Loading...
2023-12-18 RAC Minutes Minutes of the Recreation Advisory Committee held on December 18, 2023. Members present: Sandra Carro Silvia Clarke John Ise Dino LaCapra Gayle Mercado Sheryl Piper Jessica Pluhar Sharon Thompson Members absent: Jennifer Baumann Also present: Angela Dorney, Parks and Recreation Director Jacquelyn Villagran, Parks and Recreation Assistant Director Leslie Rackl, Executive Assistant George Burch, Mayor Jesse Valinsky, Vice Mayor Sandra Harris, Coucilwoman Jerome Charles, Councilman Esmond Scott, Village Manager Chris Miranda, Public Works Director Ryan Cambridge, FRMWRK planning + design Mark Beer, FRMWRK planning + design Boy Scouts, Troop 1305 The meeting was called to order at 6:45 p.m. The meeting was opened to public comment at this time. Members of Boy Scout Troop 1305 gave of list of programs they would like in a new facility, including drone racing and indoor soccer. Mayor Burch noted that currently the Miami Shores Country Club Board has made a 12 million dollar request from the Village to bring the Country Club up to date. Mayor Burch add that Doctors Charter School will be presenting a request of their own at the next Council meeting. The question becomes how the Village sells the idea of a new center to residents in order for it to pass a vote. Ms. Thompson made a motion to approve the minutes of the November 6, 2023 meeting. Motion seconded by Ms. Mercado and unanimously approved. At this time Mr. Scott introduced Ryan Cambridge of FRMWRK planning + design who will present a road map of how to get to a new center in Miami Shores. Mr. Cambridge related his parks system design background and noted he has worked with the City of Doral with their new facilities. Mr. Cambridge then introduced his associate Mark Beer who handles the implementation aspect of the design. Mr. Cambridge related that he is passionate about alternate funding mechanisms (sources) such as ballot based funding measures. He has witnessed the operational as well as the public and private sides. Mr. Cambridge said that funding remains a challenge. There are three types of ballot-based funding measures: general obligation bonds , property taxes and sales taxes. General obligation bonds generally will need a referendum, where voters will be asked to approve the bond amount; the size of the bond determines if it will go to the public. Mr. Cambridge noted that the success rate is generally high at 77%. It was noted that once the master plan vision is created the design process can begin; there can be different ways to implement the vision of the master plan over time. Ideally a master plan is needed prior to a bond referendum. Everything that you will need for a referendum should be a derivative of your parks master plan. It was noted that in Doral’s plan the ir vision was defined in their bond referendum; the residents of Doral provided input for the projects as well as for the overall vision for the city. Mr. Valinsky noted that there can be exemptions depending on the tax code of your city. Mr. Cambridge said that during the campaign feedback from the residents can be noted and tailored as you move forward in the campaign. Mr. Charles asked if there were any grassroot examples/case studies to review. Residents need to clearly see what will be done with th e money. Mr. Cambridge said another important aspect is recrafting the ballot language; noting that in Florida there are only 75 words allowed in the ballot language. One other aspect of the campaign is graphic collateral design which refers to marketing materials that represent a brand visually. Mr. Cambridge added that the most important thing is to incorporate all cross sections of your community so that everyone can see the benefit; this is done by being very specific. Additionally, Mr. Cambridge said to look at real time images in your bond campaign; everything should be strategically placed in your campaign. The ballot language should lead with the benefits to the residents and close with the cost; do not lead with the cost. Another important aspect is full transparency; add a bond rate calculator on the website that leads to property taxes. Educate people on the bond to gain their support, but do not advocate anything; educate not advocate. In addition, be present; any conversation can be a b ond conversation. In Doral it was noted that some bond meetings overlapped with the parks master plan. Mr. Cambridge said that everything done with Doral was educational. But a foundation or similar entity is needed to spearhead the campaign. Mr. LaC apra noted that he has begun speaking with residents; adding that there are funds available out there. Some residents may be able to donate between $10,000-$30,000. Mr. LaCapra is committed to helping move a new center forward; there is a benefit for residents to buy in to this. Mr. Cambridge said there challenge is to have someone take charge financially; a ‘park foundation’ would be responsible for fundraising. Ms. Piper likes comprehensive plans and feasibility studies. Mr. Cambridge believes in pure data backed approaches. Mr. Ise noted that Miami Shores is conservative and incremental. It was noted that if the ballot issue is not interesting to voters, they will not respond. Look at the larger picture; a very detailed plan will produce a broader voting audience. Mr. Scott noted that the scope of the parks master plan is written. The comprehensive plan needs to be written. Mr. Cambridge noted that the bond feasibility should include TPL, Trust for Public Land. The parks master plan will dete rmine the need for a bond as well as the feasibility. The parks master plan will create of a vision of what the next step will be. Ms. Dorney noted that a feasibility study was done previously in 2017. The concept design of a recreation center can be do ne through public engagements and charrettes. Needs assessments can be accomplished through focus groups and community workshops. It was noted that though a statistical campaign, the goal should be to be on the ballot in 2026. Ms. Dorney noted that ther e was not a ‘yes’ campaign for the previous bond. Mr. LaCapra suggested engaging people in the community through communication. Mr. Cambridge said that timing is very important, noting that parks were continually part of the discussion in Doral. Mr. Cambridge suggested adding broad community events that draw people in such as a movie. Ms. Dorney agreed that residents want to be involved in the process. Mr. Burch inquired about the timeline for a bond referendum. Mr. Cambridge suggested the first step is allocating nine months to develop a master plan. Mr. Cambridge added that the best time to put something on a ballot is during a general/presidential election since there are more voters; special elections are harder to generate voter turnout. It was noted that the average impact per home for the previous bond in Doral was $150 a year per home. Mr. Valinsky noted that we need a quality facility that sells itself to the residents. Mr. Scott reiterated that charrettes will be vital to the success of a new center. The meeting adjourned at 8:25 p.m.