[1. Call to Order]
[00:00:04]
GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE, AND WELCOME TO OUR REGULAR MEETING FOR THE PARK AND RECREATION BOARD, THE CITY OF AMARILLO, JUNE 10TH, 2026. I HAVE 130, SO I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER.
AND WE'RE GOING TO FIRST READ OUR RULES FOR PUBLIC ADDRESS.
[2. Public Address. Citizens who desire to address the Parks and Recreations Board with regard to matters on the agenda or having to do with the City’s policies, programs, or services will be received at this time. Each speaker will be limited to three minutes. The Board may not discuss items not on this agenda, but may respond with factual, established policy information, or refer to staff. The Board may choose to place the item on a future agenda. (Texas Attorney General Opinion JC-0169.)]
CITIZENS WHO DESIRE TO ADDRESS THE PARKS AND PARKS AND RECREATIONS BOARD WITH REGARD TO THE MATTERS ON THE AGENDA OR HAVING TO DO WITH THE CITY'S POLICIES, PROGRAMS OR SERVICES WILL BE RECEIVED AT THIS TIME.EACH SPEAKER WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES.
THE BOARD MAY CHOOSE TO PLACE THE ITEM ON A FUTURE AGENDA.
SO WE WILL LIMIT YOUR PARTICIPATION TO THREE MINUTES.
I SEE SOME PEOPLE FROM THE PUBLIC. IF ANYBODY WANTS TO SPEAK, NOW'S YOUR TIME.
I GUESS I'M GOING SOLO. PLEASE TELL US YOUR NAME.
THE OTHER I GOT ANOTHER COUPLE QUESTIONS IS WHEN WE HAD THE MEETING AT THE LIBRARY DOWN THERE.
MR. MASSEY, YOU STATED THAT YOU WOULD REACH OUT TO MR. SHERLIN. HAVE YOU DONE THAT? I HAVE NOT. OKAY.
THE OTHER QUESTION IS, IS MR. ALTMAN, I BELIEVE IS AT THE SAME MEETING YOU DID STATE THAT YOU WOULD HAVE A YOU WOULD PUT IT ON THE AGENDA TO CRAIG TO DISCUSS MEDI PAK. YOU DID SAY THAT, BUT YOU SAID IT THE OTHER DAY.
YOU DIDN'T SAY THAT. CAN YOU VERIFY WHAT WAS DISCUSSED OR YOU CAN'T DISCUSS IT? STATEMENT OF FACT. I SAID I WOULD ASK ABOUT PUTTING IT ON THE AGENDA.
I DON'T SET THE AGENDA. THE PARK AND REC BOARD DIRECTOR SETS THE AGENDA.
THAT'S TO ME, THAT'S A THAT WAS A CLOSED ITEM.
IT'S ALREADY BEEN DECIDED BY THE CITY COMMISSION.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE DECIDED NOT TO PUT IT ON THERE.
BUT CRAIG, BUT YOU TOLD CRAIG THAT YOU DIDN'T SAY THAT.
I DON'T HAVE THE I DON'T HAVE THE PURVIEW TO PUT THAT ON THE AGENDA.
I'LL I'LL CORRECT MYSELF. I DON'T HAVE THE I DON'T HAVE THE POWER TO PUT IT ON AGENDA.
ALL I CAN DO IS RECOMMEND. OKAY. THANKS FOR YOUR TIME.
WELL, I THANK I THANK YOU FOR COMING, EVERYONE.
OUR NEXT ITEM OF BUSINESS IS APPROVAL OF MINUTES.
[3. Approval of Minutes. This item is for the Board to discuss and consider the approval of the minutes of the Board meeting held May 13, 2026.]
EVERYBODY SHOULD HAVE A COPY. I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES AS WRITTEN.SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE MINUTES? SIGN OF HANDS? I SEE NO OPPOSED. IT PASSES.
ARE WE READY FOR THE TO DISCUSS CONFLICT OF INTEREST?
[4. Present, and Discuss Conflict of Interest. This item is for the Board to discuss the conflict of interest. ]
PARKS REC BOARD STEPHANIE COGGINS, CITY SECRETARY.SO WE HAVE A PRESENTATION FOR THIS, BUT WE DON'T HAVE IT PREPARED TODAY.
I CAN WALK YOU THROUGH WHAT THIS IS. IF YOU'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT IT, AND WE CAN GET THAT PRESENTATION TO YOU, OR WE CAN HOLD AND DO THE PRESENTATION AT THE NEXT MEETING.
SO IF YOU HAVE A PREFERENCE ON WHAT YOUR COMFORT LEVEL IS.
[00:05:04]
AND I WANT TO PREFACE THIS, I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY, SO I DON'T WANT TO GIVE YOU LEGAL ADVICE, BUT WHEN YOU SERVE ON A CITY BOARD, IN OUR MUNICIPAL CODE AND UNDER DIFFERENT PARTS OF STATE LAW, WE HAVE CONFLICT OF INTEREST LAWS THAT REALLY PROTECT THE ORGANIZATION AND PROTECT YOU TO ENSURE THAT THE DECISIONS THAT ARE MADE AND THE VOTES THAT ARE TAKEN FOR THE BOARD AND FOR THE CITY ARE DONE.SO WITHOUT ANY SORT OF OUTSIDE INFLUENCE OR CONFLICTS.
AND SO WE HAVE BEFORE YOU AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST LAWS.
AND WE ARE ASKING OUR BOARD MEMBERS TO SIGN THIS, JUST TO ENSURE THAT YOU'RE AWARE OF WHAT CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ARE, HOW THEY EXIST, AND HOW YOU CAN ALERT YOUR BOARD LIAISON IF YOU HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND ABSTAIN FROM A VOTE WHERE YOU MIGHT HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
THERE ARE STATUTORY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST THAT YOU HAVE TO ABSTAIN FROM VOTING.
AND THEN THERE ARE SOME THAT ARE PERCEPTION BASED. AND SO THERE MAY BE SOME.
AND I'LL USE AN EXAMPLE FOR COUNCIL. WE HAVE COUNCIL MEMBERS OR HAVE HAD COUNCIL MEMBERS OVER THE YEARS THAT LIVE IN OUR VARIOUS PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS LIKE GREENWAYS OR COLONIES. AND SO WE'VE HAD THEM IN THE PAST ABSTAIN FROM A VOTE ON THE ANNUAL BUDGET FOR THAT PERIOD, EVEN THOUGH THEY DON'T HAVE A FINANCIAL INTEREST.
THAT WOULD BE A STATUTORY CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
THEY STILL ABSTAIN DUE TO THAT PERCEPTION OF ONE.
SO THERE ARE DIFFERENT CHAPTERS WITHIN TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE THAT ARE LISTED ON THIS FORM.
THE PRESENTATION THAT WE CAN PROVIDE YOU OR THAT WE CAN EMAIL AFTER WALKS THROUGH WHAT EACH OF THESE ARE, TO GIVE YOU MORE INFORMATION ON WHAT THOSE STATUTES HOLD AND WHERE THEY MAY APPLY TO YOU AS YOU SERVE ON THIS BOARD.
AND SO WHAT WE ARE ASKING IS THAT YOU WOULD REVIEW THIS FORM.
SO IF YOU DON'T FEEL LIKE SIGNING IT TODAY, YOU WANT TO LEARN A LITTLE MORE OR YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS THAT DUSTIN OR COURTNEY CAN ANSWER, WE'RE HAPPY TO TAKE THOSE QUESTIONS, GET ANSWERS BACK, OR BRING BACK THE PRESENTATION TO THE NEXT MEETING IF YOU FEEL LIKE THAT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL. I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH THE PROPOSAL EXCEPT THAT IT SAYS BY SIGNING, I HAVE REVIEWED THE STATUTES AND SO I WOULD VERY MUCH SO I CAN SIGN THIS IN GOOD FAITH.
I WOULD LIKE LINKS TO THOSE STATUTES SO THAT I CAN REVIEW THEM BEFORE I SIGN THEM.
AND WE'LL SEE IF WE CAN ADD THE PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AS WELL.
AND I ASSUME WE COULD THEN JUST SIGN IT AND EMAIL IT BACK TO YOU.
MICHAEL. YEP. THAT'D BE FINE. WE COULD. YEAH, I THINK THAT'D BE FINE.
STEPHANIE, DO OTHER OR OTHER BOARDS MEMBERS SIGNING THIS OR OTHER ADVISORY BOARDS? ANYONE SERVING ON AN ADVISORY BOARD FOR THE CITY OF AMARILLO.
WE ARE HAVING SIGNED THIS. EVEN MEMBERS OF SOME OF OUR BOARDS LIKE OUR TIERS BOARDS, FOR EXAMPLE, WHERE CITY COUNCIL DOESN'T APPOINT ALL OF THEM.
BUT THAT BOARD IS ADMINISTERED BY CITY STAFF.
WE ARE ASKING ALL MEMBERS TO SIGN IT. SPECIAL NOTE AND I DON'T KNOW WHO THIS MIGHT APPLY TO, BUT IF YOU SERVE ON MORE THAN ONE BOARD, YOU ONLY HAVE TO SIGN THE FORM ONCE.
SO ANYBODY THAT MIGHT HAVE ALREADY SIGNED IT FOR ANOTHER BOARD YOU SERVE ON OR DO SERVE ON ANOTHER BOARD, YOU WOULD NOT HAVE TO SIGN IT TWICE WHEN YOU SIGN IT.
YEAH, WE'LL BE HAPPY TO FORWARD THAT INFORMATION OUT. AND THEN AFTER YOU'VE HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THAT INFORMATION, IF YOU FEEL ONCE YOU GET IT SIGNED, YOU CAN SEND IT BACK TO US AND WE'LL GET IT TO CITY SECRETARY.
THANK YOU, THANK YOU. THANKS, TOM, FOR BRINGING THAT POINT OF ORDER ABOUT SIGNING.
REALLY APPRECIATE THAT. ITEM FIVE PRESENT DISCUSS THE AQUATIC FEASIBILITY STUDY
[5. Present, and Discuss the Aquatic Feasibility Study Update. This item is for the Board to discuss the aquatic feasibility study for the Southwest and Southeast pool, including possible improvements, cost, and future plans.]
UPDATE. I KNOW WE WERE ALL SENT A COPY OF THAT.MICHAEL. YEAH. PARK BOARD. WE'RE JUST GOING TO TALK ON THIS VERY BRIEFLY.
SO I WANTED TO GIVE YOU A QUICK UPDATE ON HOW WE GOT TO THIS POINT.
SO WE HAD ACTUALLY DONE THE FIRST AQUATIC MARKET VIABILITY STUDY.
WE ACTUALLY HAD RECEIVED ONE SUBMISSION AT THAT TIME, COUNCIL VOTED NOT TO MOVE FORWARD.
THAT WAS BACK IN AUGUST OF 2025. THEY DIRECTED
[00:10:07]
STAFF TO DO STAFF LED EVALUATIONS OF THE TWO POOLS.WE PRESENTED THOSE FINDINGS BACK IN DECEMBER AFTER COUNCIL GAVE SOME ADDITIONAL GUIDANCE TO DO ANOTHER RFQ, WE WENT OUT AND SUBMITTED OR PUT OUT A SECOND RFQ FOR THE AQUATIC MARKET VIABILITY STUDY.
WE DID RECEIVE ONE SUBMISSION, AND THAT WAS THROUGH RFQ 300 AND 6-26.
AND THAT WAS TO LOOK AT ALL OF THE OUTDOOR AQUATIC FACILITIES, INCLUDING SPLASH PADS.
SO THE NEXT STEPS AND WE HAD SHARED THIS WITH COUNCIL.
WHAT WE'RE ASKING THE, THE PARK BOARD TO DO IS JUST REVIEW THAT DOCUMENT.
IF THERE'S ANYTHING WE NEED TO ADD SO THAT YOU'RE CONFIDENT IN A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL, WHETHER IT'S NUMBER OF BOARD MEETINGS THAT THEY ATTEND OR CERTAIN PARTS OF THE SCOPE THAT YOU WOULD LIKE US TO AMEND.
WE'RE HAPPY TO DO THAT. WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PARK BOARD IS COMFORTABLE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL. AND THEN ONCE THE, THE PARK BOARD MAKES A RECOMMENDATION, WHAT WE WOULD DO IS PUT IT ON A FUTURE COUNCIL AGENDA BECAUSE OF THE DOLLAR AMOUNT, COUNCIL WOULD HAVE TO TAKE ACTION ON IT. SO YOU SHOULD HAVE A COPY OF THE SCOPE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON IT OR ANY AMENDMENTS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE US TO MAKE, IF YOU WOULD JUST LET US KNOW. THAT WAY, WE CAN MAKE SURE THE CONSULTANT CAN REVISE THAT BEFORE IT GOES TO COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL.
DISCUSSION. THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION, I HAVE. I HAVE AN EMAIL WISE, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE PRINTED COPY.
WE CAN WE CAN TRY TO GET THROUGH SOME COPIES.
IF YOU I MEAN, YOU CAN WE CAN TABLE THIS AND COME BACK TO IT LATER IN THE MEETING, AND WE CAN GO GET SOME COPIES FOR YOU IF YOU'D LIKE TO DO THAT, WE CAN GO GET THOSE. AND THIS IS JUST A DISCUSSION ITEM. SO AGAIN, WE WOULD HAVE TO BRING IT BACK FOR A FORMAL RECOMMENDATION AT THE NEXT MEETING TO GO TO COUNCIL.
SO THIS IS JUST A DISCUSSION. IF THERE ARE THINGS IN THE SCOPE THAT NEED TO BE MODIFIED.
AND LIKE I SAID, WE CAN GO GET YOU SOME PRINTED COPIES, BUT DISCUSSION ONLY THAT WAY WE CAN GO BACK AND WORK WITH THE CONSULTANT, COME BACK WITH A REVISED PROPOSAL THAT YOU COULD THEN FORMALLY RECOMMEND TO COUNCIL.
MY ONLY QUESTION, I MEAN, I DID READ IT. MY ONLY QUESTION WAS YOU WENT AHEAD AND DECIDED TO PUT IN ALL THE SPLASH PADS, ALL THE AQUATIC FEATURES. IS THE COUNCIL AWARE THAT THAT'S COMING THAT WAY? YEAH, THAT WAS WHAT WE PRESENTED TO THE COUNCIL DURING THE STATE OF THE PARKS.
AND THE REASON WE'RE DOING THAT IS SO THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THE AQUATICS HOLISTICALLY, SO WE DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK IN A YEAR AND ADDRESS THE SPLASH PADS, BECAUSE A LOT OF THEM ARE STARTING TO GET TO LIFE EXPECTANCY AS WELL.
SO WE WANT TO TAKE A HOLISTIC APPROACH AND LOOK AT ALL OF THE AQUATICS KIND OF AT ONE TIME.
THERE IS ONE THING THAT WE'RE LOOKING TO AMEND AS A STAFF.
IT DOES TALK ABOUT THREE EXISTING POOLS. OUTDOOR POOLS.
WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS INITIALLY WATERFORD WAS INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE.
SO WE WOULD PROBABLY REMOVE THAT FROM THE SCOPE OF THE PROPOSED WORK.
SO I THINK THAT THERE'S A COUPLE MINOR THINGS THAT STAFF WOULD AMEND IN THAT SCOPE.
BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING THAT'S WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING.
MICHAEL, I DID NOT BRING SOME NOTES THAT I MADE, BUT MY RECOLLECTION IS I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER THIS WAS CLEAR TO INCLUDE EVALUATION OF OTHER NON CITY OWNED POOLS AS PART OF A STUDY.
THERE IS A IN 1.5. IT'S THE AQUATIC AREA PROVIDER STUDY.
OKAY. YEAH I SEE IT. I'LL STUDY UP TO FOUR OTHER AREA AQUATIC PROVIDERS.
AND SO THAT'S CORRECT. SO THEY WOULD THEY WOULD LOOK AT WITHIN THE MARKET, YOU KNOW, PROBABLY FOR OTHER FACILITIES REVIEW EVALUATE SO THAT WE'VE GOT SOMETHING TO BENCHMARK AGAINST. OKAY. THANK YOU.
I'M LOOKING FOR INPUT FROM THE FROM THIS BOARD.
YEAH. IF WE NEED TO TABLE IT WHILE WE GO GET SOME PRINTED COPIES.
WE CAN DO THAT. MICHAEL, IS THERE A BREAKDOWN OF HOW MUCH THE ENGINEERING STUDY IS FOR THE POOLS, THEN HOW MUCH IT IS FOR THE SPLASH PADS SEPARATE? NO, BECAUSE IT ALL CAME IN AS ONE PROPOSED STUDY.
SO IT'S THE TOTAL AMOUNT FOR THE ENTIRE THING.
SO IF THERE ARE THINGS THAT WERE REMOVED IT WOULD PROBABLY DROP IT DOWN A LITTLE BIT.
BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING IT'S WITHIN THAT SCOPE.
SO, SO RIGHT NOW SOUTHWEST POOL AND SOUTHEAST POOL, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL THEM ARE BOTH CLOSED.
[00:15:08]
CORRECT. IF WE HAD MUCH KICKBACK ON THAT, WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED A WHOLE AND I'LL LET BECKY ADDRESS IT.ON SOCIAL MEDIA. WE'VE SEEN A LOT MORE PEOPLE ASKING AND REQUESTING ABOUT SOUTHEAST POOL.
I REALLY HAVEN'T SEEN TOO MANY PEOPLE COMPLAINING ABOUT SOUTHWEST BEING CLOSED, AND IT WAS CLOSE TO $100,000 FOR THIS ENGINEERING STUDY. THAT'S CORRECT, THE WAY IT'S CURRENTLY PROPOSED.
OKAY. MICHAEL, WERE YOU SURPRISED THERE WAS ONLY ONE BID? NO. I THINK WHEN YOU START TALKING ABOUT SPECIALIZED AQUATIC FACILITIES, THERE'S ONLY SO MANY COMPANIES THAT ARE IN THAT THAT SPHERE OF WORK.
SO IT'S, IT'S NOT UNCOMMON. THE MORE SPECIALIZED YOU GET, THE FEWER BIDDERS OR RESPONDENTS YOU GET.
DOES THAT, WOULD THAT WHAT WOULD THAT IS THAT JUST IS THAT JUST PRESENTATION OR IS THAT OPPORTUNITY FOR, YOU KNOW, US IF WE IF WE MAY DETERMINE IT HELPFUL TO, YOU KNOW, ASK QUESTIONS, OBVIOUSLY GO MORE IN DEPTH IN THINGS OR IS IT JUST LIKE A HERE'S THE INFORMATION. WELL, AND AGAIN, I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE WANT THE FEEDBACK FROM THE PARK BOARD IS HOW MUCH ENGAGEMENT DO YOU WANT WITH THE CONSULTANT? DO YOU WANT THEM TO BE RESPONDING MONTHLY? DAILY, WEEKLY.
IS IT A HANDFUL OF MEETINGS? IS IT ONE MEETING? OBVIOUSLY OUR GOAL IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PARK BOARD IS COMFORTABLE WITH ANY RECOMMENDATION THAT THEY WOULD MAKE TO COUNCIL.
SO IF IT'S TWO VIRTUAL MEETINGS AND ONE IN-PERSON MEETING, IF IT'S MULTIPLE IN-PERSON MEETINGS, AGAIN, I THINK WE WOULD LEAVE THAT UP TO THE DISCRETION OF THE PARK BOARD AS TO WHAT YOU FEEL IS MOST APPROPRIATE.
I GENERALLY SPEAKING, THREE MEETINGS IS PROBABLY ABOUT THE NORM.
IF WE NEED TO ADD A COUPLE MORE, WE'RE HAPPY TO ADD THAT INTO THE SCOPE OF WORK.
AND AGAIN, THERE MAY BE DIFFERENT POINTS WHERE WE'RE COMING BACK. SO ONCE THEY GET, YOU KNOW, THE OFFICIAL OPERATIONAL ASSESSMENT, THAT MIGHT BE A TOUCH POINT WHERE WE COME BACK TO PARK BOARD.
SO ONCE WE GET A LITTLE BIT MORE INTO THE PROCESS, WE CAN KIND OF GIVE YOU THE TIMELINES OF WHEN WE WOULD BE PRESENTING AND WHEN THOSE MEETINGS WOULD BE AND WHAT WE WOULD BE DISCUSSING.
AND THEN ACCORDING TO THIS, IT'S JUST A ONE DAY SITE VISIT BY THE ENGINEER IS, IS THAT NORMAL AMOUNT OF TIME TO COVER WHAT? YEAH. I MEAN, ONE DAY TO COME OUT BECAUSE A LOT OF IT IS GOING TO BE GATHERING INFORMATION FROM STAFF ON CONDITION OF THE POOLS, WATER LEVELS, THINGS LIKE THAT. OBVIOUSLY, THEY WOULD COME OUT AND LOOK AT THE STRUCTURE, LOOK AT THE FACILITY.
SO THEY WOULD BE COMING OUT CHECKING FOR HEAVING, CHECKING FOR STRUCTURAL CRACKS, YOU KNOW, KIND OF DOING A VISUAL WALKTHROUGH OF THOSE FACILITIES ONE DAY MAY BE ENOUGH.
IT MAY BE THAT WE HAVE TO ADD A COUPLE ADDITIONAL DAYS JUST IN CASE.
AND THAT'S SOMETHING WE'D BE ABLE TO DO AFTER THIS CONTRACT WAS SIGNED.
IF WE KNOW, WHAT WE WOULD DO IS WE WOULD ASK FOR ANY REVISIONS.
THAT WAY WE CAN GO BACK TO THE CONSULTANT, SAY, YOU NEED TO REFRESH YOUR PROPOSAL TO INCLUDE THESE ITEMS, AND THEN FROM THERE WE WOULD BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD. BOARD WOULD MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO TAKE THE CONTRACT TO COUNCIL, AND THEN IT WOULD GO TO COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL.
ANY RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE BOARD? SHOULD WE STUDY IT FOR ANOTHER MONTH? SHOULD WE? YOU KNOW, WE ULTIMATELY AREN'T MAKING THIS ALL.
WE'RE DECIDING THIS BOARD IS TO TAKE IT TO COUNCIL FOR THEM TO ULTIMATELY APPROVE THE MONEY.
AND ULTIMATELY, I MEAN, THIS IS NOT ON THE AGENDA TODAY FOR A FORMAL RECOMMENDATION.
BUT AGAIN, WE JUST THIS IS DISCUSSION. WE JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THE PARK BOARD HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE SCOPE, REVIEW IT. IF THERE WAS ANY CHANGES THAT WE COULD TAKE IT BACK, GET A REVISED PROPOSAL BEFORE YOU MAKE A FORMAL RECOMMENDATION.
[00:20:03]
MICHAEL, WHEN WE MADE OUR RECOMMENDATION BEFORE, DID THE COUNCIL COME BACK AND THEY WANTED THIS EVALUATION? CORRECT. SO WE HAD WHAT WE WE ASKED FOR. SO WE HAD TOOK THE INITIAL STUDY BACK TO COUNCIL BACK IN AUGUST OF 25, AND THAT WAS WHEN COUNCIL DIRECTED STAFF TO DO THE STAFF LED EVALUATION.WE PRESENTED THOSE FINDINGS AND AT THAT TIME, COUNCIL SAID.
WE NEED TO GET A THIRD PARTY TO LOOK AT IT, SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE BRINGING THIS BACK.
THAT'S WHY WE PUT THE RFQ BACK OUT TO THE TO THE CONSULTANTS.
AND SO OBVIOUSLY THIS IS SOMETHING COUNCIL'S INTERESTED IN.
SO ON REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT I WAS SEEING IS IN THERE.
IF THEY FOUND THAT IT NEEDED TO BE REPLACED, WOULD IT BE REPLACING IT LIKE IT IS OR A DIFFERENT TYPE FACILITY, DIFFERENT PLACE? THAT'D BE MY QUESTION. YEAH.
AND THOSE ARE ALL THINGS WE CAN, WE CAN ASK FOR THEM TO CLARIFY IN THE DOCUMENT BECAUSE IN SOME CASES, LIKE SOUTHEAST IS PRETTY LANDLOCKED. SO IF WE START MAKING SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENTS THERE, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE THE PARKING ON THAT SITE TO BE ABLE TO FACILITATE IT.
OBVIOUSLY SOUTHWEST HAS A LITTLE BIT MORE SPACE AROUND IT, BUT SOUTHEAST IS PRETTY LANDLOCKED.
SO WE CAN HAVE THEM CLARIFY IN THERE. THIS IS REPLACEMENT AS IS IN THE CURRENT LOCATION OR LOOKING AT DIFFERENT LOCATIONS AS WELL, SO WE CAN HAVE THEM CLARIFY THAT IN THE PROPOSAL.
I THINK IT'S INTERESTING. I'M LOOKING ON MY PHONE, SO I GUESS IT'S MIDWAY THROUGH THE SECOND PAGE.
IT SAYS THE SCOPE DOESN'T ANTICIPATE ANY DESTRUCTIVE TESTING OR SAMPLING TO BE PERFORMED FOR THE SHELL OR SUBGRADE, SINCE THE VISUAL OBSERVATIONS OF THE POOL DECK SHELL AND DATA WILL PROBABLY DEFINE THE POOL CONDITION, AND THEN GOES ON TO SAY POOLS OF THIS AGE WITH REINFORCEMENT, CORROSION ISSUES, CONCRETE ISSUES AND MOVEMENT ISSUES ARE DIFFICULT TO REPAIR, AND NEW CONSTRUCTION IS THE BEST ALTERNATIVE FROM A MONETARY STANDPOINT.
SO THAT FEELS LIKE IT'S ALREADY AN ASSESSMENT.
WELL, I THINK WHAT WHAT WE DON'T WANT TO DO IS BE CREATING MORE PENETRATIONS IN THE PLASTER AND INTO THE ACTUAL STRUCTURE, BECAUSE THOSE ARE GENERALLY WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE FAILURE POINTS. THAT'S WHAT WE HAD TO DO WITH SOUTHEAST POOL, WHERE IT WAS ACTUALLY THE WATER WAS LEAKING OUT THE BOTTOM.
AND THAT'S A SHORT TERM PATCH GOING IN THERE, FIXING THAT AREA THAT DRAINS AT THE BOTTOM, PLASTERING IT. BUT WE KNOW THAT THAT'S A SHORT TERM FIX BECAUSE THAT'S GENERALLY WHERE THOSE POOLS ARE GOING TO FAIL IS WHERE THERE'S ANY KIND OF PENETRATION OF THAT STRUCTURE.
SO THEY'LL BE LOOKING AT THINGS FOR, AGAIN, THE HEAVING SETTLEMENT.
AND THIS IS A BIG COMPANY. I KNOW IT IS. AND A COMPANY THAT THE CITY OF EMERALD HAS USED BEFORE.
THAT'S CORRECT. THIS COMPANY ALSO IS ONE THAT WORKED WITH THE CAP WHEN THEY WERE DOING THEIR FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR THE CAP. AND THEN AMARILLO TOWN CLUB ALSO USED THIS SAME COMPANY AS WELL WHEN THEY WERE LOOKING INTO THEIR AQUATIC FACILITY.
WHETHER OR NOT IT'S JUST REPAIRS OR THE RECOMMENDATION IS BOTH POOLS NEED TO BE COMPLETELY REPLACED.
RIGHT. I THINK THEY'RE GOING TO LOOK AT ALL OPTIONS.
I THINK THEY'RE GOING TO FIRST LOOK AND SEE IF THE STRUCTURE IS SOLID.
OBVIOUSLY THERE ARE SOME COSTS TO THAT AS WELL.
BUT THEN ALSO LOOKING AT REPLACEMENT OPTIONS.
DO YOU REPAIR IT? DO YOU REPLACE IT? IS THERE A COMBINATION OF THINGS? I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE WANT TO GET YOU THE INFORMATION. SO PARK BOARD AND COUNCIL CAN MAKE THE BEST DECISION FOR THE COMMUNITY, BUT THEY'RE NOT COMING IN WITH ANY FIGURES ON REPLACEMENT COSTS OR ANYTHING WITH THIS.
WELL, I THINK THEIR FIRST STEP IS THE THE STRUCTURAL ASSESSMENT, LOOKING AT WHAT THE STRUCTURES ARE.
AND THEN FROM THERE, I THINK THEY WOULD MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS ON HERE'S WHAT A REPAIR COST COULD BE.
HERE'S WHAT REPLACEMENT COSTS COULD BE. IF YOU BUILT SOMETHING LIKE THOMPSON OR IF YOU BUILT SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, PICK A POOL. I THINK THAT WAY THEY WOULD GIVE OPTIONS OF WHAT THAT THAT SCALE COULD BE IF REPLACEMENT WAS THE OPTION INSTEAD OF REPAIRS.
YEAH. ITEM UNDER 1.6. IT SAYS THE ENGINEER WILL DEVELOP AN ESTIMATED COST FOR REPAIR VERSUS RENOVATION COSTS FOR COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS WITH NEW CONSTRUCTION AND HELP DEVELOP BUDGETS FOR THAT. OKAY. I'M NOT TRYING TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT, TIM, BUT IS THIS ENOUGH FOR WHAT THE COUNCIL YOU THINK WILL BE LOOKING FOR? YEAH, I THINK I THINK IT IS. YOU KNOW, MY THOUGHT THOUGH, I'M JUST LOOKING IN ADVANCE OF WHAT THE REPORT MIGHT SAY,
[00:25:05]
AND THEN I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE UP TO THIS, THIS BOARD TO DECIDE ON SOME THINGS THAT WE PUSH TO COUNCIL.AS FAR AS DO WE REPAIR BOTH POOLS? DO WE REPAIR ONE? IS IT A REPLACEMENT OF THE TWO FOR ONE? THAT'S I THINK THAT'S A DECISION.
THAT'S WHAT I THINK. MY QUESTION IS THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE LEADING US IN WHAT DIRECTION.
IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT SOMETHING LIKE TOP AND THOMPSON PARK, THEN THIS IS WHAT THE COST WOULD BE.
BUT THEN FROM THERE, I'M HOPING THAT IT'S OUR DECISION THAT WHAT WE PUSH TO THE TO COUNCIL AS TO WHAT WE'RE WHAT THE CITY IS LOOKING FOR IN THEIR AQUATICS, BECAUSE ULTIMATELY IT COMES DOWN TO WHAT, YOU KNOW, THE DEMOGRAPHICS GOING TO TELL US A LOT AS TO THE NEED OF THE POOLS. I GUESS I WAS SURPRISED THAT THERE'S NOT ANY TESTING, ALTHOUGH THAT MAKES SENSE.
SO I THINK TO ME, THIS IS LIKE $100,000 SECOND SET OF EYES.
WELL, I GUESS IF WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE A VOTE ON THIS, I THINK WE TAKE WHAT WE HAVE, AND IF WE HAVE FURTHER QUESTIONS, WE'LL BRING THEM THE NEXT MEETING FOR A VOTE.
YEAH. AND IF THERE ARE THINGS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE US TO INCLUDE, OBVIOUSLY WE WOULD TAKE THOSE WORK WITH THE CONSULTANT TO GET A REVISED PROPOSAL AND SCOPE. WE COULD ALWAYS ASK THEM SKYLAR TO YOUR POINT, WE COULD ASK THEM IF, IF THEY WERE TO DO SOME CORE DRILLING THROUGH THE STRUCTURE, WHAT THAT COST WOULD BE AS AN ADD ALTERNATE MAYBE, AND JUST SEE IF THEY COULD PROPOSE THAT.
AGAIN, I THINK THE CHALLENGE IS YOU'VE GOT 60 YEAR OLD POOLS AND THE MORE YOU DRILL HOLES THROUGH THEM, PROBABLY THE MORE THEY'RE GOING TO LEAK. YEAH, I'M NOT NECESSARILY REQUESTING THAT AT ALL. I'M SURE THAT FROM THEIR EXPERTISE, BECAUSE THEY'RE A VERY WELL KNOWN AND REPUTABLE COMPANY, THIS IS WHAT IS NEEDED FOR THEM TO, YOU KNOW, COMPILE AN APPROPRIATE ASSESSMENT. YEAH.
AND THE COUNCILMAN READ'S POINT, OUR JOB AS STAFF IS TO PROVIDE YOU THE INFORMATION ABOUT THE STRUCTURES, THE INFORMATION ABOUT THE POOLS. THEN IT'S BETWEEN THE PARK BOARD AND COUNCIL ON THE POLICY DIRECTION AND THE GUIDANCE FOR HOW WE MOVE FORWARD.
SO OUR JOB IS JUST TO PROVIDE THE INFORMATION.
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE INFORMATION THAT WE'RE PROVIDING IS WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR, WHICH IS WHY WE PROVIDED THE SCOPE OF WORK. SO IF THERE ARE THINGS WE NEED TO PROVIDE TO YOU AS THE BOARD TO MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S REFLECTED IN HERE. SO THAT'S WHY WE WANTED YOU GUYS TO SEE THE SCOPE.
DO YOU THINK THAT WE COULD GET A COPY OF THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FROM WHENEVER YOU GUYS DID IT.
THIS WAS JUST DISCUSSION. I DIDN'T THINK WE COULD MAKE A MOTION.
NO, THERE'S YEAH, THERE'S NOT A DECISION TO TAKE. NO. JUST IF THERE WAS ANYTHING THAT THE BOARD WANTED US TO ADD TO THIS PROPOSAL SO THAT WE COULD START WORKING WITH THE CONSULTANT TO GET A REVISED AND REFINED SCOPE BACK TO THE BOARD FOR FINAL ACTION.
SO DO WE ALL AGREE TO DO THAT? WE AGREE FOR MICHAEL TO GO AHEAD AND THE STAFF TO GO AHEAD.
OKAY. I SEE NO NAYS. SO I GUESS WE'RE DIRECTING YOU TO GO AHEAD.
ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE FEASIBILITY STUDY? THANKS. THANKS FOR THE DISCUSSION. IT WAS A GOOD DISCUSSION. ITEM SIX, STATE OF THE PARKS.
[6. Present, and Discuss the State of the Parks. This item is for the Board to present and discuss the current state of the parks, including maintenance, improvements, operations, and future needs.]
I JUST WANTED TO GIVE A VERY BRIEF UPDATE ON THIS.SO WE PRESENTED AT THE MAY 26TH COUNCIL MEETING THE STATE OF THE PARKS TO THE COUNCIL.
WE'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE AS WELL. BASICALLY OUR GOAL WAS TO TRY TO MAKE SURE COUNCILMAN REID HAD THE INFORMATION HE NEEDED WHEN HE ASKED FOR BASICALLY STATE OF THE PARKS FOR THE LAST FIVE YEARS. SO THE PRESENTATION WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT THE LAST FIVE YEARS OF THE DEPARTMENT, LOOKED AT KIND OF HOW WE GOT HERE AS A DEPARTMENT, LOOKED AT SOME OF THE PROGRESS AND PROJECTS WE'VE DONE OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS, KIND OF TALKED THROUGH SOME OF THOSE HOT TOPIC ITEMS LIKE THE ZOO, RESTROOMS, THINGS LIKE THAT.
[00:30:07]
AGAIN, THAT PRESENTATION IS AVAILABLE ONLINE SO YOU CAN GO BACK AND WATCH IT IF YOU'RE INTERESTED.BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THE BOARD WAS AWARE OF THAT, THAT PRESENTATION AND THE DISCUSSION.
I WAS AT THE COUNCIL MEETING, SAT THROUGH THE PRESENTATION, HEARD THE COUNCIL DISCUSSION.
IT WAS VERY, VERY COMPREHENSIVE, AS THE MAYOR SAID.
BUT I WOULD RECOMMEND LOOKING AT IT. IT'S VERY GOOD.
I DON'T HAVE ANY SLIDES. DID YOU HAVE 70? I THINK, I THINK THE THE TOTAL PRESENTATION WAS 200 PLUS, BUT I THINK WE ONLY GOT THROUGH THREE QUARTERS OF THEM.
SO YEAH, I ALSO THOUGHT IT WAS A VERY GOOD PRESENTATION.
AND I THINK THAT AT COUNCILMAN REED'S REQUEST IT, IT ACTUALLY TAKES QUITE A WHILE TO KIND OF DISPLAY ALL OF THE REALLY GOOD WORK GOING ON IN PARKS AND REC. AND I APPRECIATED YOUR PRESENTATION.
I ALSO APPRECIATED YOUR REMARKS AT THE END, BUT. ONE THING IS, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE WHEN WE ACTUALLY WENT BACK TO PULLED THE PROJECTS FROM THE LAST FIVE YEARS, IT TOTALED OVER $36 MILLION IN PROJECTS.
SO THAT'S A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT STRIDE IN A POSITIVE DIRECTION.
WHEN WE HAD DONE THE ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN BACK IN 2019, I THINK IT HAD 40 MILLION PLUS OR MINUS IN HIGH RISK ASSETS AND ANOTHER 40 PLUS MILLION IN MEDIUM RISK, WHICH WITH A DECAY CURVE, STARTS SLIDING INTO HIGH RISK VERY QUICKLY.
SO YOU HAD ABOUT 90 MILLION IN HIGH RISK OR FAILING ASSETS.
AND TO DATE WE'VE ADDRESSED ABOUT 36 MILLION OF THEM.
WELL, I KNOW THERE WAS A LOT OF WORK AND WE APPRECIATE EVERYTHING. IT WAS A GREAT PRESENTATION.
I WATCHED IT AS WELL. I AGREE WITH THE PREVIOUS COMMENTS, BUT I HAVE ONE SPECIFIC THING ON STATE OF THE PARKS I'D LIKE TO TO MENTION, AND THAT IS WITH WITH JOHN WARD PARK, THE WE'VE DISCUSSED BEFORE THAT THERE'S A LOT OF JUST BARE GROUND AREAS OUT THERE.
WE'VE WE'VE DISCUSSED THE REASONS I DROVE THROUGH THERE MONDAY JUST TO KIND OF GET AN UPDATE, SINCE SOMEONE THAT LIVES IN MY HOUSE HAS COMPLAINED ABOUT WALKING OUT THERE ON A REGULAR BASIS, AND I JUST REALLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE US REVIEW THAT ON ALMOST A MONTHLY BASIS.
I MEAN, IT'S JUST GREENED UP. IT'S ALMOST MIRACULOUS.
AND I'M HOPING THAT WE HAVE SOME SIMILAR BENEFIT OUT THERE.
BUT THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE THE LAST TIME WE HAVE A DRY SPELL.
SO I THINK WE OUGHT TO AT LEAST CONSIDER SOME SOME BACKUP PLANS IF WE GET IN THIS POSITION IN THE FUTURE, BECAUSE IT'S SUCH A NICE PARK. BUT IT IT'S JUST WITH THAT BARE GROUND IS JUST SO DISTRACTING FROM ALL THE OTHER POSITIVE ASPECTS OF THE PARK.
YEAH. STAFF'S CURRENTLY WORKING ON A PLAN BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THE GOAL WAS TO GET THAT INTO WILDFLOWERS, DOUBLE THE RATE OF SEED TO MAKE SURE IT WORKED WELL.
OBVIOUSLY, WE DIDN'T GET THE GERMINATION WE WERE EXPECTING, SO WE'RE CURRENTLY TRYING TO GET SOME ADDITIONAL SEED SO WE CAN GO IN THERE AND TRY TO GET THOSE HILLS REESTABLISHED. SO WE'RE CURRENTLY WORKING ON THAT. ARE ALL THESE AREAS NON IRRIGATED AREAS.
THERE'S NO SPRINKLER SYSTEM IN THEM. NO THEY ARE IRRIGATED.
WE RAN INTO SOME SOME DIFFERENT ISSUES WITH THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM.
A LOT OF THOSE IRRIGATION SYSTEMS ARE OLD. SOME OF THE CHALLENGES WE'VE SEEN RECENTLY ARE WHEN WE GOT A CONTRACTOR THAT'S IN THERE WORKING ON THOSE PARKS, PUTTING IN THE NEW LIGHTS. TYPICALLY, WE'LL TURN THOSE IRRIGATION SYSTEMS OFF JUST SO THAT THEY'RE NOT RUNNING UP THE PARKS.
WE'VE RUN INTO SOME ISSUES WHERE THOSE IRRIGATION LINES, THEY'VE BOARD RIGHT THROUGH THOSE IRRIGATION LINES. AND YOU DON'T KNOW THAT UNTIL OBVIOUSLY YOU START TURNING BACK ON THE IRRIGATION SYSTEMS. AND THEN YOU SEE SOME OF THE DAMAGE. SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT STAFF'S BEEN OUT THERE TRYING TO ADDRESS IS A LOT OF THE, THE ISSUES THAT WERE CAUSED FROM SOME OF THESE PROJECTS.
IT WAS ACTUALLY CAPPED OFF. AND SO STAFF HAS THAT OPERATIONAL AGAIN.
AND SO AGAIN, STAFF'S MAKING STRIDES ON IRRIGATION.
IT'S JUST AN OLD ANTIQUATED SYSTEM THAT CONSTANTLY NEEDS SOME ADDITIONAL REPAIRS.
DO YOU DO MOST OF THAT WORK IN-HOUSE OR DO YOU CONTRACT THE IRRIGATION WORK OUT? IT'S A COMBINATION. SO SOME OF IT IS GOING TO BE DONE IN-HOUSE.
SOME OF IT'S GOING TO BE DONE BY CONTRACTORS.
BUT YOU DO HAVE SOMEBODY ON STAFF THAT'S GOING AROUND CHECKING THOSE.
SO IN THE FUTURE, WE CAN STOP THE PROBLEM BEFORE IT GETS TO THE WAY IT IS NOW.
[00:35:04]
RIGHT. IS THAT. THAT'S CORRECT. WE'VE PUT SOME STEPS IN PLACE TO KIND OF EVALUATE MUCH MORE FREQUENTLY, MORE CHECKS AND BALANCES FOR STAFF AND CONTRACTORS.SO I'M GOING TO SPEAK UP AND I'VE MENTIONED THIS SEVERAL MEETINGS AGO, BUT THE NORTH LAKE, LIKE I GUESS I CAME INTO THE PARK MAINTENANCE SIDE, WHAT, THREE YEARS AGO OR THE PARK SIDE THREE YEARS AGO, THE NORTH LAKE WAS COMPLETELY CAPPED OFF ON THE SIDE OF THE HILL FROM THE MEDICAL CENTER.
HOW LONG IT HAD BEEN THAT WAY? NONE OF US KNOW.
SO WE HAD TO RECONNECT ALL THAT. AND THEN THAT ENTIRE NORTH LAKE HAD TO BE TROUBLESHOT.
REWORKED ELECTRICAL VALVES, HEADS, ALL OF THAT.
ALL OF THAT GOT UP AND RUNNING IN THE FALL. AND THAT'S WHEN THEY, CINDY AND ALL OF THEM DECIDED TO, TO WITH THE BEAUTIFICATION PROJECT AND THE NO MOW AND ALL OF THAT PRIOR TO FEBRUARY, WHICH IS WHEN ALL THIS KIND OF CAME UP, THERE WAS, I THINK WE'VE HAD 30 SOMETHING WORK ORDERS FROM THE CONTRACTOR FOR JOHN WARD PARK.
SO REPAIRS HAVE BEEN ONGOING. I MEAN, IT'S NOT THE NORTH LAKE WAS WAY WORSE THAN THE SOUTH LAKE.
THE SOUTH LAKE HAS TONS OF ISSUES THAT WE'RE WORKING THROUGH AS WELL. BUT THE THE NORTH LAKE, I MEAN, I DON'T I CAN'T TELL YOU, AND I'M NOT SURE MICHAEL CAN TELL YOU THE WHEN THE LAST TIME THAT THAT HAD IRRIGATED UP UNTIL PROBABLY 2024 WHEN WE RECONNECTED THAT LINE. SO I DON'T KNOW WHEN IT WAS, BUT THE NORTH LAKE IS BARE AND HAS PROBLEMS, BUT IT'S BEEN THAT WAY FOR QUITE SOME TIME, I WOULD ASSUME NOW THE TILLING AND ALL OF THAT PROBABLY MADE IT STAND OUT A LITTLE BIT MORE, UNFORTUNATELY. BUT WE'RE WORKING THROUGH A PLAN TO TRY TO GET PARK MAINTENANCE AND SEED AND GET OUT WITH A PLAN TO TRY TO GET IT GOING AGAIN.
I THINK WE'RE $50,000 ALREADY OVER THAT BUDGET LINE, AND WE'VE STILL GOT 5 OR 6 MONTHS LEFT, SO WE'RE WORKING THROUGH IT. WE'VE STAFF HAS BEEN CONTINUING TO WORK ON IT.
SO IT'S BEEN AN ONGOING PROCESS. AS PART OF THIS, HAVE WE WORKED TO COMMUNICATE WITH THE PUBLIC THAT THAT WAS THE THAT WE WERE DOING? NO MOW THING WE WERE TELLING FOR WILDFLOWERS, YOU KNOW, HAS THAT BEEN.
YEAH, WE SHARED THAT IN THE COUNCIL PRESENTATION. WE'VE SHARED IT ONLINE WITH SOCIAL MEDIA.
SO YEAH, THE BIG THING WAS WHEN WE TILLED UP THAT, THAT HILLSIDE, IT MADE IT A LOT MORE VISIBLE.
AGAIN, TYPICALLY YOU GET A LITTLE BIT WETTER WINTER, YOU GET SEEDS TO GERMINATE WITH THIS DRY AS A WINTER AS WE HAD, THE SEEDS JUST DIDN'T GERMINATE THE WAY THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO. SO WE'RE WORKING ON SOME, AGAIN, SOME PLANS TO TRY TO GET THAT REESTABLISHED AND AND GET SOME WILDFLOWERS.
THAT'S THE INTENTION. OBVIOUSLY, IT JUST DIDN'T MATERIALIZE THE WAY WE HAD PLANNED.
SO WE'RE WORKING THROUGH KIND OF OUR NEXT PLAN ON HOW WE CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT.
I'LL ALSO SAY THIS AS SOMEONE WHO'S BEEN ON THE BOARD FOR, I DON'T KNOW, FIVE YEARS OR SO, IRRIGATION HAS ALWAYS BEEN A SUBJECT. THIS ISN'T A NEW SUBJECT THAT WE'RE BROACHING.
WE'VE ALWAYS TALKED ABOUT IRRIGATION PROBLEMS AND TRYING TO GET IT CAUGHT UP.
AND I THINK WITH OLDER SYSTEMS AND WITH THE LACK OF FUNDING OVER THE YEARS, IT IS WHAT IT IS.
IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE DON'T WANT BETTER PARKS, GREENER PARKS.
WE'VE LUCKILY HAD A COUPLE WET YEARS. AND SO IT HASN'T BEEN AS NOTICEABLE AS IT WAS THIS YEAR.
AND I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT THEY ARE WORKING ON IT.
IT'S NOT NECESSARILY A REACTIONARY TO EVERYTHING, BUT I DO KNOW THAT THIS IS ONE OF JAMES'S TOP PROBLEMS EVERY YEAR, AND THEY WORK DILIGENTLY TO TRY TO FIX ALL THE IRRIGATION PROBLEMS THAT COME UP.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO SAY. I'VE BEEN ON THIS BOARD A LONG TIME, SEVEN YEARS.
I SEE. I BELIEVE THE STATE OF OUR PARKS HAVE CONTINUALLY IMPROVED, CONTINUALLY IMPROVED.
IS THERE A LOT TO WORK ON? OF COURSE. BUT WE HAVE MADE HUGE, HUGE STRIDES IN LIGHTING IN THE FENCING, LIKE AT JOHN SMITH PARK, OUR BALLPARKS, OUR ATHLETICS.
I HAD JUST GOTTEN ON THE BOARD AND I GOT WHAT DID I GET MYSELF INTO?
[00:40:01]
AND NOW WE'VE MADE $36 MILLION STRIDES TOWARD THAT.WE GOT TO KEEP WORKING. ARE YOU WORKING EVERY DAY? IS YOUR STAFF WORKING EVERY DAY AT IT TO MAKE IT BETTER? YES. ARE WE DO WE HEAR THE. WE HEAR. DO WE HEAR THE.
DO YOU HEAR COMPLIMENTS, MICHAEL? I CAN ASK THAT.
YEAH, WE DO GET COMPLIMENTS. THERE ARE SOME PARKS THAT LOOK REALLY, REALLY GOOD.
I THINK THAT THE CHALLENGE AND JAMES WILL TALK TO THIS TOO.
I MEAN, THE CHALLENGE ARE THOSE BIGGER REGIONAL PARKS.
THOSE ARE THE MOST VISIBLE, BUT THEY'RE ALSO THE MOST COMPLICATED AND MOST PROBABLY AGED SYSTEMS. I MEAN, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THOMPSON PARK. WE'VE STILL GOT SOME REALLY OLD WE'VE GOT GALVANIZED IRRIGATION IN THERE.
WE'VE GOT A MIXTURE OF THINGS L WOULD JUST TO A YEAR OR TWO AGO WAS STILL ON HYDRAULIC IRRIGATION.
SO STAFF HAS BEEN MAKING STRATEGIC IMPROVEMENTS TO THOSE FACILITIES.
JOHN STIFF WITHIN A COUPLE OF YEARS, THERE WAS ONLY ONE FEED TO THAT ENTIRE ENTIRE PARK.
AND I THINK THERE'S ACTUALLY 4 OR 5 FEEDS THAT FEED THAT PARK.
THE OTHER ONES WERE ALL CUT OFF. SO WE WERE JUST RUNNING OFF OF ONE FEED.
SO IF THAT FEED WENT DOWN, THE WHOLE PARK WENT DOWN.
NOW AGAIN, THERE'S ALWAYS ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT.
THERE'S ALWAYS THINGS THAT WE CAN FIX AND THAT WE WILL BE FIXING.
IT'S JUST IT'S ONGOING. WE I'LL TELL YOU A STORY.
WE MADE A REPAIR AT OLIVER ECKLE. GOT IT UP AND RUNNING ABOUT SIX FEET AWAY.
THE MAIN LINE BLEW OUT AGAIN. IT'S JUST IT'S PART OF THE PROCESS.
IT'S IT'S OLD PIPES. IT'S PIPES THAT HAVE BEEN IN THE GROUND A LONG TIME.
AND, AND I THINK THE BIGGEST CHALLENGE THAT MOST RESIDENTS DON'T UNDERSTAND IS THIS IS NOT YOUR TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL IRRIGATION, WHERE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ONE INCH LINE PIPES, QUARTER INCH, THREE QUARTER INCH, HALF INCH.
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SIX INCH LINES, THREE INCH LINES, EIGHT INCH LINES.
I MEAN, IT'S A MIXED BAG OF IRRIGATION AND THOSE ARE HIGH PRESSURE.
SO WHEN YOU START TURNING THOSE ON, IT'S NOT UNCOMMON FOR THINGS TO BLOW OUT IN OTHER PLACES.
SO STAFF'S BEEN DOING THEIR BEST TO TRY TO GET THOSE SYSTEMS UP AND RUNNING THE WAY THEY SHOULD BE.
ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT STAFF HAS A HARD TIME WITH IS SOMETIMES WE'RE GOING INTO THINGS BLIND.
I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE OF JOHN SMITH PARK.
IT HASN'T I DON'T KNOW WHEN, JOHN, HOW LONG JOHN SMITH HAS BEEN THERE, BUT 50 YEARS.
THE SET OF PLANS THAT WE HAVE FOR JOHN SMITH DOESN'T EVEN HAVE THE TENNIS CENTER ON THE PLANS.
SO THE IRRIGATION IS LAID OUT WHERE THE TENNIS CENTER ACTUALLY IS.
JUST TRYING TO WORK THROUGH AND FIND AND FIGURE THINGS OUT AND WHAT'S BEEN DONE AND KIND OF SCARY AT TIMES TOO, BECAUSE WE'VE ACTUALLY FOUND AN AREA CAPPED OFF AT JOHN SMITH PARK THAT I'M A LITTLE SCARED TO HOOK BACK UP, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S GOING TO COME UP UNDER THE TENNIS CENTER AND THE PARKING LOT OR WHERE IT IS.
SO IT'S IT'S A CONSTANT BATTLE. I MEAN, YOU SAW THE VIDEO THAT WE DID IN FEBRUARY AND, AND I MENTIONED IT IN THAT VIDEO THAT WHAT'S THE HARDEST THING TO MAINTAIN? AND I MENTIONED IRRIGATION IN THAT. I MEAN, I KNOW A LOT OF TIMES IT'S SHELBY'S RIGHT.
WE TALK ABOUT IT STAFFS GRINDING ON IT. WE'RE PUSHING THE CONTRACTORS AS MUCH AS WE CAN TO, TO ASSIST AND GRIND ON THE IRRIGATION. SO WE'LL JUST KEEP HITTING IT EVERY DAY AND TRY TO DO THE BEST WE CAN TO GET IT GOING.
SO I WANT THE PARKS GREEN AND AND PERFECT AND AND NOBODY WANTS THEM THAT WAY MORE THAN I DO.
SO WE'RE WE'LL KEEP DOING OUR THING. HOW MANY PARKS DO WE HAVE? WE'VE GOT 50 SOMETHING PARKS. AND THEN IF YOU INCLUDE IN THE SCHOOL PARKS, IT PUSHES IT OVER 60.
AND CITIES ARE SIZE. HOW MANY HOW MANY PARKS DO MOST CITIES ARE SIZE HAVE.
I, WE WOULD HAVE TO GET SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THAT.
WE'VE GOT A LOT OF PARKS. I THINK WE'VE GOT A LOT OF LARGE SPACES.
WHEN YOU START TALKING ABOUT THE SIZE OF THOMPSON AND JOHN STIFF AND YOU KNOW, RICK KLEIN, WE OWN ALMOST THAT ENTIRE SECTION. SO WE'VE GOT A LOT OF ACRES.
I THINK IT'S OVER 2400 ACRES OF PARK. SO AGAIN, IT'S A LARGE PARK NETWORK AND A LOT OF IT IS INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WAS PUT IN YEARS AND YEARS AGO. AND, YOU KNOW, LIKE I SAID, THOMPSON, WE'VE STILL GOT GALVANIZED.
WE'VE STILL GOT TRANSIT. WE'VE GOT A MIXTURE OF DIFFERENT PIPES OUT THERE.
SO AGAIN, EVERY TIME WE GO TO MAKE A REPAIR, WE'RE NOT QUITE SURE WHAT WE'RE WALKING INTO.
AND WE, WE TALK PARKS A LOT, BUT UNDER THE SCOPE OF PARK MAINTENANCE, YOU HAVE ALL THE PUBLIC BUILDINGS, ALL THE PUBLIC BUILDING GROUNDS, TRAFFIC ISLANDS, JULIAN BOULEVARD RAILS TO TRAILS.
ALL THE LITTLE SUBDIVISION POCKET PARKS, A LOT OF THINGS THAT YOU DRIVE BY THAT YOU WOULDN'T EVEN THINK THAT THE CITY WOULD BE INVOLVED IN THAT, THAT THEY ARE. I MEAN, THERE'S LOTS OF TRAFFIC ISLANDS AND LOTS OF LITTLE ONE OFFS THAT DON'T EVEN COME TO MIND TO MOST PEOPLE.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION FROM ANYBODY ON THIS ITEM?
[00:45:06]
I WOULD RECOMMEND WATCHING THAT PRESENTATION IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN IT.IT'S VERY, VERY GOOD. SO I GUESS WITH THAT WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM SEVEN PRESENT DISCUSS POLICIES FOR
[7. Present, and Discuss Policies for Re-naming a Park. This item is for the Board to discuss policies and procedures related to the renaming of parks, including criteria, historical significance, and the approval process for future park name changes.]
RENAMING A PARK. AND I KNOW EVERYBODY HAS A COPY OF THAT.YEAH. SO STAFF PROVIDED A COPY OF THE THE CODE.
WE'VE ALSO PROVIDED SOME STAFF, SOME INTERNAL DOCUMENTS THAT WE'VE CREATED.
ONE OF THEM WAS THE PARK RENAMING APPLICATION.
SO YOU SHOULD HAVE THAT. THERE'S A CHECKLIST THAT WE HAVE FOR STAFF.
AND THEN THERE'S ALSO THE CRITERIA. SO AGAIN THESE ARE ALL THINGS THAT WE DEVELOPED.
AND KIND OF REFINED AFTER THE REQUEST FOR RENAMING JOHN WARD PARK.
THIS IS OUR FIRST TAKE AT IT. IF THERE ARE THINGS THAT THE PARK BOARD WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT IN A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL OR PROVIDE ADDITIONAL GUIDANCE, WE'VE ALSO PROVIDED THE COPY OF THE APPLICATION THAT WE HAD RECEIVED.
BUT REALLY THIS IS WE'VE PROVIDED THE INFORMATION WE CURRENTLY HAVE. IF THERE ARE CHANGES, THERE ARE THINGS THAT THE PARK BOARD WOULD LIKE TO ADD, AMEND CHANGE. WE'RE WE'RE ALL EARS. SO WHAT I'M HEARING, THERE'S KIND OF TWO THINGS HERE.
THERE'S A THERE'S AN APPLICATION TO CHANGE THE NAME FOR A PARK.
AND WE ARE KIND OF TO DISCUSS THE APPLICATION ITSELF.
WELL, AND WE DON'T HAVE TO NECESSARILY LOOK AT THE APPLICATION ITSELF. WE JUST WANTED TO PROVIDE IT SO THAT YOU HAD A COPY OF IT. I THINK OUR GOAL WOULD BE TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN WE BRING A PROJECT FORWARD FOR A PARK RENAMING FORWARD, THAT THE PARK BOARD FEELS COMFORTABLE REVIEWING THAT, THAT THEY'VE GOT THE INFORMATION THAT THEY NEED.
SO WE'RE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO BE MAKING CHANGES TO THE CODE.
THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING COUNCIL WOULD HAVE TO DO. BUT IN TERMS OF REVIEWING IT OR ASKING FOR SPECIFIC INFORMATION IN THE APPLICATION OR SPECIFIC INFORMATION, WE'D BE HAPPY TO TO ADD THAT IN THERE. WITH RESPECT TO THE CHECKLIST AND THE FORMS THAT YOUR DEPARTMENT HAS DEVELOPED, I THINK THEY ARE VERY GOOD AT BASED UPON READING THE CODE, WHICH IS NOT GOOD, IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO FOLLOW. IT IS INTERNALLY INCONSISTENT AND CONTRADICTORY IN PLACES.
I JUST WHOEVER TOOK THIS AND CAME UP WITH THIS, I APPLAUD THEM.
MICHAEL. IF I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW WHO GABRIEL CHAVEZ WAS.
IS THIS SOMETHING THAT THE APPLICANT, RUDY PRESIDIO OR WHATEVER SHOULD COME AND PRESENT AND MAYBE GIVE US A LITTLE HISTORY OF WHO THIS WAS AND WHAT HIS CONTRIBUTIONS WERE? I MEAN, IT'S EASY TO MARK ON HERE THAT HE MADE LASTING SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTIONS.
YOU YOU DID ALL THIS STUFF, BUT HAS ANYBODY ON THIS BOARD KNOW WHO THIS PERSON IS? YEAH. AND I THINK AGAIN, WE CAN HAVE WE CAN HAVE THE APPLICANT COME AND PRESENT TO THE BOARD.
I THINK WHAT WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE WAS THAT THE APPLICATION PROCESS, THAT THE REVIEW PROCESS FOR THE PARK BOARD AND STAFF WAS KIND OF WHAT THE PARK BOARD WANTED. SO IF THERE ARE CRITERIA THAT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ADDRESSING, IF THERE'S THINGS WE NEED TO ADDRESS, BECAUSE AGAIN, THESE ARE NAMING OF PERMANENT STRUCTURES.
SO IT'S A, IT'S A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT DECISION FOR THE PARK BOARD AND COUNCIL TO UNDERTAKE.
SO WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE PROVIDING ACCURATE INFORMATION.
BUT WE ALSO WANT TO MAKE SURE IS THAT YOU'VE GOT A GOOD PROCESS FOR VETTING THINGS, BECAUSE ULTIMATELY, WE MAY RECEIVE A BUNCH OF REQUESTS TO HAVE PARKS RENAMED, AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE GOING THROUGH A PROCESS THAT WE CAN VET INDIVIDUALS APPROPRIATELY, REQUESTS APPROPRIATELY. SO WHEN IT GOES TO COUNCIL, THE PARK BOARD HAS HAD A CHANCE TO WEIGH IN ON THAT.
SO I THINK THAT'S OUR GOAL IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PROCESS IS GOOD.
SO I THINK WE JUST AGAIN, WE WANTED TO TAKE A STEP BACK, MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF OUR PROCESSES AND THE APPLICATIONS WERE KIND OF WHAT THE BOARD WAS EXPECTING. AND THEN FROM THERE, WE COULD MOVE FORWARD. DO WE HAVE ANY IDEA WHEN WE CHANGE THE NAME OF A PARK, WHAT THE COST IS? GENERALLY IT'S GOING TO BE THE COST OF THE PARK SIGN.
[00:50:04]
GOING TO BE, YOU KNOW, THE PARK GUY THAT WE CAN UPDATE OR SOMETHING ONLINE THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA THAT WE CAN UPDATE.GENERALLY, THE HARD COST IS GOING TO BE THE ACTUAL FACILITY NAME, THE STRUCTURE, THE PARK SIGN, WHATEVER IS TIED TO THAT FACILITY. AND IF I'M CORRECT FROM THE LAST MEETING, THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT COST? YEAH, I BELIEVE THAT IS THE COST IS WHEN THEY COME IN TO MAKE THOSE REPAIRS OR THE THE RENAMING THAT IT WOULD BE AT THEIR TIME.
NOW, COUNCIL ULTIMATELY HAS THE DECISION TO WAIVE THAT.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT WAS THE CASE WITH JOHN WARD AS COUNCIL DECIDED TO WAIVE THAT.
AND SO THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS BORE BY THE CITY.
AND AGAIN, THOSE ARE THINGS THAT WE CAN TALK THROUGH IF THAT'S THE WAY THE PARK BOARD WANTS IT TO BE, IF WE COLLECT IT UPFRONT, IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT THEY DO ONCE IT'S APPROVED, WE CAN WORK THROUGH IT AGAIN.
THAT'S WHY WE WANTED TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION, WAS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PROCESS WORKS WELL.
LET ME ASK A QUESTION. I READ THIS INFORMATION ABOUT THE NAME OF THE GUY TO NAME THIS AFTER, THAT GOES BACK A WAYS. WORLD WAR TWO. IS THERE ANY WAY.
AND I DON'T DOUBT THAT. BUT IS THERE ANY WAY THE MILITARY CAN VERIFY THAT? YEAH, I'M SURE WE COULD. AGAIN, I THINK THE FIRST STEP WOULD BE MAKING SURE THE PROCESS IS GOOD.
THEN WE COULD BRING IN THE APPLICANT AND LET THEM KIND OF MAKE THEIR CASE TO THE PARK BOARD.
I THINK THAT'S A REALLY GOOD POINT, AND I THINK IT'S PROBABLY WORTH IT TO HAVE IT IN THAT PROCESS BEFORE, SO THAT WE'RE NOT LIKE ASKING SOMEONE TO SHOW THEIR WORK WHILE THEY'RE DOING IT.
YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT'S A GOOD POINT. YEAH, THAT'S A REALLY GOOD POINT ON THE MILITARY.
AND IN FACT, I THINK THESE POLICIES ARE BROAD ENOUGH THAT AS PART OF THE INVESTIGATIVE PROCESS, THE STAFF COULD REQUEST PEOPLE TO, FOR EXAMPLE, PROVIDE A COPY OF THE SERVICE RECORD THAT GENERALLY IS READILY AVAILABLE FOR A AN AIR OF THE SERVICE MEMBER. BUT IT TAKES SOME TIME.
AND SO I THINK IT IS A GOOD POINT. WE MIGHT WANT TO ASK THEM TO REQUEST THAT EARLY IN THE PROCESS.
WELL, AND THAT'S ABSOLUTELY SOMETHING WE CAN CONSIDER. I THINK THE QUESTION WOULD BE, IF IT'S SOMEBODY THAT'S NONMILITARY, WHAT ARE THE THE CHECKS AND BALANCES THAT WE'RE PUTTING IN PLACE AS WELL. SO AGAIN, WE WANT TO TAKE A BIG PICTURE.
SO AGAIN, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE BEING PROACTIVE LOOKING AT THIS KIND OF IN ADVANCE.
SO AGAIN, IF IT'S MILITARY, WE CAN GET MILITARY RECORDS.
I THINK THE QUESTION WOULD BE, HOW ARE WE VETTING IT IF SOMEBODY JUST SUBMITS A RANDOM APPLICATION? HOW ARE WE VERIFYING THOSE TYPES OF INFORMATION? SO AGAIN, WE CAN DO OUR BEST AS STAFF TO TRY TO GET THAT INFORMATION TO SOLICIT THAT BACK.
BUT THAT MAY BE SOMETHING WE NEED TO INCLUDE IN HERE AS WELL.
YEAH, I WOULD, I THINK I WOULD, I WOULD PUT THAT ON THIS CHECKLIST WOULD BE A REALLY HELPFUL ITEM.
I AGREE. I ALSO DO THINK HAVING A FEE OF A NOMINAL FEE TO KEEP PEOPLE FROM JUST APPLYING TO APPLY.
I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH US WAIVING THE FEE ONCE IT'S ALL APPROVED, BUT I THINK THERE SHOULD BE A NOMINAL FEE THERE TO KEEP A YOUR STAFF FROM NOT HAVING TO CONSTANTLY REVIEW THESE PACKETS TO MAKE IT WORTH YOUR TIME, BUT ALSO YOU KNOW, REALLY MAKING IT WORTH THAT PERSON'S APPLICATION.
BUT I, I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO, TO DO THAT.
AND I THINK ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF IF WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING SOME REVIEW, SOME HISTORICAL REVIEW, IT'S GOING TO TAKE SOME STAFF TIME, SO WE MAY HAVE TO DEVELOP A FEE TO KIND OF GO THROUGH THAT. IF WE'RE HAVING TO GO AND GET ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT'S NOT READILY AVAILABLE, WHERE WE'RE JUST LOOKING AT THEIR APPLICATION, CHECKING IT TO MAKE SURE IT MEETS.
WOULD THAT, WOULD THAT REQUIRE TO HAVE A FEE REQUIRE CITY COUNCIL'S APPROVAL? YES IT WOULD. SO WE'RE GOING THROUGH BUDGET AND ANY ANY STANDARD FEE WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE FEE ORDINANCE, AND THAT WOULD BE APPROVED BY COUNCIL AS A PART OF THE BUDGET. I THINK ANOTHER THING THAT WE'VE GOT TO THINK ABOUT ARE THERE PARKS WITHIN OUR SYSTEM THAT WE
[00:55:09]
WOULDN'T RENAME ON APPLICATION. HAVE WE GONE THROUGH THAT BECAUSE OF HISTORIC REASONS? THEY'RE NAMED WHAT THEY ARE, THAT WE WOULD NOT EVEN ENTERTAIN A NAME CHANGE.YEAH. AND I THINK A LOT OF THEM, YOU KNOW, YOU LOOK AT JOHN WARD, JOHN STAFF, THOMPSON MEMORIAL.
SO THERE ARE QUITE A FEW OF THE BIGGER PARKS THAT HAVE BEEN NAMED AFTER INDIVIDUALS.
THERE'S A FEW THAT AREN'T. YOU'RE LOOKING AT MORE GEOGRAPHICALLY LIKE A WEST HILLS OR AN EAST OR, YOU KNOW, THOSE ARE THE PARKS THAT GENERALLY HAVE NOT BEEN RENAMED.
BUT AGAIN, I THINK WE START GETTING INTO THAT BROADER CONVERSATION.
THE BIGGER ONES HAVE GENERALLY ALREADY BEEN RENAMED.
NOW WE'RE LOOKING AT MORE OF THE SMALLER PARKS.
AND SO YEAH, YOU KNOW, I'M THINKING LIKE MEMORIAL PARK AND ELMWOOD PARK SABLAN THOSE, THOSE ARE REASONS AND HISTORICAL REASONS THAT HAVE VALUE TO THE CITY THAT WE WOULDN'T THINK ABOUT RENAMING.
SO IT'S NOT JUST THESE LITTLE PARKS, BUT THERE ARE SOME SIGNIFICANT PARKS ALREADY THAT ARE NAMED.
SO ONE IMPORTANT THING IS IF SOMEBODY DOES SUBMIT AN APPLICATION AND SAY THE BOARD DOES REJECT IT, THERE IS AN APPEAL PROCESS TO COUNCIL WHERE COUNCIL WOULD ULTIMATELY GET TO SAY IF IT WAS APPEALED TO COUNCIL.
SO. AND COUNCILMAN REID. IT KIND OF FOLLOWS THAT CRITERIA THAT YOU'RE INQUIRING ABOUT IS THE HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE, CONTRIBUTIONS MADE IN TERMS OF DEVELOPMENT, SOMETHING SUBSTANTIAL THERE THAT YOU ALL WOULD REVIEW AND LOOK AT.
DO WE BASICALLY AGREE THAT THE APPLICATION IS GOOD? OKAY. I SEE NO DISAGREEMENT ON THAT, MICHAEL.
DO WE NEED TO TAKE A FORMAL VOTE ON IT OR. NO? JUST NO. I MEAN, THIS IS THE PROCESS OR THE THE APPLICATION THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE IN PLACE.
I THINK IF THERE ARE THINGS LIKE FEES THAT WE NEED TO CONSIDER, OBVIOUSLY, AS WE GO INTO BUDGET, THAT'S SOMETHING WE WOULD PROBABLY WANT TO EITHER AMEND OR GET INTO THE FEE ORDINANCE. SO I THINK THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING FOR THE BOARD TO TO DISCUSS.
I THINK, YOU KNOW, THE TIMING. IS IT SUBMITTED? DO YOU HAVE TO PUT A DEPOSIT WHEN YOU SUBMIT THE APPLICATION.
DO YOU HAVE TO PAY IT ALL UP FRONT. I THINK CURRENTLY IT'S WRITTEN UP FRONT, BUT DO WE ALLOW A CERTAIN AMOUNT UP FRONT AND THEN THE REST WITH THE ACTUAL STRUCTURAL CHANGES. SO AGAIN, THOSE ARE THINGS THAT WE CAN AMEND INTO THIS PROCESS JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S IT'S APPROPRIATE.
I GOT ONE OTHER QUESTION. AND I GUESS IT'S THE BIGGEST THING IN MY MIND.
A LOT OF THE PARKS WERE NAMED BY THE LOCATION IN THE CITY.
THE SCHOOL SYSTEM DOES THAT. AND YOU CAN HEAR THE NAME OF A SCHOOL.
YOU KNOW WHERE IT IS. SO IF WE GO CHANGING NAMES OF 60 PARKS.
PEOPLE AREN'T GOING TO KNOW WHERE THEY ARE. SO I THINK WE NEED TO CONSIDER IF, IF WE DO THIS, CHANGING THIS, AND THEN OTHER REQUESTS ARE GOING TO COME.
PEOPLE AREN'T GOING TO KNOW WHERE CHAVEZ PARK IS.
JUST THROWING THAT OUT. I THINK WE DISCUSSED THAT PRETTY WELL. MOVE ON. ITEM EIGHT DISCUSS YOUR PARKS, YOUR VOICE.
[8. Present, and Discuss "Your Parks, Your Voice". This item is for the Board to discuss the outcome of “Your Parks, Your Voice,” including community feedback and potential future meeting dates, times, and locations for continued public engagement.]
WE'VE HAD ONE. WE'RE LOOKING AT HAVING ANOTHER ONE.BECKY, ARE YOU GOING TO TALK ABOUT THAT OR MICHAEL OR BOTH OF YOU OR ME OR WHAT? YEAH. I THINK THE ORIGINAL INTENTION WAS TO TRY TO DO THIS QUARTERLY.
SO IF, IF WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH YOUR PARKS, YOUR VOICE, WE PROBABLY WOULD NEED TO DECIDE WHEN WE WANT TO DO IT AND WHERE WE WANT TO DO IT. I KNOW THE FIRST TIME WE DID IT AT THE LIBRARY, DOWNTOWN LIBRARY.
BUT IT IS, WE ARE OPEN TO DOING THEM AT PARK FACILITIES AS WELL.
IF YOU WANT TO CONSIDER DOING THEM AT THE GOLF COURSE OR AT WARFORD.
THOSE ARE ON THE TABLE AS WELL. I'VE HEARD DISCUSSION ABOUT HAVING IT AT AT ROSS ROGERS THE NEXT TIME. I DON'T ANYBODY HAVE ANY FEELINGS FOR OR AGAINST THAT.
I LIKE THE IDEA OF MOVING IT. I DON'T YEAH, I LIKE THAT.
I DON'T KNOW THAT I HAVE AN OPINION ON WHERE I THINK THE WHARF WOULD BE, WOULD BE REALLY GOOD.
WARFORD. YEAH. YEAH I DO TOO. I THINK BOTH. I THINK BOTH OF THOSE WOULD BE GOOD LOCATIONS.
DO YOU STILL WANT TO KEEP THE SAME TIME? I KNOW WE DID IT IN THE EVENING.
WE COULD KEEP IT SAME TIME OR I DON'T KNOW, FOR GOLFERS IF WE'RE TRYING TO ATTRACT THE GOLF GROUP,
[01:00:05]
IF THERE'S A BETTER TO DO IT DURING THE DAY. I ALSO THINK WITH A LOT OF OUR SENIOR PROGRAMING, IF IT IS AT WATERFORD DURING THE DAY, YOU'RE GOING TO GET MORE ATTENDANCE FROM SENIORS THAT ARE USING THAT FACILITY.MAYBE WE DO. I LIKE THE IDEA OF WATERFORD. I ACTUALLY DO LIKE THAT.
PLENTY OF ROOM TO MEET. I MEAN, MY OPINION WOULD BE IN THE EVENINGS PERSONALLY, BECAUSE I THINK IT GIVES PEOPLE THE OPPORTUNITY THAT WORK TO COME TALK TO US. BUT I MEAN, I'M NOT OPPOSED TO HAVING IT DURING THE DAY IF YOU THINK IT'S BETTER FOR THE SENIORS.
BUT I DO THINK GENERALLY SPEAKING PROBABLY BETTER TURNOUT IF IT'S IN THE EVENING, WOULD YOU POSSIBLY BE OPEN TO DOING 2 IN 1 DAY. DO ONE EARLY AND ONE LATE.
I DO KNOW WE DO HAVE A HUGE SENIOR POPULATION, AND A LOT OF THEM DON'T LIKE TO DRIVE IN THE EVENING, BUT THEY ARE A VERY VOCAL GROUP AND THEY LIKE TO GIVE FEEDBACK AS WELL.
SO I HATE TO TAKE YOUR TIME TO DO THAT, BUT THAT MIGHT BE A GOOD OPTION TOO.
I HAVE NO PROBLEM DOING TWO. MY QUESTION WOULD BE WHAT IS THE GOAL AND WHO'S THE TARGET AUDIENCE? I MEAN, I THINK THE GOLFERS PROBABLY ARE PRETTY PLEASED WITH OUR SERVICES.
AND I WOULD HOPE AND CERTAINLY ASSUME THAT THERE IS ALREADY KIND OF LIKE A FEEDBACK MECHANISM IN PLACE AT THE WARFORD FOR PEOPLE THAT ALREADY ENJOY THAT REALLY EXCELLENT PROGRAMING. SO I THINK, I THINK FIGURING OUT WHAT THE GOAL IS, WHICH I THINK PROBABLY I UNDERSTAND IT TO BE OPENING AN OPPORTUNITY FOR DIALOG FOR PEOPLE MAYBE THAT AREN'T ALREADY USING AND REALLY ENJOYING OUR FACILITIES.
AND SO THEN IF THAT'S THE CASE, AND I'M ALSO HAPPY, LIKE, LET'S GO MEET WITH ALL THOSE WONDERFUL PEOPLE AT THE WATERFORD JUST BECAUSE I WANT TO TALK TO THEM. BUT I THINK IF THE GOAL AND TARGET IS OPENING CONVERSATION, BECAUSE WE'VE HEARD THERE IS A DESIRE FOR THAT WITH THIS BOARD THAT I THINK EVENING.
AND I THINK THAT ACCESSIBILITY IS AN IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION.
I DID LEARN SOMETHING FROM OUR LAST ONE. I LEARNED MY LIMITATIONS.
I LEARNED TO LISTEN, BUT I LEARNED WHAT I CAN AND CANNOT DO AND CANNOT PROMISE.
OKAY, I'M GOING TO SAY THAT IN FRONT OF EVERYBODY.
I DID, I KNOW MY POSITION ON THE BOARD BETTER BECAUSE WE HAD THAT MEETING.
I'M BEING HONEST AND FORTHRIGHT, FORTHRIGHT. SO AND I THOUGHT IT WAS USEFUL.
AND WE LISTENED TO A VARIETY OF OPINIONS. AND WE I THINK WE NEED TO LISTEN.
AND I THINK IT GIVES. OBVIOUSLY, WE DON'T HAVE A HUGE CROWD HERE TODAY.
IT'S ANOTHER FORUM. I LIKE TRANSPARENCY, I LIKE TO HEAR WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT OR WRONG.
WE NEED TO HEAR THAT. SO HAVE YOU GOT A DATE? HAVE YOU THOUGHT ABOUT A DATE BECKY. NO, I HAVE NOT.
SO NOW THAT I KNOW THAT WE WANT TO DO WATFORD IN THE EVENINGS, I'LL TAKE A LOOK AT THEIR SCHEDULE.
I'LL PROBABLY SEND AN EMAIL OUT TO THE OUTREACH COMMITTEE FIRST TO SELECT A DATE.
DOES ANYBODY ON THIS BOARD THINK WE SHOULDN'T DO IT? IS THERE A REASON NOT TO BE TRANSPARENT AND OPEN TO THE PUBLIC, TO HEAR THEIR VIEWPOINT IN DIFFERENT IN A DIFFERENT FORUM? NO. I WAS GOING TO ASK, HAVE WE HEARD PROS AND CONS? I MEAN, I KNOW WE ALWAYS HEAR NEGATIVES, BUT WHAT WERE SOME OF THE POSITIVES OTHER THAN ACTUALLY DOING IT? I HEARD THE NEGATIVES OF PEOPLE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT IT OR AND I MEAN, I KNOW THAT YOU PUT IT OUT ON EVERY SOCIAL MEDIA THAT YOU COULD DO AND THINGS LIKE THAT, BUT WHAT ARE SOME OF THE PROS AND CONS OF OF THAT OR MORE PROS? I'D RATHER HAVE SOME POSITIVES. I MEAN, IT WAS A, I THINK IT WAS A PRODUCTIVE MEETING.
WE GOT TO HEAR THE VOICES OF SOME CITIZENS SOME CONCERNS, SOME ADDITIONAL PROGRAMING THAT WE COULD DO FOR THE CITY. I THINK, YOU KNOW, AS WE ALL KNOW, IT ALL COMES DOWN TO BUDGETARY THINGS AND,
[01:05:05]
WHETHER WE CAN DO IT. BUT THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY OUR JOB.OUR JOB IS TO BRING FEEDBACK AND PRESENT TO COUNCIL THE THE VOICE OF THE CITIZENS.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE ARE. WE'RE ALL HERE TO DO.
AND THEN IT'S THE JOB OF THE CITY COUNCIL TO FIGURE OUT WHETHER THEY WANT TO FUND IT OR NOT.
SO I THINK FOR US AS BOARD MEMBERS, WE SHOULD BE THERE TO LISTEN TO THE CITIZENS AND BRING THE FEEDBACK TO THE BOARD AND THEN MOVE WHAT THE CITIZENS ARE ASKING US TO DO FORWARD.
AND I THINK BEING MORE PUBLIC FACING IS GOOD.
I MEAN, I THINK HAVING A PUBLIC MEETING LIKE THIS AND DOING THE YOUR PARK, YOUR VOICE, I MEAN, IF ANYTHING, NO ONE CAN SAY WE'RE BEING NON TRANSPARENT.
AND I THINK THAT'S THE GOAL AT THE END OF THE DAY.
AND I THINK IT'S IT WAS A IT WAS OUR FIRST ONE.
I DON'T THINK WE'RE DOING THIS TO DO ANYTHING BUT TO TRY TO MAKE OUR PARK SYSTEM BETTER.
YEAH, I DON'T, I DON'T THINK PEOPLE COME TO THIS MEETING TO TELL US HOW GREAT WE'RE DOING. I THINK THEY'RE GOING TO COME AND TELL US WHAT WE NEED TO DO BETTER. AND THAT'S AT THE END OF THE DAY, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR SO THAT WE CAN MAKE BETTER CHOICES OPERATIONALLY AND FINANCIALLY.
I THINK DOING IT WITH NO STAFF, THERE IS A GOOD WAY TO GO BECAUSE THEY DON'T FEEL LIKE, YOU KNOW, THEY CAN'T SAY SOMETHING HONEST IN FRONT OF PEOPLE.
I THINK DOING IT NOT IN A REALLY FORMAL SETTING LIKE THIS, A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE NOT GOING TO COME TO A CITY COMMISSION MEETING AND GET UP THERE AND STAND THERE. THAT TAKES SOME GUTS FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE THERE.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE AREN'T GOING TO DO THAT. BUT IN A TOWN HALL TYPE OF MEETING THAT'S MORE INFORMAL, I THINK MAYBE YOU'LL GET MORE HONEST FEEDBACK ABOUT WHAT PEOPLE WERE REALLY THINKING.
AND SO THAT WAS THE INTENT. YEAH. AND I AGREE WITH THAT AS I'M THINKING THIS THING OUT.
IT WOULD GO UP TO THE NORTH. THE OTHER THING WOULD BE TO LOOK AT, DO WE DO MULTIPLE MEETINGS AT THE SAME TIME, SAME DAY IN DIFFERENT AREAS OF THE CITY? THERE ARE NINE PEOPLE THAT SIT ON THIS BOARD.
THREE. WE COULD HAVE THREE MEETINGS GOING ON AT ONE TIME.
YOU HAVE THREE, THREE SEPARATE MEETINGS GOING ON.
ONE, WE'RE ALL INVOLVED THEN. AND PEOPLE GET TO HEAR, HEAR.
SO THAT'S JUST A THOUGHT AS I THROW IT OUT THERE.
YOU KNOW, I THINK INITIALLY WE WERE THINKING LIKE WITH THE FOUR WE WOULD DO FOR A YEAR AND WE WOULD TRY TO HIT THE FOUR QUADRANTS OF THE CITY, WE WOULD ROTATE IT AROUND EACH ONE, BUT WE COULD TRY TO DO IT ALL ON ONE DAY IF THAT'S WHAT YOU PREFER TO DO.
AND AGAIN, WE'VE GOT FACILITIES KIND OF SCATTERED THROUGHOUT TOWN. SO WE'VE GOT THE GOLF COURSES THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY COMANCHES ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF TOWN. YOU'VE GOT ROSS ON THE NORTH SIDE, YOU'VE GOT WARFORD, YOU'VE GOT THE TENNIS CENTER.
OBVIOUSLY THE LIBRARIES ARE ALSO AN OPTION, BUT AGAIN, THERE ARE DIFFERENT FACILITIES THAT WE COULD HOST IT AT THAT THE DEPARTMENT OWNS AND OPERATES. BUT THERE'S ALSO ONES THAT THE CITY OPERATES.
AGAIN, I THINK IT IS GOOD TO HEAR FROM DIFFERENT CONSTITUENTS WHERE, YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE AT ONE LOCATION, I THINK YOU'RE PROBABLY GOING TO HEAR FROM THE SAME GROUP. BUT I THINK AS YOU MOVE AROUND AND GO TO DIFFERENT FACILITIES, YOU'RE PROBABLY GOING TO GET DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES. AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT A HIS STAFF. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE GETTING AS GOOD FEEDBACK FROM NOT JUST ONE USER GROUP, BUT FROM ALL THE DIFFERENT USER GROUPS TO MAKE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE HEARING SOMETHING FROM GOLF OR SOMETHING FROM TENNIS OR SOMETHING FROM, YOU KNOW, THE JOGGERS OR DOG PARK PEOPLE. I MEAN, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S WELL ROUNDED THAT REFLECTS THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE.
SO. AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE LOOKED AT. IF YOU MOVE IT TO DIFFERENT FACILITIES, I THINK YOU GET DIFFERENT USER GROUPS TO GET DIFFERENT FEEDBACK BECAUSE WE MAY BE DOING SOMETHING WELL WITH ONE USER GROUP AND NOT WITH ANOTHER ONE.
I LIKE THAT, MICHELLE. I THINK THAT'S TO HAVE AT LEAST 2 OR 3 LOCATIONS.
I THINK THAT'S A GRAND IDEA. HAVE THREE OF US.
IT'S AN HOUR AND A HALF. IT'S I THINK IT'S WORTH OUR TIME TO DO THAT ONCE A QUARTER.
I THINK IT'S VALUABLE. HOW MANY PEOPLE ATTEND? HOW MANY CITIZENS ATTENDED? WHAT DID YOU THINK? OKAY. I THINK DOING A MULTIPLE LOCATIONS ON THE SAME DAY.
[01:10:04]
AND THAT DOESN'T SEEM PRODUCTIVE TO ME. I THINK THE FOCUS, MY PERSONAL OPINION IS THE FOCUS IS ON GOING TO DIFFERENT FACILITIES OVER A DIFFERENT PERIOD OF TIME. I'D ALSO LIKE TO SEE US DEVELOP SOME GUIDELINES THAT WE SHARE WITH THE COMMUNITY AHEAD OF TIME.SO I THINK IT'S FAIR TO SET SOME OF THOSE GUIDELINES AND PUT IT OUT THERE SO THAT THEN, YOU KNOW, IF THAT DOES OCCUR, WE'VE GOT SOMETHING TO SAY LIKE, HEY, WE AGREED TO THIS WHEN YOU GOT HERE.
YEAH, I THINK IT'S ALMOST LIKE, LIKE OUR DEAL WITH THE PUBLIC ADDRESS AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS KIND OF THE SAME, SAME DEAL. YEAH, I AGREE WITH THAT. I DO THINK WE HAVE TO CREATE A DECORUM AND SHOW RESPECT AND MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE IN THE MEETING ARE RESPECTED.
I KIND OF AGREE WITH TOM. LIKE I THINK IT'S A NECESSITY TO HAVE TOWN HALLS AND, AND, AND MAKE IT VIABLE FOR PEOPLE TO VOICE THEIR CONCERNS.
IF THERE'S ONLY FIVE PEOPLE SHOWING UP AND I GET IT, I GET IT WAS OUR FIRST ONE AND WE NEED TO GIVE IT A YEAR PROBABLY FOR IT TO KIND OF GROW SOME LEGS. BUT IF IT CONTINUES TO BE THAT WAY, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW THAT IT MAKES SENSE.
I MEAN, I, I WANT TO SEE 10 TO 20 PEOPLE OUT THERE.
YEAH. SO WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? YEAH. SO I GUESS THE NEXT QUESTION IS HOW DO YOU WANT TO PROCEED FOR THIS NEXT ONE? DO YOU WANT TO AGREE TO TRY IT AND SEE IF WE GET MORE PEOPLE TO COME JUST AT ONE LOCATION AND THEN SEE IF WE GET MORE PEOPLE TO COME GIVE FEEDBACK AND THEN AFTER THAT MAKE A DECISION MOVING FORWARD.
MY SUGGESTION IS WE TRY IT AT WATFORD. I DON'T KNOW, SEPTEMBER, AUGUST, SEPTEMBER, MAYBE LET SCHOOL GET BACK, GET BACK, YOU KNOW, OUT OF SUMMER MODE. YEAH.
IT'D BE, I THINK, IF YOU JUST THROW OUT A COUPLE DATES. MY SUGGESTION TO YOU, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. YEAH, I AGREE, I THINK NOT DOING IT IN THE SUMMER AS PEOPLE TRAVEL, I THINK PROBABLY AUGUST, SEPTEMBER IS PROBABLY A GOOD TIMING FOR THAT.
AND WE CAN WORK ON THE RULES OF DECORUM IF THERE ARE IDEAS OR SUGGESTIONS FROM THE BOARD, OBVIOUSLY SEND THEM TO US, AND WE'LL START KIND OF COMPILING THAT INTO KIND OF A RULES OF DECORUM THAT WE CAN PUT OUT WITH THE POSTINGS, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS A CIVIL MEETING.
WE HAVE ENOUGH TO WORK ON. YES. OKAY. ITEM NINE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS.
[9. Discuss Items for Future Agendas]
I HAVE ONE THAT I'M GOING TO SUGGEST. A COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT KIND OF A PARTNER A PRIDE IN YOUR, IN YOUR PARK EFFORT, MARKETING EFFORT.I'D LIKE TO SEE US PURSUE THAT. A LOT OF CITIES DO THAT.
PROCESS. I DON'T KNOW IF IT WILL WORK. IT WORKS IN OTHER CITIES.
YOU KNOW, THE MORE PEOPLE THAT YOU GET INVOLVED.
MAYBE OUR PARKS IMPROVE. OUR GOVERNMENT CAN'T DO EVERYTHING.
I'M GOING TO SAY THAT OUT LOUD. AND AND THE 4TH OF JULY CELEBRATION IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF HAVING LOTS OF GROUPS WORKING TOWARD THAT COMPANIES, INDIVIDUALS, CHURCHES, FOOD TRUCKS.
I THINK IT MAKES NONPROFITS. I THINK IT COULD HELP OUR CITY.
SO I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT ON THE AGENDA. ANYTHING ELSE? I'D JUST LIKE TO REITERATE WHAT TOM SAID JUST TO UPDATE ON JOHN WARD PART.
AND I WOULD SAY, LATELY WE'VE BEEN MAKING THE NEWS FOR THE WRONG REASONS, WITH INCIDENTS AT MEMORIAL PARK AND SOME OF THESE OTHER VIOLENT INCIDENTS THAT WE'VE BEEN EXPERIENCING. I DON'T KNOW HOW TO ADDRESS THAT.
[01:15:01]
THERE ARE CERTAIN SECURITY MEASURES THAT CAN BE TAKEN, BUT THAT'S BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS, NOT NECESSARILY CHEAP, BUT WE ARE GETTING PUBLICITY THAT WE'D RATHER NOT GET.OH, YOU COULDN'T HEAR ME. I THINK HAVING LAW ENFORCEMENT HERE POTENTIALLY TO JUST.
SO WE'LL SEE IF WE'VE GOT AN UPDATE ON THOSE AS WELL.
ANY OTHER ITEMS? DO WE HAVE A REPORT SHOWING THE COST OF THE VANDALISM FOR THE ON GOING YEAR OR WHATEVER. I MEAN, I WONDER IF IF YOU'RE SPENDING $200,000 IN THE BATHROOM AND YOU'RE FIXING FIELDS WHERE THEY'RE RUNNING THEIR CARS AND ALL THAT.
ARE WE SPENDING MORE MONEY ON REPAIRING THINGS AND WHAT IT COST US TO HAVE MAYBE A SECURITY PERSON AT THOSE FACILITIES? I THINK IT'S SOMETHING WE CAN TALK TALK ABOUT IN THE FUTURE.
SHE JUST GOES FROM PARK TO PARK AND DEALING WITH AND ADDRESSING VANDALISM AND GRAFFITI.
SO THERE ARE SOME WE COULD TRY TO PULL SOME NUMBERS FOR YOU ON THAT, BUT I THINK THAT COULD BE PART OF THAT BIGGER CONVERSATION ABOUT SAFETY IN THE PARKS AND AND SOME OF THE DAMAGE, BECAUSE THERE'S THINGS THAT ARE DAMAGED, LIKE AT SOUTHEAST, THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S CURRENTLY OPEN THAT WE'RE GOING TO GO REPAIR BECAUSE IT'S CURRENTLY CLOSED PENDING SOME SOME FUTURE DECISIONS.
SO AGAIN, WE CAN TRY TO PULL THAT INFORMATION.
BUT I MEAN, YOU JUST, YOU START TALKING ABOUT THE, THE COST OF AN EMPLOYEE, A VEHICLE, ALL THE SUPPLIES, AND THEN YOU JUST START GOING THROUGH ALL THE LISTS OF, OF DAMAGE THAT WE'VE RECEIVED OVER THE SPAN OF A YEAR.
IT'S PRETTY SIGNIFICANT. SO YEAH. ANYTHING ELSE FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER? IF NOT, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN.
THIS. MEETING'S ADJOURNED. I'VE ALWAYS WANTED TO DO THIS.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.