Minutes - Environmental Policy Board - 10/01/2007

Home

up costing the City more money, but it also was not statistically relevant because they only received answers from people who chose to answer and therefore did not know if that was a true cross section of the population. Environmental Coordinator Anderson reported it seemed that the consensus of the Council was that the Ramsey Resident was not an appropriate tool for this survey. He advised that ultimately, Council determined that more information was necessary before any formal direction/action would be taken. This topic will be rescheduled for another work session in the future. Environmental Coordinator Anderson stated that staff would research what the cost would be to survey every household versus a statistically significant sampling. He reported that Ms. Pierson suggested that the City write a letter requesting technical assistance to Embrace Open Space, which would provide an opportunity for private funding of the survey. He reported that that option was brought up at the end of the work session but did not get much response. Also, throughout the Ramsey3 process, there was a questionnaire asking residents to identify the five best things about Ramsey. He stated that the natural environment was by far the top answer the residents listed. Environmental Coordinator Anderson stated that the City Administrator provided him a copy of a survey, conducted in 1997 by Decision Resources. It was an overall survey of the city and the opinions of the citizens at that time. He reported that by a 78% to 18% verdict, residents favored a property tax increase for the preservation of open spaces. He explained that although the survey was ten years old, the citizens not only supported the preservation of open spaces, but were also willing to partially fund it. Board Member Max stated that although there have been changes in the city during the last ten years; there has also been a positive shift in mental attitudes toward preserving the environment as well. He stated that those survey results were very encouraging. Chairperson McDilda stated that although the EPB needs to survey the public to find out their needs, there is also a need to survey the Council and find out what it is that they want. He explained that the EPB is going into the work sessions with no idea of what the Council wants and is therefore getting nowhere. He stated that he would like to query Councilmember Strommen and to have her be the Council representative to the EPB. He questioned the possibility of having an interim work session to find out what the Council is looking for and to answer their questions, so that they can have a constructive work session and get to a point where they can make decisions on this. Board Member Max stated that there were a few misunderstandings at the work session and in order to correct that, an open line and more frequent communication with the Council is needed. Chairperson McDilda stated that he was involved in the Ramsey3 process, as were some Councilmembers and also some of the citizens of Ramsey. He explained that it is relatively easy to put natural resources at the top of the list and say that you care about it, but much harder to agree on a method of preservation and a way of paying for the land. He stated that land sometimes is willed or trusted back to the City, or you need to have funds to purchase land. Environmental Policy Board / October 1,2007 Page 4 of7