July 28, 2025 — Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Regular Meeting

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[0:02] Momentarily. Clarissa. All crowd members are here, and it's 6 o'clock. I'm are. You see? What? any members of the public in the meeting. Yes, and we are now reporting all right. Recording has been done, thanks to everyone for joining us tonight. We have a quorum of Board members present so officially call the meeting to order. Would anyone like to make a motion to approve the agenda? Would anybody like a second? Thank you. Is there any discussion for this motion to approve the agenda. Excellent thanks. All right. Motion passes. The agenda is approved. I will now turn it over to the director for future board items. Thank you, madam. Chair folks, I'm Ellie Rhodes. I'm the director of Parks and Recreation, and this part of the meeting is where we give the Board members an overview of the next 3 months, so they know what is coming in their work, and I will call out a few changes for you so normally. In August we take you on a capital improvements tour, and we hop in a van, and we show you on the ground and talk about the projects underway for capital.

[1:18] With support of the chair and vice chair. We're proposing an amendment to that, and that we actually, instead have a study session during that meeting to talk about the recreation membership structure and fees. And you're gonna get a preview of that tonight with Scott and his team other things going on in August, you'll see. We start our yearly cycle of clean week and shutdown closures where we do. A week long closure of the recreation centers to do significant maintenance work that can't happen when people are in the building, because it's messy, dirty, smelly, all of those things. And so East happened this year in on Spring Break. south. We closed a few weeks ago because we reallocated funding, and we're spending a significant amount of money to extend the life of that building to give us time to plan for the future. So the facility is closed through Labor Day currently, and the pool will open in October.

[2:09] And so our thanks to the community for dealing with that, we know that people have their favorite places, and they're going somewhere else isn't always easy, but the other facilities are open. We also have the maintenance closure for North coming up for one week, and then in your consent, agenda, we talked about some other updates with the rec facilities. as it relates also to the Council agenda. This is where we begin. We've been talking to you about the budget since April, and we start talking to city Council in September. So we've highlighted on your future board items some of those important conversations with City Council on September 11th is their 1st chance to discuss the city manager's proposed budget right now. In fact, these very minutes, and about every minute this week. The city is having internal conversations to support our city manager's effort to synthesize the budget. She will share her proposed budget with city council and the community later in August, and they'll have that study session on September 11.th They'll discuss it at a 1st and second reading in October, at which time we anticipate that they would approve a 26 budget, and we'll begin planning to implement it.

[3:14] Those are the highlights. Everything else is filled out in the future for this. so I'll pass it back to you. Any questions. Alright, very good, and then we'll move on to public participation. I'd like to start by proposing we do have some additional speakers time. We have 5 that have signed up. We have 8 that would like to speak. So if there's no objection by the board. I'd like all people who would like to speak tonight to speak any objection. Alright, thank you. Sure. What's the name? Okay, like it was 9 signed up. Thank you. Lori.

[4:05] Okay. So this portion of the meeting is for members of the public to communicate ideas or concerns to the Board regarding parks and recreation issues for which a public hearing is not scheduled for later in the meeting. Tonight there's no public hearing scheduled. So during this public participation time the public is encouraged to comment on the need for perks and recreation programs and facilities as they proceed back. All speakers are limited to 3 min, depending on the nature of their matter. You may or may not receive a response from the board after you deliver your comments. The Board is always listening and appreciative of community feedback. I believe Bernie is going to present the additional guidelines tonight. Well, thank you all for being here. The city has engaged with community members to co-create a vision for productive, meaningful, and inclusive civic conversations. Decision supports physical and emotional safety for community members, staff and as well as democracies or democracy. For people of all ages, identities, lived experience and political perspectives.

[5:07] If you'd like to be more about this vision, and in the engagement process, you can visit the URL that is displayed on the screen or colorado.gov. Slash services. Slash Pr. Oh, excuse me, slash productive dash atmospheres 3 min. Excuse me. The City Council enforce the rules of the form found in the Boulder Revised Code section 16. B. Including participants, are required to sign up to speak, using names they are commonly known by, and individuals must display their whole names before being allowed to speak online. Currently, only audio displays permitted online. We're glad you're all here in person. No attendees shall disrupt, disturb, or otherwise impede orderly conduct of any council meeting in the manner that disrupts the business of the meeting. This also includes failing to obey the lawful order of the presiding officer. To leave the. To leave the meeting, or refrain from addressing the council.

[6:12] Interesting required all remarks and testimony shall be limited to matters related to city business. no standing in or otherwise blocking the aisles in violation of the fire code. or any way that obstructs the vision or audio of other audience members. No signs of flags shall be permitted in the in the chambers, except for one sign held by a person measuring no more than 11 by 17 inches, which is held no higher than the space. So one more last one. No participants shall make threats, or use other forms of intimidation against any persons. We ask that you not fix items to podium, tornaeus, or walls, or other services and chambers, signs, flags, and other items used to communicate must be held by one person when displayed.

[7:03] Obscenity. Other epitaphs based on race, gender or religion, or and other speech behaviors that, disrupt or otherwise the meaning will not be tolerated in person. Participants are asked to refrain from expressing support or disagreement verbally, or with sounds such as applause or snapping. With the exception of declarations. traditional support is shown through American sign language plus or jazz hands. Thank you, Bernie, thank you, Bernie. Do you want to call on the 1st speaker? Yes, also. Do we have anyone online? I will double check that. We do have attendees online. As they come up we'll see if they are online or in person. Okay, okay. So the 1st one listed is Lynn Stein. When she's in person today.

[8:01] this is the podium? Right? Yes, Hi, everyone. I'm Lynn Stein from Boulder School. I have spent every single summer game that I've been in town over the past 30 years ago, at least part of that time I loved. It was dismayed to hear that it is closing early on August 17.th This has not yet been communicated to the public, but I don't even remember how I found out that I've been doing my best to let people know, so that we can let you all know how I've had conversations or emails with many of you, and I appreciate it. This all comes out of love and devotion to the pool. That's such an incredible asset for us, and I'd really like to see it stay open later this year. There's a number of reasons that it's so important. It's very different, as you know, from Star or North, or the other alternatives. It's small and it's quieter. That does not mean it's empty. I'm not there all the time. But I'm

[9:02] there are a lot for someone who doesn't work there. It's full, and a lot of people use it. You can usually get a link to swim slowly or the water walk. The lanes at Stanley aren't that slow? That's very important, because a lot of the users at Spruce are older, or recovering from an injury, are disabled, might have pocket clubs. There's reasons why people need a pool that's calm and quiet where they can get in their own way, and not have to worry about a super competitive triathlete bumping into them or turning into them. I love that also. And North, I really appreciate that we do have those tools. And I really appreciate the hard work that you all do. So. None of this is to criticize what we have. It's merely to advocate for what I feel so so strongly about another use case for Spruce's families with really little kids. Now my kids grew up with spruce. Back in the day when there was that big, rickety slide that was super fun, and Lifeguards had the sort of scary contest to see how fast they could go down.

[10:08] Now that's the place for kids. Spruce is an awesome place for little kids. I'm not as tuned in to the families with little kids I have talked to some of them. I don't know if any of them are online. It's just a much better place for little kids. It's not scary. It's also still really hot. In August I've talked to a number of people, for really they don't have air conditioning. So for all these reasons, I really hope that you can see about keeping schools open. I did read in the package there was a survey. I think it was called the Dot survey. I never saw that survey. I don't think it was at Spruce. I think there was probably bias. If you ask people in a rec facility which facilities do you like? And you don't have that survey at spruce? Of course the survey is going to be biased towards wherever it was that people didn't care about setting for informal public life offering connection, community sociability bind people together to construct communities. So let's keep this point. Thank you.

[11:17] I just want to remind folks how to respect all voices, to make sure everyone gets welcome. But if you want to show appreciation you can show Jack's hands. I know that was a lovely speech, but you did an excellent job, and it showed it can be problematic when rehearsal stream. So thank you. Thank you, Lynn. The next person listed is Greg Tucker. Hello, I'm gonna be brief. You've got important budget stuff to do. So I'm just gonna ask as a dovetail what you consider and prioritize projects and services to really remember. Right? So look, you've heard a thousand time after time you've seen it in your surveys. You've seen it in your engagement. You've seen it in

[12:12] and understood. So so I'm not gonna beat you up with a big speech about it. I'm going to give a little bit of an idea that has a twist at the end. So stay with me and participate with me on this twists. So I'm Greg Tucker. swim advocate self appointed. I'm also on the board of the Boulder Community Aquatics coalition. Okay. Bcnc. Now, we mentioned the coalition a couple of times in a meeting just recently. So I wanted to give you a little bit of an idea about who we are. We're up to. Okay. So that's the perspective. I'm gonna speak from a long time resident in Boulder, swimming at the Boulder Valley School district level

[13:02] long, long time. I'm not here representing them tonight. I'm also on the play holder of the directors, and I'm also a member of the executive group that is reimagine South Boulder Rec Center. And that's a group boulder community aquatic school issue supports. We think that lanes at South is important. But you know. we're not going to fix this problem until we build the pool. So that's what polar community aquatics coalition wants to do. We're a nonprofit. And here in Colorado we have a board. We have directors. We have some fundraising campaigns filing for our nonprofit status. We represent about 3,500 different aquatics users across synchro swimming, high school swimming. We represent those are our products masters. We have about 7 groups.

[14:05] And we're and we're beginning to be active in this community. And we have met with Allie and her group since since February on a big idea. What's the big idea? Here's the twist. It's the solution we want to build through a public private partnership mirror world class swimming facility. You know who we are, because we're going to be active in the community, and I suspect we'll be in front of that again soon. Thank you, Allie, for the work that you. Thank you. Thank you, Greg. The next speaker listed is Deborah Fryer Deborah in purse, Roger.

[15:02] sister and I, because 1st school is up until October, the year that you graduated North. So I moved here because I love my sister and also moved here because it is such an incredible. And so I came here because I had a little bit. and I was 3 months closed out this summer. So it really is before you join. There are a lot of people who have had neck surgeries, who've had a cell repairs. people who have spinal fusions. And

[16:10] every day with the free groups. We're active. We're athletic. We're not going to give up and like this person feels safe. And Scott really doesn't. It is a gorgeous pool, and he doesn't feel safe with Young in her. I was in there once this summer, and I used to go there last summer. The second thing is that it still says on your website that this is good through Labor Day, and I know that even when it seems impossible, and we were able to swim throughout during the pandemic every summer. It seems like. you know, we need someone to find them. And so I believe that there is a way of what it is. We are out. I don't know why it is, but it really seems like it's so important to the community. Mental health, physical health, community health, all of us for 20 years ago.

[17:09] And so it's not just coming here to swim. It's, you know, we support each other. We don't drink with each other, and it feels like, it is important city project. Okay. the last thing that I would like to say, I know you say that you're gonna be talking about the 2026 budget, and we would like to do whatever we can do as a community to ensure that screws is going to be open next summer. This is not a slipping slope towards. Okay, let's just like start shaving it and shaving it and shaving it. And all of a sudden it's not available anymore. We'd really like to do whatever we need to do for our advocacy to ensure that remains open for Memorial Day through Labor Day next year, and that you know how important it is that all of us are coming here, whether we're rehabbing or whatever we're doing, because we care about the pool. And lastly, I just want to thank every single one of you for all the work that you do for aquatics and making sure that we have amazing tools in boulder. This is a very unusual community that has access to pools, and you probably know that the other ones are going away like Cac is going away. And like you're it spruce, is it?

[18:17] Thank you for the work you do. Thank you, Deborah. The next speaker listed is Don Berkle. Please. Yeah. Hi, Don Bergel. Some of you may recognize me. I've spoken before my predecessors. I'm the president of the Tennis Association. and I learned last week that the East Boulder Rec Center Racket project has been put on indefinite hold. We don't have much more information other than the fact that the approved project has put been put on some type of hold.

[19:01] So I'm not here to talk about the benefits tennis, or tell you why Boulder should have more tennis courts based on our population. Over the past 3 years the city has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars studying the problem, hiring a consultant, writing a plan, working with prep and then getting buy in and approving a plan. And 6 months ago the city publicly announced plan in the daily camera and press release and a web page. So you, this group and the city already know the importance of the rationale for Pickleball Court instead, I'm here to tell you that as word of this trickles out. The tennis community in Boulder is going to be outraged, that once again the city has broken its promises to its constituents, dragged its feet and delivered nothing for all the thousands of dollars and years we've worked together, convincing you that Boulder deserves a tennis facility. We're back to nothing.

[20:08] I was fooled. I. I thought the city in this port had actually listened and made a real commitment. and I told my friends as such. but I should have known better in boulder. All we do is push, paper, and kick the can down the road. The community has received no detailed explanation of what happened or what the new plan is, and I've been told that funds have been reallocated, and that the court costs came in higher than estimated. Now, why would that be? Maybe because Parks and Rec. Has been slow walking it for 3 years, and inflation took its toll. So this group is on notice. We just received this information a few days ago. We're going to mobilize the community. We're going to rally tennis, and the pickleball people send messages to city council, make an issue for candidates and make our presence known here at crowd.

[21:11] and maybe one day Parks and Rec. And and the city will actually keep the promise. Thank you, Don. Next Speaker listed is Judy Emory? Hi, everyone! And thanks for letting me speak. I'm actually here to learn more than say much, but I am a board member with the Bogo Pickleball Club, and as you may or may not know, we have over 600 participants in our club, and really like to keep our participants informed. So the 1st thing I want to start with is. we are very appreciative and excited about the Tom Watson project. You know we saw the construction signs that are out there already announcing it. It's very excited to finally have our own designated pickleball courts, so that I'm here to say Thank you, and just would like to be informed if there's any changes to timelines, because I realize construction, there's a lot of variables.

[22:21] But if there are. If you could communicate with our board, and we will communicate with our community. So that's the 1st thing I wanted to say the second one, though, of a concern, is East Boulder. It's my understanding that it's on. Hold what Don has just said, and we have worked very much with the city for the design for input. In fact, Zach, our board member, and myself had a recent discussion with Tina, and in my mind, and I think in all of ours. It was a very constructive discussion. It wasn't to be critical. It wasn't to be. It was to say, there's some safety issues here. We really need to rethink some of these things. And so what I'm trying to say here is.

[23:05] please please continue to talk with us as you continue to sign and maybe modify what is or was the existing plan, so that again, we can communicate with our constituents. And then, finally, we really welcome ongoing information. As I said, we have 600 members, and we try to inform them of everything that's going on. They appreciate our work, they appreciate your work. And so if there's any timeline changes or project changes or nuances new to the projects we would appreciate that ongoing communication, because right now, kind of what Dom said to. We're just hearing things hearsay. And so it would be really nice to have direct communication, and I know our board would be more than happy to sit down any meeting at any time or on the phone. So again, appreciate all the work you're doing. It's all about communication. So thanks.

[24:05] Okay. And can you help us with calling those folks that our next speaker is Jennifer Cornell. Now for 20 years, and I've been going to this free school every summer, almost every day. In 1997, and again 2,007. I had various accidents, and I was paralyzed on the left side both times, and I mean, luckily I got back to moving, and I got back to life. But my main source of therapy has been, and still is this free school. and since then, you know, I've broken my hip. I've torn my acl. And then, a few years ago, I lost my fingers, knocked my toes to frostbite and but this pool has been fantastic. The guards they're wonderful, and they always help me find like I can't. I can't. So without a water belt, but they always help me put it on and help me get the tools. I need to use that facility.

[25:18] and so I love it, and I I can't imagine any better better way to do my therapy than that spruce pool. You know. I love sky, too, and things are finagling, too. I love it, too. But it's not the same like, Lynn said. Just the atmosphere, and the feeling at Spruce is so different, like we're a community. We know each other. and we support each other. And even like I said, the guards and the people who work there are part of that, too, and it's just a wonderful, wonderful facility and a wonderful part of my rehab and part of my life. And I would love to keep it there. Yeah.

[26:01] thank you, Jennifer, our next speaker, is Tammy Miller. I'm Tammy Miller, and I've been a lifelong swimmer. When I 1st came to Boulder I was odd by all the facilities that are available. It's just been incredible. And I do have to compliment all the staffers, I think, because every facility I go to they're so helpful. They're so supportive. That's really an incredible resource. I also am going to put in a little bit of a blurb for South being that I live on the south side, but South Pool and Spruce Pool, both kind of the same bites, as far as being much more user friendly for some of us who are a little compromised. I do have long covid prior to that I was a competitive swimmer. I was triathlete I've been swimming at Spruce for years. When I've gone to Scotty, I've watched swimmers swim over other swimmers who are a little bit slower and a little bit more compromised, and with the extra long lanes. A lot of swimmers can't keep up with that, as some of us age or been dealing with health issues. The thing about spruce is, it's a community.

[27:10] It's really a family seeing the same people year after year after year, because of the consistency we're also dedicated to it. There was one year when the Lifeguard situation was poor and several of us who were former lifeguards. We were all volunteering to recertify us. We'll take the course. We'll give our time up just to sit on the side for a couple hours. I mean, that's how much it meant to us already. A couple of years ago. It's now with having to be on oxygen. It's a safer community. I need to have a way to set up my oxygen and stay on it while I'm working out, since I can't actually swim anymore. And all of these ladies and so many people there are so supportive. And it's because it is a quieter pool more easily to get into to have that lap lane to have that quieter time where you're not dealing with kids and and competitive swimmers swimming over the top of you. It's just much more easy. And then the locker room, too, a little more user friendly for some of us who aren't trying to get into the big crowds in the other locker rooms.

[28:18] But the bigger part is community. You know. We're also dedicated year after year after year. There's people I don't see. But for the summertime they're the pool peeps, you know. I live in South Boulder. Most of them are in North Boulder, but so look forward to the pool peeps that I know every year there, and it is me we would consider picking it up. Tammy. The next next speaker, is Max Albert. Hello, Max Albert! Thank you, guys for this opportunity to express our feelings about screws like Deborah start crying. I just can't express how much this pool means to me. I'm a native son. I was born in Boulder Community Hospital right over here, back in November 67, I learned how to swim with screws in the summer of 69,

[29:18] when there was a gravel plant next door, gravel processing plant, and it didn't detract from the. It's just a wonderful place, and I've been-. I've been swimming ever since I swam on the side and swim team growing up. and I just I love. I love to swim in the spruce pool is just such a major part of the reason that I'm even still in boulder. I just I love going to spruce and swimming, particularly in the evening, after work. Spruce used to be open until 8 o'clock Pm.

[30:01] And it was so. It was so awesome with the sun setting, you know, as we swim, and they turn the turn the underwater lights on in the pool, and it was just just so amazing. And know I'm not alone in in my deep feelings for this pool. And I you know, I mean I I love Boulder. I I feel like, you know, just being even born here. I'm just a part of this place, and you know spruce is just part of what makes Boulder so alive to me. And to have this short season is is almost painful for me especially. I've been coming back from some health problems that I experienced myself. And I I thought I was just old and beat up, and I had so much pain in my body. It turns out. I have rheumatoid arthritis which the doctors are treating, and

[31:08] since since in this short time I've lost 40 pounds, and I you know they they've also been treating a sleep apnea that that I was diagnosed with in the hospital when I almost died of pneumonia brought on by just continuing to to work hard as hard as I could, despite the fact that I was in so much pain and spruce, has just been an instrumental part of my healing. I love the city of Boulder Recreation Department. You guys just do such a great job. And I just so appreciate everything you do and thank you so much for letting me speak. Thank you, Max. Okay. Our final speaker tonight is Laurie Misner.

[32:05] Hi, my name. I moved to Boulder in 1995 and some of 96 for 28 spruce was at that time one of those annoying fast track leads. But health issues came up was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. So now I find myself needing needing a calmer environment to feel I can't handle the chaos anymore. That comes with like a pool like sky when it's when it's busy, I find myself overstimulating. Experience has also been, and I've had 13 surgeries and shoulder replacement. So it's been like other people. It's it's a safer tool for for trying to rehab.

[33:03] It's also a little warmer freezing over at Scott Carpenter. Not that they keep it cold, but I also can't handle drastic temperature changes. yeah. My, I taught my daughter how to swim there. Yeah, I mean, it's just I feel it's it's like a safety place, you know, it's and it's it's actually easier to park and I get kind of freaked out. But yeah, I just I think that pool has so much value, and keeping it open in the summers as long as possible, I think, is super important. And yeah, I hope we can work it, I would help out.

[34:11] Oh, yeah. And then anyone else who is who came here to speak for the poll, if you wouldn't mind standing up. Yeah. So, even though these people didn't necessarily speak. These are all people, you know, who find that value of of spruce and hopefully going as long as possible. Thank you. Thank you. Very. Is there any other additional speakers online? Okay. okay, thank you so much to all of our participants in public participation. Tonight, I will pass it over to Staff to respond to comments. First, st I just for the folks who have so much emotion about spruce and about our department. My team will tell you I feel the same right? Like we have

[35:09] an incredible team. We serve an incredible community who values health and well, being. I just really appreciate you all showing up tonight. I'm going to 1st speak to about courts, and then I'm going to let Scott say a little bit more about spruce. So on the courts project just this month's prab packet. We are trying to get information together about where we're at with projects. We do have a hiring freeze and 2 vacancies on the planning team. We just got approval to recruit for those. And so we're hoping to get things back on track. I find it disheartening after so much work together that that would be accused of breaking promises and and ill intent. I think that's unfair. I think that we are doing our very best to serve a community that has a whole lot of wants and funding issues that we have been trying to address for over a decade. We're gonna be talking a lot more about that tonight, both with the budget and the recreation fees

[36:00] I had emailed with Zack, your board president. I think he currently is today. So I think he's maybe a little more up to speed, and we'll just keep working to keep you all up to date as we get folks hired and get new timelines with projects, we'll make sure the community is up to speed on getting those projects on track at both Tom Watson and East and Tom. Just to be clear, Tom Watson. The project is slowed down a little bit due to hazardous conditions at the bathroom that has to come down, so that project hopefully is just not gonna be too far delayed. But coming soon. And then Scott is our Scott Shutenberg. Our deputy director, can say just a little bit more about the work he and his team are doing to balance our budget. Yeah, thank you, Ali, and I want to echo Ali's comments, and I greatly appreciate the passion that those that came out tonight and took their time out of their evening to come and talk with us about the importance of spruce pool and and what it means to you. We certainly take that to heart and appreciate those comments and and understand. I wanted to provide a little bit of context as to how we came to this decision as to closing spruce pool the 3rd week in August versus waiting until

[37:10] Labor Day to close the pool. This year, as Ali mentioned, the city decided to reduce expenses, and asked every department to cut back on expenses here in 2025 by about 5%, which for our department equates to a little over 2 million dollars. It's hard to find that kind of money in a budget. And prime members know it's it's a very tight budget, very lean budget. And so Staff were very creative and looked at multiple ways to to find savings. Certainly the 1st thing we considered is equity. We also looked at the impact of the hiring freeze and our staffing levels. And we know that a lot of our aquatic staff are high school students that go back to school that 3rd week in August, and that greatly impacts our ability to provide services without being able to do additional hiring. And so we also looked across our system and said, Where do we have duplication of service? Where do we have an alternative that people can go

[38:11] and still have the ability to swim and or to participate in whatever activity it is. And and so, by closing through school about 3 weeks early, we're able to save about $25,000 this year. I know that doesn't sound like a lot of money, but we're looking at at anywhere we can find additional resources. It also solves our problem with staffing. And so those staff that have agreed to stay on and will work with us into the fall. We'll be moving them to our other pools and those other locations to make sure that we keep the other places open. So while it's very difficult to make this kind of decision. We feel like it's 1 of many programmatic areas that we have to have some reductions. And so I appreciate the fact that there are some concerns that were raised around the safe environment and ability to do rehab and what I can promise you is that we'll go back and talk with our staff and figure out ways to be creative, and to make sure that Scott Carpenter does feel like a safe place to come out and swim

[39:14] and so again I appreciate all the the feedback and comments. And I did also hear 2026 mentioned and potential cuts or not opening, spruceful and 26. That's not something we're considering at this time. And so we fully intend to to operate all of our facilities next year. But we're also looking at creative ways to save money in 2026 as well. I just had one note, Scott Megan Loman is our recreation manager, and what I think I know. Megan and I were talking earlier. So when a lot of the swim teams for the summer season end in early August and folks go back to school. There are many, many less Lane reservations at Scott Carpenter for the teams, so they're gonna make sure that school. When you look at that pool schedule for Scott, starting Monday, August 18.th

[40:02] You'll see times from 8 Am. To 11 Am. Where all 20 lanes are open to the community, and I have high confidence that you would be able to find a lane to yourself, that you would find a calm experience. So 8 8 Am. To 11 Am. And one Pm. To 4 pm. Are those the times, Megan? Yeah. So if you have that flexibility and the gift of flexibility in your schedule know that those are the. They're going to be much, much quieter times at Scott, Carpenter, and Monday through Friday. We're in the 25 yard configuration. So there's 20 lanes available. And and I have a lot of confidence just based on my own experience that you you probably have a pretty calm experience during once we go back to school. Will you repeat that? Did you say Monday through Friday you'll be running it. We'll send something out to the community. We are. Put something online around just publishing Megan. I'll let you chime in with what you think the best way to handle that. So we're working on communications just because we, you know, it is more recent that we had to make the decision about spruce. And that's why you're not seeing anything on the website or anything. And so we can.

[41:04] when we're updating that communication, I think what we can do is look at that schedule after August 17.th It is traditionally in long course. Monday through Friday and short course. Saturday, Sunday, however, with this change and knowing swim teams aren't there, and kids are back at school. That's something that we could can look at right? Could we? Short change the orientation? That's something that we can consider. I don't know the impact of that, so I can't promise that will happen at this moment. But I I can tell you that I will look into it and see if just that change alone might help more people feel more comfortable at that location. Thank you, everyone, for your comments on that. I was going to ask if the board had any input, the board had any input for for the for public participants or for staff or any questions. Bernie, go ahead. Thanks.

[42:04] Knowing that this is extremely difficult position that the city government is in with the with the revenue shortfall. I'm just wanting to contextualize for us. The savings that we're getting from wasn't a pool a couple of weeks early, are there? What programs are we enabling this keep active? Yeah, I appreciate that because A lot of you sitting down already, know that I love Spruce Pool. It is my favorite place to swim also, and because of the redundancy and option at other facilities. It's actually there's we're not taking swimming away. We're just taking away swimming at spruce right in that savings that is protecting. So we have limited subsidy for parks and recreation that savings allow us to have no reductions for expand, which is our program for people with disabilities. No reductions for Ysi, which is our program serving youth living in low income. And we're not impacting any of our discount special programs for youth or for seniors. And so those are the priorities and the things we try and protect when we look at service reductions, because that's what the community tells us is most important. Every single time we ask

[43:09] thanks for that excellent, any other comments or questions. I have one. Just regarding communication, Megan, you touched on this briefly. I know. Lynn had mentioned that there was no real information out there about the closure. How will you be communicating it to the user? I have been working with our communications staff member. And we'll get that online posted on social media. And I don't know if we have an e-blast and email email blast coming up. But we will have it online and posted to social media. And there may or may not be a press release paired to some of the other things that we're already doing like the we usually since we got about the annual maintenance shutdowns. And so I think we can not duplicate efforts, but make sure everything goes out in every way possible.

[44:05] Okay? And then same kind of question for Scott, I think, for the or ally for the courts projects with the being released to hire new people to get everything back on track. How are we going to planning on staying in touch with the Towns Association. Yeah, that's a i appreciate that. Thank you. So I have several meetings over the next couple of weeks to work with Mark Davison, our senior planning manager, and the planning team to look at as folks get up to speed. What does it look like? So some of the contracts we have in place are limping along. We have many projects that are impacted by the vacancies that we have on the planning team. And so so what does it look like as we support onboarding new employees to get the projects? I don't have a timeline, but I expect that when we come to you in August we'll have more information, and we'll be sharing with the board and the community just like we wrote in the the consent agenda this month that as we have more information on timelines, and certainly Boco Pickleball, older Tennis Association, we rely on them to help

[45:05] get accurate information out to folks, and I really appreciate Zach reaching out with questions and saying, There's these rumors and permanent, you know. Projects are permanently on hold, and they're going away, and none of that is true. And so I appreciated the opportunity to clarify directly with him and to provide information. So I think, long story short, as we have updates, we will try and keep the prep and the community and projects. One of our vacancies had been in communications. That position was filled in early June. And so we are way behind on public updates, on our web pages. And that is something we're working to get caught up on. Now. Okay, anything else have one, Denny? I was was an option of reducing the hours at spruce of possibility. Or why? Why would that not work? It's a great question, and and I will say that we certainly looked at at cost, saving savings and trying to establish

[46:04] if we shut the pool down versus if we just reduce the hours, we're still having the same expenses for chemicals and heating it, and and those kind of things. So closing it 3 weeks early actually allows us to to really have quite a bit more in cost savings and fully commit to moving our staff to the other locations so that we can make sure those hours are not reduced at those other locations. If we could. the staff that was at South Boulder Rec. How are you reappropriating them to facilities while we were in this break? So that was the 1st thing that we did to reduce the impacts of the hiring freeze was that because half of South building was gonna be closed regardless, could we take advantage and be able to move construction a little bit more quickly by closing that whole building so that Staff had already been redeployed. Spruce was the next thing that was no longer going to be possible to operate based on the hiring freeze.

[47:12] Okay, thank you. Everybody for your comments, your questions, and as always thank you to participating. Today, we love when you come and talk for my purposes, of the fact that everybody stayed 3 min, and you didn't make me stop you. So thank you all. So much for coming, we really appreciate it. Please come back. Yeah. I know that on your September 20 second meeting I believe you have, like a review of the Aquatics, the summer outdoor aquatic session that's on Arab Rosh Hashanah which impacts a number of us. I know at the end of your meeting you're talking about rescheduling that meeting, so just let you know that that's something I'm very interested in, and if you rescheduled it. that'd be great. I'll make a note. Thank you. Thank you.

[48:00] Okay. Moving on to our consent, agenda. we do have approval from our previous minutes. Or, let's see, give me one second. Okay, would anyone like to make a motion to approve the minutes from our previous meeting? We gotta move. Second, okay, we have a second on the consent. Agenda approving the minutes from our June meeting. Are there any questions regarding the minutes? Okay, hearing no opposition, the motion passes. The minutes from June are approved as posted we will. And then we do not have any extra minutes. So we have, yeah.

[49:00] our next section is parks and recreation operations update. Are there any questions or comments on our update director? Alright, so. But I also have something on your 1st it's a point. So. Can you? The I was curious first, st about the beverage licensing meeting on June July 30.th For the alcohol liquor license that's going to be proposed. Is that something that you think will be approved this year, or will it be next year for the reservoir? There was a community meeting a week and a half ago my understanding it went very well.

[50:03] Initially. There was a petition that went around the neighborhood, and I believe there were 32 individuals that had said they would not be in favor. Some of those after the community meeting had come forward and said they would like to attend this meeting, and have changed their minds and are very supportive. There was clarity in that meeting that the liquor license application only allows them to serve alcohol until 9 pm. And so we are very optimistic that this Wednesday at 3 o'clock will be the hearing. We're very optimistic. That that would go through and be passed. Great. Okay, alright. And then my next question was regarding the poll, that is, in the report that North Boulder Recreation Center Access or north Boulder Rec. Seems to have come up on top of that list.

[51:02] I was curious how how that poll was distributed, or sure the the Recreation center feedback was sent out in our community e-blast newsletter. So, and then we also had on site community boards at all 3 of the recreation centers. So that was sent out to. I think it's 50 58,000 people and it was also sent out on social media. It kind of tracks north is actually closest geographically, to most people that live within the city holder limits and it gets our most usage across all the facilities. My last question is, can you tell me the economic impact of having to purchase the electric landscaping equipment? Yeah. So we were able to secure several grants from in partnership with climate initiatives and Boulder County's air quality.

[52:05] I forget the exact division and so that and several of our teams were already well on their way over 90% with all electric equipment. And so the total impact to us, I believe it was less than $20,000. I know that's a lot of money it's a significant amount of money. But when you look at the hundreds of pieces of small equipment we have that align with that less than 10 horsepower requirement. It's it's a pretty impressive indicator of how far along the way we grow riding with electric. And are we 100% electric on that. Okay, as required by state regulations. But things that are less than 10 horsepower. There's a few exceptions. But yes, okay. great. Thank you for the feedback. Those are my questions. it's I appreciate all the work that the market has done to manage the budgetary situation. I know it's been like very challenging, and I know unexpected mid year.

[53:00] and we certainly, I think we all appreciate the difficulty of making decisions to take away people's access to recreation. Obviously, it's obviously what we all try to do. with that in mind. I was just wondering if you could talk to us a little bit more just stated here in the meeting a little more about the decision to invest in this center. After we previously said we were going to do that. I think it's really just goes down to the all of the work that we are doing to support health and well being in Boulder. It's pretty clear. It's fine. Our community does not desire less indoor square footage for recreation, and when we look at as part of the future of rec work and the needs assessment on a per capita basis. We we want to maintain at least indoor square footage and given where we are with our funding. Given the work of the next 2 years with the long term financial strategy. We decided it was worth it to buy some time 5 to 7 years, so that we were moving away from

[54:08] I wish there was a more official way to call it, but I call it the Cross. Our fingers strategy right? Like we were just wishing every single day that we didn't have a failure of a massive infrastructure system at the South Boulder Recreation Center. And so this investment will buy us time so that we can plan for the future and not be making reactive decisions or emotional decisions. And we've got time to really thoughtful about the communities indoor recreation needs. Do I understand the funding for that project was basically reallocated from the from the Fairview? Excuse me from the Pleasant View, Pleasant View access improvements. And so we are requesting funding for that money. Again, with the 26 Budget cycle we had been allocated that funding funding in 22, and the project we just have no pleasant view. I'm thinking of Tom Watson. Pleasant View. Is not that old? Yeah. So we have the designs. It's ready to go when we get funding. And what we needed to make this happen with this window with the South Boulder Recreation center was money that was approved and allocated, and that project made the most sense based on planning timelines. And we'll be requesting funding for Pleasant View with the 26 budget development

[55:19] and last one for me. I just you already spoke this earlier about just to make sure that we all understand the answer as of this moment. We don't know where the funding will come from for peaceful part of the court system current that project. Another rumor interrupt. The project has not been defunded. There's, I think, about Jackson. Correct me. I'm around. It's about 2 million dollars, added allocated, for the project ish 1.8 1. It's 2.2 2. There's money allocated for the project. It's new construction. So we are annexing property to make that possible. The conversion of the existing tennis courts into pickleball is not as simple as we thought it would. We have not had time for our expert landscape architects to dig into the designs and see what's possible. And so until we get that capacity.

[56:11] That's what we're telling folks is that we need time to dig in and figure out how to make it possible. The project is still funded. We're committed to figuring it out. We still believe it's an awesome and elegant solution to meet the needs of both tennis and pickleball, and we think it's possible we just need to figure it out and and figure out there would there likely will be a funding gap, and my hope is is that you know there's a lot of folks who've said we would love to contribute. We would love to support. We'll we'll likely be asking. Excellent. I realize we did that a little bit backwards. Is there anything you would like to say before we get to questions about the consent. Agenda. No, you gave me the opportunity. Thank you. We did. I appreciate it. Thanks, Jenny. Great. Any questions for anybody else.

[57:00] All right action items. We have nowhere time. I'm assuming. So we will move on to what matters for discussion. Yeah, I'm gonna introduce this item. So Jackson height, and Stacey Hoffman are here to talk about the 2026 operating budget. You'll hear afterwards about recreation, activity fees. We'll talk a little bit about cip, and there's no changes. And I want to just acknowledge what a strange budget year it is for us, and I especially for the new Prab members. To understand this is not normal. Normally, you would see fund financials, and you would see lots of numbers. And we're not working in that world. In this moment we are working with ranges of numbers. We are in uncertainty as we go into executive budget meetings this week, because the city manager I really appreciate the approach they're taking of. They have a bunch of different options from across the city. And just like we try to do to minimize impacts on priority populations to minimize impacts on large segments of the community. They're having to balance that now. And so this team has, I think, developed 5 different budgets at this point for 2026. And they're working really hard.

[58:15] And just, I wanted to take a moment to appreciate the work and leadership of Jackson and our budget team and Stacy and her expertise and all of our teammates and operations, because we do keep asking them like we have not gotten there with the 5%. And what else could we do? I have asked them to look for surgical reductions and services, because I'm not interested in just skimming across everything. We do not have fluff in our budget. We have been saying for over 10 years that without additional funding we will be reducing services, and we've met that moment. And so what I am grateful for is that because of the long term, financial strategy and the work that city council has prioritized. We are perfectly poised to have the conversation with the community about the level of service they want and the level of service they're willing to pay for right now. The 2 do not match.

[59:03] So with that I'll hand it over to Jackson and just wanted to set the stage a little bit and appreciate everyone for an incredible amount of work trying to balance a whole lot of competing interests. All these comments. Stacy is actually going to cover the operating budget tonight. And I think that I just want to reiterate this is a preview of what's coming to you next month, based on your role in the charter. You do have to recommend the department operating budget and then approve the cip from the permanent Park and Recreation Improvement Fund that these numbers aren't close. They're not right. We will have more information from the Executive Budget team this week. So we look forward to sharing that with you next month. And we'll just walk you through where we are today. As I said, very abnormal year. We typically would have a action item before you tonight. Unfortunately, that's coming next month. Yeah. So tonight we will be looking at the budget as Jackson and Ellie have described, at a very, very brief and high level. So we'll be changes.

[60:05] Jackson will go with the Cip program, and then Megan and Scott will be looking at our fee policy and facility access structure with you all. We've shown you the timeline since we've engaged with the plan. Throughout this whole process it did get revised a little bit with your action items supposedly taking place tonight that has been deferred out to August. So we will come back with that until then, and everything else is pretty much the same on a timeline for that. We want to share that out to you. This next slide really just focuses upon our Vpr uses by fun 2019, through 2024 are actuals. So you will see the stacked columns there really represent our 5 main funds, general fund point 2 5 cents sales tax fund in the late green. The Recreation Activity Fund, Permanent Parks and Recreation Fund, which you will have approval over in that lighter yellow lottery fund in blue, and then other is all capital that is put into the budget.

[61:05] but not funds that we managed. We went over this with the prab in our budget 101. So hopefully, some of this is familiar with you. Showing the 19th to 2024 for basically historic context, 2025 is what we've built, the 2026 budget off of. We use the 2025 budget as our base budget. And then our 2026 budget basically, right now. has our base cost increases in it. And it's coming in at 51.6 million with no reductions. So base cost increases are basically anything that is going to be classified as inflationary, contractual or city guidelines. So that would be like our fleet technology and energy. So this budget does not have any additional wants, needs, or proposals or requests. So we are basically looking at a flat budget. Just a couple of things to point out on the operating side for 2026 budget, we're looking at about 36.4 million submitted, or about 59% of the overall budget.

[62:14] The capital which Jackson is going to touch on comes in at 15.1 million or 41% of the total budget there. Right now, as it stands, it's about a 12% increase over prior year. With a majority of that due to capital expenditure. You can really see that in that golden color, brown, mustardy color for the other the funding which is our community culture, resilience and safety versus Cfs tax and our capital development that spike up as we do, have more programmed into 2026. Any questions on that before we move on kind of skew on the 25% sales tax fund. When when was that approved by the voters?

[63:05] Initially in 1985 reapproved in 2015 13 with the money available in 2035. And what were the parameters of that ballot measure? You know offhand. how in 2015 the language in 2013 actually unrestricted the funding. So the initial ballot measure in 95 had it really restricted for capital, for planning projects for historic preservation in 2015, when it was renewed, it was much more broad. It supports parks and recreation. Does that go to 2035, correct on the side? So the proposed reductions at the bottom left is that will come off the 51.6 right correct. So this does not have any reductions in it. This is just since it's been submitted, we are still working

[64:05] for what those reductions will look like projecting up to 4 million. Yes, so in August we will come back to you with a revised slide that looks just like this, with what is being put forward. To the City Council study session, and then also we'll put an additional slide. That kind of breaks it down to more of our personnel. our non personnel expenditure, and our capital, just to get a different look at it. But because everything is kind of in flux. Right now, we're just rolling everything up. Okay, this next slide right here, put the slide together for you permanent Park and Recreation fund, its revenue to expense comparison. Again, 2019, through 2024 is going to show your actuals. The 2025 does show the approved budget in 2026 is submitted with Perm Parks. You will see that, you know we do have high spikes of blue.

[65:07] Right? So especially 2019 and 2023. This is where we have a lot of capital projects going on. So is aware this is a lot of the capital expenditure out of this fund. So we will see spikes up some years when we are funding capital projects. But then you do also see where we do have a lot of revenue. There. can you speak to what that may have been like in 2019? What were the capital Projects 2019 would have been Scott, Carpenter Pool and the older reservoir, and then 2023 was the flat irons golf course. Thank you. There's more projects in there. But those are really spikes. So this one will be updated. We do spend a lot of time talking about the Recreation activity fund or the rap for the crab. So this is another fund that we do, monitor, as base is revenue compared to expense. You do see the straight line across the bottom. That is General Fund subsidy that we have gotten for our community benefit programming. It has been fairly flat since 2019 and continues to be flat through 2026.

[66:13] We know we are looking at some proposed reductions in this fund as well, and then also, Scott and Megan will go over some of the new revenue that is programmed into the budget about 750,150 of that is from a reclity. Grant that we have received, which will help with access into our centers, and then about 600,000 for fee usage increases. Sorry question on that. The the rath is that's revenue. We collect from our facilities right? And it's when we see a file like that like is that is that an indication? We haven't raised our rates, or that the usage has black line is indicating the general fund subsidy received. So that's from the citywide coffers. The green line is the revenue that the department has generated and collected. Blue is the expense you will see some years revenue slightly higher than expenses.

[67:11] Part of that is, for every dollar that we generate, we need to put 16 cents into reserves. There's other capital expenditures that have been made out of this fund on a 1 time basis. So our intention is 2025 is 2020 is actually an amazing year. As far as you really want, the revenue and expenses balanced. 2020 was not an amazing year, as I hear Ali chuckling over there. So just on paper. Since we operate this as a quasi enterprise from Social Enterprise Fund. Our intention is, every dollar that's made is reinvested back into the programming. So what might be viewed as profit in a private corporation is really what goes in and pays for the financial aid and the scholarships. The General Fund subsidy can't support. How are those reserves managed the 16 cents

[68:03] there is a citywide policy of every fund has to have at least a 16.7% reserve. That is 2 months of operating expenses. That is generally best practice. I think that we have some hesitations as a department, as far as whether or not that makes the most sense for our operations. What we did find is in 2020. We tapped into our reserves as a dollar amount, but our percentage did not change just because our revenue dropped so substantially, we had to hold less in reserves. It's just based on a percentage of overall expenses. Alright. And every fund in the city has this as a requirement. So this is a city wide direction, citywide policy. Okay? So as we dive into the 2026 proposed budget, this does show what we've put forward for operating expenditure per fund as well as capital. So that is for operating, coming in at that 36.4 million capital coming in at the 15.1 million for that total of 51.6 million overall

[69:18] we have gone through. And we do have some target reductions highlighted in each of the funds. We know that we are ballparking, maybe up to about a 4 million dollars overall target reduction and reductions also may change by funds. So once we do get more definitive answers from Ebt and from central finance and guidance. This week in August we will, you know, revise this and let you know where those impacts actually occurred, but just wanted to present something that showed where we've been doing some reductions in identification. Can I ask a question about the permanent Park and recreation funds. Sure, I'm not sure. I really understand that it's based on a mill levy, right? That. And so those

[70:10] collected funds go into that fund? How can we reduce it? Because it? It's a it's a restricted purpose, right? Correct. So a lot of the reductions that we're looking at for the permanent park and recreation. We've got about 1.6 million identified. 70,000 of that is operating. And that would be basically holding the position vacant into 2026, the other would be about 1.5 million hold on cip projects for staffing shortages. Also, priority projects. So things that we had built into the budget last year, we may backed out if that project is going to be deferred or put on hold just due to capacity or total funding, so so could it be like reallocated for I guess it's not maintenance, but it's like making permanent

[71:03] improvements to parks and Rec. So it could be reallocated between projects. Is that the way it would work? Yes, we've looked at the projects, and we've reallocated funding to what can be accomplished which Jackson's going to go over, that money would stay within the fund. We're not going to reallocate that money out. We would just not be spending it in 2026. Also, by not spending it. Down in 2026, we can build that up for future projects. We can earn interest off of that and put the fund in a better policy. Okay? So it just reduces the budget. But it's there. Yeah. And I think your question is, this can't be used by other departments, and that's correct. This is dedicated to parks and recreation. So it's really just managing our cash flow a little bit differently. We are seeing flattening, declining property tax, that there will be less revenue in the future. That we're partially planning for that partially just managing our cash flow. Jeez, you guys do amazing work. Have a question with something like the hiring freeze.

[72:05] are there? We're saving money on salary. We're saving money on benefits understood? Right? Are there? Then costs that come up because we have less people working in the parks? Yes, we have 3 vacancies right now in park operations, and my concern is going into the hottest months of the summer. As the irrigation systems break, we will be less responsive to them, and luckily grass is fairly resilient. But we could lose plants in horticulture areas. We could, you know, our small. I am asking them to be very, very thoughtful about prioritizing. Our parks are classified into mode 3. Mode 2. Mode one. So Pearl street, Mall civic area, the mode one they're highly visited. They drive economic vitality. You know, Pearl Street Mall trash removal is 3 times a day, 7 days a week. Catalpa Park, my small neighborhood park. There we're once we're there once a week. When we have more seasonal staffing. When we're fully staffed, we might be there a couple of times a week, and so if folks don't let us know about broken irrigation, that's probably our biggest risk risk going into August and September in October. Our concerns are making sure we properly dewinterize our entire irrigation system, which is a significant investment and then going into the winter and the snow season. Obviously we have

[73:21] a public safety responsibility to make sure. The sidewalks adjacent to all of our parks and our multi-use paths are are cleared of snow. So at current staffing levels. we could mostly get all of our snow removal done. We would have 0 redundancy if we have folks on vacation if we have folks 6 and and we would be sorely strained if there were a heavy or a significant snowfall. The city manager's office is aware. What they're wanting to make sure is that we can fulfill our commitments to existing staff before we bring new folks on. But we're having active conversations about the needs across the system. We could give other examples. But I think you asked about parks. I think the secondary portion of that is the cost of delay for capital projects, because this is capital funds. What we see is cost. Isolation has a significant impact. But we need the staff to be able to support these projects. I think we've been very clear with our department. You're not going to work 60, 80 HA week to make sure these projects get done. You're going to maintain a work life balance. That is important for you that I would say that's 1 of the unintended consequences that the public won't see right away, but does have longer term impacts.

[74:29] So thinking, it's a little bit off of like the meats and bolts of the budget presentation. But Ali, when this budget goes to effect or some version of it goes to effect next year, and you know, the trash in my neighborhood park is not gonna guarantee quickly, and we're hearing from neighbors about that like, do you have advice on how we should message? This is the part where I said earlier I this is an opportunity. So what I've been trying to show folks is city Council has prioritized a long term financial strategy. You've been hearing about it, Charlotte Husky came. New folks. You didn't hear about it in January. But there's a lot of information out there. We have been trying to tell the community again that the the level of service you want and the level of revenues we're receiving from taxes do not match.

[75:16] And so over the fall and into the winter, the fund. Our future, which is the engagement part of the conversation is kicking off. And so I would point community members to those conversations because that's where their voice can have an impact on helping us prioritize services and helping inform the tax strategy. And also, is it this week or next week that city council is talking about continuing the community culture, resilience and safety tax. So that is an existing tax that is set to expire in 2029. They're setting it up for renewal in perpetuity, which would give us another funding stream to help address some of the backlog in our system, which is one of the reasons it's so expensive to operate because it's really old. So what you should tell people is to pay attention. That was a really long answer. But to pay attention to the long term financial strategy conversations, because it's

[76:13] we see folks show up for their thing. It's spruce pool. It's the South Boulder Rec Center. It's tennis. But we have a holistic problem and ad hoc, strategies are not going to balance our budget. We have to with the community, have a conversation about thing, a thing? B, do you want both to be provided at a super high level of service? Okay, would you like to pay for it? Because this is what that costs. or with finite resources. Please help us prioritize because we cannot do it all to that point. I I wanna thank Jackson Stacy. I asked a question last prep. Meeting about how it all happened in Covid with some of these cuts, and how we brought things back. and one of the things I saw in here is that they identified some things that no longer aligned and some gaps. Is this an opportunity to find?

[77:04] Mind this? Yes, absolutely. I think that part of our business practice is continually looking at our service delivery. What programs just aren't meeting the same level of interest as before we start, stop, phase out, retire programs all the time. I think that that's very much done at the recreation side. This is an opportunity to not only look at our departments operations as a whole. But the city's operations as a whole, as far as what services are we, provide, even at a higher level than what the community expects, or is more expensive than the community expects? Can we reduce that level of service? Can we turn off that level of service? Is there something that we prioritize more? Does that even apply to capital improvement projects? It's a little bit trickier. I think that part of the capital improvement projects so much of the capital improvement is focused on transportation and utilities that, going back to the water wastewater example, there's an expectation you have clean water that you can drink that, I think, looking at it as a percentage. The parks and recreation portion of citywide cip isn't substantial, but every year there's a they've changed their acronym so many times. Project review team that basically looks at all of the cip projects over the next 6 years

[78:24] and identifies what is the overlap. If we're going in the building, North Boulder Park and Utilities is doing some drainage work there, let's synchronize those 2 projects together instead of coming up and ripping out the park 2 years later. So I think that's more how the prioritization currently works. I don't believe fund. Our future is really prioritizing at the same level of Cip. Correct. It's really around just the core government levels of service across the departments. The other piece, I would add to Jackson's excellent answer is, What is an opportunity is to look across the city at where we have duplication, and where could we coordinate to really make sure that we're delivering on good governance to the community and making sure we're being really thoughtful about. You know, there's a lot of opportunities with both open space and housing and human services.

[79:11] where we are delivering the same service or serving the same community. And how do we make sure that we're not overly duplicating. So 51 million isn't enough. What do you? What do you? What's ideal? We provided numbers for that in the 2022 department plan, but due to cost escalation and significant impacts of policy decisions since then. I know, I don't think we have a current number for operations. I think it was about a 5 million dollar gap a year if you took care of like. So we know it's in 2022. We said we needed another 1 million dollars to continue the same level of benefit for recreation. And then everything else was around taking care of the parks. Look at Jackson with his department plan. Jackson gets the prize for the night for bringing his department plan. We had said 33.3 million was what we needed in 2022. Our capital gap was about 2 million dollars for O. And M. Was 3.5 million. And then programming was a million

[80:10] cost escalation over that timeframe. We've seen over 25%. But this is operating and capital. The capital portions. 2 million operating 4.5 million was what the need was identified in 3 years across both parks and recreation. Correct. Just to point out with the capital you're going to see a lot of fluctuations. Right? So the project 1 million for 2026 out of that, we do have 11 million in Ccrs, the community culture, resilience and safety tax for civic areas. So you will see that and flow too. Just don't look at that 51 million and say, Oh, you have plenty of money, because 11 million of that is, I think, what the department plan really identified is anything that's action and vision level funding does require a different funding source.

[81:00] So that's where Ccrs has been incredibly helpful for civic area. Scott, Carpenter, the golf course, Pearl Street Mall. Those are all funded through Ccrs or Predecessor Tax. These are excellent questions. Thank you all for digging in. I just want to say on the record that, like I respect the people who visited us to say evening, but I think the closer Scott Parker pool was a very sage decision, and it's I know it's hard, and I know that, like we have members of our community who are neighbors who are unhappy, and that's difficult, but seems like a prudent decision. I appreciate that because I know it is hard, especially for the folks who are close to it. I again, I love swimming at Spruce Pool, and when you look at the visitation numbers and the the small percent of people that this decision impacts and the services that it protects. It's a good decision, and I don't like it. Both are true that really was a great segue to our next slide. So thank you, Bernie.

[82:08] So as we look across the department for potential serve potential budget reductions. You know, there are going to be targeted service level reductions, as Alex stated, and as this evening, and also, as our 2022 Department Plan indicated, without additional funding, you know, we we do have to change services. We have to do this in response to our flattening revenues, and to really, you know, bring down our cost to close this budget. So we are looking at basically 3 areas for reductions of personnel cities. Intent, however, is to fill positions that has not changed. We got you a very similar list to last month when we were looking at the 2025 reductions but for 2026, the focus will be on vacant positions. So really, looking through all the current vacancies, and then, if there are any vacancies, could we hold those open till the end of Q. 1, 2026 to recognize those savings there. I'm also looking at our non standard staffing, looking at service level offerings, basically reducing during slow periods. Right? So if there was a program at

[83:23] that wasn't really very active in the summer, and maybe only one or 2 people were attending it. Right? Is that something that could be looked at to reduce, and such also, if you know, weather related, you know, can cut back on those those services there for non personnel. You know, we are going through to prioritize those. The decrease is really going to be seen in materials and equipment. Can anything get deferred until 2027, really looking at our supply inventory, making sure no one's over buying and then just looking at uniforms and travel, making sure that everything is necessary. And then the capital investment, really looking at our

[84:03] 2026 planned projects, looking at a prioritized list, making sure that there's staff capacity to support those projects, looking at the timing of projects, and then also deferring projects that may not have full funding. So instead of just putting things into the budget and tying up that funding, taking a more realistic look and saying, Does this need to get started in 2027. Instead. I ask a past question, what was our sip budget that we approved in 25 for 20 for 2025. It was 46.2 1. That was the sip. Do we use it? I'm sorry. That was the capital improvement budget we approved. Oh, the capital improvement budget! That was The original approval was at 9.3 3 8 million. We were awarded another 1.2 million in capital development funding. So that brought it up to 10.5 million. Could we use it?

[85:05] I think I'll speak to that on the next slide in the memo that calls out in June we did an analysis, and between 24 unspent funds and 25 approved budget. We had about 19 million dollars in cip projects that were plan to be spent, but had not been spent yet. I think part of what Mark's strategy with us has been is we really need to spend on that funding. First, st that we will have a smaller ask for cip in 2026, acknowledging that so much of that funding carries forward year after year that we really want to complete those projects first, st before committing to anything. Now, is there a way to? I'm just trying to follow the dots? Is there a way to track that carryover? It's done annually through the adjustments of base process that was reviewed by city council in May. and that really just breaks it down at the fund level. It doesn't get down to say it was exactly this project, and that's what's going on.

[86:03] I think, to the planning team's credit. There was a lot of legacy projects that we kind of just kept committing to over Covid. I will. It's stated in the memo. But when the point 2 5 sales tax was renewed in 2013, and then, when the Ccrs. Was approved in 2017 and 2021. We did not add any additional staffing. So basically, we had this giant influx of funding to support more projects, but not the people to support it. And that's something that has shifted over the last year and a half roughly, what percentage of staff it would be included in a capital investment program fight per year. I mean, if you have 10 million dollars and we approved 11 million dollars this year in the capital improvement program, what percentage of that technically, or would go to staff capacity. Absolutely none of it. All of our staff is paid for out of operating budget. Okay, I just, I just see it listed there. So it's just this is staff capacity staff capacity to support the projects. Okay? So we don't want to put funding into projects. If we don't have the staff to actually do the work, the planning, the design to contract out construction and such.

[87:20] Okay, thank you. Yeah. okay, this is the end of the high level focus on the operating budget. I acknowledge these numbers are final. We will give you 4 updates next month. We will identify what those targeted service productions are. Back to everyone's point. There really isn't any fluff left in the budget for us to reduce out of. I think that Covid was a very good exercise for us to really go in and really sharpen our budget and make sure that it was accurate. We will have some targeted service reductions. We will identify what those are. I think that with everything we're leaning on the 22 Department plan. We're looking at equity impacts. And then we're also looking at the data and metrics behind it. What is the visitation to spruce pool in the month of August and September, and we have all of that, and that's helping inform our decisions that we'll gladly communicate that out as well.

[88:17] I don't know who I mean, Ali, you might be the best person to answer this. But, you talk about deferment like to 27. What happens if we're in just as bad a position. Then I'm really glad we're having conversations with the community over the next year about levels of service like that is, that is the work ahead. To say, this is this is what this costs. Are you willing to pay? We have anticipated tax measures with the community in both 25 and 26, and it is on us. I mean, we've been talking with the team. It is on us to paint the picture of. We need, you know the the fact. You know, we need it. We're doing work a lot of work with our asset management to know exactly what it costs to operate the system, the recreation number. You're going to hear a little bit more about the gap and balancing that fund. But you know it costs, if we want all of our parks to be in good condition, we're going to have a number to inform those conversations this fall.

[89:14] We want every parking in good condition. and if we don't have that number, we are starting to prepare the list that instead of replacing play areas, we'll be removing them. We will have a proximity issue with play areas. We will be removing trash cans from parks because we cannot service them. And so to inform those conversations. We're gonna have a list of what what we won't be able to do without additional funding. And it's really a matter of across all the services, and I'll stick with parks. As an example, we know we spend X amount of labor hours on turf management X amount of our labor hours on waste management. X hours on responding to graffiti and snow removal. And if we only have this amount of labor hours, what can we achieve with that? And what are we not gonna do. We're working really hard to be able to set that up in a clear. plain. Speak way with the community.

[90:03] Can you go back one more time to that slide. That's blue and green, blue and green. Yeah. for the ref, or from Perks. They're they're first.st Okay. Uses my fund. This is the department budget as a whole for fun. So I guess the one before that was the one you were just on. No, yeah. So it has gone up, and I understand that there's like money in the in the cip, but it's gone up considerably every year, and then maybe it's the carryover from the cip. But I just I struggle with telling the community that they have to pay for what they're already paying for, because they're not paying enough for it. Which is why I think the public realm tax didn't pass. People think their taxes are high already. and so if we try to go at them again. I mean, my argument would be, we're getting more money every year, and I know the Covid is a thing I was. Gonna say, I want to just visually. Please delete these 3 years, and see that from 2019 to 23 was a reduction, and if you add, add in cost escalation to these numbers, and if you delete capital, because again, we bank money right, we don't spend, we don't spend. We spend. So if you delete capital and you add in cost allocation.

[91:26] I don't do the math, but like a little over 3% increase in our operating from 25 to 26. So the majority of that increases, and from 2019, I suspect if we did that math, if we deleted capital I I don't think. And I I know it's a perception thing, and I understand that we're hearing that from the community. And I think that's the piece that it's on us with the storytelling. But that's these. I think this graphic is a tricky one, because if you look at the 25 approved to 26, take out the gold capital bar at the very top. It's exactly the same, and cost escalation is double digits across many services. So us the same means a reduction. We've done this in 2024 to compare 2019 actuals to Cpi and our purchasing power decreased significantly. We would need a budget of over 50 million in 2024, just to maintain

[92:21] for purchasing power that we had in 2019. It just goes back to the point where the budget is lean. There's not a lot of flop, you know, in addition to the base cost increases that are programmed in. You know, the last years as a department to support our outcome based budgeting. We've done a lot with realignment. So looking line, item by line item, saying, Okay, can this get moved? Or you know, if someone's not spending it over here to keep this other service going things. So we've done a lot of work behind the scenes, which is also, why not so confusion? Can I ask a question? This is some of the side issue. But with the 2027 Sundance Festival, or is the Parks department getting an additional infusion of money just to sort of prepare for the community

[93:08] for the tourists, and you know, is that I'm assuming it's happening. But do you want to take that. Sure. It's a yes and no sort of situation with all of our revenue projections we aren't actually requesting, or I'm sorry we aren't recognizing revenue until it's received. If it's considered new revenue. So that's valid measures. That's the primal effect. That's sundance film festival. What is being considered is priority positions or expenditures in 2026, and early 2027 to prepare for the Sundance Film festival, and the intention there is, we recognize that every dollar invested will have a return on investment. 2027 would be the 1st year of the Sundance Film festival. We would then have updated revenues as well as expenses for how we're programming it. I think just calling it out directly. The civic area Pearl Street Mall are kind of the heart of what's being considered that we do have a significant impact there.

[94:05] I know that didn't directly answer your question. But because of the 26 budget being fiscally constrained, nothing new. There is nothing new that we have actually requested for 2026. At this point. All of that will be evaluated as we develop the 27 budget or late in 26 for key staff to support it. Yeah. I mean, but there's gotta be like a long lead time. Right? I mean, I understand it's bad timing, 2026 being such a tough year, and probably 2027 too. But with the festival coming in, and all these people coming in. I would just imagine the city would want to put the best foot forward, potentially providing additional funding to make sure that the city looks really good. We don't have trash, you know that we are. Parks look excellent. I mean. just trying to understand how that conversation is playing out at at a higher level

[95:02] just that. They're paying attention to it. And I know folks are working really hard. That Sundance was just the Sundance Film festival was just in town last week to start the real heavy duty planning, and folks know and share that interest and are doing their best to figure it out. No, it's being talked about. Yeah, okay, so thank you. I have one more question. I know you guys want to get calling. But I'm sorry. This may be a little too high level, but have departments like I'll just speak of parks and Rec. Ever consider creating their own basket for Cpi, instead of using the generic Cpi like specific to what our expenses are. Yeah. I don't think that we have categorized it collectively. Within parks recreation. We get guidance from Central Budget. That Cpi is 3 point, whatever and they project that out over the next 3 years. Mark just messaged me Cip alone is up. I'm sorry. 80% increase since 2019 that that would be the cost of our

[96:09] capital parks projects. We can also look at minimum wage on our side. That's up over 50%. Since 2019 cost of chemicals for the pools has skyrocketed that there's certain areas that we know have increased significantly faster than inflation. Labor, janitorial chemicals fleet and equipment is a huge one. It is so difficult for us to order any of the specialized equipment at this point that that's being factored into cost escalation in the future. But it takes a while for us to play, catch up? These are great questions. We go way back to the other direction. Sorry. It took us all the way back to like slide one. All good. Okay. So I'm going to talk about the capital investment program. You've heard about this before. Cap is anything that has a useful life of over 5 years and is over $50,000. We plan for the cap 6 years in advance, and the way parks and recreation is broken that down is in asset management named park facilities and then system planning.

[97:11] You've seen this before. I'm not going to go into too much detail, but this really identifies how we're proposing to spend department funds over the next 6 years. You can see about a 3rd of it is dedicated towards asset management. Less than 2% is really focused on system planning. And that's more of those plans. Going back to some comments earlier of the amount of plans that we provide. And you can see the majority of it's going into taking care of our facilities. These are named park projects. Park refreshes other examples. We will get into some of them on the next slide. So with 2026 funds you already heard me mention that we will likely have carried forward from unspent. 2025 funds. We have kind of limited the amount of new funding that we're requesting for named park projects

[98:02] we are continuing to invest in the asset management programs just because we know that taking care of what we have is one of the themes from the department plan, every dollar that we're spending now reduces longer term expenses down the road. So you've seen this list of asset management categories before. What we have shifted is some of the asset management categories. Within a park project. We are actually using those funds to work on that park project. You can see examples up here with North Boulder Park as well as Tom Watson. So if we're refreshing play area, we're going to put it towards North Boulder Park, just recognizing that there is a significant cost escalation there with the different playground aspects. So this really covers the asset management portion of the 2026 cip on this slide we identify the named park projects where we do have additional funding going once again. This is coming back to a capacity of we don't want to over commit and are sticking to the name park projects that you've already heard a lot about. Tom Watson already has significant funding in 2025. This is just additional funding that helps with our cash flow for planned 2026 expenses. And this is the same situation with North Boulder Park

[99:17] for pleasant view. We had borrowed that funding to support the urgent issues at the Southville Direct Center. This is really just re requesting those funds I would treat it more as a bridge loan from ourselves, to focus on something that another department could help us with more immediately. That has a huge community impact. So that's why we transferred the funds to Southwell Direct Center earlier this year. And then, looking at our 26 cap, this really breaks it down by the different sources of funds. On the right hand side you see the Ccrs. The Ccrs funds are really dedicated to 3 projects. Because those support more of a broader citywide project. We typically don't look at that directly as the parks and recreation pot of money. It is the broader citywide Ccrs funds to use and it goes through a slightly different approval process, which is why we don't really get too in the weeds on that. But there is separate work being done to coordinate it.

[100:16] On the left hand side you will see the remaining colors as far as where we intend to rely on cip funds in 2026, you can see that these dollar amounts are substantially less. The department plan will tell you we typically spend 5.8 to 6.6 million on cip projects per year. And this is really a lot closer to 4.2 4.3, and this is being mindful of the amount of funding that we're carrying forward and not requesting new funds until we really wrapped up our current projects. Polar Junction is the gray folder Junction doesn't even register on here. What's the big gray part for 11th floor? The I'm sorry the big gray 11 million of it is. Ccrs, okay.

[101:07] give me an open laptop folding any new phones. I just couldn't see the colors, but I didn't see the gray represented, so I just didn't. Sorry. That's a mistake on our part. Okay, typically in the in the gray would be our other funds. So that relates to that golden broad color whatever we want to call it yellow mustard, spicy brown mustard color. We just don't have anything programmed out for 2026, except for the Ccr so this slide really identifies the named park projects, you get slightly more deep. I'm sorry this slide represents everything that we are using the Permit Park Recreation Improvement fund for for the capital per the charter. You have approval or recommendation over the capital expenses out of the Perm Parks Fund. So this is calling out directly how much for each project would be coming out of this fund

[102:05] once again these numbers might shift around slightly North Welder Park. Obviously right over here, Tom Watson you've heard about with the port system plan regional facilities. We have asset management set aside, and all of these other are really just asset management categories that we use to take care of the park system. Looking at the 6 year Cip, you can see that the gray portion is just reflective of the Ccrs funds. The majority of our funds are coming from the Perm Parks Fund, which is driven by property tax. and then a pretty even split between the point 2 5 and lottery funds, that about 47.6 million over 6 years. This exceeds the amount that we had spent on a rolling average. So really, just wanted to call that out that it is more money. I know that it doesn't go as far as it used to. and just one more time. The point 2 5 sales tax point 2 5 fund is all parks. The permanent parks is all parks. Lottery is a portion

[103:07] lottery is kind of a weird one. We currently have all of the funding in 25 as well as the current out years. It can be split with open space and mountain parks, as well as Greenways, that that is part of the consideration. As we rebalance everything in this city that it directly it has to go towards freeway up. I'm sorry there's better terminology to public access. Parkland more or less active recreation. There we are active recreation. Yes, and then I could get back alright. And then I know that I've lost over the Ccrs projects once again. This is just part of the city wide process. That civic area phase 2 is one of the main projects, as is the World Street Mall. And then East Boulder Community Center.

[104:04] What was the last 1. 0, it's the user. So this slide has been updated really just reflects that in August we will come back to you with actual numbers here and be asking for your approval. August 29th is when the city manager's recommended budget will be released to the community. and then in September and October City Council will have public hearings and study sessions related to the approval of the budget. If the budget is approved, the funds become available on January first, st and that just aligns with our fiscal year. Do do we have to unanimously approve the budget from private recommendation, or does it have to give a majority? Or does it mean within the memo that will go to city council? It will identify how many yays, nays, and abstentions, or absent individuals? It just needs a simple majority. Yeah.

[105:05] alright. So you have a lot of questions throughout. We do have 2 questions for you on the screen. Basically any questions concerns or feedback on the strategies that we've identified? And then, as we're considering the 5% reductions, do you have any input that we should be aware of. I have a question about the 5% I mean is that is that in stone can we plead hardship, or you haven't tried that. What a good idea! I think that I'm gonna go back a ton of slides. What we were originally told is every department. Every fund needs to find a 5% reduction. We see a few of these funds up here with 0 listed just because those are only spent once the revenues have actually been received. We don't project revenues in the future for those funds. The 5% is a pretty set in stone. We're being hounded daily, hourly to find the full 5%. I think that this comes back to flexibility of funding. We have a lot of different dedicated sources that can be used in a variety of ways, that there may be a shuffling of some of the funds that is made as part of the citywide collective review of things.

[106:18] Going back to the question on the lottery fund. Well, the lottery fund can be used by 3 different departments. If we haven't given up a full 5% reduction somewhere. Could we give up more of a reduction in lottery fund? There's a lot of flexibility, and that's being looked at collectively from that feature. The other thing I'll just note is that we successfully pointed out like 90% of the recreation activity fund is user fees. We're not going to reduce those by 5% that actually is counterproductive to the mission here. Right? And so the the reduction is just on the tax subsidies that support the services we described earlier. So that's why that number. You'll see that 250 for the wrap. It's not 5% of 15 million. It's 5% of the actual tax subsidies in that fund.

[107:04] I guess my only thing about the 5% is is if in a situation like Mike, Michael brought up earlier with, we're just banking money. We don't. We're not giving it to anybody, or reappropriating or just banking it because it's dedicated to parks. That to me is frustrating if we're going to be closing an important pool for $25,000. So if we're if we're not, if we're the Permanent Parks Fund. So that's dedicated to Parks. We're going to reduce it by a million one and bank it right because we can't reuse it anywhere. It's it's me and Parks has those restrictions on them. So we couldn't take that money and then pay for lifeguards. Because that fund has restricted uses which that you can speak to the long term. Yeah, I guess I'm not following the question. We're not banking money just to hit a target reduction. Right? We're we're reducing the fund to align with the fact that across the point 2 5 and other other sales tax funded sources

[108:06] everyone is projecting. We're not going to achieve our full income, even though the point 2 5 is restricted. We have enough capital in the point 2 5. Sorry Perm. Parks is restricted. There's enough capital in the point 2 5. There's enough operating in the point 2 5 that those can be braided together, and so we're not banking money here while cutting services over here. Is that what I hear is your concern? That's what I yeah, that's what I feel like I heard. I think, possibly like a little bit more context on the 5% reduction at like a city wide mandate. How does that? You know sort of play into some of the issues that we're having more on the parks and recreation side thinking about. Okay with the shortfall that we're projecting and how we're gonna hit that it is it? Very much aligned this 5% mandate with some of the things that we're also seeing across the department and changes that would be made regardless.

[109:04] Or is there a little bit of a disconnect between like that standard? 5% across the board for every department and the the plans that would make the most sense, for you know, this year and beyond for just Perks. I'm not. I'm not. I don't think I understand your question. I don't know. I think the direction we received from the city was each department could come up with their own strategy. I went back to this slide just because I think that we're really focused on a blended approach. Some departments only have operating dollars. Some departments have a lot more capital. We chose to look at reductions in all 3 categories up here. That we aren't just doing only capital capital would be very easy to say we're not going to do. XY, and Z projects. We've already committed to the community that we are doing some new projects that it feels like we need to continue with those. But could we shift funding elsewhere?

[110:01] but I think we were given a lot of flexibility as a department to determine how we issue 5%. I think that makes sense. I also was just curious about how that relates to like raising fees. Is that also part of like. if we're able to raise fees in certain areas, can we count that towards like a 5% reduction? That's 1 of the strategies that we've thrown out is anywhere that we can generate additional revenue instead of looking at a reduction, can we say that we've generated an additional 5%. The recreation activity from the Raf is our biggest example of that. Because that's 90% user fees. So the next item you're going to hear is all about user fees. And if we are able to increase these there, we don't need to find as substantial reduction to the recreation world. Does that answer your questions, Kira? I think so. Is that, does that make sense? Is that also what you were trying to get at it? Does I? Just I guess I just I still am a little.

[111:05] If something is, if the per I guess my, I still have a question about the permanent Parks fund. So if we have to cut that by a million one, but we're not using it for anything else, or or are we? Are, are we using it for something else? No, we're cutting it because we don't think the the revenue is going to be there. So For in 26 you think we'll be down revenue one? That's the projection. The projection is that be prepared, that as taxes come in we don't it? It's interesting. I was trying to explain this to one of those principal community members. We don't, you know my job? I get a paycheck every 2 weeks and I know what it's gonna be. We don't know what our paychecks gonna be right like, we are forecasting what people are going to spend in sales tax. We are forecasting what property tax is a little bit easier. But it it isn't right now, because of so much state legislation at play that is impacting the for the property tax increases that we've been seeing for a long time, and so the forecast is is that you are going to collect much less money. Adjust your budget accordingly.

[112:08] So the Permanent Parks Fund comes from. It's not property tax based. It is property tax. So isn't that so? We don't. We know what it'll be then I mean sales tax. I can see where we wouldn't know. But if it's coming out of property tax, then that should be pretty stable. it's stable, except there's a reassessment year in state legislation that will impact it. Current projections are showing we had about 8 to 10% growth going back to 2013 moving forward. They think that it's actually a 4% decrease each every 2 years because of the redistribution at the state level. And then, when reassessments occurred, property values were starting to decline. I know it doesn't feel like it as you're paying your property tax bills. I yeah, I just I I'm I'm struggling with spruce. I just think $25,000 is just like, I know we have to pinch our pennies everywhere across the board, but that to me just feels like

[113:09] and part of it. I think Jenny, too, is is the hiring freeze right? We have so many students going back to school in August that that 3rd week in August that we we need to be able to keep the pools open, and the only way to do that is with our workforce, and if we're on this hiring freeze we don't have a choice. and I think I do want to call out the $25 $25,000. There is the difference between expenses and revenue. That that's not just the expenses we've already factored in what the loss of revenue is so. This is really looking holistically at where we subsidizing that we aren't hitting full cost recovery. That's to me. The bigger crux of it is that you know, we have a fee policy and set priorities with the community based on. And if we look at who is being subsidized at spruce. It's not target populations. And so we are protecting those services. And I, you're welcome to not like it. I don't like it either, right? But I like it a whole lot more than I like the other options for reducing services. There's no good choices when you're stopping doing something for

[114:14] the community. It's it's not fun. Yeah. And it's $25,000 over what is like 2 and a half weeks, and and because the swim teams aren't at other pools, and because the kids are in school there, it's less crowded everywhere else. It's just it's like they said they used to be open till 8 now it's not open until 8. It used to be open through October. Now it's not up until October. It used to be open through Memorial Day like I get it. I mean, this is just like Constant. I know you said. It's 10 years we've been talking this 10 years, but like it is highly highly subsidized that service, and without additional funding we cannot continue. I get it, I mean I heard it. I just don't like it to me. North Boulder Park. There's money sitting there for North Welder Park to me. That's not something that people are, gonna you know.

[115:03] be impacted by as much as you know people in our disabled community even depend on that pool. Because North Boulder Park exists. So if we're going to be reallocating funds all over the place. I know it's only 2 and a half weeks. It's just something like that just to continue to reduce like something that's so neighborhood focused. It's just difficult part of our next conversation, too, is like, how do we get a little bit smarter about how we're doing our memberships and our funding strategy, so that we're not in this type of situation. Yeah, but I'm not a fan of increasing fees either. So I know. Know. So this is just I. I just find it difficult to talk about constantly putting this on me. I know the community is who pays for it, but we've been paying for it for a long time. So you have to remember that, like in Colorado, we pay the 3rd lowest property taxes in this nation. That's why I moved here. I mean it's a great deal. They're also going up, though every single year they should go up much faster and much higher. I disagree.

[116:06] Let's move on so we don't lose time. Yeah. Jackson steering. So Jackson and Stacy covered the the expenses, and Megan and I are, gonna talk about the rental and and we're gonna really dive into that checks. And if you can click on the next slide since you're steering for me, I appreciate it. This is really intended to be a 1st touch. just like the rest of the budget. You're gonna hear a lot more in August. And really, what we're hoping to do is get some input on how we charge fees across our system and what that looks like. And so we know that the Raf needs to generate a little over 12 million dollars. We're budgeting a 7% increase from what we generated or what we had budgeted in 2025,

[117:04] 2025. So we're going up about 7% to to about 12.1 million. Stacy mentioned that it's about $750,000 increase in revenue. So we know that's gonna happen. And so what Megan and I have been working on is trick figuring out the best way to generate that additional about 600,000 of that is through fees. And so tonight, what we're gonna do is present a few options. That we're considering. And we want to get some, some basic feedback from you. Our goal is to continue to provide equitable and affordable access. We want people to come in. We're here to provide recreation services, and we want that to happen. But the bottom line is, we have to generate revenue. And so we have to be creative in order to make that happen. We do want to maintain service levels wherever possible. And we know that generating more revenue helps us to do that. So so that's the hope. There and then we do have cost recovery targets for each of our programs, each of our facilities, and so that the goal is always to meet meet those. And then, obviously, achieving long term. Financial sustainability is is extremely important. So you'll see on the right side of the slide there, equity accessible, affordable. And what's the new circle? There really is flexible right? We want to give people purchasing options for our programs and services.

[118:20] Maybe a little bit differently than we've done that in the past. So what we're gonna cover is a little bit of the timeline of talking about fees. We'll talk about some fee policy updates that you can expect to see later on this fall. And then tonight we'll talk a little bit more about the general structure of access to our facilities. And really some of those seasonal facilities, and how we want to provide access to those as well as subsidy, and then market alignment. So that you understand where we're coming from as far as some of those choices. For fees. So the timeline. Really, looking at the timeline as I mentioned, this is the 1st touch for prep, so based on the feedback that you all provide tonight. Megan and I are going to go back to the table and meet with our teams and say, All right, here's what Prep thinks we should do as far as how we provide membership options and facility usage options to our community members. And so we're gonna take that feedback and start to run and crunch the numbers.

[119:21] We know those numbers need to equate to about 600,000 more in revenue. So one way or another, we want to keep our costs down as much as possible. But we also need to find a way to generate that revenue. So here in July you'll get 1st touch, August. We're going to dive a little bit deeper, and you'll see a more in depth presentation about if you're a community member and you want to swim at the north Boulder Rec Center. Here's your options for doing that. Or if you want to utilize the boulder reservoir, here's what it might look like, and so all those details will be coming later on, and then, in September, we'll have a final structure based on your feedback that you give us in August. So that's our that's our kind of timeline and our plan.

[120:04] Alright. So a few facilities that I wanted to mention before we jump into the membership structure and really talk about what it looks like. The golf course is, is a little bit different and operates outside of our current membership structure. So we have golfers, and there are memberships that we do sell at the golf course. But we've taken a look at at the golf course, and we know that we need to increase fees based on market. And so right now, 9 holes to to go out and play 9 holes. It's it's pretty good fee. It aligns with market. We feel all right about that, but we are below market for 18 holes of golf. There's a lot of opportunity there, and we look at our our other courses around the area, and they are charging more same with our cart fees. So you will see an increase in those fees proposed. From us in September. We're also working on a community access framework. And what that framework does is really looks at all of our public spaces and it's creating policies and procedures for department use of those spaces. And so we have a lot of partners and community organizations that rent our fields like Pleasant View. And we're developing a framework to really streamline access to those fields. And so

[121:22] along with that, we'll be looking at the rates for rental of our park areas and sports fields. So that'll be coming in September as well. And then the other one that we wanted to mention that you'll see some fees on is our courts. And so the court system plan came out last year, and there was an operational portion of that plan that made recommendations as to how we activate those courts right now. Our memberships that you purchase for the rec centers will allow you, if you have a membership to reserve spaces at the courts adjacent to the South Boulder Rec Center, East Boulder, Community Center and North Boulder rec center. There's there's courts right near those. And so people are renting those spaces. If they have a membership.

[122:05] we know we need to look at that a little bit differently, and we need to look at the entire system. We're starting to invest in our courts, and and Tom Watson will be the 1st one to to go there. But we need to have a consistent process. For the entire court system, for how you reserve spaces and and how you? really, just utilize those spaces aside from rentals. So we're gonna look at that holistically over the next month or so and come back to you in September with court fees. Specifically. So with that I will say that all the fee adjustments that we're making really need to align with our fee policy that was adopted in 2023 and and we're looking very closely and want to make sure that it is equitable and and so tonight we're gonna dive into things a little bit more with our membership structure. So 1st and foremost, before I hand this off to Megan. I wanna mention the reason why we're doing this right now.

[123:05] I think it's it's 1 because we are in a fiscally constrained environment. And we do need to be creative with how we generate revenue. The other important reason is, we are implementing implementing a new recreation management software. So how people register for programs and sign up and buy a membership. It's all gonna be new starting here in November. And so we've decided to go with a company called Amelia and smart Rec is the program. And so that's how people will register. And so as part of setting up that program that software, we need to input all of our fees. And so it's time that we just take a look at the whole structure and and make some some new decisions there. You've already heard a lot about expenses outpacing the revenue. There's a little bit of market misalignment, and I'm going to pass it on to Megan to start to talk about some of the public engagement that we've done, and kind of what we're thinking. Yeah. So some of you may remember, in 2019 we did a facility access questionnaire, that kind of asked some questions about like how people like to visit facilities.

[124:15] how they wanted to pay for facilities. Of course, at that time. They mentioned. Well, you know. Yeah, if if there's no benefit to not getting it, we want everything. you know, all at once, at one fee. Well, we're we're in a little bit of a a different scenario now, and so we in the feedback, the facility feedback form that went out here. I'm gonna share some data. In the next 3 slides are a lot of data. It's on your packet and so and we're gonna be talking about this more in August. You have time to really digest some of this, too, and ask additional questions. If you need to. But in the this year's facility feedback, both the dot voting and the and the online questionnaire.

[125:01] we asked a few more questions. And so these questions are really tailored to the things that we had gap in our pre gaps in our previous analysis. or where we wanted to just get a little bit more information. And so, specifically, we were asking these questions to the Recreation Center members. And so what this information is used for at that point is, if you are a recreation center member, how would you prioritize access to these different facilities in order to not increase the fees of a recreation Center membership. Would you support the outdoor facilities being sold separately? And you can see there, that's 52% said, yes, 17% said no, and then, you know, a pretty good portion unsure, and then would you support an increase in the daily drop-in fee to help reduce the burden of, or how much we have to charge for passes into the future. And that one's a little bit more split with just 42% saying, yes, 25% say, no. Can I ask a question on the online version? Yeah, right? And then a bunch of dots which have

[126:12] when when I've seen it, you know, people can putting multiple dots down. One person could put multiple dots down. I think it says somebody put a whole bunch of stickies at one person. So how how valid is this? This is not a valid. It's not a statistically valid survey. This is just to help us get a good understanding? These specific questions were not dot voting? These specific questions were either paper surveys in English or Spanish, or the online survey questions. So I think by the time I entered all the paper surveys we didn't. We didn't or not surveys survey. It's not statistically valid. It's a feedback form. There's like 108 total responses. The dot voting was was bonkers with responses. But yeah, no, this is a small snapshot, and it's not statistically valid. But I think we can draw conclusions right? So in 2019, we said, Hey, if we give you access to the reservoir and the outdoor pools and the rec centers. Do you want to? Do? You want all of it all at once? And they said overwhelmingly, Yes, we want that

[127:15] now we're at the point we're saying, do you want to pay more, to continue to have access to all that? And they're saying, No, we don't want to pay more. We, we know, looking at the numbers of where our members go, most of our members go to one specific facility. Sometimes they go to 2 or even 3, but we're at the point now where looking at how many facilities are included in your membership is something that we're trying to consider. And that's what Megan is gonna dive into. So this just provides a little bit of that context, people who are like annual members and drop in users. And yeah, I mean, we sent it to to everyone, and so I I could look up the responses on that, and it is included in the packet because I attach the full on the online results. But I don't recall the top. My head. What? What percentage?

[128:08] Of responses, from what membership type? I mean, I would assume that it was probably more members were like more well represented in the survey. So just even the fact that it's not overwhelmingly. Yes, let's increase the daily drop in rate. I'm assuming there's more members who are saying Well, and if you look at. And this was primarily targeted at the Recreation Center members right? And if you look at one of the the next few slides here will show you that at our recreation centers I think you can go to the next slide. This one doesn't exactly show it, but at our recreation centers it's mainly single digits of drop in daily entries. Except for the North Pole Direct Center, where it's it's actually a little bit more substantial amount of usage from daily drop-ins

[129:02] still within the minority, though. Yes, compared to the other past types generally. And and that's true for the indoor facilities. And so again, a really high level. You have this information in your packet. The big takeaway here is that we've collected a lot of data. We've reviewed it and shared it in the memo for reference. It's really just helping this information. All just helps us understand the way the community is accessing our facilities. And ultimately, who may experience impact from any changes we propose or may make and in our existing structure this kind, this slide reminds you and shows you, in order to close our funding gap we need to get up to a goal of a 60%, a 67% cost recovery for these user fees. And we're at about 48%. That's a $2 and 67 increase per average entry, which is 39% increase in our current membership structure which we would really love to avoid.

[130:02] That kind of large increase and so the next the next slide here this is that snapshot of across our whole system. And this is kind of getting more to your question across our whole system. This is who represents the usage and so we broke this kind of into user profiles, and you can kind of see one of the big call outs is actually all of the drop in entries a whole across the whole system. The Boulder reservoir only gets about 60,000 visits, and other facilities get in between, like the rec centers, get in between like 150 to 200 1,000 visits a year, but 42% of all the drop-in visits are happening at the Boulder Reservoir. 79% of the boulder reservoirs. Visitation is through drop-in entry. So it some of this data was in your packet. You can just see it. But in addition to all of this right, we completed a lot of market analysis which we gave you access to last month.

[131:01] you can go to the next slide. I'm sorry. One question on that. Yeah, 3rd party is primarily insurance providers. So those are people who might be your silver sneakers, silver and fit. Renew active. Traditionally, Medicare Medicaid members. They're they're almost all older adults. But they're not necessarily all residents just to add a clarifier there that it's part of a supplemental program that people buy. So you don't. If you qualify for Medicare, you do not just get silver sneakers. People buy a supplemental program. It's called Medicare Supplement B, and many of those include access to recreation vendors that accept these programs. We accept all the major 3rd party provider programs. And we do. We do get a reimbursement based on visitation. However, in the in the last 8 years, the that's our reimbursements only increase 8%, and our expenses have increased over 40%.

[132:07] So all all of this different market analysis data analysis have have come together. And we've we've also tried to go through an equity analysis. And what we've kind of noticed through some of this is, Wow, we have a really complex system. Here. We have a boulder reservoir. We have courts, we have 3 rec centers. We have 2 outdoor pools. We have all of these really great things, and we're trying to give access to that in a really simple one size fits all package that is not common. It's very uncommon, it's it, and it makes it so that we don't actually have a market comparison for what we're trying to offer and so we've avoided that causing too much of an issue, because when when you have too much of an all in package. Your your fees kind of do have to go up to cover everything in such diverse scenarios, right and then things that should be maybe less expensive. The person who just wants access to that one thing that should just be a basic service is paying paying a really premier price. And the and the people who have access and want access to all things. They're getting a really great deal.

[133:12] But it's it's really hurting the people in the middle, who really just want access to like one or 2 things. Because they could get maybe a better deal if we weren't trying to package it all together. And so we've avoided this causing too many issues by pursuing free financial aid. So anyone under 60% ami, which is the adjusted medium income in the area gets a hundred percent free access to all of our locations. But we've noticed as our fees increase, you continue to make it less affordable for those who just don't qualify for aid. And that's kind of where we're coming through with some very high level. I just want to be very blunt and honest, we can continue in our existing structure, and we can make the budget balance. However, rates would need to increase nearly 40% to actually accomplish the funding gap. 39% to be to be accurate at that 2 67 and so

[134:13] if we were to crease increase up to 20% of a rate change and try to do that over a couple of years. We'd still have to reduce service levels. If we, you know, increase over 20% and again try to do that over a couple of years, we could maybe maintain service levels. And it would kind of hurt a little bit. And so that's why we're really coming to you and saying, Well, we kind of want to explore if there's another option that maybe helps us meet these goals and help deliver really accessible services. You know, in a different model. Can I ask a question? So last year. I asked if I could ask a question. I started asking the question, how many yeses do you need? So last year we increased our fees to cover a $500,000 shortfall.

[135:03] and I was wondering if it, how it did it increase to do like do we have any measurement of success there. Do we know if we've increased or decreased visits from the year before? So I I will say that right now 2025 numbers look excellent we've done a really good job from our marketing team to the campaign that we ran for New Year's resolutions, selling memberships and getting more people in the door. It's looking really good. And the numbers right now, halfway through the year. Are above what we had budgeted so that feels really good. That being said, it's it's still not enough. And I think the bigger concern that I have is you have those that are paying that the the high percentage of yeah, we go back to slide 32. Yeah. So we know that 3rd party memberships are not the the subsidy, or the contribution that we receive from those 3rd party vendors don't pay our full cost to operate. We know that financial assistance is 11%, which is a pretty high amount, and then we do a lot of discounting for seniors and for youth. And so because of all that.

[136:17] those that that can pay or we're we're outpacing the market, and they're paying more to make up for those other groups. And and I think that's where we need to look at things a little bit differently. Yeah. And the reason I had us go back here is because it the purchase passes. So people who are actually buying their memberships. It's only 48% of all of the entry. So 3rd party they're not buying their memberships through Us. Financial assistance, they're not technically buying it right. If you take out. If you back those out, if you back out, the 2% of employee passes, and if you back out daily entries. It's only 48% of people that are buying their passes right now. And and actually, 55% of all of the passes that we of all of the access is

[137:05] highly subsidized access to those users. So that means that remaining 48%, 45% are the ones that are kind of carrying the whole load for everyone to access everything. So you're are we looking for a solution for that? And that's what we're talking about. Some initial feedback. Yeah, just a quick anecdote. I was in the hot tub in the South Boulder Rec Center a few weeks ago, and a gentleman had. you know. I think he yeah, he was a senior but the this gentleman said, I love. I love it because I I'm not having to pay anything, and I don't think there were any financial issues. And so it just kind of made me realize that there are a lot of people who are getting complete free access. And perhaps there is disparity right there in terms of you know with well is because it's not necessarily income based. It might be just because of either age or the 3rd party potential.

[138:11] vendor situation. Right? Yeah. Well, and that's those are choices, right? And it is in our department plan that we have said, we do want to provide subsidy based on age to some extent, right? And we have said in our department plan that we want to provide subsidy based on need to some extent, but those are certainly you know things that are part of the conversation like a 3rd party access? Do we want it to include access to absolutely everything? Or do we want those members to have a really good health and wellness option? But maybe going to this facility. Well, maybe they get a discount on that facility, but it's just a little bit more, because it doesn't support their health and wellness so much as it's a nice to have. I don't like. And this is just me giving examples that are not. This is nothing decided. This is just to help explain the conversation.

[139:03] So when we really look at the market, most organizations? Well, one, a lot of organizations don't offer the level of services that we have when you look at market comparisons for Scott Carpenter pool or the boulder reservoir you, you're looking at. You're not usually looking at a municipality that offers all the same things that we do. We have a lot of services that are really great. So again, reminder, we can not change anything and just raise fees. And it's not super financially feasible. And it starts making the memberships even less less likely to be available to the average person. Right? When you look at the market research, a lot of people do one of 2 options. They either separate these facilities by how they compare to the market. So, like all the Rec centers, would potentially be sold together as a rec center membership, you can definitely continue to do that. So if you want to go to south or east or north, it's 1 1 facility fee for the whole thing.

[140:03] They're similar enough facilities. You can price them. Similarly, or this recreation center plus kind of model where? If someone has a rec center membership, maybe that extends them an additional benefit above financial need or age based discounting to additional facilities. So if you have a Rec center membership and you want to go to the Boulder reservoir, well, maybe that gets you a 15% discount on on the membership there. So there's an additional benefit to being a member of the whole system and going to multiple facilities. but you don't necessarily have to buy in and pay for the value of every facility. If you're not using every facility. So these are. These are kind of some of the different options. Now, with that said, we do know that people do like access to everything, and so on. The next slide here. The. We do think there is a space in either of these potential new models to still sell an all in pass.

[141:00] What's really great about that is, that's the simplicity and the ease for the people who do like multiple facilities, and it allows us to cost it at the cost recovery targets that we need to and that the people who can afford to do that, or who do want access to all the facilities that might still be the best deal for them. Right? But those who just want to go to one of the Rec. Centers don't have to pay to access the boulder reservoir when they're never going to go there. and what's also great about this is you can potentially add future access or benefits to that in the future. So if we do come up with a really great system for court access on these passes, maybe that's something we add into a pass like this. So that was a yeah, go ahead. Could the golf cart golf course be part of this in some way? Potentially you could do a if you have a membership, you have a, you know, but we're not looking at that right now. If you want to play golf or something. Yeah, there's a lot we could certainly consider

[142:05] what I would say right now with the golf courses. We're filling our T sheets. If the weather's good. It's full I think the biggest thing that we need to look at at flat earns is making sure that we're charging the right amount, and within the market, and at a cost that people are willing to pay so that we can continue to fill the T sheet. I don't think if if the course was empty half the time, I would say, absolutely, let's figure out a way to to include that in an all in membership. I don't think we're at the point where it fiscally makes sense. We are definitely going to be raising prices at the golf course right now. We're going to recommend that. I think there's we're like I mentioned. We're under market for 18 holes, for sure, and our cart fees are very, very low when you bring these all these costs next month. Will you have comparative data like last time? Great? Thank you. And so actually, the next slide. So this 1st little general structure question, we do have a couple of specific questions for you is just

[143:06] so the 1st question, yeah, any any general questions? I think you know. Megan shared a lot of information right there. There's a ton of background information in your packet. We feel like there's there's an opportunity here to maximize revenue and yet still keep down the cost a little bit for the folks. By simply separating other facilities. Some of that data will tell you how much more expensive it is to operate the Boulder reservoir, for example, it's it's costly. It costs more to operate Scott Carpenter Pool than it does to operate the rec centers as far as Based on the time it's open during the season. And so what I will say is, I think, by separating memberships, keeping it all an option that you can pay for everything if you want to pay for it. Great pay for it by separating the facilities. It. It really then potentially can allow us to keep those costs down and and focus on what people really want to be using.

[144:01] So what we'd like to know is any general thoughts or perceptions as to whether or not we're going in the right direction. And is there anything specific you would like us to consider as we start to pull together some numbers for you. I think you are going in the right direction, and I have a question on. But in our packet. You've got cost recovery, and I'm just looking at the reservoir which interest fee entrance fees are 46% cost recovery yet the additional services bring it up. 61%. Is that something we can add to these different rec centers. Absolutely, that's happening regardless of what we talk about today. So having a diverse business model, it really helps any business be better and stronger. And and and for us it means that we can provide more services. So if we if, for instance, if we were to improve our rental spaces at the East Bowler Community Center through the renovation, right? Well, maybe we can then rent out more spaces for weddings, and you know, and charge it at a rate that's fair. But that's another revenue source that makes us less reliant on ever on membership. Solely so. Looking at those opportunities is definitely something that we're

[145:20] doing. And it's not like we. It's just not part of this conversation because it's already so complex. But it is absolutely happening. Gotcha. 67% target with the additional sources. Yeah, I will say that the reservoir does a remarkable job with their special events and their rentals. There's there's stuff happening all the time. It's a little bit different with the rec centers, and that, you know, we we could rent out the gyms all the time, but then those that are paying for a membership wouldn't have access to the gym. And so it's that fine balance of how often do you rent out the spaces? We do after problems? We do some some events each year, but we don't want to rent out our spaces all the time, because

[146:01] that's to the detriment of our regular users and some of the map that you're talking. I think the graph that you're talking about about the the total of the cost recovery. It. It's all of the revenue already grouped in. That's getting us to that total. So it might it. For instance, like at the North, will direct. Yeah, it's this. this graph, right? The problem is the total isn't covering the whole total. It needs to. Yeah. So this is it's the other. yeah, that one. Yeah, that one. There you go. yeah. So total cover cost recovery of all sources. So all sources includes all those other things that we're doing versus cost recovery of entrance fee only. And you can see, we're down at 48%, 38% at Spruce pool, 43%, 50%. The the place that we're doing best at entrance is based on that in every single location.

[147:07] So, given the economic landscape, I think this is absolutely the direction. So I really appreciate that you all are thinking about this sort of like, you know, being able to peel out all the pieces, and then you can pick what you want to spend the money on. I think that makes a lot of sense. I had a question, though, on if there was that the option where you select the facility so like I'm in South Boulder. I want to swim at South Boulders Pool, and let's say I were to select. You know I want only pay for that because I don't use the boulder reservoir. Scott carpenter would there be? I think you may have had. Maybe you didn't have this in there. But, like. Let's say I pick South Boulder. and I'm only paying for that. But something happens at South Boulder. Some issue breaks down so I can't use it. I assume there would be a mechanism where there's some sort of temporary pass

[148:04] for, you know. In the meantime I can go to East Boulder or something if we went with that kind of option, because I know that's the far right option. Well, and and generally right now we're considering the Rec. Centers would be sold altogether regardless. They do have the same market, so we can the same market data for that. So if you sold it all separately, it would probably all be same. So we're just kind of yeah, if you look at that 1st bullet point, I I think Megan and I talked about this extensively. And and because of our closures or annual closures of different facilities, it's much easier to just say, you know, we're going to close each facility for a week each year, and but you're able to go to those other those other 2 that you normally wouldn't visit. So using round numbers right now, it costs $100 a month to go to. Let's pull the rack. and you want to package all the rec centers is going to be $300 a month. What are you? Gonna what are you gonna charge? That's what we're gonna get into next month, and we'll get into some of those details. And and I think bottom line is, we need to generate a lot more money, or we need to reduce services. And so what does that look like. And so we're we're not only working with Meg and I. We've got a whole team working on this as well as our marketing person.

[149:24] because ultimately we have to be able to sell these passes to, and they have to make sense, and they have to align with market. So we're we're working on all that, and we'll have quite a bit of information for you in August. We just wanted to make sure that the Proud was, you know. thinks we're on the right path to consider some level of change right now. And and we think it's the right time to change based on the new rec management software and the fiscally constrained environment. I agree, I'm just I don't really. Again, I think it all comes down to the bottom line. But how do you think this helps the people in the middle who are subsidizing? Well, that's the next section. And we're going to get into that here next.

[150:06] Oh, you're gonna go over. Yeah, we're gonna get to that in a little bit. We'll talk about seasonal facilities. First, st we're gonna talk seasonal facilities. And then we're gonna specifically talk some 2 cents. But I I appreciate the work. I think it's really creative. And it's probably really hard to do. And you gotta crunch all this data. But you know, I definitely think you're going in the right direction with either that that yellow one or the one on the right? Great. Thank you. Yeah, completely agree. It's definitely creative. And a better way to like price according to the value that each person is getting from the activities that matter the most to them. And there's also some smart things. Also, I saw in the packet. You know, if there is no incentive really to. If you're paying for a rec center membership and courts are included, and then you can't make it. You don't really have as much of an incentive to cancel that reservation, and then that court isn't being used, and it looks like all the courts are reserved. So I think there's also some other benefits. And just like realigning incentives that could benefit a lot of people.

[151:15] All right, let's keep moving. Yeah. And so next, we're talking specifically about some of the seasonal facilities. So some of this, as Jackson mentioned before, the cost to operate our outdoor facilities, is increasing a lot faster than the cost to operate our indoor facilities between the staffing, the chemical expense, the heating expense. and and right now our outdoor pools rely very heavily on entrance fees to cover their costs specifically at Scott. Carpenter. You know, our market tells us like this is a really highly specialized facility. There's only a few facilities like this in the State when we do comparables right? And they they are commonly treated differently than, say, an indoor facility. Scott carpents the absolute, most expensive facility to operate right now. It's $604 per hour per operational hour. By the time you you count extended seasons and everything else.

[152:14] Spruce pool is completely different. Now, if we we talk about Spruce pool and Scott Carpenter, we're talking about totally different markets of facilities. It's a really aging facility, it receives the least amount of usage, and honestly, we could go either way with spruce pool. We can sell spruce pool if we do the per facility thing with Scott Carpenter as an outdoor pool pass, or you could actually lump it in with the Rec. Centers. The market is split and it could go either way. Can I ask a question? So number one, why is Scott Carpenter so expensive to operate and number 2? Why would spruce pool, is it? Are you considering packaging it potentially an outdoor pool category because it's old, and then at some point, if we invest in it.

[153:00] and it becomes more special, or something that that would be peeled out and potentially be its own, or be part of the outdoor. So sorry I'm asking you 2 questions. Yeah. So I think the 1st question is right. Now, Spruce, I'm just saying that the market that so you're going to look at the options, and then next month we'll be able to like dive in a little bit more, too, and I certainly want your feedback now as well. But spruce pool. The market tells us that a pool likes spruce. Sometimes people just lump it in with the Rec centers. This is a really small single amenity type pool, and sometimes people might lump it in with like another pool that they sell separately, so we could go either way. I think, if it were to be renovated in the future, we'd have to then relook at. What does the market of Spruce pool like? What are now the market comparables? And what's the smartest thing to do? But right now as it is it certainly could. I don't think it makes sense to sell access to school 100 separately. It's it's included with this thing, or included with this other thing.

[154:02] Your other question, too, on Star Carpenter. It's really staffing. So how many aquatic staff does it take to run? It takes about 24 aquatic staff to operate that pool per operational hour when the leisure pool and the lab pool are operating. Additionally, the chemicals alone are like $15,000 a month. Yeah, the size of the water. The fact that it's open in September. when the leaves are all in the pool like that takes a lot of chemicals to offset some of that facility. And for just Mba janitorial chemicals, energy out of our whole system to operate. Okay, thank you. I'm just on on Scott. Excuse me on spruce. When are we gonna get into a software recreation center problem with that pool where it's nearing the end of its lifespan. Well, We have actual, for instance, like we have 3 brand new boilers at Spruce pool right now, I think, with any aging facility, you hit those problems as they occur in the last 5 years we've addressed some minor leaking there. We've completely replaced all the boilers. We've replaced a pool pump. It's certainly on the list that we know it's aging, and we need to decide what is happening next with it.

[155:21] and I believe the infrastructures had major investments over the years. I don't recall the year of the last one, but sometime in the 2 thousands. There have been major investments on that. I mean, there's no Hvac. There's no roof. There's no envelope, right? So you reduce 75% of the issues. But so the biggest investments there are the pool equipment which Megan just mentioned. And even before the pumps the boilers had been replaced less than 10 years ago. and then the pool shell had some significant work sometime in the 2,000. So it's it's we've continued to invest in it right now. The biggest things that could go wrong there. We've already replaced in the last 3 years. It's more affordable to invest in spruce than it is. Scott Carpenter, just from a sheer magnitude. Right? So it's a it's a little bit of a different situation.

[156:09] So the fact that it's I mean, it's noted on this line that it's aging. So is that just you're just telling us that we're aware it was built in 1963 same year as Scott Carpenter. And so, even though it's had some investments at some point like 50 years, is nowhere at 60 like alright. So boulder reservoir. We also know that we need to make some changes to how you access the reservoir. It's different than our Rec centers. A lot of families or folks will come in and just experience it for the day. Right? They'll pay the direct daily drop in fee. They don't necessarily want a membership and be there all the time, although we do have members. But a lot of folks. 79% of our access is coming from just a daily drop in. So, looking at ways to address that a little bit differently is what we're considering. Some places do a per car entry fee like. If you go up to Rocky Mountain National Park, you pay for axle, or you pay an entry fee. There's different ways of doing it. And this facility is very unique. We operate and we're funded very differently than other reservoirs.

[157:15] And so certainly, we're gonna take a strong look at this and come to you with some recommendations. For what those daily entry fees look like and how we make sure that we're providing access to the to the reservoir right now that facility, the goal is 100% cost recovery. We do that from the extra rentals, from the special events. That's where we're making up that money which we'll continue to do. But we also want to make sure that we're priced appropriately for our market, and we have the best access and and ability for people to get into the reservoir and utilize the space. So you'll see more on the boulder reservoir coming up as well. So overall, looking at our seasonal facility considerations, there's there's several options, and I think, based on the feedback that we've already heard from you all.

[158:02] I think you're in favor of us continuing to to do this work and to continue to look at how memberships are sold, and how access is granted to our, to our outdoor spaces or seasonal facilities, and they are unique. So Scott, carpenter and spruce, as Megan said, could be grouped either with an outdoor pool pass or with the rec centers. We could look at that in different ways the reservoir, you know, we really need to align those fees based on the market and the cost to utilize that facility. And then the whether or not we do the daily admissions or the memberships. I think we need to look at both of those for the reservoir, because we do have so many different types of users there. So we're gonna come back to you in August. With your approval, diving into all these outdoor facilities as well. Now is the time to look at all of our memberships and all of our entry fees, and we're gonna try and do this all in one lump sum. So we're gonna put a lot of information in front of you in August and recommendations. And I guess with that we'll move into some questions.

[159:11] So any general questions about the outdoor pools, or or the boulder reservoir? Don't you have one about voting? So is that something that would be considered in here, and I say that, and that there's current policy approved by city Council that allows it. And so it's a whole large planning process that needs to happen to revisit the direction for that site. But if we were to increase the permit fees for that, would that come through us. You review the fees. It's part of our overall budget, and that's not part of this, though this is just entry correct.

[160:02] What I will say is we've already established what we need to generate as far as revenue in the raft this next year. It's about 12.1 million dollars. Through all of these facilities. The key is, how are we gonna get there? And that's that's what we're looking at right now. It's about a $600,000 increase for the year in in entry fees is what we're trying to accomplish for the reservoir. Does it take into account selling concessions and potentially alcohol as a way to offset. It's a great question. At this point we have a vendor that is in there operating the the restaurant, and they pay us a percentage of their gross revenue, and then they also pay a rent on a monthly basis. I don't know that alcohol sales would be enough to make a a huge impact on the budget. I mean, definitely would. It's not gonna make a huge impact on the budget. But potentially it could reduce the increase in

[161:10] 20 cents or something. But still, yeah, I mean, it could be a factor absolutely. And and I will say that I think, as part of the the Prab roles and responsibilities you've signed up to help us with our regional facility fees. So expect a phone call from from me, and we're going to talk about this, and I would love for you to help us dive into the reservoir. And what that looks like sounds good, great feedback from the community on this stuff. How would that come in? Is it just people who are actively listening to these meetings, you know. That's a great question. And I think, obviously, we, we need to make fiscally smart decisions as to how we we generate this revenue, and the revenue has to come in one way or the other. we have done some level of public engagement specifically around the Rec center members. We've done quite a bit of engagement around. The Boulder reservoir, and those that are regular users of the Boulder reservoir, and so I think

[162:10] we certainly need to take all that into account. But also the bottom line is is, we have to make ends meet and make good financial decisions the best we can. And so, based on our operating expenses, it'd be really, really easy to say, you know, we're gonna charge up here. We know we can't, because of market and so this next section that we're gonna dive into is about subsidy and financial assistance and discounting. And so maybe that will help answer a few of those questions, but I agree we have a little bit more work to do with the community engagement piece on that, to be very careful about that informing and talking to the community and letting them know what's going on is a form of community engagement. When for a conversation like this we cannot go out community every year and say, what would you like to pay? Because the answer is going to be not a lot right? And so the engagement is heavy on inform, with the annual fee setting, because it is guided by the statistically valid, robust community engagement. Prab and City Council approved Ppr. Plan.

[163:14] and so over the next couple of months you will not hear a lot about us going out and doing the deep dive engagement we do when we're planning to park or when we're doing. Because and we have information from the 22 Vpr plan. And even in that survey we ask folks like what should taxes support, and their answer is everything like they think taxes should support 50% of the entry fees. That is, that's not where we are. So I just want to be careful. I think sometimes. It's easier for for me to say, like, we're not going to be doing a lot of community engagement on fees. So I'm just thinking that you know, I I 100%. Think you all are going in the right direction. You know, the economic situation is driving this creative discussion. But I'm thinking, you know, at the next meeting you'll get input from board but it would be great to sort of

[164:09] start, you know, getting advocates who are saying, Yeah, under the circumstances, we understand where Preb is having to make some tough decisions. And you know. Yes, we could just raise the fee for everyone, and then, you know it doesn't. It doesn't. It's not equitable. I'm just trying to figure out like, how do we get certain groups? I'm thinking, for example, reimagine South Boulder just because I live in the neighborhood, but like it would be great to engage them at some level. If they're not listening to this already, but engage them at some level to say, Okay, yeah. What you're doing is reasonable, and we support the decision. And you know, maybe you do it this way, and it's just some just a more iterative way to inform our decision making in August or something like that. Yeah, and I think there'll be a lot of kind of change, management and communication that needs to occur once everything goes into effect for 2026 as well. What I will say is, the hope would be

[165:07] that if you look at a a general Rec center user right now, they're paying, and they have access to everything, and if we don't raise their fees so much, they still have access to their rec center with with their fees, not increasing that much. But maybe now, if they want to go, use the boulder reservoir. They have to pay for that on top, or if they want to rent courts. They also have to pay for the rental of the the court time that they utilize. Those are the kind of decisions that I think we need to look at. And that's what we're gonna pull together for you. Well, and and remember that like 79% of the users at the boulder reservoir are dropping entries, and when they when someone who's dropping into a facility like the boulder reservoir goes anywhere else to drop into that facility, they're actually usually paying per car and so some of the information will come back with will actually, maybe create a better user experience for people who are used to entering a facility that way.

[166:04] so you know, I I think sometimes the the data and analysis, the market analysis helps us. understand what the public might expect at that type of facility are we gonna raise? Are we gonna is there a plan? Are we gonna raise fees every year. Where are we? Gonna is there a plan to hold for a little while? I think that's something that we have to consider? I think historically, the goal was to look at fees every 2 years, for memberships and for daily admissions. Just the escalation. And and where we're at with our costs going through the roof, as we've had to look at things a little bit differently, my hope would be is whatever we present to you in August would set us up for at least all 26 and 27, and then we wouldn't have to look at it again until the 28 budget. And then, once, so you'll present it. The timeline was presented in August, and then when is it a final approval in September? Okay.

[167:07] do you know how many? Roughly what percentage of rec center users are also using courts. What's difficult is we? We can find out who is a Rec center member that reserves courts. And it's a small number. What we can't do is there's no way to track who's actually at the courts. There's no check in at the courts, so even silver sneakers or whatnot, if they're reserving that space, we're not getting a a reimbursement for court usage at all. So, looking at the courts, I think needs to be a a separate thing that we will dive into with some of those numbers. Yeah. Because, sun. Just a couple of days ago I went to the pickleball courts there at South Boulder, and all I had to do is just walk onto the court and just start playing. No one knew whether I was actually paying a fee. So yeah, there's not. There's not good enforcement on that

[168:03] right? Absolutely. Yeah. Again, especially at our satellite courts, where there's not a Rec center right near them, right? Right? So, which is is great like, that's a service. I think Parks wants to provide like we want to provide that if there's and we want to provide, if you want to guarantee the space that you can book it at. should we move on to the next section here, closing at 9 o'clock. Yes, so I'll I'll go through this pretty quickly. We've thrown a lot of numbers at you, and and there's a lot in your packet that I think is important. We always consider discounting and and subsidy as far as as we. How we set our fees. There's a few things on this slide that really stand out. 1st and foremost, 55% of our entries across the entire system are either discounted or subsidized. So there's quite a few. You can see that for age base for 3rd party, and then the financial assistance on the right side. There you'll see our growth in our financial aid program and that enrollment in 2014 it was 829 people. We're now over 4,300 people participating. And that's individuals that have come to us and have a Median household income of

[169:14] less than 60% of of the area. And so they're getting free access to our facility. So one of the things that we want to look at also for 2026 is potentially implementing a sliding scale so that those that can pay a certain amount would would pay, and we'd look at that a little bit more comprehensively. But I think discounting is a big part of of how we figure out our numbers. Just quick question is this, for city residents and non-city residents. Financial aid is just for city of open residents. Okay, 3rd party members could be residents or non-residents. Okay? And this is what we're offering. Right now, it's a 25% discount seniors and 40%. That's for seniors who pay. Yeah, yeah, okay, thank you. And that's according to our fee policy. Yeah, okay, great.

[170:05] So what we're gonna look at is financial aid and creating that sliding scale. As I mentioned, we think that's a good recommendation for creating an equitable opportunity for those to utilize our space. We can't just keep saying yes to more and more people that fall under 60%. Ami. There's there's no money paying for that. And so that would mean other folks that are paying would need to cover that additional difference. And so we're gonna look, we feel like, we need to look at a sliding scale there. Okay, so if your household income, let's say it falls at 55 ami. your maybe discount could be 75%, and you pay 25% of the fee. If your income falls at 40, maybe you get 95%. I'm not really sure, but a scale based on your income level.

[171:00] 3rd party memberships are really an interesting one. So we have agreements with 3rd party groups like silver sneakers, and we're proposing to keep those in place through 2026. We feel like they need to stay in place, and then, as those contracts expire. We can renegotiate with those insurance companies. That being said, if we were to just eliminate silver sneakers, for example, there's a large portion of the population that would be pretty darn frustrated. and they would probably just drive to Louisville, to Louisville Rec Center because they accept it there. So what we need to do is really look at those rates and figure out how we want to handle those 3rd party memberships. And we can talk about like what locations that they give access to. So it's it's actually pretty abnormal that you would give access to a 3rd party membership type out of at a reservoir or at a pool like stock. So as far as senior subsidies we could reduce the senior subsidy rate only at outdoor facilities. So, for example, you keep the full subsidy at the indoor facilities, and maybe maybe reduce that at the outdoor facilities. We could also look at changing that percentage of a discount. It doesn't necessarily need to be 25% discount. It could be a 20% discount. Those would make big differences.

[172:23] And then, same for youth, we would look at 1st and foremost, what do we classify? A a youth right now? 3, a 3 year old, I believe. 3. And under yeah, under 3 is free under 3 is free. Right now we include 18 year olds as youth. Which is abnormal in the market. Typically once they're 18. They are classified as an adult. but some places across the market for an outdoor pool like Scott Carpenter, you go with the family. They're charging even for anyone over 6 months old. So, looking at how we classify youth and what we charge for is something that we could certainly consider as far as that definition, and then figuring out what that level of subsidy should be for youth. It could be altered as well.

[173:11] You guys are gonna have all of this to present in August. The hope is that you all are giving feedback on. If there's anything you see that you think is. And like, Yeah, I mean, our hope tonight is that you're helping to narrow it down a little bit. This is why we recommended a study session in August so that it would be the sole focus of the meeting. And then the last one Megan, I think you're gonna talk about some of the market. And so these are just a little bit more. Like small little things in the market. Okay? So 1st drop in entries. You probably have seen a lot of a lot of gyms start charging more for a drop in entry to increase past sales. So that's certainly something we can consider municipalities still traditionally offer drop in rates.

[174:08] We've historically charged the drop in rate, at least at the 90% plus cost recovery rate. So if we do, if we keep the drop in rate at a at a hundred percent cost recovery or 90% cost recovery, it does need to increase substantially. We could also make a decision that, hey, we wanna we really wanna push our punch passes that don't expire and we could look at doing more of the gym model, which is more of a private industry. That's just for consideration. For Punch passes. We have heard from the community that people prefer punch passes, having access to everything. Additionally, if you start offering a different punch, pass for Scott Carpenter and the reservoir and the facilities, and they're not all the same price and the same access. It gets really confusing. So that's something that you know, we'd probably recommend that we would want to

[175:00] have our punch passes be aligned with an all in type of pass which might impact its affordability compared to other pass options. But it's certainly, you know, something we'd love your feedback on. And then finally, out of over 60 market comparisons. Boulder is the only municipality allowing 8 adults or seniors and unlimited use on household passes. Most organizations limit household passes to 2 adults and 2 youth with the ability to add members at a discounted rate. And so that's just like a really small kind of market alignment, where, instead of, you know, a a household of 10 people paying 1.6 of the adult annual rate, which is what it is right now. You know, maybe we clean that up just a little while still ensuring there's a good amount of access, especially knowing that our financial aid passes currently are are free. Equity, how we consider that. And you know, could could be a little bit. We don't have to worry about it as much, since we're already giving free passes to the people who really need it. Those are kind of the small market alignment things we want some feedback on.

[176:09] Alright. So this is the end of that section. And again, any initial thoughts on discounting financial aid. How we set up our passes. That you heard that resonated? Or you said they don't do that. Yeah. Is there another section? Or is that the last section? Okay, that's it's a 3rd party vendor. Say, you know, one of those contracts that you have. You really don't have much freedom to change them now. So silver sneakers, for example, will be renegotiated. In the spring of 26, however, they historically have not budged, and the the amount they reimburse is fractions of what our daily fees actually are. And we don't normally have a very strong negotiating position with them. And that's very true across other communities. And now we've started to see some communities starting to move away from partnering with them. But they've maintained negotiations with other vendors who have a more favorable negotiation position. So the options are kind of limited. Move to go to Louisville or

[177:17] see if we can negotiate. But that's you know, not optimistic that that would happen. So we would propose that it stays in place through 26, based on the current state of our existing contracts. I just think, it's an important note that our our 60 plus population is the fasting, growing deaf and demographic. We want and value our Asian community to Asian place. And it's this competing tension where. So it's also the most highly subsidized service we're providing. Right? So it is. I mean, we we need more time to figure something out? The answer can't be just cut it off. That would not serve our community well, and the answer can't be continue, as is because we can't afford it. So are there. Other municipalities around the country

[178:04] are kind of leaning this challenge. How to manage it? Well, there's certainly like the Denver option right which they just give residents that are seniors or youth free access right? But you have to have funding for that right. And so that would take that takes away your need to negotiate with. Some of these organizations. But I mean a couple of things that are like low hanging fruit that we could do is we could limit what locations if the point of the 3rd party memberships is to create access for lifelong health and wellness. Well, maybe that's really core to what our Rec. Centers do, but isn't core to what the boulder reservoir does. Maybe it's not quarter Scott Carpenter, but maybe it is court spurs. I don't know right? And so I think that's those are. Those are easier things for us to negotiate in or out of a contract is location. Certainly it would be great if we had a a drop dead like this is when we walk away. It. It is hard in those conversations to to walk away?

[179:03] Cause you want people to have access to things kind of following up with Yvonne's question, are there case studies of cities around the Us that you can model after you were saying, we're very unique. I think we're unique in a lot of ways. There are several communities throughout Colorado that have funding that's at a much higher level for recreation programs. So I'm not sure who mentioned it earlier. But taxpayers, a lot of taxpayers think that, and it was probably Allie that what their taxes should go for should pay for everything it should pay for their access to the Rec. Centers. It should pay for everything and the bottom line here it doesn't. And most communities it doesn't. Most communities have to generate revenue just like we do, but they're all at different levels. And so we are a little bit unique. And I think we're being as strategic as we can and and flexible. But I do think things like a sliding scale for financial aid. Things like looking at our subsidy levels or discounts

[180:02] are gonna be really important decisions that have to have to be made because I think those that can pay that have the resources to pay. They should be paying I think everyone would agree on that. But it's, I think. really tough. Right now. I think you're going in the right direction and everything I like the bundling of the past. I like all the things as long as you don't triple the cost like somebody like Michael, who only uses North Boulder wreck. If you're 3. If your 3 Rec center tasks is gonna triple in cost, because now you got 3 rec centers, I disagree. But but I I like the concept of the thing, and I think it's nice to be able to get people to move around a little bit, you know, like maybe there, if they have access to all 3. Maybe there's something interesting happening at East Polar. They wouldn't normally do so. That enhances your ability to program across the whole all of the infrastructure, which is kind of cool. well, it might be helpful to know that I think part of this conversation is like for the Rec center memberships. I I like. Certainly it's our goal to increase where we are. Currently, I don't know until we do the math on everything, what it actually looks like, but for ever. Someone having access to everything absolutely that has to go up. I don't know by how much.

[181:22] Yeah. So I think it's really fascinating. And I think it gives you a lot of different options to to to work within the community and spread things around. Right? You know, golf course. I think those costs should increase. For sure. the the reservoir. I don't go there anymore, because I already think it's too expensive to go in with my family. So just as a side note. and I guess I think it's cool. I think it's and you can really market it well and kind of get parks and work out there for something that's pretty neat. So great. Yeah. would it be possible, given the amount of information we're gonna process in August to get

[182:01] get the information a day or 2 earlier than what we currently get currently good stuff. So that's why you have this packet. Now. Because most of that information is already in there. If anything, we're gonna trim, how much you of it you need to look at. But all of the data all of the high level ideas are in there already. So you have access to that. And so we'll we'll trim it so that you can narrow your focus in August. But I I, unless you've asked for specific data or information that we didn't already provide, I don't think we're adding a whole lot of cost. and our team has been working hard on this for the last couple of months, and and assuming that you would be supportive of this conversation tonight, because we we know something needs to change a little bit with how we do this. So we'll, we'll be ready for you, and we'll get it to you as soon as we can before that next meeting. Great appreciate it. I know you guys are super busy. So

[183:06] my computer died. So I don't have. The next item is a matter from the department. Members of the prab had requested an overview of the city's response to the symptoms of homelessness and park through our safe and manage public spaces program. I have a 13 slide overview. It is for information only the prep has. It's not around homelessness, strategy. That is the purview of city council. It's not the. And so it is on the board. If you would like that to happen tonight, or recognizing. It's 9 0. 4, and you still have matters from the board. It can be recalnered. And so that's up to you. And it's just an overview of the program correct. Does anybody have any? Would you like to push it, or would you want to push it? You can go down shit. They can push it for sure. We could probably do that next month right? No, not next month. Next month. I think we're probably pretty full. I mean, we can put it at the end of the study session right? Like knowing that. That's the focus

[184:04] I can send you all the Powerpoint. Yeah, alright, let's push. That's a good plan, and who asked for that. It came out of a conversation we had back in probably January but there! There was a lot of interest from the grab at that time, just to learn more about. Obviously, we have a lot of new faces since then. so, just to be clear, it's not solely a study session in August. Jackson's reminding me we're going to be bringing you forward budget items. You've hopefully discussed those a ton. And so it's a simple action item. And then the breadth of the meeting. We'd love to focus just on the fees. And so we're that's what we're clearing the decks of other other conversations. We're not doing the Cip tour. and I'll just know you know these overviews. There's a lot of things that come across for calendars. The teams like we want prep to know about this thing. We want prep to know about this thing. And the calendar often doesn't allow it. I think this item has moved several times because it's just. It's hard.

[185:06] But it would be important for you all to talk about these meeting dates that are on your. So if you use the ribbons, or go to the very last page of your packet, your matter from the board, there's some conflicts with several of your meetings, and we'd like to to talk about it now, because both for the community and our planning, it's helpful. So, as the community member mentioned earlier. Monday, September 20. Second is the 4th Monday. That is the 1st day of Rosh Hashanah. Which is A high holy day for the Jewish faith. November 24th is the start of the Thanksgiving break, and very often prep. Will recalner that Thanksgiving meeting. Sometimes they don't. It depends. And then December 20 second. Similarly, it's the end of Hanukkah. It's this falls over the holiday break, and so we could take those month by month. And get first, st I would recommend you. Pull. Do you want to consider a reschedule? And if you do.

[186:02] it is most often easiest like September. By fate has 5 Mondays. You could just default to the 5th Monday in in September, so I'll give it to the board now, having set that up and so, 9 22 being Rosh Hashanah, there is 9 29. That is the 5th Monday, which is clear of it appears any sort of holidays. I would like to motion that we move the meeting on 9 from 9, 22 to 9, 29. Second. any. All those in favor. Hi, okay, 9, 22 goes to 9, 29, just before you continue, Jenny. It is Goose Day. I mean, it is a holiday. Okay? Well, I think that we'll just revere the goose that day. We'll do a little extra something for the goose and do it on 9, 29. Thank you, Allie perfect!

[187:07] And then, let's look at November 24th beginning of the Thanksgiving holiday. I agree that. see. And then what was the 3rd one? So we're going to December 20, second, December 20, second 1st day of Christmas break. What is on the agenda? Do we do? We have any agenda items fully calendared out that far. We certainly will have some cip projects. let me just get to something. I believe last year we skipped. Did we skip a December? We have not every year. But sometimes we consolidate items into November, is it? Last year we didn't have a December meeting? no, I would say that we move? No, we move November to December first, st and then skip the December meeting for the holiday break would be my suggestion. If we haven't really agenda anything right now. I just looked out. So we have.

[188:14] We wanted to in November. We all have a schematic design for Barker Park. and that doesn't. That could be, I mean so of the items that are on the November calendar, talking to you about nature everywhere and our work with not Unicef, that is, child friendly cities. It is completely escaped me. The organization that that is part of it through. Nope, well, they're a partner in it, obviously. But It's a c. Unesco. Is that what you said? No, this is a nationwide effort of which we are a pilot city to show how you can connect children's nature. The governing body is escaping me, and we're going to partner that with the conversation on Barker Park. That's the park at 15 and

[189:03] time that is going to be reveled. We wanted a community member had asked that you all calendar and update on our historic places plan and so that is calendared for December. It is not time sensitive. neither. so the only thing that is time sensitive. In November, December is launching nature everywhere in the Barker Park, so you could have one meeting in those 2 months. If you all design it will likely mean busier meetings October, November, and January, but based on what I'm seeing here. I think it's feasible. Didn't team. What am I missing? We need to meet by December 1st for city manager role for crab needs to meet. We would just want the final draft in front of them before going through this. It doesn't require their formal approval, though the fee schedule. Isn't that September? Didn't we say? October. September will be the membership structure? October would be the introduction of the fee schedule.

[190:05] So a lot of the fees, you would have basically finalized and approved in September, associated with all of our memberships and whatnot fees for just like the golf course, increasing those fees. That would be later. If we're not changing any of the structure, it's just the increase. Oh, but you've got that on the November meeting. Okay. so I think we're fine. So then, I think that we should move the November 24th meeting, either to December 1st or December 8th I like the 8.th Personally, just in case anybody is traveling home from Thanksgiving break and can't make it on the first.st Does anybody have any opinions on the 8th or the 1.st 1st of all, is everybody okay with one meeting between November and December? Or do you have any? Does anybody have any comments or issues there. I'm good with it, and I also would prefer the 8.th I have a reservation. I just feel like

[191:06] we're obviously in the middle of a very difficult conversation right now. We don't know what other difficult conversations may arise in the next several months, I think in here it's also to a corner now to commit to one meeting instead of 2 is a bit risky. My preference would be. Let's move the November meeting up a week, leave the December meeting calendar, and if we can cancel it later, let's cancel it later. I would agree with that. But let's move the December meeting. Yeah, yes, of course, we don't need to be internally so. Move them both up a week. That is my preference. Well, then, you were then we fall on the 1st day of Hanukkah on the December 15.th If that is this, is it that could be a potential issue for December, we could still put it there and then decide to do with it. Yeah. And I think you know, we've canceled any last year. Maybe there's a chance to cancel again this year. Moving up in November support the fee schedule conversation. So that is definitely better for us.

[192:03] Respect everyone's religion, of course, but Hanukkah is not the same as Rosha Alright, so I motion that we move the November meeting to November 17, th and move the December meeting to the 15th of December. Is there a second second all in favor. Raise your hand. and the September meeting to the 29th and the September meeting to the 29.th Great. I don't think those need formal action, so I think, if you all agree. So September is going out. The 5th November and December are both moving up a week. September is going to the 9 39. We'll have updated calendar invites out to you tomorrow.

[193:03] Alright, and then. So then from there, is there any other matters from the board or crab matters, any of the crab matters. Everybody's looking. Thank you, everybody, for all of your commitment.