Anyone who assumes the Cook County Community Center Steering Committee is pushing a united agenda is mistaken. Individual members do have their opinions about what and where the new facility should be, but those opinions clashed vigorously at a four-hour meeting on June 10, 2011.
Sue Hakes, chair of the committee, is hearing from a lot of people regarding plans for the new community center to be funded from the local 1 percent sales and use tax implemented for recreational capital improvement projects throughout the county. “I’m just getting pounded,” she said. Some comments are positive, some are not. Other committee members indicated they were receiving a lot of strident comments about the project as well.
At the beginning of the meeting, committee members shared some of what they are hearing along with their own thoughts on the project.
ISD 166 Superintendent Beth Schwarz said people are still mistakenly thinking that the 1 percent could be used to help with operating expenses at the school and the hospital. The legislation authorizing the tax outlines numerous ways the tax revenue can be used, but school and hospital operating expenses are not included.
Project architect Tim Meyer said that while he has been spending time in the community, he has been hearing people say they want the City of Grand Marais to get involved in the community center project and they don’t want their taxes to get raised.
Current Community Center Director Diane Booth, who knows how the current facility has been used over the years, said she is concerned that downsizing the plans to save money would run the risk of not providing adequate space for the kinds of activities community groups host.
Former county commissioner and current Superior National golf course director Bob Fenwick said he would support spending money on energy-related infrastructure in order to save on energy costs but would not support installing alternative, renewable energy infrastructure just to have it.
Builder’s rep Tom Wachholz of ORB Management noted that spending extra money up front on certain things, such as energy efficiency or renewable energy infrastructure, could leave more money for operating expenses later.
Site options
The committee spent much of its time debating where the community center should be built. A site had been chosen, but it would require moving the tennis courts that were newly refurbished last summer, an expense many community members think is unjustifiable.
What is under the ground – how far down they could go before hitting ledge rock, for example – could affect the cost of building considerably. Tim Meyer said that he would rather spend money to build new – and potentially longer lasting – tennis courts than to remove ledge rock in another location.
Tom Wachholz said finding out for sure all the consequences of each site option could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. “There’s a certain level of risk in every option,” he said.
Six different site options were discussed along with the pros and cons of each—things like nearness to the school, the risk of having to excavate ledge rock or mitigate for wetlands, positioning of the building to capture sunlight and solar energy, and the need to move recreational amenities currently in place.
The 12 committee members in attendance voted on the locations they thought were best. The most favored sites were (in this order): . At the corner of the New Gunflint Trail and Creechville Road . Between the current Community Center and the school complex (requiring a need to move the tennis courts) . Attached to the west end of the school.
Sue Hakes was strongly in favor of a different option that would reposition the building to fit between the current Community Center and the tennis courts. Beth Schwarz favored attaching the community center to the school. Diane Booth expressed concern about making the tennis courts the biggest factor in deciding where to locate the building.
The committee passed a motion to recommend to the county board that they authorize ORB Management to investigate the cost of researching the financial ramifications of the three site options that received the most votes.
At the June 14 county board meeting, Hakes brought the committee’s recommendation to the board but also suggested they consider the option she favored. The board voted to drop the option of attaching the facility to the school and to have ORB investigate the cost of determining the financial ramifications of the other two sites recommended by the committee and the site Hakes favored.
To see six different site options, visit the Cook County website at www.co.cook.mn.us.
The next meeting of the Cook County Community Center Steering Committee will be on Wednesday, June 22nd at 8:00 a.m. at the Cook County Community Center.
Leave a Reply