Do roll call, please. >> Mickelson, >> here. >> Miller, >> yes. >> yes. >> Burns, >> yes. If you can stand and do the pledge of allegiance with us, please. >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the
republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. We will move on to item number four, the oath of office for Mr. John Mickelson. >> Thank you, Mr. M. Mickelson. If you
could please repeat after me. I, John Mickelson, >> I, John Mickelson, >> do solemnly swear >> do solemnly swear >> that I will support the Constitution of the United States >> that I will support the Constitution of the United States >> the Constitution of the State of Minnesota >> the Constitution of the State of
Minnesota >> and that I will faithfully discharge >> and I will faithfully discharge >> the duties of the office of >> duties of the office of >> the park and recreation board >> park and recreation board >> of the city of Brainard >> city of Briner. to the best of my
judgment and ability. >> to the best of my judgment and ability. >> So help me God. >> So help me God. >> Congratulations, sir. >> Welcome officially, John. >> Welcome. >> All right. Moving on to number five. We will begin with the election of the
president and vice president for 2026. We'll nominate Andrew Schite as president. I have a nomination for Andrew. Do we have a Do we need a second for that? Do we have a second for that?
>> Mr. Chair, what you normally do is open it up for any nominations and then take a vote on the nominations that you've received. Yeah, we don't do this very I would actually second that nomination for for Andrew for president.
>> Yeah. Um any other nominations? Seeing none, we'll take a vote. >> All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Oppose. Same sign. >> Andrew, congratulations. >> Thank you. >> And vice president, do you want to take
it over now or do you want me to finish the vice president? Just let's keep rolling with you to keep it. >> All right. Um, nominations. Any nominations for vice president? >> Nominate Mr. Miller as vice president.
>> A nomination for Mr. Miller as vice president. Is there a second? >> I'll second it. >> I have a nomination and a second for Mr. Miller. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Oppos. Same sign. Mr. Miller is now
vice president. Andrew, I will turn it over to you to run the rest of the meeting. >> Thank you. Uh item number six, approval. Oh, the gavvel. Oh, I forgot to use it the whole year I was president last time. Like I feel like I shouldn't yet. All right.
Uh item number six, approval of the agenda. I'm looking for I think a motion given the document we received earlier. >> Yeah. So, I'll just make a motion to um add the uh letter documentation to item
uh which one was it? 8H. Yeah, >> perfect. Thank you. >> 8H. Yeah. So, just more information um provided for item agenda item 8H. >> I would second that. >> Excellent. Any further discussion on the
agenda? >> Hearing none. All in favor say I. I >> oppose. Same sign. We have an agenda. Item number seven, the consent calendar notice to the public. All matters listed are considered routine by the board and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these
items unless good cause is shown prior to the time the board votes on the motion to be adopted by roll call. >> I will make a motion to approve the consent calendar. >> I will second that. >> All right. Any discussion on the consent calendar?
Hearing none. Uh, please call the role. >> Mickelson >> here. >> Miller, >> yes. >> Stripe, >> yes. >> Burns, >> yes. >> All right, that is approved. We'll move
on to item 8A. Um, I'm going to start. So, no, James, you have to leave at 4:30. So, I think uh what maybe makes sense is kind of flip-flopping what we usually do. Have any board questions for James
first and then we do a public forum just to make the best use of James time. Does that kind of make sense to everybody? All right. Um Jesse or James, do you want to kind of open it up and then we can ask questions and then public forum?
>> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh so the Brainard H approached the park board previously regarding the potential development of uh Gustoson Park with uh different types of residential housing uh as a potential uh this was also discussed before
council and then there has been uh a couple meetings where there has been public forum testimony before uh the city council regarding this item. Uh so at this time staff is bringing this item to the park board to receive feedback and a recommendation that we would
further uh bring as a recommendation to the city council and then James can expound a little bit on the uh the planning and zoning side. >> Yes, thank you Mr. Chair. Um so on the development side of things just to give a brief summary of what is potential for
the property. Um you'll see there was a memo that was attached to the agenda item. Max, if you want to pull that up or scroll down. Here we go. So, there's a map that uh staff kind of preliminarily provided here. Um there's potential probably between six and seven lots. Um the
larger lots to the west would be potentially duplexes as pictured right there. You'd probably have four single family lots to the east. Um perhaps it would be um six larger lots for for all duplexes or three duplexes and four single family homes. Uh so we have uh
certainly seen um developers show an interest in infill lots especially ones that are readily developable in the city of Brainard flat um easily um accessible infrastructure which this property is. Um so uh typical typical lots within the city of Brainard kind of depending on
size um typically sell for around 15 to to 30,000. Um certainly we'd have to look at replatting this property which we've already received a quote for. Um so that would kind of be some initial cost for the city to do that. Um then we'd be looking to develop the lots kind of individually instead of going with
just one developer potentially for the property. Um that'd probably be the fastest way to to get construction underway potentially for for housing development. Um staff did attach in the memo um the uh Crowing County Workforce Housing Study. Um it really talked about
uh the amount of houses that are needed within Crowing County and Brainard. Um certainly we have a a shortage right now. Um and that shortage can um not only impact uh citizens that are here, but businesses that are looking to expand or bring in people um to the city
if they don't have places to live, can certainly impact the the economic vitality of a business. Um so this was uh again brought uh initially to the park board just for some consideration and initial comments and um city council will be looking for a formal recommendation um from the park board on
this one. We bring this to the February 2nd city council meeting um for their final consideration. With that I can answer any other questions development wise. I know we also included some information on um programming that's that's currently held at the park and and where that programming could
potentially go um if this park were to be developed. So with that, we'll turn it back to the park board. >> Thank you. James, any questions for James? >> I don't I don't have any questions. You had everything laid out nice way in that memo. I appreciate that and all the
information. >> Perfect. All right. Um I think let's do a public forum then. Um a couple notes. um ask you to keep your responses three to five minutes. Um and then just a note before we start um because I'm a charter
nerd and don't expect everyone to read the city charter. Um so the park board only has authority over land that has been designated as a park. Um so Gustoson Park is not currently designated as a park. On March 6, 2023, the council voted not to designate
Gustoson along with a couple other parks as parks. Um, and so that has kind of been the nexus of all of this. Um, so just with that background, I wanted to share that before you get started and and kind of limit what we're able to do. Um, but if you want to step up and say
your name, your address, uh, we'd love to hear your feedback. >> Logan, 824 N Streettheast. Um, so I bought the house a couple years ago. there. I bought it primarily because the park was right there. I looked at a lot
of other homes that were right in the middle of town near the way to see that as an asset. I see open landd whatever
the quality of the neighborhood single family neighborhood That seems wrong to me. I don't believe we are a duplex or neighborhood. Like I said, that's the case.
So, it comes down to budgeting. I know I've spoken at city about this budget. I'll do it on my own. Thank you. And my husband grew up in Northeast, not
far from there. He spent a big chunk of his childhood at that playing with his friends and now we do the same with our family. These are four of our five kids speak today just to what the park means
to them regularly for soccer and then the other recogize you know, there are housing shortages all over the place. I really encourage
us to sort of like break out of the boxes. I know you don't necessarily make the decision of like how the city ordinances go as far as like how can I, you know, we have a dog and we walk in
there and then there are also lots or adult child or you know or a little bit of rental income. I mean there there are lots of ways that we can think about different
maintains we also had a community been talking about what would that look like together. So again, thank you
Oh, >> yeah. >> There we go. Okay. >> Now, is it >> Oh, >> okay. Lydia Camping 1324 8th Avenue. Um I remember playing a lot of games over there like football, frisbee, and um one
of the times when I was throwing the football, there was like this I don't even remember what it's called, but I like threw it like kind of like threw it. And I was like really really surprised that I could do that because my hand sometimes cannot be that strong.
So, I just threw it, went over. There's no way that I could run as fast as Dash. If you've seen The Incredibles, there's no way I can run as fast as him and just catch it. So, it was like really, really fun playing a lot of games with my family. And that that field can be an
open space, but I don't think it should be for houses. I think it just for I think it should just be for like people that want to like play over there and spend time with their family. Maybe like even have like a picnic on like a really nice sunny day. So, we should just keep
that space like an empty park so people can like enjoy like fun, have memories with their family and all that. Thank you. >> Thank you. Anyone else? >> If I had comments about it, would you like me to step up to the podium or
should I stay up here on the day? >> Go ahead and share. >> Okay. Yeah. So I uh I lived in 824 uh and street for the majority of my childhood. We spoke about this I I think even during our master planning and so for me like as a kid um with two
brothers and then the rest of the family as well that open space was super important to us in the neighborhood and I completely agree with Logan on a lot of these things like I can't I can't support taking away green space like this especially when you look across the system we only have two places like this
um really I mean we have O'Brien Park which is completely empty now and Gustoson which is just back stops and grass So, and you're looking at the master planning as well. You know, we've did a lot of work on this and I think I think it really suits the neighborhood well. I mean, I understand that it's
changed the dynamics changed certainly when I was a kid, you know, when you go go back 28 years. Um, but like this is such a like essential part for one of the more denser areas in the entire city. And you know, especially
housing wise, everything's so tightly packed and there are a lot of kids and a lot of families in that area. And I think green space is the most important thing. Like I get it. We've got Memorial. We've got lum in the direction. We had this conversation before. We've got the school playground nearby. But truly, I don't think that
the city has can offer something this good. um even with four to six homes like that it's just again I'm sentimental certainly because I spent five or six years straight just doing nothing and grasp but I mean this is this is a part of like the philosophy
here where you know this is this is exactly what we want our park system to be and I I'm with them there's a lot of vacancies in homes in that neighborhood there are a lot of vacancies across the city of Brainard and there are a lot of homes that could use a lot of fixing up
in this town. So, I think yeah, you know, when you're looking at square footage available per person that needs to live in this town, we probably could do a little bit better, but I I just don't think this is the answer. And the upkeep's low and the opportunity cost of losing it way too high. But again,
sentimental in that sense, but I'm I'm with these folks on it. I don't want to give it up. So, >> thank you. Uh John JD, any thoughts? Um my thoughts are going to differ from everyone. Uh we need houses. That's
everything that we hear multiple times a year. Um when you look at the overall scheme of our park system, this is the only park that it makes sense at. And I say park with a asterisk since it's not technically dedicated as parkland. Um,
yes, there's houses for sale. There's opportunities, but that also comes with increased cost, which rises the price of those houses. Um, we have two of our crown jewel parks in this neighborhood. That's the only reason I would consider any park would
be this one. Um, there, if you look at our 30-year capital plan and our master planning, we have no plans for this park to develop it. Um there's there's opportunity and there's not much room to grow in the city. So it's a decision of
do we like what we have in the city right now or do we want to grow. Um there's an opportunity to put more houses on the tax base and decrease our costs albeit small but every penny helps. >> Thank you. Go ahead John.
Uh being brand new to the park board, uh the reason I initially uh I live on South 8th here where there's big sev down the sliding hill and I grew up across the street from where I'm living. So I was there out of the area for about
10 years and I've been in the my home for 30 years. Uh Big Sev was when I was a kid there were a million kids sliding. Now it seems less but still. So, I understand because we go out in our porch in our backyard and we've got
green. I mean, it's beautiful. The birds and all that kind of stuff going around. Um, so I understand, you know, Bane Park sounded like a long ways away. It isn't, you know, and especially kids on bikes and stuff, but uh we did we did do a lot
of stuff in this vacant open, you know, at most of the year just sitting there. people do go and walk their dogs and you see kids playing down there and stuff that uh it's fun. I didn't know uh I hadn't got up to speed on that this
isn't officially park that it's the way the city chose to u what you say 2023 is it that that they made that decision. Um and
um knowing how housing is when you mentioned about a lot of properties that that it I I love it seeing driving around any part of town where it's a house that's like mine 65 years old and
people have done stuff and then there's 120 year old homes and a lot of that going on. I think that's wonderful. It's nice to see. I drove through Southeast Brainard the other day and it was like, "Wow, you know, I hadn't seen that home the way it looks." So, uh, empathizing
with the children and understanding, uh, but being new to this and this is great to get input and learn about it. Uh, I look forward to being a part of this opinion. I can understand what you're saying about green space and all that.
So, I'm just here learning. uh uh brand new, but uh it's neat to see you coming forward and being being here to uh support your your point on it. So, um I thank you for coming here and uh I'll do
my best to make a when it's time to to vote on what what will be with this land. >> Thank you. Uh just a couple thoughts from me. Um,
living in Northeast, we took our dog to this park a lot, loved it. It was right, there's not a lot of sidewalks and so having a green area we could go was really nice. Um, you're not looking for cars behind you all the time, right? You're walking your dog. You feel the same way. Um, so I've enjoyed having the
park there. Um just one thing something you had mentioned JD um when we were doing a master planning we kind of intentionally didn't do anything for this park because it wasn't a park. So we said we're not going to spend time doing a master plan if it's not ours to plan. Um so it's a little chicken and
egg, right? Like you know if we had a master plan it'd be easier to say here's the vision. But we didn't do that because it wasn't wasn't designated at the time. Uh, I guess kind of where I'm at is that as the park board, I like having parks.
Um, but it is not our decision to make. So, you know, if we ask the council one way or the other, it's still up to the council what they they decide. So, I think we should endeavor to make a recommendation today, but ultimately it
goes back to the city council, both Kelly Bevvenson as the president 2023 and all the folks that voted for it. and then the council today um it can decide something else. So that's where I'm at. Dave, do you have any
>> Yeah, I just want you guys to make a decision. So because and I know that that that's a tough one to make, but I think from John, I think you asked me like why is this coming to you guys? It's procedural, right? The ultimate decision doesn't matter what you got, you've
learned that before. Doesn't matter. It doesn't matter what you what you decide. uh because you don't have that authority. However, it does send a message to them. So, whatever that message is, if it's split, if it's we we want to continue to have this be or even
to ask for it to be park um or dedicated as a park or to say, you know, continue forward. I think now is your opportunity to say what do you want to say and then that will go to the council. The council will ultimately make their decision. But the reason it's here is because we need
your input on How does the park board feel? The park board says we've made a motion to say we'd like to see this continue to be park. That's going to weigh in towards the the council's decision. So, whatever it is, I would like you guys to make some kind of
motion towards putting words back to the council so they can move forward. >> Knowing that, would anyone like to propose a motion? Yeah, I'll make a motion to uh make the recommendation to retain this um or at least uh delegate this as park land and uh nyx the
development of housing on this plot. I will second that. Uh any discussion? >> I back to my point. I mean it it comes down budgeting. I know you said we didn't put anything in the master plan,
but again budgeting wise, we have also taken a stance that we're not going to develop anything further. I I go back to my same thing. This is the only park that makes sense. And while adjoining neighbors may lose something right along their property,
the neighborhood as a whole is not losing anything um in the grand scheme of things. when you look at where parks are placed around our city, >> I would just say with your nomination on it that
um not now not with the wording of Nick's the the building project, I see that as the city council needing to decide to bring it toward them and you know, you guys did this before and do you want
that to continue in that and and then go from there. Obviously, then we're not responsible for it. But I think it's ultimately their decision. If they if we bring it in, say, "Hey, do you want this park or do you want this the way it is
today?" You know, or or I guess if they'd make the decision to to sell it and make developments, that's their decision. If they make it officially a park, then we have issues to deal with. You know, I can't imagine sort of like
in big seven in my backyard. There's nothing really to put there. I thought it was great when way back, I don't know how many years back it was that the mayor was there sliding down the hill and took out some of the trees and stuff. Uh and I I'm glad I don't think
there's any way it could ever be sold and developed the way the the land is there. But uh I think the city council needs to make a decision on on what's the status of this and if they choose to say it's part then we go from there.
>> Yeah. And I and I think that's what the motion just says like we're looking for a general sentiment here. So um you know so the motion is to give the general sentiment to the council that we'd like to retain it as a park and not have it be developed. But again that's we'll we'll move to a vote after after comment. So, and then, you know, again,
council is going to decide whether or not our even if the majority of the sentiment is that we'd like to retain it or have it be delegated as parkland and not developed, they can still of course go against us. But we'll uh you know, again, we'll move either one way or the other or, you know, the vote will be
whatever it is, but we're just trying to make a recommendation based on majority sentiment. So, I think, you know, again, um even if we're split, you know, it doesn't doesn't really give that much information to the council. But, you know, again, ultimately they're just looking for you guys spend the most amount of time on on these types of
things. And we did spend time back in 2023 discussing this park specifically and the other ones that were in that particular uh layout. So, you know, again, we're just looking for recommendation. And so, again, back to me, you just you can't replace land like
this. So, um again, and I the community is starting to grow back over there. I mean again we went 10 years after the after the paper mill closed and you know again it was became desolate you know like there was nothing going on except for the parks there. So I mean it's it
was all the neighborhood had at that time. So and I think it still retains that but a lot of the businesses are starting to return. Closure of choppers and all those other things like that that side of town's back at it. So the more the more we have for folks and
development over there the better. So, >> yeah, I think all I have to add is I I appreciate the green space. I think right this is the cheapest possible park basically for us to have, right? If you take out the fences, I guess, but you
know, fences are >> Yeah, the fences weren't even there when I was a kid. So, there were no back stops or signage to know that that it was actually public land back then either. So, we were we weren't sure if we were trampling on somebody's private property. So, but yeah. >> Um, but like in terms of our maintenance
costs, it it is material, but compared to Lyman P. White, right, it's 2% of that. So, if there's significant community input that they love this space, um, I'm not in a position to say we should get rid of it. So, that's why I will be
supporting your supporting the motion. No, significant community input is 1% of the community. >> I just I just want to say what significant is >> of the people we've heard from. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> And again, it just it I think to me it
it ends up being the power of actually people taking initiative and putting together petitions like like we have here and and voicing their opinion, which a lot of that a lot of that stuff goes unnoticed. and a lot of the motions and initiatives that we take as not just
a board but as a city government. And so for anybody to step forward in general, I mean it was the same when we quashed the pickle ball courts, right? We had public outcry and we bent to about 20 people on a specific amenity inside of
our park system. So, if you know 115 people from the neighborhood think that this that getting rid of this space is wrong, um I'm more prone to believe that uh the neighborhood is is more more justified. Um specifically because they
live in that neighborhood or is I mean we we turned down the pickleball thing uh from a bunch of Baxter residents that came and voiced their opinion about our tennis courts. So I this is one of those things where neighborhood residents have have voiced their opinion strongly in
one direction and uh I tough to ignore. Again I have sentimental value here. I mean I'm very much biased on uh on keeping this green space because I've enjoyed it. But I I just I think this when we talk about a majority I this is this is significant in in terms of
public public opinion in in my opinion. So, um, yeah, I do think this is a in in essence a majority because you're not going to have a lot of folks speak out um in one direction or another on most initiatives and this is this is a big
one. So, >> can I ask one question of staff James refresh my memory? Have we had anybody say that they are in supportive of housing? Has has everything been in opposition >> from the public? Um,
>> yeah. So, I I have not received a call um in support of housing from the public. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Um I'm not sure procedurally. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I personally I think we're ready for a
vote. Yeah, I think all of us know where we're voting. >> Yep. >> Appreciate that. You'd like to make additional comments, but yeah, I think procedurally we probably just have to move on to a vote here. So, >> yes. Um, to keep it easy, let's Could we do a roll call? Lisa. >> Mickelson
>> here. >> Yes or no? >> Yes. >> Miller, >> yes. >> Shipe, >> yes. >> Burns, >> no. >> Passes three to one. Uh, with that we will move on to Oh,
also thank you everyone for attending. >> Yeah, for attending. I appreciate it. >> We love public feedback. As you could probably guess, not a ton of feedback at parkboard meetings, so we love we love input. Um, with that, we'll move to item 8B, discussion on the BPU main lift station
exterior facade, which I believe is Paul. >> Yes. Thank you, uh, Mr. President and members of the board. So, um, as a courtesy to the park board, I wanted to, uh, bring the park board into some discussion related to a project that the
utility is currently, um, underway in design. Um, we have a contract with Widsth and HR Green to complete, uh, final design for a replacement of the city's main lift station, which is located between Rotary Riverside Park and, uh, Kowanas Park along East River
Road. Uh final design and plans are currently being prepared with the reconstruction of the main lift station tenatively scheduled for 2027. Just as a note, the final plans need to be submitted to the MPCA by March 2026 for certification.
We held the kickoff meeting for that design contract back in December. um staff and the consultant team um reviewed the contract schedule deliverables and discussed some preliminary concepts related to the exterior facade of the building and the
site layout. Um and as a courtesy we uh decided to get some renderings or a rendering generated which um being WDSH is a part of our design team they were um the creators of the park board's design standards um and so you'll see in
the in the rendering that's attached um the form and finish of the lift station building matches what the park board I think has um decided upon for a standard moving forward. Um really what I'm looking for tonight is, you know, the
the the building um where it'll be and where it uh fits in the site and the operational characteristics of that building um are in design right now. And that's really not um a discussion point for the park board to consider, but I think we're looking for any general feedback or comments as to the exterior
facade of the building. Um based on where the budget's coming back, you know, we're going to try to incorporate as much of the park board design standards as we can in this building. Um, but you know, obviously with the operational characteristics of the main lift station being the primary goal of
this project, we want to make sure that the operations, reliability, and operations are are first and foremost, but we want to consider any feedback the park board has related to the exterior facade of this building. Um, as a general note, so there there's two
current buildings on that site. One is the pre-treatment building uh that the wastewater enters into and goes through some screening before it enters the main lift. The pre-treatment building is not under consideration for um any improvements to the interior of that building. However, we did have some
budgeted money in 2026 to replace some uh equipment in the main lift station, which we're currently in discussions about moving that a little bit and uh reallocating that to do some exterior improvements to the the other building on that site. um and so that it matches
uh what we're doing here with the new structure, the cold storage building that's currently on that site, that will be demolished. And so there will be three buildings get turned into two and we're working with our consulting team on um getting some exterior improvements to the one existing building that will
remain. Um and so uh you guys have this in front of you. Again, don't get focused in on the layout or the building footprint or the size because that's all operational nature. I'm just really curious about any feedback you guys have on the facade of the building. Um, we
haven't quite gotten down to the nitty-gritty yet about if this is going to be like a CMU modular block building. We kind of showed you both options, right? The building might be all of the uh the Hardy board cement sighting or it might be more of the modular block. It
really depends on the use um of that building, the insulation requirements, and how we heat and cool this thing. So, uh, focus in on the exterior elements of this and provide any feedback and I'll take that back to, uh, take that back to, uh, the design team to make sure we
include that. >> Questions for Paul? >> I I just appreciate the the do the two-sided rendering, so the potential uh, you know, but again, I appreciate also that you uh, taking the time to just look over the the design standards.
So I think both options will fit uh at the very least um you know uh aesthetically. So thank you. >> That was my thought exactly that you use the design standards and that makes that really easy and that design actually does kind of fit into a typical park
design. I think just kind of how it's laid out. You know if it does end up being like that it it looks like it fits in a park. Uh, my only thought is whatever. I didn't know about the mix between the stone and the the Hardy board. So, my
thought was whatever's cheaper. I >> They're both in the standard. So, I don't care. >> That's might what it come down to, but really it's the interior finishes and the insulation need. Um, there's a wet well side of this building and then there's um the MCC side, which is mechanical equipment and the electrical
side. Um, and so that'll all get kind of flushed out once we know the occupancy and what this building needs to serve from a heating and cooling standpoint. >> It looks beautiful. >> Thank you. >> No formal uh action needed, just any
comments you guys have. >> Yeah, thank you for bringing this poll and for just following the standards. I think love when it makes everybody's lives easier. >> Perfect. Um I believe you're also 8C then Paul the
>> Yeah. So this is a similar discussion point. So um our current water treatment plant is located kind of in the same location as um this uh main lift station. Um we are in the process we got um uh a special appropriation from the
legislature back in 2023 to construct a water reclaim tank. Um, I'll nerd out a little bit on this and just uh hear me out here, but a reclaimed tank, you know, we have a large amount of water that we use to backwash our filters at our water treatment plant, which you
know, typically the water will filter through one direction. We go through and we backwash that water. Right now, that water, it gets wasted into the seepage basin in Rotary Park. Um, this reclaimed tank will allow us to reuse that processed water. So, it goes into a tank, it decants, it settles all the
solids to the bottom, and we can reuse that water, run it through the treatment process, so we have um less water loss. A water loss for us means that we're not getting it through our system and collecting rates on the water. And so, this reclaimed tank is a operational
efficiency at our water treatment plant um that we got a special appropriation for. The original project we went through a design a typical design bid build process where we had an engineer design the plans um go out to bids for it. The bids came back substantially
higher than what we had originally anticipated. Um and the project had more scope in it to begin with. It was both um a backwash and a reclaim portion. Um we've since that time we've con uh changed our uh project approach to go to
a construction manager at risk design approach which means we hire a contractor and an engineer to work collaboratively to value engineer this project down to meet our budget goals. And so through that process we've had a
couple what we call cost review meetings where we go and just start hacking the plans apart. We redline them. were crossing stuff off that, you know, were maybe wants and not necessarily needs. Um, right. And we we really were trying to focus on the operational needs at that facility. One of the items that
came before us that was a highcost item was the exterior um uh rockfaced uh facade that is currently on the buildings that would be right next door to this building and the new clear wells that we built in 2019.
Um, this is more of an FYI to the park board that we're going to do everything we can to include that rockface facade. We're currently working through pricing review meetings to continue to try to value engineer this thing to get what we need
from an operation standpoint and also have the buildings look similarly um to the other ones on that site. Um, but if it comes down to um, you know, a couple hundred thousand dollars or so, that's going to be the first thing that gets
cut is that exterior brick face. Um, and so once again, it's more of a FYI to the park board. Um, we're going to try the best we can to get that included in our bid package. um and part of our guaranteed maximum price. But if it comes down to the operational needs for
that specific tank um compared to the exterior uh look and feel, the operational needs are going to win that battle. Um I feel from the commission and from staff standpoint. Is there any comments related I mean is
or it's more of an FYI for you all so that when we're building the building and that's not included that you know it doesn't uh turn into a spectacle I guess at that point. But um just wanted to bring you up to speed on how this process has worked and why we're going this route to try to get our our
budgeted amount is 5.6 million. So we got to cut about $4 million out of a >> of a million project. I don't think Rock Vicade is going to do the 4 million. >> We're we're we're down to about five right now, 5.1. Um we've made a lot of changes and a lot of value engineering
things to get us to a point. We've made a lot of concessions. Um we're going to continue to look at it and the brick facade is about 65 to 66,000 for three sides. Um and so we're hoping we can fit it in the project scope just to it. It
benefits us to make it look the same, too, because we want to use these facilities for long into the future. >> Any questions for Paul? >> No. >> Uh, I have a couple like five years from now if you had
$65,000. Well, 85 with inflation. Could you put on the facade later? >> No. So, it has to be Okay. >> Yeah. It's a form liner. And so basically they they form their walls and they pour all the concrete and then the concrete just fills into the voids >> and makes it look like a rock face finish.
>> Oh, that's slick. >> Yeah. So, >> uh it's a kind of all-in-one. You either do it now or I mean there's opportunities to do more of a there's a couple other options on there like a uh a cement hardy board sighting and things, but those are substantially more expensive.
>> Cool. Um, and then this construction manager risk process. I feel like we've had projects as a park board that this would have been amazing for. Is this specific to like this sort
of infrastructure work or >> um it's getting more into what we actually just had this conversation with a couple of contractors that Tim Holmes has been working with um here for the new fire department uh remodel or uh refurbishing. Um it hasn't really taken
off yet. It's it's more on the water industry, the wastewater and water side right now because it's an efficient delivery method because usually there's a set budget and we're trying to value engineer and you know make the really hard distinction of what the needs of the facility are and what what what
would be nice but it's not necessarily a need and bringing in a contractor early into those discussions really helps. Um it is recently legislatively authorized for cities to use this method. It's a lot like um you'll hear a lot about the Gordian method, which is uh something
that Sourcewell um has um taken on with Gordian um to kind of maneuver around the competitive bidding process by bringing contractors on early. This is a very similar methodology. Um there's a lot of things you have to do to be able to meet competitive bid law. uh still
>> um but it is a valuable tool that we use on the utility side and even um more contractors are getting used to it um like the high-techs and the norons of the world that use this delivery method because it brings the owner, the
architect and the um the contractor into the same room and design the plans together and always have cost review meetings and and ensuring that the budget's being met, the owner's getting what they need and the the contractor
knows the plans inside and out because they've been a part of the development process. So, it is a delivery method. It's it's becoming more of a thing. Um I think the water industry has been kind of leading the charge on that. >> Cool. I just looking back at like Lyman P. White. I mean Jesse had to come to us
probably three meetings in a row about like amphitheater seat or step lights. It's like if we could have just figured that out before in the design process and said >> here's a cheaper option or a more reliable option we could have saved some heartache or right they made like 85
pores or something and that was yeah so just >> we've we've found the process really valuable um we have Rice Lake Construction Group as our Seamar they're a very well-known industry contractor in the water world um and uh just having them in the same room um actively real
time pricing things out for us What about this idea? Oh, that'll cost you that'll be a deduct of 50,000 on our price. That real-time feedback is so valuable. >> Yeah, it's awesome. Cool. Thank you. Sorry, not super related. I was just that was the most interesting part to me
because it's that's a tank of water, you know. Uh, cool. Any other This is just FYI, so I think we need a motion. Uh, let's move on to 8D, which I think is still you, Paul, with the engineering and the service. >> Yeah, this is the last one for me today.
Um so this has been in front of the city council. Um they uh allowed us to staff to bring this forward to both the public utilities commission and the park board as this type of process would impact both what the parkboard is doing and what the public utilities commission is doing. What staff um have been talking
about and what this uh RFP represents is a way to streamline the way we hire out uh professional services, architecture and engineering services. And so during a typical process um that Jesse or I or
uh whomever would do, we would solicit an RFP for design services, whether for a park project, a water reclaim tank, whatever it might be. And then you solicit that to firms and then you go through a big long scoring process about qualifications, who's on your project team, what's your budget, how many hours
do you have, all of that during one process. What this what we're proposing here would be to get all of the qualifications uh scoring out of the way and more or less setting up a consultant pool that
um we have qualifications based uh scoring project team scoring project experience and what kind of projects that they've done that all that scoring gets done on the front end. We set up a consultant pool where we have 15 categories laid out in this RFP for
basically any public works function that we might run into as a board, as a commission. Um, and it gets all of the once the pool is set up as a board or as staff, we simply go to these consultants within that pool category to say it's parks master planning. We have three
consultants in that pool category. We can either solicit a mini RFP which is a much simpler quick process where we just lay out scope and they just give us the fee and then we're basically at the point where we can take it on a 100% cost basis um rather than scoring out
qualifications. We already know that the consultant has done this type of work before. We know who your project team is. We know your previous project experience. We've checked your references. Everything checks out. There's a reason why you're in that pool category. We're really just looking at ways to streamline um our uh procurement
process when it comes to professional services. Um it also kind of turns the tables a little bit on the consultant world. Right now when we approve a consultant contract, we typically have the consultants prepare their professional services agreement that that gets sent to city staff. We have
city attorney review it. We provide comments back to the consultant and then we come to an agreement on the contract terms. Um this process would be you're in the pool, we awarded you work, you have a master services agreement that is prepared by the city, given to the
consultant. If you want to be a part of the pool, you have to have a master services agreement that we've prepared. And then from that point, these task orders that come up are quick, simple. They reference the master services. All the terms and conditions of the contract
are already agreed upon. Um and so it's just a streamline in the whole procurement process when it comes to professional services without um losing the competitiveness um that a typical RFP process would have.
Um like I said, this this went before the city council um at their second meeting in January. Um it went to PUC this morning. They approved it. We're looking for park board concurrence on this solicitation. This would go back to the city council um at their February
2nd meeting and then we would let the RFP out and then we would be back in front of you with a recommendation for the pool. Um I think there's a couple of categories that probably impact the park board. I think the park design st or uh park master planning, architectural
services, that kind of stuff or even construction observation services. Those are the things that you guys might want to use this pool for. Um and we would have it all set up. It's a two-year pool term. So, consultants would be getting into the pool. There'd be a two-year term. We originally set it out at a
five-year term. The council said we should back that off a little bit to allow after two years another consultant to get into the pool if they want to or it gives us the opportunity to say you did not perform on a couple of contracts. We're going to kick you out of that pool category. And then also
setting that contract limit for utilization of the pool at $500,000 for professional services. So, anything over 500,000 we would be going out to a full RFP. Anything below that, we would be going to the pool and soliciting services that way.
Any questions from the board? >> I like anything that streamlines that process. >> Yeah. >> And speeds it up. And I feel like you two would probably both really appreciate it as well >> as you're both shaking your head. Yes. Anything
from John's? >> I have emotional. >> All right. Oh, no. J squ. >> Oh, J squ. That's better, huh? >> Oh, no. >> I find that very impressive the whole process. It's nice to see being brand
new to this, but seeing government do things in a very smart way. And actually, you know, consultants are very um they like this methodology because they see the value benefit when they're doing these large RFPs and they're designing them and doing a put in a lot of front-end work. It saves them time
and money, which inevitably rolls down into the rates they charge us um for actual project work because they have a lot of overhead that goes into these designed proposals when we request them. >> I just got one question for you. Um, I
think historically as a board we've struggled with estimating upcoming capital projects. Would this pool maybe give us a resource to say, "Hey, this pavilion's about to fall down. Could you give us a back of the napkin number?" >> I think it certainly could. you know, um
there's ways that you could address like a sometimes we enter into like an on call services contract where, you know, you have a kind of an open-ended, you know, maybe you put $5,000 into a a deal for estimating services from like an architecture firm like Wid Seth or someone like that where
>> Yeah. >> they would be on call if the if the the board has an upcoming capital project, you would go to that on call contract and say, "Wit Seth, we need some real quick numbers on what it would take to refurbish this building to the design standards. can you give us that quick estimate to help us out in our
budgeting? Then they would just do their work, maybe a couple hours of professional services that would get charged against that on call contract. >> Cool. >> Um, so I mean, that's a way you could address that. Do you necessarily want to put a a limit on that contract, but that's certainly something the parkour could consider.
>> That would be amazing. Cool. Uh, do you have any >> got a motion? Go for it. I would make a motion to approve the attached solicitation for LOIS SOQS to set up the multi-awward on call consultant pool and solicit proposals from interested firms pursuant to the schedule within the
document. Thank you Paul for writing that out for me. >> You're welcome. >> I'll second it. >> Perfect. Any further discussion hearing? None. All in favor say I. I >> oppose same sign. That is approved.
Uh move on to 8E approval of the Lakes Area Youth Soccer Association agreement. Jesse or >> Thank Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh so before you have an agreement between the youth soccer association in the city, um staff has put this together with both city
attorney review as well as uh youth soccer review. Uh so at this time we are looking for park board approval of the attached agreement and we can answer questions. Yeah, the the soccer association has definitely seen this, right?
>> That's my very good >> what I heard before the soccer association was ready to sign. >> Very good. I just Yeah. Um and I think the only thing hangup maybe not even necessarily hang up. I just would like any sort of end of season sort of like
recap uh or anything like that. So when when uh when this ends before we sign her again um just have a conversation what went well any struggles that they might have had if you know if we had any staffing costs that were kind of acred
by um the association's use of this. I mean just kind of you know I think kind of our general policy on a lot of this stuff like how did it end, what did it cost, who ate those costs, those types of deals and then feedback from the association as well. um if they want to come and speak, I'd be more than happy
to to listen. Um just, you know, to continue to to grow partnerships like this in the future. So, >> a fall recap. >> Yeah. >> Or whenever is appropriate for them. I mean, they want to kick the ball in the snow, we're good. I mean, whatever. But,
uh whenever Yeah. Yeah. It doesn't sound great, but um you know I just whatever sort of recaps and you know again it gives us more information when we enter uh agreements with other associations or other sports things um or other events
um what we can look for and and best practices we can continue to improve on as we as we grow from uh learning from these experiences. So I'd appreciate that. I'll make a motion to approve this um
document agreement with Lisa. >> I'll second Jesse. >> Mr. Chair, if I can ask for clarification on the motion. Is the motion to include another provision requiring uh the youth soccer to provide a report at the end of the season or is
that more of a recommendation that you'd like to see you'd like to see the association come together? We've typically only required reports for the ones that we financially participate in like community ed and YMCA. Um but that's something that if you want us to include with the language otherwise we
can just recommend it. >> Uh I think you know I think the way that the the skills and the residents work that's kind of an individual thing you know and we kind of hear that as a byproduct. So I think in this particular instance it can probably just be a staff
report you know not necessarily something formal. And again, if Lisa wants to come in and speak to that success, I'd happy be happy to have them on the agenda or any association. Same with uh Corey, you know. Um I think that's kind of the the direction I'd like to take. Nothing formal.
>> Oh, Dave. Yeah. >> Yeah. Just to speak to that, I I think it's good to have in here that they need to work with staff at the end of the year. You know, it doesn't necessarily need to be a report report. you know, they don't need to come in and do a presentation, but having in there that at the end of every season that they
have a sit down with staff, I think that's just good business for us. >> Yeah. I don't necessarily, like I said, I don't necessarily think it's a a requirement. Um, but I would like to see it. You know, again, that's just kind of a relationship thing for us with the
with members of the community. So, you know, like I said, we we're present at some of these LON gatherings and um you know, if Lisa wants to they have an end of year thing, they want to invite some of us to and we get a a recap or whatever it might be, a phone call, sit down, whatever, but I I don't think it
necessarily needs to be formal. I mean, your your guys's opinion on that valid, too, but I don't necessarily think I need a formal like come in and tell us what your you know, like how many times you guys kick the ball around side of deal. But um yeah, I think just best practice for for agreements like this is
maybe just an end of year or end of season recap, you know, but nothing formal. >> Totally agree. Uh any more discussion hearing? None. Um all in favor say I. >> I. I.
>> Same sign. That is approved. Uh item 8F, approval of the Brainer Baxter Baseball Association Agreement. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, similar, uh, we have another agreement before you. This one's more of a renewal of a kind of a multi-year, uh, relationship with
BBBA. Uh, so staff is looking to have that agreement renewed. Uh, we've had this agreement reviewed with both the attorney and BBBA. Uh, so we're looking for parkboard approval of the agreement as you have before you. >> I'll make a motion to approve this agreement as well.
>> Second. Any discussion? They were a great partner last year. >> Yeah, I'll say the same. And I forgot to say that about LSA, but I appreciate them coming together as a partner and um appreciate them and BBBVA for can't say
that um for for being a good partner in and growing our program. So, uh with that all in favor say I. >> I post same sign that is approved. Uh 8G um ice skating party food sponsorship.
Kayla, >> well I can introduce this one for you. >> Sure. >> Yeah. Um so we were approached by Rosalinis in regard to a proposed uh partnership in regard to the upcoming skating party. Um they've asked for
waiver of park fees for a couple upcoming events that they'd like to do. Um staff has laid out a few different options in the uh park board packet. Um finance did uh respond with some concern about the ability to kind of exchange
services or goods um for those fees. Um, so I have a quick tweak to the recommendation um in regard to what's in the packet is just uh if you are interested in doing the uh co um co-sponsorship that it would be uh
contingent on that it is a something that we can legally do um and if not uh we can utilize special event dollars if you direct us to do so. With that, um, I can hand it over to Kayla to highlight any other details.
>> So, I think you basic basically covered everything on that. Um, just the reservation fee for the two future Rosalinis events would be for the trunk or treat and Easter egg hunt at Memorial Park.
Any thoughts, questions for staff? I >> not necessarily for staff, but I mean I think thoughts on this is that again kind of a great partner for events. These they're not I mean you know they are a business like promoting business
and some of these events. But, you know, Curtis and the team did a great job on the trunk or treat last year and and that's like a neighborhood and community event um inside of the park. And so I I uh it feels like an ink kind like a you
know this for that. And um I mean I'm not necessarily opposed because there is a monetary value attached to the pizzas if we can make it work. I mean they've been a great partner in the concession stand as well. So, as far as this, as far as I'm concerned, they've been a great partner. And so, if we can find a
way to make this work and have those fees waved and allow their great events to continue, um I I think I would like to move forward and and make sure our partners are taken care of. So, >> if you're ready for a motion, I think I have a wording for it. Sure. I would
make a motion to approve the co-sponsorship agreement with Rosalenies and if as long as legalitywise we are able to do that. If we are not able to do that legalitywise, I make a motion that we take that money out of the special event funds to purchase a pizza
outright. The event is close. So I we just need to make that decision. Sure. >> Uh yeah, I'll second that motion. Any discussion? U all I would add is if we're not able
to do this, I think I would like to maybe get feedback from Joe or whoever about what maybe in the future we could do when someone wants to do an ink kind thing. I appreciate Kayla you building these relationships in the community.
And I suspect we'll have more of these things come up. And so if we have a a playbook um that's attorney approved in the future, if this doesn't work, then that would be good. But cross that bridge when we get to it. >> We can highlight that in an upcoming staff report. >> Oh, cool.
All right. Um yeah, this is an interesting one. So I' I've never really thought about this. So yeah, I do think legality is going to be the the big issue. Making sure this is something we can do. there's potential for people in the public to to question this because it is
kind of one of those, you know, let me be involved and then I can get something for free type of thing. But I if it's well defined, I think would be the biggest thing. It's like what is the sponsorship? What what was received from the city in terms of pizzas, right? What was the cost of that? if it's a waved
invoice or whatever it is. Just making sure that on the legal end of things we have our ducks in a row because it is you don't want it to be willy-nilly. Oh, things were given and things were given. You know, it's never a good idea for government. So, make sure one it's
legal. Then two that we have a well um documented, you know, this is what this was and this is exactly what it cost to do this. So, and then I would be fine with it. All right. Uh any further discussion? All right. Um all in favor say I.
>> I. >> Post same sign as approved. Item 8H. So you know this is a banger of a meeting. Uh discussion of the community education agreement letter and then document that
we added at the start. This Jesse. >> Thank thank you Mr. Chair. Uh so staff uh had been working with uh community ed on development of the agreement that's in here. Um recently we did receive a
letter from Ann Marie uh in mid January that expressed a few different concerns regarding the proposed agreement. Uh so at this time staff's kind of looking for direction from the U park board how you'd like to uh address some of the the comments that were included in the uh
letter. Um few different options are listed there. I I don't necessarily going to list them out for you, but um just looking really for direction from the park board on how they'd like us to take next steps with community ed. Obviously, there is some time sensitivity as they're going to be
publishing activities here shortly for the summer. So, uh we do want to make sure that we get good career direction so we can uh approach the community ed group uh appropriately. >> Thank you. Um Max, would you be able to pull up? Thank you.
Um, so we got this from I haven't had a chance to read it. Do you have thoughts? >> Yeah. Um, me or Dave could. Uh, Ann had sent that to she sent it to Dave, tried to send it to me, but had my email wrong. Um, and this is her idea is to add this as an addendum to last year's
agreement that we had. Um, as I read over this, it it does still miss a little bit of the substance of what we were looking for. if if any sport or activity does not happen, what are the alternatives? I do believe that we're on
the right path with her and I think uh I think one more discussion with her probably will solve what we're looking for. Um you know, her concern was they have upfront costs when it comes to the print and the advertising and things like that, which I understand from a a business
standpoint there is that. Um, we're just looking for to make sure that we have the appropriate number of activities happening if I may. >> Oh, yeah. >> Yeah. Just super fast, just so people are aware of how this came about, it sat
down, had a meeting with um with JD and with Anmarie um just because of the letter that they sent and some of the concerns they were showing and some of the confusion that appeared to be happening. Uh, it was a good meeting. I I think we she voiced some of the concerns and some of her concerns with the process in which we got to here. Um,
I had asked her if she could present something to us before this meeting. It came in today. So, we'll pass it forward to you guys. You guys have it and we can take a look at it. I just want us to quicken the process now that we're we're behind, right? And we never want to be behind because we're going to make bad decisions when we do that. So, um, but I
I haven't even really had a a a chance to read through it effectively, but I think we're getting closer. And again, like JD said, there are things that the park board is looking for in terms of if this, what are the alternatives, and it isn't a hard and stone, you know, you
shall not pass type scenario, but a let's figure out a scenario and and what it looks like so that the children of Brainard are getting activities. So, um, your eyeballs are just as fresh on this as mine are, but just some backstory as to how we got here so that you guys are aware.
>> Do you have a sense of either JD or Dave, like when we need to sign this so we're not that already passed? Kind of feels like it's already passed. >> I would say, yeah, if I was to speak honestly, I would say we are definitely behind the eight-ball and we are putting them in a bad position at this point.
So, it it is on us to move quickly. >> Yeah. I I'd probably just like to see at least us do our 2025 agreement again. I mean, they have an understanding of what we're looking for. So, I mean, that comes into negotiation next year if in bad if they
act in bad faith, you know, on any programs that maybe don't happen or get cancelled, they're they're probably well aware that if we do the 2025 agreement again and you kind of let us down, things are going to be a little bit different next year. um when we when we
write this up. But I I'm with you guys on this and the urgency I'm willing to sign the 2025 agreement again um and just do that agreement once more um the way it was written and the way that we've historically done it. Um but again, community ed has our
understanding and again kind of again skimming the addendum. They have an understanding of what we're looking for and what we're trying to accomplish with a change in contract. So, you know, again, moving into next year when we actually have something a little bit more fleshed out and, you know, what
we're trying to individually um accomplish with community education, um you know, we we can come to a better understanding, but I certainly don't want any of these programs or their marketing or any of those pushes to be delayed because if they are, then we're
going to have less people inside of these programs than we did last year. So, um, I'm I'm more on the side of let's let's give them the historically same agreement that we have in the past and then with, you know, the understanding that, you know, we don't
necessarily need to add the addendums, but hey, you guys get it. Let's, you know, we're trying to be collaborative and, you know, let's let's hold ourselves to a higher standard this year and then we'll come back um and and get something a little bit more um like
actually meet and have a conversation about this and develop it through through the uh through 2026. So, and I mean because yeah, we I again we don't want to make any rat like quick decisions, especially on the addendum, but we probably can't wait until next
next meeting to to approve a contract and get get them rolling and and have some guarantees for them. So, um I'm more inclined to just to sign the previous agreement and work through this throughout the uh the 2026 year. >> One thing that Ann did mention was she
would be open to a liaison. So there was a good form of communication between the two and I think that's really it was a communication breakdown last year. Um and then knowing you know hey where are things at? We would know ahead of time if we're struggling maybe we can help
promote it on the city Facebook page that hey we're looking for softball players for this. You know we have these opportunities for kids to be out and active and involved. Um so just consistent feedback would be good. And um if we designate a staff person for
that or I would be willing to be the one that communicates with her on a regular basis of it, that's I think that'll help a lot as well. >> Yeah, just to clarify those statements, you know, in our discussion, part of the part of the issue that we've had is, you know, we and Cara's no longer with us,
but one of the concerns Cara had last year was why aren't we being made aware that these issues are arising? And part of that is just again here we are at our ivory tower, you know, come present to us. And so maybe just removing some of those barriers and saying, hey, we need more of an open dialogue here. If you
need to talk directly to a park board, maybe we do have a leazison that they can talk to. And then that leazison can say, look, I'm hearing positive things. You know, that it isn't necessarily removing it from staff thing. It's just a then the questions aren't coming from the board as to why did we not hear any of this stuff. Um, so maybe that is just
a a phone call or a text message from time to time just to figure out that type of stuff. So, um, but I I felt the conversation we had was was very good. I my concern with with last year's contract is just making sure because I don't even remember last year. Do we have last year's contract? >> There's a couple things in last year's
contract that didn't get done either. So, I mean, we're I'm fine with agreeing to that, but then, you know, like logos on the shirts. If we're going to agree to last year's agreement, I would like last year's agreement to be agreed upon. >> So, >> yeah, yeah, I'm with you. And I like
there was some feedback on the logo specifically and the the letter and and things. And um like I said, I think when we we we haven't been able to I think really dissect that and and have serious conversations about that. So, um, yeah,
I mean, like I said, I'd love to have the logos on there and I understand they are a multi-ity, uh, organization. Um, but I, you know, I understand also the strain of of what that looks like for agreements for those. So, yeah, I Yeah,
again, we'll approve the previous I'm like I said, I'm I'm willing to approve the previous agreement, >> but yeah, we got to follow the previous agreement. We've got to do it. So, it's that's my expectation. like, hey, we're gonna we're gonna get it done and we'll figure it out next year. But we're we
still, again, this this is where we're at because we haven't followed the agreements that we set forth or there were some gray areas in our previous agreements that maybe aren't exactly ideal. Um, and we, you know, we're trying to plug some of those holes. And
uh so again I think from a community education standpoint like hey this is what we're expecting from you and I understand the contract could maybe inter apart from logos um some of those things some of the language from the uh the agreement could be interpreted a
different way but these are the expectations that the programs run or there is a substitute to the program or we don't pay for it or it's allocated in some other way to help that program. So, you know, whatever the solution is, but
that's we're allocating money to these folks to run these programs. And if it doesn't happen, you know what what's the solution here? Because we paid you for it. So, in some way, shape, or form, regardless of the dollar amount or tangible dollar amount you can put to a specific program, we did pay for it. So,
um I think, like I said, I'm still willing to just do it again, but deal's a deal. So, Yeah, I just with the discussion I think this thing that weirdly stands out is the and thank you Kayla whoever Lisa put
last year's contract in here and it has the note from her that this will be logos will be possible in the future. um I'm not going to like die on this hill. But I think it's frustrating that that was kind of the assurance we got about a year ago and then it's like oh
turns out um not possible. I don't know if we have the leverage because we are in a bad spot at this point. So I kind of feel like we just have to remove that for this year. And I think if Joe is on board with the amendment like that is at least working in a direction that gives us some
progress. I think that combination would be fine for me for this year. And then yeah, we need a I believe love the leazison and start this earlier and more collaboratively next year. >> And the school district attorney has not
reviewed her addendum yet either. Okay. >> And she purely sounds like just finished it today. She was on vacation. >> Sure. >> I'm inclined to to be with Jonathan and have better dialogue this year. >> Sure. Yeah. So, I'll make a motion to
approve this agreement, but scratching out um the uh sorry, the 25 utilizing the 2025 agreement, scratching out logo requirements for this year. Um and then establishing at least a board member liaison to community education that can
reach out to us with any sort of turbulence or any again positive feedback. Again, that person could be staff if they'd like to be, but someone within this department or board um so that we have a constant stream of dialogue. Um because again, a lot of our
partnerships are are are thriving. So, um that's the motion that I'll make again striking striking the logo uh requirements for this year. >> And that is item 2G. Just >> 2G. Very good. >> I would second that motion.
Any further discussion? >> Who do you want to designate as the weaison? >> Well, I mean, you sounded like you'd love to do it, so let's let her. >> I already have dialogue with her. I'm willing. >> Very good. Y >> what if we make that a motion after this
motion? >> Okay. >> I'm on board with the discussion, but just to keep it a little simpler. >> Sure. >> Any more discussion about approving contract, Dave? >> Yeah. My only concern with the logo end of things is it wasn't just the shirts, though. was parents go to the meeting and it says Backaxter Park and Wreck.
That's the problem. It's not that we need our logo on things. It's that people need to know that these are our programs. They want to be able to trust that we're doing what the taxpayers want us to do with the funding. It's not a vanity thing. No, >> it's not a Brainer Brainer wants its logo on things. It's that we're we're
using taxpayer money for this and we need the taxpayers to know where their dollars are going. And if they're going towards programs, we want people to be aware of that. We want them to know that these are things that we're supporting. And so I it's disheartening to see a date that says 31725 and then says this
is possible in the future. Well, the future is now. I hate to be that way, but the future is now. We had a whole season to figure that out. And it's frustrating that we would get to that point. But again, I'm not going to die on a sword about logos, right? It's not about logos. It's about getting kids out
in the fields doing activities. But at the same time, this is Brainer taxpayer money that is being spent to have kids participating in sports. The whole goal of this was to get Brainer kids out into sports. We're not just throwing money at
the wind and hoping that it sticks. We we want these kids to have activities and so we need to have a partnership that agrees to that those types of things as well. >> Thank you. Any further discussion on the contract motion hearing? None. All in favor say I.
>> I. Post. Same sign. Contract is approved. Entertain a second motion about a liaison to community ed. >> Yeah. I'll make a motion to establish a board liaison to community education to discuss uh any potential required
marketing materials or recommendations on marketing materials. any turbulence or any problems with the uh allotted programs or anything uh pertaining to the agreement? >> I'll second.
>> Did you actually say it was JD? >> Oh, I mean I I guess I you know I I don't know if that motion needs to include but but we'll have JD do do the work then >> for this year. >> Yeah. For this for 2026. >> Perfect. >> And that's okay with you, John, as the seconder. >> Yes.
>> Perfect. I'm sure it didn't include his name. >> Leave the John's out of it. >> Uh, any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor say I. I. Oppose. Same sign. >> All right, that is all of our new
business. Uh, with that, we'll move on to item 9A, youth youth tournament staffing and key structure, which probably some combination of Jesse and JD, I'm guessing. >> I I can introduce it and JD can fill in
for sure. Um, this is kind of a followup from the workshop. Um, some discussion on for this item, it'd be the youth tournament fees. U, obviously there's charges that we apply to different tournaments that are held. Uh, a lot of that is for staff time. Um, so there's a
handful of options that were included in the packet and that were discussed at the workshop. Uh, staff included a recommendation here of $150 per tournament uh, per park with that option to request field maintenance uh, at staff cost uh, as well as the damage
deposited $100. And I'll I'll open it up to questions. And again, obviously JD was involved in those conversations as well. So >> cool. Yes, I just had to leave the workshop really early. Sorry. It looks like what we discussed at the workshop. >> Cool. >> I would make a motion to approve uh $150
per tournament per park with an option to request field maintenance services at actual staff cost plus a damage deposit of $100. >> Yeah, I'll second that. Yeah. >> Any further discussion?
Hearing none. All in favor say I. I post same sign. Um, and that I think nicely leads into 9B, which is going to be the same thing. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll just say it's it's a carbon copy, so the same
recommendation. >> Perfect. >> I will make a motion to approve the adult tournament uh staffing and free fee structure um of $100 $150 per tournament per park with the option to request maintenance staff at cost and a
damage deposit of $100. Second. >> Any discussion? Hearing none. Oh, Dave. >> Well, I think there needs to be a requirement over there. >> There needs to be a requirement that these adults are having fun because we've heard this in the past with these
adults in their sport. They're not they're not having fun. They're not out there enjoying themselves. So, we got to make sure that if they're going to do this, you must have fun. >> Impossible. Emotional damage for Yeah. >> Too sweaty with the Rex Sports.
All right. Um, all in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Post. Same. Sign. That is approved. All right. Got through that. Uh, item 10 is the public forum. It's the time for citizens to bring matters not on the agenda to the
attention of the board. Time limits may be imposed. Uh, we will open the public forum at 5:22. Uh, anyone online? Max, not shocked. Uh, anyone here want to speak?
Good. Cool. All right. Uh, we will close the public forum at 5:2 Three. I just hate when it's the same time. Makes us >> That was the hardest thing to do is wait for those seconds to go.
>> I saw when I started it. Yeah. Okay. All right. Uh, item 11 A, staff reports. I just want to give some details on the ice skating party coming up. Uh it'll be February 7th from 1 to 4 at Memorial
Park. There will be skating games, music, cookies, hot cocoa, and some coloring sheets. And our sponsors are the Salvation Army, Rosalini's Pizza, Caribou Coffee, Super One Foods, and Naughty Pine.
>> Awesome. Looks like it's going to be great. Any questions for Kayla on that? >> Just reiterating again, thank you and good work on growing our partners and sponsors and people wanting to be involved with the park system.
>> All right. So, that's any other staff reports or should we do the hockey rink temperatures? >> Mr. Sher, I'll just highlight uh if you didn't see the Facebook post, uh we did have uh neighborhood member uh nearby
BigS uh post some no trespassing signs. Uh we did have our maintenance staff go out there uh verify that they were not in the appropriate location. So those signs were removed. Um since had a conver I haven't had the conversation at least had a conversation with that person that posted them. Uh so we'll
continue to address it with them accordingly, but those uh those were addressed as soon as we were notified of it. >> So So we were con we confirmed it was a nearby resident. >> Correct. They reached out to us the next day. >> Okay, very good.
>> That park has a really tiny sign, right? Like it's like a no parking size sign. >> It actually does not have a sign at the moment. Um but it is on a future agenda item. Oh, okay. >> I'll I'll go over that with you. >> Oh, fun. Uh Dave,
>> hey, can I just can I just get clarification? So, are they concerned about it's a little, you know, just or concerning that we're just posting signs um willy-nilly. >> I didn't have the conversation with her. My understanding from my conversation
with Lisa, it was uh there was some confusion on where the property was. Um so, we'll clarify that as needed. um but also that there was concern about people kind of walking through that area um tenting in that area and obviously if there's trespassing issues that's
something that uh our police department needs to be made aware of uh so that they can help address it. So if that's what their concern is we we'll definitely go that route. Um but there's obviously a property line piece that if you want to put it on your property line we want to make sure you know where the property line is.
>> Yeah. Tent tenting obviously a concern. >> Yeah. I I thought I saw it between two houses like where their steps go down into their backyard. I may not maybe I'm not accurate on that but uh but yeah. And then the future item on the signage
when they way back with Bonnie Cumberland, it was 2008. I pushed on her that I thought there should be something saying hitch Wayne and I won't babble on with my it's a little boy that was killed right
in front of our house um where it came up with the naming of the park and there was uh the leader of uh what make whatever it was called community u activities of Bud Schmid he was a
teacher and a coach here forever ever uh he got a little association so that they pushed for uh that what big seven would be used as. So, when the construction was done there on on Seventh Street, the
sign and that that big uh whatever you call it, car stop aluminum thing that went away. And I assumed because I after that was all done, I thought, "Oh, I wonder if the sign's still there." And also on the south side that that one is gone. So,
and I don't know if it would be up on on the 7th on the south 7th there that the house the blue house in the corner because I know it, you know, where that property line is and where kids are sliding. I don't know
if that's clear to the property owners or or etc. on on that. But um uh I I think if it was that was a mistake. I don't think anyone was
intending to restrict them from the uh from the park. But but I guess some clear I know at one time and I don't think it's there there was a sign that was put up uh where it's the walkway
from South 8th but it's really not clear if you're just on the street where Big Sev is. I mean I could see other people coming there on that side and it's like well it's just a trail off to what? Um,
but again, future agenda item, uh, and I think it was just a, uh, a mistake by the individuals that put up the no trespassing sign. I hope. >> Does the sled garage have a sign on it?
>> It says big ad hitchway on the sled garage. >> All right. >> Still a wonderful device. What a great great uh thing that was brought to us by that city council that we have. Would thank them so much for those and for a mayor for continuing to put sleds in there every year. What what a what a
guy. Um I do think it's a great opportunity for us though to take a look at this from a city side, not necessarily from the park side. Let's take a look, make sure we know where our property lines are, make sure that they're good, they're well delineated so that there are no concerns moving forward. And then uh two, I think you're absolutely right, the entrances and
whatnot there could take some tweaking. Um, we could do that from a city side as well, just to make sure that everybody's aware of where people should be. Um, but I do have one concern though because I did see a Facebook comment that said, "Hey, we should put that light back up there." And I remember there was a certain mayor that asked for a light to
put back up there. And I remember that a certain BPU commission said we would put a light back up in there. And I think that was about four years ago. So, I'd like to remind everyone involved that we the people still are demanding lights and we have approved them. So, we should
probably do that. So, >> that new one on South Street where South South 7th there, that one's really bright. It's nice. I can see it in my kitchen very well. >> But, I'm pretty sure the BPU did say they wanted to put a light back in there. So, we should we should probably
do that and just clean that park up. It could be an opportunity for us to look at some brush and stuff as well and just make sure that that park is >> it's fun to slide at night. I did that a lot. Not now. >> Cool. All right. No motion needed on
think. Uh so we'll go 11C the hockey rink temperatures. So, uh, Troy, our maintenance foreman, he sent some pictures. Um, there was a few warm days in a row. Uh, so on the day that he took the photos,
it was 33° and off of the boards the temperature was 68°. Um, so that being said, uh, Troy does have some great ideas that we'll discuss
at a later date. Cool. All right. Thank you. Uh we've got the rink attendance. I don't know if there's anything to cover other than spreadsheet. >> Awesome. Thank you for uh yeah, accumulating that info. Again, kind of
all part of that. uh throw that into Gemini and uh take the numbers down. We >> didn't count tallies. >> Yeah. >> And then 11. I think that was informational. Jesse, Kayla, Lisa
seems really cool. I wanted to make it down there to see the giant thing burning. Um all right. Uh with that, we'll go on to board member reports. >> Yeah, I think the only thing for me was I just appreciate all the updates on the warming house. Obviously, we've, you
know, on the on social media. Um cuz, you know, not knowing when it was going to be open or closed and like the harsh climates like, "Hey, yeah, it's cold out, but maybe our rinks will be open. I don't know." So, I just appreciate the uh the I mean, because it's really the only thing that is timesensitive, I guess, in the parks right now. So, I
really appreciate it. And then, I mean, you could throw that into I you know, I mocked up a few things, but if you want to throw it into Google Gemini to have it generate an image that's a little bit more eye-catching. I I had I scrolled past it a couple of times just because it is just text, but maybe there's a maybe there is a format or a template
that you can throw that into and maybe generate via AI. So, I don't I don't quite know, but I had a few mockups. Um, you know, AI's gotten pretty good as Dave and I discussed on uh I know Duners uses theirs for just to spit out
schedules constantly. That's all AI. So, I pretty sure you can slap one of those together if you know it's a little more eye-catching, but I appreciate that you're putting those closures together. So, >> anything for you, John? >> No.
>> I have no report this month. >> Um, all I've got I think with the right our goal as a park board is people want people in our parks. Um, with the news yesterday, I see an entity that is anonymous and not really accountable to
anyone. And throughout the state has um, violated folks rights. And I think that runs counter to us wedding people in our parks is if you don't feel safe because ICE is here. I think that's unfortunate. So, I would invite them to leave
Brainard and leave the state that um, for a motion to adjurnn. >> So moved. Seconded. >> All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Post. Same side. We are adjourned.