like to call to order the December 17th, 2025 Parks and Recreation Commission regular meeting. Uh, roll call, Kyle. >> Commissioner Eert here. >> Commissioner Morhead here. >> Commissioner Tyson here. >> Commissioner Herdina here. >> Commissioner Lmark >> here. That was two. >> All right, we have two members absent. Uh if you're able, please stand and join us in the pledge of >> allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands. One nation under God, indivisible with all. >> Right. Item four, approve the agenda. We do have a slight revision, Kyle. >> Yep. Um we do have someone here to speak on a couple of the items. So, we'd like to move the the dog park up to um number seven and then follow with the concessions. Okay. >> Move agenda as with the addition changes. >> Karen moves. Do we have a second? >> I'll second. >> Second by Aaron. All in favor? >> I. >> Next item, open forum. I don't have anybody that wants to speak in the open session. So, we'll move on to the next one. Uh, approve our minutes from November 19th. Any corrections or additions or revisions? Otherwise, take a motion to approve. >> I make a motion to approve the agenda or any minutes. >> I'll second that. >> All right. We got a motion and a second. All in favor? >> I I All right, moving right along. So now we'll deal moving number 11 up to next item. Uh potential dog park location. Dave. >> Yeah. So as probably aware city the city is looking into u putting up a new public works facility. Um and in >> I need you to pull your bike up please. >> In those discussions uh parkland dedication came up. um be like any other development where parkland or uh dollars would be need to be contributed to the city just like any other project in the city and it was it was brought up of a possible good location for a dog park. Um before we get too far down that road of designing this into the public works facility uh project uh felt that we should bring this to the parks commission and get feedback from the commissioners to to see. We're not here tonight saying it should be these amenities or how many parking stalls or what's the inside of the dog park going to look like. We're just looking for feedback from the parks commission of do we think this is a good location um to take parkland uh parkland from this project and then and put a b dog park in this location. So just looking for any questions, concerns, feedback, anything that we can bring back to our public works steering committee and also the city council as we kind of move forward. >> Approximate size. >> What was that? >> What size of land are you talking about? >> Yep. So the public works uh project is on 26 acres. So it would be parkland dedication would be approximately 2.6 acres. >> Karen, >> yeah, just I looked at the design and I'm not exactly sure if I know where you're talking about down by the environmental center. >> Yeah. >> Or at the at the end of the road past the end. >> So if you look on your if you look on your packet, there's a kind of a >> I looked. >> Yep. I could figure it out. >> Yep. So, it's kind of just a little bit south of 202nd and 61. That intersection down there, uh, across from kind of >> southeast of the airport would be next to the environmental center. And then the proposed public facility, the environmental center. >> Some of the thoughts where it's it's not in a residential area where you're if you have dogs barking and running around that you're not going to be, you know, in a residence, um, you get about a 2.6 6 acre area and it would be some highland with trees. There's it's already trees inside that part. So, >> and the satellite shot is that the yellow circle >> in that general area. >> Okay. >> Do you know how big I mean dog parks can be any size, right? So, is that pretty standard? Is it what would you say? uh like the American Kennel Club, AKC, they recommend city parks be one plus acres for dog parks. Um you know, the city parks that we're researching around a couple acres. There are, and we do have someone that will kind of talk a little bit probably more in depth, there are some parks within other cities, um but some of those are are larger and um tend to be more like the county regional park systems, not city park systems. So, uh, based off of the information we have available to us, we feel like, you know, city parks are standard one to three. >> It's adequate. Okay. >> Okay. >> But Karen, >> this has come up years ago. We were going to have that session over by Shillers Schillings and that fell through. Then people kind of use it on that entrance to the library. They've kind of developed their own little dog trail there. I'm in favor of wherever you put it. I think this is a good place. We're the only city that I know that doesn't have one. Even Columbus, they have it at Lo's, that little Finston area, but it's at least someplace to put a dog. And so, I'm anxious to hear from someone else about it, but I don't want it to be ultra fancy, but you've heard the advertisement on TV. It's a dog park. It's a dog park. Maybe you haven't heard it. I watch a lot of TV, but it's very >> It's a funny ad. >> It's very friendly. You know, dog parks are the most socialized parks >> that I understand. And so I'd be just really in favor of hearing from them and then giving my my opinion. >> Great. >> Yeah. I'm wondering if there's um or if there are other locations, other sites that we're looking at too. >> Well, once we kind of get ready to do the preparing for site planning, we'll definitely compare it. I know I believe that the one that's kind of on the radar for me is I think it's like St. Anthony and it's a couple acre acre dog park. That's probably what's going to push us to look into which parks is what do we ultimately decide on where does it go? How many acres are we talking about? Right? We don't want to start diving into two acre parks if it is a six acre park or something. But um we just kind of want to get this figured out, mapped out, and then we'll certainly start diving into what we what we have for comparisons. >> Okay. Well, I know we have a resident who wants to speak also on this item. So, Steve, welcome. Just introduce yourself. And >> Steve got a key, 34 year resident, Forest Lake. Uh, first uh kudos to the parks commission, Kyle, for getting the fences up at Fenway uh where the for the pickleball courts. >> Just do your uh address, too. >> 7632 Hilo Lane, Forest Lake, Minnesota. Um so, kudos to you guys for getting it done. Great collaboration. They'll get used and they'll prove the safety out there. So, nice call. Uh on the dog park, uh two things to share. one I've had a been a dog for 30 plus years and my wife and I have traveled extensively around the United States. So we've been in an easy hundred dog parks. There are a lot of bare minimum not very pleasant dog parks and sadly they fall into that 3 acre zone where you you're talking about there tend to be in cities that don't have a lot of land. They're minimally acceptable. The really good dog parks that draw a lot of people. Two really close ones here are the one in White Bear. It's 10 acres. Um if you go down there any time of day it's full of people. The dog density is actually relatively high even with 10 acres. The 13acre park that is down in Rice Creek in Shore View is uh fully open. There are no trees in it. It's an old farm that they just repurposed. Um that dog park is extensively used. You can't mo most times of the day you can't find a parking spot there. That's how popular it is. People get drawn from all over for it. It is a great place for people to go exercise because the humans can do a large loop. It's almost a mile around the whole thing. And so people will go and do loops. They'll chat. Um, so it does bring that exercise value to it. I am very strongly opposed to a 3acre park in Forest Lake. Um, I'm very concerned that will there'll be the expediency of getting it done to check and the box will be checked. Oh, we have a dog park and we will never have a truly spectacular dog park. Something in we're a rural community. We have space. There's land around here. Let's do something like Hugo. If you've ever been to Hugo's, Hugo is unbelievable. I mean, it's uh so these there there are really good parks around that serve as a reference point for us. it's a threeacre park will be park will be a massive disappointment. And so I'm here to express that and to let you know that I hope you pause and don't just do it because it's expedient with the maintenance center and and say well we've got the space let's shoehorn it in and let's get it done because it makes that a more politically vi viable event for the community. I think that's the wrong thing. So I back in 2013 I worked with the city to try to get a dog park. So I think you remember actually Karen. So I I I I gathered uh I think it was 340 signatures Exactly. >> Uh we had we raised funds from some of the vets around town, donated thousands of dollars into a fund. They ultimately had had that had to get that refunded to themselves. Um and uh that was going to be at the end of the north the north end of the runway. So it's hard because I don't have a map with me, but for those of you who know Forest Lake, well, the run the runway at the airport goes north towards the YMCA, but it slightly angles off to where the maintenance building is going to be. At the north end of the runway, there used to be that big pile of dirt on that piece of land. remember that. Nobody knows where I'm talking about. Can you put it up on the screen? >> I mean, >> I think you're talking about the south side of the airport. >> Nope. Oh, you're you're right. I'm sorry. South side of the airport. That's why everybody's confused when I talk about that. Uh south side of the airport. So, it's a Kyle and I were going to calculate the land there. I forget how but it's it's much larger. It's much more on the scale of what you have in um Shore View or in Wiper Lake. The beautiful part about that piece of property is that walkway that goes over to Fenway. It ties the dog park in with Fenway. So you have a lot of people that come for sporting events. That's a really central jewel of Forest Lake and people if we put the one of the gates on the on what would be the northwest corner. It's a very short walk from the Fenway parking lot. So we can reuse that parking lot and then I'm sure that we could probably strike an agreement with Washington County to use the transit center parking lot which is not well used at the moment. I understand that gets a little more complicated but that's that would be on the other side of the park. So, we got two good parking facilities. We have highdensity housing over there, so there's a lot of people that live right there that can use it in that community without having to cross Highway 61. Um, it's tied in with the YMCA and the library. Again, a lot of traffic, a lot of foot traffic. It's a beautiful site and when I talked to the airports folks back in 2013, there was no objection to putting a dog park there. Um, so I'm a very, very strong advocate of that location because of the tie-in with Fenway. Yep, that's the spot right there. So, uh, alternatively, when I was talking to Kyle earlier, uh, this week, there's another piece of land. There's another 6 acre, uh, I guess it's 6 plus three. So, there's about 10 more acres that are adjacent to the piece that you see in your brochure. Um, that's currently not part of the development for the maintenance facility, but that land would Kyle, if you can put your cursor on that or the piece of land up there so that they can see it. Uh, yep, right there. So that that is just adjacent to the maintenance building and uh again rural residential area. It's already got trees. It's got topology to it. Um it would be another be it would be my second choice. Be a really beautiful place to put it. And when you have either of those spaces that you have there are large enough to do what many communities do, which is separate the small dogs from the large dogs. It really avoids a lot of conflict. So you're you would if we did the threeacre park, what we would probably find in a few years is we're going to put a fence down the middle just like White Bear did. Now you have a 1acre park for the small dogs and a twoacre park for the large dogs, it's really unpleasant experience. Um and again, I've been to hundreds of these so I can speak as a reasonable authority here. I think if we had a 10acre park and we had to do a twoacre small small dog park and an 8 acre large dog park, especially people who have big dogs and they want to take their chuck it and they want to throw the dog or throw the ball a tennis ball, you know, 100 yards and have the dog go get it and wear the dog out, you really need some land. So, that's probably enough of my speech. I just want to really advocate two key points. One is please don't do the easy thing and have it be the wrong thing. And the second thing is we have at least two good options in Forest Lake that I think with some vision and and passion and drive we can make happen and they would be spectacular. Any questions about >> Can you pull up the first area by Fenway that he's referring to? >> Just curious. >> Yeah, right there. >> So it's because if we did Fenway, you'd definitely have to do more parking. >> Well, yeah. So >> parking is a issue now. >> Yep. And this is part of the the airirst strip. And Dave, I don't know if you can share more on the the crash landing. >> This is the crash zone, so you can't bill anything there. >> Yeah, but they they didn't object to having people walking there. So I did talk to the airports folk back in 2013 about this. There are other there are other dog parks in the metro area that have are in these same zones and it's not excluded. >> We'd have to look because that has changed since the since 2013 the runway wasn't paved and the the runway has been expanded. Yeah. >> So, we'd have to check, but >> it's also not a part of MAC, which could be different regulations. >> Again, we have to know I'm not standing here as an expert in saying it can be done, but I think it should be investigated. >> Karen, >> I just can't thank you enough for being here because all I hear is you we want a dog park. We don't want one that's not usable. Judge Duty does not like little dogs and big dogs together. They're always in court. So, we have to have it big enough to separate them. And I when I said I don't want fancy, you know, I don't want a whole bunch of ding-dongs over, you know, hanging around, but they have to have some benches. >> Well, you don't. So, I'll give you a little history on the White Bear one. I don't I don't know who built it and how it got done. So, you have to somebody has to fill all the gaps, but it was pretty bare bones when it first went in. They had an egg fence that already existed on the east side. They put up some additional fencing. Where the money came from, I'm not certain. Uh I think the parking lot was dirt at first. Again, check on that. But it's a relatively small parking lot. There was no bathroom facilities. There were no water. There was no small dog park. There were no There was no protection in the park around the wet areas there. So people the dogs would come in and they'd roll in the mud. So the citizens collaborated. They put some fencing around the wet the wet areas to keep the dogs out. They ultimately built a bathroom down there. 10 years later they built a little out structure that so dog people are just happy to have the dirt to walk on. And if it takes another decade to get benches and trees and no one's going to care. They're just going to be look. So, I walk my dog every day on that path that goes by the airport. I walk from 61 out to the ball fields, around the whole thing, around the other ball field and back. It's about a 1.8 mile loop. You you see you'll see me out there all the time and and and there's always people there. It's a very very busy place. This do and that's not fancy. There are no bathrooms. There are no benches. There's right this is nothing. It's a bare dirt road that people are thrilled to walk on. Um don't don't think it has to be pretty. It just has to be there and be big and the rest of it will happen. And I will say I think it's an easy thing to fundra for. So I sent Kyle some pictures. Uh my wife and I drove down to Kentucky this summer and we just were took kind of a random path and we stopped in this little community. Couldn't have been more than 4,000 people and they had this beautiful dog park and I took pictures of it and the guy who was there, there was a guy there working. I said, "How do you guys pull this off?" And he said, "Well, we did a thing where we have a fee. the the residents get a card, a little swipe card. They pay 20 bucks a year or whatever it was. We can call and find out. It wasn't very much. I remember when he told me, "That's not bad." And they and uh and so they get in and if you if you want to use it and you're not a resident, you can either buy a year pass or you can do a couple bucks for a day pass. It's just one of those electronic gates. But they had a they had a building with bathrooms and they it was a it was probably a 12 acre dog park, small part, small dog, big dog place. Um they had some features in the dog park like teeters for the dogs to go on and other terrain things that they could weave around and um but this little community built it and the other thing they did I showed Kyle in the picture is they had a lot of sold space for like the local vet service and insurance guy and when you have an amount of linear fencing that we're going to have in a dog park especially if it's a place I'm advocating for where people see it from 61 and they see it when they go to the library and they go to the transit center and they go to all that highdensity housing you will get money for that. I mean, you can sell that space and cover some of those expenses. So, I think we can build out a really really nice dog park. >> So, just for just for kind of wrapping things up um for the sake of time here, too. But, uh one thing that's important, I think, for the commission to just note that some of the parks reference are county. They're county parks, right? They're not they're not the cities. But certainly, I think um and you can correct me if I'm wrong. I think the point is you would like to see, you know, more research done on maybe some more land to be done expanded there if possible. >> Well, I'd like to see us start with a vision. I when I was leading businesses, my line to my people always was forget what you know, just think about what great would look like. Let's start with what great would look like. And I think what we think if we want forest like to have a great dog park, it's going to be 10 acres. It's not or, you know, six, nine, it's not three. I know three is not the right answer. So, if it's going to be a great dog park, it's going to be substantial in size. And over time, it has to have a pathway to get amenities. And if it's more visible, we want access. So, it's got to have good parking. People have to know where it is. I mean, we could write this down, right? This is not hard stuff to write down. And and I think if we want something that's supportable and vibrant over the course of time, the place on the south end of the runway is an area where with the with the signage we could sell and the access to Fenway, even if it's just people coming from outside the community for ballparks and tournaments, etc., they all have their dogs. cuz I see them when I walk over there all the time. They can walk over and use the dog park. It's going to leave a really positive impression of Forest Lake. So, I Let's start with what Great would look like and then let's figure out how close we can get. >> All right. Thanks, Steve. >> Maybe we could get some of those. You know, we got quite a bit of money last time and we could we could do that again. >> Yeah, it was disappointing. I mean, and I I was just one guy going around with a tin cup and it was thousands and thousands of dollars. So, >> it's very needed here and it's very very popular with people. So, I don't think we'd have trouble finding some. Dave and Kyle, I think you got some >> direction, some feedback. And >> I think we ultimately want just yeah, the direct feedback of the the location. Is the commission on board with that being the location, knowing that there's maybe some potential for expanding? No guarantees there, but certainly something we can look into. >> How big is this one? >> So, I think it's built in like 2.6 to 3 acres. Um, >> but again, it's more so just the the potential of the location there. That's what we're looking for with the with the site. >> So the the dog park is on the capital plan for 2028. So to his point, yes, you want to design a dog park and you want to look into it. The reason why this came up now is because we're talking about the public work site. So the question is if if we want to explore this, we probably should carry this with. If we don't want this dog park here, then we go back to the public works steering committee and say we don't want a dog park there and then we move on. >> So, what what's the uh because I know we've said Tower Park, you know, some things could change there. Could that be a potential spot for a change? >> Certainly potentials, but something to bank on with a lot of unknowns. I I don't know if that's timing wise. Not sure if if having it in the 28 CIP if that's all going to work out because we don't know. Tower could be there till 28, could be there till 29. We just it's a large unknown to just bank on that space. I got you. Not to say it couldn't be considered. Um >> maybe maybe I can add one other comment is that piece of property that I'm talking about is currently leased for farming. I spoke to the farmer one day when I was out walking my dog. He was out tilling land. So, we had a a meet and greet and uh he told me he pays about $60,000 a year to lease that piece of property to to to to farm it. Uh so, it is city land already. Uh so, we don't have to retitle it. It's it's not it's not zoned properly for a dog park. It's zoned industrial tile, Kyle told me. But look, the keys the keys to the zoning are in this building. So, it's not a hard thing to fix. Um, I think if if the city wanted to be bold, and I I do believe in bold, I would separate this from the capital improvement plan for the maintenance building, and I would just have the parks commission say, "We're opening a process to build a great dog park, and let's see if we can fundra for it, and let's go out and start the journey now, and find out how responsive the community is and see how much money is available to raise." And I I don't know why wait and why tie it together. It's there's you're going to find out there's a lot of passion about this. people are going to come out of the woodwork to help make this happen. So, I I just I would vote you cleave it. >> That's why I asked about the 2.6 acres. It I don't have a dog myself. When I did have animals, we had 10 acres and they still ran off. So, wasn't >> Don't take it personally, >> right? Um, but so I hear what you're saying and you've visited a lot of them and I mean, do we want to just have one to have it done or do we want to have a, you know, nice one? Do we want to put it in? I think that's >> that's where I'm laying with it. I think it needs to be I do think it needs to be bigger. >> I like the idea of exploring >> I do >> the separating it port area. See if it's even doable. >> And then park over here and a big dog park over there. >> That's that's kind of one thing that staff has talked about this. There's a really good chance that eventually you're going to probably have another dog park somewhere else too, just with the expansion. So, it's not to say that this is the one and only that you'll get. Um, it's just kind of looking at past studies and demand of dog park is high up there and this is a a good opportunity to get something there. We have the space. It's all kind of coming into fruition now. So, but that's for you guys to discuss. If um I think ultimately we just want to know if we want to explore this as part of the dog park or or parks commission recommends to not not have it there. >> I would be a no vote >> to not have it there. not there and explore and have someone on our committee when when indeed we get to plan another >> that can help us design >> the what would be the the hard date for saying yes we want to put it in there from a planning perspective for the public works. >> So is this something we can look into more before a decision has to be made to say yes that land is now slotted or I mean, we could bring it back in January, but that's that that would probably be where we're where we're switching from schematic design into designing a project, right? And you got to either make you either include that in there or you kind of don't or you just ax it off and then it becomes its own sole project that in 2028 when we have that the dog park on the CIP, that's when you start talking about a dog park. >> Unless find a fundraising. >> Yeah, I mean I Yeah, I I can start talking to people again and see if if if the if the parks commission is open to it and if you said Steve, come back with 100 grand and we'll put it either in of the other two 10acre locations, I'll look at that challenge, you know, if that's what it takes is $100,000 to do it. I I don't think that's going to be that tough. I >> Dave, are you able to are are you able to by January meeting explore the other rest if there's restrictions on those other properties whether it's airport or leasing and other things? >> Yep. So the the land that's southeast to that public works site that he's talking about public works use that that's our that's our dump site. So I don't speaking for me being the public works director, we're not going to give up that land. That's the only land we have that we can bring material. I I think there's sentiment to explore if there is there any other spot that's viable in this area. I I don't think we should just >> I think if you want to do a full scale search then you don't keep yourself to this one location. You might look the entire city. You might look up at Bixby Park up by >> up by the park up there or down south or up in the northwest or or whatever. I think >> Yeah, there's nothing special about this location. No, the only things the only thing special is that you have land available that you get parkland dedication and it's in a commercial zone where you're not going to be bothering people. I would I would maybe add one thing though, Don, that when Blake and I were talking about this on Monday or whatever, he really liked the tie-in with Fenway and that if it if it could be close to Fenway that it does enhance that location and this piece of runway that this piece of land at the end of the runway isn't really usable for much else. So, if we could turn that into a a dog park and and if we can get that approved, I mean, it's going to sit there empty forever and just be farmland, right? I I think it would be nice to look at it and take a serious look at it and and again, what would what would great be? Let's try to start with what great would look like and figure it out. >> Well, that would be my final that I don't think it belongs where it is. It's not enough space. I'm not going to wait. I've waited so long and I didn't even like dog parks in the beginning. I was thinking, what in the world? >> But I was very much convinced when the people came out of the woodwork and order offered money and it was going to be and then it we're going to have one and then it was wetland. It's a lot of stories about it and if we just put it off and put it off, it's not going to happen. >> That was 2013. >> Look at that. >> 12 years has gone by. >> I don't have that many years left. So, I want to have a dog park but in the right place. >> I don't think that's the right place. >> Any other commission member comments that give guidance to the staff? I just think if I don't know what I don't know because when I read the notes for the the agenda, I thought 2.6 six on it. Okay. But >> yeah, >> you know, from people who have experience with feedback, I don't know. It's it's kind of like buying a an RV that's at the limit of your truck and going, I think I'll be okay. >> Because if you put it in there and it does get traction and a lot of traffic and then it becomes an issue where now it's too crowded because it's too small, then I've got 2.6 6 acre dog park and I'm going to have to look at putting another one in somewhere else in the city just to be able to >> Well, the other thing happens is the really small ones don't get used because I like my dog. I won't take my golden retriever there. I can't throw a ball. I >> Let me Let me get the commission member comments. Steve Melissa. >> Um I like I said when I first heard the amount of space that's why I asked what's the typical space? I feel like it's a small space too. And I guess this just confirms >> it seems too small to me. I would be open to checking out that airport site, see if it's truly viable. Maybe uh if there's something else. I mean, this one is small, but I think we're looking at just uh spending money on that that we with little benefit. >> And I don't think we could get the community to put the money in like in a small space. Sounds like the community would be willing to to make it even greater, but if it would need to be big enough to draw them in, >> I would be interesting in hearing what Washington County might be willing to do, too, because they have, you know, they've taken community input, and I know it's high on their list, too. >> I can almost tell you what that answer would be, Steve, but we don't need to go there. It's different jurisdiction. Uh so the one of the challenges is Dave's the public works project's under design and this is part of that design. So if the if the commission feels that they don't want the dog park there, we can let Dave know tonight. We can drop cross the site off and then Dave can work towards a 2028 CIP project for doing a search somewhere. >> That's what I heard. >> That's what I would suggest. >> So do we need do you want to make a Somebody want to make a motion to that then? I'll make a motion that we >> distraction's good. >> You got another direction. Okay. You got enough. You got this. You got You got the consensus of what we're thinking. Okay. All right. >> Don, if I wanted to try to have the city uh open the opportunity for community engagement to somehow fund a larger park somewhere before 2028. What's my mechanism as a citizen to try to do? >> It' be work with Kyle. >> Okay. So, let's try to find a >> like what's that way? >> Yep. Yep. I mean, it might be a pipe dream, but I' I'd rather try than and fail than not try. >> So, I think we Yeah, we just need to separate this. This one is just all about this. So, we we got our direction on that. >> If if uh Steve reaches out to Cal and it becomes an agenda item in January, February about changing our CIP and having more uh desire to look at a dog park, then we can discuss that. So I get we got our direction for tonight and then if Steve works with Kyle and we want to bring that back early next year to do more discussion on a just a dog park. I think we'll we'll look at that beginning next year. >> I need one more point of clarification, Don. I'm sorry. So as a citizen Kyle's got a bunch of priorities. Obviously I'd like this to be number one. I come in and say, "Hey, what dirt can we use in the city? He's got 55 other conflicting priorities. H how do I move this along in a timely fashion knowing he's got a lot else to work on? and call Karen and you call Karen every day and say you need to tell Cal to put this on the agenda. >> I like that idea. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> You you understand my question, right? I don't want to I I want to try to get something done before >> 2020 suggest. But if you if you reach out to the commissioners and say, "Hey, I reached out to Kyle. I'd really like to have this a topic on an upcoming commission meeting." That's that's your way to >> I'm sorry. I mean, I need his time in the meantime to look at the options and see what the barriers are. And somebody has to look at the land at the end of the runway and understand the rules. That's not a commission activity. That's a city activity. >> What you're going to need to do is you're going to need them to give Kyle and I direction to start looking into it. >> Can I request >> have to have an agenda item to actually say, "Hey, dog park's not on our radar until 2028." We have residents that would like that moved up. Do you want parks commission? Would you like staff to start dedicating time to move up that time frame to to do a deeper dive into this? And yes, then that would bring up looking for locations, looking for costs, looking for layouts, all everything that comes with that. >> Can I make that request tonight or I have to come back in another meeting? >> Are there are our email addresses on the city on the park website? >> I believe so. I think all the contact on the page. I'll double check. >> The city website to the park and >> rec on the January agenda. How's that? I'm sorry. What's >> That's what he's asking. That's what he's asking for. >> Yeah. >> We'll put it on January. >> I I don't know if I'm in town in January. What date? What's the date of the meeting? >> 21st. >> I won't be available. >> Uh February 21st. >> I'm in town February 21st. >> Could you Could he start a citizen committee? him. He is a citizen here and you know why couldn't he just start a citizen committee and and >> it's still going to have to come to the commission and it's going to have to go through >> we say tonight that we're >> yeah certainly he could start >> someone here who's willing to do some work and we've been waiting since 13 to get this on. So if if he wanted to start it then I'd like >> Do we have a do we have a simple >> for us to put this on the agenda? We see your passion. We feel it and I think all of us can feel it. Um I think we get it on the agenda, we talk about it and we and then you can see the minutes and then we'll go from there. So let's let's start talking about >> I always get a little nervous when I'm not let's start talking about it as soon as possible to get it moving forward because I'd like us to think about it so we can maybe build it in 28 but not wait till 28 to actually start talking about it. So >> I I I think my I'm my my my first request from a staffing perspective though is I think we need to understand understand what what land might be available and that does seem like the city needs to go look at the books. I mean, happy to stare at maps with Kyle, but I I think before anything else, we got to see what the options. We're not going to go buy a piece of property to do this, right? We have to have >> So, just just respectfully here for this item is not on the agenda tonight, right? We do have to move forward with the agenda. We have agenda items. I think it's fair to say that this will be on January agenda in some form and as long as the commission is supports it, Steve and I can start conversation just what that agenda item looks like, build out a timeline for what does this project look like and then move forward from there. >> Perfect. You're easy to work with, so that'll be fine. >> Okay. Well, thanks Steve. >> Thanks. >> Okay. >> We're going to go to number seven now. Staff report on concession operations agreement. That's uh Dave, I believe again. Yeah, >> I'll I'll lead that one. >> Kyle, sorry. >> Yep. So, just to um the the brief history is last year was the first year for concessions. High Points is Flaw um operates the concessions um at Fenway Park. Um it's it's something that Flaw manages the I believe the restrooms while you're there. They've done like all the toiletries. >> We did, but I would I don't know where that's falling now with the city taking over the field. Sir, can you come up to the microphone if you're gonna Why don't we wait and you can make comments if you need to if you get questions asked for clarify later. So, let Kyle make his presentation first. >> Yep. So, um in the past, Flaws ran the concessions. They've ran the operations in the the Fenway building where there's bathrooms. They've maintained all that. Um this is this is the first year that we ran the agreement in 2025. Uh just pretty straightforward. draws out the responsibilities of the concessions operating uh room. Um just kind of clarifying that, you know, FLA owns all of the items in the concessions area, all the the cookers, and they've bought the refrigerators, the grill, all the the inventory that's used um for the concessions. So, uh just looking to to reub both Flaw and the city um have agreed to the terms in the agreement in front of you. Uh, one thing that we did request the revenue and expense um from the concessions which we have not received yet, but FLA is working on getting those over to us. Um, so certainly it it could be something that if you know assuming you've looked over the agreement, it seemed that both FLAW and the city feels like it worked well this past year um that if if we're supportive of that agreement, we can definitely do a recommendation for council approval upon receiving the the revenue and expense report. Karen, >> there was a question in there that during their events they would be able to keep the concession money. Is that correct? Because I think that's part of the way they keep the funds down for the young people that come there and I would hate to see us take money from. >> So the only the only expense that they they have is to pay the utility bills. They don't pay rent of the facility. We don't take a cut out of any of the the revenue whether it's gross or net. >> Okay. So you don't you don't cut into their Okay. >> It's a they pay the utility bills. >> Okay. And that was agreed with FL. >> Um uh that was our previous agreement. Yeah. But hi, I'm Iron Plouts. I'm vice president of the FL organization. I live at 6485 184th Street North Force Lake. >> Thank you. >> Been in FL 25 plus years. Been vice president for over a dozen. Um we did change the agreement this year because now you're prepping the fields and stuff like that, right? >> This isn't anything to do with the the field maintenance is only concessions. >> Okay. So the the but the has changed. This is this first year is different. So the concession but we've had concessions contracts for many years previously. >> No, nothing's ever been on file with the city and flaw for concessions agreement. >> Really? Okay. Because I thought Al had done some stuff like that. All right. Um, as far as taking care of the concession stand, yes. I don't I don't know the entirety on the bathrooms and the cleaning and the all the uh >> this is just the concessions agreement. So, we don't necessarily have any. It's just to state that you guys had been doing that in the past and >> Okay. I mean, we would probably do it on the weekends when stuff is going on, but on an everyday basis, we'd have to think into that. See how that's going on. This will just be for the concessions agreement for inside the >> Okay. All right. That's fine. So, yeah. Um, as far as the funds, the concession runs on a, you know, weekends when we have a tournament, great. Every other every night during the week when you have maybe one or two or three games, if we don't have like at least three to four games, it's generally a loss. So, there isn't a lot of money made or a lot of money lost. It's pretty much a break even. And we can get that report to Kyle. I know we're working on our budget and stuff for next year. We're a little behind on that, but um yeah, the equipment's all been purchased by Flaw. Flaw built the stand with the help of the school district and some money from the city. I don't know, that's 15 years ago. >> Oh, at least. Yeah. >> So, so there hasn't been a whole lot of money made or lost on the whole situation. It's not a It's not a big money maker, but it's a requirement to have sports there because people rush there at six o'clock at night to play games and they don't necessarily get a chance to stop at McDonald's or Burger King or wherever and it is food available. So, that's that's how it runs. >> Karen, you had a question. >> It goes back to my same question that on the weekends when you do have a lot of people there and you do sell a lot of concessions, I don't and they did buy all the all the equipment and the building, whatever. So, I don't want the city to squeak in there and then say that they're going to take part of the concession money that they make on weekend. >> If you read the agreement, the agreement, >> you should read the agreements when you're when you're approving them. But the agreement says that we don't care what kind of money you make or how you run the concession stand. You just pay the utilities. You pay the sewer bill, the water bill, the electrical bill. And after that, if you're open seven days a week, one day a week, whatever you want to do, you can do. That's that's all we're asking in exchange for you having exclusive rights to run those concession stands. All the city wants is to cover their utilities that the building is costing. It's costing lights to be on the water to run all the you know sewage to go down the the drain all that. So I mean that's that that is what >> that part that part of it is new. They didn't pay >> it's not new. It started last year. So the agreement that was agreed last year it's basically a continuation of the agreement last year. Well, if they're happy, I'm happy. But they've been kind of like many times pushed away. And so I want to make sure that they're happy. If they're happy with the agreement, they know >> signed it last year and they've already signed it their side of it this year. So they must be happy if they have signed their side of the agreement. >> Good. I don't have >> I one has spoken before you guys too far. Speak to my >> Steve. Any more question any questions for flaw? >> Nope. And then so I would ask three minutes and then keep it relevant to the concessions agreement. >> So this agreement is part of one of many other agreements that you have with FLA. So I want to ground the commission on what this the story is with FLA right now. What my concern with FL is FLA is has a charitable gambling license. Their topline revenue money they took in from gambling was 20 million. >> Be relevant to the cons. >> It is relevant. I'm getting there. And uh they give out $17 million in prizes. They had $3 $3 million in net remaining after paying prizes. Only $30,000 of that charitable gambling money went to Flaw. I think it raises a question about the public good in some of Flaw's activities. And I understand that the board has an opinion that Flaw has been a generous to the community with building the building the some of the things out at the Fenway, but I was deeply involved in the in the ice arena transaction that happened. And that was not >> Steve, we're talking about the concessions agreement. >> Yep. I mean, I I there was context given about the fact that what Fly done in the past. So, I was responding about the other negative that was there. So, uh I think I I talked to uh the the city or the district about this. So, a single fieldhouse event for volleyball nets $14,000 for in profit. And I think that we're underestimating how much money is made out at the out at the fieldhouse. And 50 only 50% of the people that participate in flower forest lake residents. So the other half of the comm the other half of the participants are not forest lake residents and there's no differentiation in the cost between I think this agreement is part of the this first leg of the stool is part of a a broader question about how the city and the citizens in forest lake interact with flaw given to the magnitude of the dollars involved both capital and annual spending. So I would like to see this slow roll and put into a a more productive context about the magnitude of the dollars. >> Okay. >> So can I just clarify? So basically what you're what you're stating is to have some sort of different agreement where flaw is ultimately paying some sort of revenue share. That's what you're ultimately >> yeah best practices as defined by the University of Minnesota are communities have agreements that have a minimum cost for these organizations and a revenue sharing. Um in the past laws had an a contractual agreement with the city that they would apply uh provide their audited financials. They consistently refuse to do it. This request for the P&L is 3 weeks old. They haven't provided it. They have in my opinion as a citizen is they're not transparent. I think we need to use this as an opportunity to be transparent. Many of you have the history with FLAW with the way that the landscaping was handled and the flow of money associated with that. This is not a happy thing for our citizens and this is yet another step forward in the relationship with FLAW. We where we're not managing the relationship. We're not managing it the right way. We're not demanding the right level of transparency. We're not demanding the right level of collaboration. So I I I am laying on the tracks with what seems to be a small agreement and saying we we need to have a more balanced relationship with FL and transparency on FL's part is critical. >> Okay. Thanks. >> Any commission questions for Kyle or Dave? >> Do we need a motion? >> Yeah, we would. We are looking for recommendation of the agreement. Again, knowing that council ultimately has that final approval, say, but obviously when we bring that report, they're going to want to know if the commission recommended the approval of the agreement. And again, just noting that flaw has agreed um the president Paul Kak has signed signed the current proposed agreement. Um it just has to obviously go to you guys for recommendation. >> I'd make a motion that we recommend that the agreement continues as it did last year. If that's closer. >> Okay. Karen made a motion. >> I second. >> All right. Second by Sue. Any more discussion? >> All in favor? >> I. >> All right. And Kyle, when you get January, we could you get that report, we can look at it in January then. >> Yep. Certainly. Certainly can bring that back. >> Okay. All right. All right. Number eight, annual >> Don. Um adding the language. Um it is something to discuss if you guys do want to add the language that council approves that upon receiving the um revenue expense if you guys choose to. You don't you don't have to, but you can choose to add that language into the recommendation, which I would >> I think that's what Karen Karen is doing. Y >> give him a little push to get it done. >> All right. Parks and Recck Report, annual report. >> Thank you. >> Thanks, Steve. So just a background um within the ordinance for commissions uh it is I would say required I guess that uh there's an annual report provided to the city council by January 15th of just an overall overall um you know reflection of the of the past 12 months and the commission what the accomplishes accomplishments were what we've done what the commission has been a part of. This is a report that uh my I I put together on behalf of what the commission was um accomplishing and then the involvements for community events and um open house or the grand openings and such such uh throughout the year. So the report again just highlights things that we've gone over in meetings, what we've accomplished, uh policies, agreements, um discussions, and what uh events we were out at for the for the year. Pretty pretty straightforward report, but just wanting to put it out there if there's anything that any commissioners would like to add um to it. The the report goes to to council here early next year. Um, but feel like we highlighted everything that is pretty appropriate. So, just wanted to put that in front of you guys and and get your feedback and then I guess recommendation to to run that report to the council. >> You did a nice job with that, Kyle. >> Looks good. >> Made us look really good. We're really busy. >> A little bit concerned you're setting a high bar for us in 2026, you say? But >> we got big plans for you guys. You don't know it yet. We got big plans. >> Not yet. >> Oh, boy. Uh, do you need anything? >> Yeah, just re I think recommendation. >> Yeah, unless you see anything else and just a recommendation to to share this with councel. >> I'm seeing heads not up and down, we recommend sharing this with council. >> So, all right. >> The only thing I didn't see is because several of us volunteered throughout to run that booth at the arts in the park. Oh, >> I do I do have in there the um Okay. >> included attending pickle ball group gatherings, assisting in arts in the park and certainly highlight it more because it I mean it was a a larger >> but yeah I know it's kind of tucked in that that summary there. >> Okay. >> Is that does that suffice or do you want I mean Okay. >> No, that's good. >> Thanks Aaron for that. >> Yep. >> All right. Let's go to boat races. Seems like uh >> we're good. Might be tough to have a boat race right now, but >> that's fast. >> Yeah. Unfortunately, you got to plan that stuff well in advance, right? >> Yes, we do. >> So, we've been approached by a organization that's very adamant and and I believe they've ran this organization has ran uh events in Forest Lake before. Um it's something that wasn't a part of the proposed um or approved 2026 budget. Um but they're adamant. I think there's there's been previous history with good results with these types of events on the lake. Um and really our our only option of working with them at this point is to get recommendation to do so. Noting that there's not budgeted um amount for it. It is something that this group has agreed that they would work with us to collect sponsorship. That's pretty standard practice is that um if they go to a city city will pay the upfront the costs are for like divers um insurance they they all have to purchase their own insurance policy um like I said the diving team and then I think just other miscellaneous costs involved with getting the race set up. Something that's not really built into that cost is our own public works team has to take several hours to tear down buoys, um, put the buoys back in the lake and other prep work done. So, it's something to be cognizant. I mean, while they are city staff, it's just still taking them away from their other duties. I mean, there are some costs that should be involved with hourly um, with that. And I've talked with the organization on that. They're open. I staff I mean would love to see all the events in the world but obviously for us it's more you know trying to plan these things um out and kind of get more more jump on it but really just looking for recommendation um of pursuing this event knowing it's a good one. There's some downsides with running these in the park closing the beach down closing the maybe not closing the landing but the landing is super jammed up. um doing it in early June, maybe you're beating that that crazy summer busy time, but you're right there. Um and then really just prompting more conversation even about more special events of this type of nature when they do close down a I mean, Lakeside's obviously our premier primary park and attraction this summer. Is there any, you know, thoughts on a running this event? Um, how do we feel about maybe pursuing it or other conversations around events that are going to be shutting down a whole park? >> Right. So, Kyle, in the past, I remember snowmobile races on the lake. Did the city fund those? >> No. Okay. >> And then what about like the plunge that has divers and stuff? Is there any city dollars in that? >> I don't believe so. That's all rotary. >> The Rotary. >> Okay. So although the city has helped with setup um when they weren't able to do it on the lake, the city did, I think, do a lot put a lot of resources into setting up the pool and the parking lot. >> Okay. What What does UMPBA stand for? >> Put me on the spot. It's uh it's it's some sort of like boating organization. >> So it's not a nonprofit. >> Nope. It's a it's a for-profit. So, I mean, we just we just heard concerns about the city subsidizing one of the nonprofits in the city, and I'd be concerned if we start spending city dollars on a for-profit company without knowing what their their P&L is. I mean, we just open I think we open ourselves up to residents ask questions. >> This is a for-profit organization. >> Yeah. >> If they got sponsors, forget about the I mean, I shouldn't say it that way. That's even without including the public works time. that would be help subsidizing a private operation. My initial reaction is they should be paying the city for the public works time to work on this if it's really that great of an event. >> Is this different than the boat races that we've had >> on a regular basis? >> So, um it is a different organization. This is more like a a drag race style where I believe the like the Baker memorial is that's a it's a separate event. Um, you know, the the idea is that this would be a um a more it would be more of a draw type event, not necessarily a parks event, but a more special event to draw people, you know, into the city maybe for an economic boost is kind of the idea, but obviously they would need support of the parks commission and then who ultimately pays for some of those expenses that they're requesting. >> So, what would be the estimated cost for the city >> in this? >> $6,500. Well, that but I think you're asking about the additional >> Yeah. >> like with public >> growing staff labor and all the other stuff in as well cuz I'm wondering to his point they are a forprofit. So what's what's the estimated all-in cost for the city and then what's the estimated revenue that's going to come into the city from the event? Do they offset? Because if the city's at a loss for a for-profit company to have a race, that's an issue. Yeah, >> I I think this one is probably not worth doing too deep of a dive. It's, you know, pulling in the buoy. It's, you know, until we get a special event permit that actually what their exact requests are. I mean, and and Cal and myself have been pretty good to say we're not providing you trash pickup. We're not providing you this. Yes, we'll pull the bullies out of the water for this event, but we been trying to get really good at not offering up public works services for these events. If you want to have a service, we're going to we'll give you the permit to use Lakeside Park, but it's all on you after that. So, I I think this would be the same of >> yes, pulling in the buoys if we need to pull that in. That would just be a absorb cost, you know, and we would say no to anything else other than that. I mean, back in the day was the request of can you have somebody there to change the trash cans while our events going on? Can you we use your dumpsters to get rid of it? That has all kind of transitioned out of that where if you want to event, we're giving you that that park and the rest of it's, you know, on you to to run your event. >> I Yeah, >> I'd be concerned too, Dave. You've got that's two weeks before the 4th of July, which is probably the biggest event in the city, and you got crews busy working on that. Uh, we didn't even talk about if I live on that lake and suddenly that lake is closed off for drag racing on a Saturday. That's beautiful. It just seems >> we run into that. >> You can see where I'm headed with this. I'm I'm not supportive of I'd rather spend $6,500 on a Let's Go fishing program that's going to help >> kids uh than this a for-profit boat race. We ran into those concerns even with that other boat race that we have that we shut down that that landing and you get into that weird point of you know next thing you know we're having boat racing all these events and that landing is closed every single weekend and you don't >> you don't want to get down down that point either you know >> and this is a drag race boat race. >> Yeah, it's it's like just a straight straight line drag. Yep. >> Fast boats. >> There's another one that we have is just around that. It's more of a track race. >> Yep. >> So, with that insurance policy too, does that include cleanup? Because when these these drag boats wreck, so when they wreck, they crunch in the water. Yeah. >> They spill stuff and it's a cleanup. And I just want to make sure that insurance policy if they did go through with it. >> Yeah. They they would have to pull county. So, when there's open water involved, that's a county permit. So, all that would be covered under the insurance to the county and all that. But, um, >> and is the lake big enough for a drag race? They've done it before. Um you the recommendation I think uh I believe is like not to be closer than it was 600 ft to the shoreline or something for something like this. There's there is a standard guideline. It's just more of it's more of you know the conversation around shutting the park down, taking away park space. You know, that's that's I think our biggest concern from our standpoint with the commission is to say >> we don't want to just do this because it does it does sound like a great idea to bring the event in to bring people down to the park and that's great and there is an economic boost there, but it's also taking away park space and um that's something that you know likely residents will ask you know how do they get to do this? And that's more or less what we're kind of looking to cover. >> And that other race happens two weeks after 4th of July, right? Is that again? >> It's later in the summer. >> It's Last year was in August. I don't know that there's always a set. >> Okay. >> But it's usually after the 4th and sometime around that August time. >> So, how does a commission feel about giving guidance that we're comfortable or not comfortable with shutting down the park and that lake for for this? And then the second part would be if we are comfortable with it, then >> I'm not comfortable with us paying >> part. Okay. It's clear we're not comfortable with the 6,500 or any subsidy. >> Yeah, I'm fine with the date. And >> if I want to take the pavilion there at the park, I got to pay. >> Yeah, they they >> and they're going to lock down the whole thing >> and we're going to give them $6,500 and they're for profit. I struggle with that. >> Well, their restaurants would benefit, you know, but for the city to pay for them to have their event, I don't think that's appropriate. >> That That's pretty good information for me to take back. Okay. Okay. >> I think I think just one other just touch on that just with the 6500. I think that that might be a discussion for next year as well of >> how does the parks commission feel about events, right? And do we feel comfortable with sometimes subsidizing an event to help get off the ground? Are we completely always against it? you know, all all that in between, you know, and I I think we should have a a broader discussion on just that because I think Kyle gets ideas in all the time, right? And if we know that the commission is strongly against subsidizing any events, when they come in and say, "Hey, I got a great idea, but it's going to cost you 5,000, then we just move on." >> I mean, if we're going to subsidize anything, to me, I've got to see a balance sheet to say you need to be subsidized. >> Yeah. Are they making money? >> Right. Because if you're making money hand over fist and then I'm giving you more money, that's that's that's a problem. But I think that Commissioner Tyson's point to is it a nonforprofit, right? Is it a >> is it a name your like a church group or something like that that says, "Hey, we want to start doing this event or a local, you know, chapter. We really need to get off the ground with this. We think it's going to be a great idea. Can you help us get off the ground in 2026? We hope that it's going to be a a great event and we're going to get So, I think >> I don't want to get in the weeds here, but I think I think Kyle and I have talked about that too to bring that as a discussion item of >> Sure. How do how do we set these parameters so when he's getting all this stuff in so we don't waste time out of night going we need we didn't even to bring this here because we already know the answer to that >> yeah there could be some maybe not a full policy but some guidance for staff. So that's a great discussion Dave to have next year. >> Okay. All right. That's why we're setting a high bar for next year. >> Let this go. >> All right. >> And everything. >> All right. Uh last item before adjournment, St. Peter's parking lot agreement. >> So first a little background on St. uh Peter's parking lot. Um when Belts Park was getting uh reconstructed uh with the basketball courts and the tennis courts and then the full playground and all that site work, um staff presented two options to the city council. one to one to put in a parking lot and one to put a just a trail and I I believe I included those two drawings in there. Correct. I kept put them in there. >> So, at the council meeting, um a resident which was Karen came up and highly uh highly said that St. Peters has been uh basically allowing for residents to park in this their parking lot and um not only should we not build a parking lot that we should be you know paying St. Peters for the use of their parking lot. Council went along with that and uh directed staff uh myself and Jolene to negotiate a contract with St. Peter's Church. That contract was negotiated last November, and we entered an agreement for a a one-year agreement that we pay them $5,500 for, I believe, 30 parking spots, and we clear their snow all along the sidewalk along Southshore Drive. Though, this year it came up for renewal. Um, staff wasn't opposed to that agreement. was put on the consent agenda for the city council and council member Miller pulled it off the agenda and asked for the background. Basically what the background I just gave you. He was not a big fan of that agreement um and questioned whether or not the parks commission has ever seen that and approved that which you had not because you were not a body at that point in time. That was before um March of this year. um Lean Blake or Mayor Roberts and Council Member Ericson. Um we're still in for full support of it at the council meeting. It well at the end of the day it did pass and they approved the agreement. U but there's a termination clause in there that they could get out of this agreement. But what they directed myself to do is bring it back to the parks commission to look at that agreement and get your feedback on that. whether you think this is a great idea, you not do not think this is a great idea, you think we're paying too much money, you think we're not paying enough, the overall thoughts even of the parking lot discussion of you weren't around for that whole discussion too to provide recommendation to the council at that point either. a lot of kind of things here. But any questions, comments, concerns? Just >> I have to go back a little further even than what Garen Moore had said that night because we had a big Belts Park community rally down there and we had the beans in the jar and we asked the community what they wanted. We asked the commission what they wanted and everybody wanted a bathroom. So, father had said if the bathroom is there, they will quit using the church and he would have no problem with the parking lot. Everybody was happy except the bathroom never came to fruition and never really was seriously talked about again. One sub one person said we can make a portaotty closer to the church. Crazy talk like that. But the reason I was supportive of it when I supported it is because none of that happened and I thought when the community rallies and the commission rallies and everybody rallies and then father's happy and then nothing happens. I thought okay now something's going to happen or should happen. But then you went and put those spots next to the park which at first when I drove out there I thought that's crazy. someone's going to run out between those cars and and get hurt. But I've watched it all summer and it has really worked well to have the parking spots along the side. Um it didn't create any kind of problem that I ever saw. We also have parking lot parking spots across the street on 11th, the wrong side of the street probably, but at least they can get there and park there. Um so I've changed my mind a little bit, but I That's my feeling on the parking presently, but I will always be against I think. Isn't that something? Always I think. But right now, >> you always think >> I always think too much because I do not like the idea of using that quality parkland for a parking lot. And when I was on the former commission, we outlined how many spots you could have and how they could get in and out of that parking lot. And it looked like it was a complete disaster to try to have very few parking spots in there, give up all that parkland, and then still have it be a danger to that corner because it's such a busy corner to have people pulling in and out. So, I'm going to listen to this one now because I'm kind of in the middle of everything. I wish it would have been like in the in the beginning. It's not. So, >> all right. >> Adding a parking lot. I don't believe is going to eliminate the parking in the church parking lot. There's people are still going to park there. >> So, if we have to pay them to do that, I guess, you know, that makes sense. But I don't know that we want to pay to put a parking lot in and then pay the church because we're not going to avoid people parking in those in that row. I don't believe. So, >> Dave, maybe for context, what did you have an estimate for the cost of the parking lot? Yeah, that's what I was going to ask. >> It would have been a bad >> Well, if you'd have done it with the project, it was approximately $100,000. >> Oh jeez. >> It'd be more now. A little bit more. >> It'd be more now that you'd have to go back in. The only thing we did do is >> Kieran's favorite ponds that are out there. We did design it with the storm water. >> Yeah. >> To accommodate a parking lot in the future. So basically 18 years ROI on paying to put in a a parking lot. >> 18 years you're going to pay to redo it again anyways. >> And the grand thought of it was the parking lot is that central. You have that playground. You have the trail coming in. There's going to be a future some type of a gazebo. Your volleyball courts, ice rinks, all that will be all centralized with a parking lot. And now the parking agreement is parking people in a lot far away and then they have to walk. And then now that's why most people are just using the street because why would you walk park all the way at St. Peters and then walk all the way back to the park? There is no connection. There's no trails that connect the park to St. Peters except for the sidewalk along >> Go ahead, Karen. >> I'm really sorry. Sorry, I've heard so much negative about part of it and I always hear positive about wanting that parking lot. Staff has wanted that parking lot way back when and no matter what comes up, it always is the parking lot. Like, we're not going to let it go no matter what anybody thinks cuz we want that parking lot there. And that's fine. They can do that. But I think they should listen to others about how much it's going to cost to make it, how much loss of the park, and then how much are you going to have to pay to plow it and keep it open and whatever. I mean, there's a lot of expenses to that. >> Um, I would like to see maybe a new agreement with maybe less. I guess the biggest why staff says that is because if we name your if the Dollar Tree wants to come in tomorrow and build a building, we're going to make them build a parking lot to handle the people that are going to be using the Dollar Tree. And what why we say we need a parking lot is because we're building a park. We should not be saying, "Okay, we're going to build this," but then we're going to let somebody else take care of our parking. >> So, >> you don't think that street parking's going to be okay? And >> I'm I'm saying street parking is fine, but I I think that's why staff always leans towards that parking lot because we should accommodate parking for the people that we are bringing to that park. And to ask whether in agreement or not, it'd be no different than another business coming and say, "Well, we're just going to kind of like the dog park. We want to put a dog park. Well, we're just going to use Washington County's parking lot." Well, okay, that that sounds great, but that's also not our parking lot. And then do we have to have an agreement with Washington County? Do we you know so that's why when staff develops these things even like that dog park that we proposed we put a parking lot there because you want to accommodate if you're putting in an amenity you want to accommodate parking for the people that are coming to what you're doing >> on street parking. Yes public parking so we we already factor that in. That's why we stripe those spots and we put a handicap spot there that try to at least show people yes this is places to park. So, I don't think we're trying to jam a parking lot down people's throat. We're just our best practice of what we require anybody else to do is what we're just recommending that we should do because that's what we would ask somebody else to do. >> I'm personally fine with us paying for it. I would prefer to see a longer term agreement rather than every year we're going back through this and then you lock in a price and that price is locked in. not next year we come and now the church is coming to the city and saying what we want $7,000 and the following year it keeps going up because then at that point if we're looking at potentially an opportunity to put in more parking at least we know what our spending is going to be until that agreement's over. So the one-year agreement is the one issue that I have with it. It's too short. >> One thing to consider um is like this winter, right? We have the the ice the ice rink. In years past, we've been able to have vehicles drive right up into the park. Well, being that this is a path, we're not allowing that because it's not going to be best practice for the path, right? You run the risk of breaking that up. So, now we're going to have people parking on the street, walking all the way to the rink. We have a lot of grandparents that go in there with their grandkids are now going to have to walk a long ways to that warming house. Um, so that's going to be some risks and it's going to be probably a lot of complaints coming our way. And that's also another thing about that. It's going to be a really heavily used park. Um, and while yep, maybe that parking lot doesn't even take care of all the people that are going to be there, it's going to get them that much closer to the park coming a lot. And I I think the parking lot just takes away a lot of that uh that issue, especially in the winter time. >> Yeah. So my my question is instead of putting it where we've got it on the diagram, I'm looking at Belts Park, the actual pad for the park, you got the pavilion. Could you put it in that space that there's green space in that corner? That way we're not taking up and splitting up the big green space right there at the battle. Would it be possible to put it there? And then you're right next to the park, too, which is great for grandparents with kids. I think um I mean Dave might weigh in. I think there's a there is like that hill right there. I don't know how well that would work. I think there's a hill coming off 11th that would probably eat up a lot of that green space up top. >> Okay. >> You're probably losing about a third between a third and a quarter. >> Some of this is partially my foot and we're getting away on the the parking lot thing. I I guess we're really really we want to kind of weigh in on this just the agreement. >> Yeah. The the other the other parking lot thing is >> I did my own personal sin as I got off my own topic. So >> yeah. So the agreement uh I mean we really have to have the agreement because you're not going to get a parking lot built >> Yeah. >> before next year. So >> would everybody like to have the agreement be cheaper? Sure. But it is what it is. You have to negotiate it. >> I get the one-year thing too. It's flip side is just for the same reason that you said >> well if we are going to talk about putting in a parking lot then the one year is fine >> right >> but if we were going the route of we don't want a parking lot and we're going to go with the paying I would say I would rather lock in longer period >> right and it's and it's also then getting the church to agree which we don't we don't want to negotiate that here but so I think Dave the >> status quo >> report to the council is that we support well I should have put words I think what I'm hearing is we're okay with the agreement uh for next year. But >> I think there could be some discussion though in the future of Bells if put a parking lot and your point that you would never let a business come in and not build a parking lot for their customers. >> And so it's probably worth another discussion in the future on this parking lot. >> Yeah. Because I I just don't like the placement of where it's at there. I mean, if you turned it and then put it right up against the trail that runs from the road down along the park, then at least you're not chopping up all that space. The only problem with that is whenever the people are there watching their the at least there's some spaces that they could park and because I do see that being living in that neighborhood they park their cars there and the littles get out and do the skating or you know and then the grandparents are sitting in the car being able to watch it. So if you've got that over here you're not >> Oh it doesn't block. >> Yeah. you have, you know, five or six spaces there where you could be right looking straight out that that ice arena. I don't really see a ton of play going on across that green space right there being in the it's all up in that basketball and the volleyball court. That's not >> remember the sand volleyball sand volleyball was going to be there. >> I know. And I told I told the young volleyball players that they were going to we were going to get it. Don't worry, it's coming. another for January, but we have a long >> one. We're teeing up we're teeing up some items. We're teeing up some items. So, okay. >> All right. >> So, what I'm hearing is parks commission is fine with the agreement. Continue on. There may be some additional discussion about a future parking lot or Yeah. >> parking overall with belts, but the agreement agreement parks commission is fine with that as as it is. >> Okay. Yep. All right. Thanks, Dave. >> Yep. Okay. Uh staff updates. I'm >> good. >> Staff >> staff updates. >> Um so we got uh good news. Our Veterans Memorial Committee. Um I worked with the the committee on writing up a grant for the Minnesota um Historical Society. Spent quite a bit of time on that grant and with that group and they were awarded an additional $210,000. Great. And that's going to take care of that center sculpture piece. >> Great. >> So, we're looking Yeah, we're pretty excited about it. Um going to probably go tour the facility that it will be done next week. Um nothing can really start till January 1 just being with the grant uh for the fiscal year. But um but yeah, we're I we're hoping that 27 because it's about a 9 to 12 month process for that centerpiece to get done. So that's exciting news. Um the postcards that we discussed about Baby Park, those should be going out this week here. Um I think there was 300 plus addresses that we pulled that were all in that general area. So we feel like that's going to be a pretty good amount of feedback. Um with those questions we talked about the basketball court, no court, other um budget update, the the budget, everything's been approved. We're going to be adding taking on that dirt work at Fenway. Um, so staff is figuring that with purchasing equipment, getting prepped on what we need to um figure out for scheduling. We've added the scheduling software that we talked about, I think, at the last meeting, too, to ease that pain a little bit. Um, working with those organizations. Um, anything else on that? >> Bay View was approved as part of the budget. >> Yep. Bay View Park was approved, part of that budget. Um, let's see here. The, uh, let's go fishing. Um, so at that last meeting, I think Karen might have mentioned the being open and the commission agreed that we're open to getting them maybe some funding to help get going. And so Dave and I talked about that. And we got an official ask from Keith who presented um asked for up to $10,000 from the parks programming which we did have some leftover funding. That council did approve to give them that $10,000. So that's going to get Let's Go Fishing operating. So they will for sure operate starting in 26. Um and uh and yeah, so they're going to start doing their volunteer push and training push. So that's also uh good news. parks master plan. We had just a first call um getting that moving. Uh Josh with Bolton and Minkx putting a lot of information together, survey stuff. I'll be talking with him tomorrow just to kind of get us ready for that next meeting. Um just introductory meeting, but I think we're going to be in pretty good shape uh hitting the ground running after the holidays. Um outdoor rinks, we are opening up Friday. uh excited. The hockey association um is going to be, I think, Monday through Thursday for about three and a half hours a day. So, they're going to be renting, you know, quite a bit of ice from us throughout the the season. So, we're just kind of getting that finalized with them. That's going to be really good. But, yeah, I rank should be up and running Friday. Um hoping that this weather kind of holds up and stays cold for us. >> I was the second person to like that post by the city. >> Oh, yeah. The the rinks. Good. Good. Yeah, we're excited. The a lot of lot of hours, a lot of hours go into that and public works staff, I mean, overnights, all day shifts, but it's uh we got a lot of positive feedback last year. I mean, a lot of folks said that was the best ice they've ever had here in Forest Lake. Um, and our warming house staff heard that often. So, it's I think it's worth it. Our I think our staff overall, it's it's a big ask, but I think they also enjoy it and it's a it's a it's a win-win. Um, >> just curious if the city ever reached out to the Malards to see if because their players part of their agreement to be able to play junior hockey is they have to do so many hours of community service. So, that would be a perfect opportunity for a community service. >> Did talk a little bit that item got brought up with Matt, the retention. Um, I'll revisit that because it never really we didn't really go forward with that or talk more. So, I'll revisit that with Matt. not really the hockey association, but the minister, >> the actual malers. I think they're just a really good connecting point for us because they're they're kind of tied in with them. So, >> um, hometown holiday had a really good event. I know saw some of you down there. It seemed like a great turnout. Um, for how cold it was on either day of us, we were pretty fortunate to have good weather. >> Um, weather. >> Yeah. Thanks for those that came down and helped. I think Sue and Karen got your hands dirty with the hot cocoa and >> Yeah, we had hot cocoa home. >> You tell them to add a add add a barrel of it next time. >> Yeah, we ran out fairly quickly. >> That's That's better than bringing some home though, right? >> Oh, absolutely. And it was the best I think tree lighting that I've ever been to down there. So >> better every year. So that's great. I wasn't here. So >> yeah, we feel too good. >> My wife liked the format. She didn't like the one year where it was a bunch of >> people doing presentations or dances and stuff like that and you're sitting there forever. So, she definitely liked the >> the quick speech and let's go line it up. >> Good. Um and then last thing I have um is just we we have the the commissioner spots uh that that need to be filled too. Just want to make an announcement. I think um not to put Karen on the spot, but I think she sounded like she was interested. But we have two two spots to fill. Um so January is the the last meeting for those terms and we'll be trying to have have uh two more commissioners. So >> put some feelers out. >> If you guys know anyone that you think would be a good fit fit, um put it out to them. And >> do the two vacant spots have to reapply? >> Yes. Yep. So I reach out to me uh if you have questions on it and I'll certainly help navigate that with you, but it is something you got to reapply for. or I think it's on the city website for um commission applications. >> Okay. >> So, you can use you can use one of those QR codes you like. >> Yeah. >> Probably just fill it in for you. >> I'm going to go in person right up there now. You got these beautiful trees. I'm going to come right up in person. >> Well, I think we'd all love to have you continue on the commission with your history. >> Sometimes it's good, sometimes it's bad. >> Well, it's good to have that history on on issues. So, appreciate it. Uh, all right, Dave. Uh, just to reiterate that, Commission, if you know, I mean, just like St is Kyle's year-end report, we're doing a lot of cool stuff here. We're doing policy, we're we're getting events, we're doing building parks, all this. So, I mean, get the word out. I mean, the more people that are energetic and want to be on this this group, the more more we can do, you know? So, >> it it's great. I think we did a it's amazing. and you read back through that in a short year with a bunch of new people, all the stuff that we accomplished. So, starting in January of next year, knowing already what we're doing, I mean, look at January, we probably added five things on there just today. >> Yeah. >> Second thing is is Kyle never likes to take the credit, but that grant that he got, he put a lot of time into that and >> that's great. >> Um, >> it was huge. I mean, that I don't think that statue would have been in for five 10 years to raise $200,000 is a lot of >> Yeah. $100 here, $500 here. But I saw the grant that he filled out and it wasn't a one-page, you know, yes, no, yes, no. It was a lot of time he spent on that. So, he did a great job. Not only that, but all the agendas, all the stuff that we're doing. He's putting all the packets together. He's reaching out with residents. He's doing all this stuff. So, I he's he's really working hard for myself and for you guys. So, I just It's the Christmas time, right? So, I want to show that appreciation. I I don't know if anybody knows how hard he's working behind the scenes to to make it all come together. >> And he answers his phone. >> Yeah, >> he answers his phone. That's a big one for community. >> Yep. So, I I think he has great ideas and he's doing a great job. So, I I think with this commission and public works behind him and what he's doing to parks program, it's just this whole parks system is really taking off. >> Yeah. >> Dave, is that grant going to be recognized at the a council meeting in the future? there was a a public um uh what's that called? >> Press release. >> Press release for it and then it will be at the council meeting will be brought up my by myself as well. So, >> okay. And even when that that and then that annual report we talked about is presented, it would be certainly call out Kyle on that for so no thanks Kyle. We >> Oh, thank you all. >> So, >> all right. Uh, commissioners updates. Aaron, anything? I'm good. Karen, >> I just had one and we kind of answered it tonight. You know, been discussion on whether that's a good place for the ice arena, the for the ice for the not the hockey, but just the regular skaters. And some people have been asking where in the world they could park because they used to park in there and sit around their cars and the skating ring's right there. The warming house is right there. And I said, I don't know. I think it might have been a problem that we'd have to look at because they can see their kids skating from maybe far away, but to go in and help them with their skates and, you know, it was just always a little section of there that they could have for that. And we're not going to have that, are we? >> No, we can't just with that path. It's it's just uh not not a good mix. >> Y something to think about. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Sue. >> Um I just had one question for Dave. So, the u the new utility building, uh, when that happens, what are you doing with the old utility building? >> Public works building. >> Yeah, >> that's up in the air. Um, I think you're going to have >> public works and probably this parks commission fighting for parkland to make that whole area park. I think you're going to have community development, EDA fighting for that to be developed into u multi-unit. you know, there's apartments on both both sides to to tie that in. So, I >> think when that time comes, there's going to be some big discussion. Kyle and I already have some pretty big master plan layouts of splash pads and ice rinks and all this stuff there, >> but EDA also has tax base that they're looking for, too. So, I think >> that's not going to be an easy easy discussion. I think we're we're both bunch of people have eyes on that that property. >> More grants, Kyle. more grants. >> Yeah, that's that is definitely be a topic for discussion when that when that time does come. >> Melissa, >> um no, just thinking forward to spring. I'm hoping we do a spring fling of some sort. We like they have in the past. So, hoping that that's on the agenda and looking forward to being a part of that. >> Spring fling. >> Well, like a Yeah, spring fling. That's what we call it. Is that the one that they typically do like here with the fire department? >> Chamber does something at the lakeside with like Easter eggs and stuff like that. >> Oh yeah. And then at the over in the fire department they had like some bounce houses and stuff like that. And >> um yeah, that was really fun. The kids really enjoy it. And >> uh Oh, quick question Kyle for you. Did they officially get our meetings moved to six o'clock next year? >> Yes. Yes. So sorry about that. uh starting January will be a 6 p.m. start >> and that's going to align all city meetings for a 6 p.m. start which is I think important >> if so that is going to start in January. >> Yep. January. I'll send out a reminder too and we have a new calendar that I'll get out to you guys as well. >> Okay. >> Well, my I just want to thank too the commission this past year we started hitting the ground >> not even knowing each other in March and >> the annual report shows we got we got a lot done. It's been a fun group to work with. We've had some sticky issues. Uh but we talk them through and get them done and thanks to Dave and Kyle and uh even the planning department when we have the issues come for us and looking forward to next year and >> for folks watching this certainly depending on when you watch it. Hope you have a happy holidays and safe holidays and see everybody in 2026. >> 2026. >> So with that a motion to adjurnn. >> I second. Oh, I guess I made a motion. >> Motion. >> All right. All in favor? I