April 27, 2026 — Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Regular Meeting

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[0:11] All right, Clarissa, it is 6 o'clock. All Pratt members are here. Do you want to let members of the public into the meeting? >> Yes, and recording has begun. >> Okay, recording has begun. Great. Thank you. Okay, thanks everyone for joining us tonight. We have a quorum of PRAB members present, so I will officially call the meeting to order. This is the first PRAB meeting following the city council appointment. So tonight, we have two items that we only do once per year and every April. Number one, we're welcoming and swearing in our newest PRA members, and two, we are electing new PRAB officers. We will now begin the induction of our new PRAB board members. I will hand it over to Clarissa to begin. >> After the oath of office is read to you,

[1:02] please respond by saying, "I affirm." We'll begin with Channing. So, if you'll want to stand up and put your right hand up, please. I, Channing Benson, do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States of America and of the State of Colorado and the charter and ordinances of the city of Boulder, and faithfully perform the duties of the office of a member of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, which I am about to enter. >> I affirm. >> Thank you. All right. and Dana, if you could stand and put your right hand up and respond. I affirm after I read this, please. I, Dana Reyes, do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States of America and of the state of Colorado and the charter and ordinances of the city of Boulder and faithfully perform the duties of the office of a member of the parks and recreation advisory board, which I'm about to enter.

[2:02] She stated, "I affirm for the record." >> Okay. Welcome to Channing and Dana. We appreciate you guys applying and being willing to volunteer for the city in this capacity. We're really excited to have you on the board. Um, so let's go around real quick and introduce ourselves. Uh, if you can give your name, we'll all we'll all do this. We'll start with Channing at this end. Um, we'll start with your name, your pronouns, how long um, you've been on PRAB or working with the city and your favorite park facility in Boulder. >> Channing Benson, he him. As you saw, I've been on PR for about a minute now. And, um, Valmont Park. I play ultimate frisbee at Valmont Park. So, that's that's my jam. >> Kira Seagull. uh she her um so it's a year now being on prep. Wow, who would

[3:02] have thought? Uh so North Boulder Park. Uh I mean, you know, how could that not be number one? Um but also, uh I love playing pickle ball at like a bunch of different courts, including Chiakqua, I think, is a very unique place to play pickle ball. Mike Shriner, he him. I've been on Pr for a year, I think. And uh my favorite park is North Boulder Park. >> Um Jenny Robbins. She her. Uh and my I've been on PREAB. I'm going on my third year on PRB and my favorite park is Coot Lake. Um Andrew Bernstein. Uh he him. And my feelings about the parks have evolved in my time, but presently my favorite park is Evan G. Fine. I love how it brings so many different parts of the community together. >> Ivonne Castillo, she her I have been on PRAB for about a year now and my

[4:02] favorite I guess park would be Harlo Plats and the SBRC South Buller Rec Center. My name is Dana Reese. I'm new to PB. I would say my favorite park would be Harlo Platz and South Bould Direction. All right, thanks everybody and welcome again. We look forward to working with you. All right, now it's time to elect our PRAB officers. Clarissa, can you please announce the uh nominations for chair? >> We have two nominations on the table for Bernie for chair. Would anyone like to make any additional nominations for chair? Would anyone like to make a motion to close nominations for chair? >> I'll move. >> Very good. Would anybody like to second this motion?

[5:00] >> Second. >> Very good. All in favor, please raise your hand. All right. Unanimous. None opposed. Hearing no opposition. The motion passes and nominations for chair are now closed. Would the candidate like to say a few words? >> Uh just briefly, I'll I realized I forgot to say earlier this is the start of my fourth year on Pr. Um it's been wonderful to be part of this body for the last last three years. I'm looking forward to um the the next year and the year beyond that. Um uh I've been the vice chair for the last two years. It's been great to work with Alli on setting agenda and work with uh the rest of the staff and also work with the current members of the board, the new members and and a lot of past members. And I'm looking forward to continuing to do all of that if you all uh elect me to be your chair. Um yeah, that's all. Thank you. Oops. Is there any further discussion before we officially take a roll call

[6:00] vote? Okay, no discussion. Clarissa, if you could please facilitate the roll call vote. >> Bernie. >> And board members, you can respond with yay or nay. >> Yay. >> And please turn your um microphone on when you >> Yay. >> Channing. >> Yay. >> Dana, >> yay. >> Jenny, >> yay. >> Kira, >> yay. >> Michael, >> yay. >> Any yay. All right, there is one nominee and the vote is unanimous. Bernie is elected as chair and I'm going to pass it to Bernie to take over the rest of the meeting. Yay. >> All right, thanks everybody. Um, let's see where are we? Okay, so we are going to proceed with electing vice chair. Um, Claire, do we have any nominations for vice chair? >> We have a nomination on the table for Jenny for vice chair.

[7:01] Okay, wonderful. Uh, any other nominations at this time? Okay, seeing none, I will move that we close the nomination period for vice chair. May I have such a motion? Thank you, Michael. Any seconds? Thank you. Um, let's vote on the motion. All in favor of closing nominations for vice chair, please uh say I or raise your hand. Great. Wonderful. Unanimous. Um, Jenny, would you like to say a few words? Um, thank you for uh saying yay and raising your hand for me. I'm really looking forward to be vice chair. I've really enjoyed being chair of Pr and I look forward to filling in anytime that Bernie needs some help. Um, this is a great board. It's a great staff and um I'm looking forward to facilitating uh any upcoming meetings needed and continuing on as a member for the next three years. Thank you all. Okay, thanks Jenny. Uh, we'll do a

[8:02] Well, sorry. Is there any discussion before we vote about Jenny's nomination? Okay, seeing >> Oh, just want to thank both of you. Um, I know it's it extra effort um to be to come prepared for every single meeting um and to organize it and thank you so much for the work that you've done, Jenny, as chair um and excited that you're continuing on as vice chair. >> Any other discussion? Okay. Uh, Clarissa, would you please facilitate the vote? >> Bernie, >> I. >> Channing >> I, >> Dana, >> I, >> Jenny, >> I, >> Kira, >> I, >> Michael, >> I, >> and Ibon. >> Hi. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Uh, thank you very much. Jenny is elected vice chair. Um, thank you everyone for participating in that process. Uh thank you members of the public for bearing with us while we do our annual housekeeping. Um with that we

[9:00] can move to the approval of the agenda. Would anyone like to make a motion to approve the agenda? >> Motion. >> May I have a second? >> Thank you. Um let's see. Okay. So now we are going to discuss that motion. Uh do we have any questions about the agenda or any points of discussion on the agenda itself? Okay. Uh, seeing none, we can vote on the motion to approve the agenda. All in favor of approving, please say raise your hand or say I. Okay. Looks like it's unanimous. Uh, so we will move forward. Um, okay. So, uh, let's jump to future board items and tours. Ally, please. >> Good evening, members of the Pratt. I'm Ally Rhodess and I serve as director of parks and recreation for the city of Boulder. I'll echo curros thanks that um this role you all are fulfilling is critical. We consult with the parks and recreation advisory board every single

[10:01] month on matters happening across um an extensive parks and recreation system. You make our work better. You make it stronger. And we're really grateful for the time you put in to ask us uh construction qu constructive questions to give us your feedback. And I recognize it's all during time when you could be doing something else and we're very grateful. So during this portion of the item is where I just preview uh your upcoming agenda. We also often will highlight events happening in the department or with city council or other boards. I don't read it all to you, but I do tend to highlight things you might want to know. Um, on May 14th, city council will be discussing um, uh, 2026 financial forecast and they will also be discussing potential ballot items for 2026. This is the next step in several conversations that have been going on related to our facilities investment and other needs across the city. And I wanted to highlight that um, the April 9th city council study session, that study session summary, that official

[11:01] version was not yet complete. it'll be in their May 7th packet. So, at your May meeting, we'll give you a summary of the April 9th city council study session. We will not be able to turn around a summary from the May 14th meeting. Your May meeting, I want to highlight, is a week earlier, so that we're not meeting on the Memorial Day holiday. Uh I hope you all are out what enjoying what I consider as Boulder's best weekend. Our department is home to the Boulder Creek Festival. Um the Boulder Boulder 10K also runs through many of our park sites. our team will be busy opening outdoor pools. So, Memorial Day is a big one and I'm glad that PRA is not meeting that day. We'll be quite busy, but we'll see you the week before. I also want to highlight it says midJune that city council meeting for the long-term financial strategy and ballot measures that is happening on Thursday, June 25th, which is their last meeting before their summer recess. Um, the only thing I just want to highlight is an upcoming action item. At your June meeting, you'll do one of the things that um PRA

[12:00] has the honor to do, and that's support park naming. So, tonight you're going to hear an overview of the civic area park naming process. In May, you'll discuss the naming finalist, and then your feedback will inform the action that you take in June. That's what I got, Mr. Chair. >> Okay. No, thanks, Ellie. Um see, okay. So, okay. Jenny has some discussion. Um, and if anyone else would like to speak, that would be helpful. And as a reminder for uh Dana and and Channing, this is a plan as of today. Um, if there are other items that you want to see added to future agendas, you can let myself or Jenny know and we will bring that to our agenda setting meeting, which happens typically later this week. Um, and you can bring those up now or you can save them for items from the board, which happens at the end of our agenda. Um, so Jen, >> I just wanted to make a note on a potential future board item that I'd like to discuss at the agenda meeting, um, which is the ball fields. I wanted

[13:00] just to see if we could get an update on, um, the status of what's happening with the purchase of that. And just for clarification, you're referring to the Iris ball fields. >> The Iris ball fields. Yes. Not all the ball fields, just those specific >> all the ball fields. Uh, I will make a note of that and we can discuss that at agenda setting. what timing might be appropriate and what item we might have. >> Okay, thank you. >> Okay, any other questions about future items? >> Yeah, I'm going to point one thing out. Um, we made a change uh or staff made a change at my agenda's request to the consent agenda and we can discuss it at that portion of the agenda. I just want to point it out to you now. If you look at page, sorry I'm scrolling. If you look at page 10 of the packet where we know never mind page 13 of the packet where we have um construction overviews we've added a column for next prep touches. So if you are curious about when a project is coming back before us you can look there

[14:01] each in each month's packet and see when we are expected to see it again. Um if you're not sure about why something is in Q3 versus Q2 uh that's a question you should bring to to myself and Jenny or staff. Um and that just so you all know that this table on on page 13 helps to guide future board tours and items. Um with that we can move Oh, Jenny, go ahead. >> Sorry. Um I also wanted to ask Ally because part of that conversation I think that what's on page what Bernie was just referring to with the pre milestones overview of major projects. I also noticed uh within the consent agenda there is like a courts update and um east boulder community park update. Is that part of what we talked about or is that standard? >> Both. >> Okay. >> Um and we can talk about it more during the consent agenda. Actually, we're t so and I'm going to be in for the newer board members. So, as Jenny and Bernie are talking about, we develop this agenda collaboratively. So I would say

[15:01] 90% of the PRAB's work is driven by the staff work plan driven by items that benefit from your input and your advice either because it's part of your your role is outlined in the city's charter which is our constitution or because it's part of the advisory nature also is spelled out in the charter. And so a lot of that is the planning work. We don't consult you on a lot of operations because we're out there just doing the work and that's about 85% of what we do. we will consult you on major policy changes such as a service level change at a facility or um across maintenance. And so, uh Jenny and Bernie had highlighted that sometimes when we go into the heads down work of design and PRA doesn't hear about a project for months, you're left wondering what's going on or where that's at. And so you these updates are intended and some of these projects are in design to let you know more of the status where they're at. And um I think it's just fleshing out a little more of what we had been doing with projects that are in flight.

[16:01] >> Thank you. >> Does anyone else have any questions about um about this portion of the agenda? >> Okay. Uh so let's move forward into public participation. Um now it's time for public participation. This portion of the meeting is for members of the public to communicate ideas and concerns uh to us regarding parks and recreation matters. um for which a public hearing is not scheduled later in the meeting. Uh there are no public schedule public hearings tonight. So participation will happen now. Um the public during this time the public is encouraged to comment on the need for parks and recreation programs facilities as you all perceive them. All speakers are limited to three minutes. Depending on the nature of your matter, you may or may not receive response from the board or staff after you speak um or at the end of the public participation period. Uh we however whether we respond or not are always listening and appreciative of your time to come here this evening to speak with us and uh and your feedback. Um clarissa could you please present

[17:00] additional guidelines? >> Yes. The city will enforce the rules of decorum found in the Boulder Revised Code including participants are required to sign up to speak using the name they are commonly known by. Online participants must display their full name before speaking. Currently, only audio testimony is permitted online. No attendee shall disrupt, disturb, or impede the orderly conduct of any board meeting in a manner that obstructs the business of the meeting. This includes failing to obey any lawful order of the presiding officer to leave the meeting room or refrain from addressing the board. Only one person may speak at the podium at a time unless an accommodation, such as an interpreter, is required. All remarks and testimony shall be limited to matters related to Sydney business. No blocking the aisles in violation of the fire code in or in a way that obstructs the vision or audio of other audience members. No signs or flags are permitted in the meeting room except for one per person that's no larger than 11 by 17 in and held no

[18:00] higher than the person's face. We ask that you not affix items to the podium, deis, walls, or other surfaces. No participant shall make threats or use other forms of intimidation against any person. Obscinity, other epithets based on race, gender, or religion, and any speech or behavior that disrupts or impedes the meeting will not be tolerated. Inerson participants are asked to refrain from expressing support or disagreement verbally or with sounds such as applause or snapping with the exception of declarations. Traditionally, support is shown through American Sign Language, applause, or jazz hands. And tonight, our first public participant is Trish Mzer. And please turn the microphone on once it's red. There you go. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you all. I'm Trish Shimser and I'm very glad to be here.

[19:00] Thank you for the time to listen. I appreciate it. Um, one thing I'd like you to know about me is I am a very strong community supporter. I like to spend a lot of energy. I'm currently a volunteer ranger for the Boulder County Parks. Um, I'm a member of Bike Boulder. We work very hard to educate our citizens and get get bikes registered, which is something that helps with recoveries. Um, and also we're launching the second annual ever bike valet at the farmers market starting this coming Saturday. So I work closely with shared paths on that initiative. It's actually through that week um I'm sorry through that work with the bike valet that um I have been on the creek path recently and frankly I'm going to speak from the heart a little bit. I've been shocked I haven't been down around the library on the creek path. I hadn't been riding my bike as much. I got a new ebike, so I'm out there now and patrolling out in the county. Um, but so many things have

[20:02] changed since I was last in this area. So, the first week in April, I was on the creek path across from the library and I found a bike carcass. So, I thought, "Oh, great. I guess I'm going to have to pick this up and take it to the police." And then I looked and saw a charcoal grill laying on the side. And then I saw a lot of campers. And about that time, an ambassador came up and I talked to him a little while and he was very kind and he told me yes, that smell in the air was meth and that people were smoking meth at 10 in the morning and that folks were actually embedded right there in that area. He kindly took away the bike carcass and um the charcoal grill which I felt safer with all the fires. Um, so I sent you all a next door post because over the last three weeks I've reported camping along the Boulder Creek path between the library and over as far as the new playground a bunch of times. I was told that there should not be any delay around the Boulder Creek

[21:01] path in removing camps. Yet in the Boulder International Peace Center Peace Garden, um, there are embedded campers. They never ever leave. They've staked out the territory and between the dogs and the meth smoke and the bikes that go back and forth there. I have great concerns about all the activities that are occurring. From the next door post, there's about 7,700 other people recently that are concerned about it as well. And um the city workers that I've talked to and city staff have actually admitted that they meet every Friday with the Boulder Police, with the rangers, etc. and frankly they don't know what to do. Um there's a lot of aggression in that area and I don't feel that it's safe for families. So I wanted to share that with you and really hope that others can take a look at this. Thank you very much. >> All right. Thank you.

[22:04] >> Thank you. Next up is Judith Dak. Good evening once again. I come here as a Yimi who lives right on North Boulder Park, your favorite park here in Michael and mine too and my neighbors who are here. And I'm a Yimi because I say yes to what's happening in my backyard. And I don't want to see any of it ruined. I don't want to see um any wasted money because you see while the city planners have been wonderful in responding to our comments uh last uh at the end of the year there's still this issue of these two new ball fields and no one can answer why we need two new ball fields our ball fields are perfectly located like when I have asked one of the planners he said well it's best practice

[23:01] ice now to turn them back to back to each other and but like best practice like what for who for the people who use North Boulder Park it's not the best practice because this will create hundreds of feet of chain link fencing in a row right now we have a big space between our chain link fencing so our park feels open and is very functional plus it's just a waste of money you know like and The planner didn't know how much it cost, but I've done a little research and I can assure you that it'll be a waste of like a half a million dollars. And if it doesn't cost half a million, it's about a quarter of a million. So anyway, you know, why don't we give our police a raise so that we can attend to what the previous speaker spoke to or what about all the people from East Boulder Wreck last month who um need funding for that park? We don't need the these ball fields. So, please

[24:00] um ask keep asking please keep asking parks and wreck why you want to do new ball fields. It will be so there's one little area that it will be so inexpensive to uh remedy. Also, there's this issue of making the cedar sidewalk. See, we walk on Cedar Avenue from one from the um west side to the east side. like hundred people at least a day even in the winter walk on that sidewalk. And they're to do these two new ball fields. They're changing that sidewalk to add like it looks to me about a third about 33% more longer of a sidewalk. Well, we don't need that either. You know, we all like to cross it right at Cedar, right where it is from one side to the other. So, um, yeah, I just, uh, really hope that you will look at this closely because there is a new plan that's

[25:00] better than the one that was at the end of 2025. And I do appreciate our planners making those changes. Thank you. >> Okay. Thanks, Judith. >> Next up is Karen Phillips. Good evening. My name is Karen Phillips and I'm also here to speak about North Boulder Park. I've lived close to the park for over 50 years. I was first a renter for about 16 years, a couple blocks away, and since become a homeowner. And I'm here to reiterate some of what Judith said, but basically to just tell you that neighbors are continuing to follow the the changes in the plans as they develop. And we ask you, as Judith said, to please keep an eye on the necessity for moving ball

[26:01] fields. We don't think it's necessary to move any ball fields. We don't think it's necessary to change their shape. So we are very concerned about overdevelopment of North Boulder Park and with a lot of community input. The planners have been responsive. The remaining issues are those ball fields. Would hate to see unnecessary expense. We love North Boulder Park so much the way it is. and volleyball players. Those of you who know and love Boulder, North Boulder Park, may have noticed that the volleyball players are getting closer and closer to the west side. Um, that's existing use and the ball fields are used sometimes. We love the ball fields. We just don't want to see you spend extra money. Please put that money towards South Boulder Rec Center. Thank you. >> Uh, thank you, Karen. Next is Wendy Snider.

[27:09] Okay, just a few more things. Um, so with the Balsam Alpine project, which is uh affecting those of us who live in the area, the Park Alley Road is a wreck. It is filled with potholes. And when I try to uh remedy this myself, there is a division of the city that patches potholes, but we need it completely repaved. It's like people forgot, I guess, that with the um closure of Alpine that people would be rerouted through our park alley. Like that's where all our trash cans are. That's where some of us access our garages and driveways. And it is a wreck. and everybody's saying it's not my it's not in our budget or it's not part of our plan. So I don't know maybe you can look into that. Um did you >> I'm just going to say Judith

[28:01] transportation is outside of our purview. >> Okay. So what do we do because like they're like >> you got two minutes if you want to keep talking to us about park stuff we'd love to listen. >> Okay. So also um we you know we do think that the playground needs to be renovated and that the pavilion needs to be renovated. There's also this issue of attracting teens and what we find is that every summer when school ends the park is filled with teens late into the night. They set off fireworks. They caused three fires last summer. So I think that we need to look at also why we what are we attracting? who are we attracting and what are are they actually going to do the programming that we're people are hoping to offer. Thank you. I'll seed my time. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Next is Christine Brascoll.

[29:02] >> Hi. Um thanks for the opportunity to speak. Uh uh two months ago, I'm sure with the best of intentions, Ally uh sorry, the department head of parks and wreck had proposed that you guys change your rules on public comment to impose the same restrictions on public comment that city council has. >> I'm sorry to interrupt. Clarissa, can you please start the timer? >> To impose the same restrictions on public comment that city council has. I'm sure this was the best of intentions which is why and seems very reasonable which is why you guys had informally agreed to that um those limits. Uh but I want to explain to you why it's actually not um reasonable and why I urge you not to do this. So first of all uh there are 19 citizen boards in Boulder. Not one other board has done this. Not one. And not only that, but that not one has imposed a limit on the number of of public commenters at these meetings. Not

[30:01] one has imposed a limit on the total time for all public comment. Uh there are three other boards that like PRAB do have uh uh limits per person. Of those three other boards, there's the planning board. The planning board also these are all by the way three three minute limits. Uh the planning board has a three-minute limit per person. And this is the most strict one of all the boards in which they allow the chair at the chair's discre discretion to reduce um the per person time if there are more than 15 commenters. Somewhat similar to this. However, there's a really big difference. The planning board has three meetings per month, a total of 36 per year. Far different from the 11 we have here. I mean in theory 12, but it's never in December. Um and also too even with that it still starts at three minutes and it's only discretionary whether to go down and second of all does not have any limit on the number of public commenters nor on the total time.

[31:00] The second board that also has a limit is the open space board of trustees has a flat three minute limit just like um PRA but again even there uh has a minimum of 12 meetings a year and with an option for on their two meetings per month not just so it's the uh let me see what it is it's the first sorry second Wednesday of every month and optional fourth Wednesday so you're talking 12 to 24 meetings and even there it's only a three minute limit not two and also Alo there still no limit on the total um number of commenters nor on the total time limit for public comment whatsoever. Um and then there's the um bon board of zoning adjustment that's actually quasi judicial hearings uh totally different not like here but even in that context they still actually shockingly even allow public comment even it's quasi quasi judicial and they're still three minutes um and then looking the biggest thing is actually council. So these are the limits that we're looking at that council has.

[32:00] However, council again totally different. Council has 40 48 meetings a year, 24 with public comment minimum. And of those, I mean that means their opportunity for comment is 960 minutes total versus here at most we're looking at 440 minutes total. I mean we would be if you guys do this, you would be in a category of your own unlike any other board in all three of these respects, all of these limits and unlike council. Thank you. Thank you. Next is Vicky Mo. >> Although she may be virtual. my time. >> Second thought, I um I appreciate this uh opportunity that all of you have been uh interested in finding out from the

[33:00] community, people living by the park, how that works for them, what it's like. Um, I'm also a proponent of I've been in the neighborhood on Seventh Street since 96 and love that park. I love the spontaneity. I love the openness. I love the access across the park. Um, I appreciate the city of Boulder now deciding that it's time to update the pavilion and some of the other the water issues that clearly exist there. I just I just uh would reiterate what everyone has been saying is just paying attention to those of us who are living by the park and also how we spend money. We all we all have to always look at our own budgets about how we spend money and what are the best uses for that money. So um

[34:01] thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you. Now we'll move on to our virtual speakers. First is Robert Bachelder. Hi, thank you for letting me speak tonight. Um, my name is Robert Bachel. Are you ready? Can you hear me? >> Yes, of course. >> Oh, you can't hear me? Okay. My name is Robert Bachelder. I'm from California. I'm a descendant of soldiers from the San Creek Massacre. My second and third greatgrandfather, Granville Berkeley Jr. and Senior, participated in the San Creek Massacre. They arrived in Boulder in 1863. Granville Berkeley Senior was a prominent judge and lawyer as well as a captain in the US Calvary. Governor John

[35:01] Evans and Colonel John Chington with Granville Berkeley conspired to rid Boulder City of Chief White Analopee and the Cheyenne tribe who are intermaring with white American miners, settlers, farmers, as well as um they practice the philosophy of peaceful coexistence. Governor Evans and Colonel Chibington rushed to muster a 100-day recruits in August of 1864 to build Fort Chambers and practiced military maneuvers. The newly formed US Calvary Company D Boulder volunteers attacked White Analopee and the Cheyenne at what is now East Boulder Rec Center and Hogan Panost that will soon become Boulder Botanical Gardens on Cheyenne sacred land. The attack split the Cheyenne tribe with many headed north becoming northern Cheyenne and the rest

[36:00] including White Analopee moved to Sand Creek where Governor Evans and Colonel Chington promised safe passage, food, supplies, and peace. Instead, the US calvary under John Chington attacked the Cheyenne with 750 calvary and fort cannons as well um at Sand Creek, murdering 230 elderly and women and children, then raping women, mutilating and taking body parts as souvenirs. The message the massacre survivors fled to Oklahoma. Boulder city land was stolen by my grandfather, Granville Berkeley, Senior, and his wealthy associates. The Cheyenne were forced to leave land that had been their land for 200 years. Hogan Pan cost is sacred land because of where the genocide began in real time. The descendants of soldiers want to purchase

[37:01] Hogan Panost and develop the 19 acres in into Boulder Botanical Garden, a Cheyenne oriented park. The Cheyenne agree. We want to work with parks and recreation with the example uh they give at Scott Memorial Park uh Scott Carpenter Memorial Park. we received from the planners is too small to be practical. Boulder Botanical Gardens want to purchase Hogan Pan cost for the park but the planners who are working with us say tennis court stadium is already approved. We want to work with planners who who use page three of Boulder Valley. >> Thanks Robert. We appreciate your comment. >> Okay. >> Thank you Robert. >> Mhm. That's it.

[38:04] Next is Miss Meyers. All right. Sarah Myers, can you speak, please? >> Sorry. Can you hear me? >> Yes. Thank you. >> Wonderful. Hi, good evening everybody. Thank you so much for having me. Um, it's really an honor to spend time with you and I appreciate so much the work you're doing. I was actually the Landmarks board secretary back in 2000 to 2003. Um, and I've lived in Boulder since 97. I've been here a long time. I wanted to speak to you about the South Boulder Recreation Center. I live down the road from the recreation center. Um, and I've lived down in this h house for 16 years. I have um a son at Mesa who's a fifth grader. I'm currently in my bedroom while they're eating dinner and I'm glad to be here for a minute. Um I wanted to

[39:00] talk to you about uh renovating the rec center because I know there's been a lot of discussion about it and about which one deserves more love um and more dollars. Um I think that the city's missing the mark by not investing more in the south boulder rec center compared with east and north. Um and I have a few points to make about that. Um, the first one is that and also that there's no sub community plan for South Boulder. You probably know that, but I have a feeling that may be part of why we're kind of maybe overlooked a little bit in this effort. So, my main points are first that the East Boulder Rec Center seems to be getting all the attention. Um, and it's creating, I think, a false idea that that that is that they are the most deserving. And I feel like that's a self-fulfilling prophecy. and there's just kind of a there's momentum towards east getting more renovations. Um secondly, the facilities at SOBO really get heavily used. Um someone could argue that it serves the widest swath of Boulderites actually when you break it down. Um there are people that work from

[40:00] home like myself. Um many seniors use it including from communities on Table Mesa and Gillespie drives. Students from six schools are using the South Boulder Rec Center and you know which which they are. I'm sure Fairview, Southern Hills, Mesa, Bear Creek, Summit, and Community Monasuri. Um, my own son meets friends there after school um to play basketball because it's a safe, accessible place. And then, of course, Fairview swim team uses it. Um, and I also say that um, South Boulder, we really epitomize the idea of a walkable 15minute neighborhood, which is a city goal. So, I'm wondering why don't we augment the trend that we already have of people using walking to places in South Boulder by improving our rec center rather than improving a different one. Um, I want you to remember that seniors who use East Boulder generally are going there by motorized vehicle. So, if they're already driving there, why not have them drive over to South Boulder Rec Center and put a senior center at South Boulder

[41:00] Recre so that the people who are already availing themselves of it can continue to do that. plus seniors would have a lovely new facility. Um, and so yeah, that's quick. Um, but I really do feel like it's worth considering again South Boulder getting more resources and attention for um what's already a well-used place and um to uh remember how many students are utilizing it. Just so many. >> All right, thank you so much for your comment. Thank you. Next is Lynn Seagull. Um, it seems like it would be considerate to say the next three people that are coming up so you don't suddenly get it shoved on you. I can tell that most of you don't go to city council meetings or you'd already know this.

[42:00] Um, I guess I just expect that everyone else >> is like me and follows, you know, five city boards consistently and city council and Israel Palestine and municipalization and CU South and everything else. But this is a a multidisciplinary community, shall I say? especially we understand this because we are a university town. So I'd like to see I guess a little broader view of things. Um and so far as having you sign up ahead of time like the person that spoke earlier, you're the only board that I have to sign up for, send an email to. Like what's that about? Um I'd like to see more iteration. the it to me it seems the chair tonight just thank you bye you know that doesn't seem like really

[43:01] authentically wanting to hear what your public has to say and very little response after any of these boards or city council to anything that people bring up and why life's short you know that maybe I'm from the west coast and I don't understand. You know, I've been here since ' 87 and I still don't understand. It seems like a wild and rough place to me. Um, the person that talked about Hogan Pankost, I really wish I could have heard what he wanted to say. He was just almost done. God forbid. It's like Aaron Brockett. You have to cut it off right at the exact second. No, you don't. you can be considerate to your public. It's easy and they'll enjoy it. Um, so far as North Boulder Park,

[44:00] I went down there one night when I heard I was coming home. I ride my bike all the time. I drive my car four times a year and I was coming home and heard this big ruckus. Went down there and there were fires lit. There were firecrackers. The police were enjoying the party. I had to I'm a 73 year old grandmother. I had to round up those rowdy kids and there were thousand of them probably a lot of them and some of them were budging up. I'm I I don't have electric bike. I just use my feet and they were budging up against me. They were threatening me. Now I love those kids. I love everybody. But people need to behave. Just like Rachel Friend, who's running for county treasurer and lied that I followed and shoved her at a candidates forum when I had a sign up that Jen Robbins uh and Sam Weaver want to sell your freedom

[45:02] to Excel Energy, you know, and I have a right to have a sign. The police informed me that I didn't. And I >> I apologize, but your time is up. Thank you. Thank you. Now we have Dr. Speedback. >> Can you hear me? Okay. >> Yes. Thank you. >> Uh, thank you for letting me speak. My name is Dr. Edward Spieac. I am the curator invertebrates at the St. zoo, director for the center for native pollinator conservation and also board member of the Boulder Botanic Garden. I am speaking on the proposed um installation of tennis courts next to the proposed botanical garden. I want to emphasize that often times we think of pollution in the form of water or air pollution. However, light and sound are

[46:02] just as severe for many species as well as one of the few that are easily dealt with. This site is a site of uh traditional Cheyenne um stories of Prebles meadow jumping mouse and the northern leopard frog. Prebles jumping mouse is a threatened species under the endangered species act. The northern leopard frog is a species of greatest conservation concern in Colorado. Additionally, there are three species of bumblebees that are being proposed for listing on the ESA found in Boulder. Light and sound pollution from the proposed uh tennis courts have detrimental effects on their life cycle, their daily lives, uh exposing them to additional predation, disrupting their reproduction. I'm asking that you look at the issue of these uh tennis courts in association with the use of this land for supporting these species of

[47:00] conservation concern as well as supporting the Keystone cultural site and Keystone cultural species of the northern Cheyenne. Traditional Northern Cheyenne Chief Philip Whiteitman Jr. uh is unfortunately was not able to make it tonight. uh he is at the UN uh with various meetings uh but he wanted to emphasize the importance of this site for the story and tradition of these uh animals for northern Cheyenne traditions as well as for just the conservation of these species in general. I have also emailed the board additional notes uh looking at the science behind light and sound pollution on the three different groups that I've mentioned the the frog the jumping mouse and also pollinators to give you more background which cannot be expressed necessarily in just 3 minutes. So, I hope you take into consideration that in developing the Boulder Botanical Garden, we really look at how the land is utilized and how we

[48:02] can really address simple pollution of light and sound in order to both help human health as well as the health of the environment and the animals that require it. Thank you. >> Thank you. Now, would anyone in person like to participate in public comment? Please raise your hand if so. >> I didn't have you signed up. I thought you were the other Robert that I called on. Apologies. Um, but I didn't have an email from you for advanced sign up. Did you send one? >> And he's still welcome to speak now. That's the opportunity you're opening up. So, you're welcome to come to the podium, sir. Hello. Uh, my name's Al Godman. I live on the northeast corner of 7th and Cedar, which means that

[49:03] my property backs to the west alley a north park and my south property is on Cedar Street. And I wanted to address three concerns. One of them is this need to relocate the ball fields because of the the um wetland that is formed there. 7 years ago the city came in there and replaced the sewer head. Obviously they didn't seal it correctly because after that is when that formed. I've lived on this park for 34 years. I know it very well. And so that's an easy fix. My second concern is turning the ball field around, the north one. You are now hitting into the playground,

[50:04] the gazebo, and the basketball court and pingpong. Why would you want to expose yourself to those types of lawsuits? The third one has to do with the walkway between Cedar and Ninth. You eliminate that walkway, it's going to become a path. There are so many people that walk that with their dogs. It's unbelievable. So, I hope you reconsider some of this because I've been to both planning meetings and all the concerns have fallen on deaf ears, but you really need to look at this. Thank you.

[51:02] Thank you so much. And would anyone else like to participate? Please raise your hand. If so, and anyone online, if you would like to participate, please raise your hand and ensure your full name is displayed. All right, it looks like nobody else is signing up. Thank you. >> Okay, thanks everybody. Uh we uh although I had to cut a few of you off, we do appreciate all of your comment and your time. Um, and of course you're always welcome to submit additional commentary to us via email uh between now and our next meeting. Um, I'll just note we will be discussing our rules for public participation during the matters from the board. So if the members of the committee who are concerned about that want to stick around for a couple hours, you're more than welcome to do so. Um, and we will well and if you don't want to stick around, you can you can watch the recording and see what we decided to do after that discussion. Um, let's see.

[52:00] Does anyone on the prep like would like to ask any clarifying questions of staff or make any comments about the public comments? I'll start with Channing Kira. >> Uh so over a year ago I volunteered with the point in time count. Um and I learned a lot about um camping uh at the Boulder Creek and throughout Boulder and sort of what the process is um from the city staff. uh to handle those types of situations. It's pretty complex issue. Uh and I also learned about uh using inquire boulder um to uh submit a you know uh and if you do see some uh type of like unauthorized camping, you can use that website to uh submit that sighting and then the the Boulder team will review. Um, but I was just wondering if staff wanted to just like uh give a little bit more detail around the the process um and how they handle

[53:02] these types of situations. >> Sure. And if the board likes, typically about once a year we bring this item, the safe and manage public spaces program as an overview. It's really beneficial for newer board members. um something our community it's it's not unique in communities across the country and trying to balance safe access to our parks for everyone. Um and I appreciate uh Trish coming to speak tonight. Thank you. I I recognize that um the conditions you shared are concerning and appreciate you coming to the Pratt tonight to share them. Um we work very hard to support vulnerable members of our community and to make sure our parks are safe for everyone and it's incredibly complicated for a whole lot of reasons. Um, I will note that we do typically almost every year there's a cycle in the spring as the weather warms up where you see a growth in camping and uh the the team works to manage that. The process of addressing illegal camping in the city of Boulder is very

[54:02] cautious and to ensure alignment with the constitution and people's rights to personal property and and other rights. And so in Boulder when um a camp is established there is a notification period and support services provided try to attempt people to case management and services that would get them off um out of camping. the the city has a newer strategy affirmed last year that um the term used is rough sleeping and the reality is it's not safe for anyone to be sleeping outside and so the strategy works to address it quickly so that any type of homelessness is brief and short and so there's a myriad of partners working together from the Boulder Police Department to our utilities department to our housing and her h housing and human services staff to nonprofit community partners like the all world shelter and It's really, really hard. Um, I wish I could just say, Trish, thanks for letting us know. We'll manage this tomorrow. It It's not that easy, but I will be following up to just talk

[55:00] about how we're handling the the uptick that we're seeing this spring. >> Is there a chance that smoking >> I'm sorry, uh, public comments, >> but yeah, just wanted to say thank you, Ally. Um, again, it is a very a complicated issue and I think I learned a lot through doing the point in time count and just learned that the you know the the city does have a really like responsible approach. Um, and it it touches a lot of different factors. So, thanks for explaining the the full process a little bit better. >> While we're on that topic, can I ask a question or do we have to let's stay in order? Well, I mean, we can, but then we're going to be switching topics that I'm saying I'm talking about this specific um Ally, could you please um clarify for the audience and for me personally, what is even our jurisdiction um on these encampment issues? Because I I know there it touches on multiple agencies within Boulder, but is there anything that we actually can do about it or are there

[56:00] other agencies that actually have more direct impact on some of these encampment issues? Can you clarify by weed? You mean the city of Boulder or the parks and wreck advisory board? >> Yeah, I I guess what I'm trying to understand is, you know, I hear the concerns um from the public, but I don't really understand what our jurisdiction is for those kind to to solve those kinds of challenges. I know that there are multiple agencies within the city of Boulder that touch on those issues. What is our jurisdictional authority to to address those kinds of issues on encampments? >> Parks and Recreation. >> Yeah. Our agency, >> the parks and recreation advisory board. Yeah. So, um, other than the approval of any expenditures or recommendations in the budget, your role in this matter is advisory. >> Ellie, I think the question is about park staff. >> Yeah. Yeah. I'm just saying from a from a an agency standpoint, the entity of parks, the the >> the Department of Parks Recreation. That's what was my question was trying to clarify. Sorry. >> That's what I'm talking about. What is our jurisdiction? Our parks is our what

[57:01] is our jurisdiction to even try to solve some of these encampment issues? Because it feels like this may not be a parks jurisdictional issue. It feels like it's other >> um I don't know you that's why I'm asking the question. Are there other agencies that are addressing these these challenges? So, the city of Boulder as an organization has authority for enforcing laws on city of Boulder public property and the and then so the parks and recreation department um does not have enforcement capacity beyond our limited commission rangers and they can enforce city ordinances only. So, city ordinances against smoking in parks, city ordinances around um propane tanks in parks, but other state level ordinances or crimes such as anything that is drugrelated, that would be to our fully um peace officer certified law enforcement officers with the city of Boulder Police Department. No one department can own this topic because of the complexity of supporting people who have an overlay of mental

[58:00] health issues or drug addiction. that is not the responsibility of the police department. We have other partners in the community in the city who deal with that. Um the cleanup of a site that has been um impacted by camping is not the responsibility of the deplete Martin. We have colleagues in our utilities department and our parks and recreation department who daily are picking up um the the impacts of camping on public land. So the city of Boulder, that's why the safe and managed public spaces program is our interd disciplinary effort to reference this and perhaps we should consider on agenda setting that once a year overview. I was thinking of the runway in my head and I I think it was last summer that we last did it because this really is a topic that benefits from a a a deep overview for the PRA to understand and ask questions and be happy to bring that back as the agenda allows. uh we will bring that to agenda setting. Um and I think one thing that I would like for us to see as part of that presentation is if there's data on is is

[59:00] capping trending up or down. Uh we heard it's seasonal. Um but year-over-year is there change? U I I can tell you off the top of my head that I know that year we have seen decreases. However, there are every year there are seasonal spikes. And so we'll work and Ivon, I was just looking at Did I answer your question? Yes. Okay, thank you. >> Okay, to back out. Um, Michael, any comments? >> I do have a question for staff. Um, I think we discussed this at the last um board meeting, but I can't really recall. Did um I thought there was a safety reason for why the two ball fields were being relocated or rotated. Um, could you just refresh my recollection about that? >> There's a couple of reasons. One is that the um I am not aware of any sewage in the park. I don't think that that's that's an issue, but we do see ongoing North Boulder Park sits on the headarters of Goose Creek and we see drainage issues always. I know just anecdotally as a former coach for North Little League that those are the first

[60:00] games to be cancelled because of the wetness and the high water table in the park. And so through this project, we are taking advantage of the flood work happening with Alpine Balsom development and we are going to be regrading across the whole park which will improve conditions in the play area which right now the water drains across Delwood and washes out the pearavevel. We're going to take care of the flooding that happens across the ball fields and the marshy areas that develop and take I mean if if folks can think about I can picture multiple times throughout the year where North Boulder Park has um there are barriers up and areas protecting uh the park where it's been it's been really marshy and muddy. And then the other thing I just it's I love the job the planners have done on this. If you go to the website and look at this project pig, you'll see historic photos. The ball fields have have moved around throughout the history of the park. There used to be just one ball field towards the southern end of the park. This current location addresses those floodings and does colllocate the

[61:02] um the back stops. If you think of most ball fields, there's operational efficiencies. There's there's safety efficiencies. I heard the concerns about um potential balls hitting into the shelter. We don't share that concern. the youngest. These fields are sized for the youngest kids and now fields are sized appropriately for those ages and the younger recreational levels. Okay. Um Okay. So, I I had a question about the ball fields also, but I think you've answered it in that it's for flooding and so they're not hitting into each other, right? That was the orientation purposes. Okay. >> Yeah. And I just want to add one note. I heard concerns that that impacts the the wide open lawn and I think the team's been really responsive and heard a lot of that feedback and as we measure it and look at it actually there's more lawn and and some of it now is adjacent to the shelter which is great because in the past that fencing impacted the gathering I know coming up in May we'll

[62:00] we will be host to many many many graduation parties and those folks will now be able to benefit well not now but when when this project is done and I just want to remind everyone we're not doing this this work for the work's sake. It's because of the flood work and the grading that has happened. It allows these opportunities. Otherwise, they wouldn't be affordable. The utilities department is contributing several millions of dollars to this project. >> Thank you. Um and then I wanted to ask uh about I agree with adding samps to a future meeting, but I also wanted to I was hoping maybe in the same meeting we could talk about the clutch report and the recent changes to all roads. um that I saw which was that they're only allowing people to stay in the shelter a certain number of days. So, I'm not sure if I I feel like the these three topics are all connected, but especially for our new board members, it might be beneficial for them to kind of give an overview of as some of the camping happens in our public parks. And

[63:00] although we don't have enforcement enforcement abilities, I think it might be helpful for people to just understand um the strategy around it if that's possible. Um, I wanted to thank the commenter about the public comment. Uh, that was those are really great stats. I'm glad we get to revisit that later. So, I'll talk about that later. Um, and for the this is something that I've heard um via email. There are uh about the South Boulder sub community plan and people have asked about that. I realize that is not our purview, but if we wanted to point somebody in the direction, we have an east boulder sub community plan and a north boulder sub community plan. If South Boulder wanted to talk to somebody about that in this within the city, who who would that be? There's two areas that would happen. Developing a sub community plan would need to be a city council work plan priority. So, they would start with their members of city council. It would be closely coordinated with planning development um services and their staff

[64:00] and their work plan. And so I've heard I've heard that same conversation and I would expect it's something city council sets their work plan every single year around January and I would expect that to be posed as a possible priority as they set their future work plans. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, and interestingly, I was wondering I I did appreciate Lynn's comment about announcing the three and that is something that council does and for Clarissa that uh obviously we don't normally have a lot of public comment where that's an issue, but I think that is a good idea if when you have a series of people to say like here's the next three people that are speaking just so they can be prepared. So, I realize that is kind of brand new to us. So, but it was a good good thing to to mention if that's okay. Um, and that I believe is it for for me. Thank you. Thanks to everybody who who came out to speak tonight. Um, so I had a few questions. Um, I'm

[65:02] going to start with um Chrissy. Um, her uh questioning about the you know changing our timing to two minutes. I don't really understand why we're doing that either and I know we have an agenda item to discuss that. Um, you know, personally, I appreciate Chrissy's comments. I don't know why we need to do that. Just seems like an extraordinary measure. So, just go on the record to say that it doesn't really make sense, but I assume we're going to have more conversation about that. Um, then I wanted to talk about uh Dr. Spievac's comments and the comments that came from Robert out of California on Sand Creek Massacre. um around East Boulder development of the parks or the tennis courts. Um I want to say first of all I understand the tennis community I met with them and I'm very concerned about the situation they have in terms of not having tennis courts. So I am not aligning myself on one side or the other on this issue. But at the last meeting that we talked about

[66:02] um when we heard from multiple comments from the public about this concerns around developing this, they were talking about uh the light pollution, the sound pollution issues. And at that time I asked staff if we could address I believe Tina was on the dis could could we include something in the RFP before it was issued uh to at least create some criteria in the RFP to uh so that anyone responding on the RFP would have that requirement to say we have some cultural sensitivity issues to adjacent property. We have sa uh sound and pollution issues. We've got endangered species potential or threatened species issues. Can we include that in the RFP? Did that get included? >> So, I would love to just more broadly address the Botanic Garden proposal for a moment and then I'll answer your question specifically if that's okay. First, I just I want to call out that

[67:00] the the city of Boulder acknowledges our entire city is on the sacred land of many tribes that called the Boulder Valley home since the time of memorial. we were um settled illegally and in violation of the treaty of Cheyenne. Um and part of our acknowledgement is a commitment to build a more just future. As it relates to this project, I want to just affirm the time our team has spent with the organizer of the Botanic Gardens proposal providing guidance and support for a path forward. As it relates to the comments that this specific acreage has special significance, we are consulting with our tribal partners. We have formal government-togovernment relations with many of the tribes um that called Boulder Valley home and we are working through that very carefully and thoughtfully and as it works to your questions Ivonne about wildlife and lights and noise. I just want to remind folks that our code is incredibly rigorous. Um site annexation included a thorough ecological review and there is no presence of pebbles jumping mouse on

[68:00] this property. Um nor are there any other species of concern. The site review will include ensuring that the project complies with all Boulder codes and anyone who responds to the RFP will have to ensure that they address any concerns um and meet lighting ordinance. Boulder has a dark skies ordinance uh sound related to allowable uses on the property. And so that doesn't need to be called out specifically in the RFP because our code requires it and our staff also require that anyone we work with understands how to work with our community and our code. Okay. My concern there though, if we don't call it out in the RFP, um, we are already on notice that there are issues out there and I'm trying to avoid in the future that the city of Boulder might be involved in some sort of litigation with this. I think that if we are already on notice that there are cultural sensitivity issues to adjacent properties and we've heard from multiple people in the public from the Cheyenne tribe that we are not specifically

[69:00] including something in the RFP to say if you are going to be working on the development of this project. You need to consider cultural sensitivity, light and sound pollution issues specific to the issues that have been raised by the public and by Dr. Spievac. So, I I just think that what I'm where I'm coming from on this is this is not a small issue and I I'm trying to mitigate any exposures that the city of Boulder could potentially have in the future. We are now on notice and I just want to make sure that whoever is representing us legally that they are looking closely at that and I trust that you are engaging with our legal professionals on staff, but this is something that we need to take very seriously because I think there could be some exposure down the road. Next issue, sorry. Um, next issue was, um, I guess I didn't really understand the sub community plan why we would do that for SBRC, but um, is there some benefit to doing a sub

[70:00] community plan that that I'm not aware of for South? The benefits it's heard is there's a lot been a lot of um as folks talk about the recreation center different conversations have come up about land use and community needs for that broader area and a sub community plan is really where you zoom out and look at multi-disiplines in that way. Um I'm trying to think of so recently for example the most recent sub community can plan is for East Boulder and it really zooms out and looks at housing needs, transportation needs, business needs and develops guidance for that whole area so that as development occurs it can contribute to really broad community goals. >> Okay, thank you for that. Um and then I guess finally I would just comment on all of the public comment for the North Boulder Park changes. It pretty much sounds like that the staff is essentially saying to the public, "We're not going to change anything." I mean, that's what I keep hearing. And you all have been here. I appreciate you being here and commenting. Um, but I I

[71:01] I'm not sure what more we can do other than ask staff to consider this seriously. I appreciate the comments, but it sounds like staff is just saying we're going to continue to move forward. So, I'm just want to make that clear. Sounds like that's what our position is. Can I just offer a little more information there and just remind folks that this park like all of our sites is used by many groups and community members. Our team has worked very hard and spent a lot of time with many of the users, the little league, the Nordic skiers, people who play recreation, and I understand you are hearing from some folks. Um the feedback we've generally heard from this concept is that folks are thrilled and I understand that doesn't mean everyone. That's a really lofty target in this community and and I recognize that we're not there, but I know that our team has spent a lot of time and generally the feedback we heard is overwhelmingly positive.

[72:01] Okay, thanks everybody. Um, lots for us to talk about and coming meetings. Uh, we will move forward to the consent agenda um which is on page four of our packets. Uh Dana and Channing consent agenda contains the meetings the minutes from last month's meeting as well as um items on which the staff wants to update us but which we are not going to discuss in length tonight or we're not going to have a presentation on tonight. Um may I have a motion to consider the consent agenda? >> Motion. >> Anyone like to second? Second ching. Thank you. Okay. So um discussion on consent agenda is now open. Oh I guess we need to vote on the motion. Yeah. No. Okay. All right. Let's just talk about it. Um, does anyone have any comments on anything in the consent agenda? I will and I'll start by saying um I'm going to manage this meeting a little bit more tightly than Jenny did. I'm going to uh in for each item. We'll go in order. Uh we went right to left last time. We'll go left to right next time. Um everyone will have a turn. If you have let's say

[73:02] uh as they do in city council, let's say bring up your top two questions and if you have a third, we'll go back around. Um Dan, let's start with you. >> Question. >> Okay. I'm sure he will by next month. Um, Evvon, >> um, I I had a question about the the minutes. Is that is this the appropriate time to raise? Okay. Um so on page eight um in the board feedback on March 31st the meeting I had uh concerns about the third bullet basically from the bottom it said that the board feedback was from the study session the community's interest in maintaining and an expanding services across all three centers was affirmed. I just don't remember uh specifically agreeing or saying or advocating as a board member that we would expand services to all three centers and I just wanted to clarify that. I know we talked about m maintaining but I don't remember expanding. >> Uh my recollection is that we all agreed that we supported the recommendation by

[74:01] staff to push for scenario B for all three facilities. Is that different from your recollection? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> That was I mean I could go back and listen but that was not my understanding. I mean um I think we all had a discussion that um as I recall that we all felt that all three recck centers should be invested in. We should be maintaining core services. Um but I just don't have a specific recollection around expanding and I don't actually know what expanding means and before I agree to that I want to understand what that means. >> Okay. I think that we should review the videotape um not right now, but just to make sure that we're getting these minutes correct. Uh Ally, what do you think? >> I was going to propose an alternate that um there was no action taken at the study session and so what really is material here is making sure it reflects is there an amendment that you would propose that would you feel would be more accurate that the board could consider? Yeah, I mean I would just say the it's more clear to me that I think I

[75:01] think and I'm not putting words in my colleagues mouth here, but I think we all agree that the there were community's interest in maintaining services at all three rec centers, but I don't remember again I don't remember saying I want to expand services. I don't I don't know what expand services means. So that's why I don't feel comfortable agreeing to that. And Bernie, I'm thinking of your comment. I I also have a that feels like a very long time ago, but I have a vague recolle rec recollection of scenario B for all three centers. What what I would propose is that we strike this bullet from the amendments that you approve or from the minutes that you approve and we could bring this back for a revision at your May meeting if accuracy or having a collective input about your recommendation is is But I' I'd love you all to discuss that. I I have the same memory as Bern Bernie that you all the preference was scenario B for all three facilities >> and scenario B includes service expansions across the system not necessarily at every single facility but

[76:00] service expansion. >> What does that mean? >> It means hopefully more pool lanes and a better located age well center and more more programming for fitness and cardio equipment and more space for programming etc etc. >> Well then I didn't agree to that. I didn't agree to expand pools at East. That was not my uh intention at that discussion. >> Well, we certainly didn't agree to you nor anybody agree to any specific number of pools sizes anywhere. It's just more of a conceptual plan that we want more capacity systemwide. >> Okay. Then I don't agree with that. I I agreed that we should maintain services at all core services at all three centers. I know we had that conversation. I know we need to maintain the facilities so that every, you know, we have no disruption of services at north, east or south. I I 100% agree with that. I do not agree with spending 80 million at east to um put pools on the other side of the property. I do not agree with expanding services at the North Boulder Rec Center in terms of adding more pools or more warm lanes. I

[77:02] don't agree to any of that because I think we're in a very constrained economic environment and we have to make we've been told over and over we have to make tradeoffs and we have to make hard decisions. I think that that those were quoted and I am not agreeing to expand services at east or north or e yeah east or north especially if there is in question right now that we may not even have enough money to rebuild south. So I don't want that to be on the record. All I'm saying is we should strike and expanding at this point because that's not something I agreed to. >> Please, >> can I make a suggestion? Um, Ivonne apparently doesn't agree with these minutes. So, why don't we just put these minutes up for approval because I have the same recollection as you and we can vote on whether we approve these minutes. And Ivon's if she chooses to not vote for those minutes, that's fine. >> Okay. Um, does anyone else have any other comments >> on the consent agenda as a whole? on the consent agenda as a whole or this point

[78:01] specifically? >> Not this point specifically. >> Okay. Well, let's um let's I'm going to propose that we finish our discussion about the consent agenda and then we will vote on it which will include this uh these minutes. Um is that okay with you? >> Okay. Um do you have any other comments Jenny? >> Yes. >> Um one comment, two questions. Uh again, I just wanted to um reiterate that I do really like the uh updates that were included for East Boulder um and Tom Watson for the courts. I think that that is um going to be really helpful for everyone to kind of help follow along with that. Uh so, thank you for including that. for um North Boulder Park. I had a question. This may be related to the drought uh uh information that's in here. I did have

[79:00] some communication with neighbors about how the park is looking a little bare. I realize that everyone's struggling right now, my yard included. Um, so I was just wondering if uh there was any plans to uh do anything to the park to increase its beauty between now and hopefully the next rain that we get. >> Yeah. And I don't know the status of the irrigation systems across the um the park system. I know that we have turned on irrigation where it impacts play and formal recreation. Um, I know that uh folks will see information that's in your packet. We are asking the community to wait on watering their lawns until May to protect our water supply. Grass in Colorado goes dormant in winter. It is not dead. When we water it, it'll be rich and vibrant and vibrant. We have to be very careful across the parks in water use. um because of our equity

[80:00] work, we know that um the way we handle parks should there be a drought this year or next, it'll be different from the way we handled the park system in 2002 when I started with the city and we had a drought. Um in that scenario, parks were treated like everyone else's lawns and we had significant reductions. We expect it'll be different this time because we know our parks are everyone's backyard and so if you don't have the luxury of your own private lawn, our our parks are for your recreation. They are for community gathering. and they provide broader community benefit. But um I ran by North Boulder Park just this morning. It is it does have dry spots. Most of our parks do and we will not be doing anything special to support vibrancy. We'll be doing our best this year to keep healthy lawns that support play while balancing the this with water use. And just like the rest of the community, it's going to be tough for us. >> Great. Okay, that's perfect answer. I appreciate that. Um and then a question. I noticed that Tom Watson was pushed a month. Can you from groundbreaking from April to May? Am I wrong

[81:02] based on our last conversation? >> I don't I'm sorry. April to May. I don't recall. I thought it was May. I see Mark Davidson, our senior planning manager, hopping up to give specifics. >> Yeah, thank you. Mark Davidson, uh, planning manager. We are looking to groundbreak in May. It's basically the permitting process we're going through. We're hoping that that'll be approved in the next couple of weeks and that we've got everything lined up to roll on the ground once that's there. So, it does look like it's going to be May. >> And then um the time frame for the build of the courts right now is scheduled May to November. >> Yes. Okay. Exactly. And um we should be if if everything went great, it could be October, but we're trying to play it safe and say November. >> And is that is that time frame standard? Uh yeah, absolutely. >> Okay. And um then one last comment and

[82:00] >> I asked for I asked for two. >> I know. Okay. Come back around. >> Okay. >> All right. Bye. >> I hope I didn't lose my one comment earlier. >> Okay. Um I had a question about um the drought uh issue here and the chart that we have. What's a low lower priority outdoor use? >> Are you looking at the chart on page 11? Which chart? >> On page 11. Yep. >> And you see lower Oh. Um lower priority outdoor uses. So, um I just gave example of a high higher priority outdoor use, right? Parks, they provide recreation and community benefit. um other areas that aren't providing that benefit is more individual such as say a front yard um there might be restrictions. I feel I'm over my skis a little bit because I'm sure our utilities department has a definition here that is standard and I don't have it at the tips of my fingers. We can come back in May with more information. >> Okay. So that's personal then that you

[83:00] view it as more personal as opposed to >> widespread. Um >> I was making a um an educated guess there, but I would love you to not hold it dearly and report back in May with the facts. >> Okay. Thank you. And then the only other um question I had was on on page 12 in the summer pool operations, it seems like the access to in particular a spruce pool or a Scott Carpenter may be limited in some way or maybe reduced in some way. Um, and in particular, I'm looking at that last paragraph. These, um, users who rely on early morning or extended evening hours at Spruce or or shoulder season access at Scott Carpenter are encouraged to explore alternative options. >> Spruce. >> Yeah, Scott Shuttenberg, uh, deputy director uh, over operations. Um, yes, we certainly are looking at our pool hours really closely. Uh it always starts with our staffing and depending on where we're at with our high school

[84:01] students and many of our employees uh working as lifeguards we we tend to fluctuate ours slightly. I will say that um at this point we are not trying to make drastic changes to reduce our pool hours but we're looking at efficiencies. So, if for example um there's only one or two swimmers typically in the morning 00 a.m., we may choose to reduce hours um so that we're not paying so much in payroll and staffing cost uh to to keep open when the demand simply isn't there. So, um at this point, we're going to continue to monitor our hours throughout the summer and towards the end of the year as well. We're also very weather contingent and so hours do fluctuate for our outdoor spaces quite a bit. So, we'll continue to look at that, but at this point, um the plan is for both Spruce and Scott Carpenter to remain open um this summer. >> Anything to add? >> Yeah, I just want I'm just going to own a mistake. We our team um I this is no

[85:00] surprise. We've been talking about this. It's been referenced tonight. We are having significant constraints in our operating budget. We had considered reductions in the general operating hours for Spruce Pool this summer. We determined not to and we failed to update this language. That clause on users who relied on early morning or evening hours at Spruce Pool is not relevant through at least when the kids go back to school and it's just a miss on our part. We should have deleted it. >> Okay, thank you both. >> Those were basically my questions. Um but I'm just going to ask just in a slightly different way. Um just to to understand uh last year um we closed Spruce Pool I think I believe a couple weeks early. Just wanted to hear a little bit about um the length of time um that Spruce Pool will be operational this year compared to last year. >> Sure. So, the plan for Spruce Pool for this year is to operate until um students go back in, which I believe is

[86:00] August 12th, 11th. And following that, then weekends we would operate Spruce Pool, but during the weekdays we would not have access to our workforce. So, Spruce would close during the week. Um but we would keep Scott Carpenter Pool open throughout the weekdays and weekends. >> And how does that compare to last year? So last year due to the significant um budget reductions we we fully closed Spruce Pool when the students went back to school um due to low visitation. This year school starts a full week earlier. Last year it was a difference of nine operating days between when the students went back to school and Labor Day. And with so many other options at the three indoor recreation centers and um Scott Carpenter, we did choose to take that $25,000 budget savings. This year, the students go back a August 11th, which means there's three weekends between and they're the hottest weeks of the year. So, if if we were, you know, in my dream world, um, school would start in September and we'd have a workforce through the hottest days of the summer.

[87:00] That is not that is not the case here. And so, we do have to modify operations when the students go back to school. Um, and so, Kira, you asked it. I want to answer that really directly. What is different this year from last year? Last year, Scott Carpenter opened around May 5th. Our workforce, as Scott mentioned, it is heavily student-based and we simply don't have the workforce to open then. We we could have, we had planned on it. We don't have the staffing. We'll open May 15th. Um operating hours will be similar through most of the summer. There will be some adjustments to the leisure pool features at Scott Carpenter Pool. That facility is heavily subsidized. It takes a whole lot of staff. I think it's 14 an hour to have everything open. And so we'll talk more about that through budget development. spruce pool largely the same as last year with weekends through Labor Day. >> Okay, great. Um, and I mean I think people will be excited about that. Uh, and then just also just quickly did want to hear um in previous years have there been uh like drought alert stages one,

[88:01] two, and three or is this um potentially like a a that we would be in drought stage one? Would that be something that we haven't seen in past years? I don't know off the top of my head the last time that we had a drought in the city, but I know that this is a highly fine practice. We live in the west. Water is a big deal. And um the city utilities department, they are phenomenal at water planning. Luckily, we have over a century of water rights, which means we're not as impacted as some of the cities in the county. But um the utilities department leads the citywide drought plan. Departments have drought plans. And so Kira, I think that your question is, is this something we know how we're used to doing and it does it happen? And the answer is yes. >> Unfortunately, that seems to be reality. >> Shannon, do you have any questions? Okay. Uh, who had a third? >> Okay. I have one. Uh, just to go back to Spruce Pool for a quick second, Ally. Um, given that we know there's going to

[89:01] be a service hour change at the end of the summer, have we let that community, the Spruce School community know yet, or are we hoping they're watching? >> I should confirm, we make that sound like a done deal. It's not. We're we're we left that vague because last year, you all remember, except for Channing and Dana, we proposed a new membership structure. And so outdoor pools in the reservoir were separated out and folks could buy a recreation center specific pass. And then in May and actually um starting next week, you're going to see a promotion and a campaign around the outdoor pool passes. If those go amazingly and provide the revenue that they could, then that's really going to impact what we're able to operate into August. And so um I should I should put a caveat on what we said. It really is TBD and there's nothing to announce at the moment because it depends on on how well we do. If we have a, you know, if we have a sunny May and June, which is not great for our water supply, but it's great for um outdoor pool revenue, that'll impact how far into the season we can operate.

[90:01] >> Uh, great. Thank you. Um, I just wanted to say out loud, I'm glad that there was an update on the the drought regulations in this packet. Um, as I've been watching the level in Vue Lake decrease over the last few months, it's a source of anxiety for me, as I'm sure it is for all of us. Um, Dana, did you think of any questions? Okay. Um, okay. >> Go ahead. No, I'm good. >> Um, I wanted to uh just briefly touch on page 13 on the overview of major projects. Um, you know, noticeable here is the fact that South Boulder Rec Center is not even listed here in terms of a design. And I think my question is we've heard from staff at the study session. I think it was Michelle who said it would take about 5 years to get a project from start to finish to be built. Um when you take that comment and I hope I'm I'm remembering that correctly. Um, when you take that

[91:00] comment and you take the fact that um, when we invested in South Boulder Rec Center last year, I believe there were comments that that would buy us another 5 to seven years before potential death of an of a facility. What my concern is or my question is at what point do we need to initiate design uh for a replacement facility like South to avoid a gap in service and if you know it just feels like we're up against the clock here and I know there's no magic number when South is going to die but if that's the facility that's going to die first in the next 5 to seven years then why wouldn't we be investing in some level of design and why isn't it even listed here. And I know that operations budgets are different than capital budgets, but we're using I believe we use our operations budget to design for north as we can see here. Or we can design for

[92:01] east. And I know we're doing that. Why aren't we doing that for south? I don't understand why it's being treated differently. Uh it's it's not being treated differently. We start design on a project when we have a funded capital project. You want to tie design to project and a funded project. Otherwise, we would get in the place where we could be designing projects that may not be built for five or 10 years and then you've invested in a design that is obsolete for whatever reason. And so design typically begins when there is a funded project. And um for folks who may or may not have gotten a chance to watch the April 9th city council study session, I'll just share that there are 15 buildings across the city that are in um what the our facilities experts are calling really critical condition. South is certainly one of them. And I can I can report back. I know you know I I appreciated your acknowledging van there really no one can predict when there might be a failure at South that would impact operations. We think the money spent last year, the $2 million to

[93:01] invest in some of that infrastructure is really giving us time to plan thoughtfully for both South and other buildings across the city. And so, um, yeah, just to be clear, it's not it's not being treated separately. The facil the projects that you see up here, um, in design have a funded project associated with them, >> but but we don't have the money for North or for East. We're asking for more money. I know we're actively asking for more money because we only have about 53 million allocated for east. We're I know at the last study session what Megan said was we needed about 7 to 17 million to complete east and maybe maybe 24 million. I can't remember the numbers off the top of my head but in order to move the pools and do all the other work not move you can't move those things you're rebuilding them. But in order to do that, what I heard Megan say was we needed another at least potentially 17

[94:01] million to finish east. And I know we don't have money for the north renovation, but somehow we have money to design these things, but we don't have money to design south. So that doesn't make sense. Do we have am I confused? Do we >> The North Boulder Recreation Center project's not in design. It's in the same list. Northam >> Oh, okay. Sorry. East Boulder Community Center Q3. Okay, sorry that my that's my bad. Sorry. Um, so do we have a South Boulder design at this point? Is there something out there that we just haven't seen? Is there something how how did we price the 45 to 65 million? All of the projects at this point are priced based upon the general, very very general programmatic information that the PRA received in October and in February and in March. And I feel like those memos have several caveats for south and north that they are $20 million ranges exactly because the projects have not gotten into design and we don't know the square footage. We

[95:01] don't know which amenities would be included and that's why you have such a wild estimate. >> So we have no design on south that can be shared. Nothing's been done. I'm I'm trying to understand um >> do we have any have we asked the architecture firm to design anything even at a concept level for south for a rebuild? >> I think folks know the answer to that is no. There's no funded project. We've clarified that multiple times. >> Just wanted I just want to make sure there's absolutely no design in actively done being done for South. So there's not even a concept plan. Okay. >> Yeah. So, a little bit around what Yavon has asked. I guess I I would wonder why East Boulder Rec Center is on the project list if all across all three rec centers, you're not looking at a holistic answer. Um because why why would you move forward on an East

[96:01] Boulder Rec Center renovation without the context of north and south? >> Yeah. So >> being taken into consideration >> it it was and so the East Boulder project was proposed first in 2021 and it was prioritized based upon information known at the time with the renewal of the community culture resilience and safety tax. It was listed as a project with Boulder voters along with others such as the civic area and it was proposed by staff for many reasons. But it is at twice the size of South. It serves more people. It is also in failing condition. It meets a lot of different needs for the community and that is not to say that South is not important. We are hoping to invest in all three recreation centers. That was the subject of the March 31st study session and the April 9th study session. Um so the east project is funded and now moving forward we are seeking to identify funding for south and for north

[97:01] >> but if you're looking at the services that are going to be provided also at east I would think you'd want to look across the whole network. Oh, yeah. Thank you for letting me clarify. >> Excited about, >> you know, what what you're going to renovate or expand or whatever at East. You'd want to look across all three locations to make a decision on what I'm I'm not getting specific. No, I understand what's the south design going to be, but I would still think you'd want to look at all three locations >> and say at this place we want to focus on this. So, we're going to put in the capital to focus on that. >> Y so we have done that. Thank you. >> Everything everywhere. >> Yeah. >> So, let me clarify in 2024. So funding while voters approved east as a recommended project in 2021, funding was not allocated for the

[98:00] project until the 2024 budget. And so with the 2024 budget, we had funding to begin begin the design work I just referenced. We did that design work by launching a project called the future of recreation. And that was a project to look across the system at all three recreation centers to understand how they were meeting community needs. and that there were two goals at that future of recreation. One is to inform the design of the East Boulder Community Center so that it considered the needs of the system and to inform future projects at both north and south. And so while there's not a concept or a design for the South Boulder Recreation Center, we do have a good idea from that project what folks would like to see in a future South Boulder Rec Center. And I would love Channon and Ivon, I'm happy to offer for both of you. It might be good to have some time to catch you up to speed on those projects. There's been a significant amount of time. Your quickest resource, and I think it's one of the links I owe you, is the October recreation needs assessment. It summarizes that look at the whole system

[99:01] and how we would invest in all three recreation centers, including the South Boulder Rec Center. Not at a design level, not at a concept level, but at a programmatic level. >> Okay. Thanks everybody. And Ally, that's a good suggestion. I uh if you don't mind, would you put together an email for for Dana and Channing? Um just that the the kind of key links for the rec center projects. I think we need the the needs assessment. We need the the the facilities plan and maybe the um YouTube video of our study session from last month, which is riveting. Um and also then the most recent city council uh study session, which uh which is also riveting. Okay. So, um, we have a motion to approve the consent agenda. Uh, why don't we why don't we vote on that agenda, uh, on that on that item. Um, all those in >> I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I forgot to ask about the, um, reflexology footpath. Apologize. >> I would like to move the meeting. Can we

[100:00] keep it brief? >> I'll make it brief. >> Okay. Thank um are is on that agenda item is is that going to be um are there are there going to be operations or maintenance budget assigned to maintaining that path? I I raised that at the last meeting about the you know the goose excrement unfortunately at Harlo Plats and I just want to make sure that there would be an operations or a maintenance budget assigned to that footpath because that concerns me a little bit. Yeah, I think the item calls out any fund raise proposal project similar to I'll just call out for you folks. We get ideas often from folks who want to use public land for things and we have a fairly rigorous project process which you're learning about with this Botanic Gardens proposal. Similarly, with this barefoot path, um it is required that the fundraising include not just uh not just construction but ongoing maintenance of a new amenity. >> Okay, perfect. Thank you. Okay. Any other last minute thoughts? Okay. Let's vote on the consent agenda. Uh all those who are in favor of

[101:00] approving the consent agenda, please say I. I. >> I. >> Okay. All those opposed? >> Okay. The consent agenda is approved. >> I actually have to abstain from approving the minutes because I was not at that meeting to be able to agree. >> Fair enough. Okay. We'll count you as abstain. Um Okay. Thank you. That uh motion passes. Uh we will move on to and we have no action items tonight. Um so we'll move on to we're moving on to >> uh yes matter from the department. Thanks Jenny. So all turn over to you. >> Thanks. This first item I am going to introduce our um senior landscape architect Kuryagawa and city planner Charlotte O'Donnell to talk to you about the civic area. Just for Pratt members, we'll I think we'll take a very quick break after this item.

[102:15] >> Yeah. Yeah, I just want to um especially for our newer board members, the civic area has been a project on the PRAB's radar for a while now. This was another named project in the 2021 community culture resilience and safety tax. And this project's been advanced for uh several reasons. One, it is um this park, so the civic area is the downtown park that is between 9th and 14th and Arapjo and Canyon. It is one of our oldest parks and has some of our oldest infrastructure. It is highly susceptible to the incredible use we get being in a downtown location from festivals, from proximity to downtown. And so the irrigation, many of the amenities, they are not functioning the way they could

[103:00] be. Nor is the design really fostering economic vitality in the way that we know a downtown park can. with um more than half of our revenues coming from sales tax supporting the vibrancy of a downtown park has been shown to have um in in big downtowns 7 to1 returns. We don't have that kind of density but we can expect to see a return on this investment in the civic area and um I'm really grateful for the work of this team. I'm grateful for volunteers who help at our Wildwoods Nature Popup including board member Mike. Um, and I'm really glad to have the team here to just give you a a brief update on the project and talk about the naming. Again, as I mentioned earlier, we're teeing this up briefly with a process overview because it's going to come back to you in May and June to consider a name. That's one of the items the PRA has purview over. >> Good evening, Pr. I'm glad to be here again. Um, I'm Shiomi Kuragawa and I am with the parks department and the civic area project manager. I've seen you over

[104:00] several years now. Um, and welcome to the new board members. So excited to get you up to speed on this project. Um, I'll be doing the general update and overview of where we're at with this project. Um, we'll be doing an inform on project updates. We'll also consult PRA on the renaming process like Ally mentioned. Um, so we'll get to questions after the slideshow, but um, for consideration, does PRA have feedback or questions on the renaming process itself? And then, um, do you have feedback or questions on names that came out of our process that we'll walk you through tonight? Um, so for the civic area, we have some key themes uh, that this project supports. Of course, it works with um our STR framework from the city of Boulder, but also um Boulder Valley Comp plan as well as our BPR system plan. And so the community health and wellness, youth engagement and activity, and building community and relationships are some of key themes and goals from our

[105:02] system plan that this project supports. Um, we've done a very robust deep dive on equity and engagement and that has a big component of youth engagement, teens and actually all ages of youth. Um, community building. We're really trying to um provide unity and a safe place. Um, comments earlier this evening, this place needs to be invested in in multiple ways and worked on in multiple ways to provide um, safety and a vibrant space in our downtown. So just as a refresh um this is the overall concept plan that we've been working with the community over the past two years. So really civic area has been in planning for 10 and this plan you see here has been approved and supported by the community over the last two. We've just gone to council and gotten um support for this plan. So what you see here is um taking a whole planning

[106:01] vision and working on design with the community and what you see in the boundary in pink as well as the hotspots in pink is what will be currently funded by council approved budget. So we have designed and planned the whole of civic area and phase two for construction will implement only what you see here in the pink boundary. And so that's how we kind of do um budget setting, cost analysis, and what's possible for construction in the next coming years. That will include park updates to what you know as Central Park, so the area around the band shell. It will include um farmers market improvements. So excited to support the farmers market and um expand the festival street for all events really. And then also uh signage and wayfinding throughout the entirety of the park. And then lastly for our updates is where we're at in the schedule. So that star you see is us moving into design development. So as a recap, we've spent

[107:02] a lot of time um for windows with community several board meetings and just working with uh collective uh Boulder population to make sure that um civic area has what people need in it. So, we heard a lot about um park amenity, access to the creek, safety, and um just general more vibrancy downtown. So, we're moving now into technical design um where our design team will have kind of a myriad of experts to work on how we get things built. And in 2027 to 2028, we hope to have construction start um for that area in pink. So again, the majority of the area being around Central Park, Broadway to uh 13th Street, Arapjo to Canyon. Um part of that process was renaming. And so the renaming takes a really big form and shape in the park um to get

[108:00] community involved in a new name. Civic area was something that um didn't really stick with community members is what we heard. And so we'd like to we wanted to get the community involved in that. So, um part of that process I'll hand over to Charlotte who has led um that effort and uh yeah. >> Great. Yeah, thank you. Glad to be here tonight. My name is Charlotte O'Donnell and I'm a city planner with the Boulder Parks and Recreation Department supporting um Shahomi and the team on this. And um Shomi touched a little bit on these goals and the purposes of renaming um responsive to what we've heard through the last 2 and 1/2 year engagement process focused a lot on design, but also understanding that there wasn't a sense of place or identity across this park. Um there wasn't necessarily one theme that could unify the design ele elements, especially as we look towards signage and wayfinding. Doesn't currently exist in the space in that way. Um, we also heard the importance of the stories of the area, the history and bringing to

[109:01] light the community values and think that naming is an excellent way to um to do so and the importance of centering youth voice. So, you saw that as one of the key themes we're advancing through this work. Uh, that's important to our department plan and working a lot with teens and I'll I'll talk more about the process on the next slide and um but also engaging the broader community to re-energize this park. We know there are challenges in the space and we want to inspire that long-term connection that really stewards this vibrant downtown place. So part of this naming work um echoes maybe what you some of you heard from Primos and other parks that have been renamed or that we've discussed in past years stemming from work from the CU partnership we had in 2020 with the history department to actually look at the names across our system and uh learn more about that. And so that information is linked in your memo. Then our history staff during this project was able to take a deep dive on what have we called

[110:00] this specific area. And so that's this quick timeline again also in your memo if you want to zoom in at all to the names that we know that this space has carried. And so you'll see from settlers Smith Grove um up through the railroad uses Central Park and the design that Olmstead Jr. for the space as well as then in more recent years civic center and then civic area as of 2012 but again not a name that we heard people uh understanding remembering or using within our community a lot of we encountered a lot of confusion. So this is the process specifically around renaming that we've been embarking on and starting in your packets last fall. You've seen this very same either in bullet points or in paragraph form. You've seen this um same timeline. So still on track, still the same steps we've been talking to you about all along. We're about halfway through here in April at communitywide

[111:00] online online voting for the feedback. Um, and where we've been is in March we advanced the top names that in February our youth helped us brainstorm. So we worked with teens from Boulder High. And if our video works tonight, you'll hear from the direct them directly. Um, otherwise that link is in your memo. We also worked with students at Whittier to get feedback um on the name ideas for with CU students as well as collecting other names during the last two and a half years that we've heard from community members time and time again. either that they use for the space or they would like to use from the space. So going forward, as several folks tonight have mentioned, um in May, we would bring the recommended name to PRAB as a discussion item and then in June as an action item. This is something that PRAB has authority over is park naming as long as it's not after an individual or organization, which is um currently the case with this recommendation. And um we hope to celebrate in the fall uh

[112:00] this kickoff of a new identity and helping the space regain some of that vibrancy we all want to have it see have it it to have. There we go. Okay. So a couple snapshots into the process. These are teens as part of Boulder High's Zanta Club. So they're community serviceoriented club and women empowerment club. Um we've worked with them actually over the past two and a half years. So, they were deeply aware of the project and have been with us every step of the way through design. Um, as well as some new, of course, freshman and sophomores entering this year. And, uh, some of these words and then the collage you can see that some of the students created about what they love about the space, what they want to see more of in the space. Um, and then you can see this was actually this past Saturday. We were out at the band shell at the farmers market and Bimoka's Dia Delino event. And these are some of the students uh talking to another community member about what names they like best and um the different different meaning behind the names that they are

[113:01] recommending. So let's see if the video works. started a club called Zanta at my school and we have been working with the city to name parks and me and my friends have come up with a bunch of names and we've taken like different words and put them together and we came up with the name Civic Soul Park. >> We all kind of like the nature aspect of Boulder. We all really like flowers and we like the like the whole garden aspect of Boulder because it's kind of something that makes Boulder Boulder. if like there was like a space like that's designated to us. Um like I feel like teenagers would go and hang out outside with their friends and stuff. It's important for us. We get to experience the rebuilding of it and experience or our kids could experience like the new park. >> It's just like we're going to be the ones going there. So I feel like we should really have a say on like what name you should want have for it. So, I think I feel more confident about

[114:00] talking to my legislators or talking about or talking to the government about like community opinions and stuff and how we feel. The name we want for the park is Sunset Plaza. I feel like I feel connected to the name because it kind of binds both of my cultures like being bicultural like the word plaza like in Spanish or it can also be in English, right? I think at first this project was a little bit hard. you know, you don't see many teens kind of giving their opinion on on things. >> And for me, I would just kind of say like thank you for like giving us opportunity to do this cuz like it's kind of where we're teenagers like us get the opportunity to like do this type of stuff and give us like the creative freedom to like design a park and like help name it, which is like just something like kind of like honorable that like I feel really special for. So, so you heard them mention a couple of their name ideas. Um, and we'll start

[115:01] with those and then um also have uh the other name ideas I mentioned from CU and from other community members. So, I'll run through them really quickly and you'll see at the end um all eight names that currently community members can weigh in online and they'll I'll include the link at the end also in your memo. Um, so please spread the word or if you have not had a chance to weigh in yet, please do. Um, but we're also collecting other names. Um, so if there's something else that you're not seeing on this list, that's an option as well. So we want to make sure the whole community is represented, although we've had a chance to really um, get to connect with these teens and appreciate their leadership. So without further ado, um, maybe you've seen online already, but one of the name ideas is Creekide Park. Another is Heart Park, Civic Soul Park, Sunset Plaza, Opulus Park, East Park, Boulder Central Park,

[116:00] and Boulder Creek Park. So there there are those eight names. So yes, as I mentioned already, um online feedback is currently open through May 4th. So a full another week. We'd love to collect uh more responses. We've collected about 600 at this point and um we'll see you back here in May and June with the final recommendation. So here are those questions again and I'll turn it back to you Mr. Chair. So I'm curious you showed that that Central Park is but like was a green dot going through there even when it was called civic area. So I just wonder what the communication plan is around this part used to be called Central Park. Now we have this bigger area that's going to be called something. Does the Central Park name remain or you know how does all that work? >> Yeah, we're working through that right now with the process. We're hoping that um the names that you just saw here, the eight names will be the unifier for the

[117:01] entire park. Um, and so that would mean that the smaller central park name either gets renamed into the entire park name. Um, and or we're also going through the exploration of uh maybe it's something that's more informal that each space has its own name. Um, so we got a lot of options for um names that are around the band shell compared to the creek or specific gardens. Um, so that is an option too to have an informal name for a space. Thanks for walking through the the process. Um, and I love to just see how, you know, we started with uh involving like youth and teens um and making them part of the process. Uh, I think that's a great way to start the comm community input process. So, thanks for showing us that. Um, I just have a question. Um so will you come back with one

[118:01] recommendation for a name and then um will we what what should our discussion be around should it be about whether we want to improve that name or not or will there be multiple options for us to discuss? >> Thank you for asking that. Yes, to clarify um usually how we run this process with PRA based on the policy is coming with just one recommendation and then if there are concerns, red flags, uh fatal flaws, um we're open to to that feedback or or small changes that are needed, but we usually like to take the um community recommendation forward. So that's our intention. Um as we are collecting still collecting some extra names at this point um we might see some variation to the eight. So it is possible that we bring PRAB um maybe one main recommendation or two potential recommendations. Um but yes really a high level uh of of your looking for a high level involvement from you all not necessarily down in the wheats. So

[119:00] thanks for clarifying. >> Sounds great. Yeah I guess we just got to get that uh survey out there. I mean, I already filled it out, but uh hopefully we can get some more people to to to vote on which names they like. >> Thank you. Um I have two questions, I guess. Um you mentioned that um you know there was this engagement with a lot of teens and some other community members. Were they the same community members or similar community members who who did not or recognize that the term civic area referred to um this particular space because it seems to me like that that what drove that's what drove the need to find a name for it. Most community members um who do not use the term civic or do do not use the term civic area and don't understand what it refers to. Hence the need to rename it. Yeah, I would say so that's a theme that

[120:01] we've heard throughout engagement. So not one specific group, not just teens, not just one specific event. Something we've heard time and time again from community members. Um even this weekend being out there um folks were saying, "What are we voting on renaming? What even is civic area?" So um it's an overarching theme, not just one group of people. Um but certainly something that um yeah we've heard we have heard from teens and then other name suggestions that we've heard from community members uh definitely were in often in response to that. Oh, I don't call it that. I call it this or I would like to see it called this. Um but yeah, not not just one specific group. >> Okay. And then my next question is it from this chart on page 21, it seems like the civic area became the name in 2012. Was it specifically renamed or did it just lose its name or how did it how did it achieve that status?

[121:00] >> Yeah, it was renamed as part of the phase one process is my understanding. >> Okay. And was the same process used, you know, ident, you know, community engagement, stuff like that. You know, >> I don't believe there was as robust community engagement at the time and certainly not the same process that was teenled. So, this is definitely a different approach. >> Can I sneak one more in? So, um, how how does this naming impact or does it impact at all the ongoing RFI process? the potential that there may be some developments that may inform a name or require a different name or something of that sort. >> Yeah, that's a good question. Um, so it's actually very similar to the question about um, Central Park being renamed. Um, what we are doing as a separate tract and a separate process is working on uh, the what we call the east bookend. So that's an informal name in the area um that the RFP will go out for uh developer partnership. Um so we will remain using the east bookend name and

[122:02] it's a component of the full total area. So there there would be some clarifying but we're not going to rename necessarily the portion of the project that we're working on an RFP for for developer partnership. So if if say for example we do land on like Boulder Central Park for the name then that will remain despite what transpires with the RFI and RFP. >> Yeah, I think there would just be some clarifying language in the RFP formerly known as civic area. >> Okay, thank you. And I want to just flag Mike, I should have called out during future board items, you had requested at last month's meeting if the prep could have an update on that east bookend partnership and RFI and that is calendared for your June meeting and that is perfectly timed before a July city council conversation. >> Um my questions I have two. How um how are you collecting other names from

[123:01] people? What is the process for that? >> They can be submitted via the online form and then also at the inerson event we were at this weekend, we collected them there as well um via post-it note. I'm going to call on my own question. Do you um do you how do you then vet the names? So like if you get I mean we're not going to have a hundred names we're choosing from. So what do you what do you decide vi how do you decide what's viable? Yeah, we might. Um, for instance, something that's come back that's very popular is just the idea of the creek. And so if we get a variation on Creek Side or we get a variation on Boulder Creek, um, that might be something where we bring to the PRA, that as a recommendation to consider because we think it fits the themes that the community has been expressing to us, even if it wasn't the exact name um, that was available to be weighed in on at this point. So, does that make sense? So, and and we're not asking people and

[124:00] we're trying to be clear in this community engagement. We're not asking people to vote. We're using the word vote. Um, we are asking people to weigh in and provide feedback. So, it's not going to be a direct uh necessarily onetoone outcome. So, okay. >> Appreciate you also helping to spread that message. Um, and that's how we would use name recommendations is is trying to look at the broader themes around the name rather than maybe a specific uh name recommendation. >> Okay. And then my official second question is um I found it interesting because like right now it's Central Park. I'd call it Central Park. I know that's not really what it's called, but I called like the band shell Central Park. So if we were to like you were mentioning if you were to have kind of one overarching name but then little names does that do we just does does that fall under our purview to approve as per since we have to approve the name or is it just the one name and then the subsections or just subsections? The the policy is clear around park naming

[125:01] individual amenities are not included in that or even park areas. So, we really are looking at the comprehensive park name. >> Okay, great. Thank you. That's it. >> I don't have a question about renaming, but I do have a question about the um the cost of the project. Can you tell us how ballpark how much this project is going to cost for construction? Uh, city council allocated $18 million for this project with the 24 budget, but it's spread out over several years based on design and then when construction actually happens. I think it's great that you got feedback and kind of a working session from young people. Um, I guess I would be very interested to know, for example, if any time was spent on historical context. For example, even

[126:00] geographically, I look at the park being between Canyon and Arapjo, right? and you look at the history of the region, I would think maybe there might be a Native American name that you might consider or even just Arapjo Park or something like that. And I'm wondering how much effort or activity was done in terms of putting together a list of names from the non-young community. >> Yeah. Uh so to start with your first question around historical context um as you can see you just got one brief slide right that summarized some of our history work but um we're fortunate to have history staff that helped us do a deeper dive not just on the naming but on the area and that's been a background for this whole project and it was also something that was very important for us to share with the youth. So, they got a much longer um session than you all are

[127:00] getting tonight. And we actually had five different sessions with them that our nonprofit partner, Growing Up Boulder, helped us uh design the curriculum for and lead. And so again, they had seen a lot of information through the design process that many of them were involved in. But um we did a fairly robust uh yeah sharing and conversation around indigenous history of the area, streets and location within the city, um the natural history of the area as well as the arts and culture uh history of the area and and as well as aspirations for the future of the area. Um and and I mentioned those as kind of four themes because our curriculum was structured around those four themes and and trying to dive into them. And then each group of students actually um took on either one or several of those themes and did even a deeper dive then as um kind of in their independent groups. And so yeah, so that was a very important part of this. Um and so the first four names that we shared were and I'll go

[128:01] back. Let's see. The slide is kind of uh maybe too small to see, but you see the first four came out of that process with Zanta. And the following four were names that we heard from other community members. So that includes people from all age ranges. Thank you both. Um I will just uh thank you also for including the discourse about Mustard's last stand. I know we're all very concerned about hot dogs. Um, I appreciate you bringing some clarity to that situation. Um, okay. Unless anyone else has anything else on this item, we can we will >> go ahead Jenny. >> Since you brought up mustard that it says in the thing in the packet that in the section that mustard's that building was the reason why it's being demolished is because it's in a high hazard flood plane. Was it when it was built was it in a high hazard flood plane? that so those buildings the um and the exact uh

[129:02] year of construction I don't know off the top of my head shomi I don't know if you do it was yes it was before Boulder created the designation of a high hazard flood zone and so um and I don't know the exact year of that designation either I believe it's since the 80s and when the the flood plane protection really work began in earnest >> any else um okay let's let's take a break until 8:14. We have a lot to cover still. So, 14 sharp. >> Let me just look at So, we're hold

[130:21] >> Okay, I think we're all back. Um, so the next item on our agenda is budget. And this item was intended to be and is a bit of an orientation for um for Channing and Dana. It's alo a refresher for all of the rest of us. But approving the budget is one of the if not the most important thing that we do 15 at night and um, we're significantly behind schedule. I think what we're going to do is get a condensed version from staff and they will then follow up with um our new members and anyone else who maybe wants a little bit more of a deeper refresh on this process. Um Ally, do you

[131:00] have anything to add? >> I Yeah, Clarissa, if you'd go to the next slide. We we'd like to consult with the board. I've been talking with my 17. We're about an hour behind where we thought we'd be. And I just want to recognize that you have matters from the board and other items. So we were going to do four things with this overview tonight. Um we are going to talk about your role during the budget process. That's really quick and easy. We are going to give the 101 on our funding sources. Um that is really helpful certainly for Danning and Dana and Ch. Danning and Chana. Uh see folks this is not good. Dana and Channing. Uh um I think it's valuable for all the board members to hear that. So we could go through those funding sources or not. I just peaked if you go back to the future board items. Your May meeting is pretty light at the moment. So um we could do bits of this or we could move it all to the May meeting. There's

[132:00] actually room in the agenda. So um the the review of the funding sources I do think it takes better brain power than 8:15 brain power. We are going to talk about the 2027 budget process that is not time-sensitive. It could move to May and we're going to give a very highle overview of our 2027 CIP for our needs. All of that can move to May and it actually looks like it can fit in the agenda. And in the meantime, we could still do a deeper 101 with Channing and Dana. I have to look at your name tags now to not do it again. Um, but we would like your feedback. We're here to support. We can do the the material we have planned or we can modify. >> So, you're proposing to move all this to May. I >> I think your May agenda can can support just moving it all. If you wanted to do any part of it, just introducing your role in our funding sources, we could do that. And then May would be just the 27 budget process in CIP. So that might be a way to to do a

[133:02] little bit of both. >> Okay. Um, what does everyone think? Dana, >> I'm a finance person, so >> this is very exciting. This is why you came here tonight. Okay, Ivon. Oh, I I guess the only only question I had was um if any of this is is council for their May 14 uh meeting, are they waiting on us as a body to make any recommendations that we might be deferring till I guess if we move this finance conversation? >> There is nothing in this item that impacts any timing. If any of it were to move, it doesn't impact anything except your May agenda. So there so council's not waiting for us on any recommendations for their May 14. Okay. >> I mean I think I would like to do just a quick 10-minute overview of the revenue sources and maybe it's a little bit on SIP. I think that would be helpful for

[134:01] tonight. That's just my opinion. Michael, what's your >> Yeah, I'm I'm fine if we do something short and sweet. So, >> I think it might be best to move to May. Just as soon as we start talking about the funding sources, a lot of questions come up. It's actually very complicated. Um, it probably deserves a bit more time. >> Shannon, give any thoughts? >> I'm open to a quick overview, but admittedly for me, it would be helpful for me to like read through the materials more than I've been able to do before having it presented to me. I like like to kind of get it double dosed and so that works. So, deferring would work well for me. Okay. So, we're all over the place. What I would like to propose is that we get the review of our role in this process uh as well, including the timeline, and maybe we defer the rest of it to May. Does that seem okay to everyone? >> Okay. All right. Let's do it. >> Yes. A special thanks to Stacy for 15 to just come back in May. I'm very grateful. >> Sorry. That's how it goes sometimes.

[135:01] This is how it works for us as staff. Um, so I am so let's let's start with um this intro and just I want to um uh just we've all heard the quotes about a budget being an embodiment of our values. Um and after over a decade of forecasting a gap between revenues and expenses with the 2027 budget, we will certainly be discussing prioritization and shifts in funding to ensure we are meeting the most important community needs. And we know this will not be easy for two key reasons. Um, one, our budgets were significantly impacted by revenue loss in 2020 as we have restored services. We have done so very thoughtfully and very carefully. And so there really are not easy opportunities to reduce expenses. And then next, just so much of what we do is so deeply valued in the community. Parks and recreation contributes to health and well-being, to quality of life, to economic vitality and connection. And

[136:00] any reductions will have impacts. And our work ahead is to ensure that any reductions are considered carefully and that we ben we evaluate with every decision who impacts who is impacted and who benefits. Um the 2022 BPR plan, I know Dana already has her paper copy and Channing I'll get you one. It is an incredible compass for the work ahead. It included significant community engagement. It was unanimously supported by not only this body but by the planning board and by city council. And so as we develop the 2027 budget, we will be leaning heavily on the policy guidance of the BPR plan and most heavily on these two themes that help us um tell us to take care of what we have by prioritizing maintenance and reinvesting in our existing parks, facilities, and systems. And then financial sustainability. There are many demands on every dollar that we spend and we'll need to focus on core services and community priorities. And so the PRA's role in budget development, the charter outlines this

[137:02] very specifically. So you have mandated responsibilities that are that are highlighted or indicated by the shall. So that means just in your head here must the PRB must make recommendations to cons council concerning any expenditure or appropriation from the permanent parks and recreation fund. That's one of the funds you're going to learn about in May. So any dollar we spend from that the budget from that you actually have to approve. You also are required to make a recommendation to city council regarding the city manager's recommended budget that gets released in September. Now, as it relates to your advisory role, that's anywhere the charter says may. And that means you can, but you don't have to. And this is where at the request of the department, you may provide recommendations on other matters. And so, we do consult you as we develop the budget on fees, on service levels, and on shifts on funding. We we really appreciate the advisory input that the PRA provides. And so if you go to the

[138:00] next slide, um this is your preview. At the September PRA meeting, you will have reviewed the city manager's recommended budget that is typically shared with the entire community at the end of August. And you along with other boards will be reviewing it. And you'll see three motions. One to recommend the 2027 city manager recommended budget for parks and recreation. It says X million because we don't know the number yet, but in September we sure will. Um, you'll make a motion to approve the 2027 expenditures from the permanent parks and recreation fund. That's that shall. And then you'll also have a motion to recommend the 2027 through 2032 parks and recreation capital improvement plan um program to the planning board and city council. So, every month between now and then, we'll be walking through a process to get you through that. And I'll just I heard a request, Clarissa, if you would jump to slide 15.

[139:01] This is your preview for what's coming in May. Go back one. Nope. You're You were right. You're getting there. 15. I think you're too far. That's okay. You Oh, you can't see the numbers. All right. Go back. I'll tell you when we're there. It's a timeline with five five columns on it. There you go. Ding ding ding. Um, so in May, you'll see uh we actually weren't going to be bringing you anything around the 2027 budget. What we were going to be bringing you is an adjustment to base and Stacy can explain this process if you don't mind if I just >> Yes. Good evening. Stacy Hoffman, senior budget analyst and nice to be here with all of you tonight. Um so the city does have an adjustment base where we can change the city council approved appropriation with city councils. We do

[140:00] this about twice a year and really for our department the first adjustment to base um that will be brought to you will be um increase in revenues due to grants and then donations. Um, and then we will also have the carry forward capital improvement program dollars that were unspent in 2025 and brought forward into 2026. So, it does formally change our appropriation to the budget and that will be on a consent. >> Thanks, Stacy. Uh, Scott Shutenberg again, deputy director. So looking forward at the rest of the calendar through the year, um first and foremost, our staff are already working uh to establish their budget and make recommendations for any changes or adjustments internally. Those then get submitted internally to our leadership team and our business services team to review and make recommendations. But what you'll see in May, um, Stacy just mentioned, but then in June, we will

[141:01] present the department's proposed budget here to Pr and um, we're going to be looking to you all for input on that budget and feedback. And then in August, um, we'll bring forward our fees. And so we are already looking at fees and what adjustments we take into consideration fees that occurred changes last year um uh consumer price index and some of those changes to our expenses and whatnot. But we we'll be bringing those fees to you in August. And then as Ally mentioned in September we'll have the city manager's recommended budget. And so you will have that um that formal role in recommending um the budget at that point in time. And then city council will be doing their study sessions and their readings uh October 1st and 15th. And we hope to have an approved budget there um in October uh for the entire city. Any questions on the process?

[142:02] >> Uh what's the fiscal year for the city? The fiscal year is January 1 through December 31st. >> Yeah, I'll just add um you did receive a handout. This is something that we will be going over in May. So, this is part of um helping inform the PRA a little bit better about all of our funding sources. So, it was included to your packet. We'll bring back a copy for you so that you have it. It's just a nice reference guide as we are going through um each of our funding. Stacy and Scott, thank you both so much for adjusting tonight and coming back in May to share with us the the glory of

[143:00] 2027 budget development. I appreciate our CIP team was here and we'll we'll be back in May. Thank you all for being flexible. Uh okay. So we will then move on to matters from the board. Um thank you Jenny for bringing this more robust handout. Um, this portion of the meeting is for members of the board to report on PRAB's annual work plan goal for each member. Um, we have an informal goal of attending two or more parks and recreation related community activities per month, promoting parks and recreation through social media. If you use social media, attending site tours and supporting departments, partnership initiatives. Um, tonight we have a couple of meetings. We have one item on the agenda um which is which is the changes proposed changes to our public participation rules. Um has everyone had a chance to look at the proposals in the

[144:00] packet? Okay, that is on page 41 it looks like. So the intent go >> that's been on all night. >> How about now? No. Still >> is it? >> Yeah. >> Okay. Uh so the intent the intent of the of this proposal was uh to to put some constraints around public comment not with the intention of stifling the community's ability to speak to us but more just to keep these meetings um on a on a timeline that we can predict and plan around and um to make sure we're ending ending on time. Um

[145:03] I don't think anyone in this room intends to or or desires to silence the public or restrict their ability to speak to us. Um, however, I think there's also an interest in getting out of here at nine o'clock or close to nine o'clock. Um, okay. So, let's do this. Does anybody have any questions about the language itself? So, I mean clarifying questions. You're not sure what this means. Uh, there's a sentence that's confusing. Um, and I'll start with you, Channing. >> Okay. Kira. >> Hi. >> Um, I understand. >> Okay. >> Okay. I understand. >> Okay, maybe we didn't need this point. So, let's just let's just move to discussion. Um, unless you have questions about language general or reba. Okay. Um, okay. So, let's start with you again, Channing. What What are your thoughts on this matter? >> I'm really concerned that two minutes is not very much time. I you know, I I

[146:00] really kept an eye on the timer as people were speaking today. And while some folks I think squandered their time on a little bit too much context, I I sympathize with the ability to to get your point across in in three minutes, let alone two minutes. >> Okay. Uh K. >> Yeah, I agree. And maybe this was uh because I know we did talk about it last meeting. Um, so I might have said something um that indicated that I would prefer to move from three to two. Um, but I will clarify that I I think we should keep it at three. >> Michael, I I agree. I mean, I think two minutes is is just too short and you end up people speaking very fast and they don't finish their thoughts. and even three minutes as we heard tonight, you know, it seemed to be like a a good sweet spot for people to to make their point. So, um I think two minutes is just too short. And I'm also another

[147:02] comment I have is that I'm glad that there is there's no overall time limit for the public comment period. So, you know, in the meetings that I've attended, we've occasionally had, you know, 15 20 people speak, but for the most part, it's been pretty limited. And I I like that there is no overall limit or will be no overall limit if we approve it. And then finally, the um there was a concern raised about somebody not being able, you know, who had to sign up to speak in advance. I think it may have been Lynn >> um and this proposed language or modified language seems to alleviate that concern because somebody can sign up during public comment and so their voice will be heard. >> Okay. I liked the comment about matching it instead to not to city council but to either open space or planning. I think we might be better served. I think that it's important that we don't stand on our own because that's just confusing. But we should match up with another

[148:00] border commission. So I would like to know more about what those two um boards do and then pick one. I can respond to that if you want because we did Clarissa did do some research on that if you >> Okay, go ahead. >> Yeah, if and it is it is three minutes and I appreciate your comment Kira that something might have been misheard at the last meeting. I'll I'll share sometimes we need to do a better job at clarifying what we heard. Um and I I thought we heard two minutes but we might have captured that wrong. So anyway, um open space and planning board are both three minutes. Is that accurate, Clarissa? Yeah, >> I guess I just don't understand the problem we're trying to solve because we've never at least not while I've been on the board, we've never had, you know, major comments where we just couldn't we didn't have enough time. So, >> I think it's we just we don't have a process at all.

[149:00] >> Oh, okay. If that's just if having a process, yeah, then I Yeah, I would want to keep it at least at three minutes. So, I would tend to disagree with the twominut time frame. I think it really is too short. I think we also want to encourage members of the community to be succinct and get to the point. Um I think um 3 minutes is is good in that regard and that there is a need to transparently put forward a limit otherwise people will go on forever. Um, I also very much appreciated the opportunity we were able to give Lynn to speak even though somehow things slipped through the cracks and to actually

[150:00] give the opportunity to members who have come here in person to be able to speak up for their three minute period um is a very good thing to have. It shows people we care about what they have to say um without undue burden and I really appreciated that we could do that this evening for something that clearly slipped through the cracks in terms of not getting an email or whatever. Um >> yeah. >> Um okay. So it sounds like there's consensus around uh adopting rules with the time limit for individual speakers at 3 minutes. Um I believe that we yeah we need this is an update to our handbook. Uh so we need to formally vote on this. Um is there anything I'm missing? >> Clarissa, can you check the process? I think you all to were to review the

[151:00] language and then it needs to go to the city attorney's office to review and then you would vote in May. Is that is that correct on process? >> Yes. And I did just want to point out that the current language states that speakers must sign up to speak before the meeting in advance, but in practice we let them sign up in person during the meeting. And so that alone at least needs to be updated. >> Okay. And that that is in the proposed language that says >> correct that's the first sentence updated language. >> Can I just ask what the intent or how one defines in advance is and should that be defined? Is it a piece of paper that's out by the door as somebody comes in signing up or it has to be an email, you know, >> an hour before the meeting or >> 24 hours or currently 4:30 p.m. the day of the meeting. Um, we do want to update that process that doesn't require um,

[152:02] PRAB approval, but we did mention it in the matters from the board as well to 00 p.m. on the same day um, to encourage people to sign up earlier. It aligns more with city council. Um, theirs actually closes the day before and so we would still have it the day of. >> I want to add a little bit of a why there. the the reason and some of this has been an evolving thing since we've had hybrid meetings. So in 2020, March of 2020 and for about 2 years, we were entirely virtual and so we had to that's when the sign up in advance was required because there were all kinds of um challenges with public comment and the Zoom era, the fully Zoom era. We're now fully hybrid and advanced signup is still really helpful for a couple of reasons. one, this young lady over here has to manage setting up the timer, enabling the speaker, like going back and forth between in person and virtual. Some boards have two folks over there doing this. That's something actually

[153:01] we've looked at and Clarissa does an amazing job by herself. Um, but the other reason is it helps with that order piece and we heard the process improvement of giving folks when and especially if we have, you know, more than four or five speakers, giving folks a runway so that it's not all of a sudden Mike, you're turned on, go, right? We I think we heard that process improvement. I know at city council it's the mayor who facilitates the runway, but that's something we can talk about offline. So anyway, I just want to share the why with advanced signup. I do think there's a both and here. Advanced signup is great. It makes it easier to facilitate the meeting and you don't want to create exclusivity or or block access. >> Okay. So, um, does anyone else have any thoughts on this proposal? >> Just I just want to make sure. Is there anything in here that limits the number of people who can speak? >> I don't believe so. >> Okay. >> Yeah, I was thinking the people like if there was a limitation on people but

[154:01] time limit. Yeah, I see that. three. >> Uh Jenny, do the changes we've talked about with regards to people being able to sign up dynamically, so to speak, does that align us with the other boards with their comment um periods? >> Uh the boards have different practices. So I wouldn't really say any boards are aligned at the moment. Yeah, I'll note that the most common practice is to encourage advanced sign up. We've got a a similar chart. It looked like Chrissy had something. She'd done her own work and so I'll just know our team has our team has gathered that and it is one of the things I I agree. We've heard a a speaker at public comment say, "Gosh, I wish it were consistent so I knew what to expect." That's on the city clerk's office work plan. They provide support to all the boards and the commissions. What is most consistent is encouraging advanced sign up while still allowing participation at

[155:00] the meeting. >> Y Kira or Michael Jenny. >> Okay, good. So, I guess let's send this language to to the city attorney's office with the change from two to three minutes per speaker. Uh and then we will vote on it in May. D, did you have a thought? Oh, just if we're looking at specific language, >> do we want to instead say members of the public may sign up to speak either in advance or during the meeting? Members of the public are encouraged to sign up in advance, but may also or something to that effect. If you're really encouraging to >> Yeah. to sign up in advance may seems a little um great. >> You definitely can. Um I will say they typically refer to our website language and not the prep handbook language and this is just for the prep handbook. Um but we definitely can reward it to say

[156:00] that if you'd like. >> We would probably also want to update the website, right? >> Yeah. Okay. >> Can I ask one more thing, please? >> Yeah. >> Oh, yeah. Um on the sign up, sorry. Can you say again why we have to have a 12 closing period for sign up instead of 4? Is there a reason that that's causing problems? >> Typically, it is challenging. Um, with the 4pm I I do pick up catering and then I have to reply to all the emails and everything. We are going to implement a form stack which should make that easier. Um, but there's just a lot of moving parts around that time so it is difficult. but they're welcome to sign up in person here. And so it's mainly just um for the advanced sign up portion. We would prefer having an earlier cut off time for that. >> So they'll >> they can still show up, sign up. Okay, got it. Thank you. >> Uh any other suggestions on the on language or questions or

[157:02] Okay, good. So um thank you, Clarissa. Thank you, Ally. Um let us we look forward to hearing what the city attorney says next month. Uh and we can move on to uh matters from the board which um I know I read the text a moment ago. This is really just informal time for us to share with each other and staff. Um anything going on in parks that we've noticed or that we're doing uh or that we enjoyed or didn't enjoy. Um so Donna, do you have any thoughts you'd like to share with everyone? It's okay if you don't. No, I I would just say my experience with consent agenda items is usually updates aren't provided as part of an a consent agenda. Usually there are things that need to be voted on um that are voted on all together. Now maybe within

[158:02] public government operations. That's different. But that's been my experience in terms of consent consent agenda items. Usually it's a package of things that get voted on in one vote. Um and it's more regular non non-controversial issues that are being voted on together versus updates which are provided just as information in a premeating package and I will say that is the intent with our consent agenda. Obviously tonight we had significant discussion. Uh we don't always >> but we appreciate the note on on process. >> I I was just going to add that that Dana's experience aligns generally with the city. So the city council has a consent agenda every two weeks and it's at their business meeting and it is items that are seen as non-controversial

[159:00] rather routine city business that they can approve in a lump sum. That doesn't mean they don't have the ability to call something up as they need to. I'll share with you I don't know why our updates are part of the consent agenda. That's that's one of the things that's just not been on the list of things to change. Other departments do it is that there's a section is you know updates from the department and it's more clear and less bureaucratic to everyone that it's it's actually not a consent agenda that it requires any action and so in a future PRA packet update or other it certainly could consider renaming that. It might be more clear for folks. >> Anything else? Okay. >> Yes, I have. Um, well, I just was going to look back Oh, sorry. >> I was just going to look back at um maybe future board items and tours can be where updates are. I mean, if we were to try to move it somewhere where it doesn't require action. It's just we might want to because you do a nice job of explaining things like, oh, this is

[160:02] what we've got coming up and stuff. So maybe if updates were in there, it might be something that then isn't motionable. >> I can talk offline with the team to see when we might gather some examples and see how we might share it differently and then bring you some options. I I don't think it'll happen for May, but for an upcoming meeting and when we have time. I I I agree what's sinking into me is something we're really working on is plain language and making things accessible and even just the term consent agenda, right? If the if these are updates, how do we make that more clear? So, I think that we could um put a project in the pipeline to see some good examples and propose a modification probably not for May, but sometime this summer. >> And I think that it was Elliot who combined it. It was during his term as president he had mentioned because I think they were separate and then he decided to put everything in a consent agenda like council. So, I don't know if that helps in looking at what we did before that, but I just remember him telling me that he decided on what was in there. So, just just as an FYI,

[161:00] that's all I know about the consent agenda. Um, and then, um, I had a couple of things that I just wanted to bring up, and I'm not sure if these would be, um, updates for the next meeting or if we want to talk about adding them to future agenda. One is I'm getting a lot of communication from people in Shiakwa who are really concerned about the fire danger and possible signage that parks could help with about um you know no open flames or however um however parks can help with that and I'd put them in touch with lots of different people OSMP you know fire and you know everybody um but anything from a parks perspective if we're doing anything I would love to be able to report back to for the residents of Jadaka to let them know that parks is participating in some fashion based on the two fires that we've had up there um in a short amount of time. And um I also have heard about reservation issues with uh the new

[162:03] reservation system, some issues with, you know, when when pickle ball is requesting a court, it all comes up under tennis. Um and there's also no refunds due to weather. I don't know what any of that is or um but they're concerned about that. Um and the reservation system, they're just slightly afraid that it'll show pickle ball uses down if we're pulling out information through the system. I don't know if you wanted to comment on that. >> Yeah, I'm I'm happy to talk about that. So, we are still implementing and going through the process of refining smartre our biome our software. Um, I will say that uh we're doing our best to track accurately when a court or a space is used for pickle ball versus tennis. And we know that the concern was with having the same fee for both a tennis court and

[163:01] a pickleball court. um people would reserve a tennis court so they could get four more people playing pickle ball on that space. We've addressed that individually with the groups. We've addressed it in the smart rec system. We're going to continue to work towards that and I think as part of our court system plan with dedicated courts starting this fall with Tom Watson uh for pickle ball. We'll be able to really differentiate that and track numbers a little bit better in the future, but we're doing our best to track that right now. Okay. So, >> thank you. event. That'll be very helpful for those guys. And um that's it. >> Michael, >> for anyone who's looking to have a fun time this Sunday, the um Boulder Creek Cleanup is still soliciting people who want to volunteer. And uh looks like it'll be a great time. So, if you're looking for something fun to do, bring your uh litter grabbers.

[164:00] Um, so my my office uh recently moved to Pearl Street, but I also live like on Pearl Street. So I have to say guys did it again. Uh, it's absolutely beautiful. All the flowers. Um, and it's just now that I'm there like walk every day walking to work. um not only do I enjoy it, but I see so many people who are just like stopped taking pictures like admiring um everything that your team has done. So, yeah, just wanted to like share the enthusiasm um from the community uh how beautiful you made Pearl Street. Uh, and then, uh, I already told Jenny this, but, um, yeah, I went to the South Boulder Open play over the last month. Um, I did kind of want to see what it the the court uh, cracks looked like for myself. Um, so it is true there are a lot of cracks. Um, it is a little bit difficult there, but at the same time, um, we were able to play and there wasn't any, uh,

[165:01] disruption to playing, um, on those courts. So, I think it's it's sort of both of the the of those situations are true. It's true that there's a lot of cracks and it it does need to be resurfaced, but it's also true that um you're able to play pickle ball um on all of those courts and have a great time. So, >> I want to call out two things. One for um Dana and Channon, if you didn't know, that Pearl Street Mall is operated as a city park. And so that is you we have a team of master gardeners that cares for and um the tulips are about past their prime which is abnormal and another sign of of our early spring. They were amazing and um but on the I just want to call out in case you all missed it in the updates we shared and you all have heard folks are concerned about the condition of the courts at the South Boulder Rec Center. It is our practice now to completely tear out all of those courts that were built in the 70s and 80s on a slip sheet asphalt because it cracks. We've got clay soils, they move, and we get these cracks. Our hope had been to do that at South. It doesn't

[166:00] make sense to right now until we have a design and fund a replacement of the South Boulder Rec Center. We don't want to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on courts that create a constraint. And so, in the meantime, we have identified funding in our asset management program and we'll be resurfacing those court. It is a short-term fix and I guarantee you within a year you will see cracks again and it's the best we can do now so that we're not limiting our options for the future recreation center. I know that the the comment the public comment about um the homeless situation in the park really resonated with me and I know that a lot of it is you know it's a kind of interdisciplinary um area but it would be really you know with the naming thing it would be really a shame to spend all that money on fixing up the park into what looks like a beautiful facility and then have people be afraid to use it. >> Yeah. Yeah, I want to share with you all and I'm not quite sure when. It'll probably be more in 2027. We are

[167:00] spending a lot of time on a civic area management plan and I would expect I mean all of our parks are underresourced from an operations and maintenance perspective, but the civic area given its impact on e economic vitality and our largest downtown park. I do expect that we'll be considering ways to through partnership through other funding. We may have to reallocate funding but activation and having more vibrancy in that area. That is the number one way to drive positive behavior is through the programming. It's an area where we have continuously had decreases in fundings and special events and the things that bring that positive activity. But it's a focus for us to figure it out. Not just because of the park investment, but because it should be a great downtown park. we saw with the Wildwoods pilot just what a little bit of of activation and something that brings people down there on a regular basis can do and so um heard >> um I've got just a couple of things for

[168:00] things that we'll be putting on the calendar for the next couple of meetings is we have um uh Dan and Channing we have formal roles within this body as leison to individual projects um these are you know like projects that are sort of higher importance, higher touch. Um, South Rec Center is certainly one. The court system project is another one. Um, uh, civic center. So, think, uh, between now and our next meeting if there's projects you may want to have particular focus on and, uh, we'll be reallocating leaison roles. Um, and, uh, I think with that we can probably >> can I can I talk about because one of the things is played. >> Go ahead, please. Okay. Um, I just wanted to mention, uh, one of those liaison roles is with an organization called PlayBoulder. And Playboulder is the foundation arm of the parks and recreation department. And they have a lot of good programming that, um, that they do throughout the year within forestry and um, equitable recreation

[169:00] for youth. They meet once a month. They have a lot of good events and things. And so, um, if you are interested in being involved with that, uh, I'm on it now. I've been on it for two years. So, we're looking to have somebody else take my place on there. And it's just um it's a liazison. So, during this portion of the meeting, you just report, oh, this is what play's got going on. You know, there's like a golf outing and um they have different tree planting days and things like that. So, it's it's a really nice organization. It's run really well. It's a robust board and um I would recommend looking into that a little bit and I'm happy to answer any questions or >> actually I would appreciate a list of all of the liaison roles so I can see what actually is available that might fit with >> yeah I'll I'll provide that to both of you um and uh and it's also evolving um you know there are projects that are coming up that may need um many leaison don't presently have description what it is

[170:02] >> for sure. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I want to say we would typically review that and prepare that in advance of the meeting. And so if you all are going to calendar that for May, that list of available projects and work plan items would be shared with the May packet. Go ahead. >> Um I was wondering um do we have anyone on staff who is sort of responsible for um seeking out private funding and you shaping public private partnerships or anything like that? >> We have a variety of folks that work on it. So it would depend on the subject matter and the topic of I would say there's a variety of positions that have that as part of the job. >> Okay. The the reason I'm asking is I know because of the financial outlook, we're hoping to bring in some potential private partners for some of the work that we need to get done, whether it's new construction or or uh renovations.

[171:01] And it just I just want to make sure that um I know there are people who have asked me offline, how do we do that as an organization? And it is a full-time job. number one, seeking out donors and then finding out like how those relationships could be shaped and how we can create those partnerships. So, um I just wanted to make sure that we actually have at least one person dedicated to seeking that out because as we've seen, there are people who have shown up who have money to uh potentially partner with with the city. >> Yeah. So, specifically as it relates to I'll I'll share a couple of the positions we have. So with the 2022 budget, we created a new position that is a partnerships manager and grants and partnerships. So that person has oversight for our volunteer team and they do um a lot of the grant expertise for our team as well as there are key liaison with play but that's more at the um let's say you know we're talking tens of thousands of dollars what you're talking about major facility

[172:00] partnerships that's more in my role and we've actually made some changes recently so that I have more capacity to do that work both at fundraising and in partnership building we have consolidated all of operations just as of April under shot. Um we've made some other changes in the operation because there is a lot of potential. There are groups and folks that are interested community organizations and we really see it as the viable way for um addressing some of the amends in our community. >> So if someone asks us and the public, you know, they have an interest in potentially, you know, naming rights for a facility or whatever, you're the person that we direct them to. >> Yes, ma'am. And so also for donorships, any donor relationship over $50,000, I'm the key contact for a lot of reasons. >> You know, I'm even thinking um smaller sponsorship arrangements and does the city have a resource for those

[173:03] types of things? I I I go to swim meets at V-Mac and I see that there are canvases hanging from the ceiling that are local businesses or I went to a big swim meet in Indianapolis and they had a digital board right by the pool that was five feet tall and three feet wide with advertising. And I'm I'm wondering what is being done there in terms of not $50,000 um donor sponsors but even you know a lot of small things add up um what's being done in that regard. >> Yeah absolutely. Uh we do work closely with the play foundation for sponsoring of event. So, um they typically would come out and uh we'll do movies in the park or movies at the reservoir. Um they're involved in that also with the fundraising associated with the golf

[174:01] tournament that they offer. Um we are in the process of looking into um kind of sponsorship coordinator level positions that would be assisting our marketing team as well as doing some of that sponsorship of our programs. Um, we do right now have a lot of those opportunities. If you go out to Flat Irons Golf Course during the summer, you'll see a Jeep, for example, out there. And they've done different sponsorships. They work with different local businesses and whatnot for uh for some different things. But, um, at this point, it's throughout the department. It's not consolidated under one person. And then we work with the Play Foundation, but we are looking at streamlining that in the future. And and we do see that as a possibility to generate additional revenue. um the position could typically pay for itself and so um we're we're working on that and analyzing what might be available. >> I just want to note that the really Scott mentioned the key constraint is staff capacity and so as we look at

[175:00] there's actually a you know a budget proposal from our team like hey we'd like a position we think it could pay for itself. We don't have a lot of wiggle room for that type of a risk and and financial we're trying to figure that out how to be entrepreneurial and not risky with tax dollars. >> Any other thoughts for this portion of the meeting? Okay, we can go ahead and close the meeting for tonight. Um, welcome Dana and Channing. Hope you enjoyed your first meeting. Um, and with that, we're journed. We'll see you next month.