the west side of the trail. -3- K. Grandview Park - discontinue all sports except skating; move ball playing to other parks; build a senior center here because access would be easy (close to the Commons, Brookwood Manor); if sports continue, terrace hill on north side for built -in bleachers (eliminates maintenance problem, improves appearance). K. Find a more useful purpose for Kylawn Park. K. Possible annexation of Durnam Island from Brooklyn Park; create a small walk bridge to the island and create a park on the island. K. Willow Lane Park - extend trail to school parking lot and /or Brooklyn Boulevard; at shelter building, add depot lights, benches, other embellishments to establish more "look and feel" of an old- fashioned depot. K. Firehouse Park - add ice rink; add retired fire engine for play apparatus area. K. River Ridge Park - continue to pursue transfer to Hennepin County. K. Build a horticultural conservatory. K. The North Mississippi Regional Park Brooklyn Center should provide bike paths will be developed. and trailways that will link this park to our system. K. Central Park - irrigation for ball fields - baseball field lights - concession building similar to Lions Park - hard surface area between softball fields - path to Xerxes from archery range K. Evergreen Park - softball lights - trees - everywhere "ring" path - expand sprinkler system K. Willow Lane Park - remodel existing backstop - platform around building - remodel - complete trail - convert baseball field to softball field - water main replacement K. Happy Hollow Park - old building - no water or sewer - tree trim K. Arboretum - upper pond leaks - lighting -4- K: West Palmer Lake Park - pathway to playground from bike path - double trail (bike and pedestrian) - path from parking lot to street K. East Palmer Lake Park - fill in north drainage ditch - sliding hill or parking lot K. Grandview Park - fireplace problem in building - brick it UP - fix hill - north side too steep - improve horseshoe pits - concession stand should be more permanent K. Golf Course - street lights in middle of course (vandalism) K. Lions Park - Little League - wash out around building - have Minneapolis pave section south of park K. Garden City ark y - replace water main - yesterday - hockey rink - lighting - poles and lights should be replaced K. Marlin Park - needs most everything K. Tepee roofs - remove; block deteriorating; buildings are barren and uninteresting; replace some buildings with more practical buildings (meeting rooms) K. Develop spare (maintenance) softball field K. Pave maintenance paths - all parks K. Benches needed everywhere K. Curb and gutter around all parks L. Provide additional permanent wiring in Central Park for Entertainment in the Park area (for musical and audio equipment, stage lighting, etc.). L. Increase electrical capacity at Central Park picnic shell. M. Lakeside Park - install a few pieces of playground equipment. (Commission thought it might be a safety hazard.) M. If facilities are to invite maximum Assure adequate lighting and visible utilization by the population, there patrolling of areas to reassure residents must be a feeling of safety and of safety in the parks. confidence in well being in the parks after dark. N. Install permanent picnic tables in these parks: Lions, Firehouse, Garden City (along pathways), Palmer Lake Nature Area, Grandview. -5- 0. Kylawn Park - in joint effort with City of Crystal, construct a walkway system throughout entire preserve area. I O. Twin Lake area unique in Brooklyn Actively pursue action on recommendations. Yn y p n ations. Center parks' physical inventory. Adequate or proper utilization has been long overdue. Studies and consultant efforts should clarity and promote mutual agreement between Brooklyn Center, Robbinsdale, and Crystal. 0. Twin Lake /Beach - seed beach - buy orth lot next to Twin in Beach P. Install directional signs to parks on top of street name signs (in a neighborhood with a park, put the name of the park on the sign with an arrow pointing to the direction of the park). Q. Low park and recreation commission Commission should be more involved in shaping involvement. City staff (b default the direction and given to Y ) guidelines g g is making most of the policy and consultants instead of only seeing their direction decisions. Commissioners final recommendations. Commission should be are simply "rubber stamping" staff involved in department budgets (by percent, direction and policies. not detailed line items). Q. Low commission interest. Commission Council liaisons should have a regular spot activities not very visible to city on city council meeting agenda for commission council or general public. reports. City staff or the council liaison must do it as existing commission bylaws make reports by commission members very difficult. Televise commission and council meetings on cable television. Q. Make better use of facilities at parks (shelters and meeting rooms); open for free to civic organizations. R. Maintenance of neighborhood park Possibly more frequent monitoring of park facilities must be maintained. conditions by the commission. R. As parks and equipment age, normal Training, awareness programs, coupled with wear and tear, as well as adequate refurbishment and /or replacement vandalism, causes deterioration revenue. of facilities. R. Develop tree trimming program S. Do we really know what the citizens Develop and distribute applicable of Brooklyn center expect of their questionnaires to compile and evaluate needs parks and recreation facilities? of population so all are involved in planning process. T. Reforestation - losing not replacing trees (buy 20 -50/year) -6- r CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER council Meetin Date3/27/89 Agenda Item Number zoo - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM DESCRIPTION: REVIEW OF CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PRIORITIES LIST *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DEPT. APPROVAL: Signature - title MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached V *********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached As a part of the annual planning process the City of Brooklyn Center has gone through over the last two years, the City Council establishes certain priorities relating to issues, trends, and projects which fall into two general categories: top priorities and high priorities. Following is a listing of the current status of the top and high priority listings which came out of the 1988 planning session. TOP PRIORITIES 1. Earle Brown Farm Redevelopment Project. The Earle Brown Farm redevelopment project is complete through its design and planning stage. In early April we will take bids on reconstructing the farm buildings. We currently estimate ground breaking in late April, early May with completion of some phases of the project in the fall of 1989 and final completion in February 1990. 2. Economic Development Study — Redevelopment Policy The RFP for the housing analysis was approved by the City Council in late 1988. Maxfield Research Group, Inc. was awarded the contract for the housing analysis study. It is anticipated that the rough draft of this analysis would be completed in the middle of April 1989 with final draft revisions May /June of 1989. Once this project is completed, we will commence work with developing an RFP for a similar commercial and industrial analysis and we hope to, by the end of 1989, have a preliminary draft of redevelopment policy for Brooklyn Center. 3. Redevelopment Plan /69th Avenue North and Brooklyn Boulevard The engineering firm of Short, Elliott, and Hendrickson has completed its engineering report on 69th Avenue North. The 4f and 6f federal landing exchange statements have been completed as it relates to Palmer Lake Park. The City Council will be reviewing this report in March or April of 1989. Upon City Council approval of the final design of 69th Avenue North in the area immediately adjacent to Brooklyn Boulevard, the staff will proceed with a redevelopment study of that immediate area. 4. Lynbrook Area Redevelopment Plan The status of this project has not changed since our last reporting and that is we are placing this project on hold pending the completion of the Earle Brown Farm project and the engineering study • 1 5n 69th Avenue North. Out earliest best estimate of when we can start planning work in this area is still August 1989. 5. Planned Unit Development Ordinance We have completed the initial draft, and it is currently being presented to the planning commission for their consideration and upon their review it will be passed on to the City Council —most likely in May of 1989. 6. 1 -94 Improvement Project The highway department has informed us that the project is currently on schedule and there still exists the possibility for early completion. However, that optimistic forecast is highly weather sensitive. In 1989 in Brooklyn Center the Xerxes bridge is proposed to be torn down and rebuilt within the summer construction season. The interchange of T.H. 252 and 1 -694 is sc- heduled for completion. Improvements on 1- 94/694 in the area of the Shingle Creek Parkway .exchange and the T.H. 100 exchange are scheduled for 1989 -1990. They are also contemplating a major maintenance project on 1 -694 between Brooklyn Boulevard and Boone Avenue North. This particular construction project will have 1 -694 closed to one lane in each direction for an eight -day period during the summer of 1989. 7. Communication Project (community surveys, City newsletter expansion, promotion of volunteerism) The City Council has authorized a community survey by Decision Resources Ltd. and the project is ongoing as of the time of this report. We would anticipate having a complete survey report by the 1st of April Staff is working on expansion of the City newsletter as a part of the 1989 budget. Because of loss of personnel in the city manager's office in the early part of 1989, this project will be delayed and implemented in mid -1989. The promotional project for volunteerism is scheduled as a community volunteer recognition dinner on April 12, 1989, in Constitution Hall in the Community Center. 8. Drug Education and Prevention Program The police department has selected an officer to commence DARE training, possibly in the state of Illinois this summer. They will also be selecting an alternate officer as a backup. We have received donation funding from the Crime Prevention Fund and Brooklyn Center Lions to assist us in this program. All four school districts in the community have initially agreed to participate in the DARE program with us. The mayor's drug task force is currently working on and assisting the police department and the Crime Prevention Fund in setting up the DARE program. They are also going to be working with the business community to develop a program which could assist the business community in handling drug problems in their workplaces. HIGH PRIORITIES I. Residential Treatment Facilities Analysis The ordinance study by Resolution, Inc. is approximately one -half completed. We anticipate that both the property value study and the ordinance studies will come before the planning commission in April and be forwarded on to the City Council immediately thereafter. 2. Senior Drop -In Center The space needs analysis study for the Civic Center and specifically for the senior drop -in center are completed. At the writing of this report, the staff has the final draft of the project and will be presenting the report in the last City Council meeting in March or the first meeting in April, 1989. 3. Battered Youth Program Chief Lindsay is completing preliminary evaluation of a potential program in this area. The need for program relating to battered youth in a similar fashion as the battered spouse program, is definitely there and obvious. The problem is finding a quality, affordable program. He is working on a possible extension of the battered spouse program and a relationship with that program that could possibly serve the youth battered situation. We should have more information regarding the feasibility of this program as a part of the 1990 budget consideration. 4. Proactive Housing 9 Pro 9 ram The City Council authorized an additional housing inspector in the 1989 budget. That individual has been hired and is in his probationary training. The housing commission is currently reviewing a program which would involve buying out dilapidated houses in Brooklyn Center and building new houses on the site. The housing commission is also reviewing the rehab program criteria in our housing maintenance ordinance to see if it needs to be modified and updated. 5. Recycling —Solid Waste Program We are still involved in the lawsuit on the consortium type coordinated refuse hauling system, and there has been another legal dela in the ruling 9 y u mg on this matter. Because of this delay, the City Council has instructed the staff to start planning the implementation of a recycling program without a coordinated refuse collection system. If the Council approves this program, recycling could start around June /July 1989 and then coordination with refuse hauling would have to occur later in 1989 or possibly 1990 depending on the court ruling. 6. Crime Prevention Fund Expansion The Crime Prevention Fund is serving on and working with the drug task force in developing their and other drug programs. 7. Police Master Plan Study The master plan for this department was completed in August 1988 and will be updated as a part of the 1990 budget process. 8. Neighborhood Watch Program Expansion With the help of the Crime Prevention Fund, we are still seeking additional neighborhood watch programs and gradually increasing the numbers. Police Officer Dave Grass is the department's crime prevention officer. He is designating a specific amount of his time to crime prevention in the residential and in the business community. 9. Fire Service Master Plan Study In 1989 the department will develop a framework for a plan as this item has secondary priority to the implementation of the hazardous waste and chemical storage requirements of the federal government. 10. Aging Population Service Needs The booklet "Blueprint for Local Action: Housing and Service Needs of Elderly and Disabled People in the Community" has been distributed to the City Council and the housing and human rights and resources commissions. Currently the two advisory commissions are reviewing the materials contained in this booklet for possible recommendations and actions. This listing represents the status of the top and high priority issues created as a part of the 1988 strategic planning process. Upon completion and receipt of the report of the Brooklyn Center residential survey, we will be setting up the 1989 planning process, and I will be contacting you as to its timing as soon thereafter as feasible. i BROOKLYN CENTER COMMUNITY PLANNING PROCESS Constitution Hall, Community Center 6:30 p.m., June 1, 1989 _(Dinner at 6 p.m.) A LISTING OF ADDITIONAL ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION IN BROOKLYN CENTER'S 1989 PLANNING PROCESS I will attend the June 1, 1989, planning process session at 6 :30 p.m. I will not attend the June 1, 1989, planning process session I will attend the dinner at 6 p.m. Name Phone Number Please return by May 22, 1989, whether or not you intend to join us: Gerald Splinter, City Manager City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 s May 1989 1989 BROOKLYN CENTER PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDED PLAN OF ACTION TOP /A PRIORITIES 1. ACTIVELY PURSUE RECOMMENDATIONS OF TWIN .LAKES AND PRESERVE STUDY Twin Lakes area is unique in Brooklyn Center parks' physical inventory. Adequate or proper utilization has been long overdue. Studies and consultant efforts should clarify and promote mutual agreement between Brooklyn Center, Robbinsdale, and Crystal. Improve use of area around Twin Lakes and make it more accessible to the general population. - At Kylawn Preserve, in joint effort with City of Crystal, construct a walkway system throughout entire preserve. 2. BUILD A FIELDMOUSE - People are remaining active as they get older. The City has a need for a facility to hold a wide variety of events. - Each year, the recreation department receives more facility cancellations from school districts. - Provide indoor batting cages and pitching machines (softball and baseball). Provide loose weights and Nautilus machines in weight room. 3. CENTRAL PARK IMPROVEMENTS Construct a concession building between ball fields. Install a fence along entire east side of park (along walkways). Install sprinkler system on ball fields. - Update playground for younger children. - Consider more walkways, benches, flowers, flower beds, and landscaping in this and other parks._ 4. BUILD A SENIOR CENTER - The population is aging, yet keeping active. 5. IMPROVE SAFETY OF SHINGLE CREEK TRAILWAY CROSSINGS AT BOTH 69TH AND 56TH AVENUES NORTH - Possibly install pedestrian crossing signals. 6. IMPROVEMENTS AT LIONS PARK Little League - wash out around building. - Have Minneapolis pave trailway section south of park. -1- HIGH /B PRIORITIES 1. CENTRAL PARK IMPROVEMENTS - Add trees to provide shade near Entertainment in the Park seating area. - Install baseball field lights. - Make hard surface area between softball fields. - Install path to Xerxes Avenue North from archery range. - Increase electrical capacity. 2. OTHER PARK IMPROVEMENTS - Add bollards for bicycles in parks where needed. - Expand parking facilities at East Palmer Lake Park. - Assure adequate lighting and visible patrolling of areas to reassure residents of safety in the parks. Study possible solutions. - Maintenance of neighborhood park facilities must be maintained. Possibly more frequent monitoring of park conditions by the park and recreation commission. - Install directional signs to parks on top of street name signs (in a neighborhood with a park, put the name of the park on the sign with an arrow pointing to the direction of the park) . 3. TRAIL SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS - Install garbage containers along the trail system. - Complete trail system. Add dual trail (for bikes and pedestrians) at Palmer Lake. 4. SHINGLE CREEK /PALMER LAKE IMPROVEMENTS - Improve looks of Shingle Creek north of 69th Avenue North and Palmer Lake. - Clear out dead trees (particularly a problem in Brooklyn Park area -- Shingle Creek through Palmer Basin), old tires, and junk in Palmer Lake. 5. PREVENT GOLF COURSE VANDALISM - Install street lights in middle of the course. 6. INCREASE PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION INVOLVEMENT Commission should be more involved in shaping the direction and guidelines given to consultants instead of only seeing their final recommendations. Commission should be involved in department budgets (by percent, not detailed line items). MODERATE /C PRIORITIES 1. CENTRAL PARK IMPROVEMENTS - Provide seating for Entertainment in the Park programs (permanent, portable, P , just more picnic tables). -2- 2. OTHER PARK IMPROVEMENTS - Provide a softball complex with four fields and a concession stand. - Make better use of facilities at parks (shelters and meeting rooms); open for free to civic organizations. - As parks and equipment age, normal wear and tear, as well as vandalism, causes deterioration of facilities. Hold training and awareness programs, coupled with providing adequate refurbishment and /or replacement revenue. 3. ARBORETUM IMPROVEMENTS Install two or three path lights or other additional lighting. Add a bigger well in order to maintain levels in ponds. Provide map plaques and /or brochures showing map /layout and planting scheme. - Add a sundial. Install a bench at the northwest side of the upper pond on the west side of the trail. Fix upper pond which leaks. 4. NORTH MISSISSIPPI REGIONAL PARK IMPROVEMENTS Brooklyn Center should provide bike paths and trailways that will link this park to our system. 5. REFORESTATION EFFORT Since we are losing trees, they should be replaced (plant 20 -50 /year). -3- PLANNING SESSION PRIORITIES JUNE 1, 1989, Planning Session Completed (C) Item Group Average In Process (I) 1. Drug Education & Prevention Program 7.9 2. Committee to Review City Building & Park Expansion Needs 7.2 3. Earle Brown Farm Renovation & Redevelopment 6.9 I -1990 4. Economic Development Study - Redevelopment Policy 6.9 5. Proactive Housing Maintenance /Rehab Program 6.6 6. Battered Youth Program 6.5 7. Lynbrook Area Redevelopment Plan 6.5 8. Aging Population Service Needs 6.3 9. Redevelopment Plan 69th & Brooklyn Boulevard 6.3 10. Communication Improvement Projects (possible duplication of #25 and #28) 6.2 duplicate 11. Complete "Top" Priorities of Park & Recreation Commission by 1994 6.1 12. Residential Treatment Facilities Analysis 6.0 1 _ 1989 13. Maintenance Code for Commercial & Industrial Buildings 5.9 14. Development of a Group Home Siting Process & Plan 5.9 15. I- .94/694 Improvement Project 5.8 I -1990 16. Senior Drop -In Center 5.8 17. Recycling - Solid Waste Program 5.8 I -1990 18. Neighborhood Watch Program Expansion 5.8 C -1989 19. Subsidized Elderly Housing S 20. Maintain & Improve Business Climate & Diversity 5.7 21. Develop Annual City -Wide Spring Cleanup Program 5.7 22. Redevelopment Plan 50th & France 5.6 23. Crime Prevention Fund Expansion 5.4 C -1989 -2- Completed (C) Item Group Average In Process (I) 24. Explore Public /Private /Nonprofit Partnership for Social Services 5.3 25. Improved /Expanded Public Communications - Redevelopment, Policies, Projects (possible duplicate of #10 and #28) 5.3 duplicate 26. Planned Unit Development Ordinance 5.2 I -1989 27. Police Master Plan Study 5.2 C -1989 28. Expand City Use of Newsletter & Cable TV to a Monthly Basis (possible duplicate of #10 and #25) 5.2 duplicate 29. Complete "High" & "Moderate" Priorities of Park & Recreation Commission between 1994 -99 4.8 30. Fire Service Master Plan Study 4.6 31. Develop Intra City Bus "Shuttle" Transportation System 4.5 I -1989 32. Cleanup Shingle Creek &Palmer Lake Area 4.5 33. Establishment of a Storm Drainage Utility 4.2 34. Develop a Residents - Helping- Residents Program 3.9 35. Cleanup along Major Roads (Highway 100 /Brooklyn Blvd.) 3.5 36. Seek City Sales Tax & Alternative Revenue Source 3.5 37. Make Open Forum a More Inviting & Pleasant Process 3.4 38. Develop a Low Price Cable TV Access to Government & Public Access Channels 3.2 39. Televise City Council Meetings 3.0 40. Large Capacity Convention Center (2500 +) 2.9 41. Develop a Cultural Center, Ice Arena, Restaurant Complex 2.7 42. Use Cleaner or Less Messy Sealcoating Process 1.9 .r► Quality of Life Brooklyn Center Excel I en t 28 Poor 2 Only Fair 5 Good 64 Decision Resources, Ltd. Park Facilities - Brooklyn Center 1 Play Golf Pool CornCen Bike Trail Park =Very important Somewhat Important Not important Decision Resources, Ltd. City Services Brooklyn Center 120 100 . ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... .......... ........... .......... .......... .......... .......... ........... .......... ........... .......... ........... .......... ...... .......... ....... .. .......... ......... .......... .......... . ....... . .......... .... 80 ... .......... .......... ........... ......... ........... .......... P-4 .......... I .......... ........... ........... .......... .......... ........... .......... ........... 60-- .......... ......... .......... ......... ......... .......... .......... ..... 40 -- .......... ......... .......... 20 . . ........... .. ....... .......... ......... ........ ........... .......... 0 Police Fire Street Water Sewer Snow Animal Park M Excellent Good Only Fair Poor ecislon Resources, Ltd. Public Safety Issues Brooklyn Center Violent Crime Burglary Traffic Drugs Juveniles Other None Don't Know 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Greatest Problem ® Second Concern Dects(on Resources, Ltd. Civic Center Expansion Brooklyn Center City Hall Addition New Gymnasium Senior Drop -In Handball Courts Fitness Room Indoor Track Proposal 0 20 40 60 80 100 Favor ® Oppose Decision Resources, Ltd. PLANNING IS A PROCESS It is NOT a: REPORT DOCUMENT DEPARTMENT. EVENT PLANNING PROCESS I Identify problems VI Evaluate programs If Set broad goals to solve V Define action programs problems (doable chunks) III Set short -term targets (doable chunks) IV Set priorities EFFECTIVE PLANNING PROCESSES: 1. Keep their city's values (mission statement) clearly in mind 2. Evaluate and limit activities and commitments based on their values (mission statement) 3. Frees the City to act rather than be acted upon 4. Think ahead, prepare, and organize 5. Focus efforts and energy 6. Continually evaluate the planning process 7. Are sensitive to the ideas and thoughts of others 8. Communicate effectively and consistently with the community 9. Accurately determines the achievable BE PROACTIVE We can divide everything in the world into two general categories: 1. Those things we can affect by our choices, either directly or indirectly. 2. Those things that we cannot affect at all. Circle of Concern Circle of Influence Reactive = circle of Proactive - circle of influence influence decreases as increases as circle of circle of concern concern increases decreases 1987 Stephen R. Covey & Assoc. TWENTY PERCENT RULE Ne ative Attitude & a 9 Positive Attitude Approach Approach Look to past - Look to future Find fault or blame - Plan Belief in helplessness - Believe our actions "others are doing it make a difference to us" Never satisfied - Generally satisfied /30%1- 30\% Lean toward negative Lean toward positive -20% +20% 60% 4 Figure 1 C I T Y M 0 D E L GOVERNANCE PROCESS. Direction: What Should Be Done POLICY LEADE Educate Influence Inspire Vision Target Policies Tcne Expect tions MANAGEMENT PROCESS F Process Design: How to Accomplish E E MANAGER D B A C Org. P ilosophy K Process Designs Or g . Structure Training Pr ram 13 ERVICE DELIVERY PROCESS Action to Deliver Service (SERV DELIVERY RS N Police Service Actions Fire Service Public Works Service r Finance Service Planning Service Etc. COPYright 0 1984 Sumek Associates, Inc. All rights reserved. 25 Figure 5 THE TARGETING PROCESS FOR GOAL SETTING AND LEADERSHIP SCAN Our Community Needs and Issues Roundtable Discussion - Identify issues and needs Discussion Record highlights Test Issue FOCUS TARGETS Focus categories Discuss ideas DEFINE PROJECTS Focus issues Brainstorm possible actions PRIORITIZE Targets Projects [MUNICIPAL ACTION PLANS Desired outcomes Specific action steps KEY ASSUMPTIONS OF AN EFFECTIVE PLANNING PROCESS ARE: 1. Getting people involved (diversity of opinions) 2. Minimal constraining assumptions (e.g., municipal revenues) 3. Yearly review 4. Ask new, tough questions 5. Flexibility of thought and action 6. Allow for vigorous debate of current, relevant issues Anticipation Crisis Management Management Plan Respond Act React Prevent problems Solve problems Initiate Review Lead Follow Tomorrow Today Govern Governed Direct "Muddle through" Move forward Catch up Organized Haphazard Coordination Isolation WORK FROM PRINCIPLES NOT PRACTICES MACGYVER vs. SLEDGHAMMER - Principles _ Practices - uses ingenuity - if all you have is and principles a hammer, every to solve problems problem appears to be a nail - tailored flexible - one technique approach solves all * connections Quadrant II Time Mangement Merrill and Merrill CITY PLANNING /BUDGET CALENDAR March /April - Annual Community Planning Sessions May /June - City Department Heads Prepare Department Budgets June - Finance Department Collation of Budget - City Manager Reports on Priority List Status July /August - City Manager's Review of Proposed Budget September /October - City Council Consideration of Proposed Budget - City Manager Reports on Priority List Status November - Adoption of Proposed Budget December - City Manager Reports on Priority List Status January/February City Council /Staff Prepare for Annual Planning Session 1988 Priorities 1989 Priorities 1. Earle Brown Farm Redevelopment Project 1. Drug Education & Prevention Program 2. Economic Development Study - Redevelopment Policy 2. Committee to Review City Bldg & Park Expansion Needs 3. Redevelopment Plan /69th Ave & Brooklyn Blvd 3. Earle Brown Farm Renovation & Redevelopment 4. Lynbrook Area Redevelopment Plan 4. Economic Development Study - Redevelopment Policy 5. Planned Unit Development Ordinance 5. Proactive Housing Maintenance /Rehab Program 6. 1 -94 Improvement Project 6. Battered Youth Program 7. Communication Project (community surveys, 7. Lynbrook Area Redevelopment Plan city newsletter expansion, promotion of volunteerism) 8. Drug Education & Prevention Program 8. Aging Population Service Needs 9. Residential Treatment Facilities Analysis 9. Redevelopment Plan 69th & Brooklyn Blvd 10. Senior Drop -in Center 10. Communication Improvement Project 11. Battered Youth Program 11. Complete 'Top" Priorities of Park & Recreation Commission by 1994 12. Proactive Housing Maintenance -Rehab Program 12. Residential Treatment Facilities Analysis 13. Recycling -Solid Waste Program 13. Maintenance Code for Commercial & Industrial Bldgs 14. Crime Prevention Fund Expansion 14. Development of Group Home Siting Process & Plan 15. Police Master Plan Study 15. 1- 94/694 Improvement Project 16. Neighborhood Watch Program Expansion 16. Senior Drop -in Center I 17. Fire Service Master Plan Study 17. Recycling - Solid Waste Program 18. Aging Population Service Needs 18. Neighborhood Watch Program Expansion Th e Time Mmagement Maw Urgent Not Urgent Im portant Important Activities: Activities: C Preparation, Crises Prevention, Crises Values Clarification, Pressing problems Planning, Relationship Build - ing; True Re- creation Urgent Not Urgent I Not Important Pow Not Important Activities: Activities. rntexruptions, Some Calls, Mai, °Escape" Reading and Televi:- Reports, Meetings, Sion PrOMmate, Pressing Mattes Some Mail, Some Phone Calls, Procrastination - Activities The Four Tune Activity Quadrants t Connections Quadrant II Time Management STR�TF GI NC. Deborah Bennett -Leer MAPPING STRATEGIES INVOICE DATE JULY 12,1989 TO: CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER FROM DEBORAH BENNETT -LEET MAPPING STRATEGIES 2425 W. COUNTY RD. C2 SUITE 226 ROSEVILLE, MN 55113 RC: 1989 PLANNING PROCESS PARTIAL PAYMENT: 2/3 OF CONTRACTED FEE; REMAINING 1/3 WILL BE INVOICED UPON COMPLETION OF THE SESSION SUMMARY PRESENTATION TO THE COUNCIL. TENTATIVE DATE: 8/21/89 $2,530. PLUS $300 ADDITIONAL KEYPAD RENTAL FEE TOTAL: $2,830. INCLUSIONS: RENTAL OF KEYPADS PLANNING AND COMPUTER PROGRAMMING TIME FACILITATION OF GROUP PLANNING SESSION OPTIONFINDER TECHNOLOGY PRINT -OUTS OF ALL SELECTED DECISIONS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, ACCEPTED BY, -- _ DA E DATE DEBORAH BENNETT -LEET PRESIDENT MAPPING STRATEGIES CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 2425 West County Road C -2, Suite 226 Roseville, Minnesota 55113 612/636 -1354 FVIFIF D RMG T IR COLLABORATIVE PLANNING RESEARCH TRAINING 3$ppgpgpg$[y L n � T 3 H i l l § Y a. a £ z PROPOSAL for CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER ANNUAL GOAL SETTING PROCESS June,1989 Submitted by: Deborah Bennett -Lest President, MAPPING STRATEGIES and Jim Brimeyer Strategic Planning Facilitator 2425 W. Co. Rd. C2, Suite 226, Roseville, MN 55113 • (612) 636 -1354 MFIFIRKIG � STR�ITRGIE c,� - - - COLLABORATIVE PLANNING RESEARCH TRAINING 3 A 3 i3 s� i3 . Y3 < PROPOSAL INCLUDES: Aiiz 3 F $ I. RHCOJ94 VDATXONS X.T. ABOUT THE CONSULTANTS... III. PROJECT PRICING IV. APPENDIX 2425 W. Co. Rd. C2, Suite 226, Roseville, MN 55113 • (612) 636 -1354 PROPOSAL CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER ANNUAL GOAL SETTING PROCESS June,1989 OVERVIEW GOAL To identify, review and prioritize the City of Brooklyn Center's targeted goals for the next one to two years. It is important that this process be as participatory as possible and include as many city staff, council members, community leaders and citizens as possible. PROCESS Phase #1 City of Brooklyn Center will send out a survey to all Survey selected, potential session participants. The surveyed participants will be asked to: 1) Review last year's TOP, HIGH and MEDIUM targeted goals. 2) Add any new issues /goals to the list, and /or 3) Delete those goals which have dropped off the targeted list. These responses will be mailed back to the city, along with their indication of attendance for the June GOAL SETTING SESSION. Phase #2 Following dinner, the session participants will meet General to review and prioritize the updated list of targeted Goal goals. Setting Session Suggested process: 1) The updated list will be reviewed and discussed so that the participants have a COMMON UNDERSTANDING of the MEANING OF THE GOAL. Evaluation of the goals will come later. 2. 2) Using the computer - assisted technology (George), the participants will register their opinion as to their relevant ranking of the goals - TOP,HIGH,MEDIUM and DROP. 3) Results of the "preference polling" will be displayed and discussed. (See DISPLAY GRAPHS for optional ways to display and discuss feedback.) At this time, participants will have the opportunity to share their ideas and exchange information regarding the various goals. Having the ability to display the feedback gives the participants a quick "snapshot" of the group's opinions - which then allows the participants to focus their discussions - and thus, save time. 4) The highest ranking goals (approximately 12 -15) will then be prioritized. The method is called a forced paired comparison vote, which compares every goal to each other goal. 5) Results again, will be displayed and discussed. Degree of consensus among the participants will be checked as well as any differences between the subgroups. (City staff, Council, Community leaders, City Commissioners) 6) Session summary. GROUP FACILITATOR Jim Brimeyer TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT Deborah Bennett -Leet Phase #3 Final Council will meet with Jim Brimeyer to review the Priority general session's results. If areas of wide Ranking differences between the council's preferences and of Goals the general groups' results exist, those will be discussed. The top priorities will again be discussed in terms of relative ranking. Potential blocks to achieving those goals will also be brainstormed and discussed. The comments will be recorded and communicated to the city staff to help give them direction within their goal implementation planning process. FACILITATOR Jim Brimeyer RECORDER Deborah Bennett -Leet IFYYI PPIkIG STR�TEG IE _ COLLABORATIVE PLANNING RESEARCH • TRAINING is s ff fl Ti Hill ABOUT p � L 2425 W. Co. Rd. C2, Suite 226, Roseville, MN 55113 • (612) 636 -1354 (1(1RPP1�1� �. S TR�TE� IE COLLABORATIVE PLANNING RESEARCH TRAINING P f DEBORAH BENNETT -LEST PRESIDENT, MAPPING STRATEGIES STRATEGIES is a consulting firm working the areas of a tive planning and assessment research. d ' nclude a Change! Attitudes, Skills, & Structure 00 Strategic Vision for the 90's fi`stng for the 90's pG STRATEGIES specializes in the use of a computer- assisted #PWARE" TECHNOLOGY, an interactive communication tool used `help focus discussions, prioritize issues and communicate th!a geet3ngs' decisions. MAPPING STRATEGIES clients include: Stet� Minnesota United Way of St. Paul vgcus groups /planning Capital Allocations Mepa rtment of Transportation City of Robbinsdale trategi Planning Construction decision M2.nnetornka'Community Services Benson Optical Research /Planning Strategic Planning SRt Planning /Architecture E.Metro AIDS Conference . County recommendations Stra i�6 c� Planning D$BORAH'BENNETT -LEST is founder and President of Mapping Strategies. For "'the past 20 years, Deborah has been working in the 'fields of education, group facilitation and corporate training;. $efore forming MAPPING STRATEGIES in 1987, Deborah serVed as an :Account Manager and Performance Consultant for Wilson Learning /Corporate Learning Center specializing in the areas of'strategic planning and "groupware" technology. FORMAL EDUCATION• R.A. Education University of Illinois Post';graduatte work in Behavioral Psychology U.niv rsity of Minnesota 2425 W. Co. Rd. C2, Suite 226, Roseville, MN 55113 • (612) 636 -1354 MFIPPIMG COLLABORATIVE PLANNING • RESEARCH • TRAINING JIM BRIMEYER STRATEGIC PLANNING FACILITATOR UH ` IMEYER will be the lead facilitator during the general and � planning sessions. U, 111 Fk E..; JIM'S BACKGROUND INCLUDES: 3 z V # SEARCH CONSULTANT and GROUP FACILITATOR R U ITER for an executive search firm, Sathe & Associates, !ta k in both the public and private sectors. 1S GROUP FACILITATOR, Jim focuses in the areas of strategic l4ga ng and goal setting. Jim's unique combination of practical e x. and facilitation style assists organizations through ake �Wn process of defining and setting directions for the rut r ° JIM S PKKCTICAL EXPERIENCE INCLUDES: Q; yews management experience in the public sector; idluding city manager positions in Worthington,OH; Wot�dale,IL; St. Louis Park, MN. 1 ®' yeas experience as group facilitator. Axticles published: "Side - by - side Goal Setting in St. Louis Park ",1984 "Productivity Measurement and Improvement - A Participative Approach ", 1978 RECENT GOAL SBT ING SESSIONS FACILITATED BY JIM INCLUDE: City Qf St.' Louis Park LOGIS;!L©cal Government Information Systems Association City of Falcon Heights . BFtW Architecture /Planning Westward Professional Services FORMAL $DUCATION: N.A. Public Administration Northern; Illinois University .A.' Pc�ltica] Science Loral Cpllege, Dubuque, Iowa 2425 W. Co. Rd. C2, Suite 226, Roseville, MN 55113 • (612) 636 -1354 .Y STR�TE� IE COLLABORATIVE, PLANNING • RESEARCH • TRAINING 1 di y } s I x 1i I I x i x gg & PROJECT PRICING AIM INCLUSIONS 2425 W. Co. Rd. C2, Suite 226, Roseville, MN 55113 • (612) 636 -1354 PROJECT PRICING and INCLUSIONS I. PROJECT PLANNING ATTEND CITY COUNCIL MEETING SOFTWARE PROGRAMMING FACILITATION PLANNING II. TECHNOLOGY SUPPLY ALL NECESSARY EQUIPMENT TECHNOLOGY SET -UP AND OPERATION III. FACILITATION GENERAL GOAL SETTING SESSION (50 voting participants) FOLLOW -UP COUNCIL GOAL SETTING MEETING (Council members) IV. FINAL REPORT PRINT -OUTS OF SELECTED "MAPS" FROM GROUP FEEDBACK SUMMARY OF DISCUSSIONS FROM BOTH SESSIONS GOALS PRIORITIY RANKING AND QUALITATIVE STATISTICS: - General group's average rankings - - City Council's average rankings City Staff's average rankings - City Commissioners' average rankings - Community representatives' average rankings TOTAL PRICING $ 3,800. (Plus rental of 30 additional keypads at $300.) TIMETABLE: One third of the total fee ($1,260) would be invoiced upon signing this Agreement and the remaining two thirds (plus $300 rental fee) would be invoiced when the final report is submitted. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, ACCEPTED BY, DEBORAH BENNETT -LEET JERRY SPLINTER PRESIDENT CITY MANAGER MAPPING STRATEGIES CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DTIPPIMG STRRTE� IE _ COLLABORATIVE PLANNING RESEARCH • TRAINING $ � I § x � i n I Is rp F j x; APPEMIX is 2425 W. Co. Rd. C2, Suite 226, Roseville, MN 55113 • (612) 636 -1354 GROUP DECISION SUPPORT TECHNOLOGY The OptionFinder -) Go S GRAPHIC DISPLAY - ;r Oman— .es-= OptionFinder Applications Strategic Planning High Impact Decision- Making p Interactive Learning a ; 4,p Q Team Building 0 Research Tool C OMPUTER KEYPAD ..H YVMu • fV OptionFinder Is a computer- based, portable group decision support tool for the collection, analysis, and feedback display of confidential judgments and preferences during meetings and group discussions. Feedback is entered via individual computer keypads - then instantly displayed and recorded for discussion 7. and clarification. o.• •ta1K itiR1a0 OPTIONFINDER •' HARDWARE SYSTEM "° An organization which wants to ACT together, must first learn to THINK together. MAPPING STRATEGIES (612) 638.1354 DATA DISPLAYS Entire Group MAIN MAP (lest Run 770e) 100 A F M 75 C P 5o G t3 A C I COMBINE TWO PREFERENCE VOTES 25` � T H "GROUP MAP" 0 E 1 2.5 4 5.5 7 UKELiH00D .100 75 so BAR CHART Ism 25 0 1 2 g 4 5 Group Scatterplot (Item A. . n) 100 X 1 7 X 5 M X A so x x GROUP SCATTER MAP C 25 xx (Individual Votes on One It o x 1 2.5 4 5.5 7 UKELIH00D Subgroup Comparison (Rem A... n) 100 I M 75 4 3 SUBGROUP COMPARISON MAP P so , _ 1. Teachers A 2. Students T 3. Parents 4. Staff 1 2.5 4 5.5 7 LIKELIHOOD The following is on excerpt from the November 21 issue of Industry Week. ANDUSTRYWEEK ■ THE INDUSTRY MANAGEMENT MAGAZINE ■ TOOLS AT THE TOP Computers are entering the last corporate frontier: the executive world. COLLABORATION. Others are using V I perhaps even a well - meaning manager the computer specifically to break sidetracks the general interests of the through those frustrating in- whole company for local concerns. ter P ersonal brick walls that block exec- The team does come up with a plan, utive communication— otherwise But it certainly would take much called ego, politics, or game playing. lon er than the one day it took Mr. P 8 8 Y "I've always been amazed at how you , Heath's group, using a, smaller, PC could get 'a very good collection of based GDSS called "Optionfinder," minds together and produce such ag- With it, they anonymously voted, via a ony," says Bernard DeKoven, a consul- numeric keypad, on the key issues fac- tant on group computing and meet - ing the company. . f - Using this approach, complete m s. - 8 PP with P 8 While technology has changed the —0 X -Y graphs and bar charts, they way people do their jobs all over the quickly and clearly saw the results - Company, "meetings are being con- """ the items that were most important to ducted in a fashion similar to a hun- '- the majority f the members and Y dyed years ago, with the only addition x iL needed more attention. being the electric light," quips Doug TIME, NOT TRUTH. Despite satisfied - P Vogel, assistant professor in the de- y accounts such as this one, at least one 8 partment of management- information observer suggests caution about GDSS. systems at the University of Arizona,, Corporations are not democracies, Tucson. _ points out David Gibson, an assistant In comes' the computer to remedy professor of information systems at the these interpersonal holdups as well— m University of Texas at Austin. At the software programs designed to help Eighth International Conference on people share, vote, and prioritize` 3 Decision Support Systems in June he ideas. Using what is called a "group - f +� r ` discussed a large, now - dismantled decision support system" (GDSS), con GDSS developed and used by Exe- suitant Mr. DeKoven thinks "you can Agroup- dse►slon support system cucom Systems in the late '70s and turn the boardroom into a real group displays the breakdown of early '80s. productivity center." anonymous votes on a chart for Called the Planning Lab, it was cre- Not only can executives use the com members nD and honest communication among of a strategy planning ated with the hope of promoting open puter to quickly locate critical .numbers 8 a a presentations team of managers that might and make intelligible resentatro ht otherwise 8 8 8 P with an EIS, but with a`GDSS they can be given to political motivations reach a collaborative output. "They can However, "there are functional uses document and record their decisions, for strateg . docum a ecor r d is ambiguity. At executive- 8 and leave that room with a hard copy level decision - making, power and pol- their hands, which everybody -has STRATEGY PLANNING. Particularly itics and hidden agendas come into in d , 8 approved as 'Yes, that's how I want to in large meetings, there can be aclack of play," s a ys Mr. Gibson. GDSS can cer- goon record, "' he says. productivity, Mr. Vogel says. Vern tainly give you information more Mr. Vogel calls the very sophis- Heath, chairman of Minneapolis- quickly, he concedes, but "to say that ticated, million - dollar GDSS facilities based Rosemount Inc., thought about it's going to cause managers to be more operating at the University of Arizona this as well before he gathered a new truthful' or rational is expecting too "human parallel processing," because group of 24 senior executives' from much of the technology. "`_ members are able to key in ideas and around the world for their first strat Perhaps the most appealing trait of see those of others on the screen si egy planning meeting in May. both a GDSS and an EIS is the time they multaneously -in the ultimate brain- A typical meeting such as this one save. To executives, time is a scarce storming session. For a base user fee of can last several days. Perhaps the sen- resource. In addition, a GDSS "gives $2,000 a day, it's as if "everyone in the for managers use different planning people a much better feeling for the meeting can stand up and talk at once techniques, leaving them without a big picture in a decision - making ses- and still, be understood," he says. common format. Perhaps the quieter sion, ' thinks Arizona University's Mr. Much more rudimentary, portable sys- members of the group suffer through Vogel, "and a much better sense of the tems can be purchased for under political tirades by one or two more individual contributions that go into $10,000. boisterous members of the group. And that." ■ .. t a �iV°; _. �La Q + :Y• �� ' #: �tl'�"O'; :y. , :. !k r.. a�na a •:• a r..:. y ' ` y acT � c e '? ' >'�£ •�,'s �`"� � � -. 7 u��' ' .< • � �A�r� +' I *! d y� � ! 8 � 4R 3 Y 3 �� 3 _ 4. .:� r ., ^.x .• .' .. ..z. . , '. ,. �'Aa. .... �.'.�:��'%• ,. tv�.�. .l fit � � �� '�G.r �: '4 x Minnesota C' Adds Foc z� CRY us To set . . �e�ct�on of .. r � � bond Issues icy managers today face a manager': cuff found the standard J s # double -edged sword in set- process produced no conclusive re- ;. p Ling priorities for municipal suits. "We were floundering fora z bond -issue bids. As more people re way to evaluate our options," he.< .' locate from rural to urban areas, the says. "Unfortunately, we had too" f growing need for new public facili- many choices to consider and too`'' o t z ties clashes with taxpayers' growing great a need for the new facilities to `k a r reluctance to approve bond issues. have the process bogged down." 'k k S k The problem is compounded when Using a software program called t more than one facility is needed. De- OptionFinder from ec : a a ; v riding which facilities merit taxpayer allies, Mendot eights. Minn., the ' < consideration can lead to compli- city was ab to pr' ' ixe the °right r z , eated internal battles for city man- facilities ach facility's likeli- agers who try to balance hidden hoo a d - being ag endas, 6 passed, and explore a g personality conflicts and th ssibility of sharing the cost and disagreements over priority needs. se of certain facilities with nearby With this challenge in mind city cities. .t. managers i � " r n R g obbin d s ale Minn... The portable system includes elec• northwestern esters suburb of i M nn � ea is Ironic keypads for each group mem• w > : with a population of 14,42 , ob- ber, and enables them to provide g tained a computer - software ckage candid and anonymous input. Using that made the bond -issue pr ess run a combination of paired compari- faster and more efficiently sons and a aeries of rating scales. in- x 'We were considering eight dif- dividual responses are merged in- Q ' ferent facilities." says R an Schroe- ata F: ntl with 'n Y input from others i the A n der, assistant city mane er, , every- group to create a collective response` thing from a police stati n to a new viewed almost instantly on a master s community center. Wh a we could grid. ., illustrate a need for all f the facili• "We were able to include more / a ties. we knew that taxpa rs couldn't ke rove- Y People in the decision - making carry the load for all t e improve- Process," Schroeder says. "Because ments at once. We had t establish a they were involved and felt their building Priority or`t an rt w i 8 P y d de onstratt vie w e s x, were clearly Incorporated., " y K our reasoning behind the c Dice." those key people support our ` r� Schroeder and the rest o the city recommendation." p z c a. t �z 6 a as s Y CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 1989 PLANNING SESSION Using "Groupware" Technology Mapping Strategies Deborah Bennett-Leet 612- 636 -1354 FACILITATED SESSIONS USING GROUPWARE TECHNOLOGY 'City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota I_ Brooklyn Center is an inner ring suburb of Minneapolis, Minnesota with a population of 29,759. In the past, Brooklyn Center's annual strategic planning process included two comprehensive sessions attended by council members, advisory commissioners, community leaders and the city's staff. Major issues to be addressed by the city in the upcoming 1 -2 years were prioritized and then used by the city manager and staff to assist with their internal planning process. This year, however, after attending a Local Government Information System Association (LOGIS) meeting in which Groupware Technology was used, Brooklyn Center's city manager saw away in which the tedious prioritization process could be reduced in half - and a way to maximize everyone's time — by gathering additional information that in the past was impossible (or too time - consuming) using the tradition methods of group process. At the session, the 32 participants used individual computerized keypads to rank, evaluate and prioritize present and future issues confronting the City of Brooklyn Center. The capabilities of the Groupware Technology allowed the group to instantly view the group averages, individual scatters (shown by )es), subgroup averages and scatters, as well as the level of consensus for each Rem. Because all voting was anonymous, the technology helped to create an environment which stimulated open communications and effective team building. Through this process, Brooklyn Center was able to involve more key leaders acid community citizens in an efficient, participatory strategic planning session. Such participation is critical today for developing a shared vision and generating enthusiastic support for the city's role in creating a vision. SESSION SCHEDULE: Informal dinner 6:00 p.m.; Meeting 6:30 9:30 p.m. SESSION PROCESS *: Stage 1. Using the technology, the group "ranked" the 42 Issues by rating each Issue on a scale vote (1 -9) of Importance: 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . ... . ...... & ...... . . .. ... Moderate High Top Stage IL The 10 issues receiving the highest votes were then prioritized using forced paired comparison method (matching each issue to each other). A second vote was taken (1 -9) evaluating their Present Satisfaction on each Issue as it currently stands. Thus, a matrix was created by combining the two votes into one x -y graph. (See ENTIRE GROUP MAP -10 ISSUES) Stage ill. The results were displayed and discussed Using the graphic results as a catalyst, Information was shared and opinions were clarified (See SUBGROUP COMPARISON MAP) Following this session, the Council will meet to review this data to look at how they as a subgroup differed from the other groups and explore the implications of these differences. FACILITATOR: Jim Brimeyer TECHNICAL SUPPORT AND PLANNING COORDINATOR: Deborah Benneti -Lest *(NOTE All sessions are tailored to the city's unique situation.) BROOKLYN CENTER VOTING RESULTS ENTIRE GROUP MAP 100 F G H B PRIORITY 50 D A C E 0 1 5 g PRESENT SATISFACTION Priority Ranking Present Satisfaction Ranking 1. F - Drug Education and Prevention Program 1. A - Earle Brown Farm Renovation /Redevelopment 2. H - Proactive Housing Maintenance / 2. B - Economic Development Study/ Rehabilitation Program Redevelopment Study 3. B - Economic Development Study/ 3. F - Drug Education and Prevention Program Redevelopment Study 4. 1- Aging Population Service Needs 4. G Battered Youth Program 5. H - Proactive Housing Maintenance / 5. 1 Aging Population Service Needs Rehabilitation Program 6. J Committee to Review City Bldg./ 6. J - Committee to Review City Bldg./ Park Extension Needs Park Expansion Needs 7. D - Lynbrook Area Redevelopment Plan 7. E - Communication Improvement Project 8. A - Earle Brown Farm Renovation/Development 8. C - Redevelopment Plan 69th/Brooklyn Boulevard 9. C - Redevelopment Plan 69th/Brooklyn Boulevard 9. D - Lynbrook Area Redevelopment Plan 10. E - Communication Improvement Project 10. G - Battered Youth Program VOTING RESULTS SUBGROUP COMPARISON MAP' VOTING ITEM J- Committee to Review City Building 100i ---------- T--- - - - - -- 1 4 I I I 75 i I ISSUE 50 --------- J-- 1--- - - - - -- — PRIORITY 2 1 3 1 25 I i 11 I i 0 I I I ----------- 1 - - - - -- —� 1 3 5 7 9 PRESENT SATISFACTION SUBGROUPS ISSUE PRESENT PRIORITY SATISFACTION Average Average Entire Group 49.0 4.2 #11- Council 27.0 5.2 #2 Advisory Commissioners 40.0 4.2 #3- Other 40.0 5.6 #4- Staff 83.0 2.6 Voters = 32 GROUP MAP 10 TOP VOTE ITEMS - VOTE #2 - PRIORITY - VOTE #3 - PRESENT SATISFACTION TOP PRIORITY ISSUES ENTIRE GROUP 100 + - — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + i 75 + + F + + + P I R S I ; G H ;B S 0 50 + — — — — + — — J I + — — — — + — — — — + U R D E I ; C A T E 1 Y 25 + + + + + 0 + — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + 1 3 5 7 9 PRESENT SATISFACTION Figure 0-0 —A 7oters = 32 Disglag = BRUN DSP 06 -0 7ert `lace Data = 3ROOR3 .7TA 06 -01 -1969 Eorz late Data = BROOF.3 VTB 06 -01 -1989 late Me , 4 1 1ods = BROOR3 M'1H Parti- ipaats = BROOR2 PAR Option Technologies, Inc. Data for Figure 0 -0 —A ISSUE PRESENT PRIORITY SATISFACTION Group Group 'Dote Item Average Average A EARLE BROWN FARM RENOVATION A 39.0 7.9 REDEVELOPMENT B ECONCMIC DEVELOPY -ENT STUDY - 5'.0 5.2 REDEVELOPMENT ?CLICY C REDEVELOPMENT PLAN 69TH & BROOKLYN 38.0 3.4 BLVD D LYNBROOK AREA REDEVLOPMENT PLAN 43.0 3.4 E COMMUNICATION IMPROVEMENT PROu -, 29.0 4.0 . DR U. EDUCATIONS ' 11 .0 4.1 ?P.EVENTION ?ROGRAv J BATTERED YOUTH PROGRAM 56.0 H PRCACTIVE HOUSING 59.0 4.5 MAINTENANCE /REHAB PROGRAM I AGING POPULATION SERVICE NEEDS 53.0 4.6 J COMMITTEE TO REVIEW CITY BUILDING 49.0 4.2 & PARK EXPANSION NEEDS Option Technologies, Inc. TOP 10 PRIORITY ISSUES GROUP AVERAGES VOTE #2 PRIORITY (Forced paired comparion method) Which issue is more important for us to achieve? Which issue, when a r,b-ieved, will have the greatest impact on the City of Brookly 1) F - DRUG EDUCATION & PREVENTION PROGRAM 77 2) H - PROACTIVE HOUSING MAINTENANCE /REHAB PROGRAM 59 3) B - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STUDY — REDEVELOPMENT STUDY 57 4) G - BATTERED YOUTH PROGRAM 56 5) I - AGING POPULATION SERVICE NEEDS *53 + 6) J - COMMITTEE TO REVIEW CITY BUILDING & PARK EXTENSION NEEDS *49 - 7) D - LYNBROOK AREA REDEVELOPMENT PLAN 43 8) A - EARL BROWN FARM RENOVATION & DEVELOPMENT 39 9) C - REDEVELOPMENT PLAN 69TH & BROOKLYN BLVD 38 10)E - COMMUNICATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 29 VOTE #3 PRESENT SATISFACTION (1 -9) What is your level of satisfaction with this issue as it is being addressed at this present time? 1) A - EARL BROWN FARM RENOVATION & REDEVELOPMENT *7.9 + 2) B - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STUDY - REDEVELOPMENT STUDY 5.2 3) F - DRUG EDUCATION & PREVENTION PROGRAM 4.7 4) I - AGING POPULATION SERVICE NEEDS 4.6 5) H — PROACTIVE HOUSING MAINTENANCE /REHAB PROGRAM 4.5 6) J - COMMITTEE TO REVIEW CITY BUILDING & PARK EXPANSION NEEDS *4.2 - 7) E - COMMUNICATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 4.0 8) C - REDEVELOPMENT PLAN 69TH & BROOKLYN BLVD 3.4 9) D - LYNBROOK AREA REDEVELOPMENT PLAN 3.4 10)G - BATTERED YOUTH PROGRAM 2.7 * + highest consensus item - lowest consensus item . SUBGROUP MAPS (4) 1- COUNCIL 2- ADVISORY COMMISSIONERS 3 -OTHER 4 -STAFF 10 TOP VOTE ITEMS - VOTE #2 - PRIORITY - VOTE #3 - PRESENT SATISFACTION PRIORITY RANKING ORDER OF TOP 10 ISSUES BY SUBGROUPS VOTE #2 PRIORITY 1- COUNCIL 2- ADVISORY 3 -OTHER 4 -STAFF GROUP AVERAGE 1) F A F F F 2) H F H J H 3) B B B B B 4) E J G G G 5) G H I H I 6) I D A D J 7) D I D I D 8) A E J A A 9) C C E C C 10) 1 G C E E TOP PRIORITY ISSUES COUNCIL 100 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + i s i f F ; 75 + + + + + P f I I R H S I ; B S 0 50 + - — — — + —G— — E + — — — — + — — — — + U R D ; I E I C ; A T Y 25 + + +J + + 0 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + 1 3 5 7 11 9 PRESENT SATISFACTION Figure 0 -1 —A Voters = 3 Display = BROOk6 DSP 06-07 - 1 1989 Vert Vote Data = BROO13 VTA 06- 01-.989 9orz Vote Data = BROOB3 VTB 06- 01-1989 Vote Methods = 3ROOe3 .YTP. Participants = BROOR2 PAR Option Technologies, Inc. Data for Figure 0-1 —A I ISSUE PRESENT PRIORITY SATISFACTION Group Group Vote Item Average Average A EARLE BROWN FARM RENOVATION 6 40.0 T.8 REDEVELOPMENT B ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STUDY - 56.0 5.0 REDEVELOPMENT POLICY C REDEVELOPMENT PLAN 69TH 6 BROOKLYN 38.0 3.4 BLVD D LYNBROOK AREA REDEVLOPMENT PLAN 42.0 3.2 E COMMUNICA`ION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 51.0 4.6 F DRUG EDUCATIONa 89.0 4.2 PREVENTION . ;GR w = Ru�..A.. G BATTERED YOUTH PROGRAM 49.0 3.6 H PROACTIVE HOUSING 62.0 3.8 MAINTENANCEiREHAB PROGRAM I AGING ?OPULAT.ON SERVICE NEEDS 46.0 6.6 J COMMITTEE TO REVIEW C.TY BUILDING 27.0 5.2 6 PARK EXPANSION NEEDS Option Technologies, Inc. TOP PRIORITY ISSUES ADVISORY COMMISSIONERS 100 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + f 75 + + + + + P I R ; G I H F S I B S O 50 + — — +C— — — — + — — — — + — — — — + U R ; D E I J T ; A Y 25 + + E + + + I 0 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + 1 3 5 7 9 PRESENT SATISFACTION Figure 0-2 —A Voters = 14 DisYlap = BROOR6 .DSP 06- 07-1989 7ert Tote Data = BROOR3 .77A 06 -01 -1989 Hera Tote Data = BROOR3 .7TB 06- 01-1989 Tote Methods = BROOR3 YTH Particigaats = BROON . ? .kR Option Technologies, Inc. Data for Figure 0-2 —A ISSUE PRESENT PRIORITY SATISFACTION Group Group Vote IleM Average Average A EARLE BROWN FARM RENOVATION & 33.0 7.5 REDEVELOPMENT B ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STUDY - 58.3 4.8 REDEVEH"PHNT %CLICv C REDEVELC:MENT PLAN 69TH A BROOKLYN 47.0 3.2 BLVD D LYNBROOK AREA REDEVLOPMENT PLAN 44.0 3.8 CO'fYTINIOATION IMPROV PRO'ECT 25.01 3.4 F DRAG EDUOATION § 05.. 5.0 PREVENT -ON PROGRAM J G BATTERED YOUTH :ROGRAY 2.9 T T ' I n" ?? PROA °.: H .. OSiNG 61.01 3.9 MAINTENANOEiREFAB PROGRAM I AGING ::?ULATION SERVICE ':NEEDS 61.0 3.6 1 COMMITTEE TO REVIEW CITY BUILDING 40.D 4.2 & PARK EXPANSION NEEDS Option Technologies, Inc. TOP PRIORITY ISSUES OTHER 100 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + F; f 75 + + + + + P ; H I R B S I ; G I S O 50 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — —A— + U R D E I J 1 T , Y 25 + + E + + + C i 0 + - - - - + - - - - + - - - - + - - - - + 1 3 5 7 9 PRESENT SATISFACTION Figure 0-3 —A Voters = 5 Display = BROM DS? 06-07 -1989 Vert `late Data = BROO13 VTA 06-01-1989 Harz Vote Data = BRO0!3 V1B 06 -01 -1989 Vote Heth:Hs = BROOR3 XTH Participants = BROOR2 PAR Option Technologies, Inc. Data for Figure 0-3 —A ISSUE PRESENT PRIORITY SATISFACTION Group Group Vote 199 Average Average A EARLE BROWN FARM RENOVATION A 53.0 8.9 REDEVELOPMENT B ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STUDY - 00 6.2 REDEVELOPMENT POLICY C REDEVELOPMENT PLAN 69TH 6 BROOKLYN 18.0 3.6 BLVD 0 LYNBROOK AREA REDEVLOPMENT PLAN 42.0 3.6 E COMMUNICATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 22.0 4.0 F DRUG EDUCATION a 82.0 4.8 PREVENTI'.N PRO-3RAY G BATTERED YOUTH PRCGRAM 56.0 2.6 H PROACTIVE HOUSING 71.0 6.0 MAINTENANCE /REHAB PROGRAM 1 AGING POPULATION SERVICE NEEDS 56.0 5.0 J COMMITTEE TO REVIEW CITY BUILDING 90.0 5.6 x PARR EXPANSION 'LEEDS Option Technologies, Inc. TOP PRIORITY ISSUES STAFF 100 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + , i F � J 75 + + + + + P ' I R , S I ;B S O 50 + — - — + — — — — + — — — — + - — — — + U R G D HI I E I ; C ; A T Y 25 + + E+ + + 0 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + 1 3 5 7 9 PRESENT SATISFACTION Figure 0 -4 —A Voters = 8 Display = BROOR6 DSP 06 -07 -1989 Vert Vote Data = BROO13 VTA 06-01 -1989 Borz Vote Data = BROOR3 VTB 06- 0 Vote Methods = BROOR3 MTH ?articipants = BROOR2 . ?AR Option Technologies, Inc. Data for Figure 0-4 —A ISSUE ?RESENT PRIORITY SATISFACTION Group Grcup Vote Item Average Average A EARLE 3ROWN FARM RENOVATICN & 36.0 8.5 REDEVELOPMENT B ECONOMIC DEVELOP "ENT STUDY - 54.0 5.2 REDEVELOPMENT POLICY C REDEVELOPMENT PLAN 69TH & BROOKLYN 36.0 3.5 BLVD D LYNBROOK AREA REDEVLOPMENT PLAN 42.0 2.9 E COMMUNICATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 28.0 4.8 F DRUG EDUCATION & 89.0 4.4 PREVENTION PRCGRAI" G BATTERED YOUTH PROGRAM 44.0 :.6 H PROACTIVE HOUSING 44.0 5.0 MAINTENANCE /REHAB PROGRAM I AGING POPULATION SERVICE NEEDS 42.0 5.0 J COMMITTEE TO REVIEW CITY BUILDING 83.0 2.6 & PARR EXPANSION NEEDS Option Technologies, Inc. Sr�Ff= SUBGROUP COMPARISON MAPS FOR* EAC$.ITEM (10) 1- COUNCIL 2- ADVISORY COMMISSIONERS 3 -OTHER 4 -STAFF 10 TOP VOTE ITEMS - VOTE #2 - PRIORITY - VOTE #3 - PRESENT SATISFACTION Subgroup Comparisons A —EARLE BROWN FARM RENOVATION & 100 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + 75 + + + + + P ' I R ; S I S O 50 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — —3— + U R E I ; Al 4 ; T ; 2 Y 25 + + + + + 0 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + 1 3 5 7 9 PRESENT SATISFACTION Figure S —A ISSUE PRESENT PRIORITY SATISFACTION Average Average Entire Group 39.0 7.9 Subgroups 1 COCNCIrl 40.0 7.8 2 ADVISORY COMMISSIONERS 33.0 7.5 3 OTHER 53.0 8.4 4 STAFF 38.0 8.5 Voters = 32 Display = 3ROOR6 DSP 06 -07 -1989 Vert Vote Data = BROOR3 .VTA 06 - 01 - 1989 Horz 'Dote Data = BROOR3 .VTB 06- 01-1989 Vote MethoAs = BROOR3 .MTH ?anticipants = BROOR2 PAR Option Technologies, Inc. Subgroup Comparisons B— ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STUDY — 100 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + i 75 + + + + + P ; I R ; 3 S I ; 21B4 S 0 50 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + U R E I T Y 25 + + + + + , , 0 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + 1 3 5 7 9 PRESENT SATISFACTION Figure S —B ISSUE PRESENT PRIORITY SATISFACTICN Average Average Entire Group 51 . Subgroups 1 COUNCIL 56.0 5.0 2 ADVISORY COMMISSIONERS 58.0 4.8 3 OTHER 60.0 6.2 4 STAFF 54.9 5.2 Voters = 32 Display = BROOK6 DSP 06-07 -1989 Vert Vote Data = BROOK3 VTA 06 -01 -1989 Harz Vote Data = BROCK3 VT3 76-01 -1989 'Jute Methcds = 3ROOR3 .1TH Participants = BROOK2 .PAR Option Technologies, Inc. Subgroup Comparisons C— REDEVELOPMENT PLAN 69TH & BROOKLYN 100 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + 1 � 75 + + + + + P i I R S I S 0 50 + — — — — +2— — — — + — — — — + — — — + U R E I Cl T 4 Y 25 + + + + + 3 ; 0 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + 1 3 5 7 9 PRESENT SATISFACTION Figure S —C ISSUE PRESENT PRIORITY SATISFACTION Average Average Entire Groin 38.9 3.4 Subgroups 1 COUNCii, 38.0 3.4 2 ADVISORY COMMISSIONERS 47.0 3.2 3 OTHER 18.0 3.6 4 STAFF 36.0 3. Voters = 32 Display = BROOK6 DS? 06 -07 -1989 Vert Vote Data = BROOK3 VTA 06-01-1989 Hort Vote Data = BROOK3 .773 06-01-1989 Vote Methods = BROOK3 MTH Participants = BROOK2 .PAR Option Technologies, Inc. Subgroup Comparisons D— LYNBROOR AREA REDEVLOPMENT PLAN 100 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + 75 + + + + + P R , I , O 50 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + R 41D32 , T Y 25 + + + + + 0 + — - — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + 1 3 5 7 9 PRESENT SATISFACTION Figure S —D ISSUE PRESENT PRIORITY SATISFACTION Average Average Entire Group 43.0 3.4 Subgroups I OOUHOIL 42.0 3.2 2 ADVISORY 1CMMT SSIOHERS 44.0 3.8 3 OTHER 42.0 3.6 4 STAFF 42.1 2.9 Voters = 32 Display = BROOR6 DSP 06-01 -1989 Vert Vote Data = BROOR3 .VTA 06- 01-1989 Horz `tote Data = BR00K3 VTB 06 -01 -1989 Vote Yethcds = BROCR3 MTH Participants = BROOR2 PAR schnologies, Inc. Subgroup Comparisons F =DRUG EDUCATION & 100 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + i 1 S 14 3{ 75 + + F + + + P I R 2 S I S O 50 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + U R ; E I T Y 25 + + + + + 0 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + 1 3 5 7 9 PRESENT SATISFACTION Figure S —F ISSUE PRESENT PRIORITY SATISFACTION Average Average Entire Group , ...0 4.. Subgroups 1 COUNCI L 89.0 4.2 2 ADVISORY COMMISSIONERS 65.0 5.0 3 OTHER 82.0 4.8 4 STAFF 89.0 4.4 i Voters = 32 Display = BROOR6 DSP 06-01-1989 Vert Vote Data = BROOR3 .VTA 06- 01-1989 Horz Vote Data = BROOR3 VTB 06 -01 -1989 Vote Methods = BROOE3 ATH Participants = BROOR2 PAR Option Technologies, Inc. Subgroup Comparisons G— BATTERED YOUTH PROGRAM 100 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + i i 75 + + + + + P I R 2 S I ; 3G ; S O 50 + — — — — + —1— — — + — — — — + — — — — + U R 1 4 i E I ' T Y 25 + + + + + 0 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — + 1 3 5 7 9 PRESENT SATISFACTION Figure S —G ISSUE PRESENT PRIORI1Y SATISFACTION Average Average Entire Group 66.0 2.7 Subgroups 1 COUNCIL 49.0 3.6 2 ADVISORY COMMISSIONERS 66.0 2.9 3 OTHER 56.0 2.6 4 STAFF 44.0 1.6 Voters = 32 Display = BROOB6 .DSP 06 -07 - 1 1989 Vert Vote Data = BROOR3 .VTA 06 -01 -1989 Horz 'tote Data = 3R00B3 .VTB 06 -01 -1989 Vote Methods = BROOR3 ATH Participants = BROOR2 PAR Option Technologies, Inc. Subgroup Comparisons H— PROACTIVE HOUSING 100 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + - — — — + 75 + + + + + P i 3 I R ; 12 S I H 1 1 S 0 50 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + U R ; 4 E I T Y 25 + + + + + I 0 + — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + 1 3 5 7 9 PRESENT SATISFACTION Figure S —H ISSUE PRESENT PRIORITY SATISFACTION average Average Entire Group 59.0 4.5 Subgroups 1 COUNCIL 62.0 3.8 2 ADVISORY COMMISSIONERS 61.0 3.9 3 OTHER 11.0 6.0 4 STAFF 44.0 5.0 Voters = 32 Display = BROOR6 DSP 06-01 -1989 Vert Tote Data = BROOB3 .VTA 06 -01 -1989 Horz Vote Data = BR0OR3 JTB 06- 01-1989 Vote Methods = BROOR3 .MTH Participants = BROOR2 PAR Option Technologies, Inc. Subgroup Comparisons I —AGING POPULATION SERVICE NEEDS 100 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + 75 + + + + + P i I R ; 2 S I 3 i S O 50 + — — — — + — — — I + — — — — + — — — — + U R 4 1 i E I ; T Y 25 + + + + + 0 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + 1 3 5 7 9 PRESENT SATISFACTION Figure S —I ISSUE ?RESENT PRIORITY SATISFACTIOfi Average Average entire Group 53.0 4.6 Subgroups 1 COUNCIL 46.0 6.6 2 ADVISORY COMMISSIONERS 61.0 3.6 3 OTHER 56.0 5.0 4 STAFF 42.0 5.0 Voters = 32 Display = SROOg6 DSP 06 -0 Vert Vote Data = BROOE3 VTA 06-01 -1989 Hort Vote Data = BROOR3 VTB 06- 01-1989 Vote lethods = 3ROOR3 NTH Participants = BROO$2 PAR Option Technologies, Inc. Subgroup Comparisons J— COMMITTEE TO REVIEW CITY BUILDING 100 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + f 1 4 75 + + + + + P I I R S I S 0 50 + — — — — + — — J — + — — — — + — — — — + U R E I 2 3 T Y 25 + + +1 + + 0 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + 1 3 5 7 9 PRESENT SATISFACTION Figure S —J ISSUE PRESENT PRIOR -I SATISFACTION Average Average Entire Group 49.0 4.2 Subgroups 1 COUNCIL 27.0 5.2 2 ADVISORY COMMISSIONERS 40.0 4.2 3 OTHER 40.0 6.6 4 STAFF 83.0 2.6 Voters = 32 Display = BROOR6 DSP 06- 07-1989 Vert Vote Data = BROOR3 .VTA 06 -01 -1989 Horz Vote Data = SROOR3 .775 06 -01 -1989 Vote Methods = BROOA3 .NTH Participants = BROOR2 .PAR Option Technologies, Inc. GROUP CONSENSUS MAP (HOW MUCH AGREEMENT WITHIN THE GROUP ?) 10 TOP VOTE ITEMS - VOTE #2 - PRIORITY - VOTE #3 - PRESENT SATISFACTION TOP PRIORITY ISSUES Consensus— ENTIRE GROUP 100 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + I I i 75 + + + + + P I R ; S I ; S O 50 + — — — — I — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + U R F CGDB; 1 E I H E A 1 T J Y 25 + + + + + 0 + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + — — — — + 0 25 50 75 100 PRESENT SATISFACTION Figure C -0 Voters = 32 Display = BROOR6 DS? 06 -0' -1989 Vert Vote Data = 9ROOR3 Mlk 06- 01-1989 Rom Vote Data = BRIAM VTB 06-0 Vote Met ods = BROOA3 XTH Parti:icaats = BROON P.R Option Technologies, Inc. Data for Figure C -0 ISSUE PRESENT PRIORITY SATISFACTION Group Group Vote Item Consensus Consensus A EARLE BROWN FARM RENOVATION i 39 65 REDEVELOPMENT B ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STUDY - 43 47 REDEVELOPMENT PO' -- CY C REDEVELOPMENT PLAN 69TH & BROOKLYN 43 41 BLVD D LYNBROOK AREA RED!"I OPMENT PLAN 45 46 E COMMUNICATION IMFRCVEMENT ?ROJECT 36 45 F DRUG EDUCATIONS 46 25 PREVENTION PF,OGRAY J BATTERED YOUTH PROGRAM 41 40 H PROACT:i'E HOUSINJ 38 33 MAINTHNANCEIREHAB FROGRAM I AGING POPULATION SERVICE NEEDS 49 26 J COMMITTEE TO REVIEW CITY BUILDING 30 24 & PAR? EXPANSION NEEDS Option Technologies, Inc. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 6/22/89 1988 Priorities 1989 Priorities 1. Earle Brown Farm Redevelopment Project 1. Drug Education & Prevention Program 2. Economic Development Study - Redevelopment Policy 2. Committee to Review City Bldg & Park Expansion Needs 3. Redevelopment Plan /69th Ave & Brooklyn Blvd 3. Earle Brown Farm Renovation & Redevelopment 4. Lynbrook Area Redevelopment Plan 4. Economic Development Study - Redevelopment Policy 5. Planned Unit Development Ordinance 5. Proactive Housing Maintenance /Rehab Program 6. 1 -94 Improvement Project 6. Battered Youth Program 7. Communication Project (community surveys, 7. Lynbrook Area Redevelopment Plan city newsletter expansion, promotion of volunteerism) I S. Drug Education & Prevention Program 8. Aging Population Service Needs 9. Residential Treatment Facilities Analysis 9. Redevelopment Plan 69th & Brooklyn Blvd 10. Senior Drop -in Center 10. Communication Improvement Project 11. Battered Youth Program 11. Complete "Top" Priorities of Park & Recreation Commission by 1994 12. Proactive Housing Maintenance -Rehab Program 12. Residential Treatment Facilities Analysis 13. Recycling -Solid Waste Program 13. Maintenance Code for Commercial & Industrial Bldgs 14. Crime Prevention Fund Expansion 14. Development of Group Home Siting Process & Plan 15. Police Master Plan Study 15. 1- 94/694 Improvement Project 16. Neighborhood Watch Program Expansion 16. Senior Drop -in Center 17. Fire Service Master Plan Study 17. Recycling Solid Waste Program 18. Aging Population Service Needs 18. Neighborhood Watch Program Expansion 1989 BROOKLYN CENTER PRIORITIES 7/26/89 1988 PROJECT COUNCIL POLICY 1989 PRIORITIES RANKING STATUS FOCUS 1989 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Drug Education and Prevention 8 - review funding of Program prevention programs a. Prevention as part of 1989 b. Education- D.A.R.E. Start 1989 budget c. Mayors Drug Task Force - expand education effort to general public and business community - evaluate formalizing the Drug Task Force 2. Committee to Review City - decide whether or not Bldg. and Park Expansion to appoint committee Needs and resolve its makeup 3. Earle Brown Farm Renovation 1 - monitor progress and Redevelopment 4. Economic Development Study 2 - complete review of Redevelopment Policy Housing Study and a. Housing Study Complete 1989 establish action plan b. Commercial- Industrial Study Start 1989 - authorize Comm -Ind C. Policy Development Start 1990 Study 5. Proactive Housing Maintenance/ 12 - complete action plan Rehab Program plan based on Housing a. Review current code Start 1989 Study recommendations regulations b. Non - rehabitable home buy -out Established 1989 program c. Point -of -Sale Code Compliance d. Housing Study Recommendations 6. Battered Youth Program 11 - review potential of a. Peacemaker Center Peacemaker Center role b. Battered youth advocacy Started 1989 in this program program - review funding requests 1990 budget 7. Lynbrook Area Redevelopment 4 Holding - awaiting availability Program of EDA staff time 8. Aging Population Service Needs 18 - evaluate next step in a. Metro Council Booklet servicing our growing "Blueprint for Local Action" Complete 1989 elderly population b. Senior Center Start 1989 - complete evaluation of need for a senior center (Ad Hoc Comm) Page 1 1988 PROJECT COUNCIL POLICY 1989 PRIORITIES RANKING STATUS FOCUS 1989 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9. Redevelopment Plan 69th and 3 Start 1988 - engineering study of Brooklyn Boulevard 69th completed in 1988 (public meeting to be scheduled late in 1989) - evaluate priority of this project 10. Communications Improvement 7 - evaluate cost/benefit Projects of various projects a. Expanded use of Cable TV b. Expanded Newsletter Completed 1989 (improve circulation) C. Improved communications re: Redevelopment projects, policies, and projects 11. Complete "Top" Priorities of - evaluate this project Park and Recreation Commission along with other by 1994 priority projects 12. Residential Treatment Facilities 9 Completed 1989 Analysis (Patchen Property Value Study) 13. Maintenance Code for Commercial - establish as priority Industrial Buildings for staff and advisory commission 14. Development of a Group Home Start 1989 - provide "seed" money Siting Process and Plan for 1989 -1990 Legislative session lobbying effort 15. I- 94/694 Improvement Project 6 Complete 1990 16. Senior Drop -In Center 10 Start 1989 - review priority as a part of other City project needs (Ad Hoc Committee) 17. Recycling -Solid Waste Program 13 - review feasibility a. Recycling Program Started 1989 of "Consortium" -based b. Coordinated Refuse Hauling refuse hauling in conjunction with HRG 18. Neighborhood Watch Program 16 - determine if Expansion additional resources should be allocated in 1990 Page 2 1988 PROJECT COUNCIL POLICY 1989 PRIORITIES RANKING STATUS FOCUS 1989 ------------------------------------------------------------------- 19. Subsidized Elderly Housing - determine priority allocation 20. Maintain and Improve Business Climate Diversity 21. Develop Annual City -wide -merge with #10 and Spring Cleanup Program evaluate as a project 22. Redevelopment Plan - 50th - establish redevelop - and France Avenues ment project priorities 23. Crime Prevention Fund 14 Completed -fund has expanded Expansion into drug education assistance 24. Explore Public /Private/ Nonprofit Partnership for Social Services 25. Improved /Expanded Public - possible duplicate Communications Redevelop- of #10 and #28 ment, Policies and Projects 26. Planned Unit Development 5 Completed 1989 - council will Ordinance receive Planning Commission draft fall of 1989 27. Police Master Plan Study 15 Completed 1989 - council review annually as part of budget 28. Expand City Use of Newsletter - possible duplicate of and Cable TV to a Monthly Basis #10 and #25 29. Complete "High" and "Moderate" Priorities of Park and Recreation Commission between 1994 -99 30. Fire Service Master Plan 17 31. Develop Intra -City Bus Transportation System 32. Clean Up Shingle Creek and Palmer Lake Area 33. Establishment of Storm Drainage Utility Page 3 1988 PROJECT COUNCIL POLICY 1989 PRIORITIES RANKING STATUS FOCUS 1989 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 34. Develop Residents Helping Residents Program 35. Clean Up Along Major Roads (Hwy. 100 and Brooklyn Blvd.) 36. Seek City Sales Tax and Alternative Revenue Source 37. Make Open Forum a More Inviting and Pleasant Process 38. Develop a Low -price Cable TV Access to Government and Public Access Channels 39. Televise City Council Meeting 40. Large Capacity Convention Center (2,500 +) 41. Develop a Cultural Center, Ice Arena, Restaurant Complex 42. Use Cleaner or Less Messy Seal Coating Process Page 4 CIT OF BROOKLVN CENTER VISION, MAJOR ACTION PERSON(S) TIME GOAL ALTERNATIVES BARRIERS STRATEGIES PLAN RESPONSIBLE TABLE I BROOKLYN CENTER VOTING RESULTS ENTIRE GROUP MAP 100 F PRIORITY 50 G H B D A C E 0 1 5 _9 PRESENT SATISFACTION; Priority Ranking Present Satisfaction Ranking I. F - Drug Education and Prevention Program I A - Eerie Brown Farm Renovation/Redevelopment 2. H - Proactive Housing Maintenance/ 2. B - Economic Development Study/ Rehabilitation Program Redevelopment Study 3. B - Economic Development Study / 3. F Drug Education and Prevention Program Redevelopment Study 4. 1 Aging Population Service Needs 4. G - Battered Youth Program S. H - Proactive Housing Maintenance / 5. 1 Aging Population Service Needs Rehabilitation Program 6. J - Committee to Review City Bldg./ 6. J - Committee to Review City Bldg./ Park Extension Needs Park Expansion Needs • 7. D - Lynbrook Area Redevelopment Plan 7. E Communication Improvement Project 8. A Earle Brown Farm Renovation/Development 8. C - Redevelopment Plan 69th/Brooklyn Boulevard 9. C - Redevelopment Plan 69th/Brooklyn Boulevard 9. D - Lynbrook Area Redevelopment Plan 10. E - Communication Improvement Project 10. G - Battered Youth Program rN' r i V .. R. uo i i i r e r e I, a a { Ii :2D i ''