Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-06-10 Park Board Minutes 1 EDINA PARK BOARD 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS JUNE 10, 2003 _____________________________ MEMBERS PRESENT: Andy Finsness, Mike Damman, Karla Sitek, Ardis Wexler, George Klus, David Fredlund, Floyd Grabiel, Linda Presthus, Allyson Grande, Mike Weiss MEMBERS ABSENT: Jeff Johnson STAFF PRESENT: John Keprios, Ed MacHolda, Janet Canton, Tom Shirley, Ann Kattreh ______________________________ I. APPROVAL OF THE TUESDAY, APRIL 8, 2003 PARK BOARD MINUTES Dave Fredlund MOVED TO APPROVE THE APRIL 8, 2003 PARK BOARD MINUTES. Mike Damman SECONDED THE MOTION. MINUTES APPROVED. II. EDINBOROUGH PARK FEES AND CHARGES RECOMMENDATION Tom Shirley, Manager of Edinborough Park/Centennial Lakes and Ann Kattreh, Assistant Manager of the Edinborough Park/Centennial Lakes introduced themselves to the Park Board. Mr. Keprios commented that he thinks his staff report lays out what the recommendation is and hopes he accurately reflected the proposed $4.00 park daily admission fee. He noted that children under 12 months and adults with a paid child do not pay an admission fee. If park users wish to use the new structure and the pool the cost is only $6.00 per day. Mr. Keprios added that everything on the proposed fee structure that is in bold is new and everything not in bold has already been approved. Mr. Shirley explained that he and Ms. Kattreh visited almost all of the same types of structures in the metropolitan area. He noted that the structure they are putting in is actually going to be larger than anything else that’s currently out there. Mr. Shirley stated that the play park admission is going to be for the entire lower level of Edinborough Park as well as the Great Hall. He added that in the Great Hall they are going to be putting in a few new amenities such as basketball and scooters. He indicated that it’s going to be a whole lot of play value for the dollars they are looking at. Mr. Shirley pointed out that they are looking at positioning their fee at or below the price of everyone else that is out there. He explained that they didn’t want to jump too high right away and feel $4.00 is a good rate to start out with. 2 Mr. Klus asked how much of the expenses the rate would cover. Mr. Shirley replied that they are not estimating a whole lot of expense to start out with. Everything is covered by warranty for the first year and most of the components should last for about five years. It will mostly need cleaning to which they already have staff that can do that. He added that it would actually cost less than the ice rink. Mr. Klus asked what income they are hoping to generate from it to which Mr. Shirley responded that they originally had put down $100,000 but now feel that is a very conservative number. Ms. Wexler commented that she noticed on the comparative sheet that some communities offer a resident rate and a non-resident rate and noted that Edinborough is not drawing a distinction, is that correct? Mr. Shirley replied that is correct and noted that only a couple of communities have a distinction. Mr. Shirley noted that they do have a resident rate and non-resident rate with their season passes. Mr. Grabiel asked Mr. Shirley how he knows that 60 people a day will use this. Mr. Shirley replied that it is a guesstimate right now. However, they are basing it on what is happening in other cities as well as what they have currently experienced with Edinborough. Mr. Shirley commented that 60 is a very minimal number on busy days where they tend to have 300 to 400 people. Ms. Presthus asked Mr. Shirley if he anticipates that a lot of groups will be using the facility instead of individuals. Mr. Shirley replied that is what they are hoping for and stated that they will be marketing large groups such as schools, etc. Ms. Presthus asked if groups will need to book a date in advance to which Mr. Shirley replied they are hoping that would be the case. If groups book in advance they will receive a discounted rate, which would be $3.50 per person. Mr. Keprios indicated that the company who is building the structure has added a few extra things free of charge to which Ms. Kattreh explained what the additions are. Mr. Klus asked if a child were having a problem would a parent be able to go into the play structure. Mr. Shirley replied yes, they have tubes that are 36” where most are 30”. It’s very easy to get in and they have also put in soft pads so it’s easy on the knees. Mr. Keprios noted that he would like to put in a good plug for the three volunteer Park Board members and three staff: Mike Damman, Linda Presthus and David Fredlund, Tom Shirley, Ann Kattreh and Jeff Freund. He noted that this was the first time they ever used this process and it worked very well. It was unanimous with all six of them that this company had the best design. Mr. Fredlund asked what is the completion date to which Ms. Kattreh replied they are hoping for early September. Linda Presthus MOVED TO APPROVE THE FEES. Floyd Grabiel SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED. 3 III. UPDATES A. YMCA/Tri-City Skate Park – Mr. Keprios indicated that the skate park is well under construction. They are hoping for completion near the end of August; however, by contract the contractor has until the end of September to complete construction. B. Fox Meadow Park Development – Mr. Keprios indicated that the Fox Meadow Park project is coming along very well and should be completed within the next three to four weeks. He noted that he ordered the Park Board approved recognition plaque and it should be delivered within the next four to six weeks. Mr. Keprios stated that he plans to schedule a park grand opening celebration with an unveiling of the plaque. C. Disc Golf Course - Mr. Keprios informed the Park Board that a few Edina High School seniors installed the concrete boxes as their May Term Project. He noted that they turned out very well; however, they did require some assistance from the Park Maintenance staff. Mr. Keprios indicated that the baskets were installed as an Eagle Scout project. Ms. Sitek commented that the course gets a lot of use. D. Normandale Park Playground Equipment – Mr. MacHolda indicated that the neighborhood group for Normandale Park has decided to go with TimberForm brand playground equipment. He noted that they are very close to writing the specifications and sending it out to bid. Mr. MacHolda stated that they are taking Ms. Grande’s suggestion and will install the playground equipment in late July or early August so it will not conflict with the playground program. E. Sherwood Park – Mr. MacHolda indicated that they are moving forward with Sherwood Park and noted that it has been advertised and the bid opening is scheduled for Wednesday, June 18th. F. Dumpsters - Mr. Klus indicated that last Saturday he was at Highlands Park and talked to a city worker who was picking up trash from an apparent party from the night before. He noted that the city worker suggested that possibly a dumpster could be brought to the parks that are really getting dumped on with trash. Mr. Klus asked if that were something the Park Department would be able to do. Mr. Keprios replied that they do use dumpsters at all of the enterprise facilities as well as at Rosland Park because it gets so much use. He noted that if the volume warrants it they would definitely look into it. Mr. Keprios added that illegal dumping is a problem at some of the parks. IV. OTHER A. Pathways and Bikeways - Mr. Klus informed the Park Board that Mr. Keprios, Wayne Houle (City Engineer), Tom Winninger (Edina resident) and he recently met to discuss pathways and bikeways in Edina. He noted that Mr. Winninger lives off of Interlachen Boulevard and has a real passion for pathways and bikeways and would like to see more developed within the City of Edina. He noted that he would like to see people be able to bike and walk to more places around the city in a safe environment. 4 Mr. Klus noted that Mr. Winninger presented a good case for a lot of very good ideas and added that he would love to generate some interest with the people in Edina to work on a pathway/bikeway system. He indicated that the regional trail way has been approved which will go along the southern edge of Edina. Mr. Klus pointed out that Mr. Houle has a nice beginning plan for sidewalks, however, Mr. Winninger would like to see that taken to another level and actually have the community work on some recommendations, which could be brought before the Park Board. Mr. Keprios commented that the Park Board would be part of the bigger picture. However, he thinks they first need to get a transportation engineer consultant on board who really understands this because traffic is an enormous issue and will continue to be for some time. Mr. Keprios indicated that we need to have one master plan that is comprehensive and shows everything including pedestrian traffic, bike traffic and car traffic. He noted that right now, we do have good plans in place; however, they are segmented. Mr. Klus stated that Mr. Winninger mentioned that he would like to work with someone on this project. Therefore, he mentioned Mr. Winninger’s presentation to Mr. Finsness who noted that he would have an interest in the project. Mr. Klus asked the Park Board if anyone else would have an interest in this project because he would hate to see it just die. Mr. Finsness stated that he thinks this is a wonderful opportunity to look at some things on a big picture scale. He noted that you can’t get anywhere around the city safely on foot or bicycle. Ms. Presthus indicated that she has the same concerns. However, there is already one regional pathway that has been approved and now there is talk about putting together a community group to look at another pathway/bikeway. Ms. Presthus noted that she thinks before another group goes off spending lots of time and energy to make another plan that they probably should first hire a transportation consultant. Mr. Klus commented that this group’s major intention is to try and find something that’s coordinated with the city to work together as an overall thing. Ms. Presthus replied that what she is saying is there is already a trail system plan in the works and if a bunch of groups are making all kinds of plans there needs to be some coordination. Without some sort of coordination everyone is spinning their wheels all over the place. Mr. Keprios pointed out that one thing that is different with Mr. Winninger’s vision is there is a sidewalk plan that is a master plan that the City Council has adopted. However, there really isn’t a pedestrian/bicycle destination plan. Mr. Klus noted that he thinks this is an appropriate issue for the Park Board when it comes to trail ways. Mr. Keprios responded that when it comes to park paths we are involved, however, sidewalks and all of that is really an Engineering Department’s function. Mr. Klus asked Mr. Keprios what he thinks they should do because he doesn’t think they are in agreement to just let it die. Mr. Keprios replied that Mr. Houle mentioned to him after the meeting that he thought the idea of hiring a consultant was a great recommendation and one that he is going to pursue. He noted that Mr. Houle would take the next step because it is dealing with transportation within the city. The Park Department’s job is to create recreational and destination pathways/bikeways. Mr. Finsness added that he thinks the Park Board should stay involved in it and see which way it’s going as well as see if there are things that 5 aren’t being thought of. Mr. Keprios commented that he sees himself serving on that committee, whatever it is, and keeping the Park Board informed. B. Fourth of July Parade – Ms. Presthus noted that she has volunteered to be on the Fourth of July Parade Committee and asked that if anybody has any feedback regarding the parade and the way it should be handled. She noted that it’s a great event for the city and it really does fall under Park and Recreation. Ms. Presthus pointed out that one of the things that always make a better parade is the more money you have the better the parade can be. She added that there are still sponsorships available and the more money they take in and the more they can hire other things to come into this parade. She noted that there are different levels of sponsorships. Ms. Presthus also noted that they are selling flashing star pins for $5.00 at all of the park and recreation facilities as another way to support the parade. Ms. Presthus noted that the parade committee has done a great job as far as volunteers and pointed out that Susie Miller works really, really hard on the parade and does a great job, however, she thinks the Park Board can help them out. It’s good public relations and we should be involved. She indicated that there’s an opportunity there to which it does fall under our category to support. Ms. Presthus pointed out that it’s a huge community event because over 5,000 people come out to watch it from all over. Ms. Presthus stated that she thinks we can help them out. V. FACILITIES STUDY COMMITTEE REPORT – INDOOR FIELD SPORTS AND GYMNASIUMS Mr. Keprios indicated that his memo dated May 14th was essentially the result from their subcommittee meeting with the athletic associations of which five associations showed up and five did not. He noted that he followed up with a memo to all ten athletic associations who were invited to the meeting asking that they respond in writing by June 4th outlining their association’s needs and desires for these recreational facilities and their willingness to pay a facility use fee. He stated that at 2:00 pm on June 4th he had only received written material from only 4 of the 10 athletic associations. The Edina Basketball Association and Edina Football Association had not responded by the deadline. Mr. Keprios explained that he asked Mr. MacHolda to call the basketball association and football association to make sure that their written response was not lost in the mail. After Mr. MacHolda made those phone calls, Mr. Keprios quickly received an e-mail from the Edina Soccer Club and the Edina Football Association. Mr. Keprios explained that the subcommittee met on June 5th and went over everything that had been submitted. He stated that he put together an executive summary of what was submitted. He noted that summary shows the defined and validated needs, the anticipated impact on their programs, and their willingness to pay to use the new facility. Mr. Keprios noted that he did the same thing for the indoor field sports facility. Mr. Keprios commented that he thinks it would be fair to say that they did not learn a whole lot more from this exercise than what they already knew. He noted that he thinks it’s fair to say there is clearly a strong desire for these facilities. Mr. Keprios stated that 6 the next step from here is to validate what we believe the need to be. Mr. Keprios stated that if these facilities were built, there is no doubt they would get used. Some athletic association board members have commented that they are getting tired of being asked the same question when the answer is always the same; they want these facilities. He noted that he does understand and respect that, however, we now have to go to the next step. Mr. Finsness indicated that he felt this wasn’t a real burning issue that they need it and their program won’t work without it. However, the Edina Basketball Association did state that they want four continuous courts and were pretty clear about that. Mr. Damman commented that the main thing that stood out was that no one really answered the real questions about what they wanted them to answer. He noted that they did talk about the dome situation and how a lot of the cities around us either have a dome or talking about putting in a dome. Mr. Damman stated that it raises the question whether we should build a dome in Edina because they could go and rent one somewhere else nearby. Mr. Klus noted that one of the things that they talked about was they need to ask the City Council how much are they willing to subsidize because we can’t break even. These facilities will not pay for themselves from what they can see so far. Mr. Keprios asked the Park Board how much they think it should be subsidized, what is realistic? Mr. Keprios pointed out that we do have some enterprise facilities that operate at a loss and require a subsidy, which is why some groups are asking “why not me.” He noted that it’s not meant as a criticism but it is a fair question. Mr. Keprios stated that he believes that the Park Board should make a recommendation on what is an acceptable level of subsidy. Mr. Keprios added that he can try to help identify what he thinks we can afford to subsidize and how. Mr. Klus asked Mr. Keprios to talk to Mr. Hughes about this to which he noted he would. Ms. Presthus asked if when you are looking at a subsidy are you talking about a hard number or a percentage to which Mr. Keprios replied it would have to come down to a hard number. Ms. Presthus commented that would be pretty hard when they don’t even know what it is they are talking about to which Mr. Keprios responded that we would have to get to that point. Mr. Klus stated that he feels it’s real hard for the sub-committee to know what to recommend until they see what the school is going to do and that won’t be identified until August. Ms. Wexler asked if the City Council has been asked to give us another month to which it was noted yes. Ms. Wexler indicated that she still doesn’t think that will give us enough time and her question is are we going to be pressured into coming up with a recommendation which seems a little unfair if we can’t make a justifiable reasonable recommendation until we know what the school is doing. Mr. Klus stated that he thinks as a Park Board they have to decide that in August if they can’t make a recommendation then that is what they will have to talk about as a group. He noted that they are not going to make a recommendation tonight but that the sub-committee will look at this again and at the August Park Board meeting they will come back with their thoughts. 7 Ms. Presthus commented that even if we wait until August to see what the school is proposing we are still not really going to know anything until November when we find out if it even passes. Ms. Sitek indicated that she feels the City Council was asking of them to find out if the interest is there because obviously someone has spoken to them. She noted that she did not get the impression that they were in a huge hurry, if we have to wait to find out what happens with the school then we will wait. She stated that she doesn’t think it is an issue, they are not going to put pressure on them to hurry up. Mr. Keprios commented that he thinks the City Council is looking for us to do the prudent thing and if that means to wait for the outcome of the referendum then that should be the recommendation. Mr. Keprios commented that another item the committee should discuss is the fact that the Edina Basketball Association feels that the additional gymnasiums proposed in the School District referendum still does not serve Edina Basketball Association’s needs. The Edina Basketball Association wants several gyms under one common roof. He noted that they have stated that doesn’t do anything for them because they want a tournament facility. Mr. Keprios indicated that he thinks there should be a dialogue on what it is that we are trying to provide, what’s our function, what is our goal. He noted that if it’s to provide a tournament facility for what is a relatively small number of people, then we need to decide that. Mr. Weiss indicated that in looking at the summary right on the front page he sees four athletic associations who would utilize gymnasiums so hanging it just on basketball is not correct. Mr. Weiss commented that he doesn’t know why we are waiting to decide whether or not there is a need or whether or not we can make a plan contingent upon what the school decides. He noted that he agrees with Ms. Presthus we won’t find out until November what the city has decided about the school’s proposal, which he thinks, is entirely separate about what the city decides for its community. Mr. Weiss noted that he thinks we need to decide from the Park Board’s perspective whether or not we need these facilities. Then to the extent that the school is going to build their own we can pull that out of any plan that we would have. Mr. Grabiel asked Mr. Weiss if it’s his view that we can’t decide for everybody else but that we have to decide as a Park Board what we want. Mr. Weiss responded that actually he thinks the City Council has to decide what the community needs and then figure out if there is a way to make that work. He noted that, if it is right for the community to have these facilities, we should find a way to do it. If the Park Board recommends that it is not right for the community, it is still the City Council’s decision. Mr. Damman pointed out that the City Council asked the Park Board to do that for them. Mr. Weiss responded that he understands that but there is a part of him that says do you want this for the City of Edina, and do you want us to have a community sport facility or not. We noted that we can recommend until we are blue in the face to which Mr. Damman replied he thinks that is all the City Council wants to hear. Mr. Weiss stated that he thinks we have already shown there is a desire, there are people who want facilities. 8 Mr. Klus commented that he thinks part of the problem that the committee struggles with is that they don’t want to recommend something that’s going to say that we are not willing to subsidize it number one, and number two, we don’t know where we would put it. Mr. Fredlund asked where would the subsidy come from and what is the City looking at for the source of the subsidy. Mr. Keprios replied that we have not studied the financing options yet. Mr. Klus asked if what he is hearing is the committee needs to go back and talk about one indoor multi-purpose building. Ms. Sitek pointed out that the Edina Basketball Association specifically indicated that they do not want that. Ms. Presthus commented that the floor on the courts is their main issue but that doesn’t mean it still can’t be a single multi-use building. Ms. Presthus noted that if the schools build some gyms it takes the need away from some of these things to which Mr. Weiss commented it might because we won’t know the size of the gyms. Mr. Presthus pointed out that there are just so many variables going on at one time that she doesn’t know how we could look at anything else except one multiple use facility because there is no land to be able to build here and there and they’ve already tried to attach it to the schools which is another whole issue. Mr. Grabiel indicated that he thinks the Park Board is making this way too complicated. It seems to him that the Park Board’s job is to advise the City Council on what the city needs and it sounds like the city needs a multi-purpose building with a lot of basketball courts and a place to play volleyball, soccer and lacrosse. He noted that he thinks the Park Board needs to make that recommendation and then let the appropriate officials decide how it’s going to be financed and where it’s going to be placed. Mr. Finsness stated that he thinks they can make a recommendation tonight because he doesn’t know what they are going to do within the next two months to which Mr. Klus replied there isn’t anything else they need to do. Ms. Presthus asked so you could base a recommendation on we don’t care what the school does, and we are just looking at our program and what our needs are, which is one big multi-purpose building. Mr. Klus replied that yes, he thinks there is a need for one multi-use building. Ms. Wexler commented that for the sake of discussion she would propose a resolution as opposed to a motion that based on the information that we have available the Park Board would seize a need for a multi-purpose building. She noted that she would leave it at that with some freshening up from the committee and commented that she feels that is all they can literally do right now. Mr. Klus indicated that he thinks Mr. Finsness is right that if this is what we are thinking then we can put it into a motion tonight. Mr. Klus stated that he personally thinks it needs to be more specific about certain uses for the building. Mr. Klus noted that if the City Council wants to come back and ask us if we have any potential sites then that’s another issue we will deal with later. Mr. Keprios replied they can certainly take that approach. 9 Mr. Fredlund asked what are the participant/user numbers. Mr. Finsness commented that is one thing that Mr. Keprios asked for and was very specific about and not one group answered his question. Mr. Fredlund asked without that how can you make any kind of a recommendation. Mr. MacHolda gave approximate number of participants for some of the athletic associations. Mr. Keprios explained that what he wanted to get from the athletic associations, and he thought he made it clear, was how many more games will you play, how many more practices, how many more hours of use and how many more kids will be in the program. He noted those were the questions he was looking for answers to and he didn’t get that from anyone. He added that he thinks that the youth athletic association board presidents and board members are getting tired of the questions. Mr. MacHolda stated that he doesn’t think the numbers are going to change a whole lot in terms of serving more participants. He noted that what they are going to get is earlier hours as well as it will free up certain days of the week. More space will create more flexibility for everyone. Ms. Presthus pointed out that it’s been debated over and over but what we need to ask is; should we build more gyms so kids can play from 6:00 to 9:00 on preferred nights of the week or do we bite the bullet and have kids play at later times on specific days including weekends. Ms. Presthus noted that everyone wants the same days and times so we will still have facilities that will sit empty on Wednesday and Friday nights and Sunday mornings. Therefore, we really need to ask how much do we want to build and how much do we want to ask the community to pay for when we have gyms that are sitting absolutely empty because there are not desirable times. It’s not necessarily a matter of space it’s a matter of when they want to use them. Mr. MacHolda added that there are also some custodial staffing issues with some of the schools. The school district struggles with some of the schools getting them opened on Saturdays and Sundays. Mr. Klus indicated that if there is no motion tonight then the committee will meet and bring back a motion to the Park Board in August. Ms. Presthus commented that she has heard both arguments and noted that it has always been her vision to have a wonderful athletic facility. Mr. Keprios stated that it is disappointing when they are trying to move things along and no one responds back as to what they are willing to pay because it’s an important issue. He explained that the dilemma they are faced with is if the city builds and operates a multi-purpose facility there is a very good likelihood that our fee structure will have to be different from what the school charges for their gyms. He pointed out that this question was already brought up at the youth athletic associations Presidents’ meeting. The Edina Hockey Association President questioned why hockey teams are expected to pay $155.00 an hour for ice while other groups are only paying $3.00 an hour for gym time. He noted that is an important issue that needs to be addressed. Mr. Klus stated that the associations have already indicated that they want to continue on as they have been, that is what they are willing to pay. Mr. Keprios replied that they will have to assume that is the case. Mr. 10 MacHolda indicated that is what they are getting charged now and thinks they would expand it but probably not much beyond $10.00 an hour. It was noted that the subcommittee will come back with a recommendation to discuss and vote on at the August Park Board meeting. VI. PARK ASSIGNMENTS – GEORGE KLUS Mr. Klus read the Edina Park Board’s Mission Statement. He noted that they should try and look at this once in awhile. He stated that is says “to advise the Edina City Council as to the policies and availability of open space and parklands in leisure activities”. Mr. Klus indicated that he also looked at the capital improvements that have been scheduled through 2007. He noted that they have over 3 million dollars worth of park improvements that are to be done around the city that have so far been projected and added that a few things may change from year to year. Mr. Klus commented that he is very excited about the Park Board members taking responsibility for the open space/parklands in trying to help recommend to Mr. Keprios and staff ways that we can do some of the things that are on the list to which we may or may not have money for. He noted that we may also find other things that the community may want us to look at. Mr. Klus explained that he hopes that each month we can talk about a few parks and what is happening at those parks. Mr. Klus indicated that he would like to see on the city’s website which Park Board members are responsible for which parks so if people have questions they would know who to call. He indicated that he would also like to see something published in the Sun Current to let people know what the Park Board is doing and who has been assigned to each park. Mr. Klus stated that he doesn’t want to do more than two parks per Park Board meeting. He pointed out that he hopes there will be some private/public partnerships that can happen so that some of these things can get done. Ms. Presthus indicated that she has been visiting her parks on a regular basis and she thinks it’s great because it doesn’t seem to make any difference what the weather is, there is always someone there. She commented that she is a little uncomfortable going up to people and basically has been observing from a distance. Ms. Presthus asked if they could wear something that would identify them as a Park Board member because that would help make her feel a little more comfortable in going up to someone and asking them about their park. Mr. Klus indicated that he would like to recommend to the staff that we pick one or two parks and talk about them for five or ten minutes at each park Board meeting about what the goals and objectives are. He noted that he would also like to see as part of the motion that the City’s Communications Coordinator get the word out to the people in Edina that Park Board members are watching the parks and list who is responsible for each park. He added that we probably don’t need to include the board members phone numbers because people can call the Park and Recreation Department. Ms. Presthus MOVED THAT THE PARK BOARD REGULARLY SCHEDULE REPORTS ON THEIR ASSIGNED PARKS ON THE BASIS OF MAKING SURE 11 THAT WE GET THROUGH ALL OF THEM WITHIN A YEAR CYCLE OF MEETINGS. EACH BOARD MEMBER WILL SHOW ON A MAP WHERE THE PARK IS LOCATED AND TALK ABOUT THE PARK AND ITS NEEDS. WE WILL USE THE COMMUNICATIONS COORDINATOR TO PUBLISH, IN WHATEVER PUBLICATION IS APPROPRIATE, THAT PARK BOARD MEMBERS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR ASSIGNED PARKS AND WILL BE VISITING THOSE PARKS TO GATHER IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR FUTURE PLANNING. IN ADDITION, EACH BOARD MEMBER SHALL BE PROVIDED SOME KIND OF IDENTIFYING NAME TAG OR APPROPRIATE IDENTIFICATION THAT STATES THEIR NAME AND THE FACT THAT HE OR SHE IS A PARK BOARD MEMBER. Floyd Grabiel SECONDED THE MOTION Mr. Fredlund indicated that the words “responsible for” seem a little strong to him. Ms. Presthus made an amendment to her motion that words “responsible for” be changed to “assigned to”. It was decided to have one Park Board member present their assigned park at each Park Board meeting starting with Park Board members in alphabetical order. It was noted that Mike Damman will give the first presentation at the August Park Board meeting. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. VII. ADJOURNMENT Ardis Wexler MOVED TO AJOURN THE MEETING AT 8:30 PM. Karla Sitek SECONDED THE MOTION. MEETING ADJOURNED.