Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-03-20 Parks & Recreation Summary MinutesAPPROVED 1 2 3 4 MINUTES 5 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION 6 SPECIAL MEETING 7 ANNUAL RETREAT 8 March 20, 2015 9 Mitchell Park Community Center 10 3700 Middlefield Road 11 Palo Alto, California 12 13 Commissioners Present: Stacey Ashlund, Deirdre Crommie, Jennifer Hetterly, Abbie 14 Knopper, Ed Lauing, Pat Markevitch, Keith Reckdahl 15 Commissioners Absent: 16 Others Present: Council Liaison Eric Filseth 17 Staff Present: Daren Anderson, Catherine Bourquin, Rob de Geus, Peter Jensen 18 I. ROLL CALL CONDUCTED BY: Catherine Bourquin 19 20 II. AGENDA CHANGES, REQUESTS, and DELETIONS: 21 22 None. 23 24 III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: 25 26 None. 27 28 IV. BUSINESS: 29 30 1. Review 2014 Parks and Recreation Commission Accomplishments. 31 32 Chair Reckdahl: Our agenda today is work. We're going to start with the handout that 33 everyone should have, the PARC Priorities 2014. This is what we did last year at the 34 retreat. We're going to walk through these and then say, "Are they still relevant?" and 35 what the priority is. Prioritization is just so nebulous that I don't want to go into a lot of 36 detail of highest priority, lowest priority. Of course a priority would be good. At the 37 end, on the very last sheet, I guess it'd be page 4. We have additional ones that staff has 38 Approved Minutes 1 APPROVED put in through ones that we've identified. If there are any other ones that we've identified, 39 we can insert those. 40 41 Commissioner Hetterly: You don't want updates on last year's . You just want status, do 42 we want to continue it? 43 44 Chair Reckdahl: Yeah. 45 46 Rob de Geus: I just want to say a couple of words to get it started as well. First I wanted 47 to say that I can't be here for the whole retreat unfortunately. There's another event at 48 Stanford University today. 49 50 Commissioner Lauing: What about? 51 52 Mr. de Geus: Project Safety Net. Dr. Shashank Joshi has gathered some of the leading 53 thinkers around suicide prevention and youth wellbeing from around the country. There's 54 eight of them, really fascinating individuals. We had about 40 people in this meeting 55 including some of the key leaders. I had to present there this morning early, but it's a 56 unique opportunity. It only got put together in the last couple of weeks and that's why it 57 was a conflict. So I will be getting back there. That's one thing I wanted to mention. 58 Two, we have some binders for you that you can take home. This is obviously online and 59 you can access it there too. It relates to the Parks Master Plan. This relates to the data 60 about the Parks Master Plan and trying to put it in a way that we can access it a little 61 more easily. Particularly important when we get to prioritization and defining 62 conclusions and findings, that we can refer back to the data. It's not complete, but there's 63 a lot that we're gathering. The survey data's in here as well, which we'll be talking about 64 on Tuesday. You'll have a chance to look at that with the demographic data which is in 65 your binder. We'll keep adding to that. I wanted to mention that. Also, Keith and I did 66 work on this as well. He was just talking about it. What I had about the first three pages 67 of the 2014 Priorities was to think about them, if they are still relevant for this year and at 68 least actionable for this year in terms of a policy issue. 69 70 Chair Reckdahl: A good example of what Rob is talking about is the 7.7 acres. It's still 71 relevant going forward, but we probably won't have any action until the hydrology study 72 comes back. We're on hold until that comes back. We're going to talk about it as 73 pending as opposed to completed or ongoing. 74 75 Mr. de Geus: Review these and have a discussion about what the Commission's thinking 76 is. There may be differences of opinion about this too. Is it pending? Is it really 77 relevant? Opinions may vary about that. Talking through those things and if there's 78 agreement that, yes, still highly relevant, we can still do some work around it this year, 79 then we move it over to 2015. In thinking about this coming year, you would have 80 Approved Minutes 2 APPROVED additional interests that you want to bring up and that can be added as well. We do have 81 lunch here. You didn't see this in advance. One approach might be to get some lunch, a 82 little bit of a working lunch while everybody reviews this and reads through it before you 83 really get into it. That could be healthy/helpful. 84 85 Commissioner Crommie: (crosstalk) hot item. 86 87 Chair Reckdahl: I think that's a good example. I do want to go through some priority. 88 The easiest way to prioritize is not by importance, because that's nebulous, but by action, 89 timeline. The highest actions would be the ones that'll be next for meetings. Ones that'll 90 be three or four months from now will be low priority. Otherwise we'll be debating 91 what's more important. Timeline is crisper. We'll think about these in terms of timeline. 92 Let's take a break, have lunch and be back. Start locking down the topics and then 93 discuss relevancy on each one. Dog parks, that's highly relevant. 94 95 Commissioner Hetterly: That's ongoing. Hopefully, we'll wrap up this year. 96 97 Chair Reckdahl: Do we have an estimate of the next time it goes to the Commission? 98 99 Commissioner Hetterly: We'll have an update this month. What are we? We're March? 100 May or June. After the public outreach or did we want to talk to (inaudible). Maybe we 101 should talk about it before we go to the big public meeting. Maybe April. 102 103 Chair Reckdahl: When is the meeting? 104 105 Commissioner Knopper: Next month. 106 107 Chair Reckdahl: The meeting is ... 108 109 Commissioner Hetterly: April or May. 110 111 Commissioner Crommie: Your outreach meeting? 112 113 Commissioner Hetterly: No, we haven't set an outreach meeting. The question is should 114 we meet as a Commission before we do that or should we meet as a Commission after we 115 do that. 116 117 Commissioner Knopper: My vote is after because we've already talked about it. We can 118 bring the results and we will have spoken to all the stakeholders. 119 120 Commissioner Hetterly: Okay, so May, June. 121 122 Approved Minutes 3 APPROVED Chair Reckdahl: Has anything changed since the last time we talked about it? 123 124 Commissioner Hetterly: We've had a couple of meetings. 125 126 Chair Reckdahl: Our outlook hasn't changed at all? The things we're considering are still 127 the same? 128 129 Commissioner Hetterly: There have been some additional options. 130 131 Commissioner Knopper: We had a stakeholders meeting. 132 133 Commissioner Crommie: You should report back to us. 134 135 Commissioner Hetterly: We are going to, but we won't have a full discussion on it. 136 137 Chair Reckdahl: It'll just be at the end, an ad hoc update? 138 139 Commissioner Knopper: Yes. 140 141 Chair Reckdahl: Let's put down June as the next time we expect to see an agenda item. 142 143 Commissioner Crommie: What is the meeting called? Is it for stakeholders? 144 145 Commissioner Hetterly: No, it's for everybody. 146 147 Commissioner Crommie: Public outreach. You'll notify the whole Commission and we 148 can go if we want? 149 150 Commissioner Hetterly: Yes. 151 152 Chair Reckdahl: The next one is the website. Are we happy with the website or is there 153 still work to do? 154 155 Commissioner Hetterly: There's still work to do. It's moving very slowly. I don't think 156 there's a lot of work to do. 157 158 Vice Chair Markevitch: I don't think it needs to go to the Commission at all. 159 160 Commissioner Hetterly: We don't need to discuss it. Once we have it in a form that we 161 think is final we will let you all know. 162 163 Vice Chair Markevitch: When its complete? 164 Approved Minutes 4 APPROVED 165 Commissioner Hetterly: When anything changes. Does that make sense? 166 167 Commissioner Ashlund: Can we declare the revision complete and the maintenance 168 mode it is no longer actively being redesigned? 169 170 Commissioner Hetterly: Right. 171 172 Commissioner Ashlund: You should report on that when we get to that point. The 173 question is do you want a stake in the ground so we get to that point. 174 175 Commissioner Crommie: You guys don't feel like you need any more input from us, is 176 that correct? You pretty much know what you're doing? 177 178 Commissioner Hetterly: Yeah. The last couple of times we haven't gotten a lot of input, 179 and I think we integrated it. Maybe we don't have to come back at all. 180 181 Commissioner Crommie: I emailed you guys separately saying some of those links 182 weren't working di those get fixed. 183 184 Commissioner Hetterly: (crosstalk) we aren't coming back. I'm sorry. 185 186 Commissioner Crommie: It's always informative to go to the website and try to click 187 around. Occasionally people say, "How do I get in touch with Parks and Rec?" I always 188 say, "Go to our website." 189 190 Chair Reckdahl: What's strange right now is when you go into the website, you have to 191 click agenda. From the home site it's not obvious how to get to the agenda and items. 192 193 Mr. de Geus: You have to scroll to get to the current agenda which isn't ideal. The most 194 current thing should probably be high on the page. 195 196 Commissioner Crommie: Above the pictures. That's the thing (crosstalk). 197 198 Chair Reckdahl: If you go to the City website and go Parks and Rec, you don't end up at 199 the Parks and Rec page with the pictures. 200 201 Commissioner Hetterly: You can say May for the website. 202 203 Commissioner Ashlund: I can agree with that. 204 205 Approved Minutes 5 APPROVED Chair Reckdahl: In May we'll have some type of an agenda item. CIPs. Rob, you were 206 saying that the CIPs are going to Council. 207 208 Mr. de Geus: Right now we're in the process of trying to get the CIPs that we submitted 209 and worked with the Commission on, a sense of priorities and Staff priorities, through the 210 budget process which will go to the Finance Committee in May and then the City Council 211 in June. Then we start over and start working on the next five-year plan. It's likely it will 212 come up again. 213 214 Chair Reckdahl: That will be the 2017. 215 216 Mr. de Geus: Right. We start thinking about that in the fall. Last year it was good 217 actually. After summer, we immediately started engaging in a conversation about the 218 CIP plan. That's one thing that can happen. Then report back of how the approval 219 process is going. You can also attend those Council meetings and participate, speak. 220 221 Chair Reckdahl: The next item will be fall 2015. 222 223 Commissioner Hetterly: We call this one complete, but then we roll it over to have a new 224 entry for 2015. 225 226 Mr. de Geus: It probably should say CIP 2016-2020, then 2017-2021. 227 228 Chair Reckdahl: Next is community gardens. 229 230 Commissioner Crommie: Stacey and I did a lot of research on community gardens. We 231 should probably write that up. 232 233 Commissioner Ashlund: Come back with recommendations. 234 235 Commissioner Crommie: Yeah. I had written a letter to send to PAN, Palo Alto 236 Neighborhoods, leaders to get some feedback, to see who the leaders are in the different 237 neighborhoods who are interested in community gardens. I think I got my email to go to 238 the right place. I was a little bit confused on who to send it to. I tried to send it to the 239 head of the Midtown Neighborhood Association, and it didn't make it to her for some 240 reason. I might have the wrong email address. Sheri? 241 242 Vice Chair Markevitch: Sheri Furman. 243 244 Commissioner Crommie: It didn't get to her. I would like to do that again. That was just 245 an outreach to try to figure out who the key players are. 246 247 Approved Minutes 6 APPROVED Vice Chair Markevitch: I'll send (inaudible). 248 249 Commissioner Crommie: Is she the direct head or is she in a partnership? 250 251 Commissioner Markevitch: I think it's (inaudible). 252 253 Commissioner Crommie: Yeah, if you could send it to both of them. I'll get that sent 254 out. It's important for me to follow up because there is interest emerging from the Master 255 Plan. I don't have my finger on the pulse as far as level of interest outside of our survey. 256 257 Commissioner Hetterly: Do you have a timeline to move forward on that? 258 259 Commissioner Crommie: If I get that from Pat. We already have it written up what we 260 wanted to send out. 261 262 Commissioner Ashlund: That's not recommendations. That's an outreach phase. 263 264 Commissioner Crommie: It's an outreach. Depending on how it goes, we could aim for 265 the April meeting. 266 267 Chair Reckdahl: Are we looking at upgrading the current facilities, adding new facilities, 268 or getting generic input from the users? 269 270 Commissioner Ashlund: We were still at the input phase. 271 272 Commissioner Crommie: Input phase. To do our research we at least had cataloged what 273 we have. We needed to write up a recommendation based on that. It's two arms. 274 275 Commissioner Ashlund: It's two pieces. 276 277 Commissioner Crommie: Two pieces. 278 279 Commissioner Ashlund: Research so far and then community outreach. 280 281 Commissioner Crommie: And then the community outreach. 282 283 Vice Chair Markevitch: The outreach might take longer than writing. 284 285 Commissioner Crommie: Let's say May. If we get it done earlier, that's fine. 286 287 Mr. de Geus: Deirdre, we had just provided (inaudible). The MIG consultants are 288 coming back. They'll be here for a few days early next week and obviously for our 289 Approved Minutes 7 APPROVED meeting. We've set up a number of meetings for them to meet with different 290 stakeholders, and community gardeners is one of them. How many gardeners do we have 291 at the meeting next week? 292 293 Catherine Bourquin: He only wanted the gardeners (inaudible). 294 295 Mr. de Geus: (inaudible) 296 297 Commissioner Crommie: You contacted people from your known list of gardeners? 298 299 Mr. de Geus: They're the leagues or the community volunteers that are the liaisons for 300 each garden. 301 302 Commissioner Crommie: The problem is we were trying to figure out in the south Palo 303 Alto where there are no gardens. 304 305 Mr. de Geus: Yeah, yeah. This may not get at that. I mention it because if we let you 306 know when that meeting is, would you be available? 307 308 Commissioner Crommie: I would love to go, yeah. 309 310 Mr. de Geus: (crosstalk) 311 312 Commissioner Crommie: Stacy and I could go. 313 314 Peter Jensen: It's on Tuesday. 315 316 Commissioner Ashlund: Tuesday, yeah. 317 318 Commissioner Crommie: Thank you for letting us know. That would be good 319 (crosstalk). 320 321 Mr. Jensen: 2:00 to 3:00 at Lucie Stern on Tuesday. 322 323 Commissioner Crommie: Tuesday, 2:00 to 3:00 at Lucie Stern. 324 325 Mr. Jensen: In the Fireside Room. 326 327 Commissioner Ashlund: I'm sorry. What room? 328 329 Mr. Jensen: Fireside. 330 331 Approved Minutes 8 APPROVED Commissioner Crommie: It would be nice if you could just forward us the outreach letter 332 so we know what you said to them. 333 334 Mr. de Geus: Okay. 335 336 Commissioner Crommie: Just before we arrive. How you framed it. 337 338 Chair Reckdahl: Rob, what is the status? We had a CIP in 2015 for community gardens, 339 the irrigation replacement. 340 341 Mr. de Geus: That got approved. 342 343 Chair Reckdahl: That got approved and the work's underway? 344 345 Mr. de Geus: The replacement irrigation system. 346 347 Mr. Jensen: Had a community meeting, I don't know now, three or four months ago. 348 That includes Rinconada, Pardee, and Johnson Park. Going to replace the hose bins. It's 349 not irrigation. It's just the main water pipe that goes out there. We decided based on 350 feedback from the meeting to hold off on the work until fall, early fall because that's 351 when their downtime is for their garden. (inaudible) of the garden to be growing plants. 352 It's still on and it'll happen sometime in October, when I'm imagining the date will be. 353 It'll take a little work. Those gardens at Rinconada and Pardee Park are very large and 354 the amount of piping that has to go into those things is fairly extensive to get back the 355 network of hose bins that are out there. 356 357 Chair Reckdahl: Is this something that could take a week to do or a month to do? Any 358 guess? 359 360 Mr. Jensen: For the bigger garden, it's going to probably take about three to four weeks 361 to do for each one. For Johnson Park, it'll probably take a week, week and a half to do. 362 Most of it is trenching. 363 364 Chair Reckdahl: In May 2015 we will talk about what we've got on the outreach and then 365 (inaudible) that. Sterling Canal. 366 367 Commissioner Crommie: Daren made one point of contact. It was before our joint 368 meeting with City Council. I forgot if I got back to you in follow up or not. I meant to. 369 370 Daren Anderson: I don't think you ever did. 371 372 Approved Minutes 9 APPROVED Commissioner Crommie: You were so busy on Byxbee Park (inaudible). I'm very 373 anxious to settle this. Where do we stand on this? A lot of people have had their eye on 374 that land for both a dog park and community garden for years now. We've never fully 375 resolved it. It's ongoing. 376 377 Commissioner Ashlund: We should look back in a couple of months. If everything is on 378 the table, maybe put it shortly after that. We didn't have much to say. The findings were 379 pretty limited as far as what to do with the land. 380 381 Commissioner Crommie: What was decided at the joint City Council meeting was to 382 bring it up to another level from where we had it. There's really not a lot for 383 Commissioner Ashlund and I to do on that. Daren, if you wouldn't mind doing that when 384 you get a chance and getting back to us. Maybe once you pursue that, we can have a 385 meeting, just the three of us. You could decide to present to the Commission and skip the 386 ad hoc. Do you want to have it involving that? Daren. 387 388 Chair Reckdahl: What we have to get is what we're allowed to do. 389 390 Commissioner Crommie: The tone that I got from the joint meeting was pushing back a 391 little bit. Not just having Public Works say, "Oh, that's just for us." 392 393 Mr. Anderson: Utilities is giving a knee jerk reaction to say, "We're not allowing 394 anything there. We have easements. We have use for the land. That's it. End of story." 395 That's what the Council's message was, take that (inaudible) and keep working. I'll work 396 with Rob and see if we can't make a little headway with Utilities and see where we can 397 go. Under the same kind of rubric of a piece of property we're not quite sure what we're 398 dealing with, very nearby is a little strip of land that we had once talked about for a dog 399 park. Same kind of analogy. Utilities say, "No, you can't use that. It's part of our lease. 400 If you want to take it over, it's $250,000 a year. You guys can use it for whatever you 401 want." It's just an aesthetic piece of turf right next to the skate bowl end of Greer Park. 402 403 Commissioner Crommie: Across the street. 404 405 Mr. Anderson: Across the street. We said that would be perfect for a permanent dog 406 park. That would be a great one to bring together. Probably a sit down meeting with 407 Utilities and we can hash this out. 408 409 Commissioner Hetterly: Yes, please. 410 411 Commissioner Crommie: What kind of timeline for that? 412 413 Mr. Anderson: A timeline, can we check in ... 414 Approved Minutes 10 APPROVED 415 Chair Reckdahl: Let's talk about that later. Sterling Canal, let's talk about a timeline. 416 417 Commissioner Crommie: That's what I mean. 418 419 Mr. Anderson: I was going to lump them in (crosstalk). 420 421 Chair Reckdahl: At the same meeting, yeah. 422 423 Mr. Anderson: Same meeting. How about in two months I return to the ad hoc? Is that 424 reasonable? 425 426 Commissioner Crommie: Okay. You can tell us if you feel like you want to return to us 427 ... 428 429 Mr. Anderson: If it's necessary? 430 431 Commissioner Crommie: ... or bring it to the whole Commission. 432 433 Mr. Anderson: Okay. 434 435 Commissioner Crommie: Two months from now, so we've got it on ... 436 437 Vice Chair Markevitch: June. 438 439 Chair Reckdahl: June 2015, we will get the information and relay that to the ad hoc. 440 Lucy Evans. 441 442 Commissioner Crommie: Stacey, do you want to talk about that one? 443 444 Commissioner Ashlund: Same status. We need to write up what we have so far and 445 report back to the Commission. I don't think there's a lot. 446 447 Chair Reckdahl: Do you have to gather more information or is it just a matter of 448 assembling what you already have? 449 450 Commissioner Ashlund: We haven't done any community outreach. We just did our 451 meeting with John Akin. 452 453 Commissioner Crommie: We learned a lot of the CIP status. We already reported those 454 through CIPs. 455 456 Approved Minutes 11 APPROVED Commissioner Ashlund: I'm wondering if there are any next steps on that. 457 458 Commissioner Crommie: The next step was on the third CIP that has to do with exhibits. 459 There's only been $56,000 or something allocated to it, and that's not enough money. 460 That is something that John Akin very much wants to work on, to figure out how to do it 461 properly, how to get more money. He wanted to take a better look at the park system up 462 there. He wanted to look at the exhibits not just for Lucy Evans in terms of (inaudible) 463 but to think about exhibits in Byxbee. He wanted to think about the whole area. That's 464 what he told us. 465 466 Mr. de Geus: That makes a lot of sense too. In fact, to do it in sequence and the right 467 way, we would line up the Baylands Comprehensive Conservation Plan, which is now in 468 the CIP plan to be funded. We're advocates for that. It's in there, so hopefully it will 469 happen. That would inform exhibits and signage and all sorts of things. 470 471 Commissioner Crommie: Does it inform that when you're talking about a conservation 472 plan? 473 474 Mr. de Geus: I would think, yeah. 475 476 Chair Reckdahl: That's getting to 2018. 477 478 Mr. de Geus: It's out of sequence. We'd have to do some exhibit work, because at this 479 point they're pretty old and out of date. 480 481 Commissioner Crommie: They're almost unreadable. That's the problem. Maybe just 482 remove them and leave no exhibits while we're waiting. 483 484 Chair Reckdahl: It'd be good to have someone that looks at Foothills ... 485 486 Mr. de Geus: We talked about (crosstalk). 487 488 Chair Reckdahl: ... Arastradero, and Baylands all at once. If you just look at one, a lot of 489 the big picture stuff and organization would be repeated by other people. 490 491 Commissioner Crommie: I don't agree with that. Once you lob them all together, it 492 won't happen. It's too big. They're totally different. Why do we need them all lumped 493 together? 494 495 Chair Reckdahl: Who's going to make the exhibits? Who's going to maintain the 496 exhibits? All that process is similar. Finding volunteers and finding stakeholders that 497 want to help us. 498 Approved Minutes 12 APPROVED 499 Commissioner Ashlund: It could be separated. 500 501 Commissioner Crommie: Do you mean signage? When we talk about exhibits, we mean 502 educational materials that are posted. 503 504 Chair Reckdahl: Yes. I'm thinking in those three cases the inside of the three interpretive 505 centers. 506 507 Commissioner Crommie: Let's take a step back. You can look at exhibits as just 508 associated physically with interpretive centers. We have those at each of those 509 interpretive centers. What John Akin was saying for the Baylands, because we're 510 developing the park trail system at Byxbee Park and it's a big, sprawled out area, he 511 wanted to look at that whole system beyond the interpretive center at Byxbee Park. I 512 think it's a separate entity to look at that. That's unrelated to Foothills and Arastradero. 513 My sense is that it would fall under its own CIP. 514 515 Commissioner Ashlund: I'd like to keep it separate for now. It might end up in two 516 places. As Chair Reckdahl is recommending, it is part of the larger picture. The CIPs 517 that are in progress there right now including the boardwalk, there is ... 518 519 Chair Reckdahl: I haven't been able to pull up the CIP. The CIP title says Baylands 520 Nature Interpretive Center Exhibits Improvement. 521 522 Commissioner Crommie: We're considering a change on that so it would be broader. 523 That in and of itself might not be enough money, sitting there right now in that CIP, for 524 the stated action. 525 526 Commissioner Hetterly: What is the role you envision for this Commission related to 527 that? 528 529 Commissioner Crommie: If we're going to take the broad look, the people who are on the 530 Byxbee ad hoc would have feedback to give on where we think it would be useful to have 531 signage. 532 533 Commissioner Hetterly: Do you think we need an ad hoc for that or is that something 534 that whatever John Akin comes up with would be presented to the full Commission and 535 we just review (crosstalk). 536 537 Commissioner Crommie: That's possible. I'm open minded if that's the direction we 538 want to go. Either the whole Commission or an ad hoc. We shouldn't drop the ball on it, 539 because the momentum is there right now. . 540 Approved Minutes 13 APPROVED 541 Mr. de Geus: There's also a lot of momentum for the interpretive Center. We've gotten 542 pretty clear direction from Council to do some work out there. Get the boardwalk figured 543 out, whether we can repair it or not, and clean it up and get some of those exhibits 544 improved. We do want to take action there. If we add additional scope, the concern is 545 that it starts to take longer. I get why we would do that, because there is connectivity. 546 547 Commissioner Crommie: Where do we stand on exhibits right now for Byxbee Park? Is 548 there a separate CIP? 549 550 Mr. Anderson: No, there is not. 551 552 Commissioner Crommie: John Akin was saying, "I have to go back and work on the 553 CIP. $56,000 is not going to be enough." Is that already approved? Is the money 554 already allocated to him? 555 556 Mr. de Geus: $56,000 is. 557 558 Commissioner Crommie: Maybe what he was saying is "I'm going to need to do more 559 than what this money is going to buy." He wants another CIP that he's going to work on, 560 that's going to address the areas that are not covered by the $56,000. 561 562 Council Member Filseth: Can I chime in with a question? 563 564 Commissioner Crommie: Yeah. 565 566 Council Member Filseth: Probably Rob ... 567 568 Commissioner Ashlund: Real quick before you do. When we met with John Akin, his 569 focus was clearly Junior Museum and Zoo. Is there anybody else on staff that could be 570 our designated person that would have time and energy to focus on the interpretive 571 Center? 572 573 Mr. de Geus: Not really, unfortunately. We used to have staff that that would be their 574 home, the interpretive center. 575 576 Commissioner Ashlund: Our hands are going to be tied as an ad hoc if we don't have 577 somebody on staff who's able to work on it. It seems like a very small percentage of his 578 time is available. 579 580 Commissioner Crommie: Yet you have a strong interest in this. 581 582 Approved Minutes 14 APPROVED Chair Reckdahl: Let's go back to Eric. 583 584 Commissioner Ashlund: Sorry. 585 586 Council Member Filseth: It's sort of another (inaudible) to the same thing. Read the 587 question (inaudible). When does the Parks and Recreation Commission anticipate or 588 target the interpretive center and the boardwalk might be open again? 589 590 Commissioner Crommie: That should be our first priority. I agree with that. It's tied to 591 these CIPs. I found it pretty complicated how they were all staged over these multi-592 years. 593 594 Mr. de Geus: It's not really a Parks and Rec Commission question as much as it is a staff 595 question. There is a policy issue. The policy has been get it done and do it as quickly as 596 you can. You're going to have to help me, Daren. 597 598 Mr. Anderson: Sure. 599 600 Mr. de Geus: The study is the first thing for the boardwalk, because it's in such disrepair 601 that we need to know what's possible and the environmental piece. 602 603 Mr. Anderson: For the timing for that, we're interviewing the consultants right now. 604 That's going to start very, very soon, I'm anticipating. The turnaround time, I would hope 605 in six months we'd have the recommendation completed and have all the information we 606 need to know. That would inform the next step for the boardwalk. Do we go for short-607 term fixes? I did recommend some medium-term or long-term, full replacement and 608 (crosstalk). 609 610 Chair Reckdahl: What was the date on that? 611 612 Mr. Anderson: These are rough guesses. We're starting soon. I would anticipate in three 613 weeks we'd have a consultant selected, put him under contract and get going. I would 614 imagine within six months we'd have something back, completed and ready to go. 615 616 Commissioner Crommie: We need to say that is for a feasibility study. 617 618 Mr. Anderson: That is for the feasibility study. 619 620 Commissioner Crommie: That CIP is a feasibility study on the boardwalk. Once they 621 complete the feasibility study, you think it might be completed in six months? 622 623 Mr. Anderson: That's my guess. 624 Approved Minutes 15 APPROVED 625 Commissioner Crommie: Then we have to go and (crosstalk). 626 627 Mr. Anderson: We would request a new CIP based on whatever that was. I would say 628 put it in as soon as possible. It would go into the very next CIP budget. Unless it was a 629 short-term fix and we had existing CIP funds in park emergency. Let's say it was under 630 $50,000, I doubt it will but if it were, we could get that going with some existing funds. 631 632 Commissioner Crommie: It's September before we know what is going to be needed. 633 You put out the work order, then it's probably not going to be completed until the 634 beginning of 2016. 635 636 Mr. Anderson: It depends on what they come back with, but yes. 637 638 Mr. de Geus: There's only certain periods of time you can work in the marshland, so 639 you're very restricted. 640 641 Mr. Anderson: Plus the permitting process. 642 643 Chair Reckdahl: That could be (inaudible) problems. 644 645 Commissioner Crommie: (crosstalk) fast track. That one seems to be on the fastest 646 track; although, doing the feasibility slows it all down, of course, because you have to do 647 it in two steps. The second CIP is doing some remodeling of the interior space. It was 648 written somewhat restrictively. Commissioner Ashlund and I asked, "Can you fold in 649 programming in that building and get a design eye?" John Akin thought he could do all 650 that under that CIP. Does that one start next year? 651 652 Mr. Anderson: No, it'll be starting soon. 653 654 Mr. de Geus: It starts (crosstalk) as well. 655 656 Commissioner Crommie: The public is really interested in that boardwalk. This other 657 one's going to flow in there. Because it doesn't require a feasibility study, that might be 658 completed first. 659 660 Mr. Anderson: That's right. 661 662 Commissioner Crommie: That's why it gets ahead; it doesn't require a feasibility. Then 663 there's this third one on the exhibits. The exhibits out there are in horrible shape. You 664 cannot read them. They're all worn away. 665 666 Approved Minutes 16 APPROVED Mr. de Geus: The outside, the exterior ones, right? 667 668 Commissioner Crommie: Exterior exhibits are in really poor shape. They're a bit of an 669 embarrassment, the way they look quite frankly. 670 671 Chair Reckdahl: You're talking at the center or all of Baylands? 672 673 Commissioner Ashlund: The center. 674 675 Mr. de Geus: There's four of them. 676 677 Commissioner Crommie: Just the center. 678 679 Mr. de Geus: They're on the right lane. 680 681 Commissioner Crommie: We were discussing this, and we didn't get a good answer on 682 that. Do you agree, Stacey? 683 684 Commissioner Ashlund: Right. The question was do we have any authority to say we 685 need more funding for that third portion of the CIP to do what John Akin recommended 686 and what we agree with. The funding wasn't allocated, so how do we get in that next 687 cycle to request the funding to do that? 688 689 Mr. de Geus: I've talked to John a little bit about this. We have $56,000. That's good. 690 We ought to get a designer on board and actually get them on board at the same time 691 we're thinking about some of this interior work, so they can talk to one another. Maybe 692 we ask the designer to think in terms of a few different concepts. A concept of what can 693 be done with $56,000. What can be done if we do a little more beyond the interpretive 694 center? Let's start sharing some of those (inaudible) and that could then lead to adding 695 another CIP or adding to that CIP the next chance we get. It also allows us to do some 696 things right there in the interpretive center right away. 697 698 Chair Reckdahl: Do you think it would be useful to have John come in and talk to the 699 Commission or maybe some other staff to come talk to the Commission in the next 700 couple of months? 701 702 Mr. de Geus: Yeah, when we get a little further along. 703 704 Chair Reckdahl: Do you think an ad hoc would be better, more productive? 705 706 Commissioner Crommie: We did ask him. 707 708 Approved Minutes 17 APPROVED Commissioner Ashlund: He agreed to do that, and it would be useful. Somewhere in the 709 next six months timeframe, he'll know more. We don't have to ... 710 711 Chair Reckdahl: What is he waiting for? 712 713 Commissioner Ashlund: For some of the progress to be made on hiring these consultants 714 to start the feasibility study, to hire the designer. If we were to put him on our agenda to 715 come back and talk to us in about six months time, it sounds like he would have 716 something tangible to say and show us and tell us about at that time. If we put him on 717 sooner, I don't think he'll have anything else to say. 718 719 Chair Reckdahl: My concern is that CIP for 2017 starts September. If he comes in 720 September, we may ... 721 722 Commissioner Ashlund: Miss the cycle. 723 724 Commissioner Reckdahl: ... miss the train. 725 726 Mr. de Geus: That would be good timing, September. That would be the first time we're 727 thinking about what we would want to add to the new five-year plan. This could be part 728 of that conversation. 729 730 Chair Reckdahl: When was our first meeting this year, Ed, do you remember? 731 732 Mr. de Geus: It was in the summer. 733 734 Commissioner Lauing: July, I want to say. 735 736 Chair Reckdahl: Do we want it to come back in August so we're ready for the CIP 737 meetings? 738 739 Mr. de Geus: We meet in August. (crosstalk) July, August. Whenever we have good 740 information for a substantive discussion, we ought to ... 741 742 Commissioner Crommie: I don't know if our Commission wants to weigh in on design 743 out in the Baylands Open Space Preserve. Are people interested in this? 744 745 Commissioner Knopper: Can I ask you a quick question? With regard to the feasibility 746 study, any work or financial investment the City's going to be doing out there, are we 747 taking into consideration the sea level rise? 748 749 Mr. Anderson: Mm-hmm. 750 Approved Minutes 18 APPROVED 751 Commissioner Knopper: It seems foolish to put money against something that's going to 752 be underwater eight years from now. 753 754 Commissioner Crommie: That's being considered. The way it typically works is we 755 have someone look at some design and they bring us ideas and then we respond. We 756 should keep in with that ... 757 758 Commissioner Ashlund: Cycle. Yeah. 759 760 Commissioner Crommie: I don't know. 761 762 Mr. de Geus: We could do that. If you still have the ad hoc committee and they're still 763 meeting, then there could be additional meetings with the ad hoc committee in advance of 764 coming to the Commission. I think we'd rather do that. 765 766 Commissioner Crommie: We'll keep that alive. 767 768 Commissioner Ashlund: We're putting here coming back to the Commission somewhere 769 between July and September? 770 771 Chair Reckdahl: Yes, and the ad hoc will work with the staff to get something ready for 772 that. The next three are Master Plan. Let's skip over those, because those are obviously 773 ongoing. If we have time and there's anything we want to talk about, we talk about it at 774 the end. 775 776 Mr. de Geus: I have to get going now. I was just looking through the list. Is there any 777 here that ... 778 779 Chair Reckdahl: There's one I really want to talk about. That is the rental spaces. The 780 one time we're talking about would be to hire someone that would be doing that. Lucie 781 Stern was going to have some sort of manager perhaps hired that would be looking at this 782 as part of their job as opposed to just a separate project. 783 784 Mr. de Geus: We have three managers, one at each community center. Cubberley, 785 Mitchell and Lucie Stern. There's a cohort of three managers within the Recreation 786 Division. We look to them to do some analysis here. Related to that is the cost of 787 services study. I wanted to let you know that there is a plan for that to go to Council in a 788 study session on April 6. That's a couple of weeks away now. It's not coming from our 789 department. It's coming from Office of Management and Budget. They talk a little about 790 rental spaces in that report. It came up at a Policy and Services or Finance meeting; I 791 can't remember which. It's very much related to this cost of services study. There's 792 Approved Minutes 19 APPROVED discussion about rentals and utilization of space and what we should be doing to 793 maximize revenue versus maximize access. It's revenue based (inaudible). In that staff 794 report it does briefly talk about this issue. The cost of services study is the important next 795 thing that will happen that the Commission might be interested in. One is reading the 796 report and maybe even attending the study session or assigning it to a Commissioner or 797 two to attend. Depending on the Council discussion and their direction, we could 798 agendize it thereafter if the Commission thinks we ought to do that. 799 800 Chair Reckdahl: When you start the CIP process, one thing that's unique about this is if 801 we spend money, we make it back. We have this five-year plan; you have to have a good 802 reason to cut in line and this might be a good reason. If we spend X thousand dollars, we 803 get more of that back when we either increase rents or decrease vacancies. 804 805 Mr. de Geus: Case in point is Cubberley Community Center Auditorium which used to 806 be a library. We're very eager to get that renovated so that it can generate income again. 807 It generated $80,000 or so a year before. If it was a little nicer with a little more 808 technology and other things, it could generate over $100,000 a year, just that one room. 809 That's high on the list. 810 811 Chair Reckdahl: When is that supposed to be renovated? What's the schedule on that? 812 813 Mr. de Geus: It's a Public Works project. I asked the same question. I don't have an 814 answer. 815 816 Commissioner Crommie: My daughter's youth symphony rented that arena for the ice 817 cream social. I really miss that. We'd probably go back to that. 818 819 Mr. de Geus: It's a really large space. 820 821 Commissioner Crommie: It had the kitchen as part of it. 822 823 Mr. de Geus: There's an old kitchen for a high school, so we want to renovate the kitchen 824 again. Not as big as it was, because we never really use that huge space, a proper 825 catering kitchen, something more similar to what we have here at Mitchell. 826 827 Commissioner Crommie: What's unique about that space that we haven't found since is 828 you can eat in it when you're doing a performance. The City allowed people to eat in 829 there at least. Where we are now at the JCC auditorium, we can't do the performance and 830 eat. It was a nice space. 831 832 Mr. de Geus: With the libraries here, you can take food and drink of any type upstairs, 833 downstairs just so you know. I didn't know that. When I heard that, it was "wow." 834 Approved Minutes 20 APPROVED 835 Vice Chair Markevitch: Did you know you can't keep that in the teen room if you don't 836 have a teen with you? 837 838 Mr. de Geus: As you should. 839 840 Commissioner Hetterly: Before you move off the cost of services study, I just have a 841 quick question on that. That went to Council and we looked at it also over a year ago. 842 Council gave direction that kicked off a values discussion to reframe the issues in how 843 the cost of services was presented. Is that what this study session is about, coming back 844 with the new version or a new approach? 845 846 Mr. de Geus: It's pretty much the same approach that we talked about as a Commission 847 when Lam Do came from our department. They're recommending three tiers of cost 848 recovery. It's a study session, so there's no action. It's essentially the same thing. I don't 849 recall seeing anything in there that was specific to an outreach plan in the staff report 850 from OMB interestingly. As soon as it's public, I'll send the link. These reports are 851 going out almost two weeks, ten days in advance (inaudible). 852 853 Commissioner Hetterly: Thanks. That'll be very informative to the Master Plan process 854 as Rob said. We should try to tie them together in the way we think about what we want 855 to do in the future. 856 857 Mr. de Geus: As I recall, the staff report does talk about the cost recovery policy for fee-858 based classes within Community Services. There's a policy that already exists that the 859 recommendation is to review that with the public and probably the Commission. 860 861 Commissioner Crommie: Is there anyone who can volunteer to go to that? I'm out of 862 town that particular week. 863 864 Mr. de Geus: 6:00, I think, is when that's scheduled. 865 866 Vice Chair Markevitch: I can try. 867 868 Commissioner Crommie: It does sound really important (inaudible). Is that videotaped, 869 those study sessions? 870 871 Mr. de Geus: Yes. Is there any other questions that anyone has for me before I leave 872 about any of these topics or anything else? 873 874 Vice Chair Markevitch: It was one I was going to add, and I didn't know. We had a 875 meeting with the high school regarding the most recent suicides. One of the things that 876 Approved Minutes 21 APPROVED came up was the need for high school students to have a physical outlet. Currently, when 877 you're in high school, the only thing you have after your two years of PE is to join a 878 sports team. You can go to practice five days a week and if you're not a good player, you 879 don't get play time. It's pretty demoralizing. I asked for a show of hands, and over 70 880 percent of the parents in that room raised their hands and said they would love to have 881 some sort of pick-up, "play for fun" field space anywhere. It would take a little bit of 882 negotiation with the high school coaches, but I think we can make it happen. I would like 883 to (inaudible) if you think it's worthwhile. We would go through the School/City Liaison 884 Group. 885 886 Mr. de Geus: I would be very supportive of it. I would love to see the school district 887 weigh in on that too, though, and provide some more recreational-type offerings on 888 campus. (crosstalk) the competitive. 889 890 Commissioner Ashlund: For both high schools (inaudible). Yeah. 891 892 Mr. de Geus: They have the facilities. We don't have any gyms. 893 894 Vice Chair Markevitch: I know. They do. 895 896 Mr. de Geus: We're finding a way to meet the majority of needs. Of course, the needs 897 are insatiable in some ways. 898 899 Commissioner Lauing: (inaudible) some people want to practice eight days a week. 900 (crosstalk). 901 902 Mr. de Geus: We've defined it, whatever it is, two, three times, whatever it is in the 903 policy. That policy is meeting the need. 904 905 Commissioner Lauing: Even without El Camino which is now being open finally. 906 907 Commissioner Crommie: Along those lines, when we did the Field Use Policy, we said 908 we'd review it in couple of years. I've lost track of time. Is it time to reconstitute the ad 909 hoc for review or do you think we can let that go for another year? 910 911 Mr. de Geus: As part of the Parks Master Plan where field use is going to be one of the 912 topics that we'll look at, that's a good time, which will be this year. (inaudible) how does 913 it shake out next to the policy that we have. 914 915 Commissioner Crommie: We can dissolve that ad hoc. It shouldn't even be on there. 916 We didn't even do it last year. 917 918 Approved Minutes 22 APPROVED Mr. de Geus: It's easy enough to set back up. 919 920 Chair Reckdahl: Byxbee Hills design is the next one. 921 922 Commissioner Hetterly: That's actually you on that one, not me. 923 924 Chair Reckdahl: That actually is coming back next month, Daren? 925 926 Mr. Anderson: Yes. 927 928 Commissioner Hetterly: Next week or April? 929 930 Mr. Anderson: April. If the agenda is not packed with Master Plan (inaudible) so people 931 on the Commission can see it. 932 933 Chair Reckdahl: 7.7 acres. 934 935 Vice Chair Markevitch: That's just on hold for now. 936 937 Commissioner Knopper: I'm not backup, FYI. I'm backup actually on the Master Plan 938 (inaudible). 939 940 Commissioner Crommie: That's on hold until the hydrology is complete? 941 942 Commissioner Knopper: Uh-huh. 943 944 Mr. Anderson: The next steps is staff will bring it to Council. 945 946 Chair Reckdahl: The Park Communications Plan. What does that mean? 947 948 Mr. Anderson: I'm not sure what that one is. 949 950 Commissioner Hetterly: That was the email list. 951 952 Mr. Anderson: I think we got that one. 953 954 Commissioner Hetterly: We had a couple of meetings about it and you worked on it and 955 Daren worked on it. 956 957 Mr. Anderson: We brought that in. We've got one that's working. (inaudible) 958 distribution list. 959 960 Approved Minutes 23 APPROVED Commissioner Lauing: It's a clear victory. 961 962 Chair Reckdahl: Scott Park. That's complete. There's no outstanding issue on that, 963 right? 964 965 Mr. Anderson: The only update is that I'm meeting with the contractor to get that going 966 on Monday. Good news. 967 968 Chair Reckdahl: That's going to be completed roughly when? 969 970 Mr. Anderson: I bet we would start ten days after I meet him on Monday. I'm 971 anticipating somewhere around 2 1/2 months to get that wrapped up, maybe three. 972 973 Vice Chair Markevitch: July. Does that include the redo of the asphalt walkway between 974 the rehabilitation center and the park? It's so torn up with roots right now, they can't get 975 their wheelchairs and walkers over to the park where they like to sit. They have to go 976 back out to the sidewalk and in. 977 978 Mr. Anderson: I'm not sure it does include that. It's one of those things (crosstalk). 979 980 Mr. Jensen: The cut-through? 981 982 Vice Chair Markevitch: It's a cut through and it's asphalt. 983 984 Mr. Jensen: Past that pine tree area? 985 986 Vice Chair Markevitch: Yeah. 987 988 Mr. Anderson: (crosstalk) 989 990 Mr. Jensen: I'll add that to the list of work they do out there. 991 992 Mr. Anderson: I don't know about that, but I'm going to try. My contract's already 993 burdened. I've got another CIP with fresh money coming in July 1 where I can do 994 asphalt. We could knock it out almost concurrently. 995 996 Vice Chair Markevitch: It's a fairly small area. I just didn't want it to get (crosstalk). 997 998 Mr. Anderson: You're talking about the one that runs the length of the park, right? 999 Between the cul-de-sac and the ... 1000 1001 Approved Minutes 24 APPROVED Vice Chair Markevitch: It's not the whole length of the park. It's actually (crosstalk) 6-1002 feet wide. 1003 1004 Mr. Jensen: It cuts through the pine tree area. (crosstalk) 1005 1006 Mr. Anderson: I'm sorry. I thought (crosstalk) the big one. Oh, I'm sorry. That is easy 1007 then. 1008 1009 Vice Chair Markevitch: It's tough for the rehab people to get over there. 1010 1011 Mr. Anderson: Although it might be outside park property. I'll have to double check 1012 that. 1013 1014 Mr. Jensen: I'm sure that is. 1015 1016 Mr. Anderson: I don't think that's ours, but I'll double check. 1017 1018 Commissioner Hetterly: The bocce ball folks were talking to the department about 1019 crosswalk upgrades for that connection. Is that included in the project? 1020 1021 Mr. Jensen: It is. 1022 1023 Chair Reckdahl: That's very good. I thought that would never get done. 1024 1025 Commissioner Knopper: That includes the purchase of the bocce ball, right? 1026 1027 Mr. Anderson: Yeah (inaudible) bocce. 1028 1029 Commissioner Knopper: I don't want to hear about the bocce ever again. 1030 1031 Chair Reckdahl: While we're on parks here, Monroe Park, we've passed the PIO, right? 1032 1033 Vice Chair Markevitch: Where is that? 1034 1035 Commissioner Hetterly: That's not on there. 1036 1037 Commissioner Crommie: I'm wondering what's not on the list. 1038 1039 Mr. Anderson: Peter and I (crosstalk). We're going to get that one started soon. 1040 1041 Approved Minutes 25 APPROVED Commissioner Crommie: That's my neighborhood, and people ask me all the time. It's 1042 turned into a dog park. It's bizarre. It's full of dogs now every evening. I'm hearing all 1043 kinds of comments about that. 1044 1045 Mr. Anderson: We ran into some struggles with finalizing the play surfacing. It was a 1046 requirement of accessibility and ran into conflict with some of the desires of the 1047 residents. We're very ... 1048 1049 Commissioner Lauing: Our work is done. 1050 1051 Mr. Anderson: I think so. We can double check (crosstalk). 1052 1053 Mr. Jensen: (crosstalk) 1054 1055 Vice Chair Markevitch: (inaudible) signage in that so that it says you're not allowed to 1056 run your dog off leash in the park? 1057 1058 Commissioner Crommie: Every evening it is a dog haven now. I've lived across the 1059 street from that park for 13 years, and it's never been like that. I'm hearing that the smell 1060 is horrible. I haven't gone over there. 1061 1062 Mr. Anderson: Dogs are off leash, right? 1063 1064 Commissioner Crommie: Yeah, it's full of off-leash dogs. There's a big group of kids ... 1065 1066 Commissioner Lauing: Send an officer. 1067 1068 Commissioner Knopper: Yeah, send an officer at 7:00 at night. 1069 1070 Commissioner Crommie: What do you guys think? I missed out. 1071 1072 Mr. Anderson: I'll get back to you guys. We need to a little reconnoitering. The 1073 challenge when we get to the management and efficiency of managing projects through 1074 the Park and Rec Commission, this is one area where we exceed staff's capability to 1075 manage all projects at once. Scott, Hopkins, Monroe, El Camino Park are all up in the 1076 air. Something ends up giving, and this one gave. We need to get it back on the plate 1077 ASAP. I'm going to do so. 1078 1079 Commissioner Crommie: Thank you. 1080 1081 Chair Reckdahl: Once the Master Plan is done, we need to have a discussion about the 1082 need to hire another planner, at least a consultant for a couple of years. We have the Blue 1083 Approved Minutes 26 APPROVED Ribbon Commission catch-up and we're not catching up anywhere. Once the Master Plan 1084 is done, we'll have nothing to hold us back and we can address that. Bowden Park. 1085 1086 Vice Chair Markevitch: You've gone off topic here. Can you (crosstalk). 1087 1088 Commissioner Hetterly: Who made this list anyway, Chair? 1089 1090 Commissioner Crommie: He's just doing all the parks, it looks like. 1091 1092 Commissioner Knopper: Yeah, but they're not on our sheet. 1093 1094 Vice Chair Markevitch: They're not on our list, so it's confusing to us. Can we do the list 1095 and then he can (crosstalk). 1096 1097 Mr. Jensen: Bowden Park has the 90 percent package. It came back from the consultant 1098 to us to review. It should go out to bid probably next month and start sometime in the 1099 next few months doing the renovation. I would say by the end of the summer that project 1100 will be complete. 1101 1102 Commissioner Hetterly: That's not coming back to us. We're done with that one. 1103 1104 Chair Reckdahl: Back to the list. Magical Bridge, that is complete. Is there any ... 1105 1106 Mr. Jensen: Magical Bridge is opening April 18. The ceremony starts at 10:00 a.m. The 1107 actual ceremony itself is from 10:00 to 11:00, then it goes to 5:00 so there will be things 1108 within the playground all day long. They're going to have entertainment on the stage. 1109 They have some children's choirs and a puppeteer and a musician. Every half hour 1110 someone performs for 15 minutes. That's basically what's happening. I expect the park 1111 to be completed by the end of next week. That's the schedule. 1112 1113 Commissioner Ashlund: It shouldn't be open to anybody who's not construction right 1114 now, right? 1115 1116 Mr. Jensen: Right. 1117 1118 Commissioner Ashlund: There definitely are people in there playing with (inaudible) or 1119 something yesterday when I walked by. 1120 1121 Mr. Jensen: During the day? 1122 1123 Commissioner Ashlund: Oh, yeah. Afternoon, between 3:00 and 4:00 1124 1125 Approved Minutes 27 APPROVED Mr. Jensen: It could be the (inaudible). 1126 1127 Commissioner Ashlund: Yeah. I just happened to be there. A large, cool, remote-1128 controlled thingy. It didn't look like she was working, but she was definitely (crosstalk). 1129 1130 Mr. Jensen: That might be the Friends aerial photographer. 1131 1132 Commissioner Ashlund: Okay. 1133 1134 Mr. Jensen: She brings a drone out every once in a while and shoots the progress. They 1135 keep updating on their Facebook page, so you can see time lapse. 1136 1137 Commissioner Ashlund: (crosstalk) pretty substantial. Cool. Thank you. 1138 1139 Chair Reckdahl: Hopkins Park. 1140 1141 Mr. Anderson: Hopkins Park is complete. The project's done. 1142 1143 Chair Reckdahl: Done. 1144 1145 Mr. Anderson: There's still a little fencing protecting the seed. We seeded the turf rather 1146 than re-sod. It's growing in and the fence is only to allow the seed to fully establish and 1147 then it comes down. The rest of the park is open. 1148 1149 Chair Reckdahl: The next one, ad hocs to develop work plans and timelines. 1150 1151 Commissioner Lauing: That was an appeal for efficiency from the ad hocs last year. 1152 1153 Chair Reckdahl: We were worried that ad hocs were just sitting and not doing anything? 1154 1155 Commissioner Hetterly: Right. 1156 1157 Commissioner Lauing: That's a pretty good way of saying it, yes. There should be not 1158 only some specifics that are developed, very specific, but that it should come back to the 1159 Commission regularly as opposed to just hanging out there. In that case, I would agree 1160 with the word ongoing that we have on here. We still need to do that. 1161 1162 Chair Reckdahl: CIPs we already talked about. Field use. 1163 1164 Commissioner Hetterly: It's going to come back. We're going to talk about it again as 1165 part of the Master Plan. We don't have an ad hoc on it. These aren't ad hocs. 1166 1167 Approved Minutes 28 APPROVED Commissioner Ashlund: Right. These are just items. 1168 1169 Mr. Jensen: (inaudible) will be meeting with field users next Tuesday morning to have a 1170 conversation with them as well. 1171 1172 Commissioner Crommie: Is that ahead of a particular brokering period coming up? 1173 1174 Mr. Jensen: No. It's just to get feedback from them about the status of the fields and 1175 their input into if we need more and things of that nature. 1176 1177 Commissioner Crommie: That's good to know. Occasionally I do get people from the 1178 community saying, "I'm unhappy with the fields." I never know who to send them to. I 1179 got to (inaudible) touch with you, Daren, as if you're not busy enough. 1180 1181 Mr. Anderson: Send them my way. 1182 1183 Commissioner Crommie: They have to go your way? 1184 1185 Mr. Anderson: They can go to Adam and then we confer. He's doing the brokering, and 1186 the brokering goes hand-in-hand with maintenance. Too much brokering leads to poor 1187 maintenance. 1188 1189 Commissioner Crommie: You're the contact person? 1190 1191 Mr. Anderson: Yeah. Either way is great. Be glad to address any issues. 1192 1193 Chair Reckdahl: Feeding wildlife, is that totally done? 1194 1195 Mr. Anderson: It's totally done, in place and working well improving the situation. 1196 Several other agencies have contacted me recently to say, "Hey, I really liked what you 1197 guys did. How's it going? What do you recommend in our situation?" Not that we're a 1198 leader; we aren't. This has been in place for a very long time for lots of agencies. For 1199 those that have been in the same situation as us, they're excited that we've taken this step. 1200 1201 Commissioner Lauing: I was just going to make a comment on this. It's complete, but 1202 when we do something like this and create an ordinance, that's a new law. It seems like 1203 at some point in time out there, we should check in and see what's happening. Get 1204 feedback and see if there's compliance. That doesn't have to be something for us, but it 1205 would be great if you could collect some points 18 months out and say this is what's 1206 happening. The underlying issue here, using this as a global example for Eric, is just 1207 generally there's no enforcement on this almost by intent, because there are not enough of 1208 these people to go and check if people are feeding ducks. That news gets around. I'm not 1209 Approved Minutes 29 APPROVED sure why we're making ordinances that we're not going to enforce and what's going to 1210 happen. Just as a general question to be thinking about for ordinances that go before 1211 Council. 1212 1213 Mr. Anderson: This is one that we are enforcing. We talk to people everyday about it. 1214 This is the tool that helps get those noncompliant folks that say, "I don't care. Make it a 1215 law." It is a law now. We'll see the next time you get a ticket. It's been effective. 1216 1217 Commissioner Knopper: Have you ticketed anyone? 1218 1219 Mr. Anderson: No one's been ticketed. 1220 1221 Commissioner Knopper: There's no more bacon and doughnuts? 1222 1223 Mr. Anderson: Only when the rangers aren't there. It does still happen. I'm not saying 1224 that it's cured the problem, but it's much better than it was. 1225 1226 Chair Reckdahl: The 7.7 acres we talked about already. Arastradero Preserve. 1227 1228 Commissioner Lauing: That's something that I brought up last year that there just doesn't 1229 seem to be enough parking ever there. What there is, it's jammed and they're parking 1230 down the road. An issue there was it is designated a low-impact preserve, so we'd have 1231 to get almost a legal evaluation first as to what's available. In the short term, you were 1232 going to try to squeeze in some markers or something. In the longer term, maybe it's part 1233 of the Master Plan or not. That's where it was left. 1234 1235 Commissioner Crommie: I just want to hear some clarification on that. During the week 1236 when I go, I always find parking. During the weekend, it's the big cycling groups who 1237 come in there and congregate. I'm not sure we should do anything to these big cycling 1238 groups that are coming from all communities. 1239 1240 Commissioner Hetterly: (crosstalk) when they come and park there, then people who 1241 want to use the park can't park. 1242 1243 Commissioner Crommie: Right. 1244 1245 Chair Reckdahl: You could put a limit. 1246 1247 Commissioner Hetterly: If you ride a bike, don't park here. 1248 1249 Chair Reckdahl: No. A limit as in two-hour limit or whatever. 1250 1251 Approved Minutes 30 APPROVED Commissioner Crommie: That'd be interesting. If you put a two-hour limit, then they 1252 would (crosstalk). There's a great place also down the road where that car commuter 1253 parking lot is at Page Mill and Arastradero. (crosstalk) It's always empty on the 1254 weekend. It's not that (crosstalk) the week. Can you do a little bit of fact checking on 1255 trying to understand the parking situation there? Ed, during the week under your 1256 observations, is it a problem during the week? I haven't. Have you observed that? 1257 1258 Commissioner Lauing: I've observed it not as bad as the weekends. Sometimes there's a 1259 couple of spaces. I'm actually stunned sometimes when I'm up there that it's that 1260 crowded. Amazing. 1261 1262 Vice Chair Markevitch: We could look at maybe a two-hour parking limit on weekends 1263 in the Arastradero lot. Not during the week, because that doesn't seem to be a problem. 1264 1265 Commissioner Hetterly: Is it your sense that bike riders are parked there for a longer 1266 period of time than park users? 1267 1268 Commissioner Crommie: Yes, because they congregate. They all bring their cars and 1269 park. They come and they go on an all-day bike ride. My husband does it, that's why I 1270 know. 1271 1272 Commissioner Lauing: Your husband's one of the violators? 1273 1274 Commissioner Crommie: Not at Arastradero. His group meets at Pete's Coffee or the 1275 Alpine Inn. They meet at a place where you tank up on coffee before you go, so they 1276 don't meet at Arastradero. I know those (crosstalk). 1277 1278 Mr. Anderson: The question would be does that alleviate the problem or are you just 1279 freeing up new spaces every two hours for a higher percentage of bikers to come in and 1280 take those spots too. If the issue is we have non-park users using the lot, I don't know 1281 that necessarily solves your issue. 1282 1283 Commissioner Crommie: We ought to study it a little bit (crosstalk). 1284 1285 Commissioner Lauing: I don't think we're going to try to solve it here. The question is 1286 do we want an ad hoc or do we have any feedback on the legal aspects. 1287 1288 Mr. Anderson: My assessment of what we'd have to do if you wanted to change the 1289 status is add more parking. We'd have to do a staff report and go to the Council and 1290 request them to change that low-impact status to increase the capacity of that parking lot. 1291 That is not without significant impacts to the land and costs as well. 1292 1293 Approved Minutes 31 APPROVED Chair Reckdahl: Right now there's a lot ... 1294 1295 Mr. Anderson: An overflow parking lot. 1296 1297 Chair Reckdahl: ... that's not used. 1298 1299 Mr. Anderson: It is used for special events and volunteer programs. Acterra has a little 1300 base of operation right in that area. It gets used (crosstalk). 1301 1302 Chair Reckdahl: Could we open that up on the weekends for all? 1303 1304 Mr. Anderson: Universally regardless of purpose? 1305 1306 Commissioner Lauing: Yeah. 1307 1308 Mr. Anderson: The cost of that is then you have no place for your designated volunteer 1309 programs to park. If it was just universally open on the weekends, it'll get filled. 1310 1311 Chair Reckdahl: Could we open it on days where we don't expect volunteer programs to 1312 come? 1313 1314 Commissioner Lauing: If we give the volunteers (crosstalk) they can put on their cars. 1315 We're not trying to make this a big ad hoc on this. 1316 1317 Commissioner Crommie: These are management questions. If we don't want to extend 1318 it, maybe it can be managed differently. I also think we need more fact gathering on this. 1319 1320 Commissioner Lauing: Should we make this ongoing and (inaudible) names on there or 1321 stay with it? 1322 1323 Vice Chair Markevitch: You could even do a sign saying, "If you're part of the bike 1324 group, please don't park here. This is for the people who are enjoying the preserve." 1325 Something simple, low maintenance (crosstalk). 1326 1327 Chair Reckdahl: People are going to park there regardless unless there's a time limit. 1328 That would keep them away. Yeah, that means you have a ranger come in every two 1329 hours and swipe the tires with chalk. If you enforced it for a couple of months, then you 1330 probably wouldn't have to enforce it after that. 1331 1332 Mr. Anderson: I don't think I have staff to do that, every two hours to come in. 1333 1334 Commissioner Lauing: It seems like we are continuing this ad hoc. 1335 Approved Minutes 32 APPROVED 1336 Commissioner Crommie: The ad hoc didn't do any work on that. This is just an example 1337 of ad hoc that hasn't done anything. 1338 1339 Commissioner Lauing: It's not technically an ad hoc. 1340 1341 Commissioner Crommie: No, it's not an ad hoc. Do you want to make it an ad hoc 1342 (crosstalk)? 1343 1344 Chair Reckdahl: Could we have Friends of the Park ticket? 1345 1346 Mr. Anderson: No, we couldn't have them ticket. You could have them do that chalking 1347 (crosstalk) gross violator who could then get a ranger to come down. Things like that. 1348 The every two-hour thing on weekends, it's not feasible. 1349 1350 Commissioner Crommie: We have to study the problem more. I've only seen that 1351 anecdotally. I don't know. 1352 1353 Commissioner Knopper: The ad hoc is going to do it. We don't have to talk about. 1354 1355 Commissioner Ashlund: Is it an ad hoc of one or does an ad hoc need to be more than 1356 one? 1357 1358 Commissioner Hetterly: It does not need to be more than one. 1359 1360 Vice Chair Markevitch: Ed's going to drive a Winnebago up there, take up ten spaces. 1361 He's just going to spend all day watching who's parking there. 1362 1363 Commissioner Lauing: And see if it's enforced. 1364 1365 Mr. Anderson: I could invite you to an Open Space staff meeting. You could sit with the 1366 rangers and talk it all through, throw out all the different options. 1367 1368 Commissioner Lauing: It doesn’t need to be (inaudible) long we can do it. 1369 1370 Chair Reckdahl: The other thing I would like to add is at least some benches and/or 1371 picnic tables up there. 1372 1373 Commissioner Lauing: That comes under the same question (crosstalk). 1374 1375 Mr. Anderson: Low impact, yeah. It brings you back to that measure if that's what you 1376 guys want to pursue. 1377 Approved Minutes 33 APPROVED 1378 Chair Reckdahl: When the kids were young, we didn't go up there because they wanted 1379 some spot to sit and eat their snacks. 1380 1381 Commissioner Hetterly: There are a lot of ramifications. I don't know what they are. If 1382 you eliminate that low-impact preserve designation, then it opens up the park to a lot of 1383 other stuff that we may not want to open up the park to. The recommendation is not to 1384 (crosstalk). 1385 1386 Chair Reckdahl: The low impact, does it specifically say no benches or does it say low 1387 impact ... 1388 1389 Commissioner Lauing: I'll investigate that. 1390 1391 Chair Reckdahl: If it's the management's or the staff's interpretation of low impact, then 1392 they have some leeway to put a couple of benches here and there. That opens it up to 1393 Frisbee and a lot of stuff. 1394 1395 Commissioner Crommie: Is that the designation of Baylands Open Space Preserve? Is 1396 this our only designated low impact preserve? 1397 1398 Mr. Anderson: The specific guidance was don't duplicate surrounding areas. Keep this 1399 as low impact. The small parking was one of the elements. The lack of benches and 1400 picnics that could turn it more into an urbanized area (inaudible). In the research I did a 1401 year and a half ago on this, I've got notes from Council meetings from when this was first 1402 decided. They mentioned picnic tables and park benches there. I would be glad to share 1403 that with Commissioner Lauing and we can eventually (inaudible). 1404 1405 Mr. Jensen: I've also had a conversation with Enid Pearson, and she'd like to see some 1406 benches up there too. 1407 1408 Commissioner Crommie: As people get older, they do need to stop and rest if they're 1409 walking. It's absolutely necessary. 1410 1411 Chair Reckdahl: Crosswalk at Kellogg and Middlefield. Did we do anything on that? 1412 1413 Commissioner Lauing: No. I think Rob was supposed to consult with Planning and 1414 Transportation to see if that could get on their list. 1415 1416 Chair Reckdahl: Is that something that would be Junior Museum and Zoo? 1417 1418 Approved Minutes 34 APPROVED Mr. Jensen: (inaudible) the traffic consultant that's doing environmental work is starting 1419 to do his stuff right now. He keeps sending me questions about parking and stuff over 1420 there. We should have him study that and make a recommendation on what should 1421 happen at that intersection. (crosstalk) design the one driveway. 1422 1423 Mr. Anderson: There's no safe access to the museum there. 1424 1425 Commissioner Ashlund: Can we put you on that as to staff instead of (crosstalk) as the 1426 staff person on there. 1427 1428 Chair Reckdahl: When I go to Lucie Stern in the afternoons, 2:00 or 3:00 in the 1429 afternoon, if you take a left there, you go through three or four cycles just to get through 1430 Middlefield and Embarcadero. It's really bad. Satellite parking. 1431 1432 Commissioner Lauing: Is that the one where Jennifer was supposed to count the buses? 1433 1434 Commissioner Hetterly: (crosstalk) on here. That was just something we talked about at 1435 the last retreat, because Council was considering the additional satellite parking shuttles 1436 in the Baylands near the athletic center and the golf course in that Baylands park. We 1437 just wanted to pay close attention to it as it moved forward, because we thought there was 1438 potential for substantial environmental impacts. 1439 1440 Chair Reckdahl: Is that satellite parking dead or is that still ... 1441 1442 Commissioner Hetterly: I think it's still moving along. 1443 1444 Council Member Filseth: I think we've directed staff to go investigate or something like 1445 that. The previous Council. I also note that the previous Council was split on whether to 1446 do that or not. Some of the people who voted to proceed with it aren't on Council any 1447 more. Other people on the Council (inaudible). 1448 1449 Commissioner Lauing: This item came up from Council Member Schmid last year at the 1450 retreat to do monitoring. You volunteered to be the one to do the monitoring. 1451 1452 Commissioner Hetterly: What was going on at the Council? 1453 1454 Commissioner Lauing: No, what was going on at Baylands. There was a shuttle back 1455 and forth from Baylands, and he was concerned about that. 1456 1457 Commissioner Knopper: It could go from Baylands to Arastradero. It can just shuttle 1458 people, then up to Foothills. You would just make giant triangles with buses. 1459 1460 Approved Minutes 35 APPROVED Commissioner Lauing: Next item. 1461 1462 Commissioner Ashlund: What is BAC? 1463 1464 Chair Reckdahl: Baylands Athletic Center. 1465 1466 Commissioner Ashlund: Thank you. As far as the crosswalk, are we leaving Lauing on 1467 that? I'm hearing that. What was (inaudible)? 1468 1469 Commissioner Lauing: Yes, (inaudible). 1470 1471 Commissioner Ashlund: The status is? 1472 1473 Vice Chair Markevitch: Ongoing. 1474 1475 Commissioner Ashlund: Thank you. Rental space was ongoing as well? 1476 1477 Vice Chair Markevitch: Mm-hmm. 1478 1479 Commissioner Hetterly: We're going to tie it together with the cost of service study. 1480 1481 Commissioner Ashlund: Hetterly, you are on the BAC satellite parking or you're not? 1482 1483 Commissioner Hetterly: I guess I am, but I wouldn't call it an ad hoc. It's just trying to 1484 keep abreast of the current issues. 1485 1486 Commissioner Ashlund: Yeah. This is the follow-up page, not the ad hoc page. Thanks. 1487 1488 Chair Reckdahl: I would say this is on hold, satellite parking unless Council does more. 1489 1490 Commissioner Lauing: It's just monitoring the activity. 1491 1492 Council Member Filseth: It's only monitoring. 1493 1494 Chair Reckdahl: Monitoring. 1495 1496 Commissioner Lauing: Being alert. 1497 1498 Commissioner Hetterly: Monitoring Council Action, I'm not counting cars down at the 1499 Baylands though traffic is very bad at all hours. 1500 1501 Chair Reckdahl: City class training PARC. 1502 Approved Minutes 36 APPROVED 1503 Commissioner Hetterly: There was an interest around some Commissioners to tap into 1504 any kind of issue-specific training that is offered to City staff that Commissioners might 1505 be able to participate in. Rob would lead on that. I'm not sure where he stands. I bet 1506 they've seen a lot of email invitations to some of the nonprofit work that they're doing at 1507 the Community Services Department. I don't know if Commissioners are interested in 1508 specific types of classes that would be helpful. I think Rob probably stalled out unsure 1509 about what we would want and how to match it up. 1510 1511 Vice Chair Markevitch: I'm not understanding why we would be interested in taking 1512 classes. 1513 1514 Commissioner Ashlund: I appreciated the nonprofit and fundraising stuff that's come 1515 along our way. A lot of times when something is going to get funded like Junior 1516 Museum, like the library, like Magical Bridge, it's private fundraising that augments what 1517 the City's able to do to fund the project. I'm happy when those things come across. I 1518 don't know what else we're missing out on, but I like that category. I find that category 1519 particularly useful. We don't have a replacement on our Commission for Rob. He's now 1520 in Greg Betts' position and his old position. I don't know if there's anything we can do 1521 other than keep in touch with our staff person. If there's specific class offerings that we 1522 want to hear about, we let our staff person know. I don't know that there's a master list 1523 that the City ... 1524 1525 Commissioner Hetterly: I think (crosstalk) skills that would be directly related to our 1526 group. 1527 1528 Commissioner Ashlund: If this is coordinated at a higher level than staff, somebody who 1529 oversees training offerings, then we could check that box and get on an email list if we 1530 choose. That'd be great. How do we know if that exists without Rob here? 1531 1532 Mr. Jensen: It does exist. There is an email list because we get it all the time in training. 1533 I could learn how to do the budgeting and purchasing and how to fill out contracts. 1534 There's all kind of (crosstalk). 1535 1536 Mr. Anderson: (crosstalk) human resources. 1537 1538 Commissioner Ashlund: Are Commissioners allowed to monitor that list and see if we 1539 want to attend things or are those class offerings only for staff? 1540 1541 Mr. Anderson: I believe it's just internal. 1542 1543 Commissioner Ashlund: It's not everyone. 1544 Approved Minutes 37 APPROVED 1545 Commissioner Crommie: If there's something you know you're interested in, you can ask 1546 our staff liaison to let you know. 1547 1548 Commissioner Ashlund: Exactly. Project Safety Net puts out a lot of training-related 1549 material. If you're interested in that niche, you follow that. 1550 1551 Commissioner Hetterly: I don't think we have further work to do on that. 1552 1553 Commissioner Ashlund: (inaudible) categories of things that we were hoping for training 1554 on. 1555 1556 Chair Reckdahl: That's EIR (inaudible). 1557 1558 Commissioner Crommie: I was the one who suggested that. A long time ago, I emailed 1559 Karen Holman. Karen Holman had suggested that we might benefit as a Commission if 1560 we had some rudimentary training on how EIRs work. This came up around the golf 1561 course EIR which did come under our purview because it had to do with expanding 1562 playing fields and all these different ideas. Actually Karen Holman had suggested that 1563 maybe I look into getting some training for the Commission. I followed up with her. I 1564 wanted to know if the City ran any (inaudible). It turned out they didn't. Karen Holman 1565 had contact of someone who runs little workshops on this who would come in, if we had 1566 a two-hour meeting, and would do a workshop for us. Can I just have a show of hands if 1567 anyone on this Commission is interested in such a workshop? 1568 1569 Commissioner Ashlund: It's worth some sort of presentation. A two-hour workshop I 1570 would be interested in or if it was even a presentation at one of our regular meetings, just 1571 an overview of what it is and isn't. I would welcome something rather than nothing. 1572 1573 Commissioner Crommie: More like a 30-minute presentation? 1574 1575 Commissioner Ashlund: Up to two hours. 1576 1577 Vice Chair Markevitch: Two hours is separate from having a two-hour presentation at 1578 our meeting? 1579 1580 Commissioner Ashlund: I would be interested either way. 1581 1582 Commissioner Crommie: I've been to one of these workshops. I went to it through 1583 another organization. I found it so useful. 1584 1585 Approved Minutes 38 APPROVED Commissioner Hetterly: Actually everybody should have to do it, everybody on a 1586 Commission. 1587 1588 Commissioner Crommie: I'd be willing to follow up. As far as I got was how much time 1589 does your Commission want to spend on this. I really needed to know that before trying 1590 to schedule something. 1591 1592 Mr. Jensen: We could invite someone from the Planning staff to come in and do a 20-1593 minute presentation on what the EIR is, what the sections are, what they're looking for 1594 inside of it, what the process is of how it goes out to the community, and then how it gets 1595 approved. 1596 1597 Commissioner Crommie: I don't think you can do that in 20 minutes. My workshop, I 1598 think, was a four-hour workshop. It doesn't have to be that long. 1599 1600 Mr. Jensen: They're not going to tell you how to fill out. They're going to tell you the 1601 section and what it all means. 1602 1603 Commissioner Crommie: What the language means. It's really good to have some kind 1604 of introduction for when you're trying to read the literature. 1605 1606 Commissioner Ashlund: Did you say you had somebody who could offer (inaudible)? 1607 1608 Commissioner Crommie: Karen Holman gave me a name of somebody, but I dropped 1609 the ball. Where it ended was how much time does your Commission want to spend on 1610 this. It comes down to how we want to organize it. I'm hearing today that there is 1611 interest. 1612 1613 Chair Reckdahl: What is the threshold for EIRs? How often do we have to do EIRs? 1614 1615 Mr. Anderson: Not very often for most of our projects. It does come up though. 1616 1617 Chair Reckdahl: The golf course, we had to do one. 1618 1619 Commissioner Crommie: We had to do one for the bridge. 1620 1621 Mr. Anderson: JPA. 1622 1623 Mr. Jensen: We're doing one for the JMZ and the Rinconada long range plan. (crosstalk) 1624 five or six specific areas that they study; noise pollution. If they find bones, there's a 1625 thing on that. Studying the biology of birds as well as what it has to do with the impact. 1626 1627 Approved Minutes 39 APPROVED Mr. Anderson: Species, flora, fauna, historic resources. 1628 1629 Commissioner Crommie: Also, in an EIR you have to present alternate plans which is 1630 really informative for policymaking. There's some pieces of (inaudible) project. I was 1631 hoping someone from the City did this. If we're doing it privately, then I have to get 1632 clearance to pay the person. I talked to our staff liaison. 1633 1634 Mr. Anderson: We have people in our Planning that work on EIRs, but I don't know that 1635 you would say they were an instructor for it. 1636 1637 Commissioner Crommie: You'd want to get an instructor who can break it down, give 1638 you pertinent information efficiently. 1639 1640 Chair Reckdahl: This person that Karen Holman gave you, is she external to the City? 1641 1642 Commissioner Crommie: External to the City. 1643 1644 Chair Reckdahl: Does the City have any training on EIRs? 1645 1646 Mr. Anderson: Nope. 1647 1648 Commissioner Crommie: I was surprised by that. The Planning Department people 1649 come in so knowledgeable. They have already taken their course work on that. 1650 1651 Commissioner Ashlund: It's a prerequisite for the job. 1652 1653 Commissioner Crommie: It's a burden to ask a staff person to give a little workshop if 1654 they're not used to teaching that material. It would be most efficient if we hired someone 1655 who had experience doing such a thing. What should I do with this? 1656 1657 Chair Reckdahl: Why don't you talk with Rob and see if he wants to organize a City staff 1658 EIR training. If they do that, then we could sit in. 1659 1660 Commissioner Crommie: Beyond our Commission. 1661 1662 Chair Reckdahl: I can't believe that we would be the only Commission that would be 1663 interested in this. 1664 1665 Commissioner Ashlund: Right. Why are you saying it would be a City staff training? 1666 1667 Chair Reckdahl: Open to staff and Commissions. 1668 1669 Approved Minutes 40 APPROVED Mr. Jensen: Then the City pays for it, is what you're saying. 1670 1671 Commissioner Crommie: Clearly it should be beyond us. Do you think the amount of 1672 time would be a two-hour study session? 1673 1674 Chair Reckdahl: I don't think I want to spend four hours on it. I'd be willing to do two. 1675 1676 Commissioner Ashlund: Yeah, yeah. Get some prices and some dates and maybe 1677 coordinate with Rob in scheduling the time. 1678 1679 Commissioner Crommie: It's nice to know there's interest. 1680 1681 Commissioner Ashlund: If we open it up to other Commissions, then we can find out 1682 how many we need to fill the room to make it worthwhile. 1683 1684 Chair Reckdahl: Gatekeeper training. 1685 1686 Commissioner Ashlund: What's that? 1687 1688 Vice Chair Markevitch: QPR training. How many of you are QPR trained? 1689 1690 Chair Reckdahl: What is QPR? 1691 1692 Vice Chair Markevitch: Question, persuade and refer. If someone was thinking of 1693 suicide. It's a training on (inaudible). 1694 1695 Chair Reckdahl: I am not. 1696 1697 Commissioner Hetterly: That is on here because as part of Project Safety Net several 1698 years ago now, the Commission entered into a Memorandum of Understanding and 1699 committed to getting all the Commissioners QPR training to be additional adults in the 1700 community. 1701 1702 Vice Chair Markevitch: You're trained. I'm trained. Daren and Rob, I think are the four. 1703 Peter, are you trained? 1704 1705 Mr. Jensen: I'm not trained. 1706 1707 Vice Chair Markevitch: It probably doesn't come up in your job too often. 1708 1709 Commissioner Crommie: Do we get notices of training sessions? I don't recall seeing 1710 any. 1711 Approved Minutes 41 APPROVED 1712 Commissioner Hetterly: There have been a couple of notices of QPR training courses. 1713 1714 Commissioner Crommie: Maybe not so recently. I wonder if there was just a push on it 1715 last year. 1716 1717 Commissioner Ashlund: There was one very recently that came out through RICA. I'm 1718 not sure where I saw it. It might have been through Project Safety Net, but there was a 1719 very recent one that came out. 1720 1721 Commissioner Crommie: I don't recall seeing them. Are they coming past us as a 1722 Commission as a whole or is it on separate lists? 1723 1724 Commissioner Ashlund: That's what I'm saying; I don't remember. I might have gotten it 1725 just from the Project Safety Net list. 1726 1727 Commissioner Crommie: What is the timeframe with that training? 1728 1729 Commissioner Hetterly: It's 1 1/2 hours, 2 hours. 1730 1731 Vice Chair Markevitch: You can also do it online, but it's better if you do it in-person 1732 because then you do the role playing aspect that you can't get online. 1733 1734 Commissioner Crommie: Have either of you used your training since having it? 1735 1736 Commissioner Hetterly: I have. 1737 1738 Vice Chair Markevitch: Yeah. 1739 1740 Commissioner Hetterly: Rather than being on Rob, that's really on every Commissioner 1741 to just sign up for it and do it. 1742 1743 Vice Chair Markevitch: You can ask Minka how. She's a good person to start with. 1744 1745 Chair Reckdahl: PARC website, we talked about that already. Agenda time slots. I 1746 assume this means trying to keep the meeting to the amount of time that we can spend on 1747 it. 1748 1749 Commissioner Hetterly: I'm not sure why that's on here. It's something that we should 1750 discuss. Here it's not really an issue (inaudible) management (inaudible). One of the 1751 most challenging things for me as Chair was figuring out how long to designate for a 1752 particular topic and then moving the conversation along so that everybody who had 1753 Approved Minutes 42 APPROVED something they wanted to say had an opportunity to say it. There are a lot of different 1754 parts to that. One is the presenter. If you've got a half-hour slot on your agenda and your 1755 presenter talks for half an hour, then you're instantly backed up when you have no time 1756 for discussions. One of the things is to have staff and the Chair work more closely with 1757 presenters who are on the agenda for a particular month to make sure they know how 1758 long we want them to speak or we know how long they need to speak, so that we can then 1759 adjust the discussion time appropriately. Also, if we've got 30 minutes for an agenda 1760 item for the discussion part of it, that's less than 5 minutes apiece to speak. If one of us 1761 goes over, then that eats into other people's time. It's important to have everybody be 1762 respectful of that. Everyone may well have something to say. I heard from several 1763 Commissioners over the last year that they felt that as time backed up and as we would 1764 get behind on any particular item, they would forego making comments in the interest of 1765 moving on the schedule as opposed to saying what they had to say. That's an unfortunate 1766 outcome. At the same time, there are a lot of times when people have a lot to say or there 1767 are a lot of issues and the Chair doesn't know how much discussion is coming up. It's 1768 inevitable that you'll periodically run over. That should be the exception and not the rule. 1769 I would encourage everyone about not sharing your (inaudible) struggle with that now. It 1770 would be very helpful to him if Commissioners would come prepared with their 1771 comments and concerns prioritized so that we can welcome Keith to cut us off as he feels 1772 necessary to keep the schedule and then come back if time permits. Then you make sure 1773 you get your top priority issues covered before you get cut off. 1774 1775 Chair Reckdahl: The other point I want to make is when we ask questions, sometimes 1776 the answer rambles on. We spend ten seconds asking a question, and it's five minutes 1777 coming back. We have to be more aggressive cutting them off. If we've got our answer, 1778 let's move on with the next question. Sometimes they can eat up the time more than we 1779 do. 1780 1781 Vice Chair Markevitch: Another piece of this is the agendas. Sometimes they're pretty 1782 aggressive. You're looking at this going, "This is not a three hour meeting. This is 4 1783 1/2." To be more realistic in setting what is going to be on that agenda. Sometimes I see 1784 where we've discussed a month before we're going to do this and this and this. When we 1785 get the agenda, there's two or three more items that have been snuck in there after we had 1786 discussed it. It just really frontloads the meeting so we don't have time for that discussion 1787 piece. 1788 1789 Commissioner Hetterly: That's definitely true. Unfortunately, that's (crosstalk) because 1790 we meet once a month. There's a time sensitive issue that needs to come before us, we'd 1791 rather jam it in and stay up late than not cover it all. 1792 1793 Vice Chair Markevitch: There's a way around that too. Let's just be realistic and say, 1794 "Well, this issue has come before us and even though we've discussed it, we're going to 1795 Approved Minutes 43 APPROVED put it on this agenda for the next month. These two have now come up which are time 1796 critical. Move this one that we discussed to the next month." It's more manageable. 1797 People get tired as it gets late. 1798 1799 Commissioner Lauing: (inaudible) I've seen good progress this year is this. If two 1800 people in the room are talking about something, you can say, "My comments have 1801 already been heard by my fellow Commissioners," and move on. That's an efficient 1802 way. You don't have to get your quotes in the paper (inaudible). We're trying to get the 1803 issues on the table and move on. 1804 1805 2. Consider Potential Areas of Focus for 2015. 1806 1807 Chair Reckdahl: Let's move on now to Priorities 2015. Everything that we talked about 1808 is a priority. We've listed at least an (inaudible) date in the next decade for everything. 1809 That's our priority there. Now other things that we haven't talked about. The Buckeye 1810 Creek study, we talked about that already. Master Plan and we also talked about the 1811 Baylands boardwalk. 1812 1813 Commissioner Crommie: Relative to the Master Plan, we might want to go back to these 1814 ad hocs that we scheduled to make sure they are being completed or do we need anything 1815 more. (crosstalk) 1816 1817 Chair Reckdahl: Let's put the Master Plan on hold. If we get everything else done, then 1818 we could talk about the Master Plan for a long time. Let's get the other ones done first so 1819 we feel more free to talk. Does anyone else have things they want to add? I have a few 1820 things that I want to add. 1821 1822 Vice Chair Markevitch: Mine was the high school pickup games. (crosstalk) lead on 1823 that. 1824 1825 Commissioner Crommie: Daria Walsh when she was on the Commission, she was 1826 passionate about that too. We never made that much progress on it. Since I've been 1827 sitting on this Commission, we've talked about wanting something to be available. I'm 1828 grateful that you're willing to do that. 1829 1830 Commissioner Knopper: Something that I'm not sure how, as a Commission, we do or 1831 not do. Something that's definitely on my mind a lot is water conservation and how, as a 1832 Commission, we can create a communication plan or work along with the City with some 1833 sort of marketing to get people to stop watering their grass. Just something like create 1834 some sort of initiative and conversation in the community. I'm not sure if this is the right 1835 format. Daren and his staff and Peter have to adhere to very strict drought rules at this 1836 Approved Minutes 44 APPROVED point. I feel like there is a way that this Commission could be on the forefront of a 1837 conversation in the community about it. 1838 1839 Vice Chair Markevitch: I'm not sure it's in our purview. It's coming through the Utilities. 1840 They're going to start fining you if you keep doing what you're doing. Your water rates 1841 are going to go up. They just had some new guidelines come through the County that are 1842 pretty strict. I don't think it's our problem. 1843 1844 Chair Reckdahl: The only aspect that is our problem is from the park use, whether it be 1845 the golf course or the parks. If there's places that we could reduce water, then that's 1846 (crosstalk). 1847 1848 Commissioner Lauing: We talked last year, I think it might have been at the retreat, 1849 about should we more or less intentionally let some areas go brown to demonstrate that 1850 parks were fine. The feedback was the cost to replace that stuff is prohibitive compared 1851 to a little bit more cost for water, just on a cost basis. 1852 1853 Mr. Anderson: On some areas, that's for sure. It'd be a commitment to say we're going to 1854 let this go. We wouldn't just let it go brown. Most likely staff would sod cut and put 1855 down nice- looking mulch. We'd never have to irrigate it again except for the (inaudible). 1856 Another option is native plant landscaping. There are investments associated with those 1857 transformations. Just letting it go brown is less likely. It usually will become a weed 1858 issue. If you don't water it, then you have nothing but 3-foor tall daisies and other weeds. 1859 1860 Commissioner Lauing: I brought that up for the same reason. It was a symbol because 1861 we can only do stuff in parks, but it might help overall. 1862 1863 Commissioner Knopper: That's what I mean, lead by example. 1864 1865 Commissioner Lauing: You gave us a good scientific answer as to why that (inaudible). 1866 1867 Mr. Anderson: We are prioritizing little landscaped areas, unnecessary aesthetic turf, that 1868 are on our to-do list that eventually transform. Some of it could call for a little public 1869 outreach. There'd be a substantive change. As you drive down Embarcadero Road, 1870 there's an eighth of an acre of turf there, a tiny section of turf, that you could change. It 1871 doesn't need to be turf. People would say, "Wait a minute. What happened to our grass?" 1872 If the Commission wanted to be involved, maybe we just give it to the Commission and 1873 we can invite stakeholders. I don't know. Peter and I have talked about this a lot. 1874 1875 Mr. Jensen: I try to cut down turf where it's not useable. Pardee Park, I think we cut a lot 1876 of it out of there. Cogswell Plaza, that was one of the reasons we put the seating area 1877 Approved Minutes 45 APPROVED there. Every time we renovate a park, we're looking at those areas of turf that don't make 1878 sense as far as activity goes and trying to limit them. 1879 1880 Chair Reckdahl: In Bowden Park, that grass that's on Alma, the long-term plan is to get 1881 rid of that grass. 1882 1883 Mr. Jensen: Yes. Our idea would be to have a tree grow in there, a native tree oak stand, 1884 then the grass would eventually go away. It would be removed. 1885 1886 Chair Reckdahl: The plan is to establish the trees. 1887 1888 Mr. Jensen: Right. The transition is not as fast. It's more in keeping with the transition 1889 that our society's on in general. It's not a fast lane, but it will eventually be that way. 1890 1891 Mr. Anderson: I have a suggestion for the Commission to consider. Much like when dog 1892 issues first popped saying, "We're underserved," every renovation was asked to look, 1893 "Could you squeeze a dog park in here?" Perhaps a part of very park presentation where 1894 we're doing a CIP, there's an element that says water conservation as a subheading of the 1895 staff report. We can double check what has been addressed regarding water 1896 conservation. It's all summarized. You evaluate the plan. 1897 1898 Vice Chair Markevitch: That's good. 1899 1900 Mr. Jensen: I have all the background work to figure out how much water we save. 1901 Technically it's never published anywhere. I just have an email that I send to someone. 1902 Brad says one time a year at a Council meeting that we've saved so many gallons of 1903 water. It's not tied to anything. 1904 1905 Commissioner Knopper: To your point, part of getting people to stop watering their 1906 sidewalks, at least be more efficient. If you're going to have the sprinklers on, fix them 1907 so you're not watering the street in front of your home. If the City is communicating, 1908 "This is what we're doing. This is part of our planning process. This is where we've 1909 changed the flora of our parks." Maybe people will wake up and say, "Wait. I should 1910 maybe rip out my grass and put in native plantings." 1911 1912 Mr. Jensen: Again, our most efficient mailer is the utility bill, which I know doesn't go to 1913 everyone. If you did a PR thing twice a year or once a year that stated what the City was 1914 doing to reduce water, just as a way to update people, it might spark them to say, "Oh, we 1915 can do this too." 1916 1917 Commissioner Crommie: It does go to everyone actually. Those people on auto pay 1918 don't always open them. Everyone does get one. 1919 Approved Minutes 46 APPROVED 1920 Mr. Jensen: The cost efficiency of sending that out. Utilities is paying to send the mailer 1921 out to the whole community. 1922 1923 Commissioner Ashlund: They've got a huge public awareness campaign ongoing now. 1924 1925 Commissioner Knopper: We do auto pay, so I don't (crosstalk). 1926 1927 Commissioner Crommie: I know. That's what I'm saying. I collect them. 1928 1929 Vice Chair Markevitch: It would be more effective, that messaging that Abbie just said, 1930 as opposed to what you get now which is, "Oh, you're almost as good as your neighbors 1931 in water conservation." 1932 1933 Commissioner Knopper: The shaming. 1934 1935 Vice Chair Markevitch: The shaming. And here's this house over here. It's like, "Yeah, 1936 but that household has three people. We have four, so you can't compare it." The 1937 shaming part, I just mock it at this point. (crosstalk) 1938 1939 Commissioner Ashlund: We do have email lists now and opt-in interest lists of people 1940 who want to be informed of Parks and Rec related things. Do we have any idea how 1941 many people we have on that? 1942 1943 Mr. Anderson: It's about 50 or 60. The one I send out to stakeholders? 1944 1945 Commissioner Ashlund: Yeah. It sounds like we could even tie this in with that as well. 1946 If we were getting the word out that this was available when people are interested in 1947 water conservation. I don't know if we're the department to be in charge of that 1948 information or if there's somebody better to be in charge of water conservation. 1949 1950 Mr. Anderson: It's Utilities now. 1951 1952 Commissioner Ashlund: If it's Utilities, it's Utilities. It's not this Commission. 1953 1954 Commissioner Knopper: Okay. Let's talk to the Utilities Commission. 1955 1956 Commissioner Hetterly: It's a great idea to include in our staff reports a water 1957 conservation (crosstalk). That does connect directly. 1958 1959 Commissioner Crommie: One thing I just want to add. When we were reviewing the 1960 Urban Forest Plan, I made a comment. I don't know if it got incorporated. We still need 1961 Approved Minutes 47 APPROVED certain kinds of water hungry trees that drop fruit that animals eat and provide insects and 1962 butterflies food. If we want to have wildlife still living in our city, we still have to be 1963 mindful of how water conservation impacts living creatures, animals, and then have a 1964 balanced approach. My fear with the big drought resistance is that we'll clear all the 1965 wildlife out with it. Can we just assume that staff will naturally be mindful of that? 1966 1967 Mr. Anderson: Absolutely. I know Walter Passmore and my team are. That we need a 1968 diverse plant palate, a diverse tree palate. Peter is. Between Walter, myself and Peter, 1969 that's who's going to be leading these. 1970 1971 Commissioner Crommie: It might be nice if that's just commented on in the staff report. 1972 It doesn’t have to have a separate section. I guess what I'd say is what is the cost of this 1973 water conservation. We're conserving water and are we impacting wildlife when we 1974 conserve the water. 1975 1976 Commissioner Knopper: Removing turf is actually beneficial. 1977 1978 Commissioner Crommie: Yeah, I think it is. It comes up in the plant palette, the tree 1979 palette. It came up in the Urban Canopy Plan, not wanting anything messy. I'm always 1980 someone who'd rather have something messy in some regions of the park. 1981 1982 Vice Chair Markevitch: What you're trying to say is removing turf is different than 1983 stressing out fruit-growing trees by not giving them enough water. It's two different 1984 things. 1985 1986 Mr. Anderson: There's the danger that we just revert to a very narrow plant palette of 1987 drought-tolerant species. Soon you'll have what verges on three different types of plants. 1988 You don't want that. That's not good for the environment at all, nor for the aesthetics of a 1989 park either. That won't be the case. I wrote in "list the compromise and effects to 1990 wildlife via those water conservation methods." 1991 1992 Commissioner Ashlund: Deirdre, there was somebody that you and I spoke to on staff. I 1993 can't remember if it was (inaudible) or John Akin. We were talking about how the City 1994 has a sustainability person but doesn't have a conservation person. 1995 1996 Commissioner Crommie: Right. It was when we were speaking with John Akin. 1997 1998 Commissioner Ashlund: It was John Akin. He mentioned that there's some nonprofit 1999 that maybe we could partner with in that aspect. Do you remember who that was? 2000 2001 Commissioner Crommie: I don't remember. 2002 2003 Approved Minutes 48 APPROVED Commissioner Ashlund: All right. I'll check my notes. 2004 2005 Commissioner Crommie: That is something that I feel very passionate about, to just have 2006 a balanced focus on City staff. Daren, do you feel like that's your role on the staff? Are 2007 you our conservation person? 2008 2009 Mr. Anderson: I think so. Much like a lot of things we do, we're a small agency, so you 2010 defer a lot to organizations we partner with, like U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. They 2011 have a fleet of biologists that work in the very same habitats we do and we can confer 2012 with them. Rather than having our duplicating fleet, we refer to them a lot. The same is 2013 true for the plant experts at Acterra and Save the Bay. They have PhDs in wildlife 2014 biology and specialize in marsh plants. Rather than hiring my own guy who just does 2015 that, I have a partnership with one. I can ask him questions whenever I want. I have 2016 them review plans for me all the time. That's how I end up accomplishing those 2017 conservation elements into the job of what we need. 2018 2019 Commissioner Crommie: We brought in the (inaudible) person. You could have said the 2020 same thing. I want to be sustainable, so I confer with these (crosstalk). Within our City 2021 staff, we didn't make a space for a PhD wildlife conservation person. I don't know if they 2022 have such a person in Mountain View, for instance. We just have a lot of open land for 2023 not having a person dedicated to that, I believe. 2024 2025 Mr. Anderson: The way that Mountain View accomplishes that is through contracts. 2026 They entered contracts with, for example, burrowing owl experts. They don't have an on-2027 staff person. They just contract out. That was one thing that Greg Betts and I talked 2028 about. Do we enter (inaudible). 2029 2030 Chair Reckdahl: When you're talking about water thirsty plants, are you talking about 2031 non-native or native? 2032 2033 Commissioner Crommie: I don't know. It's really the experts who know this. When you 2034 have this diverse palette ... 2035 2036 Chair Reckdahl: You're just saying generically that we shouldn't have blinders on and 2037 look just at water efficiency? 2038 2039 Commissioner Crommie: Yes, that's what I'm trying to say. 2040 2041 Chair Reckdahl: If we have native oaks, for example, we don't water them at all, do we? 2042 2043 Mr. Anderson: We do to establish them, yes. They're less thirsty than a lot of the other 2044 trees. 2045 Approved Minutes 49 APPROVED 2046 Chair Reckdahl: In general, we are now skewing our trees towards native. We should be 2047 decreasing our water use, I assume. 2048 2049 Mr. Anderson: That's correct. 2050 2051 Chair Reckdahl: We still would water some of those just for establishing? 2052 2053 Mr. Anderson: There are some that get water ongoing. 2054 2055 Commissioner Crommie: An example would be how often do we want to plant fruit trees 2056 or mock fruit trees. I don't know how that (crosstalk) I don't think some of those are 2057 native (inaudible). 2058 2059 Mr. Anderson: (inaudible) 2060 2061 Commissioner Crommie: That would be a (inaudible) example. They provide food for 2062 birds. 2063 2064 Chair Reckdahl: For native birds or non-native birds? 2065 2066 Commissioner Crommie: I don't know. I've never drilled in that deeply to understand it. 2067 I just know from the Audubon Society that fruit trees are important to have within our 2068 plant palette. 2069 2070 Chair Reckdahl: I'm just thinking from the lazy man's standpoint, if you just plant native 2071 stuff, you don't have to water it and the native birds would be able to maintain. 2072 2073 Vice Chair Markevitch: For example, ivy has those berries on it. Every spring when the 2074 robins come through, they just clean out the berries on their way back north. It's amazing 2075 to watch. I don't think you can restrict it to native versus non-native birds. You have 2076 migratory birds that use those trees too. 2077 2078 Commissioner Crommie: It's complicated. On the ivy, rats also eat those berries, so that 2079 increases the rat population. Experts study this. I just want us to be mindful of that. 2080 2081 Commissioner Ashlund: We don't have it on staff. Save the Bay was the organization 2082 John had mentioned. I don't know that there's anything that we as a Commission can do 2083 other than wish and hope that staff would someday have a conservationist. We don't 2084 have that, and I don't think that's in our purview to say that there should be. We don't get 2085 to say that, right? We should hire a conservationist. 2086 2087 Approved Minutes 50 APPROVED Commissioner Hetterly: We should say that if we want to say that. 2088 2089 Chair Reckdahl: We can say it, but we have no (crosstalk). 2090 2091 Vice Chair Markevitch: People who become rangers are conservationists, because that's 2092 their passion. That's why they are rangers to begin with. 2093 2094 Commissioner Ashlund: Rangers aren't (crosstalk) projects and determining budgets. 2095 2096 Vice Chair Ashlund: I understand that, but they make suggestions because they know 2097 what's going on, on a daily basis. 2098 2099 Commissioner Crommie: It's different from a PhD biologist. (crosstalk) 2100 2101 Commissioner Knopper: To Daren's point, it sounds like he draws upon all of the 2102 richness of the resources that Palo Alto has through volunteer organizations that are 2103 willing to help us. 2104 2105 Mr. Anderson: I might add there's a danger in saying, "Hire the PhD. This is our expert 2106 in conservation." I have hiked through marshes with PhDs who couldn't identify a 2107 clapper rail. All my staff can. These are PhDs in the field coming out to look at native 2108 oysters. I said, "You know how to identify a clapper rail, right?" He said, "Of course, I 2109 do." One vocalized 10 feet away and he had no idea. There's a real danger in saying, 2110 "We got our PhD. Everything's set." There's a lot of different kinds of PhDs. That 2111 doesn't mean they have a field knowledge that you need to make the right 2112 recommendations. I wouldn't hang my hat so heavy on those kind of experts necessarily. 2113 Sometimes having this diverse group of PhDs that I have through this partnership may be 2114 better in some ways. 2115 2116 Commissioner Crommie: Also having conservation plans is a great protective layer. I 2117 would hope that we'll eventually have a conservation plan for everyone of our open space 2118 preserves. You have the CIP right now for the Baylands. Do we have a conservation 2119 plan yet for Foothills and Arastradero? 2120 2121 Mr. Anderson: Nope. That's the only one that has it. 2122 2123 Commissioner Crommie: When we were reviewing the natural environment element of 2124 the Comprehensive Plan, Commissioner Hetterly and I made sure there was language in 2125 there to say we wanted conservation plans for all those areas. That would be really what 2126 we need to do, is push those through. 2127 2128 Approved Minutes 51 APPROVED Mr. Anderson: It's both in the updated Comprehensive Plan and I wrote it into the 2129 updated Urban Forest Plan. You'll have two documents, if and when they get adopted by 2130 Council. They'll both substantiate call out to those Comprehensive Plans. 2131 2132 Chair Reckdahl: Anyone else have additional priorities for next year? 2133 2134 Commissioner Crommie: We've got water conservation. Are you going to have the 2135 creek undercrossing? 2136 2137 Chair Reckdahl: We can talk about that now. 2138 2139 Vice Chair Markevitch: Can we open up the one under the freeway? We're not getting 2140 any more rain this year. 2141 2142 Commissioner Crommie: I worked so hard on that, Pat, you will never believe. When 2143 we were in our meeting (inaudible) I said, "Can we have one clean out and then reopen it 2144 again?" I didn't get that. That's all I want. First of all we took five years to get them to 2145 say we don't need to be on a fixed calendar but we can use seasonal. Finally they decided 2146 that we don't close it on October 15 but we waited until the first rain. I said, "Moreover, 2147 can we do the one clean up?" They said no. They waited until the first storm which this 2148 year came around December. They didn't clean it out, and it's been closed ever since and 2149 we haven't even had another significant storm. At the staff level, Daren, if you're willing 2150 to take that on? I'd go into a meeting with Elizabeth Ames again. I'm indebted to her for 2151 pushing us through the barrier of taking it off of the calendar. This year's a perfect 2152 example of why we should have had a clean out and a reopening. We are losing months 2153 and months of use of that tunnel. 2154 2155 Vice Chair Markevitch: It (inaudible) in an hour and a half literally. 2156 2157 Commissioner Crommie: Officially it's supposed to open on April 15th, but we've 2158 missed this whole year. It could have been open except for a week. My family uses that 2159 constantly. We have to go to San Antonio Avenue. 2160 2161 Commissioner Hetterly: Is that being proposed as a topic for an ad hoc? 2162 2163 Commissioner Crommie: It's so simple. 2164 2165 Chair Reckdahl: Let's back off here and look at the big picture. 2166 2167 Commissioner Crommie: That's would be Lefkowitz tunnel, so we'd have to add onto 2168 this list. I added on Matadero, and Pat is adding on Lefkowitz. 2169 2170 Approved Minutes 52 APPROVED Mr. Anderson: Is it the same ad hoc? Is that what you're talking about? 2171 2172 Commissioner Crommie: What did we do? We did our creek and urban trails for the 2173 Lefkowitz, about how we worked on Lefkowitz. We'd have to form a new ad hoc. It's 2174 pretty simple work. Actually it's just going back to that platform and saying, "Hey, can 2175 we get this done?" 2176 2177 Chair Reckdahl: Let's get the rest of the Commissioners and then add underneath 2178 meetings. We had a meeting last week with Elizabeth Ames. Deirdre and I have been on 2179 the Byxbee ad hoc and we were talking to Daren. When we go to Byxbee now, we park 2180 over by Matadero Creek and hike up the back way instead of going all the way down 2181 Embarcadero. The thing we realized is when you park there right off of East Bayshore, 2182 you're very, very close to Byxbee. You're less than a half mile away from Byxbee which 2183 made us realize that all those people in Midtown, just on the other side of the freeway as 2184 the crow flies, were incredibly close to, in fact probably closer to Byxbee than Greer. 2185 They are closer to Byxbee than I am to my neighborhood park. That's how close it is. 2186 That underpass is being used right now; people hop the rail and go under there all the 2187 time. There's bike treads and shoe prints on the mud all the time. If we open that up 2188 now, the people who want to walk their dog in the morning can go under the freeway, 2189 and they're right there at Byxbee. 2190 2191 Commissioner Hetterly: That's an issue that has come up many, many, many, many 2192 times in the past. The city has been very reluctant to make than an official crossing. 2193 2194 Commissioner Crommie: Undercrossing. 2195 2196 Commissioner Hetterly: Undercrossing. If you met with Elizabeth Ames about this ... 2197 2198 Chair Reckdahl: Yes. 2199 2200 Commissioner Crommie: Matadero. 2201 2202 Commissioner Hetterly: Do you know that there's a working group for the trail piece of 2203 the bike plan that would go from Greer to Bryant or something like that? They wanted 2204 somebody from Parks and Rec represented on there. 2205 2206 Chair Reckdahl: Jaime mentioned that to me. On his way out, I sent an email saying, 2207 "Can I get it done for you?" One of the things he mentioned was that he had just talked 2208 to you about being a representative. 2209 2210 Commissioner Crommie: Jaime and the working group are working on a different part of 2211 Matadero Creek. That's a more controversial area because it's abutting many more 2212 Approved Minutes 53 APPROVED residences. This is what we need to strategize around. Is it worthwhile to break off this 2213 section of Matadero Creek that goes under 101 as a separate effort? Maybe led by our 2214 Parks and Recreation Commission, maybe an ad hoc from us to say, "Can we work on 2215 this one section in parallel with the working group working on the whole creek?" Is that 2216 what you're getting at? 2217 2218 Chair Reckdahl: Yes. There are a couple of barriers. One is that the ramps going down, 2219 my estimate is about 9 percent grade and for ADA it's 8.3. There probably would be 2220 some small changes, unless you can get an exception. I'm not sure of the ADA rules. Do 2221 you know, Daren? How hard is it to get an exception for that? 2222 2223 Mr. Anderson: It's possible. 2224 2225 Chair Reckdahl: We have to investigate that. The other is that the clearance under the 2226 bridge is only 8 feet. Elizabeth said that was problematic. If I'm sitting on my bike, I 2227 still can't get 8 feet; 8 feet to me is pretty tall. I think we'd be okay from a practical 2228 standpoint. I'm not sure if those regulations would prevent us from doing that. 2229 2230 Mr. Anderson: We'd have to confer with Santa Clara Valley Water District too. 2231 2232 Commissioner Crommie: Elizabeth seemed pretty comfortable with that. She has a lot 2233 of contacts there now because she's done the bridge over Highway 101. She had to do all 2234 kinds of work with Caltrans, Water District. 2235 2236 Vice Chair Markevitch: That's going to be two separate ad hocs then? 2237 2238 Chair Reckdahl: Matadero is separate from Lefkowitz. 2239 2240 Commissioner Crommie: Lefkowitz should be very quick. You'll either get a yes or no. 2241 2242 Chair Reckdahl: There's a budget issue. If they're going down and cleaning up, who's 2243 paying for that? 2244 2245 Commissioner Crommie: Right. 2246 2247 Commissioner Hetterly: We don't need an ad hoc for Lefkowitz. We just need 2248 somebody who's the lead on coordinating the planning. 2249 2250 Commissioner Crommie: To go and have a meeting with them and say, "Can you do 2251 this?" Maybe (inaudible) can do it, because I've already sat in other meetings. It's really 2252 calling one meeting. I don't think we need to do (crosstalk). 2253 2254 Approved Minutes 54 APPROVED Mr. Jensen: Sounds to me like that's the Water District issue, why it can't be cleaned and 2255 opened very quickly. If it was the City controlling it, that we'd do it and get it done. 2256 2257 Vice Chair Markevitch: It's the next layer. 2258 2259 Mr. Jensen: The Water District doesn’t move very quickly. 2260 2261 Commissioner Crommie: Our City does the cleanup, don't we? 2262 2263 Mr. Jensen: I don't think we do. I think they do it; that's why it takes so long. 2264 2265 Chair Reckdahl: We're going to have an ad hoc of one for Lefkowitz, and that will be 2266 Pat. 2267 2268 Commissioner Crommie: I think your staff contact is Elizabeth Ames. 2269 2270 Vice Chair Markevitch: Yeah, I know her well. 2271 2272 Chair Reckdahl: Matadero undercrossing ... 2273 2274 Commissioner Crommie: Can I just say one more thing about Pat's meeting? Is it a done 2275 deal that we can't keep Lefkowitz open once we build the new bridge over 101? Who 2276 decided that? I think a lot of people (crosstalk) 2277 2278 Vice Chair Markevitch: I'll ask her in that meeting. I'll ask Elizabeth. 2279 2280 Commissioner Crommie: I was just curious if anyone here knew who had made that 2281 decision to not (crosstalk). 2282 2283 Vice Chair Markevitch: We were pushing to keep it open. 2284 2285 Commissioner Crommie: Do you know, Jen? 2286 2287 Commissioner Hetterly: I don't know who made the decision. 2288 2289 Chair Reckdahl: (inaudible) 2290 2291 Commissioner Crommie: It's just another row with the crowd. (crosstalk) Some people 2292 don't like going over a bridge and they can go down through the tunnel. 2293 2294 Commissioner Hetterly: Especially for commuters. 2295 2296 Approved Minutes 55 APPROVED Commissioner Crommie: Again, it would be seasonal. It's never going to be a 2297 (crosstalk). 2298 2299 Chair Reckdahl: You reduce bridge traffic which makes it easier for everyone else to 2300 cross. I don't mind that. 2301 2302 Commissioner Ashlund: Cost of occasional cleanup. 2303 2304 Commissioner Crommie: How do you want to proceed with Matadero? 2305 2306 Chair Reckdahl: We had this initial conversation with Elizabeth Ames. What's the next 2307 step? Is she going to talk to ... 2308 2309 Commissioner Crommie: She was going to talk to Daren. 2310 2311 Chair Reckdahl: She dug up some old planning and forwarded it on to us. 2312 2313 Commissioner Crommie: The documents that she has is a feasibility study that was done 2314 for the bridge across Highway 101. They looked (inaudible) Matadero when they were 2315 trying to figure out the alignment. I think she went back and dug out that study to try to 2316 see what the barriers are. 2317 2318 Mr. Anderson: I haven't reviewed that yet. I'd be glad to help both of you guys. We 2319 could review those together and see next steps. It'd probably be pulling in Santa Clara 2320 Water District and our Public Works team and have (inaudible). After we've identified 2321 (inaudible). 2322 2323 Chair Reckdahl: For now let's keep on working to Byxbee. We may fork this off into 2324 separate ad hocs. Looks like it's going to be time consuming. 2325 2326 Mr. Anderson: You're envisioning Matadero as part of the Byxbee one? 2327 2328 Chair Reckdahl: Yeah, I think so. 2329 2330 Mr. Anderson: I'm thinking the Byxbee one's done. If you're talking about the interim 2331 plan (crosstalk). 2332 2333 Chair Reckdahl: I'm talking about the ad hoc. Not you, just the group. 2334 2335 Mr. Anderson: I see. 2336 2337 Approved Minutes 56 APPROVED Chair Reckdahl: We may get shot down and this may go away. If it does go on, then 2338 we'll (crosstalk). 2339 2340 Mr. Anderson: Should I add it here as the Matadero Creek Undercrossing Committee 2341 with you and Commissioner Crommie? 2342 2343 Chair Reckdahl: I guess you can mark that down and keep that (inaudible). 2344 2345 Vice Chair Markevitch: Anything else? 2346 2347 Commissioner Ashlund: We should keep Project Safety Net as something that we have 2348 liaison with. 2349 2350 Chair Reckdahl: We have Project Safety Net (crosstalk). 2351 2352 Vice Chair Markevitch: We used to have a liaison to Project Safety Net for the executive 2353 committee on it. When they reorganized the committee, we were dropped off. 2354 2355 Chair Reckdahl: Can we get back on it? Do we want to get back on it? 2356 2357 Commissioner Ashlund: I'd like to propose that we get back on it. 2358 2359 Chair Reckdahl: I think that would be a good idea. 2360 2361 Vice Chair Markevitch: It's got to come from them, not us. 2362 2363 Commissioner Ashlund: The them is Minka and Donna. 2364 2365 Vice Chair Markevitch: What's actually the whole ... 2366 2367 Commissioner Ashlund: The leadership committee. 2368 2369 Vice Chair Markevitch: They just hired a new director. 2370 2371 Commissioner Crommie: Rob was instrumental in helping (inaudible). 2372 2373 Commissioner Ashlund: He's not (crosstalk). 2374 2375 Vice Chair Markevitch: Absolutely. He's (inaudible). 2376 2377 Chair Reckdahl: He asked or they asked? 2378 2379 Approved Minutes 57 APPROVED Vice Chair Markevitch: I'm saying he's probably going to have to move off because he's 2380 too busy. 2381 2382 Commissioner Crommie: If someone from this Commission wants to do that, I think 2383 that's great, just to have those connections between our Commission and (crosstalk). 2384 2385 Commissioner Ashlund: I'd be glad to share that liaison with you if you want to stay on 2386 it. 2387 2388 Vice Chair Markevitch: No, go ahead. Five years is enough. 2389 2390 Chair Reckdahl: Stacey, let's propose that you're the ad hoc of one. 2391 2392 Commissioner Ashlund: Is it an ad hoc or a follow up? 2393 2394 Commissioner Crommie: It's a liaison. 2395 2396 Chair Reckdahl: Liaison then. A liaison of one. We'll see if we can get you in the door. 2397 If you can't get in the door then (crosstalk). 2398 2399 Commissioner Ashlund: I'm already on the list. I was going to the next meeting and I've 2400 been pushing to get a director back in there for a long time. 2401 2402 Vice Chair Markevitch: Are you going to the DE meetings or also the executive board 2403 meetings? 2404 2405 Commissioner Ashlund: I wasn't on the leadership committee. 2406 2407 Vice Chair Markevitch: You need to get on the leadership committee. Push for that. 2408 2409 Commissioner Crommie: Do we need any other liaison types? Anything to do with the 2410 teen community, I remember there was Commissioner, what's Paul's last name? 2411 2412 Commissioner Hetterly: Losch. 2413 2414 Commissioner Crommie: Commissioner Losch went to some of the Teen Advisory 2415 Board committees. Does our Commission feel like we need to reach out more to the teen 2416 community or does Project Safety Net cover everything? It was reaching out to kids who 2417 were interested in local government, that kind of thing. 2418 2419 Commissioner Ashlund: I don't know. I've apparently got myself assigned on a new ... 2420 2421 Approved Minutes 58 APPROVED Commissioner Hetterly: (inaudible) 2422 2423 Commissioner Crommie: Are there any other needs around that that either of you can 2424 think of? 2425 2426 Commissioner Ashlund: I can't take more on than what I've already got at Gunn. 2427 2428 Commissioner Crommie: Pat, is there anything that you already serve for? 2429 2430 Vice Chair Markevitch: Mine's mostly PTA. It's not Teen Advisory. They can come to 2431 us with the yearly report, how they're doing (crosstalk). 2432 2433 Commissioner Ashlund: It would be great if somebody had time, interest, energy to do it. 2434 It would be great. I have the interest but not the time. 2435 2436 Vice Chair Markevitch: I went to that Senior Summit about a month ago. I loved it. 2437 They're only doing it every year, and I won't be on the Commission the next time it rolls 2438 around. Be nice of somebody else, if you want it. 2439 2440 Commissioner Crommie: That's another thing. You know you're not going to reappoint 2441 onto this Commission? 2442 2443 Vice Chair Markevitch: (crosstalk) 2444 2445 Commissioner Ashlund: Senior Summit as in seniors in high school or seniors over 65? 2446 2447 Vice Chair Markevitch: Seniors over 65. 2448 2449 Commissioner Crommie: That's another thing. I can just make an announcement here. 2450 I'm not going to reappoint. That's another thing, look for more fellow Commissioners. If 2451 you have other ... 2452 2453 Chair Reckdahl: When does your term expire? 2454 2455 Commissioner Crommie: This year. 2456 2457 Vice Chair Markevitch: October. 2458 2459 Commissioner Hetterly: December. They extended it to December. 2460 2461 Commissioner Lauing: They moved it again to December. Are we still talking about 2462 new things to go on the list? 2463 Approved Minutes 59 APPROVED 2464 Chair Reckdahl: Mm-hmm. 2465 2466 Commissioner Lauing: One of the things that I don't exactly know if this is in policy, but 2467 as you know from the CIP discussions, we're really concerned about the safety of the 2468 Foothills Park thing with that fire road issue. That should be a policy for our City to keep 2469 our citizens safe. I think it fits within policy. Is that something you'd be actually 2470 working on? 2471 2472 Commissioner Crommie: Can you give a little background? 2473 2474 Mr. Anderson: I can give you an update. That's a very good question. In 2009, the City 2475 completed the Foothills Fire Management Study. In that study was a bunch of 2476 recommendations and $740,000 worth of work. A lot of it was clearing vegetation on 2477 escape routes and internal parts of Foothills Park. Not just Foothills Park, all the way up 2478 Page Mill Road up to Skyline, Arastradero Road, and all these areas in that Foothills 2479 region. It called for a number of action items. The City sat idle with it for a number of 2480 years, because nobody could manage it. No one could get it going. Primarily it sat in the 2481 lap of Public Works just because they used to do roadside clearing. This has an element 2482 of roadside clearing, so they managed that CIP, but very little happened beyond what was 2483 originally done. The Fire Department was involved of course, and it still sat idle. 2484 Eventually all parties came together and we formed a partnership. This is the recent part 2485 that gets us to where we want to be. We formed the Fire Safety Council. It's a nonprofit 2486 organization that works well as a partner to us. We funnel the money from that CIP. We 2487 didn't get $750,000 to implement the plan. We got $250,000. It sat idle for about four 2488 years. We're just now exercising the last of those funds primarily through this 2489 partnership that's now set up where they contract out with various contractors like CalFire 2490 for example. They contract with their crews, and they come in and do this clearing that's 2491 called for in the plan. Through that partnership, we're now able to really utilize and meet 2492 the goals of that plan. Before we weren't. Now we've exhausted just about every bit of 2493 the funding that was leftover from that previous CIP. We put in a funding request 2494 ongoing for this one as a CIP. It was denied as you probably know. That was the 2495 concern. Your request for new funds was shot down, what are you going to do about it 2496 now? We went back as a team, we formed this group, I'm the Chair, with the Fire 2497 Department, Public Works, and Utilities and CSD. We meet every month to discuss this. 2498 We came up with a plan. We rehired the author of the fire plan to update it, give us fresh 2499 numbers, reprioritize the work that needs to be done, and help us form substantial, 2500 justifiable requests for funding. ASD said, "We don't think this is a CIP. We want this to 2501 go into your operating budgets." We divvied up the relevant portions and the inside the 2502 park fund request will come from CSD. It's about $74,000 a year. Outside the park, 2503 $64,000 or so for Public Works, that's the roadside clearing. Fire is requesting $60,000 a 2504 year for fire assessment, fuel load assessment, and implementing the control burns. 2505 Approved Minutes 60 APPROVED Those are the three elements of the fire plan broken up for the departments. Now we've 2506 got the request in and we'll see what comes. Right now it's still on the plate and everyone 2507 understands the importance of it. Would it be valuable to have the Commission 2508 advocate? I think so, because during our meetings, ASD came to the meetings and said, 2509 "Give us a tiered approach." I understand this is what Carol Rice, the author of the plan, 2510 says you need to realize the goals. What would it be if we didn't quite get all the way 2511 there? What if we lowball? That was scary to hear that someone would put those options 2512 in this kind of scenario. I understand the need to ask the questions. We tried to formulate 2513 the answers in real impactful statements. If you went with Assumption B, you'd no 2514 longer have safety zones for police or fire and they're not going to come to the calls. 2515 Things along those nature. Your picnic areas are no longer safe for fire safety. We tried 2516 to formulate like that, and we'll see what comes. Maybe the answer is if we don't get the 2517 funding we requested, then we form a team to issue a memo. 2518 2519 Commissioner Lauing: We should be more proactive. We have a major safety problem 2520 in our biggest park. That seems to be a policy issue that we might want to chime in on. 2521 You guys have been shot down for years on this. For us to make a resolution that there 2522 are these three buckets in the budget, and Council needs to approve these three buckets 2523 for safety in our park. We'll get the wording right. It seems to me like quite an 2524 appropriate action for us to take in advance of the budget. It's not let's wait and see if we 2525 get turned down. 2526 2527 Mr. Anderson: I only say that because the budget is all happening right this minute. 2528 2529 Chair Reckdahl: How is the operating budget allocated? I know how the CIPs work. 2530 2531 Mr. Anderson: This comes from the General Fund of course. ASD reviews the request, 2532 the changes and deletions from all the different departments, looks at the overall poll and 2533 sees what's available and divvies it up based on the justifications. I think we've got a 2534 strong, strong argument for why we need to fund this, but it is an increase over what was 2535 asked for before. 2536 2537 Chair Reckdahl: ASD puts together the budget and submits it to the Council? 2538 2539 Mr. Anderson: The Finance Committee and then the Council. 2540 2541 Chair Reckdahl: This is really an issue for Finance Committee then. 2542 2543 Mr. Anderson: Yes. 2544 2545 Chair Reckdahl: Do we want to go to Finance Committee? Would that be easier 2546 (inaudible)? 2547 Approved Minutes 61 APPROVED 2548 Mr. Anderson: Maybe I can follow up. 2549 2550 Commissioner Lauing: We can do a resolution that goes to the Finance Committee too. 2551 Would that be helpful? 2552 2553 Mr. Anderson: Yes. 2554 2555 Commissioner Lauing: It seems to me like this is an action item for a Commission 2556 meeting, not an ad hoc or (inaudible) because you've got all the studies done. We just 2557 want to put our weight behind it that it is a big safety problem. 2558 2559 Council Member Filseth: I believe the 2016 budget issue (inaudible) Finance Committee 2560 in the next couple of months. (inaudible) I don't know if anybody else (inaudible). 2561 2562 Vice Chair Markevitch: I saw pictures of the Berkeley Hills from 1990. 2563 2564 Commissioner Lauing: I like the plan, that you've figured out a new way around the 2565 bottleneck. The risk now is that it's (crosstalk) it'll be ignored. 2566 2567 Commissioner Hetterly: We need a letter or a resolution then to come before the 2568 Commission as an action item. 2569 2570 Commissioner Lauing: Right. 2571 2572 Commissioner Crommie: We'll write a recommendation. 2573 2574 Commissioner Hetterly: (crosstalk) directly to Finance Committee and the Council. 2575 2576 Commissioner Lauing: Which I think we missed Tuesday. So it's got to in tomorrow. 2577 Just because of the public nature of the general (inaudible). You're at least alerted to it, 2578 Eric. If it comes up sooner than that, raise your hand. 2579 2580 Council Member Filseth: I look for it in my inbox. 2581 2582 Mr. Anderson: The other thing I can find out is where ASD is now with the 2583 recommendation. Are they putting forward what we originally proposed? Are they 2584 putting down a tiered response? I don't know; I haven't heard. I can reach out to them 2585 and get that answer concurrent with drafting a memo. 2586 2587 Commissioner Lauing: I'm happy to work with you on that, however you want on that or 2588 not at all. I'd like to see it before it comes to us for a vote. 2589 Approved Minutes 62 APPROVED 2590 Commissioner Crommie: It seems really good that it's moving into the operating budget 2591 ultimately though. That's a no-frills environment. 2592 2593 Commissioner Lauing: It is as long as they don't start trimming here and there and those 2594 are the pieces that get trimmed. 2595 2596 Chair Reckdahl: The easiest way to cut something is to break it into three pieces and 2597 then cut the three pieces. We will put that for April (inaudible). 2598 2599 Council Member Filseth: How much is this going to cost? 2600 2601 Commissioner Lauing: Say again. 2602 2603 Council Member Filseth: How much was the ballpark that this was going to cost. 2604 2605 Mr. Anderson: The total request for annual budget is right around $150,000, $160,000 a 2606 year. 2607 2608 Commissioner Lauing: Per year? 2609 2610 Mr. Anderson: No, this is the entire thing. CSD is $74,000, something like that. 2611 2612 Commissioner Lauing: Instead of putting it into a multi-year CIP, it's now a smaller 2613 piece ... 2614 2615 Mr. Anderson: Ongoing budget. 2616 2617 Commissioner Lauing: ... in the ongoing budget. The same number ends up the same 2618 after four years or five years, doesn't it? 2619 2620 Mr. Anderson: Right. The difference is this would have been a new CIP. The old one 2621 had been funded for $250,000 to cover a certain number of years. 2622 2623 Commissioner Lauing: The only question is do you have a comfort level of getting it 2624 annually, so we're not keeping a high risk situation there for three years because you don't 2625 have enough to do a surge and get it all done at once. 2626 2627 Mr. Anderson: We had talked about that too. I was more comfortable with the CIP 2628 paradigm. It used to carry over whether you spent it all, so you frontload or save money 2629 for the next year if there was a bigger thing looming, like a cleanup year or something 2630 more heavy. ASD is getting away from those kind of projects becoming CIPs. They 2631 Approved Minutes 63 APPROVED said, "This is no longer the kind of CIP we want. That'll be built into operating from now 2632 on." It's not something they're willing to do. Getting the funding is still great of course. 2633 If it needs to be in operating, we'll do it that way. 2634 2635 Commissioner Crommie: Is ASD Administrative Services Department? 2636 2637 Mr. Anderson: Yes. They're budgets and (crosstalk). 2638 2639 Chair Reckdahl: How much catch-up do we have to do with the fire? Are we in a steady 2640 state now or do we think that we're worse than our eventual goal to get into a steady 2641 state? 2642 2643 Mr. Anderson: We're (inaudible). We've made some really good strides this last year, 2644 just knocking out a lot of significant portions along Page Mill Road, and then inside 2645 Foothills Park. It looks very different in terms of the cutback or the lifting up of 2646 vegetation, the way it once was long ago and before it became all grown in and became 2647 this hazard. We're catching up is the answer. We're getting closer. 2648 2649 Chair Reckdahl: Ed, do you have anything else? The fire plan, is that the only item 2650 you'd like to add? 2651 2652 Commissioner Lauing: Yeah. We picked up another one (inaudible) funding. 2653 2654 Commissioner Crommie: Another idea for the list, does anyone want to look at more 2655 camping sites in Foothills Park? Those of you who are on that 7.7 acres committee, do 2656 you think that our Commission needs to do any work on that? 2657 2658 Commissioner Hetterly: No. 2659 2660 Commissioner Knopper: Until the study comes back, because it may well lend itself to a 2661 campsite. 2662 2663 Commissioner Crommie: I wasn't meaning for that part of the park. Just in general. 2664 2665 Commissioner Lauing: The point is do we need more campsites. 2666 2667 Commissioner Crommie: Do we need more campsites in Foothills Park? I'm personally 2668 not in favor of them being (crosstalk). 2669 2670 Vice Chair Markevitch: I wouldn't even bring it up then. 2671 2672 Commissioner Crommie: Don't bring it up, okay. 2673 Approved Minutes 64 APPROVED 2674 Commissioner Knopper: We talked to (inaudible) about it when we doing the analysis. 2675 2676 Commissioner Crommie: There's a lot of demand for the Towle Campground, that's why 2677 I brought it up. 2678 2679 Chair Reckdahl: I think the problem is that if you wanted to do it, the question would be 2680 do you want to do it at the 7.7 acres. We don't know right now because of the hydrology 2681 study. 2682 2683 Commissioner Crommie: No. I wanted it to be disconnected. I'm just saying in general 2684 camping, not connected to the 7.7 acres. 2685 2686 Commissioner Hetterly: As a general issue, that comes up then in our prioritization 2687 discussion over the Master Plan, whether or not we want to prioritize that. 2688 2689 Commissioner Crommie: Okay, that's a good point. 2690 2691 Chair Reckdahl: Peter's not here. Do we know is the Master Plan addressing camping 2692 sites? 2693 2694 Mr. Anderson: I believe so. 2695 2696 Chair Reckdahl: I'll start. I've got a couple more to add. 2697 2698 Commissioner Crommie: Did we get through the first? 2699 2700 Chair Reckdahl: Project Safety Net we have. Another thing that I mentioned to Rob, and 2701 I wish I'd caught this before. This Friends group, I feel like we're unclear on what 2702 Friends groups do. I don't even know what all the Friends groups are. There's Friends of 2703 the Foothills Park. There's Friends of Park. 2704 2705 Vice Chair Markevitch: There's like 40 of them. 2706 2707 Commissioner Crommie: I saw a list once. 2708 2709 Commissioner Ashlund: We need a new one. We need Friends of the Baylands 2710 Interpretive Center. 2711 2712 Chair Reckdahl: I'd asked Rob if he could just give us a list of all the Friends groups that 2713 work our parks. He is not here now. 2714 2715 Approved Minutes 65 APPROVED Commissioner Crommie: (crosstalk) 2716 2717 Commissioner Lauing: I vote that we don't have all 40 of them come to the meeting. 2718 2719 Vice Chair Markevitch: We just need a list. We don't need to make a whole big thing 2720 out of it. 2721 2722 Mr. Anderson: We can send you the list. 2723 2724 Chair Reckdahl: I'd like two things. I'd like to know the list of all the different Friends 2725 groups. I suspect some of them are more active than others. The other is that 2726 periodically if a Friends group is doing something new in the parks, it'd be nice for them 2727 to come back and have either an announcement at the end that Rob, when he gives his 2728 announcements, talks about parks. In the two years I've been on the Commission, never 2729 once have we mentioned what the Friends groups have done. Just a periodic update of 2730 what's going on with the Friends groups. 2731 2732 Commissioner Ashlund: Do you mean per park? Do you mean the Friends groups that 2733 are associated with parks? 2734 2735 Chair Reckdahl: Correct. 2736 2737 Commissioner Ashlund: I believe there's also one associated with recreation. 2738 2739 Chair Reckdahl: Parks and recreation. 2740 2741 Commissioner Ashlund: There's one that doesn't have park in its name. 2742 2743 Chair Reckdahl: Not that we want to micromanage what they're doing, but it'd be nice to 2744 know what they're doing. 2745 2746 Commissioner Ashlund: To know what's out there. Yeah, Palo Alto Recreation 2747 Foundation is still out there. They don't have Friends in their name. 2748 2749 Chair Reckdahl: Another thing we mentioned earlier with that grassy area off Colorado, 2750 whether we can use that for a dog park or community gardens or something like that. Are 2751 there other areas that are City land but not parkland and that we could use for purposes? 2752 2753 Mr. Anderson: In the context of looking for a place for dogs, that was the one that 2754 jumped out. I'm not familiar with too many others. Maybe one or two small spots. 2755 There's one behind the Baylands Athletic Center. It's an undeveloped piece of land. It is 2756 parkland. It's between the International School and us. It's a little small. 2757 Approved Minutes 66 APPROVED 2758 Vice Chair Markevitch: Do you mean where the batting cages may go? 2759 2760 Mr. Anderson: No. This is not in the former PASCO site. This is closer to the 2761 International School. 2762 2763 Vice Chair Markevitch: That's too bad. They'd be great ball retrievers. 2764 2765 Commissioner Lauing: Where is it relative to the softball field? 2766 2767 Mr. Anderson: Just on the other side of the fence towards the school. 2768 2769 Chair Reckdahl: The right field fence of the skinny field. There's an area back there 2770 that's just dead. 2771 2772 Mr. Anderson: It's small, so I don't know what could fit on it. It is a piece of land that's 2773 (crosstalk). 2774 2775 Chair Reckdahl: I'm not sure there's parking over there by the International School. 2776 2777 Vice Chair Markevitch: No, there's none. 2778 2779 Mr. Anderson: None. 2780 2781 Chair Reckdahl: There's none there? 2782 2783 Vice Chair Markevitch: Zero. The parents are parking in the post office lot to drop their 2784 kids off. 2785 2786 Mr. Anderson: The only thing that's put that on hold in my mind is as the levee moves 2787 over for the widening of the JPA project, it's compromising that whole area, how you 2788 even get to it. I almost want to see how it shakes out to know what the best use would be. 2789 That's another piece of land that we'd have. It's that lot. 2790 2791 Commissioner Crommie: The question of Sterling Canal is like finding real estate. 2792 2793 Chair Reckdahl: Sterling Canal's is owned by the City? 2794 2795 Mr. Anderson: There are easements in it according to Utilities. I have not seen the map. 2796 From what they say, there's a PG&E easement that runs down the middle. Although it's 2797 owned by the City, they've got that easement which is significant. They said there's three 2798 easements on that piece of land. 2799 Approved Minutes 67 APPROVED 2800 Vice Chair Markevitch: I've mentioned this to Deirdre before. Ramos Park is a great 2801 spot for a community garden. There's a big piece of land to the left side of it. 2802 2803 Commissioner Hetterly: A rectangular chunk. 2804 2805 Commissioner Crommie: I go there a lot to their dog meetings to check it out. They 2806 don't go over (inaudible). 2807 2808 Commissioner Hetterly: That's where I see them. 2809 2810 Commissioner Crommie: They would be closer (inaudible) I'd ever seen, the ones at 2811 Ramos Park. A place where a community garden I thought would be neat to look at 2812 would be that land that we have at Foothill and Arastradero. I think it's called an open 2813 space. Is that that Esther something? 2814 2815 Mr. Anderson: Esther Clark. 2816 2817 Commissioner Crommie: Esther Clark. I want to go check that out sometime. 2818 2819 Commissioner Ashlund: It's an interesting space. 2820 2821 Commissioner Crommie: It's an interesting space that's fully underutilized. I don't think 2822 anyone ever steps foot on it as far as I believe. 2823 2824 Chair Reckdahl: There's deer crossings there. 2825 2826 Mr. Anderson: There's paths that people use. There's not one utility on it. There's no 2827 amenities on it. 2828 2829 Chair Reckdahl: None of the paths are made. They're just ad hoc. 2830 2831 Commissioner Crommie: I was always interested in that for a community garden. 2832 2833 Mr. Anderson: I'm really hoping that the Master Plan will help with that. I just wrote in 2834 the notes on the maps that come out from Master Plan (inaudible). Opportunities where 2835 you've got 22 acres with not a single amenity on it. That's certainly an opportunity for a 2836 Friends group, for habitat restoration, for trail systems, for you name it. 2837 2838 Chair Reckdahl: For Esther Clark, are we constrained at all? That's considered general 2839 parkland that we can do anything we want? 2840 2841 Approved Minutes 68 APPROVED Commissioner Ashlund: Does it have any preservation ... 2842 2843 Mr. Anderson: It's open space parkland. 2844 2845 Commissioner Ashlund: Does it have any preserved status, any protective status to it? 2846 2847 Mr. Anderson: It's parkland, so it has ... 2848 2849 Commissioner Ashlund: It's just parkland. 2850 2851 Mr. Anderson: ... home facility zoning status like all our parks. It's very closely bounded 2852 by residences which makes it a little different than any of our other places. (inaudible) 2853 2854 Commissioner Crommie: I wanted to mention that (inaudible) the dog ad hoc committee. 2855 They just opened a new dog park in Los Altos Hills on Purissima. If anyone wants to 2856 check it out (inaudible) dog parks. I haven't been to it yet, but I've heard about it. It 2857 might be Los Altos Hills only dog park. 2858 2859 Chair Reckdahl: Turf? 2860 2861 Commissioner Crommie: I think it's dirt. It's near the baseball diamond on Purissima 2862 Road. There's a well-established park there. It's to the south of Arastradero and 2863 Purissima. 2864 2865 Chair Reckdahl: Arastradero? 2866 2867 Commissioner Crommie: The dog park is on Purissima Road, south of the intersection of 2868 Purissima and Arastradero Roads. 2869 2870 Chair Reckdahl: That's very close to (inaudible) 2871 2872 Commissioner Crommie: It's extremely close to Palo Alto, just blocks away. 2873 2874 Vice Chair Markevitch: Is there anything else? 2875 2876 Chair Reckdahl: The only thing that we've skipped over is the Master Plan. 2877 2878 Vice Chair Markevitch: It's ongoing. 2879 2880 Chair Reckdahl: It's ongoing, but it's ... 2881 2882 Commissioner Crommie: How about just the ad hocs, redoing them? 2883 Approved Minutes 69 APPROVED 2884 Chair Reckdahl: Let's talk about the stakeholders group and community meetings. 2885 What's the status for community meetings. That is the outreach meeting. Will 2886 (inaudible)? 2887 2888 Commissioner Hetterly: No. There's prioritization meetings upcoming for both of those 2889 groups. Those first two ad hocs should still be engaged. The Master Plan Survey is 2890 completed. 2891 2892 Commissioner Ashlund: That's the only one that's complete, yes. 2893 2894 Commissioner Crommie: We can knock that one off the list. 2895 2896 Commissioner Ashlund: The stakeholders, we only had the one. 2897 2898 Mr. Jensen: We've had one stakeholder meeting while I was at a prioritization 2899 stakeholder meeting. There's three altogether, then there'll be one at the end that'll review 2900 the plan with the stakeholders. 2901 2902 Commissioner Ashlund: The schedule is ... 2903 2904 Vice Chair Markevitch: Stakeholders next week. 2905 2906 Mr. Jensen: It's not scheduled yet. It will coincide with the next community meetings 2907 which will be in a couple of months from now after we figure out our data thing in the 2908 prioritization stage, the main stage. 2909 2910 Chair Reckdahl: Our guess is fall timeframe. 2911 2912 Mr. Jensen: No, I'm going to say summer, June probably. 2913 2914 Vice Chair Markevitch: You don't have the dates up for that? 2915 2916 Mr. Jensen: No, I do not. 2917 2918 Commissioner Ashlund: We have the dates up for the Master Plan retreat? 2919 2920 Commissioner Hetterly: We do. 2921 2922 Commissioner Ashlund: We do? 2923 2924 Commissioner Knopper: We do. We've got a Google (inaudible). 2925 Approved Minutes 70 APPROVED 2926 Mr. Jensen: That was something Robin and I were talking about. Instead of having a 2927 separate retreat meeting like this one, use the majority of our next April meeting to do the 2928 Master Plan, basically do it at our scheduled meeting. Currently the agenda has a Byxbee 2929 Park trails item on it, and (crosstalk) ... 2930 2931 Mr. Anderson: Hold for April? 2932 2933 Mr. Jensen: Yes. Then the Parks Master Plan. It has two items basically. If we want to 2934 have it and segment it out a 2 1/2 hour segment or a 2 hour segment, or we just do the 2935 Master Plan stuff as a retreat. Daren can do his thing at the beginning. We'll move into 2936 the Master Plan thing and we'll just do it on the meeting night instead of having a totally 2937 separate meeting. That's a possibility. That's for you guys to discuss though, what you'd 2938 like to do. 2939 2940 Commissioner Crommie: As long as we don’t have a backlog of any other important 2941 stuff coming through the pipeline. Is there anything that ... 2942 2943 Mr. Jensen: No. The only thing is the Byxbee Park trail (inaudible). 2944 2945 Mr. Anderson: And this fire memo. 2946 2947 Commissioner Knopper: I like that idea. 2948 2949 Chair Reckdahl: Let's talk after the meeting on Tuesday. 2950 2951 Commissioner Hetterly: Once we've looked at our binders. We can take them home 2952 today, right? 2953 2954 Mr. Jensen: Yes, you can. Or we can start practicing that stuff inside of it. 2955 2956 Chair Reckdahl: One more topic. Rob talked to me about this. We had the Junior 2957 Museum discussion last week, and I'm going to step on some toes. People were irritated 2958 with that and pushed back about the use encroaching into the park. (inaudible) 2959 2960 Vice Chair Markevitch: That's our goal: protect the parks. 2961 2962 Chair Reckdahl: The (inaudible) is that this is parkland and it is an appropriate use for 2963 parkland. That was their thinking. Just because this is a (inaudible) doesn't preclude 2964 them from using parkland. It's not like we're losing parkland. We're just using parkland 2965 for something else. 2966 2967 Approved Minutes 71 APPROVED Commissioner Crommie: (crosstalk) makes any sense to me. 2968 2969 Chair Reckdahl: My response is we want to have our cake and eat it too. We love the 2970 Junior Museum. We think everything's great, but we just want to see them do everything 2971 they can to stay within the existing footprint. At that point, if we're convinced that they 2972 can't fit into the footprint, then we would consider going into the park. Does that 2973 correspond to other people's views? One of the questions was, would it be useful for us 2974 to have a tour of the Junior Museum and talk to them and see what they'd need? 2975 2976 Mr. Jensen: I would suggest that it doesn't have to be a tour where you could show up. 2977 That could be something like a meeting. I did suggest to John Akin that they start to 2978 spray paint or stake out there where they are proposing how far it pushes, so you can 2979 develop the rendering of that side of the zoo and see it better and how it relates to the 2980 park. It will help to stand in the space and see how big it is out there or what that area is. 2981 Like I said, that area of the park is not any usable space. 2982 2983 Chair Reckdahl: What I told Rob is that I'm not concerned about the usable space right 2984 now, but 30 years from now as the population grows and our parklands don't grow. I'm 2985 concerned that we have all these straws on the back of a camel growing and everyone 2986 taking 10 feet here and 10 feet there. We may have some decisions that we regret. 2987 2988 Commissioner Lauing: I'll answer your question. First of all, we can't be muzzled on 2989 something that has to do with parks. That's not in the feedback. We have to be stewards 2990 of the park. Anytime that there's incremental usage or even a review of reconstruction 2991 and they're already on parks, we have to consider what other uses 5, 10, 15, 20 years. 2992 There couldn't be anything that's more in our jurisdiction than this type of thing. 2993 2994 Mr. Jensen: I think your question is about encroachment into the park and the size of it. 2995 Those are legitimate questions. That's what you should be asking them. That's the whole 2996 process. 2997 2998 Commissioner Lauing: Right. Some of the questions that I asked and others asked is do 2999 we need that much office space in there? Can that be separate or smaller or maybe 3000 (crosstalk)? 3001 3002 Vice Chair Markevitch: Two stories. 3003 3004 Commissioner Lauing: Or storage or some of the outbuilding places. I don't know the 3005 answer because I'm not the expert. They can work on that. You can work on that. If it's 3006 going to be a wish list, which in my judgment that's what I see right now is a wish list and 3007 a two story and all that, then I'd make a radical question of did you consider other places 3008 for it? It's a wonderful, wonderful resource, a unique one, for Palo Alto. If you can't 3009 Approved Minutes 72 APPROVED really shoehorn that wish list in there, then what else can you do to fix that a little bit? 3010 There's the whole size of the design, which the Architectural Review Board looked at this 3011 week and they were not very pleased with the actual architecture. They gave a pushback 3012 on that, changing the size and the kind of lacquer. It was in the Weekly this morning. 3013 3014 Mr. Jensen: They want it to be more playful. Their comments were based on the façade 3015 and the way that the exterior façade looked. They thought they were laid out okay. One 3016 of them suggested pushing further into the park. If they needed more room, that would 3017 mean that they (crosstalk). 3018 3019 Council Member Filseth: (crosstalk) just on the procedure here. I think what you said is 3020 right. I think that's what I expect the Architectural Review Board to look at in terms of 3021 the design. I actually am not sure who in the City looks at the site, because on 3022 commercial projects the ARB doesn't have okay. The Planning and Transportation 3023 Commission doesn't seem like the corporeal body in this case. I think it's between the 3024 staff (inaudible). This group, like you said, this is the sweet spot of parks and rec issues. 3025 We all like John Akin. He's a big vision guy. It's all well and good to ask him to go and 3026 see if he can use a little less park space and so forth. Either of which is (inaudible). This 3027 group is going to have to decide (inaudible) or not. 3028 3029 Vice Chair Markevitch: I also suspect we were the first group to push back. Everybody 3030 else was, "Oh, this is great." We were the first ones to do it. If they get upset, that's just 3031 too bad. I'm not insulted by it at all. 3032 3033 Mr. Jensen: I don't think they're upset in any type of way. That's why I (crosstalk). 3034 That's why the exhibits that you were looking at did show all those things. That was not 3035 really a part of the original things that you guys were supposed to look at. I thought you 3036 should see the footprint now, the footprint overlaid with the new (inaudible) related to the 3037 property lines. Those things are in your purview. Your purview really is to say, "Yes, 3038 you can't have that piece of parkland." They have to do more due diligence to prove that 3039 that is a legitimate thing, to push the parkland. 3040 3041 Commissioner Knopper: I liked your suggestion, Peter, that they stake out or spray out 3042 (crosstalk) ... 3043 3044 Mr. Jensen: That would definitely help out (crosstalk). 3045 3046 Commissioner Knopper: ... would help. To the ARB's point that having that façade, that 3047 wall thing. It was very imposing, office-like, facing the park. From a design perspective, 3048 again this is probably not our purview, but they have some sort of exhibit facing out to 3049 the park that kids can interact with on that portion. They need to start thinking out of the 3050 box like that, so maybe it becomes part of the park activity, whatever is happening on that 3051 Approved Minutes 73 APPROVED back wall. Maybe the BOT, the advising body, we would say, "Oh, okay, we see this 3052 because this now has added value to the park." 3053 3054 Mr. Jensen: That is the one key aspect of the design of the zoo as proposed now. It does 3055 connect itself visually to the park, which currently it does not. Currently, it just looks 3056 like it could be someone's house back over there by the fence. That was a main idea of 3057 the long range plan, how do we communicate what these amenities are around the park so 3058 people understand that those things are there. Developing that and understanding what 3059 happens along that façade or veneer of the zoo and how the bathroom building and the 3060 back of house building all work, how it interrelates to the park itself. It needs to be 3061 explored more and developed more. If it is going to push in there more, then there are 3062 things that we can look at to make it look like it's more seamless into the park, so you're 3063 maybe not losing more space there. Maybe there's more green roofs on that side that you 3064 can access somehow or something like that. 3065 3066 Commissioner Ashlund: Peter, that design's not set in stone at this point, right? 3067 3068 Mr. Jensen: No, it is not. This is just going through the process of the design. All our 3069 feedback (crosstalk). 3070 3071 Commissioner Ashlund: Did they hear our feedback that we'd like to see alternative 3072 proposals that maybe used less park space, ideally no park space. Are we asking them to 3073 do that? Are they willing to do that or are they just saying we're meanies? 3074 3075 Mr. Jensen: I think they're now going to develop plans that look at how they can reduce 3076 the impact into the park. That's definitely one of the things that they got here. 3077 3078 Commissioner Crommie: To me it comes down to this idea of "we're using up park 3079 space, so we're going to mitigate it by making something slightly interactive on the back 3080 of the building." To me, that doesn't cut it. What really cuts it is an alternative plan that 3081 doesn't use up as much space. You can have your one plan that uses up the space and 3082 then you mitigate it by making that connection. 3083 3084 Mr. Jensen: Again, it's about looking at what that space is used for now. You can't lose 3085 sight of the fact that that space is (crosstalk). 3086 3087 Commissioner Crommie: I don't buy that argument. Even if it's not being used now, that 3088 doesn't mean it can't be used. 3089 3090 Commissioner Ashlund: Open space is valuable in its own right. 3091 3092 Approved Minutes 74 APPROVED Commissioner Crommie: Yes. You can always envision uses for space. By just saying 3093 it's not used now; therefore, we should use it for this building, that's not a valid argument. 3094 Also the argument that we're just doing more park activities in the park, so let us come 3095 into your park, that's a different use of the land to have a building on it. 3096 3097 Mr. Jensen: Yes, the part that they're expanding to. The Zoo sites in the park, so that is 3098 part of the park. 3099 3100 Commissioner Crommie: We understand that. I understand that it sites in the park, but it 3101 doesn't mean that it just has carte blanche opportunity to go further into the park, just 3102 because it already sits there. 3103 3104 Vice Chair Markevitch: This isn't the right body to be talking to. 3105 3106 Commissioner Hetterly: We have 8 minutes left. Are we done with the agenda? 3107 3108 Chair Reckdahl: I think we're done with everything except this list. 3109 3110 Mr. Jensen: They are going to develop more plans and respond to your comments about 3111 the expansion into the park. 3112 3113 Commissioner Knopper: Since we're talking about Rinconada Park. I was walking by 3114 there the other day. There was a temporary structure built. It was like a ... 3115 3116 Mr. Jensen: Greenhouse? 3117 3118 Commissioner Knopper: Yeah, or a ... 3119 3120 Mr. Jensen: A sustainable house? 3121 3122 Commissioner Knopper: Right. This sign says, "Oh, people 2012" or whatever. Why is 3123 it just sitting there empty now? 3124 3125 Mr. Anderson: I think they're just looking for a place to use it. I had heard a bunch of 3126 different ideas thrown about. I don't know the current status on it. We can follow up and 3127 get back to you. 3128 3129 Commissioner Knopper: Yeah. It looks dumpy and unloved. It's just there. 3130 3131 Vice Chair Markevitch: (inaudible) how to put things in the binder? 3132 3133 Approved Minutes 75 APPROVED Mr. Jensen: Yes. These are your binders. They're tabbed to the different sections that 3134 correlate to that matrix that we were talking about. Some of the sections don't have 3135 anything in them yet, like prioritization workshops don't have anything for their tab. I'm 3136 going to give you, which I think you've received already as far as the packet goes, the 3137 survey summary information. I've got that printed out here. I don't know what section 3138 that is. Section 10. If you look at the sheets in the front, the numbers tell you what each 3139 section is. 3140 3141 Commissioner Lauing: Survey results 14? 3142 3143 Mr. Jensen: Yes, 14 is (inaudible). It took some time to put together. All day yesterday, 3144 I had two people in my office building them. Let's just pass it around and you guys can 3145 add it in there. The green binders are easier to use than the white binders because of the 3146 mechanism of the clip. You're supposed to be putting this in Tab 14. 3147 3148 Commissioner Hetterly: While we're doing this, if we're done with the regular agenda, 3149 (crosstalk). 3150 3151 Chair Reckdahl: We are done with the agenda unless ... 3152 3153 Commissioner Hetterly: I just wanted to raise the Brown Act. I don't know how recently 3154 you've had Brown Act training. A very tricky area of the Brown Act is the serial meeting 3155 issue. There's been a lot of confusion for the Commissioners about how that works. I 3156 just wanted to remind everybody to go to your training. Also at serial meetings where 3157 you run into trouble is you can't talk to more than two other Commissioners about any 3158 particular topic that's in our jurisdiction. 3159 3160 Mr. Jensen: Everyone's got 14? 3161 3162 None. 3163 3164 V. COMMENTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS 3165 3166 None. 3167 3168 VI. ADJOURNMENT 3169 3170 Meeting adjourned at 2:45pm. 3171 Approved Minutes 76