HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-12-14 Parks & Recreation Summary MinutesAPPROVED
1
2
3
4
MINUTES 5
PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION 6
SPECIAL MEETING 7
December 14, 2016 8
DOWNTOWN LIBRARY 9 270 Forest Avenue 10 Palo Alto, California 11 12 Commissioners Present: Jim Cowie, Anne Cribbs, Jennifer Hetterly, Abbie Knopper, Ed 13
Lauing, David Moss, Keith Reckdahl 14
Commissioners Absent: 15
Others Present: Eric Filseth 16
Staff Present: Daren Anderson, Catherine Bourquin, Rob de Geus, Peter Jensen, Kristen 17
O'Kane 18
I. ROLL CALL CONDUCTED BY: Catherine Bourquin 19
20
II. AGENDA CHANGES, REQUESTS, and DELETIONS: 21
22
Chair Lauing: Is there any agenda changes, requests or deletions? Nope. 23
24
III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: 25 26 Chair Lauing: This is the time for oral communications, but I don't see anybody from the 27 public. We won't spend much time on that. The person coming in is not part of the 28
public. He's a Council Member. 29
30
IV. BUSINESS: 31 32
1. Approval of Draft Minutes from November 16, 2016 Parks and Recreation 33 Commission Meeting. 34 35
Approval of the draft November 16, 2016 Minutes was moved by Commissioner Hetterly 36
and seconded by Vice Chair Knopper. Passed 6-0 Cowie absent 37
38
Approved Minutes 1
APPROVED
2. Parks, Trails, Natural Open Space and Recreation Master Plan. 1
2
Chair Lauing: Second item on the agenda is Parks, Trails, Natural Open Space and 3
Recreation Master Plan. We'll turn that over to Kristen for presentation. 4
5
Kristen O'Kane: Good evening. I'm Kristen O'Kane, Community Services. There's a 6 couple of things I want to talk about, but I think it will be brief. Before we get into the 7
actions that are on the agenda, I wanted to just give a brief summary of the public review 8
comments that we received on the draft Master Plan. Peter, if you could go to the next 9
slide please. We had an online community review period that began November 16th, and 10
it officially ran through December 9th, but I believe it's still open. If people want to still 11
submit comments, they can still do so. To date, we've received 82 responses. 12
Attachment B that was in your packet may have been confusing because it was included 13
in the bound Master Plan document, but it's at the end of this. It is a summary document 14
of the comments we've received. We have received 82 responses to the online form and 15
40 written responses, which have open-ended questions. 96 percent of the respondents 16
were residents of Palo Alto. What we did is start out by asking some overall questions, 17
sort of to circle back to where we started from. Just a check-in to see now that we have 18
the draft Master Plan in place, how should we apply what we started out with, the 19
principles and the goals, to move into implementation? The first question had to do with 20
which of the principles is most important to you, and they were asked to just choose their 21
top three. The results were that about half of the respondents said that healthy and 22
sustainable were in their top three choices. Nature was also one of the top three. You 23
can see how it ranks from there. Do you want to go to the next slide, Peter? We did the 24
same for goals. I think this one is a little bit more interesting. I've summarized the goals 25 here. Goal 3, which is supporting health, wellness and social connections through active 26 and passive opportunities, 60 percent of the respondents ranked that as one of their top 27 three, followed by Goal 4, which was the goal related to preserving and integrating nature 28
and natural systems and then enhancing what we have and then accessibility, 29
inclusiveness and equitably distributed was also fairly high. The one that I found the 30
most interesting was Goal 5, which only 20 percent of the respondents ranked as one of 31
their top three, is the goal related to developing strategies to expand the system. I just 32
thought it was an interesting outcome of the survey. Granted there were only 80 33
respondents to the survey, but out of those enhancing and improving what we already 34
have seemed like a higher priority for those respondents than expanding the system. We 35
then had some questions where we asked people to rank, when we implement the Master 36
Plan, how they think the City should focus our efforts. Programs, classes or activities 37
versus physical improvements or new facilities. In the Attachment B that you had, it had 38
an average of 3.69. I actually think that median was a better measurement. I went back 39
to my high school and college algebra and felt that median was a better measurement of 40
this. The median here was 4; it was on the higher end. Physical improvements or new 41
facilities seemed to be the priority versus programs, classes or activities. The next one 42
Approved Minutes 2
APPROVED
was rating major upgrades or new facilities to smaller improvements throughout the 1
system. Again, it was a median of 4. It seemed like it was more heavily ranked towards 2
the smaller improvements throughout the system. That was all I had for the community 3
survey. Like I said, we did receive 80 responses. Not a lot, but I think it confirms what 4
we've heard throughout the process, that people do want to see our facilities and our 5
programs enhanced and improved and upgraded, maybe not as much of the large, big 6 infrastructure changes. Are there any comments on the survey? No. I just wanted to 7
then focus on the two handouts that you received. The first one is a letter that we 8
received from Stanford University. They have some comments related to the Master 9
Plan, specifically where we specifically call out Stanford and the partnership 10
opportunities we potentially have with them. I wanted to see if there were any comments 11
on their comment letter. I think from a staff perspective, with their comments and their 12
changes we will, unless there is disagreement from the Commission, go ahead and make 13
those changes for the next draft. I did want to hear from the Commission if there were 14
any concerns about any of their proposed changes. 15
16
Commissioner Hetterly: I think it's exactly what we expected them to say. I'm fine with 17
the changes. 18
19
Chair Lauing: I would agree with that. 20
21
Commissioner Cribbs: I would agree with it too. I think the good thing is that it's in the 22
document and at least we're talking some (inaudible). 23
24
Chair Lauing: That we're talking about … 25 26 Commissioner Cribbs: That we're going to talk about it, some possibilities. That's a 27 good thing. 28
29
Chair Lauing: Of ongoing partnerships? 30
31
Commissioner Cribbs: Yes. 32
33
Ms. O'Kane: I'll talk about next steps, and then the letter from the Commission and then 34
the action. The next steps are we intended to go to Council in January of 2017. We had 35
planned to go January 9th, and that's no longer on the agenda partly because we, Rob and 36
I, needed to check in with our City Manager, Jim Keene, and just do a check-in before we 37
move to Council that this is where we are, this is where we're headed and this is the 38
status. We haven't had the opportunity to do that. The Council meeting is undetermined 39
right now what date we will go, but we still anticipate going in early 2017. 40
41
Approved Minutes 3
APPROVED
Rob de Geus: Definitely. We did finally get a date actually for next week now, which is 1
good for Jim. Jim Keene, the City Manager, and Ed Shikada, the Assistant City 2
Manager, both have a copy of the full draft Plan, and they're reviewing it. We will have a 3
chance to meet with them next week, but we still won't make the 9th on the meeting. 4
5
Commissioner Moss: I was wondering why we haven't had checkpoints with City 6 Council or the Manager until now. I would have thought that we would be checking in a 7
couple of times … 8
9
Mr. de Geus: We have. 10
11
Commissioner Moss: … more formally. 12
13
Mr. de Geus: We've had several study sessions with the Council. We will return to 14
Council in January again. There's a question of whether it will be another study session, 15
maybe not. Maybe it's a discussion or even an action item so they can give some 16
direction, which they can't do formally at a study session, before we bring it back for a 17
final action. We'll talk with the City Manager about that next week. 18
19
Ms. O'Kane: We will be starting our CEQA process soon. We just received approval 20
from Council to amend MIG's contract to begin the CEQA documentation process. We 21
anticipate that there will be a public hearing for the CEQA review at a PRC meeting. 22
We're anticipating that would happen at the February meeting. We'll update that and 23
keep you up-to-date on the status of that as we get closer. That's our anticipated date 24
right now. Hopefully go to Council in March or April with the final Master Plan and 25 CEQA document for adoption at that time. 26 27 Commissioner Moss: We won't hear anything about CEQA in the January meeting. Is 28
that right? We won't have an update or anything like that? 29
30
Ms. O'Kane: We could provide an update on the status. I think it depends where they are 31
in the schedule. February will be where we will invite the community to come, the public 32
to come and comment on the CEQA document and the Master Plan at that time. The next 33
thing I wanted to mention is there is a letter in front of you that's called a Message from 34
the Parks and Rec Commission. This was drafted initially by the Parks and Rec 35
Commission ad hoc meeting, and we went back and forth a little bit and refined it. The 36
intent is to have this be really the first page of the Master Plan document. This is a 37
message from all of you. It will also be a message from the three new Commissioners 38
that come in, because they'll be ultimately the ones who are making the final 39
recommendation to Council to adopt the Plan. It'll be a message from the Commissioners 40
to the community, a call to action, just sort of an inspiring message to say this was a big 41
effort to get here, and thank you all for your participation in that effort, now let's all 42
Approved Minutes 4
APPROVED
commit to implementing this Plan. I know it wasn't in the packet, so you all didn't get a 1
chance to review this in advance. 2
3
Chair Lauing: We should take the time now, even if we want to pause here and make 4
sure you all read that. Her summary is exactly correct. The ad hoc went through huge 5
rounds on that. The ad hoc being Keith, Jennifer and myself. We circulated it back and 6 forth to staff, and the typical enhancements happened. However long this takes, it can be 7
2 minutes or 2 hours. I just want to make sure everybody gets their oar in on this of 8
where they would like to … Maybe we should add that if it needs rework, we can bring it 9
back next month. Any comments from those who have finished reading it? 10
11
Commissioner Cribbs: I had just a question on that. The ad hoc committee is 12
comfortable and happy with this, the letter, since you wrote it? Staff is happy with it? I 13
think it's really good. As the new kid here at least for the next year, I'm wondering if 14
there's a way—maybe it's not appropriate as part of this. We've done all this great work. 15
What happens now? We're not very specific in the end about what's going to happen, 16
how we're going to reach out to people, how people can get engaged. What's the call to 17
action or does the call to action not belong in a document like this? There's all this 18
enthusiasm that has been generated. We've said that and we've thanked everybody. 19
Now, I'm like what are we going to do now. It may not … 20
21
Chair Lauing: That is part of the debate that we've had over the last couple of weeks. I 22
can assure you of that. 23
24
Commissioner Cribbs: (inaudible) 25 26 Chair Lauing: No, no. It's on the table. Somebody from the ad hoc want to address that? 27 28
Commissioner Moss: It says that this Plan outlines the roadmap and process to do both. 29
That's what we're supposed to—we're supposed to follow with this road map and process. 30
As far as which program we do first, which goal we address first, I'm not sure that we 31
have to go into that here. We have all of these programs that we need to address. They 32
have all kinds of things in them. How else can we say it? 33
34
Commissioner Cribbs: If I'm a person reading this and I'm excited about parks in the 35
future and the vision based on Palo Alto's parks in the past and what we have, what do I 36
do next? Who do I call? 37
38
Chair Lauing: Abbie. 39
40
Vice Chair Knopper: I kind of looked at this slightly differently. I looked at this as a 41
welcome letter, because this is the first page of a—I forget how many pages, like 150. 42
Approved Minutes 5
APPROVED
This is just that this vision can only be realized with the community's enthusiasm and 1
commitment. 2
3
Ms. O'Kane: Could you repeat that, Commissioner? 4
5
Vice Chair Knopper: I just said I like the way this letter ends, where it says this vision 6 can only be realized with the community's enthusiasm and commitment. I felt like that is 7
a call to action, that we will need you. 8
9
Mr. de Geus: Chair Lauing, Council Member Filseth had a good suggestion. Instead of 10
saying "will be calling," just say "calls on all Palo Alto residents." 11
12
Commissioner Hetterly: I think that's much better. I was toying with the success of this 13
Plan depends on participation by all Palo Altans, but we call on all (crosstalk). 14
15
Chair Lauing: A direct call to action. I like the edit a lot. 16
17
Commissioner Reckdahl: Do you want to say anything about it? 18
19
Commissioner Hetterly: No, I like it. I think that's good. 20
21
Commissioner Reckdahl: I mean the document as a whole. 22
23
Chair Lauing: A lot of collective effort went into drafting the letter. 24
25 Ms. O'Kane: Are we ready? 26 27 Chair Lauing: I don't think we need to—you've got our comments? 28
29
Ms. O'Kane: Yeah. Moving on then. Do you want to go to the next slide? I included 30
the action on here. They're a little lengthy, so this will require some explanation. Our 31
intent initially was to come here tonight and ask the Commission to make their 32
recommendation to Council to adopt the Plan. Unfortunately, we were advised by the 33
City Attorney that we could not do that because we don't have the CEQA document 34
completed yet. It would be inappropriate for the Commission to recommend a Plan 35
without knowing what the environmental impacts of that Plan are. We did feel like it was 36
important for there to be an action tonight, especially for the three Commissioners who 37
this is their last meeting and who worked a lot to get us to this point. There's two 38
recommendations here. The first is to accept the Master Plan as the embodiment of the 39
programs and policies that are tentatively recommended by the Commission. The second 40
action is to direct staff to perform CEQA review based on the programs and policies 41
described in the Master Plan. Those are the two actions on the table. 42
Approved Minutes 6
APPROVED
1
Chair Lauing: Was there any discussion about approaching this in a way that you could 2
address the first one, take out the words "tentatively recommended." "Contingent on 3
approval of CEQA"? 4
5
Ms. O'Kane: That was my original language that I proposed. That was not allowable. 6 7
Chair Lauing: According to the City Attorney? 8
9
Ms. O'Kane: According to the Attorney, yeah. 10
11
Chair Lauing: Attorneys always want to slow things down. There's a lot of attorneys that 12
(inaudible). 13
14
Commissioner Moss: Can you … 15
16
Chair Lauing: The unfortunately thing about that is that three of the seven are leaving, 17
and three brand new ones will be approving. It's a bit ironic after the years. The 18
Council's going to understand that. It's our agreement in the minutes, Jen and I, we need 19
to do something tonight to be on record that the old Commission is supportive of the 20
document that we have before us. 21
22
Ms. O'Kane: I think we'll have the same—I don’t think issue is the right word. When we 23
go to Council, there will be new Council Members who haven't been involved in our 24
study sessions and this whole process. There will be a little bit of a recap to do there as 25 well. 26 27 Commissioner Moss: Tell me again what the CEQA review is supposed to do. 28
29
Ms. O'Kane: The CEQA review is assessing whether the proposed project, which is the 30
Master Plan, is likely to have significant effects on the environment. The way a CEQA 31
document is done for a Master Plan is a little different than building something that has a 32
finite start and end. Because this is a program, it will be a more programmatic CEQA 33
document, meaning it will have some assessment of impacts based on what we know 34
today. As we move forward with, say, a dog park, it may or may not have enough detail 35
in that CEQA document to say whether that dog park will have significant effects on the 36
environment. There may be additional CEQA that needs to be done depending on the 37
project and how much is covered in this. 38
39
Commissioner Moss: That's my point exactly. It seems like it's not necessary to do it 40
now because you're going to have to do a CEQA review on almost every action that we 41
take. Therefore, it seems like you could accept the Plan knowing that you're going to 42
Approved Minutes 7
APPROVED
have to do CEQA reviews on every thing and part of the process. Of course, this is going 1
to have an impact on the environment. Hopefully, a positive one. Why do we need to do 2
it now and with every program? 3
4
Mr. de Geus: It's really advice from a legal ... It's a question of how specific the Plan is. 5
If it's really unspecific, then we don't need to do any CEQA. Their evaluation was it has 6 enough specificity that we need to do at least a—what do you call it? An initial study of 7
some sort. 8
9
Commissioner Hetterly: You do not necessarily have to do CEQA for every project as 10
you move forward. Just like when we renovate a park, we don't have to do a CEQA 11
analysis (crosstalk). 12
13
Commissioner Moss: And restroom … 14
15
Commissioner Hetterly: I think, restroom we don't. 16
17
Commissioner Moss: This is the blanket CEQA that in addition to the blanket CEQA … 18
19
Commissioner Hetterly: There may be some (crosstalk). 20
21
Commissioner Moss: … there may be some additional ones for the some of the programs 22
required. 23
24
Mr. de Geus: Right. 25 26 Ms. O'Kane: We may be able to include enough analysis in the programmatic CEQA 27 document for some projects so we don't have to do it later. Larger things definitely are 28
not going to be in here. Some of the smaller projects, for example dog parks again, we 29
may have enough detail in this document that we avoid that stuff later, and we can get to 30
the implementation of that project sooner. 31
32
Peter Jensen: I think the overall idea of doing it is to clarify that the document itself does 33
not have the impacts. It's that study that, hopefully when it gets through the initial study, 34
declares what is recommended in here does not have negative environmental impact. 35
When people ask—they do, because this is the standard operation that you have. The 36
backup material says we did the study and looked at it, and it is either this or this. 37
38
Commissioner Moss: If we direct you to perform that CEQA review, it will only take a 39
month to do? 40
41
Mr. de Geus: A little longer than a month. 42
Approved Minutes 8
APPROVED
1
Ms. O'Kane: Right, because the public hearing would be in February, and that's the 2
opportunity for us to hear the public's comments. 3
4
Commissioner Moss: I go back to do we need an update in January so that we know 5
what the CEQA says before you go to the public. The Commission. 6 7
Mr. Jensen: I think we should have enough information by then to give you an update of 8
what the initial studies are showing. 9
10
Commissioner Moss: I'd like that. 11
12
Commissioner Cowie: Just a technical question for Rob and Kristen. Do we really have 13
the power to direct you as opposed to requesting you? 14
15
Mr. de Geus: It's more of a request to get direction from Council, the City Manager. The 16
Commission advises the Council. 17
18
Ms. O'Kane: That's a good point. That's language from the City Attorney. I think the 19
spirit of it is that you as a Commission accept these and now let's move onto the next 20
step. I think that was the spirit of that language. 21
22
Chair Lauing: Is there other discussion from Commissioners about this? You need this 23
(inaudible)? I would suggest that one of the Commissioners on my left and right should 24
make the motion, and the other one should second it. 25 26 Commissioner Cowie: I'll make the motion to approve it subject to that tiny modification 27 we made in Bullet Number 2. 28
29
Chair Lauing: I was trying to get the retiring Commissioners to make and second the 30
motion. 31
32
Commissioner Cowie: I'm sorry. I did not (crosstalk). Sorry I didn't let you. Forget that 33
motion. I withdraw it. 34
35
Vice Chair Knopper: Jennifer, why don't you make the motion? 36
37
Commissioner Hetterly: I move what that says. 38
39
Vice Chair Knopper: What? Seriously, make the motion. You can do better than that. 40
41
Approved Minutes 9
APPROVED
MOTION: 1
2
Commissioner Hetterly: I move that we accept (crosstalk) as the embodiment of the 3
programs and policies that are tentatively recommended by the Parks and Rec 4
Commission and request that staff perform a CEQA review based on the programs and 5
policies described in the Master Plan and return to the Commission for a final 6 recommendation. 7
8
Vice Chair Knopper: I second that motion. 9
10
Chair Lauing: You like that motion, huh? Does anyone have any further discussion now 11
that it's a formal motion or questions? I think we're ready for a vote. This is as close as 12
we're going to get with this Commission. All in favor. Any opposed? 13
14
MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 15
16
Chair Lauing: Progress after almost 2 years. Onto Council to do their job. A lot of 17
effort all around right up to the end in a collaborative way with the staff, all the staff, 18
Peter and Daren and Kristen and Rob and beyond. One of those things that years from 19
now when you're thinking back on what you did on this Commission, that's going to be 20
one of the big ones and hopefully will be real as opposed to the gorgeous document that 21
went through a lot of drafts. 22
23
Commissioner Cribbs: Could I just say as a latecomer to this party I thought it was 24
amazing. The whole catching up when I started and the whole process through this last 25 year, seeing the ad hoc committee work together with the staff, seeing the staff so excited 26 about getting it done, the changes that you all were able to make so quickly, this is an 27 amazing document and one that, I think, everybody—I'm sure proud to have my name on 28
it, just a little piece of it. I think it's remarkable. I think it's going to stand Palo Alto in 29
good stead for the future. Now, we have to figure out how to fund it, but my hat's really 30
off to you all. Congratulations. 31
32
Chair Lauing: Thank you. Now, you're the veteran. That item concluded. 33
34
3. Other Ad Hoc Committee and Liaison Updates. 35
36
Chair Lauing: Do we have any ad hoc committee or liaison updates, which can be 37
informal or formal from staff or the ad hocs? We have some dog park ad hoc, right? 38
39
Vice Chair Knopper: No. 40
41
Chair Lauing: (inaudible) 42
Approved Minutes 10
APPROVED
1
Mr. Anderson: I've got two. Daren Anderson, Open Space, Parks and Golf. I've got two 2
updates. One on the Buckeye Creek hydrology study. We had Commissioners there as 3
well. If they'd like to interject, please do so. Also on the dog parks. We had the public 4
meeting on the Buckeye Creek hydrology study on December 6th up at Foothills Park. 5
Pretty decent showing of participants; we had about 15. Met for about 2 hours or so. At 6 the meeting, ENGEO, the contractor who's done the study, explained that they've done 7
the analysis. That is, they've studied the hydrology of the creek, and now they've got 8
some recommended concepts, meaning what are we going to do to address these erosion 9
problems. We have two, and they're not fully developed. They're really rudimentary in 10
terms of how much effort they put into them, because they didn't want to go too far down 11
the line before checking in with the public, our stakeholders and eventually the 12
Commission, to make sure we're on the right track. The great part of the meeting is we 13
walked away with almost unanimous belief that these two concepts are on the right track, 14
that they are going to be the appropriate way for solutions in that creek. A lot of the 15
questions that came up, though, were things that require further study on those concepts 16
before we can really start answering some of the questions. It's difficult for me to explain 17
without visuals exactly what those concepts are, so I'll just do them in very broad terms. 18
Essentially it would be widening the creek in a few sections, allowing it to meander, in 19
particular in front of the Interpretive Center up at Foothills Park. In the other part of the 20
part called Wildhorse Valley, the creek there, one of the concepts is to do something a 21
little different. It would actually have two channels in that portion. You would have the 22
existing channel that is deeply channelized and eroded and not functioning well, and then 23
a bypass channel to cut through Wildhorse Valley and meander and connect up again. 24
One would accommodate a higher flow, and the other one the lower flows. Again, it's 25 not fully fleshed out. That'll be the next step that we'll start working on. Shortly 26 thereafter, they'll meet with the regulatory agencies. There's another key thing before you 27 invest a lot of time developing concepts, is it permittable. Will these agencies approve of 28
this before you've spent thousands of dollars developing them? I think we're on the right 29
track. I think we should be able to come back to you soon, January or February, with 30
those concepts and some more information from ENGEO. Any comment from the 31
Commissioners who were at that meeting? 32
33
Commissioner Moss: When the creeks meander, they're also going to be widened, and 34
it's going to be a gentler slope. Those are key pieces to that study, to slow things down, 35
to try to absorb some of the flow so it's not so cutting, so eroding. I thought that was 36
really important. 37
38
Mr. Anderson: A key piece of it. 39
40
Commissioner Reckdahl: The other thing that I did not appreciate was these streams both 41
are not in their native locations. They've been moved by man. If we want to move them 42
Approved Minutes 11
APPROVED
back to their natural location, we're not allowed to do that. The current route of the—I 1
should say we're not necessarily allowed to do that. The current path of the creek does 2
have a preference. It's very difficult to move that. For example, Buckeye Creek along 3
that grassy area has been pushed in the center of that grassy up to the side. It's causing a 4
lot of erosion on that hillside. If you wanted to move that over and have it go down the 5
center again, it'd be a tough fight to get that through the government. 6 7
Chair Lauing: Which government? 8
9
Commissioner Reckdahl: The State or Federal? 10
11
Mr. Anderson: It'd be a variety of regulatory agencies that we'd deal with. 12
13
Commissioner Reckdahl: Even though it's not where it used to be 100 years ago, it's in 14
its preferred location right now. Vegetation around it has grown up and become 15
dependent on it. There's issues with that. That does complicate our lives. We can't just 16
decide what we think is the best route; we have to go through the permitting agencies. 17
18
Commissioner Moss: I guess one last comment is that the part in front of the Interpretive 19
Center is a big, open, grassy field. This would be not in the middle of it, but close to the 20
middle of it. Therefore, you wouldn't have this wide-open space of grass. There are 21
good things and bad things. The good thing about it is it costs a tremendous amount of 22
money and Hetch Hetchy water to keep that grassy lawn watered and maintained. The 23
bad thing is—the good thing is that you won't be able to use it for playing fields like a 24
soccer field, but there's still plenty of room for people to have natural play. I think it's a 25 good compromise. 26 27 Mr. Anderson: There's impacts to recreation. Some of them positive, and some of them 28
taking away how we might have traditionally used that turf. We analyze that, and bring 29
that to you for further discussion when we come back. Any other comments on Buckeye 30
Creek? 31
32
Chair Lauing: Do you have a relative timeline yet as to when something could be done 33
up there? Whatever the choice may be. 34
35
Mr. Anderson: This project will give us the roadmap and the plan for what to do. We 36
have to submit a new capital project to actually do it, build it, change the creek. I think 37
that'll come out of this process, and we'll figure that out. 38
39
Mr. Jensen: This is going to be like one of the processes of the Master Plan, doing an 40
initial study on something and then coming back. It is not going to be a small-scale 41
project. It's basically recreating a stream bed up there that was destroyed, because we 42
Approved Minutes 12
APPROVED
decided to pave a road through it. This project connects to the 7.7 acres, because it is just 1
part of the natural system that's up there. Eventually the recommendation will be, 2
whatever happens to the creek itself and the 7.7 acres is going to have a price tag to do 3
such things but will need to be done. Again, just something else now to consider, 4
constant funding to do. 5
6 Mr. Anderson: The other update I had for you is the dog park topic. We had a public 7
meeting yesterday to look at adding a dog park at Eleanor Pardee Park. Thank you to 8
Commissioners who came; really appreciate that. Well attended, about 70 participants. 9
Successful in terms of getting lots of feedback. That's always good. Successful also in 10
letting us learn a lesson in terms of—it's a mea culpa. I probably should have known 11
better, but we had started with an option in the center of that park. There were factors 12
that were unknown at the time that forced us to move it from that preferred location to 13
another. It ended up being very, very close, right on the fence line to some neighbors. It 14
just is unpalatable to a significant number of them. There were a lot of messages, and it's 15
tough to convey it in a concise way right now. The takeaway for me—I'm interested in 16
hearing the Commissioners' thoughts on this too—was putting it right on that border of 17
someone's backyard is really not the way to go. We have to consider other places at least 18
for this park. Maybe if you lucked out and found a dog owner that couldn't wait to get 19
into that dog park, it might work. But not here, not at Eleanor Pardee. There was enough 20
responses that said this is not the right place. There still are options in my opinion from 21
what I heard from everyone still within Pardee to put one, but it's going to take a little 22
more creativity and maybe compromises on the size a little bit to make this work. We'll 23
also have to have more negotiations with our environmental stakeholders, because it's 24
likely that we'd have to put this somewhere near the oak trees. That was feedback that 25 we heard from Canopy and Audubon Society, that impacts from dogs would be harmful 26 to both the oak trees and to the wildlife associated with those trees. I think more 27 negotiation and more meetings; it's possible. Tomorrow we've got a meeting for Peers 28
Park about adding a dog park there. It's got fewer of those problems. We're 75 feet from 29
the nearest resident backyard fence. It's significantly larger. We've got more room to 30
play with if we have to make that a bigger buffer. We've got a little more option there. 31
I'm interested in seeing what comes of that meeting and looking forward to it. I'll be back 32
soon to update you on that as well. Any comments from our Commissioners? 33
34
Commissioner Reckdahl: One thing I want to say is we want to take into account the 35
neighbors' opinions, but we can't give them a veto of what we do in the parks. They 36
bought that house; the park was across the back fence, and they knew we were going to 37
use it. The purpose of a park is to be used. If it's not a picnic table or recreation, any use 38
of the park is going to make noise. I think we need to have an appropriate buffer between 39
it. I don't think we want to go right up to the fence. We also can't kowtow to their every 40
desire. We have to balance that, and it's a very difficult problem. 41
42
Approved Minutes 13
APPROVED
Vice Chair Knopper: The one thing I would say, in addition to what I said last night, is 1
that it would be helpful moving forward if we actually had specific scientific facts on tree 2
impact and bird wildlife impact instead of opinion. As we know, the trees at the Hoover 3
Park site haven't been impacted at all because they're deep-rooted trees. Having the 4
blanket statement "dog urine hurts trees," factually let's find out so we have a specific 5
counter-discussion point. If indeed we find out it really hasn't hurt the trees and we have 6 this evidence in front of us, I think that's helpful. People were following me to my car, 7
quite literally. I think the people feel like—one of the last public speakers said, and this 8
resonated with me, "I have two little dogs. They're my children. I don't have children." 9
10
Commissioner Cribbs: He was almost in tears actually. 11
12
Vice Chair Knopper: He was. He said, "I walk past that park, and I feel like I'm not 13
welcome there with them." That resonated with me, because I thought, "Here we are 14
trying to be completely inclusive, and dog owners don't feel that way. They feel like they 15
have so many restrictions on them with regard to it has to be on a leash or you can't be in 16
a park. People are judging." Several people said that to me last night, that that 17
gentleman really was in tears in about that. Lastly, I know we can build a dog park. I 18
might not be on the Commission, but I'm going to help you build a dog park. I just want 19
to publicly, on camera say I will help you, because so many residents want it there. Even 20
my friend who lives on the fence line came over, and he's like, "I don't mind a dog park 21
in Eleanor Pardee. I just don't want it on my fence. Just a little bit over." I think most 22
people can be reasoned with, and we can get one. To staff, I just want to commend them, 23
because the things said to them were sometimes terrible. They just take it so politely and 24
professionally. I admire that. 25 26 Commissioner Cribbs: I'm glad you said that. I've been (inaudible) the staff are really 27 terrific responding to everybody. I actually came away—because I didn't make the 28
statement nobody followed me to my car—being very encouraged about the fact that 29
there will be a dog park at this particular park, that there were enough people who were 30
really enthusiastic, understood the reason that there needed to be one there, wanted 31
something in north Palo Alto. I really loved the gentleman—I should have followed him 32
to his car—who said how can we pay for this, how can we help to pay for this, what are 33
the details and how can we get started doing that. That was very encouraging. There 34
were some really good, thoughtful people there who, I think, understood this has been 35
going on for a long time and we should get it done. 36
37
Commissioner Reckdahl: That brings up another topic. The Magical Bridge and these 38
dog parks, people really like them. I think it'd be appropriate to put a sign up saying the 39
Friends of Palo Alto Park helped pay for this. If you want more things like this, please 40
support the Friends of Palo Alto Parks. You can send your check in and earmark it for 41
whatever you want. That's how people speak and that's how they move. Speaking to 42
Approved Minutes 14
APPROVED
your point earlier, that's how you can get through. If you really want to fund a project, 1
it's going to be much more likely to happen than if you don't fund it. What would we 2
have to do to put signs up, like Magical Bridge? 3
4
Mr. de Geus: Magical Bridge, it wasn't just the Friends of Palo Alto Parks. They created 5
their own foundation, the Magical Bridge Foundation. 6 7
Commissioner Moss: It's on there. 8
9
Mr. de Geus: And it's on there. (crosstalk) 10
11
Commissioner Reckdahl: Does it say that? 12
13
Mr. de Geus: … who the governing board was. I don't know if there's any … 14
15
Commissioner Reckdahl: Does it encourage people to contribute or just say this money 16
was given to them? 17
18
Mr. de Geus: I don't think it encourages them. It recognizes the people who did 19
contribute. 20
21
Commissioner Moss: And that you would be giving to other Magical Bridges around the 22
country rather than Friends of the Palo Alto Parks, the Magical Bridge Foundation, to 23
build other ones in Redwood City, for instance. 24
25 Mr. de Geus: That's a good point. If you're at a park and having a good time, to see 26 somewhere that there is a local group of residents that love our parks and are trying to 27 help the City improve them, that you see that or read about that. If you're so compelled, 28
you might want to give. We'll think about that a little more, because I think it's a good 29
idea. 30
31
Vice Chair Knopper: A woman spoke last night—I didn't get her name because she was 32
like speaker number 60. She said that she was one of the founders of Palo Alto Park, the 33
Friends of, and that she would be willing to orchestrate, organize. I think people are 34
motivated. I think there's enough people motivated that it could be a private-public 35
partnership that would be very successful. People didn’t love the idea that it would just 36
be barebones, like fence and call it a day. They always referred to the one … 37
38
Mr. Jensen: In Mountain View. 39
40
Vice Chair Knopper: They want statutes. They want the thing down at San Antonio 41
Village with giant hydrants, artificial turf. 42
Approved Minutes 15
APPROVED
1
Mr. Jensen: I do think that brings up an important point. In the Master Plan, the hard 2
part is funding everything that's in there. There is a Friends of the Parks group that is 3
established. It would be nice to promote and build that group to be the mechanism of 4
funding, because it's going to take that to achieve what we have to do. 5
6 Commissioner Moss: There's also a dog owners association, 400 members strong. 7
They're behind all this as well. 8
9
Vice Chair Knopper: We know who heads it too. 10
11
Commissioner Moss: My feeling is that there will be a park there and at Peers Park. 12
Whether they get done at the same time or right after one another, I think they're going to 13
happen very soon. The only problem is really the exact location. There was room a little 14
bit to the west. They did talk about the garden behind it, towards the north, as being 15
totally useless as a garden, so you could push a little bit in that direction and come in 16
from the fence a little bit. The third suggestion was along Center. You don't want little 17
children playing right next to the busy street, so put a long dog park that's fenced in right 18
next to Center, which is what I was hoping would happen at Bowden right next to Alma. 19
You can't have little kids playing soccer right next to Alma. If you put a dog park along 20
that strip, away from the fence lines, it protects the rest of the park. It's a buffer for the 21
rest of the park from that busy street. That was it. 22
23
Chair Lauing: Thanks, Daren. 24
25 Mr. Anderson: Thank you. 26 27 Chair Lauing: (inaudible) as always. Other ad hocs or liaisons before we move onto 28
Department Report? No. 29
30
V. DEPARTMENT REPORT 31 32 Chair Lauing: Department Report from Kristen or Rob. 33
34
Mr. de Geus: I had a few things to report. One, the Lucie Stern Community Center is 35
closing for some construction activity, new heating, new air conditioning and a variety of 36
other things. It's closed at the end of December 19th through March 31st. We're 37
scattered, the staff that work there, all over the place. I'll be at City Hall. Kristen will be 38
at Mitchell Park for a month, and then Cubberley for a month, and then with Daren at the 39
MSC. I wanted to let you know about that. We are bringing forward a contract for the 40
swim lesson program with Tim Sheeper to expand the lessons in such a way that doesn't 41
have an impact on the lap swimmers or masters, because we need to do additional public 42
Approved Minutes 16
APPROVED
outreach there. We're doing that. I met with, I think, eight lap swimmers for an hour and 1
a half a week or so ago. We had a great discussion, and I better understand where they're 2
coming from. We're also doing coffees at the pool. That's been good mostly. I noticed 3
Kristen got yelled at today, which wasn't very nice. That was unusual. Most were very 4
… 5
6 Commissioner Moss: Not fair. 7
8
Mr. de Geus: It's just part of the process, to make sure that people really do feel heard 9
and that we do understand where they're coming from. That will take just a little more 10
time before we consider additional things for Tim Sheeper to do. Do you have a 11
question? 12
13
Commissioner Hetterly: I do have a question on the pools. I think having the 14
organized—the masters obviously is an organized group, and the lap swimmers are more 15
or less organized. That makes it easy to communicate with them. What about the rec 16
swimmers who are maybe not lap swimmers, who are maybe the summer users, the open 17
swim people? How are you reaching out to them? It seems like it all overflows 18
somewhere when you add a use. I think you should figure out a way to get in touch with 19
those swimmers. 20
21
Mr. de Geus: We've talked about that. It is more difficult, that group. They have a real 22
interest too. They want to see more recreation swim time. We want to do that too. Even 23
to do that, that does mean there may be a little more sharing for some of the other groups 24
if we want to do later evening recreation swim and other good stuff. You may have more 25 information on this than I do. One thing I believe we're doing is reaching out to the 26 parents that had kids in swim lessons, because they are from the same families that are 27 taking advantage of the recreation open swim, with surveys. Beyond that, are we doing 28
anything else, Kristen? 29
30
Ms. O'Kane: We're exploring that. We've asked some of the lap swimmers to offer 31
suggestions on how we might reach some of the other pool users. Someone 32
recommended putting a notification on Nextdoor, some of those other social media sites. 33
It's not just the rec swimmers; another group that we aren't hearing from are those people 34
who may want to use the pool for lap swim, but the current times don't work for them. 35
That's a group that we really don't know who they are or if they exist even. It's how do 36
we reach that group that isn't in one of those organized groups or quasi-organized groups, 37
like you said. 38
39
Commissioner Hetterly: It might be helpful to talk to the pool coordinators at Eichler or 40
at Green Meadow, because they every summer have a similar conflict with their swim 41
teams. Everybody wants all the lanes. During the competitive season, there's a lot 42
Approved Minutes 17
APPROVED
greater demand on the pool, but that's of course when all their members want to have rec 1
swim. They struggle with that every year, and they may well be able to share some 2
insights about what really mattered to them more was not hours, not having two lanes 3
open for 8 hours a day. It was having five lanes open for 2 hours a day. That kind of 4
thing might be informative. I think both of those pools have longtime managers at this 5
point. 6 7
Mr. de Geus: That's' a good idea. We'll reach out to them. We're just taking more time 8
with this. If and when we do something more, there will be small, incremental changes 9
for the good hopefully and evaluation before we start making drastic changes. 10
11
Commissioner Moss: When did you want to be done with the—you wanted to be able to 12
have swim lessons starting in May? 13
14
Mr. de Geus: April. 15
16
Commissioner Moss: You want to be done April 1st or something like that? 17
18
Mr. de Geus: We would meet with Council in January, probably their first action 19
meeting on the 9th, which will be just for the swim lessons. We'll be utilizing the pool 20
when it's currently not utilized at all. It's just closed. Any other questions on that? The 21
golf course is going well. I was out there again a couple of times. I took the City 22
Manager out there and Lalo Perez, our Chief Financial Officer. Still on schedule and 23
under budget. I wanted to let you know about that. Also the Council—maybe Council 24
Member Filseth wants to talk about this—had two Colleagues' Memos this past Monday. 25 One was to reaffirm Palo Alto's commitment to diversity and supportive, inclusive and 26 protective community in light of some of the national things that have been happening. 27 Did you want to say something? 28
29
Council Member Filseth: I thought it was pretty straightforward and noncontroversial. 30
31
Mr. de Geus: It was just reaffirming the values that the City has. There was also a 32
Colleagues' Memo to support the donkeys at Barron Park. The City is putting in, I think, 33
$15,000, and then there's a fundraising campaign for the next 5 years to make sure that 34
the donkeys are cared for and protected. Great news there. 35
36
Commissioner Moss: Is the donkey paddock part of parks? Is it considered (crosstalk). 37
38
Mr. de Geus: It's actually private property. 39
40
Commissioner Moss: It's private property. 41
42
Approved Minutes 18
APPROVED
Council Member Filseth: Acterra is the official operator. 1
2
Mr. de Geus: Does the maintenance. They can't afford to be doing that. 3
4
Commissioner Moss: Are we intending to annex that or anything like that? 5
6 Mr. de Geus: The property? 7
8
Commissioner Moss: Yeah. 9
10
Mr. de Geus: I think it's private property, and they have the donkeys on that property. I 11
don't think there's any discussion about it becoming City land. 12
13
VI. COMMENTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS 14
15
Mr. de Geus: We have a New Year's Eve event which actually happens during the day 16
for seniors, which we do every year. We do a countdown to midday. Always fun. 17
There's live music and good food. If you want to volunteer, that's one that's … 18
19
Ms. O'Kane: Just a note on that. This year it will be at Avenidas. 20
21
Mr. de Geus: Yeah, a great partnership. Also we have a Commission recognition event 22
tomorrow evening. I wanted to just check to see who was going to attend. 23
24
Commissioner Reckdahl: I can't. 25 26 Mr. de Geus: Two Commissioners will be there. I remember going to one of these and 27 there was no Commissioner. It was pretty embarrassing. I had to go out there and get a 28
picture (crosstalk). 29
30
Commissioner Cribbs: (crosstalk) the Commission or the dog park committee. 31
32
Mr. de Geus: I know not good timing. There's so much happening this week. 33
34
Commissioner Reckdahl: The holidays is a bad time to have it. We have so many 35
conflicts. 36
37
Mr. de Geus: I'll pass that onto the Clerk's Office. The last thing I wanted to mention is 38
that we're starting to prepare the budget for fiscal year '18. There does look to be a gap in 39
the budget as we look ahead, as much as $6 million that we need to figure out. It's not a 40
1-year budget gap; it's a structural gap. There needs to be an ongoing reduction or 41
increased revenues or some combination of both. Every department in the City needs to 42
Approved Minutes 19
APPROVED
take a good look at some different scenarios that will help close that gap. We're just 1
starting … 2
3
Commissioner Reckdahl: Is it due to a revenue down turn or they were spending more 4
money or both? 5
6 Mr. de Geus: I think it's more on the spending more money side and the cost of 7
healthcare and pensions and those types of things. Revenues are still on a trend up in 8
most categories. 9
10
Council Member Filseth: I think the expenses are increasing and revenues increasing. 11
The good news is revenues are increasing. The bad news is expenses are increasing. The 12
question is how fast are they growing relative to each other. The City has had a number 13
of one-off windfalls in the last years. One year there was a huge real estate transaction, 14
so we took several million dollars in documentary transfer taxes, but that was only that 15
year. There was one year where Tesla—we got sales tax on every Tesla sold. We had a 16
big sales tax year that year, several million dollars. That was just that year. We're more 17
like the norm (inaudible). 18
19
Mr. de Geus: We'll be working through that process. 20
21
Commissioner Moss: Public-private partnerships are far more important now. 22
23
Mr. de Geus: They are, and they will continue to be. One of the areas we do need to 24
look at is just how we deliver services, can we do it a little differently that still gets us to 25 the quality that the public expects and they're still accessible and affordable, but maybe 26 done a little differently. We'll be working on all of those things. 27 28
Commissioner Moss: I'm thinking of the AT&T property and how we would get enough 29
money. I was reading from some other environmental group how they built up a fund 30
ahead of time for private donations to be able to jump on critical pieces of property. We 31
need to do that because the odds of us being able to jump on something—considering that 32
we have this shortfall on top of everything else, we have to do something like that. 33
34
Mr. de Geus: That's all I have to report. Anything, Daren? 35
36
Mr. de Geus: The only one I wanted to mention is I'm losing two amazing 37
Commissioners that were on my ad hoc for dog parks. Gaining stakeholders I hope. 38
We'll need replacement ad hoc Commissioners to help me with this process as we go 39
forward. I just want to put it out there. 40
41
Vice Chair Knopper: Do you have new Commissioners? 42
Approved Minutes 20
APPROVED
1
Mr. de Geus: I had the same question, because they did the interviews on the 30th. 2
They're postponing the decision into January. I'm not quite sure why that's happening. 3
Just because there's three new Council Members as well, but they didn't participate in the 4
interviews, so that just seems a little bit … 5
6 Council Member Filseth: I wasn't sure why it took so long either. There was a lot of 7
stuff on the calendar. We did get out before midnight every time. 8
9
Mr. de Geus: It was probably just too full on the agenda; although, it usually goes pretty 10
quick in terms of that vote. In any case, it hasn't been (crosstalk). 11
12
Chair Lauing: Are they going to be seated before the January Commission meeting? 13
14
Mr. de Geus: That's the question I had. I was assured yes. They're keeping the 15
applicants updated. Early January, the first couple of weeks, they'll make a decision. 16
17
Council Member Filseth: There's four of them, right? 18
19
Commissioner Reckdahl: Four total. 20
21
Mr. de Geus: Yeah. Those next (inaudible) on Council. 22
23
Council Member Filseth: No, no. On the Parks and Rec Commission. 24
25 Mr. de Geus: Anything else? 26 27 Chair Lauing: There has been precedent if a new member is not seated, other members 28
can (inaudible), but it sounds like that's not a problem. 29
30
Mr. de Geus: I wanted to know that, so I could share that with you this evening, if that 31
might happen. They said (inaudible). 32
33
VII. TENTATIVE AGENDA FOR JANUARY 24, 2017 MEETING 34 35
Chair Lauing: The tentative agenda for the January 24th meeting. The list was in the 36
packet. I thought we decided that we didn't need to do the Junior Museum and Zoo, 37
because it's already gone to Council. I don't think that needs to be on there. I'm not sure 38
there's any more on the hydrology study. 39
40
Mr. de Geus: I'll check in with the consultant. I do want to come to you soon. If not 41
January, it'll be February. I need to make sure that you guys are on board. 42
Approved Minutes 21
APPROVED
1
Commissioner Reckdahl: During the meeting, there were a lot of questions where you 2
said, "I'll look into that." You may have some updates for us. 3
4
Chair Lauing: You'll need to elect officers. That goes on there. You might want to 5
consider at that meeting determining, or even tonight, a retreat date. 6 7
Ms. O'Kane: What are we going to do without you keeping us in check? 8
9
Chair Lauing: I think it's too early for any of us to be guest speakers for the retreat. 10
You've got this one on your (inaudible). 11
12
Mr. de Geus: I think we skipped comments and announcements. You might want to do 13
that. 14
15
Chair Lauing: I'm sorry. I thought we got into that after the staff (crosstalk). 16
17
Mr. de Geus: We did a little it. 18
19
Chair Lauing: There was so much back and forth. Go ahead. 20
21
Ms. O'Kane: We have a token of appreciation for the three Commissioners who will not 22
be coming back next month. On behalf of all of us, your involvement and your insight 23
has just been priceless. We thank you for everything that you've done and all the hours 24
you've spent outside of these meetings to help us out and review draft after draft. Just 25 your enthusiasm and commitment is very much appreciated. We thank you, and we are 26 going to miss you very much. 27 28
Council Member Filseth: Since most of you folks are not going to be able to make the 29
party tomorrow evening, thank you very much. It's just (inaudible) work with people 30
volunteering your time. You look at stuff like this. This is just so important, and it takes 31
so much time to do. You don't do it very often. Thank you once again. I very much 32
appreciate it. 33
34
Chair Lauing: We were at the last recognition that Council did for us, the plaque for our 35
service. We got them again. 36
37
Commissioner Hetterly: I'd just like to say it has been an absolute privilege to work with 38
this staff in particular and Community Services and Public Works. You all have been 39
really phenomenal, your commitments, your smarts, your dedication, everything you 40
know about what's going on. I couldn't imagine working with a better group of people 41
for stuff that's really important to the whole community. I want to thank you. 42
Approved Minutes 22
APPROVED
1
Chair Lauing: I wanted to say from my perspective and not to speak for everybody else, 2
it's sincerely mixed feelings. It's a tremendous amount of work. I think you and the first-3
year Commissioners are getting a glimpse of it. You're not going to get a lot of applause 4
from the public. I think that's okay, because we're doing it on behalf of the public, but the 5
public is lots of little splinter groups that have their own interests like any political group. 6 That's okay. We listen to them, and they help make decisions better. We try to plod on. 7
To reflect back on, in our case 7 years and 3 years … 8
9
Vice Chair Knopper: Almost four. 10
11
Chair Lauing: Four, that's right. There were lots of good things that got done. We take 12
that with us with a lot of contentment, I think. To directly overlap with what you just 13
said, from the get-go I've been so impressed with the—wrong word and not glorious 14
enough, but the work ethic of all of our City staff. The dedication that they have to these 15
issues and the accomplishments not necessarily because you're Palo Alto residents but 16
because you're committed to that job and to the work of parks, the wellbeing and the 17
health, that we know we're helping people in that way. That camaraderie and partnership 18
has just been terrific across the board. Council Members also are these highly paid folks 19
that do the same thing that we do here basically, just put in a lot of effort. 20
21
Council Member Filseth: We make infinitely more than you do. 22
23
Chair Lauing: It's the same dedication. It's for the people and the place. It's just been a 24
great experience. I thank all of you for being as active and involved and dedicated as you 25 are. 26 27 Vice Chair Knopper: I would like to say thank you to everyone. This has just been such 28
an eye-opening experience for me. I certainly was guilty of this; you just take for granted 29
that your City just runs. You turn on the faucet; clean water is going to come out. You 30
walk to your park; there's going to be a lovely rosemary bush that your dog can pee on. 31
You just take certain things for granted, especially living in Palo Alto. The last 4 years, it 32
just every week, every month, every meeting that I went to, I just see the dedication and 33
the hard work and the commitment and the thankless hours sometimes when people are 34
not so nice, like what happened today to Kristen. Oftentimes, you get many nice people 35
come and say thank you. The fact that you get up every day and you do it for the 36
betterment of my family—this benefits my family, my community. I just want to say 37
thank you so much. It's been a tremendous educational experience for me. It really has. 38
I just appreciate it so much. I hate to say that I love this orchid, it's so beautiful, but it'll 39
be dead in (crosstalk). I have like a black thumb. I'm going to try, really because it's so 40
lovely. Just thank you. Jennifer pretty much said everything I wanted to say. It's just 41
been wonderful, and I can't thank you enough. 42
Approved Minutes 23
APPROVED
1
Commissioner Moss: I want to make one more comment. Daren said that two of you 2
were integral to the dog park committee. You're also integral to the community gardens 3
committee. I spent an hour, more than an hour today, talking to one person about the 4
community gardens. I took everything for granted. The fact that there is no issue about 5
the community gardens, no big issues, is a testament to the fact that things are running 6 okay. No news is good news. 7
8
Commissioner Hetterly: I do my best. 9
10
Commissioner Moss: Thank you very much for all the work you did on that committee 11
as well. 12
13
Mr. de Geus: I'll just say something as well. It is one of the most interesting parts about 14
the work, I find at least. What's different than the private sector is that it's a real 15
partnership between citizens and City Hall. Almost always we make a better decision 16
when we're at the table together, really honestly thinking about how to improve a service 17
or a program or a park. It's really rewarding in that sense. You three are going to leave a 18
big hole in particular. For Jen, you challenged us and our thinking about a lot of things. 19
It's almost always come out better because of it. I really appreciate that. I hope you stay 20
involved. I still have your number, so I'll call you. Ed, you've been a great leader, just 21
steady, keeping things moving, just the right kind of poise and then a great sense of 22
humor. We're going to lose a lot here, I think, actually. Big shoes to fill. 23
24
Commissioner Reckdahl: No matter what the subject, they always were intelligent and 25 (inaudible). 26 27 Mr. de Geus: I think Keith's coming back, so that's good. 28
29
Commissioner Reckdahl: If I don't, I get an orchid. 30
31
Mr. de Geus: Thank you. 32
33
VIII. ADJOURNMENT 34 35
Chair Lauing: I think that's it in terms of action items for tonight. Motion for 36
adjournment? 37
38
Meeting adjourned on motion by Commissioner Hetterly and second by Vice Chair 39
Knopper at 8:02 p.m. 40
Approved Minutes 24