Parks and Recreation Advisory Board – March 2024

Video Description:
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board – March 2024

Read along below:

Speaker 1 0:00
The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, can you please start with the roll call?

Unknown Speaker 0:03
In usual here, got your page

Speaker 2 0:16
here and the council liaison showing the court is not to

Unknown Speaker 0:29
education he’s got a gallery. Yeah.

Speaker 1 0:44
So first of all the agenda is approval of the agenda. Before we just approve the agenda for the new business section, there was an intent of discussing going into 20 projects, but there were some more urgent updates and decisions that we need to make. And that’s why we ended up moving around the way it did. So with that caveat, does anyone have any amendments? You’d like to make? Genda sessions there so if not, then all in favor of the is there any Oh, is there a motion to approve the agenda?

Unknown Speaker 1:20
I move to approve the agenda. And we

Speaker 1 1:22
have a second one second. All in favor. And we have Sam virtual vote. Yep. Cool. Okay, awesome. Okay, moving on to approval of previous month’s minutes. So for the previous month, there was one minor edit and want to make about the attendees specifically that Jeff was not present outside was and then was outside of that. Does anyone have any modifications to the previous month’s

Unknown Speaker 1:59
vlog

Unknown Speaker 2:01
ever central staff

Unknown Speaker 2:10
do we have that do we have anyone have that list of almost everyone I mean everyone

Speaker 3 2:21
we can we’ll add that to to the list. Okay. David can help us it was

Speaker 4 2:36
yeah, that was my only note about like minutes is that it was way more stuff is captured.

Unknown Speaker 2:48
Okay. substance or in terms of like, presentation visitation? Anything specifically you have to call out think it’s a lot more

Unknown Speaker 3:06
do we ever make presentation slides? Like are they

Speaker 5 3:16
really good presentations. You presentation available. So, just to say thank you to all of you, supervisors who enabled that to happen and gave them time to do that. Hopefully, you all got paid and and also you all get past six because that was my favorite meeting we’ve had so far. As far as important you know, just really knowing things that really Oh,

Unknown Speaker 3:51
good. Yeah, I think there’s definitely

Speaker 1 3:56
Okay, with that being said. Are there any? Yep, Sam. David presented to me.

Speaker 6 4:05
David, I fortunately really can’t hear anything as you’re saying. Dave Are you hearing it all

Speaker 4 4:11
personally? Oh, yes. As a whatever Nick is doing I think How are you projecting? I can hear Nick Okay, but anyone else he would patiently close right here so next.

Speaker 1 4:22
I will say I am intentionally speaking louder. I am trying to be as

Unknown Speaker 4:26
good as me it’s working out a little bit for Sam but I can

Speaker 6 4:29
I can hear back but it’s gonna be hard to hear Jeff, for example, or anybody else. It is too hard to do it remotely. I’ll just I’ll just run out of quorum but I feel like the room must be better equipped than what we’re hearing right now. Or else Norris no one’s ever done a virtual meeting in the room?

Speaker 2 4:46
No, can we have difficulties and just constantly hear that? I wonder if it’s coming out It’s coming from camera. So, yeah, so,

Speaker 7 5:04
so either the last thing that we’ve done before or that sometimes works is x callback. Yeah, like it

Speaker 2 5:15
is free three camera mic and we need to try and get it off of that. So we’re gonna go out and

Speaker 5 5:33
swap two different J lab. This is the wrong mic, isn’t it? The other one did.

Unknown Speaker 5:38
It didn’t work last time. We just tried it

Unknown Speaker 5:46
can you hear me? Or Danielle before you hear us now?

Unknown Speaker 5:50
Just unplug it and play.

Unknown Speaker 5:54
Okay, let’s try that.

Unknown Speaker 5:57
Can you hear us?

Unknown Speaker 5:57
Yeah, much better. Thank you.

Speaker 1 6:00
All right. So approval previous month’s minutes. Does anyone like a motion to approve the previous month’s minutes as amended with the additional name changes or at ease?

Speaker 5 6:20
I would like to move that we approve the minutes to include a link to the presentation. And otherwise

Speaker 1 6:31
I’d like to second All in favor. Aye Aye. All right. So we have voted on that. Okay. Good call page. Thank you for reminding me. Okay, moving on public invited to be heard. I think we do have public invited to be heard. Sherry, you say your name and your address and three minutes

Speaker 2 6:51
a day. Hi, my name is sharing loi 1632. Sherman way and long my residence since 1987. I’m here to speak to the issue of the Fourth of July fireworks display. I’m strongly opposed to the option to have the fireworks set off at the city’s property on the mountain with viewing a Dickens nature area. After the Times called article about moving a fireworks display from Fox Hill to this location several people expressed concerns to city council about the negative impacts on thickens open space or open space masterplan specifically says open spaces for passive use only eight to 10,000 people is not passive use. In addition to comments and city council there were several negative comments published in The Times cop and the TC light. The issue is not where the fireworks will be set off. But where the spectators will watch which is Dickens nature area that’s protected open space. We invested over $4 million in taxpayer money at Dickens including planning planting native plants, flowers, shrubs, trees and installing irrigation. There has been huge irrigation problems there and all the vegetation has continued to struggle to be well established. It’s compromised already. Most of the trees have died. As you know are saying grain Creek is the focal point of this open space. This sensitive riparian areas essential habitat or variety of birds we have to fish and Vivian’s pollinators and other wildlife which depend on this riparian area for water, shelter and food. 90% of all wildlife depend on riparian areas for survival at some point in their lives. Concentrating eight to 10,000 people trampling the land was feed dogs parks, wagon strollers, bike sparklers, trash and other food waste ground fireworks like fountains and other loud explosive fireworks will cause tremendous damage to an already challenged area and be incredibly disruptive to wildlife. It’s inevitable plastic and other pollutants will be going in the creek are saying Free Market riparian Greenway is a jewel and she and the wildlife supports deserve better and SVN safety is also an issue. There’s certainly no connection to local neighborhoods or residential housing which will force the vast majority of spectators to use their cars to head to Dickens open space. There is very limited parking decanted along Boston which means people will have to park in the two shopping centers along 119 and across 287. The Best Buy parking lot cannot accommodate a 10,000 people so many will park by Lowe’s or cross 287 by McDonald’s, forcing people to cross 119 and 287. Both the streets are very busy, very wide and unsafe crossing for pedestrians especially after dark. This high traffic area normally has almost no pedestrian traffic, so drivers will be caught off guard. Not everyone will use the traffic lights which will exacerbate pedestrian danger. The fireworks display the fairgrounds worked until 2020 When Boulder County wouldn’t allow it that year due to COVID Fox Hill was tried With very real parking and viewing challenges, again the fairgrounds works well with multiple access and viewing spots including Rogers Grove, Hobby Lobby parking lot, Home Depot and target neighborhoods to the north and west and sunset golf course. The dispersed viewing locations really both parking and traffic nightmares. With hundreds of people not leaving their cars at all. The fairgrounds makes the most sense. If the issue is a Boulder County is difficult to work with, then perhaps it’s time to do some relationship rebuilding. After all, the fairgrounds fall well within Longmont property lines and we should be able to utilize this property for one event annually. Finally moving this, or additionally moving the symphony and picnic to Dickens nature areas impractical, and also not done without impacts to the land. At Thompson Park has become too small. Roosevelt Park is a great location, it is way more accessible than they constrict musicians hauling their instruments and for picnickers to. Similarly the city has a well established template for events at Roosevelt, the stages power, etc. Plus Roosevelt is close to businesses for sandwiches, ice cream, coffee and adult beverages. I do like the city’s plan to include drones this year for people to get a sense of that. Hopefully, people will embrace the drones. And we can move move forward eventually replacing fireworks displays, with drones with drone shows sometime in the future. While I am most people really like fireworks, there is no denying the harm caused people, pets and wildlife. By the way, the 2002 open space master plan clearly identifies activities the community believes are acceptable, and those that are not of open space defining passive recreation. Fireworks was specifically identified as a five of the public comments that indicated it was not acceptable on open space. Please do not support this option to exploit our Dickens natural area protected open space. Instead, please make a recommendation for city council to direct staff to pursue the fairgrounds for fireworks and Roosevelt Park for the symphony concert. And thank you.

Speaker 1 12:15
Thank you for that. Appreciate your your input on that. We do have an agenda item we’re ready to dive deep into the into the event. So we’ll discuss it at that time. There were two agendas underway. But one was that. Okay, that’s it for probably going to be heard. Right. So we will move into new business, the first step is discussing the recreation fee increases in budgets. So Jeff, you’re gonna help us because Ben is gonna help us with this one.

Speaker 8 12:47
Okay, we have this one on the last last time sheet for your guys. packet is in there shows what the fees we’re planning for for right now returning may 15, trying to fit it in with a brochure and I’m trying to get people to understand that and planning for it. For summer activities actually started out with sunset. This is due to budget situation in recreation were currently there is not enough budget to get through the rest of the year. We do need to get to a situation where we can appropriate some dollars. And this will take us for that. That being said, we have had some some forward movement as far as response from Treasury about where we’re at with the budget. Have you won a little bit? Okay. So the, where we’re at with that right now is we do have some some plans, one of the one of the let me let me back up just a little bit.

Speaker 3 14:05
So I think one of the things that is really important for BI to know is the financial policy that requires recreation to recover 80% That excludes at risk programming, free community events and capital over $5,000 Everything else that that we spend has to be recovered at that 88%. So in 24, we have but a budgeted revenue of $4,125,000 and expenditures of just a little over $6 million. And and so for us to be able to get to a place where we’re able to start spending or appropriating money, we’d have to bring in another almost $600,000, before we can get any advantage of that to help us with expanding our expenditures. And and part of the challenge of that is that costs have gone up so drastically over the last four years in 2020. We compared to our budget today, just for wages for recreation, is gone up over $927,000, with really no additional services to any of our community. And so we have to get in a place where we’re getting more people to participate in our programs, and to be able to bring in more money to be able to pay the bills at the end of the year, if you will. So Ben is proposing the fee increases, and I’ll let you talk more about that. But cost recovery is really the driver of what sets what we can and can’t do in recreation. One of the things that then Ben referred to a meeting that I was at is that, in general, the administer, the city administration, agreed for recreation to make two proposals at this year, one is to increase our scholarship program from $100 per person to be able to go to $300 per person, that’s generally for everybody 17 and younger. And we would like to include that to to include people with disabilities. And then the second item would be to view the cost recovery program, which hasn’t been looked at since 2008. Cost Recovery at that time went from 70% to 80%. The city was really in economic downturn. And so recreation, generally over the years, I think Ben would would agree with this, that as the economy tends to go down, recreation has a bigger appeal within our community that people aren’t as able to travel and are still looking for, excuse me things to do. So we would look at trying to drop that back down to 70%. Or look at things that could possibly be excluded, like access to the outdoor pools would be one of the things that we would look at. So that is many of the kids and people in our community can access those pools during the summer months where the scholarship

Speaker 8 18:05
program itself to get credit for the amount that you do in our region. We’re rebuilding that program now. But for years that was 70 $75,000 worth of programs. Support for doing that. And there are a few other things in here that want to look at package to bring this all together. But it’s it’s a place where

Speaker 8 18:36
we do expect the increase that’s proposed and we’re planning on to for the rest of the year, a rough estimate is between two to $300,000. For full year. I don’t think they can hear you as well as they can hear Jeff, I don’t I don’t think it’ll be short. I’ll try and project this a little bit better. I think I get a little bit deep at times. That’s

Unknown Speaker 19:10
Do you want to go into any detail

Speaker 8 19:11
on on? Well, in general, as far as the fees, and you guys had this, it’s it’s a standard how we do a standard increase, which is about 10%. And then everything is equalized, to make sense from from the daily drop in so that we have 50 segments so that the numbers work so that the passes relate to each other. If you pay for a year, it’s a better deal. So there’s a program that we you kind of have in place to do that. So that’s how those came around. And then we have a general director to staff or programs to raise those 10% And there’s some flexibility there because there are other factors of programs where I knew it’s just getting started. impact that if it’s rolling and very successful. That’s really We certainly would sports in particular subject to market. And then particular among that the adults work. So you really have to, you can’t just up softball by $200, for example, or folks will just go somewhere else, basically. So, so that’s the basis of where these numbers come from.

Speaker 1 20:24
Any questions or discussion that we’ve had, to an extent, Sam, if you have a point, an item that you would like to raise? I’ll start with you. If you do, thank

Unknown Speaker 20:36
you for asking No, no questions. Does.

Unknown Speaker 20:39
Anybody else Ah.

Speaker 5 20:42
So, I struggle with this. And you know, I’m a huge supporter of recreation. And at the same time, I feel like, this is just further pricing people out of recreation. And I know that that is not what you want, and you guys are working with the system you’re given. But, you know, when we were doing the ballot initiative, I heard from a lot of people that they already couldn’t afford the Rec Center, and I can’t pay, you know, that costed is for a family to be a member at the Rec Center. And I feel like, that’s what we want the recreation facilities for is to be accessible to families to be as accessible as possible to as many citizens as possible. You know, and at the same time, I don’t think the city is city setting you guys up for success or government because the city council, they’re not necessarily upgrading facilities, you know, I think. So that may cause you to lose people and problems, that eyestrain, so you could you know, maximize recovery with people going there during the season. So I really feel like the city should be looking before they asked you to look at another fee increase, like a few months after the last increase, they should be looking at changing that recovery rate and how they can better enable more citizens to have access to the rest without having to keep raising fees. Engage.

Speaker 4 22:19
So I have two questions just in general, how does the increasing cost recovery compared to like, cities, it’s

Speaker 8 22:30
higher. It’s I have ad hoc information. The problem I run into when we do this, and this in the past when I was also here is that it’s apples and oranges at time. So So what’s covered? What is it? What’s in there? What is it? But in general, what I have found are cities are between 60 and 75%. Lafayette, for example, that 75%, but they’re not held to that they don’t, there’s nothing you’re actually held to. So that’s just a guideline for them when I talk to them, or Collins and 70 70% 65. And again, besides that, there are things in each one that will be different. And so an actual Apples to Apples challenge. I certainly haven’t heard of anybody at 80% or above it. You feel like at this point? And then how are our non

Speaker 4 23:38
resident rates, established outside resident rates

Speaker 8 23:44
established by counsel and are set for 45% percent premium?

Unknown Speaker 23:55
It has been compare that

Speaker 8 23:57
you’ll see that and you’ll not see it. It’s varies by city. A lot of cities have residents rate and that resident rates, some don’t. Just it varies.

Speaker 4 24:13
So, so then the general perception, which we already know, is out there, because during the election other times, now, our taxes are through the roof, right. So sometimes we flush with a ton of money. Why? Wise, why do we have to disconnect that? You know, property taxes, you know, in some cases have gone up 20 40% to a few years and we still have a budget problem for stuff like this.

Speaker 3 24:43
Well, I I don’t know that everybody would consider that we have a budget problem within recreation, which is the the thing that the belief is that the budget was based on the policy and recreation is trying to find ways to work within that, to think of changes are going to happen, that wouldn’t happen until the 25 budget is, is part of the issue. If we don’t raise rates, we’re going to have to look at other ways to reduce our costs, which could include cutting and some things. And that that, in my opinion, is even worse than reasonable females.

Speaker 4 25:33
Does a 10% increase in ease, though, like, already pricing out, I mean, you’re you’re trying to both increase number of participants and increase fees, and that it goes against the supply demand curve. And so I think that’s just you know, aspirational, it’s not actually an operational sort of thing. It’s just like, so is there a forecasting of if you raise your prices, 10%, you lose 12%. And people coming. I mean,

Speaker 8 26:03
in our, in our history here, and this will be the shortest time between the theories that we have done so I’ll have a record or something like that. But we that has never happened. Or usage has never gone down to American current usage. Just the Rec Center for comparison right now is added above.

Speaker 1 26:29
Where we talked about staffing, is hence why you want it to be Recreation Center

Speaker 8 26:36
Director certain times four or five o’clock in the afternoon is very, very powerful.

Speaker 3 26:47
Which is good, good cost of business has just gone way up and didn’t give anybody goes out to eat and notice how much more things costs. And when you have a division that has a cost recovery requirement, our costs have to our expenses go up. So our revenue, what we charge has to go up as well. Hey,

Speaker 5 27:13
business city policy candidates city choose to reduce your cost recovery or give you some relief from that cost recovery.

Speaker 3 27:24
Yes, but that can only be done by city council. And, again, if we reduce our cost recovery, there isn’t an expense expense that will go with that. It isn’t just that we lower fees, that somewhere in the in the general funds going to be less money that can be used to fund other things, whether that’s recreation or other, you know, Park kinds of things. Because right now we put in in 23, we generated roughly 4.2 million in revenue, if we reduce the cost recovery, that will go down, which then will have an impact in other areas of the city. And you know, if they might be able to backfill with other sales tax or whatever, but that’s the, you know, there is a cost to

Speaker 5 28:22
that I’m getting the feeling is that the revenue has gone up and that maybe we’re all thinking that it might should be there. And it could come from other places. And we’d like to see that if I’m not speaking for the board too much. That’s kind of what I’m gathering. I know I’m priced out of using. I mean, I like really think about it like, Okay, can I do five things while I’m at the Rec Center? Because I’m not just gonna go and swim, you know, because it’s money, you know what I mean? So, right, it is a thing. I’m also wondering if it’s in the cost recovery, you know, that we have, except for free events? Have we thought about making lots of things free community events, like maybe yoga classes, free community event? Just labeled free community event? You know, I don’t know, just to get around, I think. I don’t know. But I think the money’s there.

Speaker 3 29:21
I can’t respond to that. Yeah, I don’t know. Yeah, I don’t know. Council or city manager may have other priorities. But I think we wouldn’t be if we wanted to test a yoga in the park and do it for free. I think we could do that. But to purposely tried to circumvent the policy. I think there would be some people direct feedback,

Unknown Speaker 29:48
people would be a little frustrating to hear. Yeah. I mean, I get

Speaker 8 29:56
that. And those those accounts that don’t recover also have their own budget to serve. The community. That’s a budget is a specific budget. So if we tried to put something into there, there’s no money. Okay?

Speaker 5 30:10
I, okay, that makes sense. I get that. But I look at, you know, like the the library can’t like when I’ve worked with the library, they can’t they are literally not allowed to do cost recovery, even if there’s a failure and says, Can I pay $5 for this, like this whole idea, like, they cannot do any cost recovery, yet, recreation, which is also essential, has to do 80%. That seems really unbalanced. As far as the budget to me that it would be like that. I’m not saying I’m necessarily against raising the fees, but I’m just bringing those things up. And I think the last thing we should do is bring salaries down. Like it’s like, already, our recreation staff. I mean, even with the raises, we know that a lifeguard has lives in their hands, and that they deserve like a real wage, because they’re like doing actual life saving work and things like that. So we shouldn’t reduce. And we shouldn’t reduce that staff. I think that’s the most important thing to me, but I’m

Speaker 1 31:15
better from grades, because that was actually the point that I was in a race. So you mentioned in terms of your chances, because you mentioned, you know, the implication of we don’t do this dissection, average and fees, we have to make some cuts, have gotten out what those cuts might be at this stage in terms of staff program. So for that, what do we really mean get a sense of what that really would look like? I know, it’s a hard question to answer, spotlessness, but what

Speaker 3 31:42
we’ve thought is some, but they haven’t been well received, probably worse than this conversation here. Yeah. I, I really feel like we’re a bit of a chicken or the egg kind of thing. And I hear the concern about raising fees. But I don’t see that we have really a choice at this point, until we can get a proposal during the budget process to city council to be able to revisit the cost recovery. And are there things like outdoor swimming pools that could be excluded from from the cost recovering? Maybe other youth programs? Maybe adults still have to? And I’m spitballing here, so none of this is, you know, adults might be in a better place to play to pay then what sort of the kids are, you know, we we’ve talked about? Do we open all the pools out outdoors, and that was one that was not received? Well, but there are pools that do financially better than others. And, you know, you know, we have three outdoor pools, not opening one, and driving the use to the other two was something we talked about, but we won’t be moving forward with that. So we have to look at other ways to do this. You know, revenues were very good last year, they were almost $400,000 ahead of what was budgeted. And I do think that the administration is acknowledging that whether you’re at 80%, or or 77% $400,000, is still a good number. And, and maybe that’s the interaction we we had is trying to make sure we keep bringing in more money that’s been what’s budgeted, and then work with with them to still allow us to appropriate some additional funds. The just to give you an example of how, how difficult the wages are in 2019 at the Rec Center, we had, like $788,000, budgeted in temp wages in 2024. We have 724,000 and actually spent over 900,000 last year, because in part a part of our challenge is that in the 3.1 budget, recreation was not bringing in any money or much money because of COVID So our budget was cut by $1.1 million. So as money was being added to temp wages, you know, that that let me back up a second to 1.1 was the equivalent of cut In 25% of our budget, except for in the areas of regular employees, and the matching benefits, so that means the Rec Center budget was was cut for temp wages by the 25%. So every time money was added over the years since then it was 25%, short of what we really needed. And so we’re having to find ways to save money in other areas of the budget, to be able to spend the money in the in the temporal ages, where we need to

Unknown Speaker 35:38
rebalance

Unknown Speaker 35:40
or severely pitch.

Speaker 2 35:46
So, we need to use it’s gotta be only two days, sometimes just a little bit here getting reports. Oh, all right. This is the table solid.

Speaker 5 36:00
I feel like stuck between a rock and a hard place. I’m sure you guys do too, because I just I fundamentally believe that the city is just under investing in recreation. And they’re forcing you guys into an impossible position. And, you know, negatively impacting the public by continuing to raise rates. I mean, it just raised at the beginning. It was like six months ago,

Unknown Speaker 36:30
on February 1.

Speaker 5 36:33
Okay, what’s that? Yeah. But you know, I just fundamentally think the city should be investing more in recreation and prioritizing, making it accessible to, you know, people with lower incomes, having a sliding scale, you know, some way to address accessibility. And this just feels like a band aid that’s going to make a public frustrated, you know, because they’ve already said things are too expensive, and now they’re going to have a negative connotation with recreation. And I don’t know how to send a message to city council that this is okay. That we are in parks and recreation Advisory Board, cities under investing in recreation. It’s not okay. So I don’t want to negatively impact you guys, because you guys are doing the best that you can. But I also don’t. I don’t think that this continues to increase the sequencer.

Speaker 9 37:35
Believe last year, we were talking about this exact issue with the whole missing new quarter. Is there no, I’m sure we talked about off off air towards the end of it. Is there no recovery clause or anything like that with that you guys can get back and get yourself back into normal with that with that budgetary deficit, you’re still running,

Speaker 3 38:00
that there is a clause to that, that the commitment was that once we started bringing in more revenues, that we wouldn’t be able to appropriate that money to be able to spend it. The challenge is we have to get to the 80% recovery. Before we can take advantage of that. And and again, at the end of last year, we were 77 78%. there abouts. Yeah. So that $400,000, based on the 80%, we had no benefit from bringing in that extra money. So basically, what I think I hear tonight, is that we need to move up our scholarship conversation sooner with counsel, and at least get the information in front of counsel about cost recovery. So as we go into the 25 budget, they’re aware of the challenges that that we have.

Speaker 5 39:02
I think that and then I like what Paige said every word was what I meant to say but she says better. And really was emphasizing a whole idea of I know it’s complicated, but looking into sliding scale. Because the people that need the most and their kids just want to go swimming that day. I didn’t plan today because they’re working both jobs today. They’re not planning today to get the scholarship for the summer. And the people that get the scholarships are the people that are on it, and they’re the people that are connected and that have somebody helping them connect and things like that. But the I see there’s just more than two long months, there’s there’s more and more people that are affluent coming to Longmont, it just it’s apparent because there’s people in the restaurants and I’m like how can you like I don’t even understand, like how you can go to a restaurant on Tuesday. So there’s more people For outlet, and then there’s more people who are impoverished. And there’s more people that are just kind of struggling, like not quite in the poverty line, but probably in the polar county poverty poverty line. They don’t even know how to access things like scholarships and things like that. And no matter how much you advertise it, it’s still going to be a lot for the people that need it the most. It’s a lot for families to to apply for a scholarship or things like that, to give this free if there’s like, I don’t, I don’t know the answer, but a sliding scale. And I don’t know the answer of how you would do that and make it easy. Like it’s complicated, but there’s got to be an answer. And somebody’s probably doing it someplace. Because all around the nation, communities are like this right now, you know? Yeah.

Speaker 9 40:54
Just just as a firefighter is mentioned that, I want to just as a soft detail, it’s not a hard number, but that some communities dump on unhealed is strictly to the recovery percentages, or is there a reason why long one has to be as strict to it, that’s just a city council.

Speaker 8 41:13
It’s a Sydney at one point, and for many years, the city recreation did very, very well. Just my experience being in lots of rec centers over the years, I can tell you the run Peter is as busy as you will find the heart rate, just it just is. And we were doing very well. I started in oh seven. And so it was never initially, you know, we were always running between 85 and 95%. Of that as much as 95%. And so what it’s not an issue, if you’re worried about it, there’s there’s flexibility within the budget year to year, and we’re able to add things and appropriate when we need to. So this is a very new situation for us, I guess other cities have faced in different ways.

Speaker 9 42:05
And so just for the perception of because this is a little bit more of a macro golfer the whole thing that is is it a five year 10 year type thing that was still going to pursue another rec center, or that’s just kind of tabled. Until sorry.

Speaker 8 42:22
Yeah, I mean, I think it’s certainly something we monitor approach again. Yeah,

Unknown Speaker 42:27
I just didn’t know.

Speaker 8 42:29
We discussed that here in this group there that it and in our groups are talked about that. You certainly don’t have a timeline now. But absolutely, the community doesn’t

Unknown Speaker 42:42
yet know that.

Speaker 9 42:43
I guess. It wasn’t so much as to set the time like I was just more debt for the perception of the public asking for more money in this particular way. You guys been forced to ask for money this way. After the public, kind of lambasted the the idea of having having a new rec center. Is there. Is there it Does anyone see that as kind of a perception issue towards we have to raise money now for a facility that we can’t even maintain? Well, it’s not for us.

Speaker 1 43:20
I understand. Yeah. As far as perception.

Speaker 9 43:23
Yeah. Just specifically, it wasn’t from our point of view right now. It’s

Speaker 6 43:30
it’s the division, not the division. Yes.

Speaker 8 43:33
its entirety. So we were down to our numbers are 20 $27,000 at the end of last year, to give me an example of a five point something $9 million budget, you’re down to that much. And it’s in the wrong accounts. So I spent about two months with finance trying to find money to put into the right little accounts, to pay Visa cards, or just to pay our our bills day to day.

Unknown Speaker 44:09
We got there. We got there.

Speaker 8 44:11
But we know this year will be really works. We know that for a fact, because last year, there were things we still didn’t have openings going on last year. Everything is open right now. And so we know that and there were reasons for staff and we would give them money we would like to utilize for raises for camp staff. You know, it’s it’s really rough. We can try to appreciate those folks because they keep us open. And we’re choosing as a society and it’s great to pay folks better. I think that’s great.

Unknown Speaker 44:50
There’s cost

Speaker 5 44:52
really well 80% was arbitrarily put like from a tree of thing 80% does not have to stay blocked. It’s my message to counsel that doesn’t, they can change, they made it, they can change it. They made that goal, they can change it.

Speaker 1 45:15
Which is great. Why? Because speaking, this is a great discussion on like, where we’re heading here. I think I want to move into like the action phase where we’re going to do about the situation you just learn. And what’s the next steps? I’m kind of it would be, I would love to make some type of recommendation to city council tonight, you can do online as a board on that. Of course, there’s some different ideas and what that might look like. So I think maybe one way for us to do this is just to do informal, not an actual vote, just a straw poll on what we think the focus of the recommendation should be, and then move from there. Does that sound? So let’s just do it informally. How many people here on the board would be interested in making motions related to the sea change itself? As the focus of the recommendation to city council?

Speaker 3 46:10
Just for the record, the council does not have to approve the fee chain course. We have that authority delegated to us for recreation? Ah,

Speaker 1 46:20
I did not know that. Actually. That changes a lot actually.

Speaker 3 46:27
It’s it’s a unique thing. But with how often we have to set fees, there’s no way we could be going to counsel all the time to be able to adjust or set so that is designated to bat

Speaker 1 46:43
an eye. I see. Okay, okay, so this recommendation just seems okay. So then the alternative then be some recommendation related to the gut check related to that recovery target, and making some recommendation to city council to modify the recovery target as an action. We’ll be interested in pushing that forward. This is a gut check.

Speaker 5 47:16
Question for you. So if you may you have you have the authority to approve the fee increase, but you don’t have authority to not like meet the financial target, right city council would have to somehow say like we’re gonna give you relief from this requirement and allow you to spend these funds that are sitting there but you can’t spend them because you haven’t reached that. I believe that

Speaker 3 47:50
that I don’t have the authority to appropriate funds until we hit the 8% I believe that

Speaker 3 48:05
and, and maybe what we do is next month, we come back with some proposals for cost recovery things that we can present to you and then based on your recommendations, that’s what we can take to council

Speaker 1 48:22
Okay, so don’t make any recommendation this evening on the app recovery portion of it

Speaker 3 48:28
but I think it was the one thing I guess would like informal vote on if I could is is yes thumbs up or thumbs down on see increase Yeah.

Speaker 1 48:41
I mean, we can also be formal actually

Unknown Speaker 48:46
we could have still

Unknown Speaker 48:47
have informal and then make a formal

Unknown Speaker 48:51
formal first because people can change their minds based on conversation.

Speaker 1 48:57
Okay, so even formally known as a actual motion unfurling who would be in favor of the fee increases as the pose

Unknown Speaker 49:10
yeah

Speaker 5 49:12
yeah, only thing that can happen like to stay afloat

Unknown Speaker 49:17
suddenly, I would just be paid started thinking as I saw Sam Sam was its

Speaker 9 49:25
was not in begrudgingly because these guys have been put in that position. It’s kind of like when you talk to a doctor but your insurance provider gets to pick what medicine it’s very similar. Yeah, so that’s that’s kind of the pill.

Speaker 5 49:45
So I kind of just wanted to test this with you guys. Just wondering what would happen if we had customers Alicia requested city council to relieve recreation services from having a game Freeze, and instead of allowing you to spend your dollars 80%. I mean, is that a possible thing, though, like, we asked council to consider that. Is that worded correctly?

Speaker 3 50:17
Yeah, I think it’s worded correctly, whether that’s you or not.

Speaker 1 50:24
And if we were to do that, would we be able to hold off? The fee increases until that would be decided on by the next city council meeting?

Speaker 3 50:36
For the first time you the timing is right, yeah. We The brochure is in production, and then it has to be in there. It goes out here in two or three weeks,

Speaker 8 50:51
and literally tomorrow on that brochure.

Speaker 1 51:05
Okay, well, we have options here where we can get ready to take this. Is there anyone that wants to make a motion for the fee increases, regulating the fee increases to see staff? That’s the council as defined within the packet. Now, there’s no rules. There’s rules

Speaker 9 51:31
would like to move to, for the fee increase? Recommended as recommended in the packet?

Speaker 5 51:40
Yeah, I just want to know, do you think that we can we can our case to push for the 80% relief? If they’re like, Oh, you’re gonna be fine, because

Speaker 8 51:54
I can answer. Yeah, my my opinion is, I don’t think it does. I don’t think it weakens it to be clear. I’ve projected this out. And the way we’re set up now, I don’t know that we can do a percentage game. Again, the way we’re choosing to pay temporary staff, I don’t know that I don’t know that we can reasonably do there will have to be another fee increase that this is we’re going to be here, we really don’t see that as realistic to do another view increase every year. Even with this one. We don’t quite get to 80%. I still think we come up slightly short or right at it to where there’s no flexibility. And

Speaker 3 52:45
part of you know, I don’t I don’t want this to come as a shock to City Council or the city administration, because they’ve always been very supportive of recreation. I think this is a timing thing, where, after so many years of at working after the reduction that it’s catching up with us now. And I think that to be fair to council, you know, they, they can be really criticized for this, because I don’t think they even know that. This is an issue right now.

Speaker 8 53:23
You know, you were last month councilor McCoy. He hadn’t been I rushed through a little bit of this, you know, he immediately said, yeah, maybe this is something we need to look at. Let’s get this down to to other levels. So his response last month, on record, was saying that generalized IBM Support. So I think that there was some understanding there and I don’t think doing this hurts our case, necessarily, because he doesn’t get us there for sure.

Speaker 1 53:56
So yeah, just one more thing, make just an idea. Perhaps we should just extend it because I think we’ve talked about this range options next to what we would raise the city council for modifying eight years of recovery, whatever they might be getting more leeway routine medicine 5%. What are the options that might come up with? Would it be helpful we added that to the to the motion?

Unknown Speaker 54:26
When will they be considering? I mean, what would be time?

Speaker 3 54:30
Well, we’ll present our budget requests in May for recreation for them to consider. The deadline will be towards the end of May for us to put in any options and we would like to whatever we present you the feedback you get. I move forward with what that what is presented to council those options.

Speaker 5 55:00
I suspect you’ve rent options to us that include a lower cost or company.

Unknown Speaker 55:06
You don’t necessarily need a motion for that

Unknown Speaker 55:14
but you can also of course, you want a motion for that. There’s no reason to.

Speaker 3 55:23
Hesitation I have is there was already a motion on the floor. Yeah, you’re right. You’re right. You’re right. Thomas even move movie interrupted.

Speaker 9 55:41
Again, I’d just like to move to approve the fees as presented in the packet.

Unknown Speaker 55:51
We have a second.

Unknown Speaker 55:58
Yeah. Okay. All those in favor? All right. Yeah. Five,

Unknown Speaker 56:05
to be good. And we got

Speaker 1 56:10
all those oppose. Yeah, I bought off my game today. Okay. I think that wraps up for the session, we can move on the next agenda item. Next up is the proposed Fourth of July event, head hitting partners should be a good one.

Speaker 3 56:36
I’ll start off, start us off, and we’ll go from there. So in January, the city manager approached a number of city staff about the options for relocating the Fourth of July out of Fox Hill, to an area down by Dickens Park. One of the main reasons for that request was to be able to have the firework shot from a piece of property that is owned by the city. And that would be the Fire Training Center just off of Martin. That way, there is no issue with somebody coming in to the fallout area. The majority of it, like what was an issue at the fairgrounds, the fairgrounds have had challenges where they would be shooting off the fireworks and people wouldn’t be right there on top of them and totally unsafe to people to be that close. So we as staff agreed to recreation staff agreed to come up with an event, work with the Caranas to be able to move the event from from Fox Hill, the koalas are still very interested in being part of the event, they will fully fund the fireworks. And then we are requesting a little over $81,000 to be able to do the event at Dickens Park. The staff originally proposed to city council that the event take place in the park, just because of the time of year, we were really criticized over the years about doing rhythm on the river in in Rogers Grove, and how hot it was already, let alone doing it on on Boston, and how much he could be instead of in the in the park. We have have known from the beginning of the park design is that it was really never intended to be a special event location. The commitment that Recreation and Parks had made internally was that it was going to be more of an open space, passive recreation and not large events. So Council after the information was presented, they asked us to come back to you all and talk to you about your thoughts about the event and what passive recreation meant to you as a board and how as it relates to open space. So with that, Danielle we’ll talk a little bit about what passive recreation means to us based on the code. And then Sam will talk about what our possible solution is to hopefully make it a win win for everybody.

Speaker 2 1:00:05
Yeah, yep. So like Jeff was saying, for the City Council motion, February 27. They want crowd to weigh in on, does the proposed event that we’re going to go through, meet the definition of passive recreation. So this is what we’re going to guide you through now. So one of the proposal to understanding three analyzing the two together so you can see in the in the coming slides, there’ll be slides that are talking about the proposal, understanding slides that will help you understand the context and the slides where we talk about the proposed event, as it pertains to the context that I’m going to lay out for you. And then for is, is for you to discuss and decide. So let’s go through. So up here in the corner, you can see that this is the proposed event. So when so first of all, in terms of passive low impact, recreation, and what does it mean, it’s always project and site specific. So it comes up for every county, every municipality, that lands, manages, parks and open spaces. And so you have to look at each proposal differently. So this, we went through this process with the button route management plan. And this is something that David mentioned to city council, but it was different, we had different parameters we had a preserve that we were dealing with. So that’s why we want to look at each instance separately. There are general definitions for passive recreation, low impact recreation that you can find, we’ll talk about that, but then we’re gonna lay out the context. So the proposed event or activity, we want to look at all these pieces when we’re thinking about passive low impact recreation, the size and the magnitude of the event. This one

Speaker 7 1:02:23
yeah, do we want to so this is the event as it was proposed to council with the event in the park itself, estimated attendance about 10,000 people, Kiwanis basin, they had about 4500 people at Fox Hill, so we’re anticipating about double that. attractions include food trucks, your garden and make games stage with live music. Event infrastructure is the not so glamorous parts, portable toilets, trash, dumpsters fencing, that kind of stuff. And then as far as duration, it’ll be a five to nine event with setup and strike happening same days, it’ll be approximately 12 hours. And then you always align obviously with fireworks is pretty high. Also have ambient lighting and safety lighting.

Unknown Speaker 1:03:26
And then,

Speaker 2 1:03:28
so going through size, magnitude, duration and timing, noise and light levels, types of use. So is it consumptive or non consumptive? So non consumptive would be like walking through a park? A large event like this is more than consumptive category because a lot of the things that Sam was just talking about, there’s lots of people the infrastructure and then types of impacts. I don’t understand why this cuts off

Speaker 2 1:04:04
so yeah, just these are the types of things that that we think about and we can we can come back to this if we need to, but are the impact pipes short or long term? Are they temporary or permanent? Some of the things that could happen in the nature area, wildlife disturbing soil compaction, we know a lot about wildlife in Dickens Park nature area, an increase in leads will definitely happen. NEW SOCIAL trails, the riparian corridor is a concern. So now understanding the context.

Speaker 2 1:04:47
So first, to understand the context, we’re talking about a nature area. So our code defines nature area, which we previously called district parks. So you’ll see it both ways in the court district partner nature area, but in two different sections versus section 404. District parks are devoted to low impact recreational uses in Section 13 Nature area means a designation of public land providing access to an enjoyment of important natural historic and cultural resources and allow for limited low impact and passive outdoor recreation uses that fit the unique natural characteristics of the particular area. And then finally, hours of use in nature areas, the hours of public use shall be between one hour before sunrise and one hour before one hour after sunset. And we’ve just heard this is a 12 hour set up to strike. So then, continuing on with understanding the context, we have various documents that not did plans and project work pertaining to this particular that that speak to this particular nature area. So Dickens farm nature is actually encumbered by a conservation easement that is held by Boulder County. And along with that came a baseline report at the time that the easement was put in place. We have system wide plans that speak to what low impact passive recreation means. And why we’re why I keep saying low impact and passive recreation is because those terms come out of the conservation easement. And then we have some general definition in the open space master plan a bit of a definition in the Parks, Recreation and trails master plan. We also are golden to our wildlife management plan. So all these are adapted plans, that we’ve got site specific plans, there’s Dickens has its own master plan. There’s the same thing Greenway master plan, because the Greenway goes through this nature area. And then there’s the resource management and project work that we’ve been doing at this particular nature area, the resilient St. Green Project and so right now we’ve got all the native plantings are are under warranty still. So low impact passive recreation.

Speaker 2 1:07:18
So this is this is coming out of the open space master plan. So even with low impact, passive recreation, the idea is minimal development, preserving the wildlife and ecosystems minimizing environmental impact and emphasizing preservation, minimal rules of engagement coordination or formal programming, non consumptive uses wildlife observation, walking, etc. So

Unknown Speaker 1:07:45
I didn’t know what you can find

Speaker 2 1:07:50
in terms of, and so now now, we’ve gone through understanding the context and then kind of analyzing the proposed events. And the context, we do have some commitments that we have to think about here we’ve we’ve talked about the Parks and Recreation and trails master plan and passive recreation. But we have to acknowledge that that that city council directed staff that with each open space, the goal would be to have a conservation easement on it to protect the conservation values of that encumbered open space in perpetuity. So we’ve got that direction and the technical Council on this does have a conservation easement on it. And so then we’ve got the, you know, the partnership and agreement with Boulder County, who is the grantor of the conservation easement, we are, you know, it is our job to uphold the conservation values that are laid out in the conservation easement. And it’s also you know, our promise to the public. And then number two open space sales and use tax so voters have tax themselves and to protect open spaces. So it’s our job to come to you and talk to you about you know, the idea of passive recreation and protecting this nature area or open space.

Speaker 7 1:09:24
Okay, so now let’s talk about the proposed site layouts on to you can kind of follow the logic. So this is the option we just talked about the one that was presented to council. As for the attendee experience, the best option and that’s to focus sort of the footprint of the event on the manicure areas. So down by the picnic shelter is where the stage would be. It’s where the symphony would be on the pathways would be where the food trucks are, this would be the beer, garden and future area and then portable toilets here. So that’s kind of the more focus for from the event perspective, a centralized footprint, grassy areas are cooler than on hardscape. And we would provide shuttling only for attendees with mobility needs. There’s obviously a large impact in the nature area, we would obviously be encouraging people to use the nature area after sunset. And who’s heard that Daniel just mentioned, this was option two. So this was city manager kind of directed us to look at Boston Avenue as an alternative. So that’s just basically moving everything up to the streets, which is a fine footprint. Also, the stage would be over on the east side of the street. Vendors kind of lined up along the streets, and then your garden kind of in this grassy area here. And we would anticipate lots of foot traffic in this whole area. And then the festival itself would start here with a closure, and then this would be parking. Over on the west side to

Speaker 5 1:11:09
show go back, you show me where the stages I just can’t see stages right there. So people standing to look at it doesn’t look like there’s any place for anybody to watch people on stage. Well,

Speaker 7 1:11:22
so the stage would be sort of pointed west. So people would back up into the street face the stage, which is not ideal, from a performance perspective, either just looking directly into the sun. That’s the best way to line it up so that they also have viewing of the fireworks, the fire trade is over. And this area here. And this red circle is the fireworks Fallout zone. So we have to control this so that people don’t enter that jungle fireworks. So the stage would be the natural end point of the festival.

Speaker 5 1:11:55
Okay, question again. So usually the symphony was like, really in the day. And then they were talking about stage later in the day right before fireworks Symphony would move to

Speaker 8 1:12:10
we try to clear up a little bit, I think really currently exist. And going back a little bit of history, that Symphony approached us this winter, or they want to say December before talking about the possibility of using Roosevelt rather than cops in part. Our recommendation to them at that time was it’s really gonna be hot. It’s there’s no shelter for it, there’s no shade as opposed to touch the park with all the great trees. So stay there. Well, we later find out that comes apart to the work done. So the general plan is for them to go back to Roosevelt this year and this year only. Not considering this at all. separately. We’re totally tasked with coming up with this plan. And our general thought and the general plan, nothing’s finalized yet, because we have to get from A to B is to have the symphony do their their concert during the day, probably at Roosevelt park this year, if they do it this year, and then play during the fireworks

Unknown Speaker 1:13:23
at the

Speaker 8 1:13:24
fireworks have doubled. So if the Roosevelt Park thing had never come up this year, they would just be doing their concert at Thompson as as they generally have. And that will be fine. I think that’s where the confusion so what we are proposing and what they’re currently planning on is two concerts

Unknown Speaker 1:13:50
they’re booked by another city.

Speaker 3 1:13:54
We for a number of years have been trying to work for them playing in Longmont during the fireworks and trying

Unknown Speaker 1:14:04
to find the location that worked. So that’s that makes sense.

Unknown Speaker 1:14:10
Yeah, that’s where

Speaker 3 1:14:13
we are. We’re the staff are very committed to the Thompson event. We feel like the folks that attend that event are really not the same people that are going to come to fireworks at 930.

Speaker 6 1:14:32
Quick question, sorry, I turned to jump in. Yes, you’re okay. Yes. Okay. It’s a little hard to hear everything. So maybe this is already asked but on the Thompson Symphony question, are we quite sure that the construction Thompson will start before the fourth? It seems like it’s been extending out and might start after that it’d be it’d be a shame to move them that actually not be starting construction until August. For example,

Speaker 2 1:14:58
we’re on schedule so Our design documents are done. March is going out to bid. We’re going to award in May and we anticipate construction starting in June.

Unknown Speaker 1:15:08
Okay, so everything points out that being close to the line. Okay, nice.

Unknown Speaker 1:15:17
What are the sorry.

Speaker 7 1:15:21
So just on the Boston footprint, the footprint is more compact, which works a little bit better for like waste services and that kind of stuff. Easy shuttle access, it will be a heavier shuttle toll. Just because Kim from Park junction, which is going to be the majority of parking up to Boston, is a little bit further a walk, there’s going to be lots of hardscape, which the event infrastructure will sit on. And there should be minimal impact to the nature area from the event infrastructure. Obviously a condiment and heat because it’s going to be hot. And from the attendee experience perspective, you can’t see Boston Avenue, when you’re walking up from the parking lot at harvest junction. So you really have to know where you’re going. You need to activate a little bit along the trail so that people know where they’re going, while shuttling and safe use of the major area. So this is the compromise that we came up with that we feel like, fits everyone’s needs the best, which is to have the festival on Martin streets along the bridge and fence off the areas to encourage people to stay out of the major area after sunset. So Martin Street has better views, both from the parking lot and mountains, you can look over the major area from there, and activation along the street makes flow much better. And it still has the stage would be up here facing south. And folks who fill in this way. And along the bridge here along the east side, we would do the food vendors, the carnival games, all of that stuff, here would be the beer garden. And folks would walk up this is heartless junction down here. So they would walk up from the south and festivities will be easily visible as they’re walking up so they know exactly where they’re going. And this would help keep people out of the nature area after sunset. We only we wouldn’t have to shuttle anyone. So we would just designate a close area of our destruction as a accessible parking. And it’s the best compromise between attendee experience and protection of the major area that only con is obviously going to be the heat, but it’s going to be July. So just thinking about that.

Speaker 3 1:17:57
So we would like to hear your feedback about what passive recreation means your feedback on the three locations. And and if you believe I guess the third option really becomes more of a win win. What what else I will just say is that public safety has really emphasized that they felt like this location is better than a fairgrounds is better than Fox hill that they feel like there are less safety issues. And I can’t talk specifically about them. But that’s what they’ve indicated to us. Yes. For all three, well, they don’t really share about the location, and they feel like it’s easier to control traffic here, then for sure, at Fox Hill. The you know, the, I’ll tell you that the Quan is have made it very clear that they don’t want to go back to the fairgrounds and that they wouldn’t. So my thought is that it’s here or goes back to Fox Hill. Again that the city is the city council’s this decision maker, but they really want your feedback on on the passive part and by moving into an option three does that address those most concerns?

Unknown Speaker 1:19:36
Because that just back up a second. Directly Dickens Farm Park as

Speaker 3 1:19:41
gear area, city manager he didn’t necessarily say the park. He believes that the park can be used for events. II preferred or recommended more of the Boston Boston street Access, and we’ve kind of been as, as, as staff that do organize events, we really feel that hard surface in July is not the best place to go. But understanding that the that we wouldn’t be in this is just me talking I, I believe that I couldn’t, in a straight face, go before city council and tell them that having 10,000 people in an open space property is is really how it was outlined to be. I don’t think that’s appropriate.

Unknown Speaker 1:20:43
David.

Speaker 4 1:20:46
Yeah, I think, again, maybe help you know, the board the group guide is going into I think it also is looking for the best samples looking for Japan, lipo, crabs definition of passive record, record recreation and low impact, I think, you know, Danielle did really good job of laying out those definitions we have the row, I think, for me is really looking at which ways options is the most consistent with those definitions as we go forward. So with respect and uphold those definitions of low impact and passive recreation, so I know we had some other groups or their definitions of passive recreation. And I think in a staff, we have some pretty clear guidelines or compensation easements through the body language to develop language, we have those definitions that add, the subjective part is, is it consistent with this use that Daniel talked about? Time, space and location. So that’s that, thank you, thank

Unknown Speaker 1:21:46
you, David patient admissions.

Speaker 5 1:22:00
So I’ll start by saying I love fireworks, I would love them to get closer to my house, which this would be, however, just looking at this, and knowing the impact of large public events like that, including, you know, all the tribes and you know, that extra, besides just people coming to watch the fireworks. And just based on my experience working in conservation, I don’t think these kind of events are consistent with what is described as low impact passive recreation in people, particularly the first two, I don’t know that area well enough to comment on standard option, and that may work could have to go to lunch. But I think anything that causes that kind of impact to what is the purpose, essentially, of prairie ecosystem, be in the middle of summer, when it’s going to be drought stressed, you know, riparian systems that you’re still trying to get to re establish. If you have a bunch of people wandering through there, there’s going to be a negative and it’s going to be stressed a lot life. And frankly, I’m really looking worried about the tiredness. I mean, grasslands, dry, that seems really scary to me, honestly. So just for me, this would not fit. I mean, in general, this kind of event, I don’t think that nature area was intended for this kind of event. Because it’s a nature area. Now, whether that third option works or not in May, I would probably look more at events to say whether it’s and I don’t know if you’ve talked to Boulder County, about whether they would agree that this

Unknown Speaker 1:24:02
Boulder County about the entire

Unknown Speaker 1:24:04
all the options

Speaker 5 1:24:12
if you really could keep all the impacts of a I mean, obviously you’d stop.

Unknown Speaker 1:24:18
You know, we wouldn’t say the last

Unknown Speaker 1:24:19
sentence.

Speaker 2 1:24:23
I mean, sorry, nature area, we would still want to fence out and do crowd control such that we are abiding by the hours of use of the nature area.

Speaker 4 1:24:37
I mean, we can’t get there, right yet to get in front of Boston. This offense, Martin. Otherwise you could ride your bike. I mean, are you saying or asking how you think I think you can’t get directly north of the bridge. Down to Boston. Well For,

Speaker 5 1:25:01
like writing, there’s like because I run it. Like there’s a path from that bridge down to the trail on the creek. Like, yeah, so you can go there, like, and I mean, at Boston, or at Harbor structure or arrange for the road

Unknown Speaker 1:25:26
maybe I’ve been on a social trail, that

Speaker 4 1:25:29
central trail. Along that line, there’s a big ditch, and there’s a fence. There’s a good five foot fence.

Speaker 1 1:25:40
I see two names. David. And first, then Sam was a mix. David, did you want to say something?

Speaker 4 1:25:47
I want to yield. Okay, just since I’ve spoken once already. So

Unknown Speaker 1:25:52
thank you, Sam. You’re always wanting to talk to you.

Speaker 6 1:25:55
Thank you. I think this question was just asked, but I couldn’t hear I’m sorry. In this space, in this option three scenario, you’re suggesting that there would be no access from Martin to the Greenway. Intentionally there’d be a fence there. But you could still access the Greenway from the west.

Speaker 5 1:26:23
just scraping everywhere to watch the fireworks. I mean, people are going to be this is what I would do. This is my this is my neck of the woods. This is what I like, oh, well, a good place to watch the fireworks is going to be from an inner tube. And if I thought of that, 30 seconds, somebody smarter than me thought like, there’s hundreds of people that are gonna do that? Well, I

Speaker 6 1:26:47
guess my suggestion is that it is a significant difference of use to have people, you know, walking through and sitting on the grass areas in Dickens farm that having food trucks, and you’re very looking at their. So it’s pretty different from option one, which I’d like. A second question is, in these maps, this kind of this red area of the North end was kind of I think the drudgery for the fireworks was closed off and how it’s drawn on here. Does that mean that you would not be allowed to walk down from Martin Street from the north part, you wouldn’t be able to walk to this part from basically whether it’s a recycling center? Is nobody close?

Speaker 7 1:27:22
Yes. Only during the fireworks. So only for that 20 minutes during the firework show. Okay,

Speaker 6 1:27:29
it’s just a short pleasure. That’s for that all in Boston there as well. Yes.

Unknown Speaker 1:27:32
Okay.

Speaker 6 1:27:34
Because I think one of my concerns is that I don’t think there’s enough parking and herb assumptions around the people you want to have come to this. And I think he will get there on a bike or by foot from the Northeast and the West is ideal. There’s just a short closure that I’m going to be explaining turn on that. That’s great. That’s all I have for now. Let’s

Unknown Speaker 1:27:53
exam. David, are you still you like, are you raising your hand?

Speaker 4 1:28:00
Maybe your day job and deliver job layoffs live and talk about the analyzer stuff. I mean, everything is it looks like sound. However, again, just kind of reminder, you know that recreation was the spot of having to try to put event in place with all these constraints. And as we work through all kinds of iterations and staff spent a lot of time out there, the mayor’s that timeline, Herald spend time on it, rec staff natural resources, staff, jump the 11th hour kind of came up with this proposal. And I’m just gonna say I think it does the most minimize it impacted for me like with Jeff to say, it’s going to have no impact on this nature area. I can’t say that, but I get I think they’re tasked with for new people. So not either moving through the park or having activities in the park, I think we’ve done a lot to try to move as much outside of it and give people good ways to get to get that without having to move through the nature area very much. So I get me jumping through the conversation is when we should people knew that this was a lot of staff working time to kind of find something that disrupt that balance, and we were all tasked with.

Unknown Speaker 1:29:08
Thank you. Thank you, David page.

Speaker 5 1:29:11
So I guess part of what I’m worried about is that this is setting a precedent to do this here every year. And I mean, I would be really concerned with the idea that this is going to be perceived as a venue for big public events looking at this.

Speaker 7 1:29:31
The mayor did say that she doesn’t want this event this year to set a precedent that this is the 2024 events and that she would like something else to be hers.

Speaker 3 1:29:48
And and the city manager said that if this did happen every year, it would be the only event that there would not be any other events approved other than the Fourth of

Speaker 4 1:29:59
July. I wanted to just on SAP site and topic here, I get into that was discussed a lot page. And I think staff is really looking at one of the attempts to bring them in the future. But again, we can never speak for councils of registered future I like hybrid that put together through this process can be creative about providing new opportunities to go forward.

Speaker 1 1:30:27
So I have a question that I’d like to ask and kind of an obvious one that we think we kind of talked about, we haven’t really done the bottom of what is the Kiwanis Clubs concern with the Boulder County Fairgrounds? Do we know?

Speaker 3 1:30:44
Not for sure. The the challenge that has been indicated is that there’s no way to control the fire that where the fire officer Yeah, where they’re shot out. And by by doing it inside, so that red line is quite a ways away from where they’re actually shot off from again, and, again, it’s a fenced area owned by the city, and no one but authorized people could get into that, which is where the biggest risk is.

Speaker 4 1:31:22
You can start with the fire department. This is their view originally, several years ago, so we don’t fence an area over kind of caveats with fireworks. I mean, that’s what they indicated the fire area like surface area is not that huge of used to then companies will events around the states, right, just for me. I think we’re creating. It feels like we’re creating 80,000 on a profit, which put it where we want it over a Boulder County Fairgrounds put a fence around it, it costs us 50.

Speaker 3 1:32:03
But I don’t think the city wants that either. The traffic control is much greater as what they have indicated. None of the fairgrounds parking is available, because it’s an all in the fall off area. So there’s no way except by trail or by foot to get to Rogers grove.

Speaker 5 1:32:27
Sorry, they can’t set off the fireworks in the arena. Like the their arena is totally fenced. You can’t get in there. Like you set them off from the arena. fairgrounds.

Unknown Speaker 1:32:44
Yeah.

Unknown Speaker 1:32:48
And it’s dirt.

Speaker 8 1:32:51
Dry. No. And this is just me hearing it said Kiwanis has talked about how their horse shows going on that weekend. Yes, they have equalization. So that’s one thing I have heard. I don’t know that specifically though. Alright, page.

Speaker 5 1:33:08
I just wanted to go back. So you guys specifically asked whether or not this kind of activity conforms with our view of what is low impact passive recreation.

Unknown Speaker 1:33:20
That’s what Congress was asking.

Speaker 5 1:33:24
Okay, well, I answer is my answer. Again, like, can you mitigate like, is option three? mitigating that on a short term, but I think in general, this kind of activity? Really?

Speaker 4 1:33:43
Yeah. Just does the creation of the event though, create more people using the space like it feels like that’s, you’re creating more of the problem. Then Then if you just launched the fireworks from the fire service center, and didn’t close down Martin Street, other than during the fireworks sort of thing. People are still gonna go well, I think half of us already said it’s gonna go between Walgreens and whatever I can go into the park anyway to find the spot to just hang up in the park. holding an event near it is everyone’s going to disappear and try to find that to do it. Anyway.

Speaker 8 1:34:22
This is this has been our directive to come up with that’s been

Unknown Speaker 1:34:30
done a lot of celebration.

Unknown Speaker 1:34:31
This is the bridge

Unknown Speaker 1:34:34
that’s why bridges amazing.

Speaker 4 1:34:37
What did you just say it’s so we’re literally if you’re on the bridge, you can see the wastewater treatment plan right so and you have to put up a wall up. Me for someone who’s done a bike event has gone by this route like five times people keep the foundry they eat the fire station, and the heat like, like when we’re selling glassware. one location that has

Speaker 3 1:35:01
the visibility corridor that this has that if you go to Roosevelt Park, there’s all the trees around. So you lose some of that. Right? Go back to the fairgrounds, the golf course was used in the in the past, the trees are blocking some of that is what people have told us. So

Speaker 4 1:35:23
is the airport is ginormous space.

Unknown Speaker 1:35:29
That has not been suggested.

Unknown Speaker 1:35:31
And we do public events.

Speaker 1 1:35:35
So it just, I mean, action. And yeah, I’ll just I mean, I think

Speaker 5 1:35:42
it’d be good to discuss on the board. Like there’s sort of two questions. I think one is does this event meet the definition that we see of low impact passive recreation? And then I feel like there’s another question, which is, given that, is this an alternative that we can live with for one year?

Speaker 3 1:36:06
They didn’t really ask that they asked about. I don’t know that. They haven’t seen this either. Counsel asked.

Speaker 5 1:36:18
I just am thinking about, like, precedent is a big thing. Oh, we won’t do it. But we could have a whole new council could have a whole new mayor. But now let’s precedent. And then also, like, let’s say we wanted to have a 200 person stargazing event there at midnight, that would be shut down right away, like, and that’s so much more passive than this. I

Unknown Speaker 1:36:48
would shut that down. Okay. Well, good to know, because that’s what we’ve done some things. Okay, same type, okay. Yeah. Okay. Well, we did though.

Unknown Speaker 1:37:12
It was up about a party.

Speaker 1 1:37:17
So there’s a lot of different directions, we can go with this, right. I think that probably makes make sense to open up before does anyone has a motion they’d like to make? And we can we can we can do from there about which path you want to go down?

Speaker 5 1:37:34
Should we do the informal struggle about like, I think this has to do with? Like, does this fit the definition of use of use it? Like, what do you guys think if you’re really, you know, being honest, not like, do you want the event? Or do you not? Does this fit the definition of use for this area? So So, if you think it does, yeah. Thumbs up, if you think it doesn’t fit the knot that you’re saying you don’t want this? This thing? If you think that once you’re

Speaker 1 1:38:07
not about option three, just in general, just four do we think that this constitute is passive?

Unknown Speaker 1:38:16
Use? Yes.

Speaker 1 1:38:18
I think that’s a fair. That’s a fair point shuffle and foremost in the meeting room this evening. I see tons of sand where are you at?

Unknown Speaker 1:38:28
I don’t believe it fits the definition of acid use.

Unknown Speaker 1:38:34
Okay, that was Miss Scotland as

Speaker 4 1:38:37
a Jeff, would you ever like a cruise? Or what would be approved at the U opp in this area? For anybody else’s?

Speaker 3 1:38:50
No, because it was traditionally are based on the design of it was not intended to be?

Speaker 4 1:39:01
Right. Okay, so no, just just the fact that it is by definition non event space is so weird concept for me to try to wrestle around it, by definition is event space, but yet we’re trying to pick a random event space, I

Unknown Speaker 1:39:18
saw a page firsthand.

Speaker 2 1:39:22
And I just wanted to respond to that. When when a park or a nature area is planned. And then there’s a master plan. There’s a whole public process around how you know what, what that space is, can be used for. And in this case, it was it’s a nature area, so it’s not a park. It wasn’t designed an amphitheater in there and there’s a conservation easement over it. So those are the things that are kind of guiding sort of

Unknown Speaker 1:39:53
Jim’s maybe across add to what I’m saying,

Speaker 8 1:39:56
yeah, the master plan for this niche area does How Furniture Fair Use for small to medium sized events that focus more on the nature aspects of this nature area.

Speaker 7 1:40:09
So educational property, that kind of thing. So I’ve been informed that there is going to be a public places, events application for a event for teaching the community about the watershed. So the education stations within the church area with the rest of a charter people overlay to parents.

Unknown Speaker 1:40:38
My pitch,

Speaker 5 1:40:41
I would like to move that we respond to city council that after discussion, do not believe in an event and the size and nature conforms with the definition of interest that recreation for a conservation area.

Unknown Speaker 1:41:00
Point of order.

Speaker 3 1:41:03
So my only thing is a road isn’t part of the park. We’re staying away from understanding

Speaker 5 1:41:13
the motion is not about that, but that we’re not talking about whether we like here or not. Yeah, the question that we were asked was, does this kind of event conform with that definition? Or

Speaker 1 1:41:26
taking part against part is no. Right? Is there a seconder? For that motion that we offer again? Second? Second? Is Aaron. Okay. All in favor of that motion?

Unknown Speaker 1:41:39
Sorry, could you Could you restate it for me?

Unknown Speaker 1:41:41
Yes. Paige, can you?

Speaker 5 1:41:49
She’s really good word. I move to that we respond to city council that after discussion, we do not feel that an event of this size and characteristics conforms with the definition of low impacted concert recreation or Conservation Nature area.

Speaker 6 1:42:12
Okay, thanks for just keeping it narrow. It’s a question they asked us basically, yes. Okay. Thanks.

Speaker 1 1:42:18
Thank you. And then we had Aaron seconded. And then Okay, so all in favor of that motion? Carries hands. Nobody oppose the motion passes. Okay. Do we now just could you still have before we move the next agenda? Do we want to make a motion? We want to discuss New York region about option three. Anyone want to raise that? Acknowledging that?

Speaker 6 1:42:45
Comment on that? I think it’d be good. It sounds like people are generally somewhat open to the idea of option three. I personally think there’s a lot of potential there. And we’d like the chance to workshop that further to try to encourage access and use of impervious surfaces receding, and all kinds of things that can be done with some good ideas. That’s I guess my question would be, is it worth making a motion in support of something like that, that we do think could be compatible with the nature area? And then is there a chance to bring that back next month and talk further about that it was never discussed are moving like next week and getting started? We’re going back to campus on

Unknown Speaker 1:43:23
the 26th.

Unknown Speaker 1:43:27
I guess I mean, we have to give it a

Speaker 3 1:43:28
challenges, we have to have time to plan this event. July is just around the corner, right,

Speaker 5 1:43:35
that we have to have time to provide feedback. I mean, if we can’t provide feedback and and say, well, we would love to help you and provide some alternatives to it.

Speaker 1 1:43:48
So So given that we don’t have one had the opportunity to discuss it in future months, and was Would you still? Do you still want to proceed with making a motion or?

Speaker 6 1:44:03
Full summarize that to counsel? When we discuss it? I don’t think we need to make a motion that is understanding my perspective. But it does seem like we can thread the needle on having an event here. There’s lots you can do to encourage, I guess, to discourage uses of the Greenway, that area and Dickens that are not desired. While encouraging attendance. I’d like to think that we can host an event like this in the city in all the spaces that we have. There’s more to talk about with, I guess the bare ground, lots of questions. But if this is the answer that you need to move forward, I think we should try to try for it and see it and see if we can get it

Speaker 8 1:44:41
done. That. So related to this site, and this just I mean, just came up the discussion with Parks folks, it’s been about some fencing out there. We hadn’t really discussed it specifically Jim, do you want to talk about what we still get this event went off in this way. And Martin, what we still might look at fencing off as within that area within the nature. Yeah,

Speaker 7 1:45:11
I think you can see the Greenway soft Creek. Yeah, sure

Speaker 5 1:45:24
have to be so extensive? Can it not just be? Does it have to be good checks for music and final games,

Speaker 3 1:45:35
we have been charged to do that part of the event. And I believe that a part of the goal will be to provide other entertainment opportunities where it might lessen someone do. Yes. That will work or not.

Speaker 5 1:46:05
That makes sense. I mean, that that makes more sense to me than other people are gonna, I mean, people just want to set off fireworks. And like, seriously, they’re, they’re cool and fun to set off. They just want to like set off fireworks, it’d be kind of nice if people actually just got a spot to go, like set off their own fountain and Roman candle thing. It’d be really nice if you could just offer that spot. Right? Because like, it’d be cool, you know, every 12 year old boy, who is 72 year old boy still wants to do that.

Speaker 8 1:46:44
Yeah, so our show can hear that third option is on large street here. So we will be expecting people with their parking here to probably use the Greenway trail coming through here to mark street here. So looking at kind of the most likely areas that people will start infiltrating into Dickens farm with the fencing off this area,

Unknown Speaker 1:47:06
people out there.

Speaker 8 1:47:09
I would I would ask to then David is if there is more concern about people going through the nature area after hours to watch the fireworks? Is there a possibility to get Rangers or PE to help close off the trail and three ways to drag people out in nature? If that’s an option or not?

Speaker 4 1:47:37
I can’t speak for PD. But I know Harold must make his work so I’m sure he can direct after the ranges have already have a plan for the evening to be there and to assist as needed. So I think Jim, if you can look at the areas and walk people out of remembering that the Greenway trails themselves are both playing while I was we’re movement groups of people trying to get from point A to point B Greenway trails are grassy areas where you have concerns with the wildlife so like that, so I think working with your group, and Rangers, we can definitely try your best to do that.

Speaker 7 1:48:15
Yeah, I think was Ranger health and some strategic firms who feel well with it pretty well, people are training nature. Not to say that’s not gonna happen. But compare the three options that have been discussed because it has the least impact. Like

Speaker 5 1:48:32
the west side of the major area to like, see, you go less of that. And now that it’s known. No, I’m sorry. i Sorry, I was otherwise going that way. Um, you see that area right there rocky area, right, that whole thing that’s gonna be other viewing area? No, I’m talking about this area I’m talking about. I can stand like, so pass the cottonwood trees. This is going to be chock full of people. And they’re going to come from the dispensary over there and they’re going to like the dispensary and I always forget the name of that put in take out the bits here. You’re gonna be here, this this right here. It is now moving down to nothing and it won’t grow up that much this this year. That’s just gonna be a big viewing area of people unless this is close cut off. That’s wild turkey habitat. And Clover habitat. So I don’t know.

Speaker 1 1:49:37
Thank you. Thank you very sorry. I just want to ask for time. Does anyone want to make a motion on the options outline?

Unknown Speaker 1:49:50
Okay, I just feel that we should.

Speaker 3 1:49:53
Yeah, I think it would be good to have some type of end if you say the fourth option. The fourth option might be don’t do it here. That’s exactly where

Speaker 1 1:50:03
I was going. So So if not, I was wondering, I like the motion that we recommend to city council. Neither of that we don’t use the digging farms, or Martin Street area at all for this event. Do I have a second?

Unknown Speaker 1:50:26
Second, okay.

Speaker 1 1:50:29
All right. All in favor of discussion. open discussion. Okay. Okay, there.

Unknown Speaker 1:50:37
Sorry. Can you repeat that?

Speaker 1 1:50:38
I made a motion Sam to recommend that to city council that we do not use the diggings farm area or Martin Street areas at all for this event.

Unknown Speaker 1:50:51
And there was a second airing did second

Speaker 1 1:50:53
after a free presentation. But yeah, there’s still discussion you

Unknown Speaker 1:51:02
don’t want to be Fourth of July Scrooge.

Speaker 1 1:51:07
And this is also not there. This is your recommendation. City council. City council. Yeah.

Speaker 5 1:51:12
I just don’t see what’s gonna change next year. I don’t I don’t see how like, why we’re doing something. We’re gonna be like, Oh, we’re just gonna do it for this year. Cuz something’s gonna change. We’re gonna have some new area someplace in our city that has this great fireworks venue?

Unknown Speaker 1:51:30
Aye. Aye. I think that if a woman’s here, we’ll be back. Oh, it’s

Unknown Speaker 1:51:34
gonna it’s gonna be that forever.

Unknown Speaker 1:51:38
Any other?

Speaker 5 1:51:40
I mean, I’m just wondering. I mean, if we were if we were one year from opening up the sugar mill. That’d be different.

Speaker 1 1:51:58
But we’re not starting a discussion. Sam, did you want to open the session? For this motion is on the floor? No, good. Okay. All right. So all in favor of the motion recommendation Council not to use a secondary farm order barn to at all for this event? Savings. Got 123. All those oppose. You

Speaker 4 1:52:37
saying I just don’t think I know. Yeah, I think it’s a traffic either way.

Unknown Speaker 1:52:46
Like split? I don’t know if that actually is harmful.

Speaker 1 1:52:50
That’s okay. That’s okay. We don’t have a majority.

Speaker 5 1:52:55
Majority. We don’t. I mean, but you guys know how reserved we are about all of it. I guess that’s an important input for you guys to get you started not gendering it for you folks to know is how reserved we are about this idea.

Unknown Speaker 1:53:10
But the motion does not pass. David,

Speaker 4 1:53:17
I’m joined with over here and we’ll get back to Sam’s original question about if they wanted a staff. If we wanted you guys to vote by her just say yes, we did. During these motions, not pass, I do these workers out pay back how important it was for this group not to have impacts that so as well, as I was kind of hoping for you do when I was trying to get back to Sam’s question. If there’s a way to get through that Ito that comes with a very clear that the least money impacted and carries with this group was trying to get to that was, again prior to stuff that has happened. And I just want to make sure I try to get back to Sam’s question. Yeah. Do you think having input from this group is important? And I think whatever it is, I think we can share that with consequences.

Speaker 5 1:54:08
Yeah, I mean, that’s what I was trying to get to. And I couldn’t think of a way of just saying, you know, if they could I just don’t think they can have this kind of event without an accident. They could have just the fireworks and you know, really protect the nature area. Maybe that is a workable option that yeah, something of this scale is just starting again.

Speaker 1 1:54:33
So we aren’t we are a 30. So this was a great conversation. I’m glad we were able to get through. But I think we need to move on. If did not move into an adjournment but we do have one more new business topic on the agenda, which was discussing the board retreats. And of course we’re all tired and in probably a gray day by this point. But I know this has been moving around Last month, and just once again, so he could just continue to compete down the road without any type of discussion on this and maybe opening up just a little bit. So into the board retreat, there’s a couple of decisions we need to make for this starting with, you know, would this replace the board retreat? Replace a standing meeting or be an additional meeting? will be one part? And the second part would be, what would you like to dive into? And so maybe we’ll use us tonight tonight, just discuss options, arrange them just a little bit, and we’ll come up, we’ll just cap this within five or 10 minutes, because we’re already late as it is, then we can come back and make a decision later on, if you’re not able to come to it designated everybody who just open the discussion for, you know, first of all, with this, we should have this border trigger place, and it is safe to say in a meeting or be its own standalone discussion with the gate prior year or two. And I should say, what would be some ideas that you’d like to consider for that board retreat? Anybody have any thoughts on this?

Speaker 5 1:56:06
So last year of distance reference, we did it on a Saturday morning, right? I think it’s kind of hard to replace on meeting just, yep. You really have Yeah, kind of gets tired. And

Speaker 1 1:56:28
so if we were to do one, we feel roughly that it would be its own standalone, similar to how we did last year.

Speaker 5 1:56:36
If possible, I’d love to like be or could be even Callahan house or I don’t know some way to like create the meetup and meeting do something. Maybe at Union.

Speaker 4 1:56:59
Scott, oh, yeah, I just attach a field trip with retreat for us to separate things. But I’d love to put things in more like human contents, it’s good to see things. Sometimes the scale is a little off when we’re looking at.

Speaker 1 1:57:21
So so if I’m playing if I don’t hear that correctly, we’re saying that free food is nice, but actually, we’re going to do anything we need to do grips. Hiltermann deallocation?

Speaker 4 1:57:32
Well, I think earlier, we had said, you know, being able to visit projects that have completed or something like that would be or projects that are coming up next year or good to keep in mind. It could be a hybrid.

Speaker 1 1:57:51
Thank you. Any other thoughts on that? So in terms of topics, then choose words word retreating, diving into any thoughts and agree on on what we want to discuss.

Speaker 4 1:58:06
I would throw out. Yeah, besides, the projects are coming up on it. I think the CIP process is always something that’s interesting to do, even though it’s gonna be off cycle for another few months, which is to gear up some future crab to be having the timing and an education to know what to do about the CIP and getting involved in.

Speaker 1 1:58:34
Okay. Any other thoughts on topics? Yeah,

Speaker 5 1:58:42
I would like us to take a deep dive in inclusion right but we’re just keeps this can keep getting kicked down the road as it it’s it’s frustrating that it just keeps down the road. You have to set aside things time to do to do things if you really want to say oh, we want to be inclusive. We don’t know why. We have certain people, certain folks or certain identities that don’t feel welcome in our spaces, or don’t feel like they can use I’m sorry, I’m talking loud not because I’m being passionate because I want to like be loud here. But if we want to include we want to be truly inclusive, we need to set aside time for it. We set aside a ton of time to hear about like what’s going on at what Park and all that stuff that we haven’t set aside time for that. So I did send out an email that was I didn’t realize that it was illegal set out thanks. Send out sorry, but there there is like there is Eco inclusive is excellent. And one of the workshops is called collaborative community engagement, which be would be a really excellent use of our time. I haven’t had I’ve had several partners trainings before. But that would be an excellent use of our time is learning how we can engage folks that don’t look or have identities like us here or,

Unknown Speaker 2:00:28
and I would love to hear from you for sure.

Speaker 1 2:00:32
So I think we have CIP deep dive up prosecute dive DNI deep dive, I would add one, which would be going into a master plan or being a master plan and going really into that document and just tearing it apart and really dissecting it would be something that would be something we haven’t done as a group before. And that would be something that I would be interested in as well. So we have three topics. They are just one more quick rant against the law. Sam. Is there any others on that list of chat there? Okay, so, Jeff, is it okay, what I think we should do is send out a poll to the group offline for potential Saturday or Sundays, dates for for this for the board retreat, you’re gonna discuss with us a lot on dates of when you can do it. And so you can join, and then of those three topics we can discuss, perhaps in next month’s meeting, which of those would one go?

Speaker 3 2:01:34
In? I actually heard for a field trip being the other. Oh, yeah, you’re right. Yeah. Or

Speaker 5 2:01:49
gonna talk about how, what are we gonna do about falling apart recreations? But we could. I mean, I think any of those we could combine. You can do all this stuff outdoors. You can do all this stuff and a pavilion. Yeah. Okay.

Speaker 3 2:02:10
Do you want us to include in the poll priorities about what the four or five items to date and topic

Speaker 1 2:02:19
will be? Okay. weigh in on that? Yeah, I think it would be fantastic. Okay. All right. Let’s keep moving because we’re already over time here.

Unknown Speaker 2:02:31
Anyone have any

Speaker 1 2:02:34
meat? I don’t think we actually do doing the violence doesn’t say no,

Speaker 3 2:02:37
it’s kind of an informal thing that the board has always done. That’s what

Speaker 1 2:02:41
I’ve noticed. We’ve always been in the bylaws and chicken last month, two or three. Okay, we can just anyone want a motion to extend the meeting? I know. We’re already eight minutes over. We’re probably going to close out. I don’t want to speak too soon. I’ll make a motion. Okay. Okay, thank you, sir. 15 minutes on favorite. Sam will do that as a no.

Unknown Speaker 2:03:13
Yeah, it’s not the bylaws. Okay. All right. Does anyone have this item to the packet? Do you want to raise? A few minutes?

Unknown Speaker 2:03:23
I haven’t. But I can just I am gonna go through I kind of have a long list. So I’ll just

Speaker 4 2:03:31
so yes. So the question feeds back to your your comment about Thomson, Boston and Newbridge and Gallo both were over well, budget when Vince came back? Well, we didn’t start it was

Speaker 2 2:03:47
over budget, but the you know, we’re reward, we’re going to have to wait 90 days to send it out to bid again. So what we’re doing in you have to alter the scope so that it’s not unfair for fitters that have already done it. So that is going to go up in April. And there are some strategies that will allow us to, we’re going to do some alternates within that bid, so we can then control like, the what

Unknown Speaker 2:04:15
is included? Okay.

Speaker 4 2:04:18
That’s going to get to that one answer then. So are we then concerned with like in putting out other projects, see Thompson park or whatever,

Speaker 2 2:04:28
because it started in 2018. And so there’s just a lot of things that have occurred with that project.

Speaker 7 2:04:34
With the other projects that we’re doing, which include the clover, the fox and the dry creek, some of those are on schedule, two of which one is under construction and was getting ready to start construction in boxes following.

Speaker 2 2:04:47
And so looking ahead, Russell looking at alternative delivery methods for some of our other projects like the Roosevelt Park, doing looking at a design build delivery model, so then we can control that food I kept it also due to the nature of the project. So that kind of helps with that some of those overages where they can help us put together establish what the specific scope might be and then work within our budget that we’ve established. So we’re looking at all these different options

Unknown Speaker 2:05:22
Thank you.

Speaker 5 2:05:23
I have a quick one. The public meeting for the for

Speaker 2 2:05:30
the public meeting, there were six people. And there was what total staff It was a cold night. You know, the Moscow lighting represented with a mouse so he can show what the light eating can kind of expect to give examples of different types of lights, or where the systems are installed. And it had some questions about the programming and the hours.

Unknown Speaker 2:06:00
There wasn’t a whole lot that came out of it. As far as the sledding hill, no one. There really came to touch. We did have Josh Sherman, who does oversee that project there to answer your questions.

Unknown Speaker 2:06:12
I saw the notifications in, in my son’s outside, like that newsletter. Middle School. Yeah. That’s where we had the meeting. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, just recently, they had an updates parent newsletter, about what’s happening in the contract and the contract. That’s good, which I thought was, yeah,

Speaker 2 2:06:36
and the contractor their trailers for both Windows and drag feet are in the dirt, the parking lot, that the park. So there’s a bigger presence here

Speaker 5 2:06:43
because they’re seeing capitalism, fencing and activity, so and it was about snow here, so nobody’s super attached.

Unknown Speaker 2:06:49
Well, I think sledging might be over for years.

Unknown Speaker 2:06:53
That’s yeah. But you want to just use it well.

Unknown Speaker 2:07:03
All right. Any other items in the packet? Last call, okay. I’m from staff. Nothing. Kensington.

Speaker 7 2:07:15
Restroom repair will be completed next Thursday, the 21st. It will open with the other parts from RE energized

Speaker 5 2:07:23
for this is just in time for you to go to bathroom, waiting. The whole time?

Speaker 1 2:07:32
Are there any items from the board to raise? visits? Scott, I have I

Speaker 4 2:07:38
want for David, about the transportation mobility plan. There really wasn’t anything that really touched back on greenways. And tying in greenways, it was really kind of concerning that the mobility plan is really engineering focused on the streets, despite the fact that the cover image is of the Greenway, that holder. And I thought the intent was to include the greenways as part of our transportation, infrastructure at some point, but you’re going as a closed in terms of public to be heard parts. There really wasn’t a lot to be said. National Marketing do then agree with you. You know, I’ve stood up there just because we were even invited to that meeting. So I showed up because I fear that will be piece one talk about and then I do think having Jodie Marsh is you know, Phil Greenwald’s? You know, God man and my Angelica Dima, things we’re really looking at Stephanie do the same thing is you’re looking at our greenways really as more than just recreation, but a transportation alternative transportation way to get people’s spaces. So I think we’re gonna continue to push that. But honestly, I agree with you. I think it’s something that we will continue to keep pushing, because it is nice. Okay. Thank you. It’s reinforcing. I mean, the consultant basically said, That’s not in their scope to talk about and I was like, that’s, I think Britain’s the project, beginning. So just because we’re still siloed. Right? Using talking about greenways. And where the sidewalk touches the Greenway, we might as well just be have pull up a 10 year old plan that we’ve already have. And just go with that, because has some failure, but other plans is that we didn’t tie the two systems together. And again, just say I think this Brian made that connection, Danielle and her team working closer with her Greenwald to defeat her group of closer engineering. I think we’re trying to make sure the silos are at least connecting and talking. Okay.

Speaker 1 2:09:56
All right, any other items from the board? okay with that, I’ll entertain a motion to adjourn. Second, second, second. Okay, all those in favor

Transcribed by https://otter.ai