[Music] Heat. Heat. [Music] Should I start? Okay. Okay. Where did my gamble go? Good evening. Uh, we're going to call to order the June 4th park board meeting. Uh, Leslie, will you call roll? Yes. Uh, Christie is absent. Hanley here. Lairman here. Schultz here. Samurski here. Vitali here. Chair Ibraham here. Uh, do I have uh a motion to approve the minutes or does anyone have any comment on the agenda? On the agenda and we have no changes to the agenda. Okay. I move to approve the agenda. I'll second it. Uh Christie is not here. Hanley approve. Lman approve. Schultz approve. Samurski approve. Vitali approve. Chair Ingerham approve. If I could, who who motioned that? Hanley. And who second that? I didn't. Okay. Thank you. So, now we'll move to approval of the minutes first. They're pretty long. Did anybody have any questions or comments about the minutes? If not, I'll look for a motion to approve them. I'm thankful to the person who typed up 32 pages. Yes. Is that a motion? A motion to approve. Okay. Second. Second. Hanley, approve. Lurman, approve. Schultz, approve. Samurski, approve. Vitali, approve. Cherry Graham, approve. Uh, item five is citizens wishing to discuss items on not on the agenda. I notice we have some people here tonight. Does anyone want to speak or No one's on the phone. So, I guess we have no one for item five. Any special matters? No special matters. No special matters. Good. So, we'll move to number seven, uh, 7A, review of the 2026 2030 capital improvement plan. Yes, Chair Graham and Parkboard members. Kelly will, uh, walk through the CIP. This is something that we do every year. Um, this is a item that we are looking for feedback and recommendation for approval to the city council. It will go to the council um, I think in July, probably July. Couple times. Yeah. Yep. A couple times. Yes. Before they certify it. Right. Thank you, Leslie. Good evening, Park Board. Um, as Leslie said, each year the um city does a 5-year capital improvements plan. So, capital improvements plan is really large ticket items, big projects, big pieces of equipment, things like that. So, each year we then bring the um parks and trails section to you. So, this capital improvements plan is a is a huge document. It's a it's a planning document. when the city council approves it at the end of December, um we actually approve one year. So, they look at 2026 to make sure we have those projects set, but then it also looks out another four years. So, that's why we have uh a 5-year capital improvement plan. We bring you just the parks and trails related section as I mentioned. So, there's a lot of sections, major equipment, fire trucks, um buildings. So, the Willis Center does HVAC equipment and new gym equipment, things like that. But, we just bring you the items that are related to parks and trails. So, we're going to go through those pages tonight. really, you know, at the end of the at the end of the night, we we're looking for feedback. Um, I think the two questions that were in the report were number one, is there something in there that you thought maybe shouldn't be in there or did we miss something? Sometimes, you know, as the year progresses, we we get feedback from from residents, we look at some of our plans, you know, we we look at our post plan, um our park master plans, things like that to to try to help gauge what should be included in this um CIP. And then secondly, priority. Um, so as you know, as a five-year plan, we kind of slot things in where we think it best fits. We work with our finance department closely um to make sure the numbers add up, but maybe there's something that we have slotted in 2028 that you all feel should be moved up or or back. And so those are kind of the the feedback questions that we're looking for. Um, you know, just a couple things as we actually get into and maybe we can pull up a one of the pages itself. So, there's, I think, maybe 20 or so pages that are in this uh section of the CIP. We can kind of go through them, and I I'll just kind of point out the top section is more, you know, we're we're we're talking about the total cost over a 5-year program. So, this first one is the athletic fields unapproved, which is actually this one's an unfunded page. So, this is not funded, but it talks about the co the the cost over 5 years or longer. Um, it puts them into the, like I said, the parks, trails, and open space division. It assigns it to a specific city contact and then it gives it a priority ranking of 1, two or three. Uh priority rankings, it did list that in the report, but um anything with a priority ranking of one would be a project necessary for public health and safety. And in our section, we don't have many ones. We have a lot of twos and threes. Twos are really projects that maintain or make existing systems more efficient. And three is more about just expanding our system. So in the parks and trails section, we see a lot of twos and threes as you consider as I think that first page was. Um this was a two. So this is an example of a a future project. Uh athletic fields uh improvement unfunded gives a short description of what this might be. So this is more anything in the future. We're just thinking about this and so we just want to make sure it's on the city council's radar. Make sure it's on everybody's radar. Um and we put that they were highlighting that 180 out in the future. So this is for um potential lighting to uh the fields over at Lone Lake Park. Just an example of we have probably three or four unfunded pages in this section. Yes. So is is the idea that it's it would be funded you hope it would be funded in 2031 or that during the each since it's looked at every year that it would get bumped up. Yeah. and funded late in 2028 or yeah, it doesn't necessarily mean it's just the next year out. We just it's just more of something that we're thinking about for the future. So, we don't necessarily know that it's 6 years out or 10 years out. We just have been thinking about that in the future. So, we we we have we do discuss it. Um we have not decided to fund it yet. That would be something that if if um you know the park board recommended and or staff thought it was very important, we could recommend to the city council that they do try to fund it in in one of those five years. But um we did not recommend that this year. Okay. So it's just sort of a placeholder and a we're thinking about this correct. Stay tuned in the future. Yeah. Exactly. And we can go to the next one. The next one's actually a funded page. It's the athletic fields improvements funded. So you can see the total value of this page over the five years is $330. The one thing that I didn't mention on the first page is we've got two line items. We've got the expenditures line item and then the funding sources. So expenditures, what are we actually doing? Are we acquiring land? Is it a construction? Um most of ours are construction or maintenance. And then the funding source, the city has a number of different funds. Um this one and many of our um park and trail projects are funded through our park and trail improvement fund. So this uh if you can we did zoom in. Great. So this one highlights some of the things that were happening. So in 2026 remodeling big willow concession stand uh you know some fencing in 2027. Darren manages this page and this is just talks about certain park improvements um with athletic fields specifically. I'll just keep going. If you have questions, just stop me. Or if you want to see a certain page, we don't have to go through all 20 pages individually either. The priority on this, too. This is probably two, correct? Yeah. Just curiosity on the Lone Lake page, the last the last page, it has lighting for two fields. Is the soccer field two fields or what's the second field? It's two soccer fields, correct? No, one soccer field. One soccer field. One soccer field. Um I wonder if we split it to two smaller soccer fields for the smaller. It's a big field. Yeah, I think that's what it's one big grass. That's what I was just curious. Rectangle space. Y thank you. Yep. So I don't know if we'll keep we can keep going. Um the next one is um looks like this is the Cullen Nature Preserve Parking and Trails. This is TBD. Dear or Matt, do you have any specific information on this one? Um, thank you. Parkboard turn. We're in the process of master planning Colin Nature Preserve. Currently, we have a draft plan in hand. I've been working closely with the friends of Colin Nature Preserve. um working with them throughout the process, get their feedback on master planning requirements for Colin Nature Preserve to open that to the public and make sure it's as um welcoming and as beautiful in terms of a ecological restoration as it possibly can be. Um so we have a draft master plan in hand. But over the winter, late winter, early spring, we went for um grant dollars from a state organization called the LCCMR, the Legislative Citizens Commission, Minnesota Resources. Minnesota Resources. So, it's a ecologicalbased grant pool. So, we have an application in place for the Cullen Master Plan with that organization. and crossing our fingers we should hear in the next few weeks whether we get invited to interview to potentially receive those dollars. So the CIP reflects the potential dollars that we would get from that grant partnership. So um we requested 700k from that organization splitting that over two years to roll out the implementation of the Cullen master plan elements uh trails parking boardwalk features on the site benches um things of that nature. Um so we're really waiting to see whether or not we're going to get that funding from this this state pool. But in the meantime, we did include some money um from our park and trail improvement fund to at least begin to implement some of the colon master plan items next year if we do not receive that money from the state pool. We will have to reassess our prioritization to, you know, implementing some of those features if we do not get that money for future CIPs in the future. But for now, we needed to apply um and let them know that currently we only have 100k available in our CIP. And hopefully that they would understand um that we would need the rest of that money to fully implement the master plan as submitted with the grant application. And is that sufficient for whatever kind of matching they need? Yes. So this this would accommodate the match. Yeah. So it's a big pool of money. It's a it's very competitive. There's statewide requests, dozens and dozens of requests, al nature focused, nature preserve, land acquisitions, river restorations. Um, our angle is that we're within the metro. We could attract a lot of people to see a very high quality restoration in on on site. It's not just about the residents of Minnotonka. We're proposing in a sort of a regional draw to see high quality ecological restoration. So, crossing our fingers. Yes, Dave. So, um, if we were if we were if we're not if we were to not get the grant, this is obviously a really important project. Do we is the total of the CIP dollars we're seeing today the total for parks and or is there ability to to move things around in the big big budget? We would have to come back next year with the rest of this CIP request. It's a substantial amount of money. Okay. But did I hear you right that the city council doesn't actually finalize this until December? Yeah. So they'll have a meeting here in June where they prep and then I think they actually come back in September. So there's a couple meetings before they actually approve the the overall city budget in December. Correct. But we it I read this that we'd like to be working in 2026. Yes. So if we don't get the grant and you have to come back in next year's CIP process, then this would get pushed out. significant elements of the master plan would get pushed out into the future or we could rep prioritize money. Yes. Well, right there time to potentially money for Okay, good. That's that's what I was hoping to hear. It would really hurt our grant chances if we proposed saying we also have CIP money allocated for Okay, which we couldn't do at this point. So, thank you. The next page is um the Glen Lake Glen Lake Park skate park and park. Um, so again, Matt's got this one. You know, this one has a couple different funding sources. Uh, park control improvement fund is is one of them, but it also has the community investment fund. Community investment fund is a fund that the city uses for community projects. U back in 2011, the Willis and Fitness Center when they remodeled use some of that those remodel dollars were from the community investment fund. Um, this year in in 2025, we actually have dollars for the ice arena refrigeration project. Um, some of those dollars are for the from the community investment fund. larger communitywide projects that um you know that they have to meet certain criteria to fund. So Matt, anything on the on the skatepark? But just at this point we we keep calling it skate park, but the the project scoping has evolved a bit. The Glenlike activity center is there and that's been identified to be raised in the coming year. So we will have a big hole on a very major intersection in our city. So, we keep calling this the skate park, but really it's a Glen Lake park with a skate park element added to it. So, the way the parking functions and the mighty mites fields is all going to be conceptualized with a skate park being an element. We just realize that it's a very critical park amenity opportunity in the city Glen Lake there. Um, so we want to recognize that skate park would continue to be an element, but it would be one of the amenities. Um, potentially gazebo space. Um, not a not a building per se, but more park-like, more welcoming, more trees, green infrastructure associated, less just parking and an old brick 70s building, just more of a community amenity. And will will the design for that come back to the parkboard? Yes, it will. Yes. So, um I have a scope from Damon Farber to begin um potentially designing that in the next few weeks here. Okay. Is the skate park going to be smaller than we'd originally talked about or TBD? Um frankly, we were sort of locked in during the skate park feasibility study of the existing skate park location and the the um the existing playground. We got some community push back about the proposal to potentially move the playground around. So the timing of the Glen Lake Activity Center being proposed to be torn down gives us sort of whole cloth to to reinvent a a concept for that whole site. So hard to say exactly the finished square foot of the skate park. We would certainly want it to, you know, be in that realm of that we have identified through the skate park feasibility study from two years ago. Have the community investment funds been allocated and budgeted already or do we have to go through an approval process as well with designs and whatnot? So that's a big chunk of the money. Yes. So for 2025 there was design and construction previously allocated of 800,000 and this request would get us up to 300 from the the park and trail improvement. Cool. that 800. So there's 800 in 2025 and 800 in 2026 from cons community investment. Just 26. Just 26. Yeah. We had some dollars back in 2025 for design work. Uh I don't I can't remember which funding source it was from. I think it was probably from the A little confusing. Yeah. Cuz it say it says 800,000 was approved in 2025. Yeah, we we it was in 2025, but we didn't use it because we weren't ready. So we just shifted it over. It's like a carryover. So, the dollars are still there for the project. It's not 1.6, it's 800,000. Got it. And we also did apply for Henipin County uh grant. We didn't receive it this year. I think we'll probably try to apply again. There's been talk at the state um legislature about funding skate parks. Yeah, they're not doing much. Um so, um we haven't heard from there. So, this is where we're at currently with. And is there any any thinking about the fact that it maybe should be somewhere else or is it locked in to be at Glen Lake? The skate park feasibility study went through the process of identifying this from a trails connection standpoint, adjacency to schools. I think the opportunity of the activity center going away makes it more integral to that whole corner. And frankly, I think we could do a better concept than was laid out in the feasibility study. Um, but we went through that whole process to identify that location. Mhm. Yep. Okay. Uh, next page is a big number. It's the Opus Area Park Improvements. That's a a TBD. That's over $30 million. Uh, you do see that the prior prior there's 1.45. We actually got state bonding dollars. Uh, $725,000. That was a match. So the city had 725, state got 725. So that's that 1.45 that we're using for design work and and other things. But um you know future knowing that the opus area is going to change. It is changing already and and as light rail comes in and hoping we can get some green space um you know $30 million is is a big number but um it's hard to say what what it's it would cost for a for a park out there. Any anything to add to that? We've met with the developer of the Minneapolis Mart late last year. They were still conceptualizing what they're interested in developing on that site. The city doesn't own the parcel of land yet. So, we would need to enter into negotiations there. The goal originally was to open a park by the time the light rails running. That doesn't seem feasible at this point. Although, you never know. Yeah. It depends. We're really working with the developer who currently owns that land. Yeah. So, would the land come from the developer? Yes. Just present. Uh, no. We'd have No, we'd have to use some of our money to buy it. Yes. I just heard today on the news that the Timberwolves ownership group was looking at a variety of sites in the metro and that was listed. I was surprised to hear. I don't think it's a new stadium. Yeah. No, not for stadium. Stadium. Timberwolves are looking to move. And I don't know how serious it was, but it was on the ownership group's list of sites. Minneapolis, Martonka. Oo, just a piss off. So then this whole thing would be back to the drawing board. The Timberwolves would want to buy it from the developer. It would be out of our hands. Okay. It didn't seem very likely. I was surprised to see it, though. Yeah, that would be parking would be interesting oneway road system through there. All right. Uh the next one is park and open space purchase. That's 27312. One more page there. Um you can see there is a prior dollar figure there. We actually had uh almost a million dollars and one of the purchases that the city just made was um land down just you know right next to to Big Willow. So uh there is 500,000 earmarked for 2027 uh if something were to come up. So that's what the 983 the 983 was used already. Correct. Yep. But we are allocating another 500 in case a property comes up that we we would like to purchase. So, uh, next one is the park habitat stewardship program. Sorry, stewardship plan. 515,000 over the 5 years. I don't know if that's Leslie maybe. Yeah. So, this is, uh, sort of the ongoing restoration planning that efforts that we're doing. It's really an offshoot of the natural resources master plan. If you recall, the plan included a um implementation schedule for parks to have restoration occurring. And part of that process is developing plans, which you'll see a few tonight. Um once those plans are brought to the park board and we have some community input, then we use capital improvement dollars to actually implement start to imple implement those plans. So, if you look at the schedule for 2026, if you can go down a little bit, um we're scheduled for Victoria Evergreen Park, Kinsel Park, Mitaka Mills Park, and Civic Center. Uh and this is just for the restoration planning and implementation piece. Um and so we have funds allocated every year. And so as these dollars continue over the years, they'll be used for uh restoration projects. uh think of a kind of a large contracted projects and then also ongoing maintenance as we start to do some initial restoration. We'll have to continue to maintain these areas and so all of that is sort of built into these this fund as we go forward. So eventually all the parks all the parks that are big enough to have restoration would be right in maintenance. So, right, and in the in the implementation plan, in the natural resources master plan, we have a table. We've prioritized parks. We're just basically working down that list. And sometimes things move around a little bit. Um, if you know some of these parks are getting master plans, we want to our goal is to have the habitat restoration plan in place before the master planning happens. um just so it's a kind of constitutes a planning layer or planning information for that master planning effort but yes we are sort of systematically going through our parks. Can I ask a question a general overview question about master planning? Sure. So, especially for people that are newer and those of us who probably were told this before and don't remember, is is the concept to have a master plan for every park or where's where's the cut off? The post plan identifies the parks that are either large enough or have a variety enough of amenities in them. ball fields, trails, other items that we would need to essentially survey the community about and and potentially prioritize additional funds to add gazeos, upgrade parking. The human use components are involved in those master plans. But no, it's not every park by any means. Most most of our parks are smaller and fairly straightforward and those don't have dedicated CIP dollars. Okay, moving on. Next page is the park investment plan. Um, so 1.4 million over the 5 years. A lot of these are um playground equipment, tennis courts, um, safety equipment. Darren, anything specific jump out on this page? Uh, nothing out of the ordinary. Oops. Nothing out of the ordinary. So, it's just planned. uh replacement of playgrounds is the main uh thing. So back in 2001, there was a large referendum done to update Minnotonka's parks with the idea that they bonded for this big project to redo the parks between 2002 and 2006 with the idea that okay, we're going to spend this money to revamp these parks, primarily the ones with playgrounds, and then have it so we don't have to do another one of those. we can just go through our CIP and gradually replace equipment and elements of the parks as they age. So, we're just in the process now of starting, we started four years ago replacing playgrounds. So, just continuing on do generally two playgrounds a year um and then uh to replace that and then do safety uh like wood fiber and other things in the in the parks. I assume the schedule is based on the age of the equipment and how fast it primarily age and also just the amount of repairs that were do. So some say one playground might not be as old, but we're having more aging or repairs having to done. So we'll maybe have that one go sooner even though it's maybe not as old. and is I heard just in a conversation with the general public that it'd be nice to have more playground equipment at Glen Lake by the Mightymite fields or whatever those fields are called. Um would that be should that be funded here or is that in the Glen Lake plan? We postponed the upgrade of those playground equipment at Glen Lake knowing that a park plan was coming down the road. So, yes, everything we could fit that the community is asking for on that corner, we're going to try to squeeze it in there. Okay. Everything. Okay. Uh next, speaking of park planning, that's the next uh page. Uh so, park master planning. So, we've got uh master plans listed from 26 through 29. Matt, anything? Yes. Uh business as usual. We're going through the park planning process. Big Willow is about to come up. I have a scope in my inbox from Bolton and Mink who's going to be performing the master plan. Big uh ball fields over at Big Willow, but a lot of ecological restoration. We have the restoration and maintenance plan being presented to you tonight. We'd like to do those in advance of the master planning. A lot of wreck groups over at Big Willow that we need to hear out um hear input from as well as you know, it's a it's a big popular park. So Big Willow is happening this year. Here's the list for future years. Some big upcomers. Lone Lake being a substantial one next year. So, Victoria Evergreen seems smaller. Maybe it's maybe I'm not measuring it right on the map. It seems smaller than those other ones. And it seems it's a lesser task certainly because it doesn't have athletic fields for instance or other demands. It's just one of the bigger parks that the post plan identified for master planning. It'll be a lesser effort than certainly Purgatory or uh Lone Lake or Big Willow. Okay. So that's why the dollar amount smaller. Correct. Um at our last meeting we when we were talking about the off leash areas, there were discussion around additional off leash areas to to explore and we talked about whether the master plan lineup here is correct. If we're looking at incorporating off leash development in some of the some of these other parks, I think in particular looking at this list, it was say like Lone Lake versus Civic Center Park timing. These dollars are just consultancy fees to do the master planning. It's not implementation. But even even so, this would imply that we wouldn't do a master plan, start a master plan for the say the civic center until 2027 if we identified the need to flip them. Yeah. Flip them around or push. So that's still that's still possible as part of this. Okay. I just wanted these these drafts were created months ago at this point. Okay. I just want to make sure that that's still feasible. And um for this year, since you mentioned it, the big willow master plan is is the possibility of the I'll call it the Minnitanka corridor for an off leash area. Is that going to be part of that master plan discussion? Okay. We would identify to the public that the community work group identified this area as a potential off leash area and explain the logic behind that and present it to the public for feedback. Okay. Um, Purgatory Park master plan was kind of our first one. I think we learned a lot over a 12-month process. And you're probably I I'm guessing you've learned from that. You're implementing something. You're probably approaching things a little differently with the ones going forward. Um, and I think it got strength tested about a little bit in our last meeting when we had a big misunderstanding about where the, you know, uh, unleashed dogs would be were, you know, were approved or not approved. So, I was wondering if you could come back at some point and just say, hey, here's what we learned from the process. Here's how I want to approach master plans differently in the future. just maybe maybe even just before you do the That's a big idea because I I think there's a lot of learning that could be our consultants learned a lot. They took some bumps on the process as well. Extra feedback and and extra meetings that they were asked to attend. Those things add up certainly. So yes, there's a lot of lessons to be learned. Um there's new things at Big Willow, the wreck organizations, the the baseball and softball is pretty serious affair over there. Um, so we'll have new challenges certainly, but I think we got the gears turning a bit. All the master plans will uh eventually look similar. They're all have this planning our parks uh aesthetic to them, and we'll certainly be learning the lessons hopefully as we go. Okay, we can keep moving. Um, the next one is the plant pest program 1.16 over the five years. Leslie Matt. Yes. So this is uh what we call our forestry fund. So this is funding that is set aside specifically for tree removal and re reforestation efforts. Um primarily probably the biggest chunk of this money goes towards responding to emerald ashbor. So as you can see when you drive around the city we have been significantly impacted. We will be for several years. Um, and so we have had a slight increase in this fund in terms of the expenditures in 2026 through 20 27. We'll we'll see where we are in 28 and 29, but for the foreseeable future, we have additional funds um that are being requested of the city council just to help us respond to EAB. So that's the these funds are um we this fund I think has been in existence for well over 10 years and um it is we supplement the money through our operational budget as well. So this isn't solely the only funds we have to address forestry issues. Um, but this is primarily what we use for EAB and will be using for EAB. And this include Oops, sorry. This includes removal and replanting or just removal? It includes removal and replanting. Yes. A lot more removal than replanting though at this moment. Yeah, I know that's the expensive part, right? And I just want to point out we do have this year we received a pretty significant grant from the Department of Natural Resources to fund uh ash removal on private property. It's called the relief grant and so you may have heard about it. Um we are we will be actually applying for additional funds once once they become available through the state. Um it was supposed to be this spring, hopefully this fall. um that'll continue to supplement the funds that we have. And then we did actually just find out that or found out that we were selected to receive an additional 270,000 from the Metropolitan Council to assist with dealing with emerald ashbor and ash removal on that that would be focused on public property. Um so the other grant was for private property. So are these dollars I'm sorry I know you want to talk. Um, are these dollars for city land? Um, they are for removing trees on city property and in the right ofway. Okay. Um, the our council policy is that the city will pay for removal of trees in the right ofway if they pose a risk to the to the road or trail. We just lost our screen. Not sure what happened. Um, yes. Yay. So Leslie, was there in the past a subsidy for private citizens to tap into that grant for their private room for their private removal of of ash trees in the past because other cities have that kind of subsidy? So we we received the grant uh last year, we've implemented it this year. That is the first time we had uh funds to fund tree removal on private property. So we have not had any kind of specific fund allocated for private property in the past. Any of these dollars? These aren't No, this is not for private property. The CIP is only for public property. But just just to as I said, the right of way, which is technically private property, but the cities have the city has an easement o over the right of way. So we have an interest in the right ofway. And the council policy is that we do pay for removal in the rightway. So technically those are private trees but they are also uh they have implications for the public. So there will be some sort of announcement or and a explanation of how a person might apply for said funds for private trees. So we had a a a web page devoted to applications for people who are interested in applying for the relief grant. Um those funds are not available right now. We did expend all of those funds. So, we're we're waiting for additional funds. So, hopefully when they become available, uh hopefully this fall, we'll apply for some more and if we're successful in receiving it, then it would be open to the public again. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Next page is the Purgatory Park Red Barn site planning. So, as identified in the Purgatory Park master plan, get $55,000 for planning and design efforts uh in 2026. So, this was an item to do out of Purgatory Park master planning. This was um prior to the off leash dog conversations. So, we've left this page in for now. Um adjacent to this site um is up for conversation for off leash area. So, we're keep losing our page for a second. That's a bit distracting. Just keep talking. Just keep talking on this. Um, so we have um a placeholder in there for a consultant fee to look at what a public use facility, what those potential needs would be met there. Um, how the city would use a site like that, what would be um, you know, generally affordable for the city. We also have um part of the reason why this is still relevant um regardless of the off leash dog conversation is Excelsier Boulevard is getting a trail along the road there and um there's talk about um storm water management potentially occurring on that site. Um uh trail head or some other sort of parking adjacent to the trail between the you know the high school and out east. Um, so there's additional considerations beyond the red barn itself and the off leash conversation about what that that site in Purgatory Park could be used for. So that's what this budget is. So this is not really to look at the structure that would be part of this and but um well let me rephrase then we're not thinking this barn itself can be saved though, right? We have a a engineering study from about 10 years ago now that had initial costs to salvage the barn and repurpose it and it was north of a million dollars to make it safe to store park equipment in. So we would use some of this money to do an architectural engineering assessment and conceptualize some to-dos with the barn. Could we salvage bits and pieces of it? um just to think it through a little bit. Okay. And that would also fund whatever was necessary to do with the poor bats that live there. So I've actually been in touch with DNR bat specialist for about a year or so now who um is very interested in that site and I was communicating with about um helping us install some temporary slashpermanent bout housing in advance of the barn being raised. Okay. So, yeah, we're going to try to take care of them. So, um it sounds like we're kind of on hold on this depending on the off leash discussion. That would presume that the off leash discussion drives the decision on how that space is used. And whereas if you had a design to how to use that space alternatively, you'd have the ability to compare the two. You follow me? Is that a consideration or not? I think everything's on the table at this point. Um, we'll have to see what the city council ultimately has to say about whether or not we want to spend this money depending on what comes of the off leash conversation because it's kind of a unique site particularly with the trails going by. So, it's sort of like you'd hate to go, "Yeah, let's put the dog park there." And then later on go, you know, we really could have had a XYZ there. and it's already been changed. So, just want to make sure that that's on the table when whatever's discussed is discussed. Thanks. Okay. The next page is the Ridgel Commons programming equipment. So, in 2027, we've got 200,000 for refrigeration. So, um when we built Ridgel Commons, we were planning to have um you know, in ground ice and refrigeration, very very expensive. And so to make that project work, we pulled that out of the budget. So have 200,000. That's like a mat system. Is that correct, Darren? So, uh, we don't have to just rely on mother nature, but it will help us create, uh, good ice out there. Correct. We would purchase a liner or rink system that would go in the center, that concrete plaza area. We would own whatever the ice shape would be and then we would rent the refrigeration equipment each year, just have it set up off to the side to run it to have good ice in that area all winter long. This is not a hockey rink. This would be a pleasure take pictures with your friends rink type of deal. So, yeah. And how how big is that? I I looked at it today. It's not I think it's bigger than this room but not a lot bigger. I will measure Darren's going to measure. He's got that 100 ft radius. I don't know what the and I I wondered if there's some history with this. Is there a great clamoring of people saying I really want to go to Ridgedale and go ice skating? Uh I don't I don't know that there's a great amount of people. I think we we have the one event out there. Um, in the winter we the we light the trees and we get a good following out there. I think it's a it's our only urban style park and I think it it's one of those things that has worked in other places. I don't know that we've heard of, you know, hundreds and hundreds of people, but uh I I think it would be a nice site for something this this type of amenity. So, this 200,000 would would create that amenity. It would it would be the purchase of this system to it would totally create that. Then we would rent out of our operating budget and you rent the Gotcha. And then all the electricity to keep it at ice temperature when it's 45. Yeah. We haven't talked about the logistics of that and the season and how long you go. Correct. You know, I mean sometimes in February it is 45 or 50. So uh you know the the the infrastructure is available out there. We did put all the electrical in. So it's there but yes it it would cost money to not free. Yeah. Um there there is I didn't realize this, but Dicks has a refrigerated rink just across the parking lot from there that's open middle of November to roughly middle of February. And it's open for public skating of parts of Friday, Saturday, and Sunday for the same price that we charge up at the ice rink behind us, Ice Arena. Okay. Um, which I So I'm just something to keep in mind. Yeah, understand. It's um personally not a high priority for me, but maybe there's I understand the G- Whiz appeal. Um, so the concrete plaza is approximately 95 ft across in a circle. So just under 100 ft diameter. Okay, we'll keep moving. Uh, next one looks like the Shady Oak Beach. Um, so Shady Oak Beach, uh, run by the recck department. So we look at different things in here. We're looking at, you know, we put the had the saw in the park program out there. Uh the one thing that we were hoping to upgrade is the lifeguard shack. So where people change when they go for uh that program is not heated and so we need to insulate that to have uh proper air and uh heating in that area. We would prefer to do that. So So they don't come with their swimming suit on underneath their snow out. Some do. I think some do, right? Yeah. Um it's just it's been such a popular program. Um, obviously it wasn't set up for winter use when they built it way back and so um, you know, we're planning to run that program again and it was very very popular. We had, you know, over 2,000 reservations and so we just want to winterize the GAR check. That's the a big piece of this page. So we'll just keep going. Uh, Timberline Park is the next uh, page. That's 175,000 in 2028. That's the new park. Darren Matany, that was the land that was donated to the city that previously had a tennis court on it. So when we went through the process and got the neighborhood input, we you know had approvals to move forward with the park. So we put that in for 2028 and that's so far where it's stayed and that's where we'll uh start in 27. We'll start getting neighborhood meetings and do get feedback for what we want for amenities in the park and then get it designed so we can bid it and build it in 2028. So would the thinking back to the page with the the little the park the parks that have the playground equipment that get refreshed every so often is this is not part of that. I mean why is it separate? This will be this is a creation of a new park. Okay. And then eventually then 20 years down the road then this park will be in with the other pages when we start replacing it. That makes sense. Thank you. Why is this one a critical one? It seems like one that we could do whenever you know the money makes sense. That could have been a clerical error. I Yeah, I don't I don't know. Typically because we're expanding that might have been a three. We'll have to look at that. Thank you. that doesn't seem critical for the safety of the general public, right? Uh, okay, we'll keep moving. The next oh, probably five or so pages are all the trail improvement plan. So, they, you know, Matt, I don't know if you want to talk about these, but they kind of broke them up by year and unfortunately they're not the right year. We've got 2026 is the Minnitanka Boulevard, 2728. Matt, just any kind of general overview about trails and it's a it's a big effort. Um we it takes years in advance to start planning these trails. We have a very um uh well-designed trail improvement plan that helps prioritize which trail segments get implemented before others. We also take the opportunity when partnerships or logical connections arise. For instance, when Three Rivers Parks um moves forward on implementing regional trails throughout the city, we would potentially move up some smaller connections to connect to those regional trails. We we try to treat the trail system holistically, but we don't have infinite funds. So, um engineering does their best to look ahead and prioritize based on the trail improvement plan, and the CIP reflects that. 2026 is basically the marsh down to Tonka wood, I believe. Is that correct? And utilities are currently being buried out there. Sure. So, does the city have to pay for that? It seemed like some I don't know that I was reading it here, but someplace there was a fairly short trail that was $2 million or something and that included burying the utilities. And I was just wanting to make sure I understood why that was our problem. So the the funding for the trails comes from um several years ago there was a um franchise fee from gas and electric. So that's where the these coffers um come from. When we have to implement the trail and the wires are above, we would partner with Excel, but we end up fronting the cost on that. We consolidate utilities and trenches where where necessary. We they they do the upgrades at that point that are going to be required to eliminate having to tear the trail up in 5 years. So, we try to get ahead on some of that. I I I'm think it's a great benefit to have buried utilities. I'm not objecting to that. I just I had it in my mind that we knew how much it was for a mile of trail and all of a sudden it was a lot more. There ends up being a variety of surprise expenses. It's not just the actual trail itself. There's utility work and storm water issues and all sorts of stuff come up. There's a there's separate fund for burying of the overhead. So the the costs for burying overhead utilities is not part of this. There's a different page for that. So, but those fees are collected through franchise fees and those are franchise fees that existed prior to what was passed to build the trails. So, uh as far as why the Excel and the power company or the telecommunications companies, they're perfectly happy having their stuff on a pole. So, they don't really there's no benefit to them to bury them. So they they they're easily accessible to go out and fix something hanging up in the air with their trucks. So there's not really a benefit to them to bury them. So that's why we have to foot the bill. So why are they buy burying all that fiber optic in everyone's yard? Because when the power lines got put in 70 80 years ago, there's no poles. There was no technology to drill the drill those things underground. So, trail projects big. You know, obviously these are large and the the price just keeps going up every year. The price per square foot, like you mentioned, it it it doesn't get cheaper. And so, you know, we're hoping to do one a year, but um you know, because of the cost and sometimes we're not we're not doing one a year, but couple big ones coming up and the staff time certainly these end up being a big labor sink, right? So, is there a new just so we can keep a rule of thumb in our mind? um roughly cost per mile or half mile or whatever. It's really tough. For instance, Hopkins Crossroad has a lot of topography, so there's retaining walls that wouldn't be necessary on Minnotonka Boulevard. It's it's very difficult to have just a overall cost per foot. We can see if we can try to find something. I know they had a ballpark and I don't have that. even a range for icky hilly topography with bridges and scary stuff and then flat. Yeah, I don't have a number in mind, but yeah, it seems worth having. Okay. And then the last page is the um the trail rehab page. So, uh just under $1.5 million over the 5 years. Again, this is for rehabbing trails. Um looks like next year we've got some on 62 Vine Hill uh Vinehill Road to 60. Is that correct, Darren? Sorry, for trail rehab. Got some projects next year. So, uh what page 21? So, on this one, um I guess two questions on the Purgatory Park, the timber bridge with the steel bridge. That's the bridge at the south side of the main center or the one right by the parking lot. The one by the parking lot. Okay. And removing the steep slope on the south end of the bridge. That sounds like at the far end of the park. This is this that's Big Willow. Oh, okay. Good. Okay. Yeah. Oh, that's good. I like that because I in the winter I fall down there. Um, don't do that. Yeah. So 2029 is for trail paving in Purgatory Coington and Meadow where there's existing asphalt trails and also then in Big Willows replace that exist. I know. Yeah. Now I missed the big Willow. Now I know exactly what you're talking about. Okay. That's a good safety move. Yeah. Then 2026. So the whole asphalt trail that goes along Conor Road 62 from basically Baker to Vinehill Road would be an overlay on that. uh pedestrian improvements, ped ramp improvements at the signalized intersections uh there. And then 2027 uh Hillway Road, Orchard Road, uh Arthur Street West, actually we just paved that last week because the trail got damaged from a truck that had to drive on it and blew it up. So that we that one moved up the process uh pretty fast. Uh then Dwight Lane, which is a short connection from Dwight Lane, goes up to YMCA Lane. There's a trail there. Um Lynwood Road is right on the north side of Highway 7 by the southern target entrance for by the bank and the uh so there's a trail on the north side that goes to towards Old Excelsier. Oh yeah, I've been on that. That needs Yeah. Sorry. and then uh uh the short segment on uh Townline Road. So, and then that last page just uh was a map that showed the um the trail projects uh in the next four years. So, just kind of a a visual of where we're at throughout the city. All right. I'm trying to remember and maybe it's maybe it's on there in red I guess. Uh the McGinty Road deal to try to get a trail going from say uh right out here out towards McGinty Road to Why is that is that is that in some I know the mayor always talks about that. Three rivers. So, Three Rivers is currently studying a connection between, they don't have a route planned, but Weisetta down to our to their regional trail connection by our civic center. So, the route would have to come through that location. So, we're sort of waiting and hoping that Three Rivers would implement the trail through there. That would be great. Thanks. So, again, those are the park and trail pages. you know, I don't know if you have any other general comments or questions or or um did we miss anything? Is there something in there that we should pull out or uh you know, funding priorities? Anything moved up or back or again, we're looking for feedback and whether we pass it along as is or with, you know, some suggested modifications. I think that's we're just looking for feedback tonight. So, yeah, I've got uh I've got some feedback. Um, so the what what I'm what I'm thinking here is kind of stemming from uh the work that's already in place through uh the through Jace Alexander and as the director of DEI for the city and also from my own personal standpoint as kind of a voice for people with disabilities and um concerns about uh equity and inclusion in our planning and our expenditures, which is what we're talking about here. And so um I have some thoughts and questions about where how we got to where we are as it relates to some of those matters. So the first thing I would say is um when I look at priorities, the CIP priority rankings number one through three, which is on page 35 of our meeting packet, and you you pointed them out. Um I'm curious if we would consider um ADA related concerns or accessibility inclusion related concerns for people with altered ability. uh number one, a project necessary for public health and safety or to meet legal mandates a as a priority level. Um, so I would be interested in your comment on that, but I'd also like to hear from potentially the city attorney as well as Jace Alexander on where they would prioritize uh these these matters because my concern when looking at how we prioritized these different expenditures um this should this you know questions of accessibility and inclusion should then rise in my opinion to the level of uh the ADA and legal mandates. Now, um, however that falls, however that interpretation falls between, I would say one and two on the on the considerations, um, it still may be something that as a park board or as a city, uh, in conjunction and in input from the perhaps the DEI commission andor, uh, Jason Alexander directly uh we may say we we want to elevate equity focused inclusivity focused expenditures. Uh now that presupposes that uh effectively none of this was uh none of this type of discussion or planning was included in the parks open space and trails plan or the uh the trail improvement plan or the park investment plan. the the uh trail, yeah, the park investment plan. And I quite honestly didn't see any verbiage in any of those documents that indicated uh inclusion, accessibility, or equity as um points of focus. And so it makes me concerned especially given that you know our DE DEI staff as well as the DEI commission had not was not yet formed when these were uh these plans were put into place and so some of these toolkits like I know as staff you have an equity toolkit that you're supposed to be using uh that was not in place either for for you to kind of reset and say to yourself, how is this um how is this meeting our inclusivity goals or do we even have those goals when we were making when these decisions were being made in the last several years? Um and uh so I would like I would like us to um basically reassess the post the trail improvement and the park investment plan uh for an inclusion focused project funding uh system as opposed to the way it's being proposed now. And uh as a city, we would not be uh out of line to do that. In fact, it it's probable that we would be either on time relative to most municipalities with the exception of certain ones in our own metro area like Minneapolis who started doing some of this work a decade ago to assess their uh the degree to which their parks and wreck system uh was inclusive and accessible. and to the point where they have, you know, even in this 25 26 years a recreation uh parks and wreck Minneapolis ADA update. So, they're kind of making that uh a staff priority to to glean through everything that's being done with the lens of uh the ADA. And then they also have a uh parks for all comprehen parks for all comprehensive plan for that's over a 15-year time period that was implemented in 2021 through 2036. So I I believe that Minnotonka should have the same uh focus as we're deciding about tens of millions of dollars o uh being spent over 5 years that before we start spending it, we should be reassessing whether it's really uh focused on accessibility and inclusivity. Um because that's what that's what this is all about is making sure as many people as possible that want to come to our parks or be involved in our recreation activities can do it and that they're that everybody is is included and it's accessible to them. Um again the the National Recreation and Park Association um uh organization which you guys are probably be aware of or members members in um they have great resources right on they have a park for inclusion resources web page. So a lot of this work um in terms of how this should be done does not require uh brand new thinking um because it it's uh part of your national organization that uh is elevating this. We also have apart from Minneapolis another lo local leader and apart from Jace Alexander as our our kind of citywide equity and inclusion leader. Um but we have the public health law center in St. Paul has a uh a publication that they they printed in October or uh published in 2024 October uh entitled elevating equitable access to parks and again it's another kind of uh highlight roadmap uh mechanism for for cities to think about development redevelopment uh upkeep and the like regarding equity and inclusion and accessibility and um so I'm not sure what the best uh uh kind of way to direct but I would like uh instead I would like to to make this actionable instead of just a discussion or me saying something. Um, so there's a couple ways that that I I guess I I seek your opinion on how how to do this, but um we haven't had in place as far as I can tell um kind of equity toolkit mechanisms for the decision-m that this board does or has in the past. and I'm not sure that many commissions or boards do. And so we've got plans that are rolling that haven't had this review or lens. And rather than just continuing on and letting 5 years of work and money be spent without this lens, I feel like we should have a hard stop and a review and um utilize either the city staff equity toolkit andor within each board, in our case the park board, utilize, you know, regional best practice, regional road maps, like Minneapolis has already put together or utilize the national organizations that you guys are members of probably and aware of like the National Recreation and Park Association to um to do a comb through and a reassessment of how do how does our plannings and our spending priorities really reflect um park equity, accessibility, and inclusivity. Um because my concern is that we will continue to fall behind in meeting those goals for members of our community and this will yeah we'll just continue to fall further behind in in prioritizing funding for those groups. So, uh, I'm curious what my colleagues think, but also from staff, uh, other than kind of a directive, uh, you know, for me to formally request that, which I'm happy to do, uh, what you would recommend as a mechanism to, uh, to get this going. Well, I'll I'll take a make a comment, I guess. Maybe staff has a better way to think about it. I think you raised some some very good points. Um, our role is kind of to be a sounding board or for the city council and stuff. We have not had any direction from the DEI unit or from the city attorney regarding these very valid issues and I think it was presumptuous for us to impose a lens on that in the context of the timeline for the CIP. But I I think it's a really good point to have as a I don't know if it's a motion or a note or whatever, but I think I think you raised really good points that it would be what's the city council's po position on this because they are excellent points, but we've had no direction or guidance provided in terms of what the council's uh perspective on that is other than obviously the formation of DEI and that um the city attorney is new so it's going to be new for that but I think that's a really good point and I think that would be definitely worth at least from my perspective worth uh incorporating either that's a motion or just a statement uh if others are on board with that to kind of query the the council what what they want us to do what's the how we would approach that. So if I may um chair Ingraham and Precord members just just to help me understand kind of what what you're saying. So, are you um are you are you looking at the CIP here as it's being presented, which is a a five-year program that we see every year? It's kind of a rolling five-year program, and we have elements in the program um like trail master planning and park master planning and habitat restoration. Are you suggesting that each of those items or the pages we call them pages or or projects are looked at through a DI DEI lens. Um you also mentioned the post plan, the trail improvement plan. Those are whole separate planning efforts that have taken place um that sort of guide what goes into the CIP. Um they have their own goals. Um, I I haven't studied the post plan recently, but I'm pretty sure I recall there was an accessibility and inclusivity part of the plan that is intended to be applied whenever we use it. So, when we do a park master plan, we're, you know, trying to achieve the goals of the post plan as a whole. Um, I'm just trying to trying to understand what exactly you're looking for. And so just to kind of maybe throw it back to you. Sure. So yeah, thank you. Um, and this is just iterative. We're we're trying to kind of uh narrow and and hone and how do we make this work? So when I look at page uh 37 of our packet and 36, you know, we've got these brief summary statements about what the post plan is, what the trail improvement plan is, and what the park investment plan is. And then of course as we just moved through the CIP we we looked at specific funding both at p as a page a single page for a single project or over five years but also trail improvement plan park improvement plan and um so anyway when I when we look at these summaries of what these plans are which of course the plans are 50 20 30, 70, whatever pages. Anyway, the summaries at least do not indicate anything about equity, inclusion, or accessibility, which is uh a major problem uh in in my opinion. Um and it's not just uh I I you know, words matter, summary matters, it shows you what your values are, right? So the fact that we don't see in the post plan that there's a focus on accessibility and inclusivity and we don't see in a summary of a tip or PIP the same language tells me that we haven't really thought of that. That hasn't really been on the radar. And that's a major problem in my opinion. and whether I'm directed by the city council. To me, it's a it's it's about justice. So, I'm not going to wait to be told what I think justice should look like in our city. So, I'm just going to speak that. Um, so I do think we should uh we should strongly act or recommend that before we continue to allocate money for projects that were uh decided upon andor strongly proposed based on, you know, uh, good intentions and good planning, but without a clear focus on equity, accessibility, inclusivity, we need to stop and reassess. And then once that's part of our playbook as a park board and lots of other boards and commissions through the help of the DEI commission input through the help of Jace Alexander then it's embedded and this doesn't become what will be for us or for the city council big lifts and staff to reassess all this stuff that has been on the burner and churning through for the last several years but without this important uh lens just justice based lens that I think has been missing. Uh so I do think it's both Leslie. It's both page by page for for the projects in which there's specific monies and allocations to say is this really do we would we really spend this money in this way or on this project from the lens I'm describing? Yay or nay. And it may result in things being completely eliminated or it may result in saying we don't have hardly any money for this that or the other that is a primary accessibility inclusivity focus. So therefore money's already earmarked for these other projects are gone. Those projects are gone because our focus should be in in a in a different direction. So, it's both page by page and it's also these larger plans being um reassessed. Now, I've already had communications with Jason Alexander. Uh he and I have discussed uh varieties of issues unrelated to the park board through other volunteer groups that I'm a part of. and uh they uh you know he he is not um uh he he can't be everywhere all at once for the entire city. So, so we we have to we have to be taught or learn how to do some of this equity analysis for the sake of the community, for the sake of our positions here on this part board, and for the sake of providing good input and feedback to the city council to make sure that the decisions we're passing along or recommending or or providing affirmations on uh have been vetted in this way in these with this lens in mind just just as we use other metrics you know usage uh you know stewardship of money as you were kind of saying I want to understand better you know trail price per foot or per mile. We care about these things and I care about this and I think I hope my fellow park members do too. So, uh, so it's a both and in my in my opinion, Leslie, some of it could be fairly easily addressed uh, with just adding comments as far as ADA wise. So, every every trail in the trail improvement plan when it gets rebuilt addresses all the ADA, right? So, we design it new ped ramps uh, depending on what's needed at traffic signal. So all the trails are looked at ADA wise uh to make sure they're current and then that's both new uh new construction in the trail improvement plan and then what also we do in the trail rehabilitation. So if we overlay a trail every pedestrian ramp crossing over a street we get current uh current ADA standards. So a lot of that is addressed, you know, when we get new playground equipment, we meet with the vendors and look at what is what are some accessible elements in the playground or playground um amenities or features in a playground equipment, you know, for accessible things that that are available for, you know, when doing the uh picking out playground equipment. So we it may not be specifically addressed but we could address fairly easily parts of what you're saying that we're already doing. So like the skate park would be developed with ADA in mind. Correct. If it's done. So for instance referring to the post plan the guiding principle of equity inclusion has four specific goals. de uh equity inclusion parks and recreation facilities help build diverse and equitable inclusion. Um inclusive to our community, develop park programming and facilities that fit the need of community through the lens of diversity, equity, inclusion, encourage recreation participation by all park users uh regardless of race, age, gender ability. These are things that we put up front in our or could certainly do better in in terms of our master planning outreach and making it very clear that when we refer to the post plan that we call out these you know distinct goals. Um this is page 19 of the post plan. Um you know and really highlight those as soliciting that particular feedback from the community. Um you know we do want to expand our parks to as many people as possible. So the the for instance the problem with the post plan is there's a lot in here. Um and some of it certainly does get lost. Um but one of the key guiding principles is promote equity and inclusion, prioritize equity throughout the parks, open space and trail system. And so we could certainly do a better job of quantifying what that looks like as the projects roll out. Yeah. Yeah. I think um you know I think anytime we're we're in in the position of making a decision to move something forward uh I would like staff to have an equity note for the recommendation. Uh, and I would like that note to reflect that staff has engaged in within the community to get feedback that this actually represents something that people who are concerned about or themselves deal with accessibility or inclusivity pro uh difficulties think actually accomplishes what they hope. as opposed to uh assumptions being made or I read this in a book or a pamphlet about how to do uh accessibility builds in a playground or this right so we need to know from members of the disability community that this is what actually is impactful and then the second is uh kind of progress reports right how how are we doing How is this? How what what do we what have we accomplished? What do we continue to accomplish? So, um it's very explicit for for us, for the community, uh because right now, page by page, there's nothing explicit about about this. And so it it leaves it leaves me with the question and again I don't think I'm I don't think I'm off completely that this this maybe wasn't the first lens that people were using. Um I do I do I have I have seen uh I I have young children so I'm I'm at playgrounds all the time. I have seen playgrounds revamped in this city that are demonstrably inaccessible in their revamped state. And I think to myself, okay, well, that was a missed opportunity. Uh, and so, um, so I don't want anybody else to have that sense as they encounter our parks or try to ac one thing would be kind of, uh, an equity impact statement. would be or I don't know what determine something along those lines for every for every project that we need to make a decision on uh would be helpful and I don't you know I guess I'm still waiting to get some more information on the process within the city already for equity uh assessments because I know there is one uh But uh I think it would be helpful for us as a commission as well. This is kind of secondary to this immediate business, but in general for uh Jace Alexander to be able to come talk to us about um about these processes integrating into our future decision- making uh for whatever we're dealing with today. we're dealing with CIP and natural resources planning, but uh to be able to use the same these same tools to help us as we go forward with whatever is on our agenda. Um but it would be helpful for me, I think it would be helpful for the city council to um see more explicitly how equity considerations have been addressed. Um, I'd almost tack on to that a little bit just saying that, you know, you can meet all the minimum ADA guidelines, but that's the minimum, right? but then looking at it through an equity lens of what can we do to go above and beyond to really make sure we're being accessible and equitable. Um, so I think I understand what you're saying is that we can we can add this verbiage into the documents, but that's really just skimming the surface of what we could be doing. we could be looking at it through a completely different lens and really making it more of a priority as opposed to a this is our minimum checklist of we've hit these minimum things that we have to do. What else can we do to make it even better? So, you mentioning the playgrounds and how yes, they probably are built to ADA standards, right? But there are additional things that could be added to a playground to make it even that much more accessible and inclusive for people of different abilities. So, I think that's kind of what we're talking about is like really going back and looking at the documents through a different lens completely and saying, have we tried to do everything we can to make these parks, trails, playgrounds, whatever, as accessible and inclusive as possible? If I'm understanding you right, I think you said it perfect. Yep. So, um, from an actionability perspective here, our action we would take tonight that we're supposed to take tonight is whether or not we recommend these going forward to the city council in their current form. um or not recommend that going forward. Um and or with changes. I'm sorry. Or with changes. Or with changes. Yeah, that's true. Chair, I might add, I think it's important you you made some very good points and in my opinion, Jayce is our expert and and I would like to personally, you know, use him as we work through this process. Number one, and then two, I think it's a good idea to have him come and talk about the future. So, not not necessarily holding up projects, but as we work through this 2026 CIP with him and the DII division, we've got a second person now, too. You know, they just haven't gotten to a lot of things, right? I mean, it's it's a newer division and so I think uh I think that would be a good idea to for us as staff to go back to him. We work with a lot of people across different departments and divisions. Um, as you know, a lot of eyes are on the CIP and making sure that uh he and Karen, our new our new DEI staff member, see that too. I think that would be may be an option moving forward. If I could just add um I like to it helps me to sort of synthesize things that I'm hearing from the board and and want to make sure that everyone on the board has a chance to respond, but I'm I'm hearing some different layers to this. So, there's the CIP here in particular that you're seeing, which is these are pages in a much larger three three- ring binder full of pages that the council sees. Um we do um right now have a process where we denote those that are uh you know more on the lines of sustainability uh stewardship. We have some icons on some of these pages or at least we used to. I'm not sure if they're still there or not. But if the if the park board wants to um provide that feedback to the council that perhaps there should be that that the park board wants to see that diversity, equity, inclusive inclusivity lens to the CIP as a whole and especially to the pages that you see. I think that's certainly a something that you know you you guys could recommend. Um, and then I see I hear you're talking about the specific planning efforts that we've undertaken. Um, as we continue to work through those, those lead to new projects, um, making sure that we have and we're using some kind of lens and a way to assess them. I do think having Jace actually come and speak and and actually you read my mind because I was planning on having Jace come and speak to the park board as well as Ally Sutherland, our sustainability coordinator. Um those I think are two lenses that would be really beneficial as you um look at some of the work you do related to parks and and parks and park access and things like that. Um so there's that and then um you will uh every year the park board will see their and re have a chance to review your strategic plan. And so that's something certainly with the new parkboard members that's something that will be brought to you I think um Kelly do we do that in December or January I can't somewhere around around that time frame that could be a time to include some of those ideas and desires in the strategic plan of the board as well. Um so I think there's there's different layers of this that you can start to incorporate and work this into uh if you if the if the board wants to do that. So, I think that's all those are are good ideas, but we certainly want to have a chance for the park board other park board members to reflect on that. Um, reflecting back on the last few years that I've been on the board, I agree that um, equity and inclusion have not been enough of a priority in our discussions and do regret that. We do have an opportunity as the parks group to kind of be a leader in it if we so choose to be. Um, I do want to do it in a way that's that's synergist with the strategy of the city though. Um, just and their goals and their strategy just so we're not doing things that they would not approve, for example. Um, so so I love the idea of meeting with Jace. maybe he can help us with how what the strategy for the city and goals for the city are starting to look like so that as we're talking and making decisions we can ensure that we're we're marching to a similar beat. Um, if you do already have I don't think my my recommendation would be not to hold any of this up, not to stop it right now, but if you do have equity inclusion comments that are relevant on the pages, it would be kind of cool if we were the group that that really made a mark and made a point of it. Um, and then and then recognize that we have we have some work to do over the course of the next year. This we're not committing to all five years right now. We're kind of committing to to 12 months really. Um, so recognizes a group that we have some some work to do to up our game in this area. Caleb, I appreciate and respect greatly your commentary and align to it very much uh in terms of heightening awareness of what you're describing for equity and inclusion. And I also respect that what the staff has done. They have used that lens. It's not that it's been in and you know absent or a wall. it just may not have shown up in the manner that maybe we would have liked to have seen it. So, uh, having it more front and center, I think, is a is a good idea and a noble idea and the concept of justice is correct there. And so, um, yeah, I I can definitely align to those comments. I could imagine taking the Sorry, I'm not on I could imagine taking the um the page that's park investment plan talking about updating all the um playground equipment. I don't know what page that is. It says it's one of one. Huh. on the bottom. It says one of one on mine. I don't know. Uh anyway, it's the park investment plan. It's the one about updating the playground equipment. Um, since you particularly brought that up, I could certainly support adding some language to this to um direct staff to work with some kind of with a group. I don't know how to find a group that would want to work with the city, but maybe you do to say these are given these four choices for playground equipment. This is better. That's terrible. That kind of thing. Yeah. So, uh I um I don't bring these issues up as some sort of expert uh on exactly what this should look like down uh or with any with with really any detail. It's uh just just as we rely on staff as parkboard members, just as staff relies on consulting agencies or companies, uh that's we we would still work within that framework, but we would have not just as a lens as as you said, and I totally 100% agree with exactly what you said, but as an elevated focus. And that's what's missing from just saying, "We approve this, but g whiz, city council, we'd like you to have a stronger equity assessment for these projects." Um, because what I'm talking about is is not checking the boxes. It's it's about a fundamental I think it's more fundamental the shift that I'm describing for how we should be addressing the money we spend on parks, the money we spend on wreck in this city and th this as you said Leslie and I I appreciate that perspective is a tiny part of the CIP book right but when I think of accessibility and inclusion within a city. One of the most blatant places that shows up or doesn't show up as a fundamental foundational priority is in parks and wreck activities. Because most of the limitations that people think about that they're they have abbleism embedded into city functioning is related to physical or cognitive disabilities. and parks and wreck is a big flag in those for in that sphere. Okay. as opposed to you know I don't know economic development or you know I mean there are other areas there are lots of areas where these issues matter but park and wreck activities and trails and playgrounds are a very visible part in which community members or visitors to our community uh will or will not interact based on how well the city has fundamentally prioritized equity and inclusive accessibility themes and frameworks into their the foundation of what they come up with. And because my concern is that it's not been the case uh not not not out of malfeasance but just not out of it being a foundational component to to the thinking and planning that by moving forward much more than perhaps the end of this fiscal year with the status quo means we're missing an opportunity a major opportunity to be leaders for uh our community members and for the uh perhaps the metro in this realm. So, uh, the first thing I would say is, uh, maybe let's could we formalize a I could I direct staff to meet with Jason or find a time that Jason Alexander could meet with us in the next one or two meetings so we can start getting his we can start being an extension of his expertise as we make these decisions sooner rather than later. and then craft with the help of parkboard members or staff some sort of recommendation to the city council that's effective effectively saying we we we have significant concerns that the CIP as it relates to park matters should be reassessed with a foundation and focus on accessibility and inclusion and then brought back to the park board for review. When is this being uh submitted to the city council? The next study session is June 15th. So soon, very soon. So, typically typically the CIP does not come back to the park board. Um, that's just the process and how it's been. Like again, the city council sees it in June. I believe it's a September date and then uh approval in December. So that's that's the current process. So then it really would be our recommendation would be when it goes to the city council that there is some sort of stipulation within it that they need to pay attention or they need to elevate the thought of DEI concerns within this plan. So when they look at it, they need to they need to look at it through the lens of DEI. Uh I or at least I mean it needs to be a consideration that they think about it because it wasn't explicitly put into the plan. So right, we would need to ask them to think about it and it would pertain to any any of the projects. not just parkour basically pertains to any city project. Um I think it's I think it's a good I think it's a a good point and um I think for I do think meeting with having Jace meet with us and maybe we had to attorney too. I don't know but Jayce meeting because we had no input from that. Um, I'm more interested in Jace meeting with staff to come up with how staff incorporates these goals in our planning because by the time stuff comes to us, it's too late. Yeah. Um, you know, that's we're just here to kind of review work. And to be fair, this is a lot of money. Yeah. That's already been allocated. And if we truly care about this, we want to make sure that it's being paid attention to so that this money doesn't isn't used improperly or not in the best way possible. So I think um one just to see see move things along our I think one thing would be to recommend that this moves forward in its current form. But with the flag you raised about the concern whether or not um the DEI goals are reflected as strongly as they should be because I think it's I think you bring a good point which is they probably aren't. um but in the absence of knowing what the city's direction is for that in terms of what the I mean we're we're following along with priorities that we're getting through staff and so I'm guessing right now there's a there's a bigger issue just in general and maybe one way that to flag it is as this goes forward we just make the notation that um we would like to see more thoughtful uh emphasis placed on those those um goals. goals and and also potentially, you know, adjusting the priorities or adding a priority to the CIP process around those goals. But I think um I just I think I think we have to keep moving forward with the investments here just because of the timeliness of contracts and a lot of these things. Well, a good number of these really aren't what I would, you know, think of as DEI related like restoration plans and MRA ashbor and things like that. Um, Cullen could be because of the kinds of trails that go in. Uh, certainly uh whoever made the point about the the park equipment certainly could. Um, but I do think to to uh Kayla's point, um, we've got some terminology in the post plan, but we haven't really executed through in terms of verbalizing more explicitly how it's impacting um, things. And I and I I would agree with Cory's comment about, you know, there's the there's this threshold for ADA and then there's, you know, because I've seen comments about people who um and I apologize, I'm not that knowledgeable about this stuff, but who come back with saying, you know, what's the right terminology for sensory kids with sensory issues about how, you know, the park equipment and stuff like that, they may be able to access it, but there's still sensory overload issues and stuff that that can be addressed. Um, [Music] so so I don't know what all that means. Need a a motion or a decision from us as an outcome of this section? We have to make a recommendation to move these forward or not. Yeah, ideally the the board is making a recommendation regarding the CIP portion that you're seeing that's going to the um council in the form of a motion and a vote ideally. So I'm just curious how you and I think rather than trying to work through each of these and add a dimension of how much I think just a blanket statement about the you know the relative importance um that's placed on you know the uh accessibility equity and inclusion elements would be appropriate because I think it probably flows through other departments plans as well. Mhm. Well, it certainly this should be this should be citywide. It it should touch all all manner of things, but my point again is today here we are as park board members and we know that the park system, the park portion of our city is a major uh is a major place in which accessibility inclusivity can be leveraged for the greater good of the community. So I would modify slightly what you're what you're saying aboutation and say uh all CIP projects should be reassessed by the city council with an equity foundation and any CIP project for which multi-year funding is allocated should be uh considered for um like a temporary hold for a more in-depth accessibility inclusivity review. Now, we could look at that or we could direct staff to look at that. So, I'm not talking about something that says this year we're doing this trail, the next year we're doing this trail. I'm talking about and maybe there isn't one. I'd have to delve back into each of these pages. You know, certain projects if we start now, we're going for 5 years because it takes 200 grand every year to finish this project. But we don't want to spend that million if it really doesn't reflect at its foundation accessibility, inclusivity. So, we don't want to start that train rolling on that kind of project. That's different than the ones that yes, there's funding every year, but it's for a new segment, let's say, separate segment, and we have some we have several of those pages. That's a different thing to me because we can then reassess that every year through our equity lens. Staff can do it. We can do it. But a project that hasn't started, could start, requires funding every year to keep it going that we're not sure has been adequately vetted through a lens of accessibility. To me, we should recommend those be halted by the city council. So, that would be my caveat in a general statement about equity. uh the equity should be the foundation and reassessed on all of these and any CIP that requires funding year after year to see to fruition a final project that uh should be put put on hold until a more formal full equity review can be done or another perspective um is there a way for staff to go through these pages again quickly and just update either the description or the justification and add where applicable a DAEI component like within a description for parks or playgrounds. It would just have something that says we're going to look at this through a DEI lens or we're going to you know like just something quick that you can add into these pages. If this is going to city council quickly soon, there might not be time to do a whole overhaul, but maybe there's a way to just take these individual project pages and just quickly update them. Well, there's another way to look at this is that there are only 20ish here. Can't we just can we look at the first five and talk through so that we're clear everybody's clear on what sorts of things you think are okay to move forward and are not because I'm I'm not completely clear on what you mean. I mean, I I get the idea about if it's a long project, but Oh, let me let me there's new. My my point is though that by doing the work that's in front of us, it's already putting things that were in motion and thought of as important prior to an equity focus in in on the books for money being spent as opposed to look, you know, team city staff. Uh if equity was at the foundation of what you were thinking we should spend money on in this city, would it really look like these projects? And maybe the answer is absolutely. But I well let me I actually would hope that that's not the case because I do think we can do better and I hope we will do better in the future. So I would think that if we really said foundationally uh this is our focus going forward that what we have in front of us would actually change to reflect that. Um let let me let me just maybe I'm going to try to be too practical. I and again I'm not I agree I agree with your sentiments totally. A major example, a major thrust of the city has been connectivity and access, the ability for people to not have to drive their cars to be able to take trails and that a significant number of these pages and dollars relate to trails expansion. And I can't imagine we want to put those on hold to reassess whether or not we want to do those trails, how they're executed perhaps. Are we at the minimum of ADA or can we or are they going to cost a little more than they say here because we want to go a little bit above what those trails would look like. Um, but I I I I got to believe that the city council would want to continue to ex to pursue the trail expansion plan. the efforts around natural resources, emmon ashbor, um all those all those plans that's our natural resource we're protecting. And I and I again I I I don't think those would be significantly changed. Would we say we're going to we're going to forego any natural resource restoration dollars for the next three years while we develop a DEI plan for the city to then create new plans based on that? I don't know. I I think that's an expensive proposition for our natural resources. Um skate park, maybe that's one that we shouldn't be saying is one that gets teed up because one, it's not happening yet. Two, Lake Park. Glenn Lake Park, I'm sorry, Glenn Lake Park. Um, and that and that clearly, you know, a greater uh focus on that your issues could result in a different kind of design for that. Um, you know, I think certainly the playground equipment, uh, you know, improvements or changes could do that, too. But um when you say uh you want to hold for a reassessment of all the plans with a DEI lens, it it frankly bothers me because one, we've been given no DEI lens from the city to apply and and I would think the staff Huh. Would the staff agree with that? I mean, well, certainly the park board hasn't. Yeah. Yeah. But I'm asking am I staff? equity assessment tool that we use internally for internal programs um but not something that we've brought forth to commiss or boards as of yet. So would you say right now you're developing your plans based on the city's guidance for DEI? Yeah, I would say overall Sure. Y okay we use the tool. So we needed just to maybe better awareness of that just as just as anformational point, right? and and you know if to having Jace come and talk to the park board and I think we can try to see if he's available in August which is your next regular meeting next meeting um that might be a good time to talk about what types of tools could be used at a commission level uh as far as assessing projects. Um, you know, we do have, again, the parkboard has a strategic plan. Um, you will review that next year for the year after that. That certainly is a time to also incorporate some equity language if you so choose. Um but also uh having some mechanism or assessment tool to re use to review projects whether it's at a staff level or even at a parkboard level. That's something we could also look into and and seek advice from Jace as well on that. Dave, I tend to agree with you. I um I'm more practical. Also, I think there's a balancing act we have to do here between what is aspirational and what's practical. And I think that as I said to Caleb, I completely align to his sentiments. And I really respect the advocacy to heighten awareness here. But I also don't think we should throw sand in the gears of what has been done, which still has an overlay of some DEI. It just hasn't shown up in these reports to Caleb's point. But I do think that we should say this is a multiffactorial analysis that we're going to be doing in the future. And as one of the factors in that multiffactoral analysis is that DEI is going to have heavier waiting than we've had in the past. So do we need a motion to to move what do we need what do we need given this isn't a typical kind of thing. This is a motion to move these forward to the board to the to the city council with the directive around uh I don't know if we're quering them on how on how effectively they're incorporating DEI into these or or requesting that they more actively involve DEI uh objectives in our planning process because it may maybe it's happening at your level. We just haven't seen it. Yeah. Right. I mean, so I guess you know, so what's before you now are these pages of the cap. So if you choose to recommend approval and moving these forward to the coun to the city council for review with no changes, no changes to, you know, dollar amounts and this project over that project. Um, but you want the council to review with a DEI lens when they when they go and review the exact same thing you're reviewing. That's certainly something you can put into a motion. Um, certainly, you know, having Jayce come and talk to the parkour, that's that doesn't have to be a motion that no, I I hear you guys on that. Um, and then also using it more as a lens going forward. I don't think we need a specific motion on that. I'm hearing there's uh some consensus on staff direction. So, I don't feel like we need a motion on that, but ideally we do have a motion specific to these CIP pages are are in front of you. So, before we do that, did anybody have any because I have one more question, but anyone have other more questions about these before we entertain a motion? Go ahead. So you have a question or a question. Okay. A totally different topic. In fact, it feels very secondary at this point after the what you brought up which is very important. So I have okay something that is kind of on the same wavelength. Um I would propose that um we remove the skating rink in the up at Ridgedale Commons. Okay. So, so can I can I uh and and I I hear I hear exactly what you're saying. I'm just wondering if we should uh close off the equity discussion and make our motion and recommendation on that. I think there's there can be an equity issue related to that related to the ice ice rink. Okay. Well, let me ask my question because it doesn't relate but and it does seem very secondary now. Uh this is for more to Matt is um so the city council is going to be reviewing and making some decisions on purgatory relative to the off leash areas and that will involve funds. We shouldn't be worried at all about the CIP aspect relative to any funds that would beol involved in the off leash area there. None of those others. Okay. So, so that's that's a separate separate bucket they're going to have to solve for. Correct. Okay. Thank you. It's not our responsibility to Yeah. on that, but it could be added before December. Correct. Okay. Got it. Yeah. They could choose that, but it wouldn't involve say, okay, we got to drop this to do that. Or could Okay, just so you know, like it could drop any ice ring to do that. Yeah. Okay. Uh I just think if if we're talking about able-bodied people uh or aeness, that's sort of an assumption about So that assumes they can't skate. The rules say you can't be on the ice without skates, but she doesn't mean you have to be standing on skates to skate. Okay. The 2027, I think we have some time to take a step back and like really think about the proposal because it's two years out. I feel like what we're really committing to is the 2026, correct? The 2026. I think the project needs a little more like what are we really thinking here and why are we doing it? But um maybe not take it off right now because I don't think that money's getting Yeah. Although I think what I was gonna again I'm trying to be as I'm trying to be a little bit more specific than just uh you know in uh make equity the foundation of this decision. City Council. I would like to call out a few projects that I think uh I I would like to be more explicit to the city council about projects that we can see that maybe this the city would rework if they had started from the foundation of equity. One of them is the skate park, which is not called the skate park. It's called Glen Lake Park, but everybody knows what's been there. Okay. Um, so from an equity lens, you would have to say to yourself, is that what we envision maintaining in this space? From an equity lens, you'd have to say to yourself, does does the ice rank represent what we, you know, is that reflective of this foundational value that we want to move forward with as we make these decisions? Those are two things we could call out in our recommendation to the city council. So there may be a pragmatic we um we approve or we we recommend in general the CIP. We request that the city council elevate an equity re review as they decide whether to finally to make final approval. But we specifically request these two projects be reconsidered or whatever term we want to use from a inclusivity and access accessibility standpoint. Kev, I I don't feel comfortable with that. Um I don't feel like I have the information to fully understand why you would make that determination. I haven't heard from this uh this consultant you're talking about. As I said, this is a multiffactorial, but not the primary factorial. So, you're making it primary, and I'm not sure that that's correct here. I have a son who was a phenomenal skateboarder, and he had friends in wheelchairs at the skate park. So, I'm I'm I'm I'm not in alignment with making those recommendations to the city council. Well, my suggestion is not that that there is no longer a skate park. It's that I know or I I'm fairly confident that equity was not at the foundation of the decision or the current ideas in people's brain about what a basically a potential brand new space. We've got a tear down. We've got a very old skate park. Uh if you started from scratch and you had an equity focus, what would you what what would staff and the park board say we we want there? You mean what what how we'd use the space in total? Yeah. Again, if it was a clean slate, if if if it if it literally was a clean slate, not just an old skate park next to a raised building. So that's that's why I bring that up. Not that it would never include include a skate park, but my my my strong sense is up to this point, these have not been the foundational considerations. But there's going to be a new plan now that there's been a decision to get rid of the building. And I I remember when we were talking about the skate park a couple years ago that there was talk about kids in wheelchairs, right? So it's the the skate park is an interesting one because if from my perspective and I appreciate Brad's comment too, we've had the community come forward with a express concern around that opportunity. And we've had uh middle Minnotonka East middle schools come forward. the teacher has got one of the largest programs in the metro area with kids. So the the community's expressed a lot of interest in this and the city council has to date been supportive of that. So to say to those interested parts for the last three years that they've been exploring this to say time out we're going to stop and reconsider how we might use that whole corner when we know there's a strong desire by people for that amenity. Um I don't like that word but we seem to use it. Um seems a little premature when uh you know to your point we should be developing it in a way so that it's it's it's uh accessible for all. Um but I wouldn't say at this point uh we should stop it. I mean, it could end up being stopped based on the design of the plan or the budget, but to not continue to do the development of the the proposal seems premature to me. Yeah. And I mean, the skate park was one of the first projects when I came on the board, and so we've seen a lot of iterations of this. Um, we've seen a lot of different designs. We went through a lot of feasibility studies. Um, I I didn't see anything in any of that work that didn't seem like it was not going to take into consideration accessibility. I I feel confident that the skate park is going to consider all of those things. And I think especially with the new design and the new reimagining of this park, I think it's actually going to be even better than what we were expecting. to keep this moving. I would make the recommendation, Dave, that we move forward with the CIPs as as recommended by staff with a very heavy serious notation around the sentiments that we've talked about regarding DEI sensibilities and advocacy that we feel is a is really important for the park board and for our community. But I don't think we should be holding this up. Is that a motion? if you want it to be. We need a motion, right, Leslie? Yeah. Then that's my motion. I'll second. Okay. And now there's discussion. Make a tweet presumably. Oh, okay. Discussion. Okay, that's true. Thank you. Caleb should get to have speak again. Uh yeah. So I I think overall uh we're talking about the same the same thing. Um I have a sense of urgency about this uh because I feel like uh we're behind this hasn't been a focus. And so that's where I'm coming from with not, you know, putting sand in the gears as as the term was was laid out. Uh and we we should reassess in a mighty way when the need arises and we should gum up the system uh when the need arises in as as quickly as possible. So, uh, I don't have I'm not speaking practically. I recognize that for the governance of a city. I'm speaking with haste and I hope that we can I hope the city acts in haste as it relates to equity reassessment. Uh, I don't know how to I don't know how to express that in verbiage to the city. Because I feel like what some communities do in regards to these issues is they they perform lip service or they put it in the plan and they never actually address it explicitly. And I that that would be a massive fail for me morally and for our board I feel and for the city. And so I would just like to spend another minute or two. We have an attorney, so he's a great verbiage guy, but can we come up with some strong a bit a bit of a strong just small statement that's the park board approves the CIP uh but strongly strongly wishes for a significant equity re and accessibility um you know uh emphasis emphasis or a foundation to be placed on the final approval of these projects by the city council. And why why do you not want to make an an amendment to the playground page? I mean, I heard you say I'm not an expert, and maybe that's that was your reason, but that seems like the most it's the the example that you gave was that the new some of the new playground equipment has not been very accessible. And this seems like an opportune time because we know there's dollars being spent each year in different parks. Um, I'm I'm I don't want to put you on the spot, but I don't understand why you don't want to change that. Yeah. So I think there's I'm trying to walk a line between uh like the approach to the the the approach to these different projects that work that we encounter or that staff work on annually and integrating waving into that as a foundation that equity is is the first thing people are thinking about because when you have that then you create parks differently, you create playground systems differently, they cost differently. And so we have to fac that factor that in. But as a new member, I don't know. Do we really every year go through this in July or Yeah, we're in June. But again, we do this what in what appears to be somewhat superficial. like I'm not hearing the details of the playgrounds tonight or in in in this document that comes like in the project management timeline. Yeah, we're not Yeah, we're we're not we're not we're a kind of a advisory governance role. We're not in the supervising and managerly role for this. So I wouldn't I would not expect for us to be reviewing and approving. So if we say so I mean apart from saying uh we don't want to just meet expectations on the ADA for our trails for our parks for our playgrounds for our uh refurbishment and and and the like. We want to exceed it or we want to lead. Uh that's certainly my vision or my hope for this city, but I don't other than making that recommendation. I can't be detailed about every single part of those processes. I would rely as I said at the beginning on uh DEI and equity experts or national organizations that inform our park and wreck staff. And I would rely on the consulting firms that we choose to utilize that maybe they're they have the track record uh in equitydriven park development or refurbishment or the like that I don't have. That's why I say I don't I don't have to be an expert. You don't have to be an expert. Our staff doesn't have to be an expert, but we learn together and then we use experts that are cons as consultants. So, so that's why I guess I I don't know I don't know what to say to be explicit other than to try to be explicit in the verbiage I was just trying to work on because there are so many moving parts and details that in in order for it to really work, it has to be embedded in the foundation of what the staff do as a first assessment of what are we working on, what does it look like, and what does it cost? So one thing chair if I can just as a point of order. So we do have a motion on the table and a second and we're discussing. So I just want to make sure you're discussing or are you suggesting that a motion be changed which technically it can't be unless someone wants to withdraw a motion. Unless somebody wants to withdraws or amend I guess first. Well, I mean we don't really have ex I mean do may maybe you typed it out but I don't know what the exact language is that we're voting on unless it's like verbatim you know for what was said. It would be what he said. Can you read it back? Well, I I don't know if I got it verbatim. uh and we have the tape so luckily we can always go to the tape just recommending removing recommend moving forward the C cip pages which you're seeing in current form with a strong note that uh the park board would like to see more consideration on DEI for all projects is what I had written down and to clarif go ahead go ahead to clarify uh we're talking about not only accessibility for disabled people of various kinds, but also equity in terms of lower income areas of the city are getting equal access to parks and which we've seen in the post post plan had highlighted kind of the distribution of our parks. Well, one of my one of my things is and I and I I presume I think you're probably correct, Caleb, that the city hasn't probably met your standard of how high the bar should be, but I but I'm also a little cautious because it sounds like there's a tool that you guys use that we don't know anything about or see. So, there may be more in the planning than we've than we've been exposed to that takes into account those those objectives and goals. Um, but I I have a feeling that there could be more still. Strong feeling probably. I mean, just the fact that we've never had Jayce come and talk with us or Jayce hasn't come around and talked with us would say, you know, there's an opportunity there for evangelizing the the role. So, we have a motion and a second. I don't hear anything. We vote on this at this point. Okay. Yep. All right. Hanley, approve. Larman, approve. Schultz, approve. Samurski, approve. Vitali, approve. And Chair Ingraham, approve. Okay, motion passes. Good points. Can I make uh Can I make another motion? Sure. I guess you can. Uh, I would like I would like to recommend that staff create a parks for all type comprehensive plan. Allah the Minneapolis Parks and Recreation um comprehensive plan for uh for you know a a long-term future. uh that could be in the realm of how these comprehensive plans have worked for the city like 10 year, 15 year, 25 year, whatever those typical timing metrics are. Um to again make this to embed this, integrate this, weave this into what we're what the city is doing going forward. So if I can just check with other staff, typically when we have a request by the park board to do some kind of study or some kind of plan, funding would have to be allocated for that. So I suppose a request or motion could be that there is a CIP page added to allocate funds for some kind of planning effort or frame development of a plan. Could could I offer opportunity or a suggestion too since we have a lot of new members and also existing members. It's been a while. Would it would it be appropriate or would another approach be to maybe at our next meeting to have a staff sort of I won't say represent but to provide an overview of the post plan with focus on how those things affect and then and then we can calibrate is do we need a whole new plan or do we need to look at the post plan with um you know to beef up certain sections or beef up because I I just uh parks raw all kind of is at the core of what the post plan kind of was trying to do in its own language of what three years ago or whatever. Um so it might just be useful to everyone to see that and then go oh hey it's perfect or more likely you know in three years some things have changed and we need to amend these sections. Yeah. Yeah. And al but also to to follow up uh with the trail improvement plan and the park improvement plan which I understand are separate from the post or are those inclusive subsets of the post? The post led to those items. The post master plan with these goals. We're doing the master the post I view the post kind as being umbrella. So, so the post is inclusive of the trail improvement plan and the park investment plan. That's my question. Yes or no? Or are they not the trail improvement plan? That's before the post plan. It's unrelated to the parks. That's multimodal connections throughout the city. View that view that as connectivity. I mean I would personally I would view that as pure connectivity. How we execute it could but the million dollars are connectivity. So then I would say if it's not inclusive of the post then it should be uh it should undergo the same uh equity re review or equity rewrite it might be and that's why I would say a comprehensive plan that is a parks for all equity in the parks focus that might in integrate the post the trail improvement and the park improvement plan into a single vehicle that or each of those are reviewed uh under a CIP uh funding to ensure that it is a uh comprehensive plan with a equity foundation. Dan, did you have a comment, too? It might be worth meeting with Jace to actually work with to develop a framework to how do we implement what you're suggesting versus making that decision now say we we want to make a CIP page without knowing all of it. So it might be worth having those meetings with Jace and develop a framework of how what needs to be looked at, how does how do we go about the process even say what we're going to uh have as a guidance for creating a CIP and we we we can certainly do an overview of the post plan which is that big umbrella system guiding document um and have Jace come and talk to the park board and We try to connect some dots and we don't need a motion for that. No, we don't need a motion for that. No, it's simply a better assessment of what we're doing currently. I mean I I we do build a lot of our processes around making sure materials are available in numerous languages for instance and and um a better assessment of what we're doing currently to to tee up the conversation. So we moving forward with the CIP going to meet have Jace come and talk with us and you guys will give an overview of the post plan with the emphasis on how how we do or don't effectively incorporate those goals. Yep. We can we can definitely do that. Okay. So, now we're on to I think let's more discussion on to 7B. Yes. And this will be match. This part has pictures colorful pictures, not just spreadsheets. Um so as referenced in the CIP, we've been creating restoration and maintenance plans for specific parks. This is um through the natural resources master plan process that helped us prioritize um restoration goals and strategies. Um the restoration and maintenance plans are essentially deeper dives into specific parks. So we've been rolling these out over the last few years. Um these are developed by staff working closely with local volunteers, the folks in the field doing that work. Um so there's a bit of a review process and really these are road maps to begin performing the restoration and coordinating between uh sort of our buckets of input. So we have our volunteers, we have contractors through the CIP dollars and then we have staff time. So this presentation is uh meant to be an overview of that process. So, as I mentioned, it came out of the natural resources master plan. Really, what we're doing is uh focusing our efforts in these parks on specific what I'll refer to as target plant communities, and I'll get into those. The three presented tonight are uh Big Willow, Jadana, and Green Circle Park. So, they're all separate documents. So, the idea is to present an overall restoration vision. Really, these are management tools. Um, we're directing staff and volunteers, working with them in the field, what they're going to be doing, and then we're creating separate scopes and contractor specific um, tasks and and budgeting and reviewing those and making sure that those processes and and strategies align with these documents. Really, I I can't stress this enough, restoration is is a process. It's not a an end result. We can say we're trending towards some target plant community. We're going to try to incorporate these plants in it. But restoration is a process. We take it year by year, season by season. We get droughts, we get new insects, we get diseases. We learn through science that different techniques, different seed mixes are more effective. So really, I want to stress that these are meant to be living documents. Ideally, somebody would look back 10 years from now and say, "Okay, this is what they planned on doing then. These things are working. These things aren't. We're going to adjust as necessary." So, um, can't really stress that enough. We do leverage the volunteer community early and often. Um, really they're boots on the ground in a lot of cases. There's hundreds and thousands of hours put into these parks in in a lot of these locations. Um, and then throughout this process, we make sure that the folks around those parks that maybe aren't totally dialed into the restoration effort have a chance to see these. They might say, "Hey, why did you mow down that perfectly green plant?" And that's our opportunity to explain what Buckthornne is and why we're doing these restoration works. So really folks walk in the park that maybe they're not dialed in. These are good sort of lay person level documents to explain our restoration strategies. So really um what we do is identify a target plant community. So this is sort of the ideal conditions. In a perfect world, this would be um what we're assessing in the field and then sort of trending towards some particular plant community. We give it an overarching name. We have some prescriptive elements that would get us towards that plant community. Um but understanding there's a lot of pressures out there. So, um, existing conditions, the surrounding land uses, the general park visibility. We like to restore where folks can see our input, they can see our money being well spent. Um, we strategize areas of um, high ecological diversity already. So, we want to enhance those and protect those first. And then we we certainly understand ongoing climate change and the pressures related um, that come along with that. So, um, broadly the restoration maintenance plans have maps and then descriptions for each target plant community. I don't plan on getting into those in particular tonight. Um, but Big Willow, for instance, is one of our major parks. It has had substantially improved areas through volunteer efforts. Um we have an amazing park steward and the and the group out there putting in a lot of long hours making buckthorn piles for us seeding uh native seed mixes these days. So we've evolved that volunteer process so they're seeing things grow not just extracting um plants. Um the key target plant communities out here are a um oak savannah, a mixed savannah, and then we have a lot of um general oak woodland out there. So, we have a lot of tall red oaks. Um, we have a lot of aspen coming in. The park is bisected by the railroad corridor which adds some impact to it. Um, there's a lot of topography. There's an old homestead which is the key node where the volunteers have been working significantly. Um, and we have the creek corridor through here. So, a really key ecological corridor that we want to enhance the the habitat around. Can you talk about the areas of that are dashed yellow lines? I didn't see that in the key. I didn't know what that was. Yes. So, those are what we're calling those are our priority work areas. That's where we're going to start. So, we're going to start in those locations and push out. So, generally those are represented by areas where they're they're adjacent to volunteer work or existing conditions and we want to expand those or for instance in the case of Big Willow uh they're along the creek corridor. So we just know a lot of animals, birds move up and down that corridor. We certainly want to enhance the ecology around those. And then frankly, it's very aesthetically pleasing to see these restorations go in. You can stand on the bridge in Big Willow and look down the creek and see the buckthornne pushed back and see plant communities be established over the years. And there's currently already a fair amount of work going on in that uh lower oak savannah area, isn't there? Yes. So there were homes here. We've recently done some forestry mowing in there to knock down the buckthornne, but the key volunteers have worked. There was a a mansion here decades and decades ago. There's still some stone and and brick ballards out in the field there. Um, but the the park stewards have worked diligently and pushed this oak savannah north. And the goal would be to really open this into a true oak savannah. So limited canopy um for grass and forbes on the ground plane um to establish conditions where we can do continual prescribed burns through there as a management feature. So um big willow very spectacular and as mentioned previously we're undergoing master planning this year. So this restoration document will sort of be a a backbone to that conversation. So, um, that process will be an opportunity to explain what we're doing in terms of restoration at Big Willow Jadana Park. Um, very popular park, but a bit of a pocket. It's got these two islands. So, Hickory Island and what we call picnic island. Um, there's actually the long linear blue feature down the middle here was an air strip that was built in the 50s and 60s. Yeah. Yep. Yeah. So there unfortunately that sort of the the road out to the island picnic island was a man-made feature and the airirst strip was uh you know a human-made feature. So there's a lot of disturbance that's gone on out there and that's led to a lot of u invasive species over the years. Uh it is along the creek corridor which is extremely valuable but the the geology on this site is really what makes it unique. These are um glacial outwash features. They're stone and grally. They're elevated off the creek corridor out of the wetland. Uh the oak hickory woodland is specifically very majestic and beautiful. It's it's somewhat um preserved and and has undergone staffled restoration for uh decades at this point. And it's really a gem. It's tricky to get out there. You got to go on the right uh wetland conditions here in the winter. Um there's some deer paths out there, but otherwise that's sort of protected it. So it's a bit of a gem, but it is considered part of Jadana Park. Um so we would um continue to restore that oak hickory woodland out there. It's it's almost close canopy, but it's really spectacular. So there, from what I gather, there's enough deer pressure that it's a problem. There's a lot of deer pressure. If you look at the aerial images of the wetlands, there's trails all over the place. They do three rivers perform deer survey this year and they look in the wetlands to see the deers that that's where they hide out. So we need more dogs out there. Plenty of dogs. Yeah. My mic's off. Should I got picked up? Uh picnic island has this beautiful picnic grounds. There's mature oaks, but we there is some concern about the pressures of that foot traffic and that picnic use out there. So, we want to, you know, consider the impacts of that that day use during the the summer and and continue oak woodland restoration along the the wetland edge, you know, in this pretty spectacular um island out there. So, uh, the bones are in place, enhancing the ground plane with increased diversity, removing, um, particular plants that pressure, um, the enhancement of that diversity, adding native seeds and, uh, potentially even containerized or bare root species in the future of these woods, woody species. Yes. In the Jadana packet, it talked about we can't it's not possible to restore back to presettlement. It doesn't say that in any of the other ones and I'm not sure why we can't. There is there is another park where there's a reference to some part of the park. I can't remember which part. Yeah. I often we make these target plan communities are based on the existing conditions and what is realistic in terms of yeah that's restoration. So I'm good with that. I just it's not stated any in any of the other ones and it sounds sort of like I don't know I good note we can take a look at that. Sure, we certainly want to be consistent with that type of language. It's important language. Just seems overly negative to me. I thought in Big Willow there's a reference somewhere in Big Willow to a similar issue. Okay. But the loose purple specifically related to the wetlands. Yeah, we do somewhat say the wetlands are would be too much for us to Big Big Willow had the same reference. Okay. Well, good note. Um before you leave this chart, uh I'll call it the Cargill Trail. Is that is that just off the top of the page? Is there what are the This is Mooney Park right up here. Yeah, but I mean the trail the trail goes along the Cargill property. It's part of Mooney Park. Okay. But is it is it It's right off the It's off the top of the page. It's not part of Jadana. No, I know that, but I'm just trying to proximity. It's it's over the edge. It's right under the word Jadana there. Okay. Jogs down through the Okay. So, why is Picnic Island called an island? I I wasn't aware of it. I mean, I've just anecdotally what we've called it because it's surrounded by wetland. Yeah. Oh, all right. Okay. It's an estimates. Thank you. That makes more sense to me. It is. Okay. Sorry. I carry on. And finally, uh, Green Circle Park. This is an opus. Um there's certainly a lot of uh commercial property around here. This is actually a man-made pond. Um but it is a highly used trail system through here and the future park improvements um making this site important in terms of restoration. There's a a fairly well-kept and restored prairie. Um there are some challenges with weeds along the wetland edge that staff have been working on and looking to enhance. Um there's a quite beautiful gazebo with a sort of a mixed savannah wrapping around it. So a a true local amenity for the folks that live and work near this area. Um but it is truly an urban park. It has the pressures of of the urban features and the storm water impacts on this pond. The the storm water raises and lowers the the water level in this pond making conditions along the wetland edge uh difficult for restoration. um be but because it's so visible um it's worth investing in and um enhancing the plant communities out there as best as we can from a from an equity standpoint. There's a lot of people that live in apartments near there so they've it gives them some nature. Um I noticed that it talked about the mayor's monarch prairie. Yep. Do we need to do anything to that prairie to make sure it still has milk weeds in it? We certainly protect the milkweed and we enhance it. It goes in our seed mixes often and um those monarch way stations are very important for our accounting of our process um in terms of sporting the monarch. So yes, absolutely full sun out here. Um the good bones for the restoration to continue. And would if the planets and stars align, would the the park that's added to Opus be anywhere somehow connected to this? It's right off the map down here. It's southwest of here. So, this pond that's just in the bottom would be on the eastern edge of that new park. Okay. Yeah. So in theory I there's some near future where we're beginning to restore around the this pond buffer and creating that connection of restoration between Green Circle Park and this new park. Technically parking for this park is all in commercial location. There's a few stalls right there. I know drive right here. But yes, it's this is apartments right here and a lot of commercial. So, it's used daily. When I was in there last summer, I wasn't really paying too much attention to what the surface of the trails is. I a lot of the circles are paved. Are those paved or they Yeah. Yep, they're paved. They're all asphalted there. We are doing a wayfinding plan currently that'll um help you navigate through there. The trails are a little labyrinth like but yeah they there's a bridge that crosses here so important to demonstrate the restoration as you cross the waterway there. So feedback and any questions or concerns about the restoration and maintenance plans for Big Willow, Green Circle, and Jadana Parks. I'm happy to bring back any page up for you. I think these look great. These are all great parks and very worthy of this restoration. I think it's great. Typically, we like to come back later in the year and give updates of what the restoration is looking like, who the contractors are, how we've benefited from the volunteer work. So, we've done that in the past for Purgatory and Hillway Park. So, we plan on doing that moving forward here, too. And are you had said that these were developed by staff, the plans were plans? Correct. Okay. Initially the natural resources master plan and then the first version of these we did have consultant help but we've since turned that into a template so we can sort of get these out with staff and volunteer input relatively quickly without reinventing the wheel. And then there's a consistency between these particular planning documents. To me it's seemed a little bit like Jadana was written by somebody else but um I guess it doesn't matter too much. So staff product um with the with the you know the opus has changed so much when we when green circle was originally done was that was that the city originally or was that opus that did that good question I don't know the history I would imagine it was probably yeah it was built as part of the development there and so back when they did all that it was really all um office office occupancy and now we have a ton of I think you meant a ton of apartments there. Yep. And um and I'm not sure what the population of the apartments are in terms of age, but their families are older. I know some of them are are older gener, but they're not all of them. And so I'm kind of curious um kind of Caleb's point earlier is if if the big buck park were to be too far down the road or a bridge too far, is the population of the community there such that green circle should be looked at differently in the future because there really aren't kid amenities at all. I'm not talking playgrounds or anything, but it's really designed for I I got an hour I got a half an hour break at at lunchtime. I'm going to walk around the the ponds. Um that would seem something worth thinking about. That's not a restoration project, but a park project. Certainly, when we look at the design of the new park, we take into context the surrounding amenities. What are those connective tissues that we can utilize or leverage? Okay, that was good work. I learned where the largest service berry tree is. The what? Largest berry tree in Minnetonka. Read closely. You'll find out where. Go check it out. Uh, good. Any other comments or questions? So, does that mean we're on to reports from staff? Yes. Um and we have two items to provide updates on. One is the off leash dogs and one is Overland and Coington Park. So I think Matt is taking the first one. Yep. So after the May 19th city council meeting, staff was directed to develop conceptual off leash dog areas for Purgatory Park. Um these would specifically we got direction to develop two options. one of approximately 25 acres and one of approximately 45 acres. Um we are performing a feasibility level concept design for this looking at the practical nature of the site topography concerns. I've been meeting with um fencing contractors about the practicality of getting fence and what the gates could look like and the costs related to those those features. Um, so the idea would be in 60 days of May 19th, that'll put us later in July to present to th to the city council those two concepts of approximately those acreages. Um, and including the cost estimates related to those and particular concerns, pros and cons of the various areas we were directed to design concepts for. And so that will so that will not be coming back to the park board. It'll go directly to city council. Correct. Correct. Okay. The next one. And will the staff using the guidelines that came out of the working group? Correct. Yes. So referring to that as much as possible that these are the characteristics that this particular area meets or does not meet of the criteria. I have another one. You do? Oh boy. And then there's Pickle Ball. Is it Oberlin Park? Oh, that's right. Yes. Yes. Yes. It's a small one. Uh Oh, it went away. No, it's not mine. It's not mine, too. I Okay. Well, I can I got it. Basically, wants Oland wants to pickle ball and Cington doesn't. Correct. So, we hosted an open house back in the spring. Um we got uh concern about the noise of pickle ball. So, we've been looking at existing tennis courts that are due to be resurfaced or would we would consider to install pickle ball lines. We looked at Oberlin as a special request. Um, and Covington, which was due to be resurfaced. The neighbors around Cington were concerned, the typical concerns with pickle ball, the noise and the parking. It's a very popular um sport. So, Coington will remain tennis only. It's currently being resurfaced and new lines will go down, but it will be a tennis court. But we um did hear significant um interest in pickle ball lines at Oberlin Park, which is in the northeast corner of the city. Um a lot of apartments and town homes around there, but there was interest in installing pickle ball lines on the existing tennis surface. So with the tennis size net, pickle ball lines added. So we were able to get some more pickle ball in. All right. and I will talk about upcoming uh meetings. So if you remember, we do not have a meeting in July. So we will skip July. The next regularly scheduled meeting is on August 6. Um we are planning on hosting a training prior to the regular meeting. So that would be during the dinner uh hour. This would be a training with our city attorney, our new city attorney. So we should all be at dinner on time. Yes. if you can make it uh dinner on time and it will be actually in this room. So, we'll eat in this room while he's uh providing us with some providing you with information. Uh the two topics are uh open meeting law and data practices and then any other questions that you guys have. So, that will be at 5:15 here in Minihaha and then the regular meeting will start at 6 p.m. Do we think we can get Jace for that meeting too? uh for the regular meeting. Yeah, I will certainly ask and see if that fits into his schedule. Um I already have Eric, our attorney, scheduled for the premeating meeting uh for the training. So, he's ready to go. And I would I would just urge everyone to try to be there for that training session because it is complicated. Complicated. more complicated than you think perhaps. Um, and then in September, we typically host a joint park board meeting with the city council. So, this is basically it's a parkboard meeting, but the city council is is in attendance. So, it's the park board's schedule or agenda, not the councils, if that makes sense. Um, we typically have a meeting for about 1 hour and then we will go on a tour. So right now we don't we haven't discussed internally on sites of interest for that tour. If you have any interest of seeing specific places or parks or amenities, please let me know and we can certainly consider that as part of the tour. Right. Um that's as far as we plan. Yes. So just a question on that joint meeting. Um you you mentioned like the first hour is basically our typical agenda and it's short. Yes. So, uh, as a new member, I'm I I didn't interpret that meeting in the same way given some of my other experience working with within cities and and this sort of volunteer space. When is there a time that the park board and the city council kind of discuss subsequent work plans or strategic priorities for uh you know future timelines that allow us for dialogue let's say from park board to city council city council back. So we have one hour to do that. That's that's one that's the joint meeting where the park board can directly discuss items with the city council. And then if both for that meeting but any other meeting again for my for my newness, what is the process to have a specific agenda item to request a specific agenda item for a meeting as well as provide you with our information for the packet for this for for your regular for a park board meeting inclusive of that se September meeting. Mhm. So, you know, the park board as a whole certainly can bring up ideas for agenda items if you'd like to see something. Um, it's, you know, typically it's not one park board member asking SCA staff to do something. We like to see a consensus among the the park board. Um, it doesn't necessarily need to be a formal motion. If that is helpful, you can certainly do that. Um but for us and just to manage our you know our time and workloads we we would need to hear from the park board as a whole if a specific agenda item should be brought to the park board. Usually that's part of the agenda on the meet the August meeting. So the month before we say okay what's what do we want to talk to city council about because it's a once a year opportunity for us. Yes. Yep. So we can include that in our agenda. Mhm. Okay. Um, and then we have other meetings and activities. Kelly, do you want to So, is there no October? There are no November and December meets. There just no no content yet. We just don't have content yet. But there's no October meeting. There is October 22nd. But it says delayed. Oh, delayed. Oh, okay. Got it. Thank you. So, Yam Kapor is That's okay. I I didn't read it correctly. I did want to point out in August since we were talking about the Cullen Nature Preserve, I forgot to mention the master plan that Matt talked about having a draft copy of um that uh we will also bring that at that August meeting. So, we have that tenatively scheduled right now. Yeah. Other activities, it's June, so we're busy. Uh first farmers market was yesterday over at the marsh. So, the first uh one at the marsh had almost 600 people. So, um, actually pretty good attendance for when it, you know, rained up until 2:00 and it was kind of gloomy the rest of the day. So, farmers market Tuesdays over at the marsh. Uh, you know, we got Music in the Park coming. Shady Oak Beach opens this Saturday and then we end June with um Summerfest. So, um, a lot of activities coming in June. Busy month. Are you open to entertaining? Are you My thing won't stay on. Um, are you open to entertaining places to go for the tour, so maybe Cullen? I Not everybody here's been to Cullen. Probably. And uh maybe Glenn Lake. Yeah, sure. Yeah, we can. Or and and or also consider if out of the off leash discussion some other areas come up. That would be something too. But those are good ones. Yeah. Colin, we were out what? Two last year. Couple years ago. Yeah, I like going there. So, the new the new people haven't seen it. No. And yeah, it's just whether it's new to the city council change one person, right? It's thinking about what they need to see to help further our agenda for the next year. Yeah. Or to show successes that, you know, we've had. Oh, another we were we were at Glen Lake last year, weren't we? I think it was last year or two years ago. It was last year when we were looking at skatep parks. We were there a couple years, but they're still good ideas. They're still good ideas. So, and another thought would be the the new parcels along Mituck Boulevard. Big Willow. Yeah. Yeah. The Big Willow extension. I agree with that. Okay. Anything else on theation? Otherwise, we have park board member reports. Does anybody have any reports? Um, I went to a tour with friends of Mitaka Parks of Big Willow Park and the it's they've done lots of work. It looks the parts that they've worked on look really great. So, it's um the whole the process is working as far as restoration. Yeah, there's a lot of good progress been made in all of our parks, but Big Willow is really uh a beautiful park. Um I just make a comment. um after the whatever that was April city council meeting um I wasn't able to attend but I watched it and there was clearly uh and I don't know how many people watched it or was able were able to attend but there was clearly talking about May you mean huh the May one well the May was a special was it was May too they were both in May they both in May yeah the the May actual council meeting uh it was clear that there was uh some confusion around what was in the original purgatory master plan and kind of how the park board made its decision of our recommendation to them. And I did write a note to uh city city manager Mike Funk who distributed to the city council just to kind of clarify um the basis that we made the decision on the fact that the master plan did include areas that were marked as off leash areas that they did approve. um and kind of again explain the rationale that uh given that was a 15-month project. It wasn't uh a shortterm effort. It was a pretty extensive 15-month project by staff and the park board and with a tremendous amount of public input. And so for us to kind of overlook that level of input and planning uh seemed kind of precipitous in the time frame. And that's why we did, you know, we kind of went with what had already been approved. And I I think that helped a little bit because I think clearly was there was confusion around that. So that's the only I had to report. I was at that meeting, Dave, and it was an amazing public forum. Yeah. And I was there for about three and a half of the four and a half hours. You guys stayed longer. Um, and I think our input and our comments ultimately were incorporated in a thoughtful way. And I think we made some good recommendations and suggestions that ultimately got absorbed. Um, but it was unbelievable amount of public commentary and uh very feisty. But well commentary back go back to the archives and review last year's public comment sessions on the master plan if you want to see feisty. Good. Somebody said the best line at that event said that people come out for barking and parking. Yeah, that's my fun. Yeah, that was really funny. That was the city manager. Yeah. Oh, Mike. Yeah. Great. Well, good discussion. Anybody? If there's nothing else, I'll entertain another motion. I'll make a motion to adjurnn. Second. We don't have to actually do roll, do we? All in favor say I. I. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so much. [Music]