Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-06-24 Parks & Recreation Commission Summary MinutesMINUTES 1 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION 2 REGULAR MEETING 3 June 24, 2025 4 In-Person & Virtual Conference 5 Palo Alto, California 6 7 Commissioners Present In-Person: Jeff Greenfield, Amanda Brown, Anne Warner Cribbs, Yudy Deng, 8 Nellis Brown, Bing Wei 9 Commissioners Present Virtually: None 10 Commissioners Absent: Shani Kleinhaus 11 Others Present: None 12 Staff Present: Sarah Robustelli, Kristen O’Kane, Amanda Deml, Chrisine Paras 13 CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL 14 Meeting was called to order at 7:08 p.m. 15 PUBLIC COMMENT 16 1. Minxia Zhang did not present a comment but passed out documentation for the Commission to 17 read. 18 2. Ron G., Founder of Moodfit, highlighted the wellness benefits of pickleball which aligned with 19 Council’s goal of increasing well-being and community belonging. Ron G. quoted 2-time Surgeon 20 General Vivek Murthy regarding the negative health consequences of loneliness and need to 21 prioritize social connection. The repurposing of 2 under-utilized tennis courts into 8 new 22 pickleball courts is being considered. The Palo Alto Pickleball Club proposed paying for the court 23 expansion. Palo Alto has 240 percent more tennis courts than pickleball courts, while pickleball 24 can generate 32 times more player games. Ron G. agreed that concerns such as parking must be 25 addressed but said the Pickleball Club has a track record of working closely with the City. 26 3. David S., president of the Palo Alto Pickleball Club, highlighted the comments in the packet that 27 said pickleball courts were overcrowded and wait times were unacceptable. One comment 28 mentioned how 60 people were playing and 100 people were waiting. David S. felt the new 29 courts would absorb the waiting players and therefore may not impact parking but agreed more 30 parking would be welcome during peak evening and weekend times. The Pickleball Club secured 31 an additional 35 parking places via an agreement with the closest neighbor to be available 32 during peak times. There are 51 tennis courts in Palo Alto and 15 pickleball courts. The Palo Alto 33 Tennis Club has 125 members and the Pickleball Club had 1,500 members at the end of 2024, 34 with about 900 being residents. The beneficiaries of the Mitchell Park courts are those who live 35 or work in Palo Alto. Pickleball is inclusive by age, ability level, gender, socioeconomic position, 36 and place of residence. David S. agreed pickleball was louder than tennis but opined the 37 comments alleging that neighbors, the closest being 450 feet away, could hear the play were 38 exaggerated. David S. encouraged Commissioners to walk the neighborhood and listen for 39 themselves. Building new pickleball courts would cost millions of dollars, impact green space, 40 and take years. Converting tennis courts would cost about $100,000 and the Pickleball Club and 41 donors would cover the cost. The Pickleball Club suggested an expansion plan and hoped the 42 City would consider it. 43 AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS 44 Chair Freeman suggested moving up Item 2, the Cubberley presentation, to Item 1 because 45 there was information in the presentation that could help decide whether Cubberley should be 46 an ad hoc and what to do with the Wellness Center. 47 Division Manager Sarah Robustelli clarified the suggestion was to swap Item 3, the workplan, 48 with Item 4. 49 Vice Chair Greenfield was concerned members of the public may tune in too late to hear the 50 Cubberley discussion if it was moved up but agreed that hearing the presentation first may be 51 beneficial. 52 Commissioner Brown suggested moving Item 5 up to allow time for people to tune in and 53 reverse the order of the agenda. 54 Ms. Robustelli said last month the workplan was last and everyone had wanted to hear that item 55 first in today’s meeting. 56 Chair Freeman assumed the Commissioners had read the packet and understood the content of 57 the Cubberley presentation and agreed to leave it as is. 58 The Council Liaison Report will not take place until August. 59 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 60 1. Previous month’s minutes not in packet. 61 The Commission will not vote on the May meeting minutes until July’s meeting. 62 CITY OFFICIAL REPORTS 63 2. Department Report 64 Division Manager Sarah Robustelli highlighted upcoming events such as the Summer Movie 65 Night series at Mitchell Park, the 4th of July Summer Festival & Chili Cookoff at Mitchell Park 66 with Commissioners invited to be judges, and the Municipal Service Center Open House. Last 67 Friday’s summer movie night drew 250 attendees, less than normal, which staff believed was 68 due to the high winds. Ms. Robustelli thanked the Commission for attending the Fred Eyerly 69 Tower Well Park dedication on June 18, which included a ribbon cutting and the unveiling of a 70 newly designed park sign. The woodworking special interest camp held in Mitchell Park sold out 71 for both weeks with a maximum of 22 campers. 72 At the Rinconada Pool, weekly lap swim visits were around 900, an increase of 100 from last 73 year. Weekly recreational swim visits were around 2,675 which was an increase of over 300 from 74 last year due to increased hours of operation. Total weekly visits were up 550 from last year with 75 an average of 4,500 visits. Recent site amenity upgrades included new ADA benches and 76 expanded picnic tables. 77 Open Space had been discing and mowing for fire fuel mitigation. The third community meeting 78 for the Cubberley Community Center is scheduled for September 17, 2025. 79 A slide showed the estimated project schedule for the ongoing turf study with stars denoting 80 PRC involvement, including focus groups in July and feedback on the draft report in August. A 81 report and presentation to City Council is scheduled for October 20, 2025. Ms. Robustelli 82 recapped the Greer Park basketball project which included resurfacing and expanding the 83 smaller court with a plan to reopen mid-July. The Heritage Park restroom was open to the public. 84 Vice Chair Greenfield asked for elaboration on discing and if it was done to create a fire break. 85 Vice Chair Greenfield wondered if there was a schedule for the Mayfield turf replacement. 86 Ms. Robustelli confirmed discing creates a fire break by turning up soil along the outer edges of 87 the preserve, which provides protection to other infrastructure outside of the Open Space. 88 Council approved the construction contract for the Stanford/Palo Alto Playing Fields on June 9, 89 2025. There is no schedule and the pre-construction meeting has not taken place, but a 3-month 90 construction window is anticipated and the Commission will be updated at the next meeting. 91 Commissioner Cribbs asked if there had been any scholarship requests for summer programs or 92 swim lessons and wondered how long the Team Sheeper contract extends. 93 Director Kristen O’Kane explained that camps qualify for a fee reduction program through the 94 City but swim camps and classes go through Palo Alto Swim & Sport. Ms. O’Kane did not know 95 the number of requests. Ms. O’Kane believed the Team Sheeper contract went until 2027. 96 Commissioner Wei asked how the turf study and basketball resurfacing align. Commissioner Wei 97 questioned what material was used for the Greer Park resurfacing and what the timeline was. 98 Ms. Robustelli said the turf study will look at natural, synthetic, and hybrid turfs but did not go 99 into detail with other surfacing. Council directed the focus area was at El Camino Park. The CIP 100 funded a replacement for El Camino Park this year which had been deferred due to the turf 101 study. The resurfacing at Greer Park was grind down, then pave, then acrylic surfacing on top 102 similar to tennis courts. Ms. Robustelli confirmed clay court material was not used. Signs were 103 posted at Greer Park indicating the reopening will be either July 11 or July 18. 104 Commissioner Deng congratulated staff for opening the 4-stall restroom at Cubberley track and 105 heard great feedback. Commissioner Deng wondered how much the new benches at Rinconada 106 cost. Commissioner Deng asked if the vegetation fire near El Camino impacted the parks. 107 Vice Chair Greenfield believed the foothills were closed due to the vegetation fire. 108 Ms. Robustelli said the 8 blue benches at Rinconada were purchased for about $9,000. The ADA 109 benches were extra from Boulware Park and were repurposed for use at Rinconada. There had 110 been 2 recent fires. Ms. Robustelli was not aware of impacts to Open Space parks from the 111 vegetation fire last week, but the other fire had rangers deployed but was outside City limits. 112 Chair Freeman asked how the waitlist for summer camps compared to past years and what was 113 being done to reduce it. Chair Freeman wondered what the top 3 classes are and why. Chair 114 Freeman questioned if the increase in swim visits at Rinconada was solely due to the extended 115 hours of operation. Chair Freeman asked what the hours are for the restroom at Heritage Park 116 and how that information was communicated to the public. Chair Freeman wondered if there 117 were updates with First Tee. 118 Ms. Robustelli mentioned new special interest classes such as woodworking which took place in 119 the bowl in the outside space at Mitchell Park to address space limitations. Staff is working on a 120 portion of the procurement process. Ms. Robustelli confirmed the 550 more weekly visits at 121 Rinconada was due to the extended hours of operation. The Heritage Park restroom is directly in 122 the line of sight from the playground area and there is signage, however the Roth building is not 123 completely open yet so there is a phased approach. There were no major updates on First Tee. 124 Ms. O’Kane said camps at the art center, junior museum, and zoo tend to fill up due to space. 125 Commissioner Brown confirmed the restroom at Heritage Park was clearly open, accessible, and 126 heavily used. 127 BUSINESS ITEMS 128 3. Establish a Cubberley Ad Hoc; and Amend and Approval of the Parks and Recreation 129 Commission 2025 Workplan; and Assign Commission Ad Hoc and liaison roles 130 Division Manager Sarah Robustelli pulled up a draft workplan and thought the best approach 131 was to go through project by project. The establishment of the ad hoc was noted at the end of 132 the workplan. 133 Chair Freeman suggested addressing ad hoc membership after the workplan was approved. The 134 document pulled up showed items previously reviewed and approved at the retreat. Chair 135 Freeman asked if any Commissioners wanted to update the goals or timeline. 136 Vice Chair Greenfield wanted to standardize the timeline for consistency. 137 Commissioner Cribbs felt the number of ad hoc committees, 8 or 9, was overwhelming and 138 mentioned difficulty for staff and Commissioners to get things done. Commissioner Cribbs 139 expressed an openness to determining if an ad hoc was critical. 140 Chair Freeman suggested going through each project to determine if it should remain as ad hoc, 141 move down as a liaison, or be combined. Chair Freeman was concerned whether the timeline for 142 the CIP Review project was realistic when staff may be working on other items and suggested 143 deferring back to staff. Chair Freeman asked if FY26 would only go out to Q1. 144 Vice Chair Greenfield wanted staff input on the suggestion to change the timeline for the CIP 145 Review and confirmed the timeframe covered by the workplan was FY25 and FY26 Q1 and Q2, 6 146 quarters total, with the CIP work done in Q2. Vice Chair Greenfield questioned whether to spell 147 out “fiscal year” and wanted consistency. 148 Director Kristen O’Kane explained the workplan goes through the end of calendar year 2025 149 because of the change in recruitment for new Commissioners. All CSD’s Commissions and the 150 Stormwater Committee were on a different schedule and would likely be presented to Council. 151 The new workplan, in the Commission handbook, is around the March 2026 timeframe. Ms. 152 O’Kane said FY26 would go to Q2 because the fiscal year starts July 1. 153 Chair Freeman clarified that the change would be FY25-26 and Q2. 154 Commissioner Brown felt the CIP workplan would be best as a liaison role because it is seasonal 155 but repeated annually and there were a lot of questions about CIP projects throughout the year. 156 Vice Chair Greenfield suggested a 2-person liaison role for the CIP project. 157 Chair Freeman agreed to move the CIP project to a liaison but asked if there were any 2-person 158 liaison roles. 159 Vice Chair Greenfield confirmed that currently 7 of 13 liaison roles were 2 Commissioners and 160 asked if the CIP workplan item was effective for FY25 and should say FY25 Q2. 161 Ms. O’Kane said staff was fine to move the CIP project to a liaison role. Ms. O’Kane said the item 162 would still be in the workplan with a liaison instead of an ad hoc. 163 Chair Freeman asked if the Park Dedication project was ongoing. 164 Ms. O’Kane confirmed 1 staff member had availability to work on the Park Dedication project 165 which would come to the Commission next month to present with the ad hoc. 166 Vice Chair Greenfield thought the timeline should read “FY25 Q1 through FY26 Q2” and 167 suggested “FY25/26” for the title. 168 Chair Freeman wanted to remove “FY26” from the project title because it was already defined 169 under the timeline. 170 Commissioner Cribbs felt the project was a regular function of the Commission as opposed to an 171 ad hoc and asked if there was another way to handle it. 172 Vice Chair Greenfield clarified it was not a standing committee but there were specific tasks for 173 the ad hoc to address within the period. 174 Commissioner Brown agreed the project was an ongoing function of the Commission and did not 175 fall into the definition of an ad hoc and suggested a liaison role or staff responsibility. 176 Commissioner Brown thought that, with Cubberley and other Council-directed items, the project 177 may get deprioritized so other time-sensitive projects could be elevated. 178 Chair Freeman thought this project may benefit from a 2-person liaison role and agreed it did 179 not meet the ad hoc rule of having an end. The liaison could work with staff once a month. 180 Commissioner Wei mentioned previous experience in the ad hoc and agreed the project was a 181 goal of the Commission. 182 Ms. Robustelli asked if any adjustments were needed on the workplan document. 183 Vice Chair Greenfield was in favor of keeping the ad hoc and was unsure how this project 184 differed from other continuous projects like the Recreation Wellness Center or the Middle 185 School Athletics. Vice Chair Greenfield felt removing the ad hoc was a drastic step. 186 Chair Freeman reiterated that an ad hoc has an endpoint and felt this project would be on the 187 workplan every year. Chair Freeman was in favor of moving it to a liaison role. 188 Commissioner Cribbs said the Mayor encouraged the Commission to find more parkland. The 2 189 people in the liaison role could give the Commission a monthly report and get staff involved if an 190 opportunity arose. Commissioner Cribbs reiterated the concern of limited staff time. 191 Commissioner Brown disagreed that an ad hoc was more important than a liaison, citing 192 aquatics, golf, and dog parks. Commissioner Brown felt if a specific opportunity with an 193 associated finite project warranted an ad hoc, it could be moved but that was not the case 194 currently. Commissioner Brown wanted the Commission to set up a workplan that set realistic 195 expectations for the public. 196 Vice Chair Greenfield clarified the reasons for removing the ad hoc and mentioned City Council 197 had approved the ad hoc for multiple years. Vice Chair Greenfield asked if there would still be a 198 workplan item for Park Dedication with a liaison role. 199 Ms. O’Kane was unclear about the difference between the current 2-person ad hoc and a 2-200 person liaison role that meets monthly. 201 Chair Freeman asked if it made a difference to staff if it was an ad hoc or liaison. Chair Freeman 202 questioned what the ad hoc was specifically working on. 203 Commissioner Brown felt the project did not fit definition of an ad hoc due to lacking a clearly 204 defined start and end. Moving the project to a liaison role would not accomplish the task of 205 reducing staff workload. Commissioner Brown asked at what point the ad hoc work would be 206 complete. Commissioner Brown felt that ad hoc required specific tasks to be accomplished as 207 opposed to a time period associated with milestones. 208 Vice Chair Greenfield opined the project had a clear end, referencing the specific high-priority 209 task which had a start and end date. The ad hoc was reviewing 7 different sites that were 210 identified before the ad hoc was created and continued to work on identifying other locations. 211 The work of reviewing the listed sites would be completed at the end of the year. 212 Chair Freeman felt specific parks should be associated with the project and progress updates 213 given to the Commission. Chair Freeman clarified that, when reviewing the workplan at the next 214 retreat, those priorities would be replaced with new priorities. Chair Freeman asked if the 215 Commission would vote on changing to a liaison role. 216 Ms. O’Kane proposed changing the wording of the high priority item to include specific sites. By 217 the end of December, the assessment of the sites as they relate to parkland dedication would be 218 complete. If the Commission decided to put it back on the workplan, it could be discussed then. 219 Ms. O’Kane was willing to keep it as an ad hoc or switch to liaison work and stated the 220 Commission would vote on the workplan at the end. 221 Vice Chair Greenfield was unsure if the project would stay as a workplan item if it were moved to 222 a liaison role. Vice Chair Greenfield noted the CIP Review was completed and had an ad hoc 223 associated with it when it was ongoing, though it remained in the workplan as a liaison role. 224 Chair Freeman asked if the items defined as high priority could be completed. 225 Vice Chair Greenfield felt the workplan item could be completed with an active ad hoc but 226 questioned if it would stay on the workplan with a liaison role, opining that had not been done 227 with the first project. 228 Ms. O’Kane reiterated that, with the first project, the ad hoc was eliminated, a liaison extended, 229 and it was kept on the workplan to conclude in FY26 Q2. 230 Vice Chair Greenfield thought the timeline for the first project was only FY25 and not FY26. 231 Commissioner Brown was in favor of keeping projects 1 and 2 on the workplan and moving both 232 to liaison roles. 233 Chair Freeman supported keeping both projects on the workplan as liaison roles. 234 Vice Chair Greenfield asked if staff would clean up and reformat the timeline and if staff was on 235 board with how the workplan was listed. Vice Chair Greenfield questioned if there was a lot of 236 work around reviewing the status of CEQA for the BCCP project. 237 Ms. Robustelli agreed staff would reformat the timelines after the meeting and was looking for 238 substantial changes. Staff agreed to review the first portion of the BCCP high priority list. Ms. 239 Robustelli felt reviewing CEQA was ambitious to complete by the end of the calendar year. Staff 240 completed the first step and was working with the ad hoc to solicit input. Staff tried to complete 241 the first set of bullet points because it would impact the status of CEQA. 242 Chair Freeman felt this item could remain as an ad hoc and asked if FY26 was a realistic timeline. 243 Ms. O’Kane said the project will take at least through FY26 Q2 244 Commissioner Brown asked if it was more realistic to expect the first section to be completed 245 during the span of the current workplan and have the remaining items as future next steps. 246 Commissioner Brown was in favor of moving the other items to reduce expectations and wanted 247 to remove the funding for a consultant. 248 Ms. Robustelli agreed to have the remaining items listed as next steps and noted the first step 249 was on last year’s workplan. 250 Vice Chair Greenfield supported removing consultant funding and wondered if the CEQA review 251 and path forward high-priority items could be moved to low priority for tracking purposes. 252 Commissioner Cribbs felt it was important for the public to know how long the project had been 253 going on for and agreed to remove the funding item. Commissioner Cribbs suggested adding a 254 date of when the project was first established. 255 Vice Chair Greenfield said the current draft BCCP had a date that could be added onto the high 256 priority item. 257 Chair Freeman asked if the Nature Preserve Access Policy project was getting wrapped up. 258 Vice Chair Greenfield said the ad hoc would present to the Commission soon. Work would wrap 259 up and the ad hoc would convert to liaison roles to likely be covered by Open Space Reserve 260 liaisons. The ad hoc met with staff within the past month for a site visit and the strategy was 261 discussed then. The timeline was accurately reflected on the workplan. 262 Chair Freeman wanted to move the Recreation Wellness Center to a liaison and move the 263 Cubberley liaison to an ad hoc in its place. Chair Freeman said partnerships had been formed 264 and a letter of intent had been done. A charter was received from City Council to investigate 265 spaces for potential locations. 266 Commissioner Cribbs agreed to move the Cubberley liaison to an ad hoc and downgrade the 267 Recreation Wellness Center, stating the ad hoc should address the wholeness of Cubberley. 268 Commissioner Cribbs noted the importance of community and Commission support and felt the 269 Cubberley ad hoc could ensure that recreation needs were reflected as much as possible. 270 Vice Chair Greenfield asked if the workplan item would remain open for the rest of the calendar 271 year and proposed adjusting the measure of success to be something accomplishable within the 272 timeline of the ad hoc. Vice Chair Greenfield felt completing the facility would not occur within 273 the year and proposed the measure of success to be the completion of the high priority items. 274 Ms. O’Kane asked if the project would remain on the workplan and if it was necessary to adjust 275 the measure of success if not. 276 Chair Freeman said the intent was to move the project off the workplan. Chair Freeman clarified 277 that the plan was to adjust the statement of success, close the item, and move it to a liaison. 278 Vice Chair Greenfield opined that, since the project is being removed from the workplan, the 279 timeline would be changed to FY25 and the item would effectively be completed. 280 Commissioner Cribbs asked if it would be more useful to look at the Cubberley ad hoc to see 281 what its goals and objectives are and then incorporate the Recreation Wellness Center if 282 necessary. 283 Commissioner Brown clarified that the item would get deleted off the workplan, folded into 284 Cubberley, and then become a liaison role. 285 Vice Chair Greenfield suggested not deleting it off the workplan but setting the timeline for FY25 286 so it would be a completed workplan item. 287 Ms. O’Kane proposed the specific tasks Council identified regarding the Wellness Center be the 288 measure of success. 289 Chair Freeman agreed to replace the measure of success with the language from Council. 290 Regarding the Playing Fields project, Vice Chair Greenfield suggested editing the measure of 291 success wording to remove contingency because the CIP funding had been approved. Vice Chair 292 Greenfield asked if there was a possibility that the El Camino turf replacement could occur 293 within the calendar year since that was the end date of the ad hoc. 294 Ms. Robustelli said the funding was in relation to El Camino Park so it was still funded for FY26, 295 which starts in July. Staff would work with the ad hoc in July and the turf study would come to 296 the Commission for feedback in August, which would be reflected in the final report to City 297 Council in October. Decisions within the report would impact El Camino. The El Camino turf 298 replacement would not be completed by the end of the year. 299 Chair Freeman asked if the turf replacement would be in progress by the end of the year and 300 what the end date of the turf study was. Chair Freeman proposed adding Mayfield in the first 301 measure of success item and starting a new line for the turf study portion. 302 Ms. Robustelli said the turf replacement depended on the findings of the turf study which would 303 be presented to City Council in October. 304 Vice Chair Greenfield suggested adding the forwarding of the turf study to City Council for 305 approval or consideration as a measure of success. 306 Ms. O’Kane asked if a date for forwarding to City Council should be added. 307 Vice Chair Greenfield felt the date should be the end of the calendar year but did not feel it was 308 necessary. The timeline was correct as listed. Regarding the Conservation Plan project, the date 309 for the BCCP current draft plan was May 2022. 310 Chair Freeman hoped the Racquet Courts Policy would be presented at the August meeting but 311 thought portions had to go to City Council in either October or November. 312 Vice Chair Greenfield felt City Council work should not be reflected on the timeline but 313 suggested keeping it open through the end of the calendar year. 314 Commissioner Brown suggested changing wording in the title to “Racquet Courts Policy Update.” 315 Chair Freeman agreed to add “update” to the title and to take out the “if warranted” wording 316 under the measure of success. 317 Vice Chair Greenfield wanted to add “to City Council” under the measure of success if Council 318 needed to approve the policy update but remove the timeframe for the recommendation. 319 Ms. O’Kane said the City Council has approved recommendations in the past. 320 Vice Chair Greenfield asked if the timeline for the Middle School Athletics project needed to be 321 adjusted and if so, to when. 322 Commissioner Cribbs thought the goal was supposed to be more than a discussion by August but 323 did not feel that would happen. 324 Chair Freeman asked if the goal could be met by the end of the year or FY26 Q2. 325 Commissioner Brown suggested reaching the goals by the end of 2025. 326 Vice Chair Greenfield said the timeline was FY25 Q1 to FY26 Q2 and felt that the action items 327 under the timeline section should be included in the priorities or measures of success section. 328 Commissioner Deng had received emails from Greene Middle School about a free contractor 329 after school program offered by the YMCA and did not know if that was related to the Middle 330 School Athletics project. Commissioner Deng suggested reaching out to Adam for clarification. 331 Ms. O’Kane suggested starting at “FY25” and removing everything after “Q2” for the timeline. 332 Vice Chair Greenfield wondered if feeling confident about the program moving forward was a 333 measurable standard for success and suggested changing the wording. Vice Chair Greenfield 334 asked if there could be more detail describing the recommendation. 335 Chair Freeman asked who was on the ad hoc for the Middle School Athletics project. 336 Commissioner Brown, Commissioner Cribbs, and Commissioner Deng were on the ad hoc. 337 Commissioner Brown proposed striking that portion of the measure of success and keeping 338 “forward recommendations to City Council” if the other ad hoc members were in agreement. 339 Commissioner Brown felt leaving the recommendation generic was fine. 340 Regarding the Cubberley project, Ms. O’Kane said that a master plan would be completed by the 341 end of the calendar year to be presented to Council in December. The plan would not go to 342 Council for final adoption until March 2026 to align with CEQA. 343 Vice Chair Greenfield said recommended moving the goal from the timeline section to the 344 measure of success section. 345 Chair Freeman wanted clarification on what having a complete vision of the facility meant. 346 Ms. O’Kane said the wording could be changed to “complete master plan.” Staff would likely ask 347 the PRC to make the recommendation to City Council. 348 Vice Chair Greenfield asked if it should read “master plan recommendation forwarded to City 349 Council for approval or consideration.” 350 Commissioner Cribbs wanted to move “support ongoing community engagement ” to the high 351 priority list and thought the Commission had a role in encouraging the opportunity. 352 Commissioner Deng asked if engaging with Concordia should be moved to the high priority list. 353 Ms. O’Kane felt engaging Concordia was part of ongoing community engagement efforts and 354 asked if the Commission wanted to reference the Recreation Wellness Center. 355 Commissioner Deng felt it would not hurt to include the Recreation Wellness Center if it was 356 going to be taken off workplan. 357 Chair Freeman suggested leaving the wording as is, noting no other groups were specifically 358 mentioned. 359 Vice Chair Greenfield said the liaison and ad hoc assignments would be approved at the same 360 time as a single action. Vice Chair Greenfield suggested updating the list of ad hoc before 361 reviewing ad hoc members. 362 A document listing the PRC FY26 ad hoc committees and liaisons was pulled up for review. Ms. 363 Robustelli confirmed the CIP Review, Park Dedication, and Recreation Wellness Center projects 364 were moved to liaisons. The Cubberley project was added as an ad hoc. Project titles were 365 reviewed and updated to align with the workplan. 366 Commissioner Cribbs and Chair Freeman offered to step down from the Cubberley ad hoc. 367 Commissioner Deng offered to join the Cubberley ad hoc. 368 Vice Chair Greenfield was concerned about having 3 Commissioners on the ad hoc that were 369 board members of the Wellness Center. Vice Chair Greenfield explained the perception could be 370 that the members on the Cubberley ad hoc could unduly lean towards the Wellness Center or 371 give it priority, though did not suggest that was happening. 372 Chair Freeman thought that objection was not a reasonable conflict of interest and noted that it 373 has been that way for the past 3 years. 374 Vice Chair Greenfield said the previous ad hoc was for the Wellness Center but now the focus of 375 the ad hoc had expanded beyond that. 376 Ms. O’Kane wondered if Commissioner Kleinhaus, being absent, would want to be on the ad hoc. 377 There was discussion about Commissioner Cribbs and/or Chair Freeman going off the ad hoc. 378 Vice Chair Greenfield said Commissioner Cribbs going off the ad hoc did not address the 379 concern, which was the potential perception of a lack of diverse opinion from a Commissioner 380 not on the nonprofit board for the Wellness Center. Vice Chair Greenfield asked for staff input. 381 Commissioner Cribbs wanted the Cubberley project to be successful and proposed Vice Chair 382 Greenfield be on the ad hoc until 2 new Commissioners could step into that role in October. 383 Chair Freeman proposed stepping down from the ad hoc with Commissioner Cribbs and 384 Commissioner Deng and asked if Commissioner Kleinhaus was willing to be a member of the ad 385 hoc or was willing to give 2 new members an opportunity to join in December. 386 Vice Chair Greenfield clarified the concern was that the ad hoc should not exclusively be 387 members of the nonprofit board. Vice Chair Greenfield did not volunteer to be on the ad hoc. 388 Commissioner Brown felt that standard had not been applied to any other ad hoc or liaison and 389 cited a lack of diversity of viewpoints on other projects. 390 Ms. O’Kane suggested assigning Commissioner Kleinhaus to the Cubberley ad hoc and revisit if 391 there was opposition. 392 Commissioner Cribbs was removed from the Cubberley ad hoc. Chair Freeman remained and 393 Commissioner Kleinhaus and Commissioner Deng were added on the Cubberley ad hoc. 394 Commissioner Wei and Commissioner Deng asked to be removed from the Playing Fields ad hoc. 395 Commissioner Cribbs joined the Playing Fields ad hoc. 396 There were no member changes to the Racquet Courts Policy Update or Middle School Athletics 397 ad hoc. 398 The liaison list was reviewed. Chair Freeman asked for elaboration of the Palo Alto Unified 399 School District liaison and felt it was important to keep. 400 Ms. O’Kane explained that Commissioners have attended City/School Liaison Committee 401 meetings in the past to observe but noted related items, such as Youth and Fields, were 402 represented elsewhere. 403 Commissioner Cribbs felt the PAUSD liaison role was an important function to facilitate 404 discussions with the School District about an increase in sharing facilities or working on current 405 arrangements so things move smoothly. 406 Vice Chair Greenfield thought this topic was discussed at the retreat with a suggestion for Ms. 407 O’Kane to review the agendas and notify the liaison if the meeting was appropriate to attend. 408 Ms. O’Kane stated the PAUSD had not met in several months with the next meeting in August. 409 Chair Freeman agreed to stay on the PAUSD/City liaison and asked if anyone wanted to be added 410 to other liaisons. Chair Freeman was removed from Recreation Wellness Center liaison. 411 Vice Chair Greenfield suggested a maximum of 2 people per liaison role. Vice Chair Greenfield 412 felt it was important for the Chair to be a part of the CIP Review liaison. 413 Ms. Robustelli recommended Commissioner Kleinhaus be removed from the CIP Review due to 414 being added to the Cubberley ad hoc and a mentioned lack of desire to stay on it. 415 Commissioner Cribbs observed it was good for there to be 2 Commissioners on the liaisons with 416 a Commissioner leaving in the fall so that information could be shared. 417 Vice Chair Greenfield agreed and noted an open position on the Safe Routes liaison, which acts 418 as a liaison to the Office of Transportation in general as it applies to PRC items. 419 Chair Freeman said one of the new members will likely be assigned to the Safe Routes liaison. 420 Public Comment: None. 421 There was discussion around the proper procedure for addressing a split motion. 422 SPLIT MOTION: Chair Freeman moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown, to establish a 423 Cubberley ad hoc; approve the Parks and Recreation Commission 2025 Workplan; and Assign 424 Commission Ad Hoc and liaison roles as presented except for moving the Park Dedication from 425 an ad hoc to a liaison role. 426 MOTION PASSED: 6-0-1, Commissioner Kleinhaus absent. 427 Move Park Dedication from an ad hoc to a liaison role. 428 MOTION PASSED: 5-1-1, Vice Chair Greenfield voted no, Commissioner Kleinhaus absent. 429 4. Receive an informational update on the Cubberley Community Center Project, including 430 Summary of Community Meeting #2; and Provide Feedback on Conceptual Designs; and 431 Receive results of Community Poll #1; and Provide Feedback on Cubberley Strategic 432 Activation Plan; and Provide Feedback on Cubberley Project Workplan Updates 433 The Commission took an 8-minute break. 434 Amanda Deml, the Assistant Director of Community Services, presented on the Cubberley 435 Community Center Project. Staff met with the PRC regarding Cubberley on April 22, 2025, which 436 is when the first community poll was released. The poll results were reviewed with City Council 437 on June 9. The second community meeting was held on June 12. Staff met with the Public Art 438 Commission regarding the Strategic Activation Plan on June 19. Staff will meet with the Planning 439 and Transportation Commission on July 9 and the Architectural Review Board on July 17. Staff 440 will go to full City Council on August 18. The third community meeting will be on September 17 441 and staff will meet with the PRC again on September 23. 442 Chrisine Paras, the Assistant Director of Administrative Services, stated the first poll was a critical 443 planning tool to inform upcoming community meetings, serve as foundation for development of 444 the master plan, and to provide insight into the potential success of a ballot measure. Staff 445 partnered with FM3 to design the poll with input from the Cubberley ad hoc and City Council. 446 The poll was to survey voter input of goals and future of the Cubberley site and examine possible 447 support for a tax or bond measure. The poll surveyed 437 voters from April 28 to May 7. The 448 results were reviewed by the ad hoc committee on May 16 and with City Council on June 9. 449 Detailed results can be found under the meeting materials from the June 9 Council meeting. A 450 second poll is scheduled to launch in the fall of 2025 to test a refined concept plan, possible 451 phased approach to the site, and tax characteristics and bond sizing. A third poll is scheduled for 452 the spring of 2026 to test voter support of ballot measure language. 453 The 3 most important priorities to voters were the efficient use of taxpayer dollars; basic 454 building improvements such as electrical, plumbing, and earthquake retrofitting; and green 455 space. Persuasive messages focused on basic repairs and safety improvements as well as 456 providing on-site childcare and affordable recreation opportunities. Less important issues were 457 pickleball, tennis courts, and dog parks, with athletics and adult education also being lower 458 priorities. A strong majority of voters were willing to pay up to $250 per year per household for 459 the project. Some were willing to pay up to $500 per year, however that level fell below the 2/3 460 threshold required to pass a parcel tax measure or bond measure. 461 Ms. Deml gave an overview of the second community meeting facilitated by Concordia. About 462 130 community members attended. The revised vision statement, developed using input from 463 the first community meeting on March 19, was shared. The revised vision statement reflected 464 community priorities such as adaptability and connection while staying true to Council’s original 465 vision. At the second meeting, Concordia presented 3 conceptual plans, each with an A, B, and C 466 variation that explored different building configurations, new construction versus renovation, 467 green space, bike and pedestrian circulation, and above or below ground parking. Participants 468 then completed 2 activities. First, each table of up to 8 shared feedback on liked and disliked 469 aspects by placing 18 stickers, 9 red and 9 green, on the concept plans and expanded in writing. 470 Second, individual participants reviewed key design elements across 6 categories: arrival and 471 parking, pedestrian circulation, building scale and physical space organization, landscape and 472 greenspace organization, balance of building and green space, and being a good neighbor. A full 473 summary report being compiled by Concordia should be completed within a few weeks. 474 Ms. Deml referenced Attachment B in the packet which showed the 3 conceptual designs for the 475 Cubberley site. The buildings were constructed between 1945 and 1968, which predates the 476 ADA and code updates. In 2022, a facilities assessment found that in 3 years (2025), most of the 477 Cubberley buildings will be near the end of useful life and within 10 to 20 years, all buildings 478 would be at end of life. All buildings have code, maintenance, and facility deficiencies. The 479 existing site has 250,000 square feet of outdoor space, 184,000 square feet of indoor space, and 480 121,000 square feet of parking. The proposed sites’ outdoor space would increase to 335,000 481 square feet, the indoor space to 280,000 square feet, and parking to 210,000 square feet. 482 Each of the 3 designs showed key features including building layouts, greenspace, promenades, 483 and pedestrian and bike circulation. The underground parking runs parallel to Middlefield Road. 484 A slide showed Diagonal Concept 1A, which had all new construction and buildings organized in 485 a diagonal shape. The layout created a larger space along Middlefield Road and had 3 large 486 green spaces. All green spaces could become any outdoor activity including remaining as grass, 487 outdoor gardens, sport courts, a pool, or amphitheater. The Diagonal Concept had the most 488 direct bike crossing, with the bike promenade highlighted in orange and the pedestrian paths in 489 yellow. It offered a Middlefield and diagonal promenade and assumed underground parking. A 490 slide showed the same design in 3D. There were 2 mobility hubs on either end for pickup and 491 drop off locations, which were included in each concept plan. Another slide showed Diagonal 492 Concept 1B in which the Pavilion, theater, and the I Building were kept and renovated. A slide 493 depicted Diagonal Concept 1C which included a 4-story, above-ground parking structure in the 494 upper left-hand corner of the site. 495 A slide showed Grid Concept 2A, which included all new construction with buildings organized in 496 a grid shape. The layout included 1 enclosed courtyard and 4 medium green spaces. It offered a 497 perpendicular bike flow, a Middlefield promenade, internal parallel promenade, and internal 498 perpendicular promenade. It assumed underground parking. The concept was shown in 3D. 499 Another slide showed Grid Concept 2B in which the Pavilion, theater, and the I Building were 500 kept and renovated. A slide depicted Grid Concept 2C which included a 4-story, above-ground 501 parking structure in the upper left-hand corner of the site. 502 A slide showed Linear Concept 3A, which included all new construction and a layout that created 503 a large central open space. It offered 3 large green spaces and perpendicular bike flow with a 504 circular option. It featured a Middlefield promenade and 2 perpendicular promenades with 505 landscape mall. It assumed underground parking. The concept was shown in 3D. Another slide 506 showed Linear Concept 3B in which the Pavilion, theater, and the I Building were kept and 507 renovated. A slide depicted Linear Concept 3C which included a 4-story, above-ground parking 508 structure in the upper left-hand corner of the site. 509 Ms. Deml summarized that the diagonal layout offered quick bike and pedestrian flow, the grid 510 layout had more but smaller green spaces, and the linear layout showcased a large central open 511 space. 512 The next steps in the master planning process include collecting and analyzing feedback from 513 this PRC meeting and the June 12 community meeting. The final master plan will be presented to 514 the community and City Council on December 8, 2025, to include the proposed master plan, cost 515 estimates, and phasing scenarios. 516 Attachment C in the packet was the Strategic Activation Plan. In coordination with the City 517 Council Cubberley ad hoc committee, staff decided it would be beneficial to enhance and 518 activate the Cubberley site in the near-term in order to generate community awareness and 519 excitement, draw public interest, and build momentum leading up to the 2026 ballot initiative. 520 The Strategic Activation Plan intentionally aligned with the 3 broader project phases of master 521 planning, community engagement and polling, and anticipated the November 2026 ballot 522 initiative. The phased approach supports resource allocation, balances staff capacity, and 523 maintains strategic alignment across all project stages. 524 Staff was seeking input from the PRC on the draft plan, which outlined a variety of potential 525 strategies to build community excitement and momentum for the project during the master 526 planning phase. The current concepts include physical enhancements to the site, community 527 events, and temporary art installations and performances supported through the Public Art 528 Program’s upcoming 2026 ArtLift Community Grants. The Strategic Activation Plan will circulate 529 to the Cubberley ad hoc, Public Art Commission, PRC, Cubberley Users, PRC ad hoc committee, 530 and the City Council for review, feedback, and recommendations. The final plan will be reviewed 531 by City Council on August 18. 532 Staff requested feedback regarding the 3 Cubberley conceptual designs and Commission 533 support/participation for near-term activation. 534 Vice Chair Greenfield asked if green space was equivalent to any outdoor space, such as sports 535 courts, and how to interpret the polling results regarding green space in terms of the priorities. 536 Vice Chair Greenfield hoped the next poll would more clearly delineate different types of 537 outdoor space. Vice Chair Greenfield asked what the total outreach was and if the process 538 utilized multi-modal contact per person and if each person was reached via all 3 platforms. 539 Ms. Paras said green outdoor space was an unspecific concept but noted that preserving trees 540 and green space was the component the community reacted to. Sports courts were more tied to 541 athletics, which voters ranked as a lower priority. Ms. Paras did not know the total number of 542 those reached but confirmed there were 437 respondents. Ms. Paras was unsure if the process 543 was multi-modal but said it was multi-platform, including email, phone, and text message. 544 Ms. Deml said, anecdotally, people were reached via one method and agreed to follow up with 545 more information. 546 Commissioner Cribbs felt it was important to understand how the polling was done and how the 547 recipients were chosen and asked for elaboration on how the company conducted the poll. 548 Ms. Paras believed the company used a list of registered voters as a contact list, which was 549 random, and decided whether to contact via email, phone, or text. 550 Commissioner Brown referenced a similar survey done in a different jurisdiction. The firm 551 ensured it reached out to a statistically significant number of people that was stratified to be 552 representative of the community. Commissioner Brown presumed this firm did something 553 similar since it is well known. 554 Chair Freeman referenced the presentation in April that detailed the survey results and the 555 methods used to conduct outreach, saying it covered a large demographic area. Chair Freeman 556 clarified there were 2 community meetings that were open to everyone. Chair Freeman gave 557 anecdotal evidence to support his concern that few people know about the Cubberley project 558 and wanted to help figure out how to expand that reach to get more engagement. 559 Ms. Deml confirmed the 2 meetings were open to everyone and that mailers had been sent to 560 every home. 561 Public Comment: None. 562 Commissioner Wei asked if there had been any voting on the preferred concept design at the 563 community meeting. Commissioner Wei asked how to navigate the combination of bike and 564 pedestrian flow and green space. 565 Ms. Deml said there would be a version of the in-person meeting on the website. The goal of the 566 meeting was to provide feedback on which components were best liked, which Concordia will 567 then take to create one refined plan to be presented on September 17. Certain elements from 568 each design plan were highlighted as opposed to a singular plan. Each design had different 569 configurations of the bike/pedestrian path that cut through the space. The square footage of 570 green space was equivalent across all 3 plans. The configuration is what was open to feedback. 571 Commissioner Cribbs wanted to emphasize the analysis and poor condition of the buildings. 572 Commissioner Cribbs was hopeful that there would be more about the opportunity in future 573 presentations. Commissioner Cribbs suggested hosting a fun event such as painting a mural or 574 doorway or putting up a sign for near-term activation. The bond issue and amount of money 575 required was not insignificant. 576 Ms. Deml highlighted the community was happy with programming and agreed the buildings 577 needed to be updated. 578 Commissioner Brown complimented the project outreach and felt it was well framed to capture 579 what was most important. Commissioner Brown felt pedestrian access was an important feature 580 and dovetailed well with other ongoing City bike/pedestrian plans. 581 Vice Chair Greenfield opined the community and polling process got the top 3 priorities right but 582 felt the bond would be a considerable challenge. The City would own most of the existing 583 building space at Cubberley while PAUSD would retain ownership of the playing fields. Vice Chair 584 Greenfield was concerned what would happen to the playing field space if the PAUSD needed to 585 open another high school. Vice Chair Greenfield heard comments from the community wanting 586 to have a large, contiguous green space. Vice Chair Greenfield asked whether the Nelson Drive 587 road access would remain as is, being bike/pedestrian entrances and open to emergency 588 vehicles but closed to vehicular traffic. Cubberley currently has a covered breezeway through all 589 campus buildings which did not appear to be preserved or considered in the current design 590 proposals. Vice Chair Greenfield asked if there would be bike lanes in the underground parking. 591 Vice Chair Greenfield queried if the gym design would include indoor/outdoor access similar to 592 the large Mitchell Park conference room. Vice Chair Greenfield questioned if underground 593 parking would properly support large canopy trees above it and was interested in reviewing a 594 map of protected trees. 595 Vice Chair Greenfield preferred the diagonal design concept due to the optimized bike paths and 596 felt it was the most interesting. Vice Chair Greenfield opined the grand promenade had appeal 597 depending on the elevation and landscaping of the middle. Vice Chair Greenfield thought some 598 questions, such as being a good neighbor and balancing building and green space, were difficult 599 to answer because the designs in those areas were very similar. The structured parking location 600 appeared to take out one of the existing structures. Vice Chair Greenfield thought that 601 maintaining existing structures was environmentally beneficial and cost effective. The 602 community desired the quality and experience level of the preserved facilities to be consistent 603 with the new facilities. Vice Chair Greenfield thought the project specifics, which were the 604 focused agenda of the third community meeting, would drive public interest and wanted to 605 figure out how to leverage that within the activation process. 606 Director Kristen O’Kane hoped that the City would work with the School District to ensure the 607 best use of both sites if that scenario happened but there was currently no guarantee with the 608 fields. 609 Ms. Deml had heard similar feedback regarding a large, contiguous green space during the last 610 meeting. There was discussion around having green space in place of some buildings on the left 611 side. That feedback may alter the plans that come back, which could include buildings being 612 moved or removed to accommodate the larger green space. Ms. Deml confirmed that the 613 Nelson Drive access would remain as is. The proposed plans did not indicate a breezeway 614 because staff was not currently working with that level of detail. Underground bike paths had 615 not been discussed although there would be walkways. Staff had been working with the Friends 616 of the Wellness & Recreation Center. There was thought for a 4-court gymnasium, 2 bottom 617 courts and 2 top courts, with the possibility of doors that could open to be indoor/outdoor as 618 well as the potential for outdoor courts. Ms. Deml was unsure if the parking structure could 619 support trees. 620 Commissioner Deng thanked staff for the presentation and felt that sending the online version of 621 the community meeting was critical. 622 Chair Freeman appreciated that the 3 concept designs focused on retaining greenery and 623 reiterated that the Cubberley buildings were antiquated and the infrastructure was not up to 624 code. Chair Freeman thought highlighting those issues could help the public understand why 625 renovating would not be the best option. Chair Freeman liked the idea of scheduling more 626 events at Cubberley and proposed signage that showcased the concept designs to help people 627 visualize future plans. Chair Freeman suggested having food trucks with music and thought 628 Cubberley would be a good platform for summer programs. Chair Freeman emphasized the PRCs 629 commitment to the project. 630 Vice Chair Greenfield asked if a hybrid parking model with some underground and some above 631 ground was considered. Vice Chair Greenfield wondered what level of plan detail would be 632 completed prior to the ballot initiative. Vice Chair Greenfield encouraged staff to share the fine 633 details with the PRC and other commissions after the ballot measure passes. 634 Ms. Deml confirmed a hybrid structure was being considered and had positive feedback. A 635 hybrid structure would be more cost effective than a fully underground structure. The master 636 plan would be completed when people voted on the 2026 ballot initiative but would be more 637 detailed than what was presented this evening. After that, an architect would be hired to 638 complete more detailed plans. Ms. Deml felt the PRC would be heavily involved in future steps. 639 5. Informational Update: FY2026 Budget Summary in the Areas of Parks, Open Space, Golf, 640 and Recreation 641 Division Manager Sarah Robustelli presented on the approved FY2026 budget. Every fiscal year, 642 the City develops a budget for operating and capital improvements that support the delivery of 643 programs and services that align with Council priorities and community needs. The City Council 644 passed the proposed FY26 budget on June 16, 2025. Within the CSD budget there were 85.27 645 full-time and 53.08 hourly positions for a total of 138 positions. The proposed operating budget 646 with CSD expenditures is $43.4M and community services revenues are $15.6M. 647 A slide showed the FY26 Capital Improvement Fund expenditures by category, which totaled 648 approximately $98.1M. The largest allocation was for buildings and facilities at $36M, which 649 included recreation facilities like Lucie Stern. Parks and Open Space accounted for $12M. The CIP 650 budgets were reviewed in December and January. 651 The FY26 proposed budget reallocated staffing for more resources for summer programs at the 652 Foothills Nature Preserve and Mitchell Park with a net zero impact. That action recognized 653 higher camp revenue. The budget expanded staffing, contract, and supplies funding to improve 654 accessibility and ADA compliance in recreation programs for individuals with disabilities, which 655 was supported in part by external grant funding. A $100,000 increase in rental and reservation 656 fees was recognized due to higher fees and an uptick in rentals. 657 A series of meetings with the Finance Committee took place in May. The Finance Committee 658 recommended combining the uncertainty reserve and budget stabilization reserve, achieving 659 18.5 percent or $60M in FY27, and reducing ongoing budget deficits. Staff was given direction to 660 return on August 19, 2025, for review. Staff was working to come up with a $6M operating 661 budget savings with a minimum of $2M ongoing and $4M one-time savings. City Council will 662 review and approve in September 2025. 663 Public Comment: None. 664 Vice Chair Greenfield asked if the requested budget reductions were from the approved budget 665 and if that included the entire budget or impacted the capital budget. Vice Chair Greenfield 666 questioned if the capital budget was considered part of the operating budget. Vice Chair 667 Greenfield queried if the $2M ongoing reduction would apply to the operating budget and if the 668 capital budget reductions were in addition to the $6M. Vice Chair Greenfield asked if there were 669 numerical goals or guidance for the capital budget reduction. 670 Chair Freeman asked if the $6M reduction would impact things like parks, open space, and golf. 671 Chair Freeman questioned when the PRC would know what the cuts and impacts would be and 672 what the criteria was that would guide decisions on potential deferrals or reductions. 673 Ms. Robustelli confirmed the budget reductions applied to the approved budget and said the 674 reductions were in terms of the operating budget with potential impacts to the capital budget 675 with one-time reductions and potential deferrals. The capital and operating budgets were 676 separate. Ms. Robustelli believed the $6M was for the operating budget but deferrals for capital 677 budget reductions were being considered. Staff would know more by August 19. The impacts 678 would be citywide and the PRC would be updated if there were impacts to parks. There will be a 679 presentation on August 19 to the Finance Committee to discuss scenarios and potential impacts 680 that will go to the full Council for review in September. Some deferrals discussed with the 681 Finance Committee involved prioritizing public safety and risk mitigation over aesthetics. Ms. 682 Robustelli believed the $2M ongoing reductions applied to the operating budget and the one-683 time potential deferrals was the $4M reduction of the capital budget. 684 Commissioner Cribbs asked if the reductions would impact staff positions. 685 Commissioner Deng asked if the $6M operating budget reduction could come out of the $43M 686 expenditure and if the $98.1M was for Parks and Open Space or the overall capital for the city. 687 Ms. Robustelli did not know if the reductions would impact staff positions. The $98.1M was for 688 the overall budget. 689 Chair Freeman asked how to get the community to understand how budgeted projects might be 690 affected by the cuts. Chair Freeman felt that each department would start to think about what 691 projects within their portfolio were candidates for possible deferrals. Chair Freeman asked if any 692 information that affected the PRC would return to the Commission. 693 Ms. Robustelli explained that an approved budget was needed to give staff time to think through 694 the potential impacts and that all things would be considered. The plan is to go to the Finance 695 Committee and then to Council. The PRC would be kept updated throughout the process. 696 Director Kristen O’Kane encouraged Commissioners to watch the August Finance Committee 697 meeting and suggested viewing the previous Finance Committee and Council discussions to 698 learn more information. 699 Vice Chair Greenfield reviewed notes from last year ’s presentation and asked about the status of 700 the 445 Bryant Street Community Center. 701 Ms. O’Kane noted improvements to the space, such as replacing the HVAC system, and finalizing 702 an agreement with La Comida to use the downstairs space. La Comida would be open in the fall 703 of 2025. 704 Ms. Robustelli confirmed roughly $4M deferrals for the CIP as well as a $2M operating budget 705 reduction. 706 6. Ad Hoc Committees and Liaison Updates 707 The Nature Preserve Access Policy was on the agenda for July. Chair Freeman recognized Eric as 708 the new community gardens liaison. Plot assignments for 2025 opened on June 13. Chair 709 Freeman noted there was work to fill vacancies and reengage waitlisted gardeners across all 710 sites. The Eleanor Pardee and Johnson parks were the most popular, being 94.5 percent and 97.4 711 percent filled respectively. 712 COMMISSIONER/BOARD MEMBER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS OR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS 713 There are 4 items on the agenda for July: grassroots ecology, Park Dedication, Open Space 714 update, and the Nature Access Policy ad hoc. 715 ADJOURNMENT 716 Meeting was adjourned at 11:03 p.m. 717