Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-12-19 Parks & Recreation Commission Summary MinutesAPPROVED APPROVED 1 1 2 3 MINUTES 4 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION 5 SPECIAL MEETING 6 December 19, 2023 7 In-Person & Virtual Conference 8 Palo Alto, California 9 10 Commissioners Present: Chair Greenfield, Vice Chair Brown; Commissioners Anne Cribbs, 11 Nellis Freeman, Joy Oche 12 Commissioners Absent: Commissioners Shani Kleinhaus, Bing Wei 13 Others Present: 14 Staff Present: Kristen O’Kane, Adam Howard, Lam Do, Javod Ghods 15 16 CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL 17 Chair Greenfield called the meeting to order. A roll call was taken with five present. 18 PUBLIC COMMENT 19 None. 20 AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS 21 None. 22 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 23 1. Approval of Draft Minutes from the October 24, 2023, Parks and Recreation 24 Commission Regular Meeting 25 Vice Chair Brown made a motion to approve the October minutes. Commissioner 26 Freeman seconded the motion. The motion passed by a 5-0 roll call vote. 27 2. Approval of Draft Minutes from the November 28, 2023, Parks and Recreation 28 Commission Regular Meeting 29 APPROVED APPROVED 2 Commissioner Oche noted that the word "tracking" in line 26 should be "applying." 1 Vice Chair Brown made a motion to approve the October minutes. Commissioner Oche 2 seconded the motion. The motion passed by a 5-0 roll call vote. 3 CITY OFFICIAL REPORTS 4 3. Department Report 5 Kristen O'Kane, Community Services Director, noted that the Department of Community 6 Services has hired Amanda Deml to fill the role of Assistant Director for the Arts and 7 Sciences, to start January 16. Inclusion and accessibility for the entire department, 8 including recreation programs, has been added to that oversight. She noted a goal to 9 improve the ability to communicate and serve residents who need special attention to 10 accessibility and to provide programs and services that are inclusive of everyone in the 11 community. The recruitment for the Assistant Director of Open Space, Parks, and Golf 12 will begin in January through an external executive recruiting firm. There is an event on 13 Monday, January 15, partnering with Youth Community Services, Jewish Community 14 Center, and East Palo Alto to offer a Martin Luther King, Jr., Day of Service. Regarding 15 project updates, the skatepark parking analysis is complete and submitted to the Planning 16 Department; there is a community meeting scheduled for January 17 on the 17 Recreation/Wellness Center; the baseball field at Hoover Park is scheduled to reopen 18 February 3; and the annual sports fields renovations at Cubberley and Baylands Athletic 19 Field are in progress, with both to reopen early in the year. She provided updates on 20 several capital improvement projects: El Camino Park Synthetic Turf Replacement 21 Project, Mitchell Park Dog Park Project, and Mitchell Park Net Climber net replacement. 22 Commissioner Cribbs asked if community funding went into the Little League project. 23 She also questioned if there was an opportunity for the new staff member in the Arts 24 Center to fold in the gender study. 25 Lam Do, Superintendant of Parks, Open Space, and Golf, believed it was volunteer 26 hours. 27 Director O'Kane felt this was a great opportunity for the gender study and would talk 28 about whether it was the right fit for the new assistant director or for someone else. 29 Commissioner Freeman commented that Mark Ribeiro did a very good job of 30 summarizing the Palo Alto Little League project and had gotten positive feedback about 31 that. 32 Chair Greenfield asked whether the increase of the dirt area was to increase the base path 33 length. 34 APPROVED APPROVED 3 1 Adam Howard, Senior Community Services Manager, explained that it was to extend the 2 base path by 5 feet to allow an older age group as a step before going to a full-size field. 3 Commissioner Oche was excited about the MLK Day Celebration. She asked how 4 residents can find the link to that event on the JCC website. Regarding the skatepark 5 parking analysis, she questioned how long it typically takes for an analysis review and 6 what is next after that. 7 Mr. Howard responded that the MLK link will eventually be on the City's website and on 8 the YCS and JCC websites. 9 Mr. Do explained that Staff has not yet been able to dive deeply into the initial analysis 10 and anticipated working on it early this year and reporting back next month. 11 Commissioner Cribbs questioned the role of the Skatepark Ad Hoc group going forward. 12 Mr. Do explained that there are multiple perspectives. It is not a Capital Improvement 13 Project and is still in the development phases, so continued input from the ad hoc was 14 welcome. 15 Commissioner Cribbs believed the Friends of the Parks were waiting for the skatepark 16 traffic analysis before the Department gave the go-ahead to start raising money. 17 Mr. Do would get back with more about that. He noted that it was not just Community 18 Services but also Public Works and Transportation that needed to dive into that analysis, 19 so he was not able to give a definitive green light update. 20 Chair Greenfield encouraged prioritizing the skatepark and keeping the process moving. 21 He also welcomed Director O'Kane back to the Commission as a liaison. 22 23 BUSINESS 24 4. Aquatics Annual Report – Tim Sheeper – Discussion – (45 min) 25 Tim Sheeper of Team Sheeper, the provider of aquatic services at Rinconada Pool, 26 provided six profiles of community members who use the pool, from the data collected 27 daily and the data from the annual surveys. He summarized the preferences, interests, 28 and uses of general pool users, lap swimmers, open/recreational swimmers, summer 29 campers, swim lesson participants, and master swimmers. 30 APPROVED APPROVED 4 Commissioner Oche was curious how the feedback was collected and how it is 1 addressed. 2 Mr. Sheeper explained there is an annual survey sent out near the end of the year to 3 about 2500 participants who used the facility. The lap swimmers have formed a Friends 4 of Rinconada group to meet with Staff a few times per year and provide feedback. There 5 is a good understanding of what the community needs. He was optimistic about being 6 able to expand the number of hours for swim lessons and open swim this year. 7 Commissioner Oche asked if there was a long waitlist for swim school in the summer 8 and the ways to fill that gap. 9 Mr. Sheeper responded that the hope was to provide swim lessons from spring through 10 fall and potentially year round. That path had changed with the pandemic and is now 11 back on track. 12 Commissioner Cribbs asked if there is trouble attracting staff. She questioned who has 13 the pool in the early and late evening. 14 Mr. Sheeper was pleased with the staff model. He noted that the youth swim team starts 15 using the pool at 4:00 and have been finishing at 8:00. In 2024, the hours will be 16 changing and swim lessons will be held in some of those lanes in the afternoon starting 17 at 4:00. 18 Commissioner Cribbs felt it was important for everybody to learn how to swim. She had 19 a question about older lap swimmers who have trouble getting out of the pool. She 20 asked if going across lanes to the ladders was the best way to exit in that case. 21 Mr. Sheeper stated Rinconada is one of easiest pools to get out of because the water is at 22 the deck level. He agreed with going across lanes to the ladders, much like crossing the 23 street. 24 Commissioner Freeman asked if the number of people surveyed was limited. He 25 questioned whether there was a need to reach out to partner with other communities or 26 private clubs for additional pool space. 27 Mr. Sheeper responded that the survey is sent to anybody who has an account or used the 28 facility in that year. People who come in for drop-in do not set up an account, so their 29 contact information is not available. He also stated that whatever pool space is available 30 in the community will be used. The demand is higher than the supply, especially in the 31 heart of Palo Alto. 32 Vice Chair Brown asked if there were any anecdotal trends not included in the report that 33 Mr. Sheeper wanted to share beyond the quantitative numbers. She also noted there was 34 APPROVED APPROVED 5 not a Water Babies class offered at Rinconada currently but hoped there would be space 1 for that in the future. 2 Mr. Sheeper described that a therapy exercise pool was something Rinconada has not 3 provided. The pool at Rinconada is more of a competition type of pool with the water 4 kept at 80 degrees. In an instructional/therapeutic pool, the person is not moving as 5 much and needs a warmer temperature in the range of 86 to 90 degrees to be 6 comfortable. The other gap is family locker rooms, especially during the warm months. 7 He noted that with more space, Water Babies would be on the schedule for Spring. 8 Chair Greenfield asked where swim lessons would be offered in 2024 besides 9 Rinconada. He questioned other pools in the community being used for swim lessons as 10 it has been a benefit to the community to have lessons offered at JLS or Gunn, for 11 example. 12 Mr. Sheeper explained that the focus is to make Rinconada a robust site for swim 13 lessons. He stated that bringing on another site required new staff and new leadership, 14 and he preferred to focus on doing the best possible job at Rinconada. 15 Chair Greenfield asked if it was a priority from a staff perspective to expand the location 16 of lessons. 17 Kristen O'Kane, Community Services Director, did not have information about 18 community input on expanding lessons to other pools and also did not know what the 19 school district had at those pools in the summer. 20 Commissioner Cribbs felt some of the discussion related to the Master Plan and how to 21 work together with the school district to maximize existing resources. She thought it 22 would be great to look at the current available pool time and see how to maximize that. 23 Chair Greenfield asked if any members of the public wished to speak, and there were 24 none. He believed there was a community need for pool access in South Palo Alto. He 25 was interested in getting an understanding of availability from the school district and 26 expanding the footprint of offerings for the following year. He noted the survey 27 response rate was 8%. He wondered if there was value in trying to get a greater 28 response. He commented on the input looking for more swimming opportunities later in 29 the day and questioned if that was the 4:00 to 8:00 p.m. window and whether there was 30 demand to keep pool open later. 31 Mr. Sheeper agreed that more survey response would be helpful. The people requesting 32 later hours were mainly lap swimmers and master swimmers looking for after-work 33 hours, 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. The pool closes at 8:00 p.m. He felt there would be a small 34 demand to keep it open later but stated it was not prime time. 35 APPROVED APPROVED 6 Commissioner Freeman questioned if people are happy with the current fees being 1 charged. 2 Mr. Sheeper stated the survey was helpful to see that around 75% of people who were 3 satisfied or highly satisfied with that. When researching how prices compare to others in 4 the municipal space, he felt it was competitive. 5 Director O'Kane noted there is a CIP for a family changing room and would follow up on 6 the status on that. 7 Commissioner Cribbs stated the family changing room has been on the list for a long 8 time as a request and somehow keeps getting pushed down. She hoped it would come to 9 the top soon. 10 5. Parks and Recreation / PAUSD Partnership – Adam Howard – Discussion – (50 11 min) 12 Adam Howard, Senior Community Services Manager, stated this discussion was in 13 connection with the Master Plan goal to enhance partnerships and collaborations with 14 Palo Alto Unified School District to support access and joint use of facilities. He gave 15 an overview of the Middle School Athletics Program, including locations, sports, and 16 history of the program. He reviewed the responsibilities of both the PAUSD and the 17 City in this partnership. The participation in this program is around 1000-1300 18 registrations yearly with 299 current waitlists. The expenditures are around $530,000 19 and revenue $400,000. This program is very popular, and the space available at all three 20 schools is crucial as the City does not have enough facilities to operate on its own. The 21 other standing partnership is the Field Maintenance and Use Partnership, which provides 22 access to fields on elementary and middle school sites and tennis courts on high school 23 sites in exchange for the City providing maintenance to those spaces. The maintenance 24 costs are about $1M, evenly split with PAUSD. There is a 60/40 split between the City 25 and PAUSD on any revenue from permits, roughly $30,000 to PAUSD. Both of these 26 partnerships are very important to the community. 27 Commissioner Freeman asked what was involved in the field maintenance costs. 28 Regarding the City paying for equipment, he questioned if the City would be responsible 29 in the event of needing to add lighting to a court. 30 Mr. Howard responded that the vast majority of costs are for the seven staff members 31 who maintain the fields. He explained that the responsibility for the City to provide 32 equipment was more athletic equipment, such as basketballs, racquets, and jerseys. The 33 larger-scale projects would likely fall under field maintenance where there is a 50/50 34 split. 35 APPROVED APPROVED 7 Vice Chair Brown asked about the challenges that have occurred with these programs, 1 where one party's request was not able to be accommodated. 2 Mr. Howard felt there were no real sticking points or conflicts. He noted the MSA has 3 the ability to rent the space after the City use finishes in the evening, most likely to 4 community groups. 5 Commissioner Cribbs asked how the insurance works for the MSA Program. She 6 questioned where the coaches come from. In terms of equipment, she asked if the kids 7 get to keep their jerseys or must give them back. She questioned whether there was a 8 need for contributions from the community in terms of kids who cannot afford to play. 9 She wanted to know why pickleball was less expensive than the other sports offered. 10 She noted the registration numbers with around 100 less girls than boys and questioned 11 the reason. She asked if the field maintenance was done by City Staff or a third party. 12 Mr. Howard explained that the MSA Program is covered under the City's insurance. 13 Coaches come from wherever they can be found: high school students, parent volunteers, 14 everywhere. He noted that any equipment used for MSA gets returned, but there is a lot 15 of wear and tear, and things will need to be replaced frequently. He felt equipment 16 might be a gap for struggling families as the fee reduction does not cover that. As this is 17 the first time trying pickleball, the cost is lower to ensure participation. It is also not part 18 of a league and has no refereeing or scheduling with other schools. He felt the gender 19 gap in registration was due to co-ed flag football having only four girls participating. 20 The numbers are much more even in other sports. He responded that the maintenance 21 staff for the school fields were full-time in-house employees. 22 Commissioner Oche questioned the ratio of fee reduction applicants to the total and what 23 the criteria is to choose the fee reduction applicants. She suggested possibly allocating a 24 set amount of money to set a goal of how many people to help. She asked if it was 25 possible to track the waitlist data more specifically, between those not in any program 26 and those already in another program. She questioned how the decision to add co-ed 27 pickleball and Frisbee was made and if feedback from the community was considered. 28 Mr. Howard answered that anyone can register if they have fee reduction or not. The fee 29 reduction registrations are less than 1% of the total. He stated that waitlist data would 30 have to be done manually but felt the number was probably on the smaller side for 31 anyone on a waitlist and playing in a sport. The waitlist is an issue, and all the demand 32 cannot be met, even if there were enough coaches. Finding coaches is the biggest 33 restraint right now. He explained that new sports are added based on the popularity of 34 things happening in the community and feedback from community members. 35 APPROVED APPROVED 8 Chair Greenfield wanted to know more about the process of signing up for Middle 1 School Athletics. He also asked which sports are co-ed and whether the Middle School 2 Sports activities were publicized to the community in the Enjoy catalogue. 3 Mr. Howard responded that registration is first-come first-served basis. Each school and 4 sport has a day. Registration opens at 8:30 a.m. Some sports fill quickly, and 5 registration is almost always online. Teams are not skill based, and all registered players 6 participate. There was discussion about potentially changing the registration process. 7 He explained there is girls' and boys' volleyball and basketball, and the remainder are co-8 ed: flag football, cross country, pickleball, tennis, wrestling, track and field, and ultimate 9 Frisbee. The activities are in the Enjoy catalogue. 10 Chair Greenfield noted that the prioritization focus on Palo Alto residents is based on 11 City policy and this Commission periodically reviews that policy. 12 Commissioner Cribbs asked if a student could play more than one sport per quarter. She 13 questioned if this was just for students who attend Palo Alto Middle Schools. 14 Mr. Howard responded that a student can only play one sport in a season. He stated the 15 participants are 99% students from these schools but homeschool and private school 16 students can participate as well. He also explained that they try to stay away from 17 offering sports that are more heavily done in the community, like soccer, and want to 18 offer something that is not skill based. 19 Commissioner Cribbs suggested sharing this with the City-School Liaison Committee. 20 Commissioner Freeman asked if the waitlist of 299 was about average and whether the 21 same people tend to end up on the list. He felt the lottery system would probably be a 22 better system. He questioned how an applicant knows they qualify for the fee reduction. 23 Mr. Howard believed the numbers were a little higher than usual as finding coaches has 24 been more difficult this year. He noted that all sports fill quickly. Girls' volleyball is 25 one of the most popular and fastest filled. He stated that students who qualify for the 26 free and reduced lunch at PAUSD also qualify for the fee reduction. 27 Kristen O'Kane, Community Services Director, added that there is a dollar amount cap 28 on the fee reduction per year, and that is being increased so people do not meet the cap as 29 quickly. 30 Mr. Howard stated the cap right now is $300 and it was unclear if people needed to hold 31 that for summer camps. Staff wanted to adapt the program so people do not have to 32 make that choice. That is built into the General Fund, but in the past, the Palo Alto Rec 33 Foundation has helped offset the cost to the City for providing that support. 34 APPROVED APPROVED 9 6. Capital Improvement Project (CIP) Update – Lam Do – Discussion – (60 min) 1 Lam Do, Superintendant of Parks, Open Space, and Golf, presented the CIP projects 2 proposed for the upcoming five-year cycle for discussion about prioritization and 3 assessment for any missing projects that should be considered. He listed the CIP criteria 4 and the prioritization of projects and funding levels. He displayed an example project, 5 including funding and expenditure schedules. He also showed a chart of FY 2024-2028 6 projects and the current budget estimate. The FY 2025 preliminary proposed CIP 7 projects were discussed. For the most part, they are projects that had been identified 8 previously in the prior five-year cycle that will be updated. Over the 5-year cycle, there 9 are about 35 proposed projects, and he presented a chart showing which fiscal year each 10 project was slated for. There are also six projects that are annually proposed, mostly 11 repair and maintenance rather than a specific scope or comprehensive plan. Several CIP 12 needs were identified that are not currently in the five-year CIP plan because of a larger 13 design scope, need for community outreach, or need to identify a funding source. He 14 finally reviewed the CIP process timeline, ending with plans for City Council to review 15 and adopt the capital plan and budget in June. 16 Vice Chair Brown suggested narrowing the scope of the conversation to be more 17 realistic, giving feedback on the projects presented, prioritizing whether they are in the 18 correct year, and identifying gaps and missing projects, with the understanding that those 19 large projects will take staff capacity and bump other things down the timeline. She 20 liked the order and prioritization and wanted to err on the side of keeping Year 1 realistic 21 so those things can come to fruition. 22 Commissioner Freeman asked the funding rolls over to the next year if a project is not 23 completed in the first year. 24 Mr. Do explained the factors that may delay a project. If a project is unable to be 25 completed in a fiscal year for any reason, Staff has the option to work with the Office of 26 Management and Budget to go through a reappropriation process. He gave some 27 examples of reasons why that may happen. 28 Chair Greenfield noted there was overall good success of things moving forward without 29 major changes but that a lot depends on the general budget status of the City. He asked 30 if Mr. Do had any comments on the overall city budget projections at this time. 31 Mr. Do responded that it has been reported in the press that the City is in good health, 32 but that does not necessarily mean it will funnel into CIP projects. Staff is operating 33 based on the needs, independent of the City's financial status. 34 APPROVED APPROVED 10 Kristen O'Kane, Community Services Director, added that the Finance Committee was 1 presented with the long-range financial forecast on December 5 and that presentation and 2 staff report would give insight into how the City views finances. 3 Commissioner Freeman asked if there was alignment between approved projects and the 4 resources to manage those projects. 5 Mr. Do answered that Staff resource has been an ongoing issue, and of late, funds have 6 needed to be reappropriated and projects carried forward more. He agreed with looking 7 at what is realistic and what could be accomplished. 8 Commissioner Cribbs asked what criteria OMB used to approve or put aside projects. 9 She also questioned if she was reading the Preliminary Proposed CIP Projects chart 10 correctly in that there was money in FY 26 and 28 for dog park renovations. 11 Mr. Do explained that OMB was not reviewing projects for validity but balancing how 12 much the City can support financially. He also noted that the dog park renovation and 13 installation CIP is funded every other year dependent on the source of funding. 14 Chair Greenfield questioned the expenditures for art in public spaces over FY 23 and 24. 15 Mr. Do did not know the specific projects that was for. The art in public spaces program 16 provides public art throughout the city and is typically not within the scope of the 17 Division of Open Space, Parks, and Golf. 18 Director O'Kane added that projects like Fire Station 4 and the Public Safety Building 19 have or will have public art. This item is associated with any municipal project and any 20 private development that meets certain criteria. 21 Chair Greenfield asked for more information on the Foothills Dam Seepage project, 22 which has been rolled over. He stated that restroom implementation has been slow and 23 asked how that is reflected in the CIP budget. 24 Mr. Do answered that the dam has an ongoing seepage year-round, and this item is to 25 initiate finding the cause. He would get more information from Public Works on the 26 details. The park restroom funding has been rolled over and reappropriated to pool a 27 larger amount, and the restrooms coming online in this FY are at Ramos, Cubberley, and 28 Boulware. 29 Commissioner Cribbs asked why the Magic Bridge restroom was so far out when there is 30 a huge need there. 31 Mr. Do stated the design is being proposed in FY 25 and implementation in FY 26. 32 APPROVED APPROVED 11 Chair Greenfield stated Foothills Buckeye Creek Maintenance had fallen off the five-1 year plan and asked if it was a matter of funding. 2 Mr. Do stated that was being addressed two-fold. The Foothills Nature Preserve 3 Improvements are being funded for FY 25, 27, and 28 and cover pedestrian pathways, 4 bridges, and the design and study of improvements specific to Buckeye Creek. That 5 long-term solution would also need a funding source. 6 7. Ad Hoc Committees and Liaison Updates – Chair Greenfield – Discussion – (15 7 min) 8 Chair Greenfield stated Hawthorns (MidPen) Area Planning had a public meeting on 9 Saturday and a site tour a few weeks earlier. That is progressing along. Staff is getting 10 ready to send an updated recommendation to City Council for review. The Master Plan 11 Ad Hoc looks forward to picking up again in the new year and had met to review the CIP 12 information. 13 Commissioner Freeman did not have any changes to report on Golf. Staff remains in 14 communication with the State Water Board and ecology consultants. There will 15 hopefully be more information about timeline at the next meeting. Golfers continue to 16 be reminded to stay out of the wetlands. 17 Commissioner Cribbs asked if there was an update on the First Tee agreement. 18 Kristen O'Kane, Community Services Director, stated Staff was working through a 19 different agreement related to fees and would focus on the long-term partnership once 20 that was resolved. 21 Commissioner Cribbs again mentioned the public meeting at Mitchell Park on January 22 17 and hoped there would be good attendance. There was continued discussion with 23 various people around Silicon Valley about potential grants but nothing to report in the 24 near future. 25 COMMISSIONER/BOARD MEMBER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, 26 ANNOUNCEMENTS, OR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS 27 28 Chair Greenfield listed items that would be followed up with Staff to finalize the January 29 agenda: Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan update, Golf, E-bikes, 30 Recreation/Wellness Center, Foothills Nature Preserve PIO, Recreation Program Review 31 Ad Hoc update. He wanted to look to have three items agendized for January. 32 33 Vice Chair Brown suggested an informal ad hoc report in January on the 34 Recreation/Wellness Center and having it agendized in February. 35 APPROVED APPROVED 12 1 Commissioner Oche felt the Recreation Program Review Ad Hoc would have an update 2 in February. 3 4 Commissioner Freeman noted he had previously mentioned the possibility of having 5 someone from the JMC to provide a presentation on the challenges they are having and 6 whether the commission could help them in any way. 7 8 Kristen O'Kane, Community Services Director, felt that would be an informational item. 9 There is a consultant putting together a plan to help guide operations into the future, and 10 when that is completed, there could be a report on the findings there, probably in March 11 or April. She asked if there is normally a retreat at the beginning of the calendar year. 12 13 Chair Greenfield responded that typically the retreat is following the reorganization of 14 the Commission. It was previously discussed that the reorganization meeting would be 15 in April and the retreat in early May. The May meeting is focused to the work plan. 16 17 ADJOURNMENT 18 19 Meeting adjourned at 9:50 P.M. 20