Folks, as soon as we get a green light here, we'll start the meeting. Well, good evening everybody and welcome to the Adina City Council meeting. It is Tuesday, August 18th, 2026, 7:02 p.m. Uh, as Director Benerrod indicated, we are doing these meetings in a hybrid fashion. people are watching remotely have been during uh the pandemic and and ever since the pandemic, we continue to conduct these business these meetings in this uh in this form uh which I think is important for our for our residents to be able to either watch remotely or uh be in in city hall itself uh in council chambers uh to share their views on things. We don't have any uh public hearings this evening. There's one uh chance for community comment and uh typically we would cover things that uh you know we you would not be able to talk about things that are are on the agenda or scheduled for a future public hearing. There's uh one person here I think that's going to speak tonight on on a matter that is indirectly related to um something that's on the agenda. I'm going to let her speak. So um having provided that information and there's the call-in information if you want to call in if you're watching from home or some other location. I'm going to call the meeting to order and ask our clerk Sharon Allison to call the role. >> Council member Agnes absent. Council member Jackson >> here. Council member Pierce >> here. >> Council member Risser >> here. >> Mayor Hublin >> here. Next is the pledge of allegiance. >> Algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thanks everyone. Um, we've got a form of meeting agenda that's been published for the benefit of the council and staff and the and the general public. Is there any anyone on the council or from a staff standpoint that wishes to modify the agenda in any form or fashion? Is there a motion to approve the meeting agenda as published? >> So moved. >> Member Jackson moves. Member Pierce seconds the adoption of the meeting agenda as published. Any further discussion? Roll call, please. Council member >> I. >> Council member Jackson >> I. >> Mayor Hublin >> I. >> Council member Pierce >> I. All right. We have a meeting agenda and we have something to work from here this evening. Uh and the next thing on that agenda is community comment. And if there's anyone in the audience that wishes to address the council on a matter of concern to them, please come forward. >> Good evening. >> Good evening. My name is Abby Reynolds. Uh good evening, uh Mayor Hopland and members of the city council. Thank you for allowing me to speak tonight about an issue that has become increasingly concerning for my family and our neighborhood at Arnison Acres Park. I live next to the park and we love Arnes & Garden and a real asset to our community. That is exactly why I am asking the city to protect it as a public park and not allow it to become an unregulated venue for large private commercial style events. Throughout this summer, we have repeatedly seen large gatherings and elaborate luxury picnic setups occupying substantial portions of the garden. These events can involve dozens of people, large tables, backdrops, balloons, decorations, and amplified music. On August 8th, for example, there were multiple large gatherings beginning around 4:00 p.m. One had more than 50 people and the largest continued until about 10:00 p.m. with the tearown continuing and continuing until approximately 11:00 p.m. Bright lights and headlights were shining directly into my home. [snorts] But the most serious issue for my family is the noise. These gatherings have repeatedly included loudspeakers playing music, sometimes with explicit language as well as shouting and screaming. The sounds direct travels directly into our home and into my young children's bedrooms. This is not an occasional inconvenience. We have made multiple calls to the non-emergency line, including July 29th, July 30th, August 3rd, and August 6th. We have also tried speaking directly and politely with the people holding these events, explaining that the noise is going directly into our children's bedrooms. On August 14th, we again had to call because of loud screaming and a loud speaker playing music. It was after dark and the park was otherwise quiet. Sudden loud screaming coming from a darkened garden frightened my children and woke them from sleep, a common occurrence this summer. I have also spoken with the parks director and I want to be very clear that I wholeheartedly support his efforts to address and control the situation. I appreciate his willingness to work with the problem and I am asking the city to support those efforts with meaningful and consistent enforcement. There's also the important issue of public access. Arnison acres belongs to all Edina residents. Residents should be able to walk into the garden, enjoy the flowers, take a peaceful stroll, or simply sit and appreciate its beauty. When large private gatherings and elaborate settings, >> I need to have you wrap up your remarks. I'll let you drift over a little bit so you can wrap them [snorts] up. >> Um, our family should not have to choose between allowing late night park noise or calling the police because a private gathering has effectively turned our neighborhood park into an event venue. We love our Artisan Anchors and thank you for listening and I hope you take this seriously. >> Thank you, M. Reynolds. Thanks for being here. >> Um, anyone else? Yes, sir. Come on up. And it's better to use the side podiums unless you have unless you have something from an overhead standpoint you wanted to show the council. >> No, this is fine. >> Go ahead. >> Uh, yeah. My name is Derek. I'm a concerned citizen. Uh, I'd like to talk about the, uh, city's contract with Flock Safety for um, automated license plate readers. Uh from what I understand, uh I know the city remains committed to using Flock, uh for automated license plate readers and ALPRs in general. Um I think this is a decision that the public should get to be involved in as this technology, you know, the way that it works is that it tracks every single person regardless of whether or not you've committed a crime. I think it's something that tracks all citizens, should have the consent of all citizens, or at least be brought to a vote. I don't think um I certainly know a lot of people who aren't happy with the idea that these things just showed up overnight with uh no one and no one gave any approval for this. Um and I just um I think that there should be some sort of uh you know public forum held about this. Uh I personally don't think the benefits of this technology outweigh the risks and I don't think that the benefits outweigh the significant price tag either. Um and I guess those are all the comments that I have for tonight. >> All right, Mr. Kosh, have you seen the um material that the RPD has released on this topic, which is something that others have expressed concern about? >> Uh yeah. >> You seen the brochure and and the >> Oh, there's a brochure. I've uh Yeah, I would love to take a look at the brochure. >> Okay. Um if you would share with the communications director your email address, we'll get you the material that we've released. We prepared the release to the public because we know there are concerns about benefit versus uh invasion of personal privacy. >> Awesome. Well, okay. Well, thank you very much. >> Thanks for Thanks, Mr. Car. >> Mr. Mayor, um in the um minutes of the meeting or somehow can we make that information um in response available to everybody in the public who'd like to see that? Is there a way of >> I mean, it's online, Ryan, or it's about to be online. It'll >> if it's not online, it will be coming on soon. I know Lauren was working on the final draft. So, >> okay. And that >> will be on the police department website under LPR. >> Wonderful. Thank you. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Thanks for that suggestion. Thank you. >> Thank you for listening. >> Anyone else wish to address the council on a matter of concern to them? Hi David Frankle. Uh obviously I didn't hear any discussions about Bremer Arena but for better or worse I spent a large part of my life in that facility. Uh that building the west rink is 60 years old. I heard in the meeting earlier in the work group the life expectancy of roofs roughly 20 years. Well, it's at around 60. It's a steel roof and people of Braar Arena refer to what's under between the roof and the arena the attic basically as a zoo. That place is probably full of wild animals. But in any case, there needs to be a long-term plan for that facility because it's way past its useful life. If it's a cinder block building with a 60-y old roof, it could experience some catastrophic issue in the short or long term that would need immediate replacement and there's no real plan for it. The other thing is about 10 years ago, the city unilaterally took away all advertising, the dasherboard advertising from the youth hockey association as well as the concession stand hoping to make a smaller gap in the deficit for Bremer Arena. Neither one of those make a lot of money, but it upset and burned bridges for a lot of potential sponsors of that arena, including a large medical device company. They didn't realize, they weren't told that that money was being sent to the city and not to the youth hockey. The other thing is, you talk about budgeting for AI. If you use purchase any type of technology these days, it's going to have AI embedded in it. How are you going to determine what percent of that product is going against your $2 million supposed budget? For example, drone is a first responder that I talked about a couple meetings ago through company called Skyido that's loaded with AI. How do you determine how much of that's going against your budget? Just about any health care system you would purchase has AI in it. So setting a budget, I I don't know where that's going to come from. You just don't go out. If you want to go buy access to chat GPT for 20 bucks a month, you got lot to use there under two million. Software products already have this stuff embedded, the vast majority of them. The last thing is I heard nothing in the budget about dead tree removal. I'd make a guesstimate and I have a YouTube channel that has a lot of them on it. Edina issues in YouTube. I would guess there's at least 50 dead trees on public land in Edina and none of them are being removed. If you may remember maybe five, six years ago in Eden Prairie, a dead tree fell on a woman and killed her. That cost the city a few million dollars. Can't have that done. Happened in Edina. There's a lot of dead trees along public sidewalks and public trails, including Ardan, Pamela, and Weber Park. It's loaded with dead trees. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Frankle. Anyone else? >> Good evening. >> Please. >> Hello. My name is Helen Ferraro. Um I Dino resident for four years. Um, I have reviewed the city council's proposition for the policy that you wanted to have as far as um in response to what happened at Yansy Park. Um, is this an appropriate time to talk about that or do I is that public comment or can I do I have to wait until you actually bring it up? The >> Would you wanted to address the issue at Yansy Park? >> Yeah. Well, address the respon the city's response to that with the proposition as far how you were how you were going to >> um manage large gatherings. >> Oh, >> that Yeah. Is it okay to talk about it now? >> Yeah, we had somebody else speak about it, so I think it'd be okay. >> That's okay. >> Yeah. Go ahead. >> Um my concern is that the proposition or policy as it stands right now, as I understand it, um could allow for um racial profiling. There could be a lot of confusion as to how this is going to be administered. If you are requiring a permit for gatherings over I think it's 25 people. Um are the police going to require a permit be presented to them if they see a gathering that they think of people who are all related or who are coming together for the same purpose? Are people going to be required to bring a permit uh have that on hand in case the police want to question them about that? How is a police officer supposed to determine um if a group of 25 people who are in the pavilion or in the one of those covered park structures, how are they going to determine if those people are all together or if it just happens to be a collection of people that seems that they might be all together for the for the same purpose. So, um I I completely understand that something needs to be done in response to what happened. Um, I appreciate everyone's fear as far as gatherings of teens, um, and what that can, you know, the trouble that that can bring. I just urge caution in how, um, this permit requirement is going to be administered so that the police are equipped with the proper information as how to administer this and that people know if they are gathering that they need to bring a permit. Um, so those are my those are my concerns. Thank you. Yeah, thanks M Fero. And I think if you if you have a chance to stick around, you'll hear the presentation and hopefully there'll be some enlightenment there. >> Good evening, Mayor. >> Good. >> My name is Ralph Zickert. I want to thank manager Neil for his 2027 budget proposal. His magnumopus of unsound and unsustainable. The so-called 6% levy increase is once again not based on spending cuts, but optics. Optics that put the 2026 budget to shame. So, how does manager Neil propose to achieve a 6%? Easy. The proposed budget takes $7 million of prior year's tax surpluses from city coffers to do a one-time buy down of the levy. A buy down that includes $2 million to pay off debt on which the city pays 2 and a.5% interest. Council members, how many of your constituents would pay off their 20-year 3% home mortgage knowing they needed to turn around and borrow at today's 7%. A lot of talk is about sustainable budget. So, council, where will the next where will next year's $7 million windfall come from to help pay for the $60 million plus dollars of remaining deferred maintenance? or the tens of millions in future capital and equipment, the details of which still have not been provided to the council. Yet, you're looking to set a preliminary levy on September 15th. Finally, the question I have for the council is how can our city council call this job status quo? Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Zigger. Anyone else wish to address the council? Sure. Come on up. >> Evening. Yes. I think it's best to best to use the side one. >> Did you? >> No, I haven't filled this one out yet. All right. This is not even working. >> Good evening. >> Good evening. Uh my name is Marcal. Uh nice to meet you all. I'm a parent and a community member. Uh and I would like to address there's a whole lot of information that I still don't have in regard to some of the uh recommendations that is made towards the parks of Adina. Uh but I have a suggestion in my belief and my personal feelings that some of the comments that I have read or some of the recommendations that is already made uh to close the parks or even make the recommendations where someone makes the request to priorus the parks will make it much more difficult to youth and young people where it will provide more uh criminalized action against young people where uh they will utilize these parks regardless what the ordinance that is restricted uh that will come out of it. So even though it is very important that we focus on the safety as a community collectively uh in regard to what has been going on. I think it the restrictions that has been mentioned and recommended will create more problems and more uh biased towards young people where they will be criminalized. And I will encourage you to look into are we going to focus on a resolution that is going to be positive for the young people in our community and our community collectively? Or are we going to make an ordinance that will also backlash and be biased and will create more criminalized against young people who their lives has not even started yet. uh moving forward I will have more uh recommendations or resolutions of ideas as a community member but at this point I would like to mention that which is some of the things that I have read uh even though I wasn't present last meeting uh that I will uh uh request that you consider in your decisions whatever recommendations that you receive receive to be a one that actually creates a resolution that it's good for young people and the safety of the community and not just uh a restrictions that is made to criminalize young kids that their lives have not even started yet. >> Thank you, Mr. Muhammad. >> Thank you. I appreciate you for the opportunity. >> Thanks for being here. Anyone else? Let's check with anybody online. Nobody online. Um we had a good amount of time to be able to have folks come online. Okay. Uh our practice is to um go to our city manager and have him answer some of the uh concerns or address some of the concerns that were raised at the prior council meeting. So, let's let's do that now and and uh have Manager Neil address some of those things. >> Thank you, your honor. We had two questions at our previous meeting on August 5th, both having to uh to do with our water system. First question is, is the uh was the city impacted by recent cyber attacks on public utilities in the metro area? Our answer is no. In in response to the recent coordinated cyber attack targeting more than 30 Minnesota municipal water systems, the IT department and the utilities division both in our city have been closely monitoring the situation in coordination with the state and federal partners. After reviewing our environment, excuse me, after reviewing our environment, state staff found no indications that Adina systems were affected by this attack. Second question is, is the city's water system safe from cyber attacks? The security of the city's systems is monitored continuously by both internal and external staff. And our def our defenses are adapted as new threats emerge. Adina's water system is also designed so that core operations can continue safely even if remote systems need to be taken offline. Staff perform regular security audits, vulnerability assessments, and tabletop exercises to continually identify and address potential weaknesses. staff remain vigilant in protecting city infrastructure and we'll update the city council as appropriate. >> All right, thank you. Thanks for that update that prompt any inquiries or comments from council members. Um I did think of a couple of things I could address for Mr. Frankle tonight. In fact, I just did today a um mayor's minute on tree on trees uh dead trees in the city parks and dead tree removal and you may want to watch that. Um they're taking down trees I think that pose a risk, but the ones that uh are taken down aren't necessarily removed and I don't know if that was a concern or not because of various factors that are ecosystem related. So, folks in the parks uh may see in these natural environments that uh a tree is down and been taken down, but it won't necessarily be removed uh because it has some environmental benefit. Um and then we do have we've got our park director here and he can maybe address this quickly when he stands up to speak. We do have a long-term plan for bringing our ice arena. we're spending um >> we we do, but I I'd prefer to be able to answer that at our next meeting so we can give a full and factual answer to >> Yeah. My only point is that we've we've committed to spending a little over $40 million at Braarice Arena. >> Um okay, let's move on then to the um next portion of the agenda, which is the adoption of the consent agenda. And um member Russer wants to remove item 6.5 just for discussion purposes. Uh, and is there any other council member that wishes to remove an item from the consent agenda or a staff person? Okay. With the exception of item 6.5, is there a motion to approve the balance of the items on the consent agenda in a single motion? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Member Jackson moves member Pierce seconds the adoption of the items on the consent agenda in a single motion with the exception of item 6.5. Uh, any further discussion? All right. Roll call, please. >> Council member Pierce. I, >> Council Member Risser, >> I, >> Mayor Hublin, >> I, >> Council Member Jackson, >> I. >> All right, the items on the consent agenda with the exception of item 6.5 are approved. And now we'll turn to item 6.5, uh, which is a proposed construction cooperative agreement for a local trail connection to the Nimal Creek Regional Trail with Three Rivers Park District. And, uh, I think member Risser wanted to make a comment and maybe an inquiry as well. member, >> I am just so happy that this is actually going to happen and it's sort of a missing link. I think it's really important that people who are in the southeast quadrant of Edina, particularly with this new Henipin County Library, have multiple means of ac accessing that. And so this is a oddly shaped little strip of Edina land. and it will be turned into this pathway making it possible um for kids who go to Richfield schools and for Richfield kids to easily much more easily access the library. So I think it's a a really great thing and I just wanted to call that out. I don't think I have any questions about it but I'm very happy to see this move forward. >> Yeah, you know thanks for thanks for bringing that up. I think it is it's going to be a great little trail connection. Uh would you care to move the matter member? So move. >> All right. Second member moves item 6.5, which would be the approval of the cooperative agreement for construction of a trail connection to Niml Creek Regional Trail with Three Rivers Park District uh over on the city of Richfield boundary. We've got a motion by member, second by member Jackson. Any further discussions? Uh roll call, please. >> Mayor Hlin, >> I. >> Council member Pierce, >> I. >> Council member Jackson, >> I. >> Council member Risser, >> I. 6.5 is approved and we will be entering into that cooperative agreement. And now we're going to move on to the reports and recommendations portion of the agenda. And the first item there is a um uh resolution accepting donations. We have to have a super majority to do that. And is there a motion to adopt resolution 2026-46? >> So moved. >> Second. >> We had a motion second. Uh motion by member Jackson, second by member Pierce to adopt resolution 2026-46 which accepts donations on behalf of the city of Edina. Any further discussion? A roll call, please. >> Council member Pierce, >> I may >> I >> uh that resolution 2026-46 is approved. Uh there were a couple of uh nice donations in this reporting period uh for the park and wreck department. Paulie Norman and Richard Fox donated $3,200 for a bench donation. Thank you uh Paulie Norman, one of our great photographers and has taken many photos of the United City Council over the years and other wonderful photographs as well. Uh and then the communication department received um I think as an inkind donation from the MPX group. So thank you to those donors. Uh next we're going to move to the reports and recommendations or uh ports onward on the reports and recommendations portion of the agenda. And the second item here is 7.2 which is a proposed ordinance that would um involve some additional restrictions uh for park and publicly owned properties. Uh and um manager Neil, do you have anything or I just turn to director Veter? Well, we had some discussion on this topic at our August 5th uh council meeting. Uh we took some feedback from all council members individually and as and as a group. Uh council or excuse me, director um uh Veter was not able to be with us uh at that meeting, but he's here tonight. He's had a chance to consider that and also feedback from a couple other community institutions. And so we're here to make another presentation to you on on a revised ordinance. >> All right. Very good. Thank you, Director Veter. >> Thank you, Mayor Hublin, and members of the city council. This evening, we are asking you to grant a first reading for amendments to Adina City Code, specifically chapter 24 that works on regulation of parks. Um, what we are proposing for this evening is a uh modified version of what you saw on August 5th. We have gone back and reviewed uh that meeting, your feedback um specifically looking at how to better shape this, how to better uh regulate um what we had initially proposed on the 5th. Um we're trying to balance the needs and expected uses of our park system while also preserving people's right to assembly and their right to protected and first amendment speech as well. Um, so the version that we did propose to you, we have gone back and revised that. We did present that to the Edina Parks and Recreation Commission on the 10th. We were able to add that to their agenda. Had a discussion around the uses of parks, um, the existing permit structure that we've already had in place that we already manage and to gather their feedback and that feedback is listed in your packet. So, we are bringing that information to you this evening and it really works around um our permit structure that we already have in place regarding rentals of our buildings, rentals of our park shelters and rentals of our athletic fields. And the amendments that we are targeting for you this evening is specifically to um require a permit for any group over 25 that is only going to be using our buildings, our picnic shelters or athletic fields where originally what we had presented to you, we had presented you a very broad um overall use in the park system. This goes back to just those three key areas, our buildings, our shelters and our athletic fields. In addition to that, um it was briefly talked about at your last meeting, we do not have a mechanism within our ordinance our city charter that says if you do have a permit for one of those spaces that you actually have priority for it. So this ordinance also has that amendment that if you are a group that has a permit and you encounter a group that does not have a permit in the space that you rented, um that priority goes to those that are holding that permit. And if you uh do not vacate that space, you would be in violation of set ordinance. Um so that allows us to do two things. One is because we have widely and heavily used um use of our park system. I put in the staff report when we look at bookings for just our buildings and our shelters in 2025. Now, that includes our own use, which does um use the park system. We had over 2,400 reservations and bookings within our park system in 2025. Uh for 2026, we're already over 2,000. So, we did not have and that did uh that was one of our um struggle areas in the past where we did have um potentially competing interests um within those systems. And especially when we look at how we rent those buildings. When you rent a building or a picnic shelter, we kind of have an AM rental, we have a PM rental or an all day. Now, if we go to one of those sites and we prep that site, we clean that site. We get that ready for a one:00 rental and a group comes in at noon and has their birthday party and leaves um a lot of their frosting. Um now we have an issue because the group coming in um did pay for that site and did expect um a clean and prepared location. So that is one thing where um granting the permit priority to that person um does hold. Now again that doesn't mean our parks can't be used without a permit. Um it just means that in that area um if you're a group of 20 25 or more we're asking you to pull one of those permits. And if you are using one of those areas that the group with a permit does have priority. Um in addition we are looking to create a separate carveout for um what we are experiencing at Arnison Acres Park and that is slightly different. As was mentioned earlier this evening during community comment the use of Arnison Acres has changed um drastically. It has really changed the character of that site um largely due to its um legacy and long-term planning of the beautifification of that park. But Arnison Acres is being used um basically right now for a commercial use and it kind of feels like the social media boom. It's a little bit of the gig economy where um people are using that for um commercial uses of organized picnics and events. um they do play loud music. Um they are coming when they know we don't have a reservation or dominating that space and again charging for that use and some of these setups are extremely elaborate. They bring in rugs and pillows and tables and catering and sound systems and um we have um in the past tried to really go at the root cause of that is to try to find them. Traditionally they're on social media Instagram or Tik Tok offerings. try to find that at the source. Um, a lot of them are paid through Venmo, so there's not a brickandmortar location that we can go to and try to discuss this with. Um, just today, one of our staff members found 12 additional social media sites offering these popup picnics um that we'll try to um contact and address. But again, it's it's kind of a a new and posh picnic phenomenon. So, um, when we call, um, that area of Arnison Acres Park the Tranquility Garden, um, I don't believe right now the use of that is living up to its reputation. So, um, specifically for Arnison Acres, we're trying to limit that area from the parking lot, the gazebo, and the garden. Just those areas of the park to no more than 10 or more. No picnics or events, no amplified or performed music or sound, and no commercial use for this. about um people profiting off of our park. That would be specific to that area. Um areas um in the next section really lay out um our process for permits. 7-day advanced notice that we can add conditions to those. Um traditionally, we are not adding conditions to our permits only if they deviate outside of the norm. Um, for those of you that are not familiar, the city has an overall special event permit license for things that occur like the art fair or the Fourth of July parade, the homecoming parade. Um, this would allow us to add some conditions for things that are outside of the norm within our additional park system. We do get very unique requests. It may be um an internal run or a walk that kind of bridges outside of a graduation party, a picnic, renting of an athletic field. So to allow to add some of those conditions, also the process for denying one and appealing um if that position is denied. And the last piece is kind of a little bit of a break glass and that either myself or law enforcement could declare an area of a park closed if needed to be. And really what that is is a little bit of a tool to allow us to evaluate the use and say, "Hey, we need to um um um prevent either further damage to the park, escalation of that, and really um evaluate each case on a case-byase basis. So, um not just the reason we were called to a location, but really to um arrive upon, evaluate and understand the goings on of that site. Um from a recreational immunity standpoint, you know, some of these activities are a little bit concerning. We always look at an inviteee, a trespassy, a lency um within our park system. So, we do get large groups. Um you know, there is a concern about that pre-plannedness, right? Are they overtaking a site? Are they crowding out a group that already had a permit? Um or are we using a park for maybe not its intended consequence or um um ability and there are unintended consequences to that. So um really looking that you know we think about our building rentals you know those are all um listed on our website. We've been doing rentals of those locations all the time. So Ardan Arnison, Cornelia Countryside, Fred Richards, Pamela Todd, Walnut and Weber, right? We [snorts] are currently renting all of those locations. We think about those picnic shelters. It's Chow and Fred Richards, Rosland, Sherwood, Utley, and Wooddale. Um, we're So, those are those sites that we're doing over 2,000 rentals or 2,000 bookings a year on our athletic fields. I think you've probably all heard from your athletic associations that are in town. We have 14 of them um that are using those outside athletic fields, right? Heavily scheduled and we always try to get people to come on. We do do some private rentals as well, try to open that up. We have good partnerships with other um um partners within the community, you know, where we're using Courtney Lewis, Pamela, Van Bulenberg, Braar Turf, Countryside, Weber, Wooddale, Yansy, right? We're using all of those heavily for those athletic associations. And we just want to ensure that we do kind of have an orderly process for that and really know when groups are coming and going so we can um either in assist in planning for that or understand what we need to do the next day to go back and clean that site. >> [snorts] >> Um I appreciated council Risser's um you know view last time on some of the signage that is out in our parks. That was one of the um heavy recommendations from the parks commission is identifying these rentable areas and how people could go about that. So really communicating well on that um um to kind of rebrand in some of those areas to ensure there's kind of that notice of it. Um and again we um are asking you for that first reading this evening. Uh second reading would then be on September 1st. As um your request last time, there is a better Together Edina page currently open to um get comments on the text that is on site and that is open until August 30th, so the day before your meeting. Um there has been a few um feedback loops around verbiage. Is there an extra noun? Is there an extra verb? Um do we have a double negative? We will work to clean up that um technical language for you for the next reading. However, um I think the intent is um within that that we will um work with. So that's what I have to present to you this evening for right now. >> Questions for director Veter also member Jackson. >> Yes. Thank you. So thank you for working on this and thanks for the more detailed explanation of what's going on. I think that really helps us especially with the Arnison Acres understand what it is we're legislating on. We always don't want to legislate blindedly. Um so and thank you to both the um uh MAC the which I don't remember what that stands for but our community um group that helps with policing and then also the parks commission for reviewing this. Um the MAC had a couple of really good questions. One was whether this um uh limitation on groups of 25 people would apply to parking lots as well as other areas of the park. Uh, Mayor Hlin, Council Member Jackson, the the way the language is written right now is the a group of 25 or more would need a permit to use only a building, a picnic shelter, or an athletic field. >> Okay. >> And not other areas of the park. I think that was a an area where you had some discomfort last time was about what about this grassy area over here or we want to sit on the hillside and watch the fireworks during Fourth of July um, etc. So when we did look at this group of 25 would only need to if they're using the building, the picnic shelter or an athletic field. >> Okay, terrific. Thank you for that clarification. So if I did want to have a group of 25 come out and rent uh one of the athletic fields, what would the fee be on that? >> Um Council Member Jackson, I can get that for you. It varies sight by sight um depending on how long you wanted to use that. Um we have um worked as well with some of the varying neighborhood associations on what their actual use is. Um there's actually one group that um well predates me I think even to maybe two prior directors and we think of the Morningside Athletic Club. Um they've been in existence so long we've um we've actually worked to um background some of their volunteers and they have a key to the warming house. So, um, so really it depends on use, depends on time, and depends on location, but I can get you a listing of what fees are for the types of fields for the next meeting. >> That's okay. I think the the answer to my question is it's not changing. It just doesn't have a different tiered level or anything. And it would be just like the baseball association using one of the baseball fields. If you wanted to go use a soccer field, you'd pay the same rate that that other people would be paying. It's not discriminatory one way or another. It's a it's a set fee that's already in existence >> and council member Jackson actually the council sets those annually. >> Okay. >> So there's an annual review. It's a recommendation from the parks commission to the city council. City council adopts those fees annually. >> Okay. Thank you. Um and then um and this let's see um if an officer is called out and um they ask people to go home, they don't go home and they get cited, what is the penalty and um you know what is what is the what are the consequences of not complying with an officer saying please go home. This is too many people. You don't have a permit. Um, I'm going to start talking about how we would proceed on a complaint basis and then uh, Lieutenant Schultz is here um, this evening um, to kind of maybe talk about um, their role in this process. And really um, like tonight we actually have an attendant at Arnison Acres, right, to try to help educate and monitor some of those conduct. So our first point would try to be to go to the source and talk to the individuals, right? is either um what is occurring that drew us there. Right? Again, evaluate what's going on, not just take um information that got called in. So, go to the source, what's occurring, do you have a permit, we already have a group here, we're going to ask you to either move to this side of the park, we're going to ask you to relocate. So, really try to get voluntary compliance. Um ask them to come back. You know, how do you make that reservation? um and really try to ensure um as one of our commissioners said, you know, parks are for people. I'm against limiting on um limiting gatherings. However, I do understand that there's something here that we need to address. So, um really working on kind of that education and voluntary compliance level to start. And while most of the times that works, we have had examples where that hasn't where we've had to go to the next phase and actually um ask for a presence of um EDI law enforcement. And that's where we would um turn over to Lieutenant Schultz. >> Yeah. To Director Perry uh Veter's point there, we would want the park staff to first engage with the issue. If they have to call us in, uh voluntary compliance is always our first hope there. Um if we can have the group leave and educate them on what the ordinance is, we're not going to be proactively driving around looking for permits. Uh but if we get called by park staff because there is some type of issue or conflict between holders there uh we would ask for some voluntary compliance uh to your question on what the end out if we did write a citation. It would be a petty misdemeanor on this ordinance. Um if we chose that our hope is that it would give us a tool to be able to educate and and tell them to leave. If there isn't an ordinance we may be able to come and encourage them, but if they say no, we can't do anything about it. So, and that sounds to me like a trained response that all the parks and and police officers are doing. So, this is um institutionalized so that we're not going to see disperate um enforcement of this that that that's this is standard operating procedures. We go with the parks completely civilian. Hey, what's going on here? Can I answer any questions? And if it escalates, it escalates slowly and with with sort of a a trained response that is uniform against whoever it is that we're talking to. Is that a good summary? >> I think that's an excellent summary. I would also think um either our staff, if they're available to engage with groups, or the police department staff is really looking at as a way to um actually to engage the community as well is, you know, what can we help you with? what other items are you interested and I know from a programming sense you know we do deliver a lot of programs always looking for factors and availability and offerings as well is to actually try to engage with people >> okay so you opened that um one of the things that I've heard over the years is a lack of teenager um activities in Edina and um so I'm going to make that plug once again um it'd be great to have things for teenagers to do besides swings and and slides Um, you are absolutely correct. Um, I think in our um our role in parks and recreation, that is the absolute hardest group to program them for. We always look at it as an hourglass. When you're from two months old to two years old, that's the bottom of the hourglass. And we have so many offerings for you. And as the hourglow glass goes up, that really gets tight in teenage years. And then once it gets higher, when you think of early adults and adults to seniors, it widens back up at the top of the hourglass. Um that is the age where um you know, I don't want to be in a formal program. I want to be just with my friends. This type of um I don't want to do this activity because I'm already formally in that one. I don't want to do it again. So that that uh that piece in the middle is absolutely difficult to program for. And um it's not for a lack of trying, but it's just um you know, use of um use of facilities, um interest levels, um what they're what they're experiencing socially, academically just drives a variety of other interests that might not necessarily be parks and recreation. >> So in the community engagement, maybe you can they'll maybe they'll come up with some great ideas. That would be uh very welcome, I think. So, I'm going to pivot and play a little bit of devil's advocate um and say, you know, we had an event that happened. Will this um ordinance give the police the tools they need to try to prevent other um uh shootings and and violence in our parks? I believe this is one tool that will allow us um in any event that that we believe um a large group is gathering, maybe there's some arguing going on and we have a presence there and we say it's time to leave and people choose not to leave, it will give us an an an option to in the toolbox to maybe go to the next step We're sometimes limited on we need some type of law to allow us to tell people what to do >> or ordinance. >> So, this will be a useful tool um when when things are not going well. You'll have a a new tool in the toolbox to help make remain keep things peaceful. >> It's Yes, it's another tool for us to to help keep things peaceful in the park. And again, it's similar to like our six-hour parking ordinance. We're not going to drive around and be checking permits, but uh upon complaints or issues in a park, it does allow us some latitude to be able to do some type of enforcement or education. >> Okay. Thank you, >> Council Member Pierce, then. >> Thanks, uh, Mr. Mayor, and thanks member Jackson for that very thorough comments. Um, it covered some of the content that I wanted to hit. Um, and so I've got um maybe four more points. Um, one is to just kind of ground everybody. I think there were three issues that you've talked about today and that we talked about last meeting. One is these popup picnics. Um the second one I believe in Yansy there were there was a soccer friendly soccer match going on right on the athletic field and then three um young adults then gathered and then someone fired a firearm a gun. Those are the three things, right? [snorts] Um, I do want to urge us not to over react and overgineer in ordinance against those three things. And so what I like about when you and I met, you clarify Arnison and Acres. Um, and so the comment I made earlier is if people are in our parks doing things that we don't want them to do, then I want them out of my park. Like I don't have any there's no other way to say that. Um, and you gave two examples. One would be these pop-up picnics. We would like for that not to occur. And then the second one, the firing of the firearm. There's already ordinances against that. You can't fire a firearm in the city limits. And so there's already something there for that. Um there's no issue with someone playing a friendly soccer match or whatever on one of our athletic fields. Um unless that field is reserved and someone else has paid and has reserved that u then uh those folks who might be on there need to be asked to leave and the police need some mechanism to address those kinds of things. Uh but other than that, I think I believe our parks have been utilized in the way that they should be without other than the ones that you've mentioned. And so if all of that is true, I think that um what I would ask is for us to consider uh 15 Oh, so I got to do the whole thing. Section 24 255 15, right? And it says um cannot gather with a group of 25 people or more for any reason without obtaining and being in compliance with an advanced reservation permit for the use of a rental park building, park shelter, or athletic field. And so what I wouldn't want is if the third one where someone is playing a friendly soccer match on an athletic field and there's, you know, 25 people. Um the field's not reserved and there's nothing going on. They're just playing a friendly soccer match. Um they should be able to continue to do that. And so when you and I talked about that, what I would have wanted is some way, and you've explained, and I agree with you, you explain why we can't do this yet. Some way that if if a group decided they wanted to play football or soccer or cricket or whatever, and they go to a athletic field, looks like it's open. Maybe they can check on their app to see it's open. And right there they could say, "I'm registering. I'm going to play be here for the next two hours for this match. Now everyone is aware. You're there. You're supposed to be there. You're registered. You're good." [snorts] Um, and you rightfully explained some of the challenges of that. Uh, but I still would not want an ordinance to preclude a group of kids or young adults using a park in a way that I think is great. Um, and so the way this is written, they would be discouraged from doing that. And so I would encourage us for 15 um to just consider drafting that in a way that does that would allow um for the use of an athletic field um without violating the ordinance. I'm not sure how you do that, but that's one. to um I was the most irritated by the popup picnics when you describe those. Um and so for that one, I kind of have the same concern. Um saying that you cannot gather in those spaces with a group or with a group of 10 or more. I I think that that's an appropriate use of the space of the garden. If like I'm taking prom pictures there or I'm gathering there with my friends to take photos or whatever, um I think they should be able to do that, but I don't want it to be commercialized. Don't want the loud music. Um don't want all the noise. And so I would rather find a way to say sure, right? You can use the park, but you can't do it in a way where you're commercializing, right? You're creating noise. No loudspeakers. All of that I'm cool with. But I would not want to draft this in a way that says, you know, our residents who may have 10 or 12 people that want to gather and take photos, like they should be able to do that. Uh, Mayor Havlin, um, Council Member Pierce, members of the council, actually, commercial photography is allowed in our parks. That's actually addressed not within the park ordinance. >> Okay. >> Um, there is a separate section in Dina City Code that allows um um it actually requires a a permit for commercial photography or video production. say um a group was shooting a commercial or something of that nature in our park system, you know, deliberately for commercial uses. That requires a permit under that same section. And I apologize, I don't know exactly which item that is. It does allow for um commercial photography um for um nonmonetary purposes. So, specifically for engagement photos, graduation photos, um any of those types of things, um commercial photography is allowed within our park system without a permit. So, Got it. >> Um and really that's people coming in with very fancy cameras and light lenses and maybe a backdrop and >> that is much different than I think the use we're experiencing right now in that site. So I think you're the way you're describing commercial use like we've had the conversation so I know what you're getting at there. Um and so I don't maybe maybe I'm picking at the use of that word. Um and so I understand what we are trying to stop at the park. So, the question would be, if my daughter is doing prom and there's 15 of them and they want to go there to take photos, can they do that? Are they in violation of the ordinance? >> They would not be in violation of the ordinance. >> And that's not clear to me. So, that that's what I'm getting at. Um, so that that should be an allowed thing for them to do. Um, but it at first glance it would appear that they're not able to do that. They'd be in violation of the ordinance and it's not just a numbers thing per se. Um, so I'm not quite sure how to address that, but I think you understand what I'm getting at there. And then, um, the last one. So, I like, um, 24 258. uh number six. And so if I think about again the the three incidents and I I honest I keep saying that because I can't think of I've been on council for six years and I can't think of any other time that there have been these kinds of activities. Um and so um those three with number six folks are playing soccer halves at it. No issue with that. Um the commercialization of the park. We're addressing that. Number six really is the only one that gets at in my opinion the primary reason we're here uh which is the incident in Yansy Park. um in which my hope would be and this is my question similar to member Jackson's what what we really need is to be able to deescalate those kinds of gatherings whatever they happen to be. Um, and in this case, if there is something that kind of looks there's a bigger group there, um, yeah, ask some questions. Hey, what's what's going on? We might have been able to had we done that, have those, uh, young adults leave the park. And if they don't, this is saying we can shut down the parking lot, ask people to leave again in an effort to deescalate something. Um, and so I I I hit this one because I'm not sure how you would know to go to the park because there's an issue or or a potential issue. So, there has to be some notification um some way of knowing that that is happening. And today, unless I'm wrong, the only way that happens today is if a resident calls 911 or they might go to 311 or whatever. They have to contact us to say something looks kind of shady out there. >> I think that's the only way we would would know. Unless I know we're patrolling and so if the patrol happened to be out there and saw something that looked suspicious then So those are the two ways you would know. >> That is correct. If we get called to a park from a resident, our patrol officers are actively patrolling the park and have some reason to believe there's some arguments going on or loud conversations and think it's maybe going to turn violent. Um the third way we may is we do monitor some social media via our crime analysts. So we do receive some intel of some of these popup events that are happening at the parks. So we do at times get a heads up, not a lot of time, but that there may be some event and it may involve rivalry groups that um may turn that way. So we sometimes do have a heads up to where to patrol. Yep. >> And none of that is new. Right. Those are established procedures, I guess, that we have. >> Correct. >> And we've used those before. >> Yeah. >> Yep. >> In addition, Council Member Pierce, we actually have sort of deploy um like a park attendant type person to go around and um kind of be eyes and ears and really understand um evening use as well. >> Yeah. Yeah. And so I I um raised that one because it's tangental to member Jackson's question about making sure um there's no bias in the way that this is implemented. Um and so I I'll just use the example I was I walk in Yansy Park. Um I think it was Monday or Tuesday. I'm walking and a neighbor couple passes by and says, "Hey, you're on the council." We were there on the 5th. And she says to me that um they live on the corner. And from their backyard, they could actually see that people were gathering. And she said she didn't know what to do. Um, and so if you see something that it's your part, too. If you see something, you have to say something. Um, but then to member Jackson, that really means we're trusting the police to engage with residents in a respectful way. But there's really no other way to do that, right? There's really nothing else. There's no other effective way to do that than to um and uh Chief Milbour talks about the carrot and the the stick, right? Being present in the community so that uh residents feel like police is a part of the community and they're coming to make sure that whoever's in the park doing things that they should be doing, we want to make sure everybody feels welcome and is safe. And so if as long as we're doing that, um I do think that this is at the first reading with those couple of comments I made, um I I I think that this would um go a long way in doing that. The the only other thing I mentioned when we met is um you you mentioned that Ernest and Acres, they're using a garden there. I actually wouldn't want them to do any of this in any park, but maybe they wouldn't go to Bredesen Park [laughter] to do a popup picnic. Um, so I kind of get the the beauty of why they're there in that they've made that selection. Uh, but that is something that we wouldn't want to have in any of our parks, not just that one. So, I appreciate um you coming in and and looking at this and adding a lot more clarity to it. >> Council member Mercer, >> I um at our last meeting I had a lot of concerns about number 16. I think um it does have some grammatical issues, but um in terms of content, it is much improved. And just to be very clear, um, it does not allow gatherings by a group of people at a rental park, building, park, shelter, or athletic field. Um, you know what? I screwed that up. It's talking about if you do not have um priority of use, right of use for that space uh and a person has a valid advance reservation permit for the park building, parks, shelter or athletic field or an area defined within the permit description, they have priority and I think that's just fair. Um, and so I think that is just kind of a housekeeping element that I garbled in attempt to read. Uh, but I also feel as if 17 uh needs some work. I do agree with member Pierce that this could be a situation where they just the posh pop-up picnic pops up somewhere else and then we've got a situation in a different park. Um, so I think that is something that we need to take care of. I would hope that there is language in our code that addresses amplifying music that is really loud and you know whether you're one person alone blasting your stereo or whatever that that is something that is not okay. Um, and so I'm a little concerned both with the scope being just Arnison acres and um, the behavior being a group of 10 or more, you know, because maybe you have a popup starting that's sort of a flop, but you've got the organizers there blasting their music, helping people attend. I don't know, that could happen. Uh the one I am most concerned about is 15. Um gather with a group of 25 people or more for any reason without obtaining and being in compliance with advanced reservation permit. Because if you look at the language um for getting a permit for an athletic field, it starts at $80 per hour. And I think um for that casual group, you know, wanting to do a soccer game or something like that, spend an afternoon uh with friends, you know, doing a pickup game or something like that. I'm having a hard time with that. And uh but at the same time, I know we do need to maintain our fields. Um and when they're used, there is uh you know, some issues with that. But uh I also hear and agree entirely with member Jackson's point. Um it would be good to be a city where people can go and engage in athletic events, especially young people, and be able to do that um without severe repercussions. So, I'm wrestling the most with 15. Um anyway, that's that's where I am right now. However, I do appreciate the additional language that focused on like rentable park buildings and park shelters because with this, if you've got a casual person just walking through, no one's sitting under the Rosom Park pavilion and you want to just go, you know, hang out in the shade or whatever, that's totally fine. Um, but I I also with picnics, um, I I think for the reasons that I've already cited, um, sort of singling out picnics, which it makes sense because this is the problem we're having right now, but again, I think it really comes down to the commercial use and the noise, the sound, all of that. Um, and I would hope we'd have, don't we have language in our code that says you can't be doing commercial stuff in our parks? Um, except maybe photography or am I wrong? >> Um, Mayor Hman, Council Member Ra, I'll have to check on the exact language that's in there and get back to you. Okay. However, um, when it comes to sound, we have an overall that you need a um, a sound permit for amplification. However, to actually enforce it becomes a little bit cumbersome. I'm sure when you've encountered like sound issues between neighbors, right? And we have to do a sound study and what is the actual decibel level and is it over 65 for a prolonged period. That's when we started getting into we really want to have in the tranquility garden >> a limit on amplified and performed sound. Right? So, we're really looking at um trying to set up a special rule perhaps for a special park or a special park area about preventing that noise. Um where in the rest of the park system we do allow it or you know people may play music at their picnic shelter or or you know at their graduation party, but we're really looking at you know it's it's hard to call it the tranquility garden when it's not very tranquil. So that's why we're trying to do this carve out specifically for this area at Arnison Acres Park. Okay. >> When it comes to that amplified sound, it's hard to enforce to get readings and what's the decibel level at the property line and by then it's >> Are there times like you can't do it after a certain time like 10:00 if it's I mean >> yeah, our park hours are generally 6:00 a.m. to 1000 p.m. So once 10 p.m. hits that's different. However, you know, that is a long prolonged time frame to be amplifying music or performing music um with some of the social media activities um leading up to that time frame. >> Okay. Thank you, >> Council Member Jackson. And then I'll I got a few thoughts, too. >> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just have a follow-up question based on member Pierce's comments. when we put the signs in the park to remind people that we want this to be a safe place and if they feel um you know threatened what they can do. Can you remind me of what that language says? I think I think what I'm getting at I'll just tell you why I'm getting at that is that if anybody who's in the park feels unsafe you we already have a reminder um of what they can do. So, it's it's not just the neighbor seeing or someone driving by, but then if you're actually in the park and you feel unsafe, hopefully that that sign reminds you that that there are options as well. So, that's all I was thinking of. If if you don't have it close by, that's >> I do have it. Would you like me to read it for you? >> Yeah, that'd be great. Thank you. >> Um, actually, I'll I'll thank the lieutenant over here. The city of Adina is committed to a safe, welcoming public spaces. If you observe activity that appears unsafe or not consistent with intended park use, call 911. >> Okay, good. Thank you. So, just to remind people that if they are there and they see other people in their group even getting uh out of hand, there's that reminder. So, um if if ask people to help keep us all safe. >> This has been a good discussion. Um, people are trying to find a pathway that honors, I think, public right or just a sort of public notion of use of public parks. You know, kind of an unfettered use and we've had some experiences that have caused us to think otherwise or that we may need to do something about it. Um, you know, when you look at section proposed section 24-25, the predicate language there says in addition to recurrence of 24 254, no person shall in any park or publicly owned property. Then it goes on, you know, everything flows well from that. you understand what what what kind of conduct is prohibited until you get to 16. And then it says gatherings by a group at a rentable park building, park shelter, or field shall have no priority of use or right of use of that for that space. I see what you're trying to get at there, and that's the notion that if someone's down there without a permit, they don't have any priority, but it doesn't mean they can't use the space. >> That's correct, Mayor. Yeah, but it needs to be married a little bit more effectively to 15. So, you know, in listening to council me all of my colleagues up here, it made me think that what what you're really trying to do is encourage people to get a permit in an advanced reservation permit. Not mandate it, but encourage it. Uh because they don't bother to get one and they go down and somebody else is using the pavilion or using the field. Well, that's just the way it is. It's like pickup basketball, you know. Uh unless you get people to agree that winner winner stays and loser goes home and the next group comes in. >> That is true, mayor. >> Um so it strikes me that one possibility to find a pathway to balance out these concerns that people have is that you encourage people to obtain a advanced reservation permit. Then that language of 16 I think is really interesting. The start of it that gatherings by a group at a rental park building, park shelter, athletic field shall have no priority of use or right of use for that space in the absence of a permit is what you're saying. person who's in possession of a valid advanced reservation permit for a park building, park shelter, athletic field, or an area delineated within the permit description has priority use of that defined space. If we could marry up those concepts where it's not a mandate that you get a permit, but that we're encouraging people to do it and if you got one and you go down someplace and somebody else is using it, you have priority and and and it gives the police the ability to go down there and be the referee, say, "Hey folks, you know, you got to go." And they they what we've worried about is right now all they can say is, "Please go." You know, but what what an ordinance does is gives us a little bit of backup from a from a legal standpoint to be able to say, "Yeah, you really really you got to go. Otherwise, you know, you put me in an awkward spot. I'm going to have to cite you for a gross misdemeanor if you don't get out of here because you don't have a permit." And these other folks do. So, that's at least one possibility with respect to that aspect of it. I'm thinking about the the Arnison Acres thing. What what are are the park hours different in different parks or are park hours uniform? >> Uh mayor, they are uniform with the exception of uh Braar Park where we do operate the arena in Courtney Field later into the evening. Um that I believe is till 11 p.m. Um same thing with the uh golf course has a special rule because of the uh banquet room banquet facilities for weddings to go later into the evenings. But the rest, the majority of our parks are 6:00 am to 10 pm. >> So, you know what I heard Abby Reynolds say, and I've talked to her on the phone about this, is that really where it gets troublesome is when it's after park hours and and they stay. Now, there if they're making noise with amplified music and and I don't know what the test is for that, that you're too loud. I mean, if you got if you got a guitar player there playing an acoustic guitar, that's a different situation than a live band or or a um a DJ with a big speaker system. Um so you can you can easily kick them out after bar after dark. The way our ordinance is worded now, right? after 10 p.m. >> after 10 after 10 p.m. >> Even even Wow. So, okay, that kind of messed up that chain of thought. Um, also the way 17 is worded, I don't see any reason why somebody couldn't avoid using the formal garden area, the gazebo picnic shelter in the parking lots and just go up. They could park in the parking lot and just go up and sit by the building on the patio or spread themselves into the lawn. They wouldn't be in violation of this proposed form of ordinance. >> That is correct, Mayor. We're really looking out for the formal garden areas. >> Yeah. [clears throat] Is that is that where the most of the activity has been taking place with the >> That is correct. >> Pop-up commercial picnics. >> That is correct. Yeah. And this would allow >> they want a little bit of shelter in case there's weather and or whatever. I believe the the beauty of the gardens adds to the social media attraction. So, and when we think about that area as well is like the darn garden council, right? The investments they've made. Um, really looking out for those long-term investments as well as, you know, when they do their events. Um, again, we permit so many different groups and activities is we're already working with the garden council for things like their annual plant sale, right, which isn't a building, isn't a picnic shelter, isn't an athletic field, but that's kind of one of those special use things where we know this in the spring on a Friday and a Saturday, we know and um we're all well aware that the annual plant sale is going to occur, right? So, that's again a permitted activity that we work with through those those groups. Yeah, I don't really know how to solve the Arnison and Acre situation. I think member Pierce raised the issue of people, you see people down there all the time taking family photographs and especially get the graduation time. >> Um, >> our intent is that would still remain a viable use. Um, >> yeah. What are we trying to do down there? Let's just maybe we can think about it that way. We're trying to prohibit popup picnics organized by somebody who's getting a fee for organizing a picnic. And then there's all kinds of loud music and a lot of noise and they don't leave. And um because of the I don't know if this is the right word, but the poshness. I don't know if that's an actual word or not. um bringing in um like pieces of carpet to sit on, pillows, tables, catering food, catering drinks, um props, displays. Um it's it's a commercial operation. >> You know, somebody uh stopped me at one of our meetings and I think I actually think it was over at Yansy Park when we had the meeting on that Monday night following the uh shooting. uh this firearm discharge episode and said that they had moved here from St. Paul and in St. Paul they have park attendants in the parks year round. We've got them in the wintertime and for the hockey, you know, and the ice skating. But it it did make me think about, well, what about that Arnison Acres situation if all of a sudden some truck rolls in, they start unloading all kinds of stuff, including amplifiers and big, you know, they they're starting to set up a big operation like it was a wedding. And uh in one of our parks, we had a park attendant there. They say, "Where's your permit?" and they can't even get set up. So, we're not going down there halfway through or after the fact and saying, "Hey, pack it up and get out of here. We got some other way to stop them at the front end." >> That's something to think about, too. How do we stop them at the front end? >> This language would allow us to stop them at the front end, >> but without somebody down there in the park, >> how are we going to How are we going to know? >> Um, we've actually activated a kind of a part-time park attendant, and there should actually be there this evening. Um, and really we've we've kind of had to implement that for some of these reasons. Um, I know it's a um, it's post the Yansy Park um, occurrence. However, I think these issues have been building over time. Um, we have had a park attendant um, in the evenings for some time primarily trying to regulate athletic field use, right? Um part of um I think council member Pearson and I talked about it is a lot of our athletic fields are in really good condition, high quality. We try to maintain them to you know the best of our abilities and not a lot of other communities do that. So we do get spillover use, right? Especially in the spring when our fields are ready and other people's aren't. So, we kind of think about this in that same way is um you know, for a while now, we've tried to have park attendants to help our athletic associations that go through the process to get those permits um to say, you know, you do not have it this evening. This group has it because in the past it was, well, it's not that we're just going to not get off the athletic field. We'll just go to this side and you take that side. And our association's like, no, we reserve the full of it. So, there's been that push and pull over time and we've kind of added this part-time position to to go out and help on that and now we're trying to expand that to help in these other areas where we're seeing these issues. So, um by having someone there um and monitoring and if this was in place, we could try to prevent that from the setup because it is so elaborate. >> Spring, you need to be thinking about something like road restrictions. think like field restrictions >> because they they will get torn up then. >> Well, and I think you know we talk about number six about being able to close a park. I think you know outside the safety and security it is about managing the investment we have in our fields. If we >> go through and we airate Lewis Park and we overseed and dress it and we put up signs that say, you know, field closed and a group comes in and tears those fields down. Number six would allow us to again have a mechanism to formally ask them to leave. um so those fields can heal, so they can grow um you know for you know that intended purpose. So, um, we're we're trying to, um, overlap a lot of these issues, but being very specific on how we address them to ensure, again, like I said in the beginning, that we allow people to use our parks for the um, intended purposes, but then balance that right to have um, the right to assemble and to protect your First Amendment uses. So, I think what what we're all wrestling with, and I think you are too, is that with respect to the Anie Park episode, there were a bunch of good kids down there just playing soccer and playing touch football. And then some other people showed up that weren't of the same mindset. And I think everybody's worried about, you know, do at the end of the day, if we're not careful, do we end up punishing good behavior? and then causing something causing causing bad feelings that way and and alienating some kids because they didn't do anything wrong. So, I think that's all we're trying to do collectively is figure out some language, some pathway to get there that gives kids use of the parks, other people too, but doesn't interfere with those rights to use the park and lets us regulate in the circumstance where we need to regulate. And I know you're working your way there. So now I'm thinking, do we need to send them back with this dialogue that we've given them and still hold off on first reading or is there some navigation here on first reading that we could do and then think about it in the gap and then look at some revised language in two weeks? >> I I'm comfortable passing this on first reading. some of like we some of the language does need to be cleaned up and I think you've pointed out the lack of parallelism in number 16 um that can be worded in a way that that fits the ordinance better and and gets to the point. Um but I like what is in here um I think for first reading purposes and we can tighten it a little bit. Um I guess I would defer to um member Pierce if he's comfortable with that. >> Uh yeah, I'm very comfortable with that. Um it for no other additional reason is it does still create a little bit of space uh for resident feedback, additional comments. Yeah, >> I almost think you could combine 15 and 16 in some fashion so that you don't lose that concept that that that's tethered to the beginning of 16 where gatherings by a group of a rentable park building, park shelter, athletic field shall have no priority of use or right of use of that space uh in the park without a permit. You know, but it doesn't say you can't use it. It just says you don't have priority use. make that clear. I mean, you know, >> you can look at that. >> And um and to me, you don't have to get a permit. So, but we'd encourage people to get a permit, but if you do get a permit, then you got priority. >> That is correct, mayor. Also, I mean, there are a lot of other advantages of getting a permit. Um we've worked very diligently when say we've had uh restroom um uh damage, you know, that occurs and we know that um there's a graduation party there the next day either to help prioritize maintenance to work with those folks to say, "Hey, can we move you to a different location? How can we help adapt that?" Right? I think the hardest thing is supporting groups of a large size without knowing when or where they would be coming. So um in addition to um you know the the priority of use, it's also um helps us in the sense of plan better for how we manage those systems. As I said, you know, we're booking those spaces as well and we're, you know, upwards of 2,000 at just those places that I listed. >> You know, if you've we know our PD and we know how they interact with people. Uh, but if you've been on the wrong side, if you're from a group of people that have been on the wrong side of selective enforcement, you worry about selective enforcement. And and I know that's what you're trying to avoid, too, is putting anybody on the PD in a in a position where they'd be accused after the fact of selective enforcement. So trying to navigate all of this is a little bit tricky, but I think based on the things that we want to make sure that they have as tools, we got to do something. >> So how about remember um >> um just grammatically number 17 also needs work. It's the first word was gatherings and then it was changed to gather and so now it doesn't work. Um, but I you have articulated my primary concern and I think I agree we're all on the same page. We don't want to be punitive. Um, but we want to be [sighs] and I do I I am still concerned that this could, you know, there are some things that need to be worked out, especially with 17. Um, and also, you know, we want to be we we do want our parks to be welcoming and we don't want people feeling like, oh my gosh, I could get into a huge amount of trouble just for kicking a soccer ball around with my friends, you know? So, it's I I can understand I'm grateful this is not a please vote to pass this tonight and this is the first reading. Um, and so I I think it's improved a lot since we first got it and I appreciate that. Um, but I do still have some concerns and we all do. We've all articulated that. I think this is a case where we're all on the same page. So, >> I think it's just good to make it clear up front that if you're you're free to use the parks even if you're a group of 25 or more, you can use a building or a shelter athletic athletic field, but if someone comes and has a permit, then they have priority >> currently or in this proposal. >> No, in the in the future. >> Yeah. If you're over 25, we would ask you to get a permit, right? That's the language of number 15. >> Yeah. But you don't have to. >> Um, you don't, right? >> If you think that there's a chance that a group of 25 or more >> uh could not use the park unless they had a permit, we need to know that. >> That's what I'm stating in 15. A group of 25 or more gathering at a park, using a building, a shelter, or an athletic field would necessitate a permit. >> And that's an $80 an hour cost. Then why does it say in 16 that gatherings by a group undefined which could mean 10 25 >> a rentable park building park shelter athletic field shall have no priority of use or right of use of that space. >> Um that's to give the priority to the person with the permit. So 16 is where a group could be of four people that are in your picnic shelter that you have rented and may not leave. And this would indicate that the group with the permit has priority of use of that space. So we do not have that mechanism now. So that group could be, you know, a group of one, group of two, >> right? >> Could potentially be an obstacle to a group that actually did have a permit. >> That takes me back then to the situation we had at Yansy Park. We got over 25 kids down there playing soccer and touch football. They don't have a permit. If that if that happens again and they don't have a permit and nobody comes down to use the park, then what? >> Um it would only be if we're called down there to engage with what is occurring or observing that it could start with education. It could start with um is there a priority of use? It could be asking to leave and it could escalate from there. We looked at 25 because the size of the gathering. 25 um um kind of hit a threshold of being a little less impulsive. Um 25 seemed organized. That's two full teams of soccer teams, uh four substitutes and a referee. That's a large gathering. >> Mr. Council member Jackson. >> Yes, Mr. Mayor. And so I think about too, you know, 25 people chewing gum, throwing away their popkins cans, you know, um tearing up the field and stuff. That's a lot of people. And so I think that was part of what uh what we discussed last time was the wear and tear on the park facilities with that larger group. Um so I I don't know if that helps at all, but I I think about, you know, having to clean up the garbage from a large group. Um, manager Neil. >> Yes, Mr. Mayor. Um, I think we have time uh we certainly have time to put this topic in a more in a work session discussion. I think it'd be easier for you to to discuss and and uh to edit uh a document if we were in that kind of setting. We have time to do that. We have time on our our September 1st work session to use that time for that purpose if you'd like to. I like that idea better than us you you heard this conversation this evening and then and then basically telling Dave Kendall to go back and draft something and he makes a he makes his best guess at what he's >> trying to do instead of us just working through it in a work session. >> Others feel the same way. >> We'll invite Dave to come to the work session, too. >> Yeah. Oh, yeah. We'll let Dave come. >> Yeah. >> So, no first reading then? >> No first reading. >> We don't have to do it tonight. >> Okay. We'll table this to >> to September September 1st when it when's the work. Let's see. Well, we might not have the language polished up. >> Yeah. >> Table it to September 15. >> That's fine. Yeah. Okay. Is that okay with people? All right. Uh with respect to ordinance proposed ordinance 2026-12 which would amend chapter 24 of the Dina city code regarding additional restrictions for parks and publicly owned properties. Is there a motion to table this matter to September 15th 2026? A meeting of the city council on September 15, 2026. There a motion to that effect. >> So moved. >> Member Brisser moves >> second. repair seconds the um postponement of this matter to the uh September 15, 2026 meeting of the United City Council. Any further discussion? >> Yeah. Um >> yes, go ahead. Member Jackson. >> I guess I'm concerned, you know, we've got that's two more weeks of summer things can happen and we still don't have a way to um do anything about it. And so that's, you know, I I suppose we can vote um, you know, first and second reading on the 15th, but there was a lot of concern and, you know, social media is still out there to have popup groups and everything. Um, I I don't know if we want to that's almost a full month again um to delay it. So that I'm going to uh >> vote against that. I believe >> I think that's that's fair. the um the question I my concern would be Ernest and Acres just from our conversation that is um very disruptive. Um I don't know if there's something we would want to do to address that now versus wait until September 15. And then uh in terms of Yansancy Park, I mean though that the Yeah, my biggest concern there is still people that are gathering for like legitimate reasons like how do we address that? And so I know that's what one of the things we would address in the working session. >> Let me back up a second. you know, we would have been on second reading on this ordinance on September 1st. And um you know, maybe one possibility would be between now and September 1st work session, we could have Kendall work up some additional language. So, we're a little bit further down the road and maybe we'd be able to do the whole thing on September 1st to your point of reading and waving. >> Yeah, I would be more comfortable >> with that. Withdraw that motion. That would be >> um I have found member Jackson's points compelling. So I, you know, see the logic of that. >> I think member Pierce is going to withdraw that reluctant second. [laughter] All right, let's go back at it then. U should we postpone this matter for determination by the city council? This is proposed ordinance 2026-12 which would amend chapter 24 of the Atlanta city code regarding additional restrictions for parks and publicly owned properties to the meeting of the city council on September 1st, 2026. Is there a motion of that effect? >> So moved. >> Second. >> All right. We got a motion by member Pier, second by member Jackson to postpone this matter for decision on September 1st, 2026 at the United City Council meeting. Uh any further discussion? Roll call, please. >> Council member Rouser, >> I. >> Council member Jackson, >> I. >> Mayor Hublin, >> I. >> Council member Pierce, >> I. >> All right. Thank you, Director Veter. That was really helpful. It was a more contentrich conversation tonight. Thanks to you and thanks to Mr. Kendall's reddrafting. Um, I think we're at 8.2 now, which would be a little discussion from the city manager about possibly changing our methodology of dealing with um our city, state, and national legislative platforms. >> Thank you, your honor. Uh the proposal tonight is really uh offered to you after uh we have kind of developed some etiquette and some protocol around how we put together uh your state legislative and national uh legislative agendas. It really came to to staff if we've been doing this for the past couple of years that perhaps there's a lot of there's some unnecessary redundance uh redundancy in what we're doing. Uh we have we belong to at least three organizations as a city uh but both the league of cities, metro cities and municipal legislative commission that all do the same kind of process uh that care about the issues that we care about and if we could uh instead of instead of trying to replicate uh and provide our own u uh platform of of priorities uh could we use theirs and and and add some difference to what is happening at those kind regional levels. Um so really not uh not going through the process of forming a platform but still have a process for putting together priorities that are very adina specific that really all most communities have something like that anyway. It's you know somewhere 5 to 7 5 to 10 kind of items that are very specific about city government not about county government or state government or even national government. So, that's a that is a proposal I wanted to put in front of you tonight. Um, uh, the council has the discretion about how we do this, so we'll take our lead from you, but this is an offer for you. >> Yeah. Thoughts from council members? Council member Jackson, this used to be your world. >> Yes. So, I think this is a great idea. Um it will help us also when we go to Washington um to sort of take up that large voice of of what the National League of Cities is talking about. We can always talk about ident you know Edina specific things but I think that'll make the conversations flow better. Um and it also I I don't think that we want to go down rabbit holes that might be coming in the future. we've been, you know, pretty disciplined, I think, about so far, but I I really like this as a as a way to focus our efforts. >> Other thoughts, member? >> Um, yes. And actually today I and yesterday I have been listening to the platform committee meetings from the League of Minnesota cities online because they are meeting in Duth now um hatching things out and they've had some very good discussions on affordable housing as well as the family medical leave act and other topics. So I think this makes a lot of sense but I do think you know it was interesting to see the cities that were represented physically there in Duth and I had planned on going up but um could not really swing it. Um, so but I I do even though I just said that think it would be good if we are going to take this route and even if we're not um maybe participate a little bit more um when it comes to those uh gatherings where we are actually talking about policy and what would make sense for the next legislative session so that we do have a voice um in that dialogue. Uh, Council Member Rizzard, thank you for mentioning that because the league does uh, kind of take this, they do a road show, right, where they take their their platform out into a number of different locations around the state. And so there is there's at least one, if not two opportunities to do that here in the Twin Cities, too. >> Council member Pierce, any comment? Yeah, >> no additional comments. >> Yeah, this caused you to think of something else. Council member Jackson. >> Yes, this is for manager Neil. So, in your Friday report, can you please give us the dates and times of those? That'd be great. Thank you. >> Thanks. >> I think this whole notion of um figure out what our priorities are and then with respect to the organizations we belong to, we just track along there. You know, if somebody asks us to the legislature, we're over there on one of our bills, what do you feel about this particular bill from the MLC or the League of Minnesota Cities, we can opine on that. I think this is a much more streamlined approach. In fact, I've often wondered over the last couple of years, how did our legislative agenda get so big? You know, and people have worked hard on it, especially our fellows. We probably took some pressure off of you. [laughter] >> All right. Um, let's see. Oh, we got a primary election results report coming from our clerk. >> Uh, Mr. Mayor, I just wanted to uh get in a quick announcement too uh before Sharon takes the the mic that we are cancelling your H meeting on October 1st. >> Okay, that's all I've got tonight. >> All right, very good, >> Clerk Ellison. >> Another another stellar job. >> Yes, Mr. Mayor. Thank you very much. Um kudos to my team um that helps out also. Um so tonight I just wanted to um share with you the um results of the primary election. Actually um we had nearly a 20% um higher turnout than we've had um in past in the last uh two years. Um so we had 37% uh turnout um for the primary. And from that breakdown, we had on election day 26% um voted at their polling places while um 8% came during that those 18 days um of early voting here at city hall and uh 3% voted by mail. Um, so with these numbers, um, the 18 days of voting that I actually had you approve, um, there were mixed, um, feelings on that, right? Um but um it did work out great actually in having the 18 days of voting because we processed um 3,175 voters here at city hall which aligns perfectly with the data that I had shared um with you when I asked you to approve the 18 days of um early voting. Um and then in terms of um how many voters we had here at city hall, our lowest number was um on July 29th where we had 99 voters. And then our highest was um on uh August 10th, the last day of early voting when council member Pierce came to vote, I believe, [laughter] when we had our highest number at 735. >> Oh wow. >> Yes. Um, and that is not uncommon actually because during early voting, that's when most voters are looking to vote. It's either um here at city hall to put their ballot in the ballot counter or at their polling place on election day. And for the general, I am expecting that we will see multiple days where we will have more than 700 voters uh coming to city hall to vote. Uh so overall, it was a great turnout. Um, one anomaly that we did experience was that, um, on election day, it is not, uh, strange for voters to come into city hall thinking that they can vote at city hall on election day, but we had 200 voters come into city hall trying to vote at city hall. Um, we've generally would have maybe about 30 to 50 voters. And so I'm not sure what information they were getting um why they chose to come to city hall. Uh Lynette and Becky at the front desk were rock stars. They jumped on the secretary of state's website, found their polling place, and redirected them to their polling place. Um but yes, a very strange um event for us on election day. So other than that, I think it was >> take a little credit for that mentoring of uh Lynette and Becky. I mean that was it was masterful really handling 200 people that expect to be able to vote here and now they got to go >> somewhere else. >> It was and most were pretty >> some were compliant but I'm sure there were a few that were >> uh >> guessing they should still be able to vote here. >> Yes, absolutely. We we did have that um even one voter who tried to tell me that he should be able to vote after we were already closed. So, it was very interesting, but a great turnout um all around. Um great experience um great team of people that helps out. So, >> well, kudos to you and your team. >> Thank you. Appreciate it. >> Anything else from anyone on that on the election? Okay. Um manager, anything else other than what you've already provided? >> All for me, thanks. >> Uh member Pierce, nothing from me. Okay, member Jackson. >> September 4th is the big band event at Nolan Mains put on by the Ed Fund and it's a fun event every year. So, I encourage people to come listen to live music and think about helping students. >> Gooder. Um, resident Frankle's comment about dead trees made me think about live buckthornne. Um, and particularly live buckthornne on the public right ofway by on the um, now I have to be sure I get it right on the west side of Wooddale because um, and between the country club and the bike lane and I really think we need to figure out a way to clear that. It is a problem that came up when we were talking about changing the bike lanes. It used to be cleared. I did actually walk that segment to try to discover the parking no parking signs. There are a total of five no parking signs in that area and you can just see one. So, four of them are completely embedded in um buckthornne. And I think we need to get rid of it because you can't, you know, pull over. You can't sometimes the foliage ends up kind of creeping over the curb and all of that. And and we really the public right away should be made available. So I don't I don't know if there's a plan to get that back to the grass that it once was, but it I think would be a good thing for us to do. And that's all I've got. One of the um on the tree issue, one of the things I thought u our resident David Franco mentioned was uh you know the danger of falling trees on city property and I think you might want to comment on our city forester and are they doing an effective job of taking down the trees that are dead and making sure that uh we don't have trees standing that could fall over in a bad storm for example. I'm sure there are trees that might fall over in a storm. >> Bird dead or alive. >> Dead or alive. Um, we have but but we we have a forestry group uh that handles this and I think you all know Luther. He does a great job in getting out there and kind of but he does appro but he does need to apply some priority to what he sees in the field and that doesn't always um it's not always appreciated by by others when he has to make some decisions about what what can be what can be left and what has to go but he's active and doing it every day he works >> yeah I noticed I I think you know I think we've all noticed this the asht tree devastation has really come home now it's a lot of dead trees And I see a lot of them on Mindot right away and other locations as well. Uh just a quick update. I've got exec committee tomorrow and tab meeting following. That's tab exec. Uh I'm going to take a look at the craftsman tomorrow. I think you you were over there a few months ago. >> I was. Yeah. >> I'm going to go take a look at that tomorrow and then walk with the mayor tomorrow night at six o'clock at Centennial Lakes. If anybody wants to come and join me, uh 6 o'clock Centennial Lakes right at the Centrum. I'll be there. That's it for me. Anybody else have anything? All right. Uh, city council meeting stands adjourned.