[music] [music] Heat. [music] [music] [music] [music] Heat. [music] >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music]>> Council member Buouie. Council member Coleman>> here. >> Council member Kim>> here. >> Council member Jo>> here. >> Council member Naker>> here. >> Chair Johnson>> here. >> Five present. two absent being councilmember Buouie and uh Vice Chair Yang who's expected shortly.>> Wonderful. I feel like today is just going to be an incredible day for thebudget conversation. So, I'm looking forward to this presentation. So, I'llbe welcoming up Director Rodriguez to talk about the parks and recreationspresentation of the 2027 budget for us all today. Welcome, Director Rodriguez.>> Thank you. Good to see you all, council members. appreciate the time to go overthe 2027 uh budget presentation for the parks and recreation department. Uh justwant to recognize the park staff here. Uh we have some park commissioners,others. So just just noting that. Appreciate the support and everyonebeing here. Um kicking things off, just noting that this is the cover photo.This cover photo features the North End Community Center, which we opened lastspring. incredible addition to the north end and ward five and a staple inproviding program for our youth and young people um not only for thatneighborhood but across the city. So uh just wanted to highlight that as we getstarted. Um a couple slides for your awareness. Uh here's the agenda. We'llkind of breeze through these next three um mission vision strategic planninggoals. Um have some things in the appendixes around these if you have anyspecific questions overview of services. Um I do want to pause briefly here andjust note that uh a highlight for everyone that over a decade in the topfive nationally uh for our park system ranking by the trust for public land uha very objective measure that demonstrates proper investment andplanning lead to strong parks and healthier and safer communities and wereally are a national model for other cities across the country uh of how ourpark system operates. All right, here we go. Uh we've shifteda few slides around since we first um sent this to council last week. Uh solargely based on the feedback that we received, but this slide provides ahighlevel summary of our proposed general fund changes for 2027. Uh wantto start by acknowledging that this budget is not perfect. Uh we struggledwith the idea of dialing back services after so many years of investing to meetgrowing demand and community expectations. Uh but the financialrealities we face uh today and budget pressures that continue to grow ratherthan shrink require us to think a little differently. Um at the same time, I'mappreciative appreciative of the mayor's office uh and their proposed budgetrecognizes both the importance of both our services and our staff. Um thisproposal could look a lot different uh than what I'm going to share with youtoday. We could be talking about significant layoffs, broader facilityclosures, or suspension of critical programs and services. Instead,throughout this process, there's been a clear recognition that parks andrecreation isn't simply a nice to have. Uh, it's an essential part of thequality of life of our city. Um, and that's something we've consistentlyheard from you all, and that is reflected in the mayor's proposedbudget. So, while this proposal includes reductions, it also includes importantinvestments and funding shifts that put us on more solid footing for the futureuh for mission critical work that has either been carrying significant budgetdeficits or relying on one-time funding that is expiring. Um, none of theseshould be entirely new topics. They're issues we've been discussing for sometime and consistently and have consistently said 2027 budget is when weneed to act and this proposal addresses many of them. So, getting into thespecifics, obviously it's difficult anytime we're talking about reducing uhservice hours or closing recreation facilities. These aren't changes that Iwant to make, but in this budget climate with nearly 90% of our general fund tiedto staffing uh and required building costs like utilities, uh we have to findcreative ways to reduce costs if we want to avoid layoffs or wholesale closure ofadditional facilities beyond duth and case which we'll talk about later.um oversimplifying this a little bit, but just noting um I've put my staffthrough a lot of different exercises uh over the last se several months toconduct a comprehensive review of our budgeted activities. And becausestaffing and building operate operations drive so much of our budget, we took aclose look at utilization across all 26 rec centers, including visits bylocation, day, and time to understand where our peak and off- peak usageoccurs. So we've shared some of that information with you uh with councilmembers who have asked including additional data in the appendix whichwe'll share later uh but are happy to provide anything further after thispresentation. Um from that data we worked to identify where we could reduceservice hours while creating the least disruption possible uh for the residentswho rely on these facilities. These proposed reductions are largelyconcentrated during lower attendance periods and primarily affect what wecall drop in use which we'll get into. I'll walk through each of these changesin more detail in the next few slides, but there's one important point aboutthe savings showing here. The budgeted amounts don't necessarily capture thefull financial impact. These reductions will also help address variable andcurrently unbudgeted staffing costs associated with that with what hasincreasingly become the new normal for safely operating our facilities. I havea slide later that specifically shows just how much we have unbudgeted for ourwork. And many of our rec recreation center staffing models were establisheddecades ago, literally when I worked at Groveland Rec Center. Um when it wasn'tuncommon for a 16 or 17year-old employee to work alone or even be responsible forclosing a recreation center after dark. That's no longer realistic um in thiscurrent climate or responsible staffing model. Public a public safety incidentsat our facilities have increased significantly over the past three tofive years, requiring us to change how we staff and operate our buildings. Safeoperations today increasingly require additional staff coverage costs thatwere never contemplated when many of these facility budgets were establisheddecades ago. So, these changes provide savings and cost avoidance beyond whatis explicitly reflected on this slide. And I'll dig further into that uh as weget into the presentation here. But um specifically including how the duth andcase operating budget is reflected or not reflected on this slide.Any questions before I dive into the individual line items proposed forreduction? >> Council President Nre.>> Thanks Madam Chair. I I don't know if this is reflected later, but just tosummarize, are all of the planned returns or restorations to general fundbecause these items were previously funded with one-time funding like ARPAdollars? >> Yes, the majority. Um there there's somenuance there, but we will address that in future.>> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> So, jumping into the first servicereduction um headline, closing non-hub recreation centers on holidays. Um, justfor the purpose of how we define centers on these next few slides, non-hubtypically are sites that operate after school, 2 to 9 pm. Uh, hub sites meanlarger community centers, 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. hours of operation, and alongwith some weekends. Uh, currently all recreation center sites are closed onmajor city holidays, uh, including Memorial Day, Labor Day, Fourth of July,Thanksgiving, and Christmas. Uh with this proposed change, sites currentlyoperating two to nine would be closed on additional city holidays including MLKJunior Day, President's Day, Junth, and Christmas Eve, while our larger hubsites, community centers would stay open. Um we've actually beencontemplating this change for a while, even outside of the established budgetprocess, um as generally we see lower overall facility use on holidays. Um andthen running parallel to that is also um challenges with staffing the buildingswith staff uh leave requests or other things on those specific holidays. So umit's been something that we've talked about for quite some time. Uh holidayoperations also come at a higher cost. Uh employees receive holiday pay inaddition to premium compensation for hours worked uh creating additionalbudget pressure relative to typical operating days. Um at the same time wewant to preserve flexibility for like targeted exceptions. uh where there'sdemonstrated community use on holidays. That makes me think of like LangfordFourth of July and uh how the building operates that day um programming at MLKRec Center on MLK Junior Day. So, there would be some um targeted exceptions forthings that have been established over time or some level of flexibility ifthere was to be a special event or uh defined program on that specific day.>> Council Vice President Yang. >> Thank you, Chair Johnson. Thank you foryour presentation, Director Rodriguez. I noticed that on the list here, itdoesn't have all of the rec centers. So, would you would the department be ableto provide a list of the rec centers that would still be open during theseholidays? >> Uh, council member Yang, yes,absolutely. >> Thank you.>> And along that vein, Director Rodriguez, how many rec centers would remain open?>> So, that would be the hub sites, uh, community centers. So, I think that'saround nine sites. So that's like the Arlington Hills, Highland Park CommunityCenter, Battle Creek, uh North End Community Center. Those are just a fewexamples, but it's around nine hub sites.>> Okay, thank you. >> Jumping to the next slide, uh proposalwould be to reduce Rex Center AM hours at all hub sites. So again, those sitesthat traditionally open at 9:00 would bump back to 10. Um, so you got I didn'tknow it was on the next slide, but there's all the hub sites there.Arlington Hills, Battle Creek, Frogtown, Highland Park, Lynwood, Northdale, NorthEnd, and Oxford. Um, bumping those all back an hour. Um, that'll also alignArlington and Highland Park Community Center with a 10 a.m. library openingthat already exists. Currently, they open an hour before library opens atthose locations. Um and then noting Oxford would not be impacted um giventhat Great River Water Park is is open October to May because of its morning umaquatic programming. Lap Swim, which is a kind of a payto-play ser uh service,so opens around 6:30. Uh this would largely impact users for walking tracksand fitness room spaces. uh CC sporadic use at these community centers in themorning for folks that want to get in there around the eight o' or nineo'clock hour uh to get a workout in or walk around the track in the winter. Umif I had to guess um using Highland as an example, primarily seniors and othersthat are there early morning and want to get a walk in. Um so that would be thethe biggest impact there if we were to bump back an hour is is those specificamenities, the fitness centers and the um walking tracks. Jumping to the next reduction. Thisproposal would eliminate AM hours at Edgecom Rec Center, meaning the facilitywould be operated like the majority of the other rec centers that are non-hubcommunity rec center sites. So again, opening at 2 p.m. during the school yearand at 12:30 during the summer. Uh the existing preschool program at thislocation would not be impacted as fees uh cover the required staffing. Um we'restill working through the specific staffing and building logisticsassociated with this proposal including how access and operations would bemanaged going forward. Um we're also exploring a full cost recovery model forcertain activities with demonstrated demand uh such as a pickle ball programat Edgecom. Um and since this proposal has been made public, we have heard alot from pickle ballers about the need to try and get to a solve that wouldkeep them um in the building for their uh desired use. So if that's looking ata potential membership or different fee structure, we are going to engage thatgroup and have more conversation about that. Um but that would be the biggestimpact there. Um, again, you take out pickle ball in the pay to placepreschool program and you're talking about sporadic use for a fitness centerprimarily from the um periods of 9 to 2 or any other like private meetings orthings that may have been scheduled or rented out.Director Rodriguez, could you also share a little bit more about how you usedyour racial equity and accessibility strategic goal to determine theelimination of hours cuts back from holidays in some of the areas and justthe overall reduction lens that you used noting that the strategic planning goalsseem to be around community health and well-being, racial equity andaccessibility and sustainability and stewardship. So, can you talk a littlebit about how you used racial equity lens to determine the cuts that you areproposing? Yeah, I I yes, Council Member Johnson, II would say that um our our decisions are rooted in data, but also have tolook at the impacts across the entire city. Um, I don't think there's anysingle one answer in terms of of a variable that determines how we get tothese points, but we look at the usage. We look at the participation data. Wealso look at the quality of facility, the staffing models, um, theneighborhood and ward impacts, the closest hub site, um, vicinity to beable to walk from one rec center to another. So, um, to answer yourquestion, there are a lot of things that go into these decisions. Um, and youknow, when we get into these budget reduction conversations, there's a loton the table to start and how we isolate these specific reductions down overtime. It's really based on all those things that I just described. Um, but weknow that we have to go through a process uh on the mayor side and thecouncil side and the community side. So, we're going to continue to have dialoguethrough the end of this budget cycle with community about these proposedchanges and see what happens in terms of potential restorations um moving forwardum with reductions um and hearing community voice. So, um that's kind of ahigh level answer to your question, but I'd say everything that we do is rootedin those strategic goals and decision-m. >> I see. And then as a followup just foryou, um, [clears throat] one of the things that's been incrediblychallenging is to find out like how much money we're spending on each rec center,what's our staffing levels at each rec center. Um, it's kind of similar to thelibraries. It's been really difficult to understand just how much money we'reactually investing in each facility that we have. Um, where would we find thatdata if we wanted it? Because I've asked for it and I don't see it reflected inthe slides. Council member Johnson. Um I that'scertainly something we can provide in the appendix and has more information. Iwould say um again um a dynamic kind of staffing model by center um certainlycan give you a best guess estimate on some of these things but they do shiftum in terms of need public safety other things. So um I can get into that in ain a future slide here that will answer that in a little more detail. But um if>> okay cuz just to be clear I did review your slide deck and I don't see thatinformation reflected here. What I'm specifically asking for is around howmuch money we're spending on maintenance, how much money we'respending on leases, how much money we're spending on the overall operations ofeach rec center. >> Yeah.>> Did you want to say something? Sorry. >> Oh. Uh Chair Johnson, we we don't uhcurrently budget that way. Um we do have data and we we can extract it. It's amini research. We heard you and and we're trying to assemble that data. umis just a little bit more challenging just on kind of how Andy said how we'rea little bit more dynamic in some of the staffing models. Um but we can provideestimates. >> Yeah, it would be really great to knowlike you know we have data from years prior of also just of like how muchwe've actually spent in each rec center and in library for that matter.>> Thank you. Um Council Member Jo. >> Uh thanks Chair Johnson. Thank youDirector Rodriguez. I just um I just wanted to to comment on the Edgecom RecCenter and also the um the reduction in AM hours. So for Edgecom Rec Center isin Ward 3, it's in Mallister Groveland and um with the other uh reduction inmorning hours to Highland which is also in Ward 3. Um, I just want to share thatthat does impact the pickle ball um, programming that we have offered becausepickle ball is offered in the morning at Edgecom and at Highland. And I know thatDirector Rodriguez said he'd heard from quite a few folks. I've heard from quitea few people because it's my understanding there's not going to be areally great ability to absorb or shift that service with the morning hoursbeing cut at both locations. And um, it's my understanding that is that is apretty highly used program. Um, so that's something that I'm very concernedconcerned about um for how it's going to impact our community. there's a prettyhigh concentration around Edgecom and in Highland of seniors and they really relyon that programming for uh you know for their own physical and mental health andto be able to find connections and see their friends and um so that's somethingthat that I really care about is exploring how we might be able to uh youknow I think folks have even said they're willing to pay more money to godo pickle ball or how we might be able to restore some of those services to toour community. There's also um drop in tot time that's at I think both of thoselocations and so that's also um impactingour community and I do think that you know I know we're going to talk about umDuth and Case and Highwood Hills it I just want to point out that when you'relooking at the map there's a map at the end that has usage and you can see thatlike there's there's less usage on the east side rec centers. You can just seesmaller dots over there compared to other areas. Um, and I guess I'm justgenerally concerned about um the concentration of reduction in serviceson the east side. Um, and I guess my question is,uh, it's it's my understanding that, you know, following up from Cher Johnson'squestion that there was exploration into by parks into with the 4% cut you wereasked to make, looking at all of the rec centers and what some of the optionsmight be and that, you know, that decision ultimately was is made by themayor in terms of what is being chosen to cut. Is that correct, directorRodriguez? Council member Jo. Yes. Um Parks putforward a variety of different recommendations um but worked inparallel with the mayor's office, but ultimately they have the final say ofwhat lands in the the proposed budget. >> Okay. Thanks. Yeah. Well, I'm I'm justI'll just say I'm just very generally open to exploring with with the folks atthis table um what options might be to restore these hours. Uh, I just thinkthat, you know, we're looking at saving some of these save like a fewhundred,000 or even less. And I think that the value that they provide to ourresidents is just much greater than that. And they they care about theseservices so much and really need them. So, I'm looking forward to to, you know,the next steps on what kind of what kind of problem solving there might be forthis. Council member Jose, council members, I also do want to clarify forthe heat maps and other things that you're seeing for dropin use. That isdrop in use is categorized by I'm dropping by to use the bathroom orutilize open gym is not reflective of youth sports. It is not reflective ofoutdoor use um or paid registration programming like if I'm signed up for abasketball team and other things. So it tells the story of like the the drop inuse but there's additional layers of numbers and other things. So like it isa very surface level set of data. Um we've done a lot around rec centertracking and attendance over the last few years. Um and are continuing torefine that work, but I just want to kind of set the standard for what dropin use means um at those specific locations.>> Thank you. >> Yeah. Jumping to um modified operational modelat Highwood Hills. This proposal would reduce regular indoor operations atHighwood Highwood Hills Recreation Center, which first opened, I think, in1974 uh while maintaining public access tothe recently improved outdoor park amenities and recreational spaces. Um,Highwood Hills currently experiences some of the lower indoor utilization ofthe city's 26 recreation center uh 26 recreation centers across the system.This facility is also also has significant limitations that affect itsability to support expanded programming and community use, including no airconditioning, deteriorated tile, gym flooring, and limited indoor recreationand programming space. Um, for those that don't know, this is a schooldistrict-owned building and it is a space that we lease. Um, so this changewould generate approximately 75,000 in annual general fund savings uh througheliminating the lease with the school district that covers the cost of the SPSstaff provided um maintenance and utilities for the space. Um the budgetretains limited funding to support what we would call ad hoc indoor spacerental. So uh for reservations or other permitted use through the schooldistrict. So that would be working with community to talk about what do we wantto retain in terms of uh programs within that space. So if we heard fromcommunity that we want to retain some element of rec check or [snorts]evening open gym opportunities things like that that is what that um balanceof funds could be used for. Um so just noting that um also has a little bit ofa tricky history given that it had closed previously and then we came back.Um so the contracts and things that um allowed us back into the building umchanged. Um and then also noting that um I think they are Brad correct me if I'mwrong index for inflation on their side and we are not so like there is a budgetgap there in terms of the contract that we have in place with the schooldistrict. >> Director Rodriguez, can you talk alittle bit further about that? So Highwood Hills Rec Center was closedprior um proposed to be closed prior. So bringing it back in the contract haddifferent things within it. Could you just share a little bit about like whathappened when the rec center closed the first time?>> Chair Johnson, that's a great question. It it precedes me, so I may rely on Brada little bit. I was I was there for the the restoration of that. So, weessentially had to negotiate a new agreement with the school district andwe did re-enter um and that was driven largely by former council member Princeif I can remember correctly. But, um previous to that, I'm not sure of theactual contractual obligation of how we >> Yeah. Chair Johnson. So Brad Meyer ParksFinance didn't introduce my Mr. Meer. Thank you myself at the beginning. So weoriginally closed Highwood in 2013 as part of kind of a systemwide um budgetreduction strategy there. It wasn't the only facility that was closed. It wasagain a similar analysis based on usage. Um it was restored in the 2019 budget umwith kind of a very bare bones minimal staffing model um and and kind of umallotting for some um monies for for maintenance for parks to self-performthe work. That's why you see an FTE in the budget, not just uh a line item formaterials and services. Um we worked with the school district to to try toidentify some efficiencies where um they could provide some services that weremore costly to us. um and maintenance and utilities were things that um wefelt we could kind of save some money on and still be able to get into thebuilding. Um that that lease agreement is why it's different than all of ourother joint use sites where we have school district um and and park spacesthat are kind of operated uh jointly together. Um and it is the only facilitythat is a SPS owned uh building where we have um our staff inside their theirspace. Um, so that 75,000 is uh the current uh gap or it's actually closerto 100,000 is the current gap reinvesting 25,000 into the ad hocrentals. Um, but we're continue to see those costs increase. So it's indexedfor inflation. So each year it goes up, but we're going to uh so this representswhat we're estimating for 2027. If we were to stay in the space, um, we'dlikely ask for some additional resources to help cover the expected gap with the2027 inflation as well. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I appreciate it.>> Thanks, Brad. Um, and I would just note, you know, for some of our conditions ofour facilities, and as you can see on this slide, um, we can only program withwhat we have. And, you know, I I noted the gym condition, and I know CouncilMember Johnson, I know that's been a high priority for you over the yearswith the school district to see that space improved. We've advocated for thatas well. Um, but we're very limited in the amenities with inside this buildingin terms of what we can do. Um you see that craft room is essentially our ourdefault w check space which we've seen numbers decrease significantly on uhpostcoid a lot of kids just getting picked up after school not reallystaying um for after school programs or services um sporadic open gym use butagain desire to see improvements to that and then uh a multi-purpose room that umkind of limits our ability of what we can offer um for what we do own on this site. I Iwant to make that um clear. We own the outside amenities, so the field and thebasketball courts. Since 2024, we have invested nearly 1 million in updates tooutdoor areas at this location using CIB, Common Cent, and private funds fromToro Foundation, the Minnesota United, and thanks to our partners at the St.Paul Parks Conservancy for helping to support that. Uh 2024, we opened a newsoccer and new outdoor athletic fields. Last year, we renovated two basketballcourts with all new surfacing and equipment. Again, noting that the reasonfor these continued investments is responding to where the demand is andtaking care of what we own. So, this budget proposal allows us to continueprogramming, ensuring that these spaces will be well used, but just noting thatthe outdoor amenities are where we see the most active use on the site.Director Rodriguez and just kind of going back to the usage maps and justfor clarity. So even though we see some of the higher usage of the outdoorspaces and amenities, that's not actually reflected in the Highwood Hillsusage data that we have in front of us. Is that correct,>> Chair Johnson? That's correct. We do not have a good way to track outdoor use. Sowhen I say um um that those amenities are highly used, that's more of a avisual assessment as opposed to um actual data tracking. um we just don'thave a way to I'll say check in people for outdoor use. Um but are looking atthings that might be relevant to help uh tell that story more whether that's youknow using utilizing cell tower data for pinging cell phones for folks that maybe on the property things that help tell those types of stories. Um so that issomething that we're continuously looking at. Again, just saying that wewe're coming a long day a long way with um data collection for recreationcenters and outdoor use specifically and expect some progress in the coming yearson the the outdoor question. >> Okay. And and besides like outdoor parkfacilities that we have in the area, are you aware of any sort of other publiclyaccessible basketball courts, um soccer fields,indoor meeting spaces in that neighborhood? Um, I would say thesewould be the closest. The walkability to Battle Creek is is not great. Um, butthat would be the closest location when you're talking about indoor basketballcourts and fields uh for things that we own. Um, Conway is another, but again,it's um the walkability for a child or young person to get to those spaces.We've heard from community that um that that's not a feasible path for them. So,just noting that specifically um as an important variable in some of thesedecisions. So, it it does um isolate folks in specific neighborhoods when wetalk about these service reductions and their ability to get to the the closestnearby option. Uh whether that's indoor rec center or other basketball court,soccer field, things like that. >> Uh Council Member Jo,>> I just uh thank you for for sharing that, Director Rodriguez. Um ChairJohnson, are there are you aware of any plans from the schools to invest in theHighwood Hills Rec Center? Council member Jo. Um the schooldistrict is going through an active u facility planning process for the entiredistrict um with a variety of different stakeholders um parks included. Um Idon't have specific lo um information on future plans for Highwood Hills at thistime. But I know that is active conversation districtwide right now thatthey've been planning uh that they launched um at the beginning of summerand those meetings continue. But I think eventually from the school districtdistrict you'll see recommendations across the entire system of what theirfuture plans are. >> Okay. And then I one more question>> the the outdoor spaces um with the I guess with the impacts to the HighwoodHills Rec Center that are proposed in this budget. Would the public still beable to use the outdoor spaces? >> Council member Jose. Yes, absolutely.Those are parks amenities owned by the parks department. Um so those are stillavailable for public access and use. Um and I also admitted this but should saylike in the prime time of summer and other things like we we do have ourmobile wreck program that could you know set up shop there. So our mobile wreckprogram is is to go to places where recreation centers aren't immediatelyavailable uh provide recreational opportunities programming there more interms of camps other things. Um so there are some alternatives if there was a reccenter reduction at this location. Um and that's really what we would focus onif um this level of reduction were to proceed of how we can further activatethe site and keep a presence there knowing that the outdoors um are thebusiest amenities. >> Okay. ThanksD Rodriguez. What sort of communication is happening on the site when it regardsto the school district? I'm just curious if they knew prior to the of um theannouncement of the closure that we were considering closing the facility orgoing out of the lease with them or the partnership with them and or do we havelike ongoing meetings with the school district to talk about this site andprobably other sites that we have joint partnerships with them around um theschools and rec centers being close by. We have a few in the on the east sideand just I'm wondering like what sort of communication came within the schooldistrict around not only this decision but potentially some of the numbers thatwe were seeing and reflected here some of the conditions of the indoor space.What does the communication between the city and the school district look likeespecially regarding Highwood Hills? Council member Johnson. Um what I wouldsay to that question from a park standpoint specifically is we wepreviewed this um proposal with them um and have some surface level conversationthat you know this will be a proposed reduction and will likely require moreconversation um as far as like the site level staff um on the rec center side.Um definitely engage them um before the mayor's budget address. Um but we'lllikely have to engage um principal and others um in the future here. Um, so allthat to say, uh, very surface level conversation with the school districtand again, uh, the city serves on the overall, I'm going to say task force fortheir long range planning for the entire district, Highwood Hills included.>> Before we switch over to Duth case, because I know that's where we'll begoing. I just simply wanted to be able to note that I'm extremely disappointed[clears throat] with the continued efforts to try and close the HighwoodHills Rec Center. Over the last decade, this conversation has come up and um youknow, I think we learned a lot as a community about what it looks like totry to continue to close Highwood Hills. Highwood Hills Elementary School was aneffort that the school district made that was completely and utterly rejectedby the community. Highwood Hills Rec Center was closed as well and then wasbrought back because community members saw a direct correlation between thatcrime and not having actual programs for young people. And I just want toreiterate that while um we have numbers in front of us and what appears to me asa continued theme [clears throat] is we're using usage to justify taking anasset out of a community that does not have many. I asked the question aroundreading meeting spaces and gathering spaces because in Highwood Hills it's anincredibly high residential area. There are no other public meeting spaces inthat entire neighborhood. Um, when you look at the map and you look at thatcorner of the city, removing this asset actually means that we have no publiccity facility that is indoors or providing indoor asset anywhere south oflower Afton. And I just want to say how short-sighted that is and incrediblyinequitable. I do not see a racial equity lens in that decision whatsoever.It has a very large immigrant population. that particular site andacross the street during Operation Metro Surge had federal agents walking in andharassing Somali East African residents in my community. So much so that theydidn't necessarily feel comfortable even going to use indoor or outdoorfacilities during that time frame. In [clears throat] addition, we have someof the highest taxpayers in Highwood Hills Rec Center when it comes to myward. And what we're basically communicating to them is that we'regoing to have a 6.8% property tax levy increase, but they're going to losetheir rec center again. And I just want to share that like that type of adecision and reduction as we're calling it is a full-on closure. The onlyclosure being reflected in this budget which is very similar to the Dayton BuffLibrary conversation. $75,000 is what we're saving and we're taking an anasset that literally serves its only purpose um in that community um out ofit. And so I just want to share that like when we're making decisions, Iappreciate the million-dollar investments in outdoor spaces. is I wantto be very clear that there was also philanthropic partners that invested inthis outdoor space and there was a huge reason why people invested in thiscommunity because for years it has been underinvested. When we talk about theamount of money and maintenance and all of the things that go into a facility, Ijust want to be clear that we are removing Highwood Hills Rec Center andonly saving $75,000. I don't know of any other place in thecity where that's actually true. And so I just want to share that with you,Director Rodriguez, because honestly, last year I fought really hard to bringback the hours of Operation for Highwood Hills Rec Center. I'm incredibly disdisappointed that once again under a different administration, under adifferent council office, we're having the same conversation having not learnedfrom the first result. Community members have talked often for years about thissite. Every time a inst an institution, the school district, the city has triedto close this site, it rec it comes back years later because it's a priority. andthe heart of the Highwood Hills community. Um, and I'm not sure whatsort of community partnerships or conversations happened, but I'm notaware of any community engagement that went into talking about the HighwoodHills rec center closure. I wasn't even aware of the Highwood Hills rec centerclosure until a few days before it being proposed. And so, that didn't give usmuch time to even talk to Eastiders about it. Um, to talk to the schooldistrict about the indoor facilities. And I've advocated very strongly forinvestment on the indoor spaces because what I see is a lack of investment for along time and it's reflected in the numbers because how can you use a indoorgymnasium that isn't actually a gymnasium doesn't actually have agymnasium floor a basketball hoop that doesn't actually bounce back a spacethat during the summertime actually gets so hot to the fact that the floorsbecome a slip fall hazard. So when you're looking at indoor usage thatmight be why people aren't using the gym. And so when we're thinking aboutwhat we can do to invest and I think to to boost numbers, I just want to beclear that it's not closing a rec center, it's investing in it muchsimilar to how we've invested in the soccer fields and the basketball courts.Literally putting a million dollars into those outdoor spaces means that thoseoutdoor spaces have been full since they've been started. And I think thatthat is just a reflection not of the community's interest in the facilities,but our interest in making sure that it stays. And I just haven't had thatbecause ever since I've been a council member, I've had to fight for its sheerexistence. And I just want to to be very clear that that feels terrible to me.>> Council member Johnson Point, I will just say from my chair uh as director, Idefinitely have advocated for the school district to uh invest funds into thatgymnasium and things uh and other amenities uh within the school. Um and Ithink it just it runs parallel to your point of the overall school buildingkind of being on the chopping block continuously. Um and hopefully with theschool district and their uh long range planning um we'll have a better visionof what that facility will entail. Um I will say uh we haven't closed or reducedrec um we haven't closed a rec center I think nearly 13 years if I remembercorrectly. Um so this is the first time in my tenure where we're proposing areduction um to this level for specific to Highwood Hills uh in Duth case. Um asI said in the beginning of the presentation this isn't something that Iwant to do. Um, but we have to look at some of these decisions and for lack ofa better term, um, kind of negotiate throughout the budget game. Here'swhat's proposed and now the council has it and now we have to have these toughconversations. So, um, I appreciate those points. They're very well heard,um, and totally understand where you're coming from.>> Council member Kim. Yeah, I just really appreciate um what you've lifted up,Council Member Johnson, because similar to what we had in the North End, theWellstone Elementary School was on the chopping block and that was the reccenter for us. >> Um and I wholeheartedly agree time andtime again, I feel like, you know, it's the Amy Brenowan talking point, but weare not only fighting for just existing infrastructure in our communities in thenorth and on the east side, let alone fighting for something that's better.And I think that there um your question around equitable investment across thecity is apt. That is one that I've talked about at this table time and timeagain around where we're investing money um and how we're applying an equitylens. What I am very interested so you have my support to find a budgetsolution for this um because I I hear and also personally know the impact ofwhat this can look like um and why it's so important. But and in addition, whatI would urge us to also do is, you know, what is the council's even sort oflarger um uh strategy or investment or like what are we looking at in terms oflong-term investments of the city um particularly around deferredmaintenance, but also like you know we had a very large conversation around CIBlast year, right? how and where we're putting sort of strategic investmentsand so you know the next slides we see duth and case right so I sort of wonderand would be very supportive of how we work with the administration but alsowith our colleagues to look at what is the next not just like maintaininginvestment for highwood hills rec center for this area but what is the largerlong-term investment that we're going to be placing in this community becausewhat I'm hearing from you today which I think the parks and recck director isalso um reflecting back that even for the north end like this just wasn't goodgood enough. It's not what the community deserved. And so I think um you know I'mvery interested in that conversation and would be um uh supportive and andwilling to participate and however you want to sort of strategicallyum think about how we place Highwood Hills sort of next next up. We have Duthand Case North End. where does this investment and particularly for the eastside and for our um our neighbors uh that are workingass and are immigranthow they're impacted by these decisions but then how are we sort of shifting ourfocus into what's that longer term investment game that we're after. So youhave my support and um I also recognize that um any cuts to services especiallyby a director that as we heard was closing a rec center at 16 um is anincredibly painful thing to do. So you share I I share that um I share thatfrustration, but you also um I um you have my support.>> Council member Kim, uh Council Member Johnson, and and to honestly to addressall of you, but with specific uh emphasis on W 3, 4, and 7, um as I as Italk about the relationship with the school district and the long rangeplanning, I I I really think we need to talk with them about our joint uselocations. We are operating on agreements from the 1970s that are veryunclear in terms of maintenance responsibilities, who pays for what, allthose different things. But looking at Ward 4 specifically, you have a lot ofjoint use sites like Groveland or Hancock. Um, and then pairing HighwoodHills into that conversation as well. What is the long-term strategy for thoselocations collectively between the school district and parks? Because asyou see, we we've we've dedicated and done our investment at Highwood Hills.Now it's on the school district side to say what are you doing with yourbuilding? Right? Knowing that we operate and are a leasey of that space. I justthink there's good government practice there for us to be partnering andaligned a little more on the future um uh the future of all those facilitiesknowing that we maintain a presence in both.>> Thank you, Director Rodriguez. >> Yeah. >> All right. Um so noting the the closureof Duth and Casease Rec Center. This proposed closure is driven primarily bybuilding condition, not budget. Um we've had a few questions on this one. So I'lltry and explain all the variables. Um starting with the fact that Duth case isnearly 70 years old. Uh and has been in poor poor condition for decades. Uhwhich you'll see in the photos in the next slide and the in the handout thatI'm I'm sending to you all right now. Um, I told uh my team that I wanted tobring in a piece of the siding that recently fell off um of the building toshow you today. They advised me that probably wasn't a good idea. I did itanyway. Um, apparently it was covered with bird droppings from the colonythat's living inside the walls. So gross. But um, thank you Tom Hegel, ouroperations manager. We did find a piece of that. Like this is literally a pieceof the roof that is deteriorating and falling off. Uh you can see some of thesiding here uh that is readily falling off in the park uh next to ourplayground. Um speaking our operations manager, when Tom Hegel started with thecity, I think in 2006, he was told during his first week of building toursthat the Luan case needed to be replaced and that significant investment may notmake sense. That's a true story. So 20 years later, we're still having the sameconversation. Um, we've reached the point where continued band-aids andtemporary fixes are no longer a responsible investment there. Um, thebuilding has a growing code safety and accessibility and maintenance concernsand it's why it's our top priority for demolition and replacement. So, whathappens with the site? Um, design of the new east side community center at Duthand Case is more than uh half complete with design expected to finish midwaythrough next year. Uh we're finalizing the project budget and aggressivelypursuing non- city funding to help determine how quickly construction canadvance. Uh you'll see in a couple slides what it took to get the North EndCommunity Center done, which a similar project is being contemplated at Duthcase. >> Um so questions from you all of why isthis budget neutral? Um we're not requesting an operating budgetadjustment for 27 as part of this uh change. If the building closes beforedemolition, there will be minimal carrying costs for utilities, security,and maintaining the vacant building. But we we believe those costs can largely beabsorbed through reduced utility and operating expenses from closing thefacility. Um if demolition needed to happen beforethe larger construction project advances, that would be a separatecapital need. Um, we're developing that estimate now and would elevate itthrough the capital budget process, but there's likely a range of options uhwith the option needed to fully prepare the site for the future building atabout a half million, but more to come on that uh for the current staff thatwork at that spot. Again, this uh budget proposal ensures no staff would be laidoff uh regardless of timeline for closure. uh when it is officiallyclosed, staff would be reassigned to a neighboring recreation centeruh where we have staffing gaps and greater utilization. Uh staff would alsocontinue supporting outdoor programming at the Luan Case, which is very popular.Um so the bottom line on this, the closure addresses growing safety andcode concerns. It stops us from putting more money into temporary fixes andallows us to focus on delivering the replacement facility. um with the costfor demolition and or estimates for alternative carrying costs beingfinalized and and will be discussed in the future.>> Director Rodriguez, we have a couple questions. Council member Jo.>> Uh thank you, Sher Johnson. Um I have I'm trying to understand the conditionof the Duth and Case Rec Center. I see that you brought in deterioratingroofing. Um and I see issues with wall siding, HVAC plumbing, and the thedoors. Has the code official said that this is not safe for occupancy or couldyou talk about that a little bit more? Are there structural concerns? Do thedoors open and close, things like that. >> Council member Jo um to specific to thedoors opening and closing. You can see there that we're missing a door handle[laughter] on the front door there. Um just noting that. But um yes, we have acode correction notice from the fire inspector that outlines everything thatyou just described. We'd be happy to share that with you all. Um that hasbeen a conversation that's taken place specifically over the last year and ahalf. Um but like I said, it's been been ongoing for for 20 years. But yeah, soyou're talking about a failing roof, structural integrity,um asbestous um rodents, all sorts of different things um that we couldaccount for in terms of the overall um condition of the building. And again,just noting its age um close to 70 years old. So like there are a variety ofdeficiencies and we've reached a point where we just cannot continue to investin this facility and need to start thinking for the future which we'veproactively done over the last couple years thanks to to common sense salestax. So hypothetically like we could be shovel ready for construction next year.We just need the capital to make the new building happen.>> Okay. I think I'll just I'll just add that umI I guess I just I I'm just a little bit concerned that I mean this didn't happenovernight and so I would imagine that Duthan case has not been safe for peopleto be inside of it for quite some time if you're talking about failing roofstructure and things like that and so um uh I would in the future as much as wecan and I know we're talking about a budgetary issue where we don't have themoney to invest. We don't have a lot of options, but um that you know we we getmuch further ahead of things like this in the future. I know that our ourcity-owned buildings are deteriorating. It's a huge issue. Um but this is justreally concerning to me. >> Council member Jo, what I I I concur andI think what the parks department has advocated for is and we will get into alittle more on the next slide. North End is a good example is how do we startplanning for these things to avoid this very situation because right now youkind of peacemail meal funding support from different um bodies of government,private funds and other things to support the expense uh for capital. Umbut I do think there's room for improvement there through our CIBprocesses and other things to prioritize these things so they don't get to thisdilapitated state. Um, but just to further elaborate on your question aboutthe issues, I mean, I noted asbestous, but also ceiling failing during activeprogramming or roofs leaking and flooding areas, no AC, which forced usto close um for a period of time this summer given that long heat stretch thatwe had of 100 degrees that was just not sustainable for or safe for our youngpeople or our staff, right? Um so just noting noting those things. I do thinkthat there is u a lot of room for process improvement in how these largercapital projects are planned for um and um implemented from a capitalfundraising standpoint. Um and we have done a lot of work to establish criteriaand rankings of how these centers are prioritized uh through our system planand which outlines a variety of different conditions and variables thathelp um prioritize rec center replacement. and we'd be happy to sharethose with you. >> Oh, thanks, director. I I I appreciatethat and I'm I'm also just concerned. I mean, we've been talking about equityand a lot of these things are happening on the east side and I'm just alsoconcerned that this is on the east side and somehow this got to this point. Ican be honest, I don't recall. I don't believe that that's been a situationwe've had in in in my ward. Um, and so I'm just just want to uplift that thatthat's just concerning to me. Council member Jo, council members, I would noteum you know for the entire rec center system, we probably average a new reccenter every five years, five to six years give or take dependent on fundingsources. And just noting again the the conditions and other things um that comeinto play. But I do agree with you. I think this should have been aprioritized 20 years ago. Um and we are here to try and clean it up.>> Thanks, Dre Rodriguez. We also have uh two questions. I'm going to go to uhCouncil Vice President Ying and then I'll go to Council President Ner.>> Thanks, Chair Johnson. Well, Director Rodriguez, I appreciate you bringing theevidence of the current status of the building. Um I I just think that, youknow, there's a lot of the a lot of behind the-scenes work that often, youknow, patrons who come to our rec centers don't get to see or often thinkof because one of their main priorities is coming in and having fun with um youknow, just the amenities that we have in the building, the space, and and beingthere in community. And I I I really wanted to take a moment to give a shoutout to um our former and current mayor, former and current council members u andcommunity advocates um many community organizations who we've been a part ofreally advocating for the rebuilds of many different buildings and evenrenovations of outdated facilities in our city. Like we have libraries gettingrenovated right now. Hanland Midway Library just um opened and we have astate-of-the-art building over at the north end um with the community centerand it's really phenomenal and I I am really excited about the future of UDuth and Case um being rebuilt because as you all can can see and even haveheard through the data and also even you know for me as council memberrepresenting this ward here have heard the need and desire from many committeemembers for um a um a building that has the type of space and amenities that thecommunity really truly needs. You know, when I think about our our rec centers,I know that often times our mind goes directly to how can we make sure thatthis is a resource for our local communities. And I would uh challenge usto think even in even even broader and bigger bolder as well, especially whenwe are doing rebuilds of these uh different uh rec centers about how wecan have it be a location that draws in people from the outside too because weknow that you know maybe there are certain things that we can offer here inyour city that maybe other cities can't. And so it is a really great way for usto even be boosting our economy and just bringing in more folks from the outsideand having our rec centers sort of be this touristy area um that attractspeople um who don't live in St. Paul. And so when I think about that, it is aa really exciting vision and um just makes me really hopeful about the futurehere. I I do want to highlight um that I meanI just really appreciate the transparency from from you directorRodriguez and our parks and rec team because I have been very aware of theconditions at Duth case really for as long as I've been on the council hereand again that's why the rebuild has been so important to advocate for it isdefinitely one of my top priorities um in my um on my work plate and I wantedto emphasize what I brought up um to you know the mayor and her staff also hereat the table too when we had a presentation from the office offinancial services which is that it's really important to understand what thelike what the plan is for the rebuild we've made it very far in terms of thedesign phase and I know that um by the spring of 2027 we should have shovelready plans for the rebuild in terms of what happens after that the timelineeven the funding sources for the rebuild it's still very unclear for me and I'msure even more unclear for our community members ers, which is why there areconcerns from them. I know you probably you've seen this before, you know, justcirculating on social media that there are community organizations evenconcerned that maybe the rebuild is not going to happen. Um, and again, justwanted to reassure folks that mean for me as a council member, it absolutely isa top priority. And I've um shared to the mayor that I um I would really likefor um her to um have a really hard commitment towards the rebuild and actum and really push staff to put together those solid plans so that we can shareit out to the community. The sooner the better. Um and one of I know that we arestill in ongoing conversations with many community members, even the booster clubat the Dithan case rec center to share information, understand where they'reat. Um and for me like what's really important is just again when um makingsure that we we do have a solid plan in place um because if we if we all of asudden you know closed the duplicate case rec center we don't have that planwell the community is going to go without services for I mean could beyears and I know that one of the things I've heard from from some of theeastiders I've talked to about the rec center so far is that theirunderstanding was that there would be no gap in services for the rebuild. So thatum meaning the current building would still be up and running while therebuild happens because the new the new building would be on a on a differentlocation of the land. I mean it's a it's a really big space. Um we have a lot ofgreen space there. And so I um this is just information I I wanted to share notonly with you but folks um you know my colleagues here especially at the tableso that they understand you know what current conversations are moving rightnow. um and what I'm sifting through as I'm talking with folks who and wantingto to um get answers to. Um but I I know that we're you know you're pretty closeto the end of your presentation. So I I did just want to share overall um oh andemphasize what I've been seeing at the table table here over and over which isthat I truly believe our um libraries and parks and rack recck centers or justservices overall is truly one of our top priorities in the city. if we're notfunding these um you know really important front-facing services for ourresidents and I'd say even for folks who don't live um in our city but come toour rec centers and libraries for these services then it just really is a hugeum loss opportunity um because we know that we won't have any governmentpartners who step in to do that work for us and and give us the you know the themoney that we need in order to keep these going and so that's reallyconcerning for me and I would really urge us to come from, you know, I'd say,you know, as a council for us to come from an angle where we get really clearabout what are the things that um, you know, what are the changes that we wantto make, what's our priority so that we can really prioritize that. Um, and uh,and to me, you know, for sure, libraries and parks and wreck comes at um, it's attop of mind for me. And I just think that it's very it is reallydisappointing um that a lot of these cuts are happening in areas ofconcentrated poverty. Um it is very inequitable as well. And so I understandthat there's a lot of decision-m that goes behind, you know, getting the thebudget to be where it is today. I just think that ultimately we can't alwayshave um data be one of the most I guess like you know one of the highest factorsthat drive our decision- making because at the end of the day um it's it'speople's lives you know and the quality of life that they have here in the cityum that is that plays a huge part into this and for folks in areas of concconcentrated poverty they might not always have a built schedule where theymake a decision to go visit a library or rec center but to me especially as as aparent and mom of very many little ones, um I I always want to make sure thatwe're building towards a city that is familyfriendly, that is kid-friendly.And so that means making sure that parents have the option to just drop into um a rec center or library if they wanted to, and that they actually havethat option available. And so even cutting hours um I understand the budgetum the budget proposal, I say, you know, behind that. However, it just means thatif we do that, we continue to cut options for families overall, and that'sI'm something I'm very opposed to. >> Thank you, Council Member Yang. Uh, wehave Council President Ner. I saw Council Member Buie's hand as well.>> Thanks, Madam Chair. Uh, following up on the council vice president's points, Ithink it is critical that we're talking about the future of Duth case. Um nowand a question that I have director um that I appreciate followup on is whatare the what are the carrying costs the holding costs of keeping the buildingstanding but closed um if we are talking about having shovel ready designs byspring of next year um but not yet having the funding identified to makethose plans happen. I would wonder about the carrying cost versus the cost ofdemolition. Um, especially given, and I'll have more to say about this later,that we are talking about a very small amount of ongoing savings caused by thereduction in hours and the other closures. And I'd be curious to know howmuch we were we are putting in just to keep this building standing. Um, and Ialso think it would be worth looking at our 2027 common sense sales taxinvestments. Um because for example, we may want to if the holding costs arehigh enough, redirect some of those dollars to demolition. Um especiallynoting that only two of the 12 13 of these investments are on the east side.And I think it's clear from this budget that the east side is um by far gettingthe short end of the stick in every way. And these common sense investments, Ibelieve, are completely within our discretion. And I think this might be anopportunity to the vice president's point where, you know, rather than justfollowing along with the schedule of what's in the worst shape, um, we couldbe giving something back to the east side through our capital investments,through the common sense, and I'd really encourage us to think about that.>> Council member Naker, uh, Council Member Yang, points well taken. Uh, we cancertainly follow up, uh, with the code correction notices and the estimatedcosts. Um, it is substantial. I I want to say around a million plus just tokeep the building operational or standing up. Um but um just to the pointon common sense um you know when that was um approved in November 2023 thiswas the first project that we prioritized and to the point where we'veinvested 3 million in just the pre-esign planning to get us to a constructionready project. So, um, we we've demonstrated that need. Um, if we didn'thave common sense, we wouldn't have the pre-esign. Um, because we'd be lookingat what you see on the screen and trying to find different funding sources to getthat work done. So, that was really an effort to uh build a launchpad for thenew building and have others come in and say like, let's build it. So, like thatis like we're ready to find the the capital funding for this project.>> D Rodriguez, I appreciate that. I can't tell you how um I will just say I can'ttell you how relieving it is to hear some of my colleagues that represent ummultiple different neighborhoods also bring up some of the questions andconcerns that we carry. So often we place the east side and the burden ofadvocating for the east side on the council members that actually representthat community. And so I just really want to just echo um take time toacknowledge that and I appreciate the questions that are being given. Um, Iwill share that as any part of a real capital campaign, you have an idea ofhow much things are going to actually cost and the timelines that we'reworking for. And there is a full plan on what a fundraiser and fundraisingcapital campaign looks like. Right now, I have a lot of concerns about the holesin this one. Um, because I'm not necessarily seeing timeline. I'm notnecessarily seeing commitments. I'm not necessarily seeing fundraisingstrategies, but I'm seeing closure. And so one of the things that I would justgive and echo back to you and to the administration as it relates to do thecase. I really appreciate you bringing forth this uh graphic. I'm not surewhere else in the city this would ever happen. And I think that that's where alot of folks have a lot of concerns because this shouldn't be acceptable inany community. Um and over the years, you know, when you look at the mapthat's in your appendix, when you take out the Luan case and you take outHighwood Hills, there are large gaps. some gaps that if you're walking and youdon't have a car are 40 to 50 minute walks because the walkability on theeast side is not the same as other places as well. the bus transit uhroutes are also not the same. And as we've learned, even car sharers routesare not the same on the east side. And so just when you think abouttransportation, especially for young people who often walk to one, onelocation to the other, um you're talking sometimes 40 to 50 minute commutes bysimply removing Duth case. And so I would just share with you um you knowwe've been talking about a lot of hard pieces but I just I'm not I'm notpersonally thrilled and I will just share from my colleagues you know whenwe look at a capital campaign what we're hearing right now is we have madeinvestments that we are working towards creating the capital but we don'tcurrently have a timeline identified for when this rec center is going to comeback in. We can prioritize it. There are other funding sources that couldpotentially be re-evaluated. But when I voted for the sales tax and when Iadvocated for the sales tax, I did so with the understanding that at certainpoints in time, some recent may have to be higher priorities when it comes torenovating. And a closure, much similar to the pressure that we would put onevery other property owner, if they had a building in this condition, would behow long is it going to take you to repair? And we would actually have a aum expectation that they would move expeditiously. I think in this space,the city has to do the same that we're asking for most of our property ownersin the city, especially those that go through this property. We would have afailing roof, have siding that is coming off, having a sign in their buildingthat says you can't use this side of the building, um having leak issues. Wewould tell them they don't have the the precious gift of time, and I just wantus to operate in the same fashion. >> Thank you, Council Member Johnson. Umjust a a a quick comment on that. and um kind of just plays into this slide. Um Imentioned the funding complexities and need and showing kind of north endcommunity center as our most recent new build and what would resent represent asimilar scope uh and project for duth and case. Um to answer your timelinequestion, it is all contingent on on other government entities and whetherthe city uh can fully uh fund the cost of a renovation. So, you know, we'vedesigned up to I think about a 30 or $40 million building for this location.could certainly scale down. We could keep it at that number. Um but I thinkthe question is can the city solve that at the local level themselves or do youneed to um tap uh state partners and others um in terms of prioritization andwhere that goes. Um so that's state bonding money um and playing into thepolitics of how that plays out in a legislative agenda in future cycles. Allthose things um factor into the timeline and um noting um what myself, councilmember Kim went through with North End and just knowing the different hoopsthat we had to jump through just to get that project to the finish line wassignificant. So all that to say I um again theme of something I said earlier,I do think there are more efficient ways to look at some of these capitalprojects and how they're planned for. Um, so I hear you. Um, and would love tofurther refine or finalize a timeline to get a new building here at thislocation. [clears throat] >> Council member Broy, did you still havea follow-up question? >> Um, not as a question, but I I CouncilMember uh or Chair Johnson, I just wanted to share um, you know, that wasthe same kind of question I had in terms of like where does it show up? Um, Iultimately uh also am in support of making surethat we're not losing any rec centers um in our in our park systems. Um, butthere's been a lot of like conversations around just like where we would see thisat. And um, if you were to ask [cough] one resident, they will say that they'veseen this roof deterioration uh, by Hik Brown. They've seen aginggyms and um programs and recck centers being outsourced and hours being reducedat Jubilee Lee. They've seen um you know external upgrades at Dunning Rec butaging um um um internal um infrastructure. Umand this is not you know seeing we're having like oppression Olympics but I dothink it is a issue um that I've seen not only in my ward um and I know uh umdirector Rodriguez have you know heard from me plenty of times in terms of uhleveraging the advocacy um to the point where there's Facebook lives you knowgoing on because uh there's like buckets and buckets of water pouring through theroof at HQ Brown Uh and while we're trying to integrate and maintain uh theRondo library, we have Rondo library staff who are trying to ensure try torun a library with a deteriorating roof. So we have seen um this level um of umdefa maintenance and I do think you know I I am a strong component to make surethat we're having space for young people. Um, I also would want to elevatethat, you know, as a council member, I do tend to what the data is saying, um,not for a, uh, a justification for closure, but for a blueprint, buildingof a blueprint of what to come and when we are designing rec centers, um, whoare we designing them for and what type of functionality are we looking toinvest in? Um, I would say as someone who's being very fiscally responsible,especially this year, especially with the $25 million budget deficit and, youknow, as my third year as a council member, just kind of seeing how we areusing different sources of funds um to fund infrastructure, excuse me,projects. Um, I just want to make sure we're not kicking the can down the road,but I also want to make sure that can doesn't continue getting more expensivedown the road. Um, and I think, you know, politically I feel like we can,you know, we can solve the math problem. Um, but I do think this is going to takegreater leadership, um, not only on the on the, um, congressional level, butstate level. um and ask the question to our colleaguesum you know how how strongly do we prioritize or care about our rec centersum our library centers and being more collaborative um I would just give anexample as well and and I know we um have to get to the slide but umat least like what's interesting with ward one and I think director couldspeak to this a little bit more um many of of our rec centers are already likein partnerships. Um like MLK is in partnership with Hley Q, Dunning Rec isin partnership with Arts US. Um but I'm what I'm noticing with the East Side, itdoesn't seem like they have um like partnerships. Doesn't look like theyhave like a community organization that can help expand with that capacity. Um,I don't know if that could be, you know, uh, a leverage or advantage, but I doknow at least in Ward One, um, when we don't have the funding to actually, uh,um, fix the roof or we don't have the funding to even staff the building, um,that's where there was agreements somewhere in the past for um, nonprofitorganizations to help fill that gap. So, I think um just a offering to um some ofmy um colleagues on the east side, I I would like to see um a rec center thatoperates more of like a wraparound service. Um, and I think that is the wayof the future in terms of not just like a recreational place for sports andactivities, but how are we actually serving um the community uh with accessto, you know, jobs and mental health support. So, I'll just share that. Thankyou. >> Thank you, Council Member Buouie.Council members, I the theme I'm hearing is is all around deferred maintenance.And I, you know, I've been at this um for a few years now and continue toraise that. Common sen has certainly helped uh you know spearhead some ofthose things. Is it enough to cover our full deferred maintenance backlog?Absolutely not. Um so you notice or mentioned the roof replacements atOxford um and Q uh roof was replaced at Oxford last summer thanks to Common Sentuh MLK HQ Brown just wrapped up um I think just about a week ago um for thatfull roof replacement. So um those things are moving forward but is itenough to sustain the entire entirety of our facility portfolio? No. Um CIB alsohas been historically underfunded. Um so we are essentially in a battle withother departments to try and figure out how we can get those dollars to wherethey need to go within the parks department. Um so again just anotherrecurring theme that I'm seeing in this presentation is the need for processimprovements within the city on how we do these things. Um so noting>> director Rodriguez if you could I just want to time check us as well um withthe slides that we have and I I appreciate your comments. I also thinksometimes being transparent about our plans. So when CIB funding is allocatedwhen those community meetings take place >> I'm Duthan case closure wasn't beingasked at that time of we'd have to close the facility this year and not be ableto do that if we don't have prioritization of those funding. So Ithink if the plans in the future include closures of duthan case or any reccenter due to deferred maintenance or conditions of a building we probablywant to be transparent in that process so it can actually have a fair chance atbeing funded in the broader scheme systemic uh investments and since thatdidn't happen you know I just think it was a missed opportunity and one that Iwould hope would be prioritized in the future is that if we see deterioratingthings you know maybe we talk about the deterioration but did the folks thatwere reviewing some of the community proposals some of the people who sit andreview the CIB proposals know at that time that if they did not have a chanceto fund the case fully that it would close this year. I'm not sure. Um butjust for a time check for you, we're at 11:11. We do try to end at 11:30. So Ido want to give you a chance to go through the remainder of your slidesnoting there will probably be additional questions. Um there's quite a bit ofinformation colleagues in the appendix. Uh there's quite a few slides landedthere. So, if you have questions at the end about those as well, um, feel freeto ask them at that time. But I'll ask you to continue. Um, and just simply forrecord purposes, uh, Council Member Buouie, a lot of East Side rec centersactually have partnerships. Their partnerships are institutions. So,Conrec Center as well, for example, has a Sunday Foundation. We have several reccenters that have school district funding. So, Dayton's Bluff Rec Centeris right next joining building to Dayton Bluff Elementary. Highwood Hills is aJPA with the school district. Um, Battle Creek is a hub that is right next toBattle Creek Middle. Um, and just in some of the different programs we see,uh, like we have government entity partnerships, not necessarily nonprofitones, and then the ones that are nonprofits probably more foundational.Um, East View, you know, obviously having St. Paul Urban Tennis in thesite. So there is some there is definitely some partnerships there and Ijust wanted to make sure that all of our colleagues are aware of that but had tosay something especially as it relates to Arlington Hills and some of the otherplaces all of our rec centers also are very similar in nature but the partnermight be a government entity. Um so just wanted to clarify that and then whydon't we go through um I'll get let council member Jo ask her question andthen we may need to go to the slides to get through all of them and I apologizefor the time. >> Uh thank you chair Johnson. Just reallyquick, I I'm trying to understand the path forward for the Duth and Case reccenter project. It seems to me like with the common sense, um the city has done alot of what we can at this point to get the project ready. Do you see I mean I Idon't see a path forward without significant funding support from thestate and the federal government. I'm assuming we're talking about like a 40or $50 million rec center. I'm not sure if that's whatwe're talking about, but it's my understanding the common sense, as yousaid, is not going to be able to, you know, repair all of the deferredmaintenance that's probably hundreds of millions of dollars or be able to buildall these new rec centers that we need. Um, so I guess that's my question is, isthere a path forward for Duth case without the state government or andorthe federal government? Council member Jo, we would have to have some internalconversations about um I'll defer to Brad too on just cash flow and otherthings specific to common sense sales tax and um knowing that that full costwe probably couldn't fund the entirety of of a new structure out of thataccount, but um what we could borrow in terms of proceeds and how that wouldwork. >> Yeah, Chair Johnson, Council Member Jo.Um it [clears throat] we do have uh the common sense and CIB as options for thelocal but state funding, federal funding, we are kind of we'reaggressively pursuing all those if we want the full scope of the design tohave it uh like North End Community Center, which is um what the design iscurrently contemplating. If it's abundantly clear that the state or otherum sources are not going to be viable anytime soon, um to Andy's point, wewould have to have some serious conversations. I mean, the buildingwould take three years of all of CIB or three years of all of our um commonsense proceeds to be able to um fully fund internally or just with with citysources. Uh so we contemplated this as a as a budget that would includemulti-sources including state partnership and potentially federaldollars. >> Got it. Okay. Well, I'm I'll just say,Chair Johnson, uh I mean, I'm fully supportive of whatever we need to do asa council to um you know, with our legislative agenda to be able to seethis project through. Um and I mean, I guess the worst case scenario would beif it is looking like it's going to be several years before we could even getthis funding or it's not looking like it's going to happen, we would belooking at a significantly downsized project then it sounds like. SoI um yeah, I just am trying to understand that a little bit better. Butthank you. >> Gotcha.Um noting the time constraints, I'll I'll try and move a little quicker here,but if you have questions, obviously uh feel free to interrupt me. Um gettinginto some additions, adding safety technology. Um as mentioned earlier inthe presentation, safety incidents in our facilities continue to rise. Um andwe did do an external parks and recreation safety assessment uh yearsago as a result of the incident that happened at Oxford Community Center. Umthat raised se several critical recommendations. But this investment uhwould be an important start in advancing some of those recommendations includingsafety technology improvements at various rec centers. That includes morecamera programming spaces uh of programming spaces, remote access forlocking facility doors if we need to go into what we call a secure for anyreason. um and adding other lockdown technology at hightra locations um orthe hub sites that we mentioned earlier in the presentation. Um so working withour safety and operations teams, we would continue to identify additionalneeds around um staffing and supervisions, trainings, inspection, andon-site emergency preparedness. But this fund um really um would help us um justmake some of those technology improvements. Um, and that's why it's uhgeneral funded, not capital. Although we're open to whatever funding sourcesensure this priority advances, um, it's essential to some of the things that wesee every day, specifically this summer with teen takeovers and other thingsthat we've experienced across the city. Um, we will have a final list before theend of the year, but I know one of the first projects will be um, facilitylockdown technology at Oxford, um, which is our highest traffic location asschool restarts. Um, jumping into utility increase.You've heard us talk about utilities over the last several years. Uh, thanksto the investments made over the last two years specifically along with whatwe're proposing for 2027, parks building utilities should be near break even forthe first time in more than a decade. Um, at the same time, we're aggressivelypursuing grants and non- city funding to reduce costs and invest in green energyor sustainable building practices. Um, recent examples include geothermal andsolar at North End Community Center, solar at Frogtown. Um, not celebratingquite yet. Inflation remains a challenge, but we're hopeful that thethe level of additional investment needed in future years will begin todecline. Uh, and we'll continue to be successful in non- city funding forother green energy solar projects. Jumping to right track restoration togeneral fund. This ad shift is a big one, especially as we and other agencieslike ours continue to um grapple with funding reductions from state partnerslike DED. Uh Right had another huge summer. We placed 760 young people ininternships across a wide range of organizations and agencies.Unfortunately, we also had to turn away nearly 2,300 young people who appliedand were looking for that first job opportunity. Um that's uh we don't wantto turn those kids away. That's heartbreaking and we know we couldn'tserve all those young people, but also demonstrates the tremendous demand forthis work and why continued investment in this program is so important. Um, asmany of you have heard during our previous budget presentations, goingback to the 2023 budget process, shifting these existing FTEs fromtemporary ARPA funding to the general fund has been a a strong priority forus. Uh these are existing staff who have been doing this work since um 2022 andwe're all and we're all added thanks to uh American Rescue Plan funds. Um andeach plays an important role in supporting the program andinfrastructure behind our youth employment engagement work. On thetechnical side, this shifts the positions from fund 211 to the generalfund. So that's right sizing what has historically been fairly limited generalfund support and providing a sustainable funding source for these core youthprograms. Um we've provided regular updates to council on the right trackwork. Um looking forward to sharing our 2026 annual report soon. Uh beyond righttrack, these investments have allowed us to dedicate staff to other missionfocused youth work that includes the youth on boards program, the St. Paulyouth commission. Um as well as improve connections with sprockets, our out ofschool time network. Um and then for those of you that were able to join uslast month, we hosted um in partnership with Council Member Kim, our first stateof the youth event at North and Community Center. Another example of howthis work continues to grow and evolve. Um so it's an exciting time for ouryouth programs um and how we build up young people across the city for careersum hopefully within the city of St. Paul. Um, and although this is a largebudget ask, it's one we've been planning for for several years and will ensurethere is continuate continuity in staffing and programming. We need tokeep building on on the momentum that this program has built um over the lastfew years specifically. >> I do see a question for council memberKim. Council member Kim, we have about 10 minutes.>> I'll be very brief. Um, it's less of a question, more of a statement. I saw umSprockets and Right Track being moved into the general fund and I just want toname what an incredible win that is for us to not rely on one-time dollars foran investment in a program that we've been deeply committed to for severalyears. Um so to me I see this as a huge huge win for our youth programming. Umif you remember to our budget um engagement for the council um one of thesort of economic development or workforce development priorities thecouncil had was to increase funding for writ um I'm still sort of interested inwhat the temperature of the council is around this um but ultimately see thisas one of the best wins for the program um and we'll just sort of appreciate anyum support for my colleagues for that consideration but um it's not a I won'ttrade trade additional money for for this but and an incredible one for theprogram and uh we look forward to hearing from um Jaci, my right trackintern today um who will be presenting a follow-up on how the first inaugural uhstate of the youth event went. But um just looking forward to continuing tosupport this program in the general fund for years to come.>> Thanks Council Member Kim. Um thanks for the lead in on sprockets. So just notingthat um as well here on this slide um some key stats here. Um, but at its mostbasic level, Sprockets continues to be a binder for the strong youth networkacross the city to help coordinate out of school time programming for our St.Paul youth. >> Just as a quick followup um to to thesetwo items, Director Rodriguez, just for clarity, is the numbers that we'reseeing on either the right track side or the sprocket side um is thatencompassing of the $191,000 HR transfer or is it not? This thiswould be se I'm sorry chair Johnson this this would be separate so the the backfill for the revenue is separate from that.>> Okay so this would be separate from the revenue getting from the>> uh chair Johnson so I I do know we're planning to give you a followup uh thatwas requested from right track on um HR funding that's going into the program.So we'll make sure that's that's clear as part of that.>> Okay. Wonderful. >> Thank you Brad. Um this slide shows ourhistoric budget to actual performance. We've talked in previous years aboutthis and the significant unbudgeted pressures that parks faces. We'llhighlight those on the next slide if we have time. Um the reality is that we thedays of having discretionary budget available to absorb those costs aregone. Um nearly 90% of our budget is tied to staffing and direct facilitycosts. That leaves us with very little flexibility when unexpected costs occur.uh things like a flood, a storm um within the city where we know that wehave to react and get things done. Um as a result, parks has required year-endbudget assistance from outside the department in several recent years toaddress those pressures. Obviously, ideally, we'd like to see the year-endvariance at or near 0%. Um, you'll see some variation yeartoear because revisedbudgets can include one-time funding, carry forwards, or shifts betweenfunding sources, ARPA, uh, including ARPA in earlier years like 2022. Um, butthe bigger challenge is that storms, floods, building fires, public safetystaffing requirements, and incident response like copper wire theft don'tcome with a budget. Um, but we know that residents rely on those services orcleanups of storms, floods, things like that.um we don't have an emergency or contingency line item to absorb thosecosts when they occur. So that's really the story behind some of thesehistorical variances and the pressures will show on the the next slide here.So this is a snapshot of our major unbudgeted pressures across both thegeneral fund and special fund. Um you've heard from Maline a few weeks ago aboutthe financial position of funds citywide. This helps kind of show what'sdriving the parks challenges. Um inflation compounds the problem. We'reresponding to more pressures without dedicated funding while the resources wedo have simply don't buy what they used to. Um none of these pressures pressuresare particularly new. We've been incrementally addressing some of thoseum some of these over multiple budget cycles. Um as I mentioned with utilitiesthat used to be our largest unbudgeted pressure. Today the biggest challengesare public safety and maintaining our aging facilities which we've talkedsignificantly about today. Um, public safety costs continue to grow, includingresponding to teen takeover type events where sometimes hundreds of youthconverge on a recreation center or park and require a significant staff andsafety response. I've seen those things firsthand this summer. Um, seen FrogtownCommunity Center have to staff at least 12 people outside just to accommodatesome of those things that are going on. That's that does not account for thepolice or on ands staff that are also there. um in addition to the programswe're trying to run inside the building. Um and that is just based off areactionary planning nature of things that we find out about within theneighborhood or a young person tells us about where all of a sudden 80 to 100young people are converging on the site for not good behavior. Um so publicsafety is is a real and evolving thing for um parks and public spaces thatwe're continuously trying to address. Um, KOMO special fund also remains achallenge and would benefit from shifting additional visitor centerattendance to the general fund. That is something that we brought to um thisbudget presentation multiple times over the years um in addition to otherrevenue generating um activities within that space looking at fee structures umand making all sorts of changes this year around that. Um and then we'recontinuing to absorb uh costs that aren't necessarily core park services.Um, you know, parks is responsible for private property graffiti cleanup,securing caves because of trespassing. Um, we have no line item for portabletoilets across the city. Yet, the expectations um that the community hasfor those within their specific parks are strong. Um, and we have toaccommodate. I think that is something that we made um kind of an expectationwith residents during the pandemic when we prioritized that. Um, but that's a$200,000 line item that we don't have money for, but yet everyone wants aporta potty in their park. Um, so every dollar spent responding to thosepressures either contributes to an overspend or requires us to redirectresources away from other mission critical work. Um, ultimately that'swhat you're seeing reflected in our year-end budget performance. Um, thisbudget doesn't solve every pressure on this list, but it continues to makeincremental change um on the areas that we can address.Director Rodriguez, I did see a couple questions. I'm just going to share withfolks. We'll go a little bit over time um today for the budget committee and iffolks at the lever at 8:30, that's okay. We'll wait at the end and do thequestions there for those time frames for that. Um so continue, DirectorRodriguez. >> Continue.>> Got it. Okay. Just making sure we're in overtime.>> Slide 23. This shows revenues from our non-enterprise funds. Um, we'recontinually looking for ways to drive new revenues and ensure our feestructure keeps pace with inflation. Uh, while be care being being careful to notcreate barriers to our programs and services. Uh, we analyze our feesannually um and make adjustments based on a a wide array of factors. Um, butover the past year specifically, we put some extra work into getting creativeand identifying new opportunities to generate revenue while maintainingaffordability and access. Um, so we'll be providing you all with a acomprehensive recap of our fee changes following this presentation to kind ofdemonstrate the the thorough and thoughtful approach on that. Um, but onething couple things I want to highlight. Free free sports and classes will remainfree, but we're adding a sliding scale pay what you can option um for those whowant to contribute and can afford to do so. Um, we've implemented non-residentfees in areas where we're able to. Um we've always increased um suggestedwe've also increased suggested voluntary donation amounts at the zoo whilecontinuing to maintain free admission. Um all those changes are intended toshore up our special funds um particularly those that have beenunderperforming and help move them back toward a break even point. Um enterprise funds which are largelygolf fees and permits. Golf continues its steady performance and chipping awayat um what is a multi-million dollar negative fund balance. For those thatweren't here a decade ago, we operate operated golf at more than a $1 millionnegative deficit annually. Um so it's incredibly encouraging to see how thatindustry has flipped postco. Um also excited about the potential new revenuefrom the new driving range lights and other new revenue ideas we've beenkicking around for our courses. Um I think we're close to maybe hitting$500,000 in revenue just for the um driving range alone um this year. So umlooking forward to turning the lights on um there. Um where you're seeing revenuedips. We did have some one-time events occur in 2025 that caused somedisruptions to some of our permits, rentals, and partner or revenues, butwe're seeing strong performance this year and are confident that willcontinue into the future. slide shows adopted spending by fund andwhat's being proposed for 2027. Uh, a couple notations beyond our proposedbudget reductions and additions we've already discussed, but most of mostchanges are technical accounting shifts adjustments, but a couple notes. Um,fund 211 general government parks will be spent down and largely exhausted. Um,we'll have more info on that if we have time. uh lower town ballpark, a loanrepayment to deed uh sunseted and that budget was adjusted to the actuals whichis largely money in and out handled by Treasury and our contract managementstaff. Um one notable change, the solid waste fund. We're looking at getting outof the trash business and shifting a couple FDs from the park solid wastefund to public works. This is still an evolving concept that we're talkingthrough. Um, and we'll be able to share more about later, but excited about thepotential to work in tandem more with public works to improve trash servicesacross our system, like real-time data that shows trash is full without needingto some needing someone to call in and complain or note that their trash hasn'tbeen picked up in a few days, right? Which I'm sure you all hear about.[snorts] Overview of FTE impacts 26 versus 27.Largely a repeat of what has already been covered. Update on fun 211 projects andactivities. We weren't able to get all of these program successes,accomplishments into the appendix, but um we'll plan to send a follow-up todetail all that has been accomplished thanks to ARPA uh and fund 211. umactivation of public spaces downtown. Some examples there for, you know, thevarious programs and things you've seen in our downtown parks. Um that one-timefunding really helped us spearhead um some pilot programs that we've adoptednow. Um and even shifted some staff resources to to continue on. Um so wehave some added emphasis of downtown park programming and we'll continue on.We were able to get almost 300 trees and uh planted and maintained. We're almost300 trees to plant. um and then help to maintain several medians downtown. Learnand earn which is essentially like youth job pro uh programs that can lead todirect placement or um in a specific field. We'll report out some data on thezoo apprentice program, EMS Academy, uh pharmacy academy, UX user design. Lot oflot of good things to celebrate out of uh this specific account. >> Did it did it uh just noting the thingson the horizon. some I've already talked about, but um public safetyspecifically, we didn't get into the regional park funding um constraintsthat we have at the state level, but that's a a sign significant item that wewould love all of your support on um as we approach legislative session um tomake sure that we get an equal share of what we need to maintain those spaces. >> All right. And I know that I said wewould be going a little bit later, but I think we also have a closed doorcurrently. >> No.>> No. Okay. All right. So, just making sure. All right. Cool.>> What? >> Just the three of us.>> Oh, wonderful. Cool. Great. Um, well, that's still us, [laughter]but um we so we are running a little late. We'll be able to take a couplequestions and then we'll we'll journ. So, council president,>> keep it quick. >> Yes.>> Thanks, Madam Chair. Um, director, thank you for this presentation, for yourleadership. I want to share um my colleagues frustration and anger that Iheard expressed earlier. I um we have been so clear at this table that weshould avoid frontline cuts, that whenever we have a tough budget, weshould be prioritizing the things that people depend on. This budget does notdo that. It cuts frontline services. Um it cuts again on the east side moredeeply than anywhere else. Um and and also our our seniors um who are are apopulation that we should be thinking about. I think those early morning hoursthat that is a group of folks who often do not get um services and see thoseservices reduced. Um, at the same time, we at this table have a responsibilityto actually do something about these issues that we're seeing in the budgetbecause it's now on us. And two ideas, one that the total savings from all ofthose cuts is $188,000. It's a drop in the bucket. And when Ithink about a program like Right Track, which is a phenomenal program, moving ahalf a million dollars back onto the general fund from ARPA, I think this isan opportunity for philanthropic support, for corporate support to thetune of $188,000 ongoing dollars for a program like that or a program likeSprockets that could eliminate the need for these cuts. And that's somethingthat I personally would be happy to work on. I think it's something we need totalk about as a council. And the second thing I want to bring up is somethingwe've talked about at this table before, but Komo Zoo is a constant net uhdetractor from the city budget. Um we have 16% of the people who visit the zoolive in St. Paul. Everyone else comes from elsewhere in the state, which is awonderful thing. Um but the fact that it is a regional park means that we cannotcharge non-resident fees. And I think it's really time to ask the questionwhether or not we benefit more than we lose by having that regional park statusor whether or not it's time to go to the Met Council and ask for an exemption tothat so that we can start to actually um recoup the cost from people who do notlive in St. Paul that currently is being born um solely by our residents. So Iwould ask again to the department um to do that costbenefit analysis. I knowwe've talked about some of the costs, but I would really like to see what itwould actually how much we actually benefit on an annual basis from beingpart of that program versus what it costs um to not be able to charge higherfees or any fees to non-residents. I'll leave it there.>> Thanks, Council President. Council member Buouie,>> you don't have any additional questions. All right, I'm doing a quick lookaround. Council member Jo, >> I'll just say quick thank you, Sher.Thank you, Director Rodriguez. Um, I really appreciate this conversation andI know we'll be talking about libraries later and thank you council presidentMaker for bringing up how much money that um, the parks is contributing tothe budget cuts. It's 188,000. Um, and I recognize that all departmentswere asked to make cuts and there were a lot of things to choose from. I agreethat um you know it's it's hard to cut from the budget without cutting staffand cutting hours, but also those are the folks that bring such a significantamount of value um to our city because those are the services that ourresidents value. Um and that can't really be captured by the cost we'recutting. I mean, $188,000 brings so much more value, you know, Idon't know, 10 10 to 20 times that to our residents. And so I'm I appreciatethe the um suggestions that Council President Aker brought forward. I lookforward to exploring those. I'll also add that, you know, if we're looking atthe median home and I think it was $58 a year that um the current levy would add,like we could make up $200,000 for like less than a dollar a year, I think. So,I just want us to think about that when we're thinking about investing in ourcity, what our residents are willing to pay uh to receive the services that theyexpect while also understanding their property taxes are going to just aregoing to continue to go up. So, thank you.>> Thank you, Council Member Bruce. Uh and thank you, colleagues, as well. Youknow, I think one of the things that just continues to be increasingly clearto me in this budget cycle is that the east side disproportionately is impactedby every cut that's proposed um in the libraries and in the parks and reccenters. And so, you know, I would just say before we adopt that, you know, I'mreally optimistic from some of the conversations and line of questioningtoday just around, you know, what what we are valuing because I feel like thebudget statement is a value system. And you all heard me at my budget at thebudget address with the mayor when I shared during my speech that balancingthe budget on the backs of residents isn't actually a balanced budget. This100% balances the budget on the backs of eastsiders. And I think when we'relooking at just where we are in this point in time, Ijust want to ask us, you know, how much can we ask a neighborhood to pay whilesimultaneously taking away the things that they're paying for?And I just want to lead that from a value standpoint for me because as wecontinue to raise the property taxes, we aren't creating an exemption for theeast side. We're not creating an exemption for Highwood Hills. We're notcreating an exemption for Duth and Case Neighbors. And we're not necessarilysaying that you don't have to pay. We're basically saying you don't you won'tactually have access to a library and a rec center. I'm really excited about thepicture that's up right now because that was when we cut the ribbon at HighwoodHills um field. That was amongst Highwood Hills kids at the schools. thegentleman in the hoodie um and on the right side, Gou is like our neighborhoodum star when it comes to advocating and being in community with east with ourEast African Somali Somali residents, but also just our Highwood Hillneighbors that know him. When you take an asset like that out of our community,there is no bringing it back. And that's what we've been seeing when you when theHighwood Hills Rec Center was taken out of the community before. And so, youknow, I'll just I'll just leave us with that and simply share that um as ataxpayer, but also as the council member, it is my duty to represent thecommunity that I serve and not being consulted on these closures and not evenbeing asked for the impact and not being able to be in a space where now webasically have to transition into negotiations. It's hard to negotiate thevalue of $188,000 when we're quite literally negotiatingclosures. were quite literally negotiating hours at rec centers whenthe council vote verbally and also in a memo shared that we didn't want eitherof those scenarios to be here. And so, you know, I'm happy to go intonegotiations. I'm excited about the conversations ahead with you all. I'mjust incredibly disappointed in this and the overall decisions coming in fromfrom what we have to negotiate. Um, I feel like it puts us automatically at adisadvantage and one thing I know about the east side is that they already feeldisadvantaged. So, thank you for your time today though, Director Rodriguez. Irecognize the the role that you have here and the tough decisions across theboard. Um, you know, when it comes to the budget cycle, I would encourage andimplore us all to have some really intentional conversations later onbecause to me, I don't think $188,000 is worth the impact we're about topropose here. And also doing a net neutral close to Duth case makesabsolutely no sense. So, thank you guys so much. And with that we are adjourned.