City Council - Regular Meeting

15 seconds.

Hey, we're liveing and ready.

Yeah. I got a black marker today. That'll work. Have nothing to say today. I call to order for the city of Pataski the city council for February 2nd, 2026. Please rise with me for the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. I pledge algiance 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.

City clerk Beck, would you please call roll? De Moore, present. Wilmont, present. Nocttra present. Walker is absent. Murphy

present. We have a quorum. Next is the consent agenda. It's the January 19th, 2026 regular session, city council meetings as well as the close session which I will distribute to you. Uh city council meeting minutes as well as acknowledge and receipt of certain transactions administratively that have occurred since January 19th, 2026. Also, you will also acknowledge that you've received the 2025 fourth quarter investment report. You have any questions or comments on on the consent agenda? I move to approve them.

I support is Tina, did you have something you wanted to say? No. I go to Miss Beck for roll. No. Hi. Wilmont. Hi Deore. I Murphy. Hi. Next is public comment. John. Yeah, you guys send it back. Thank you.

Next is public comment. This is the opportunity. Let me let me clarify one thing first. Anything on the agenda you'll have a chance to speak to after that issue is is discussed whether it's motioned or not. That was clarified through the uh city charter. So, uh, at this public comment, if there's something else that you would like to speak to, come up to the podium, give us your first name, last name, and you'll have time to speak to council. And I ask that you speak to council up here, not to the audience. Does anyone wish to speak to council at this time?

Okay, hold on, Johnny. We have one Mr. Todd, you have the floor. Thank you. Um, my name is Ken Todd. Um, and my comments are regarding the Winter Sports Park, but I may not be available. Hold on one sec, sir. I'm going to ask that you start over in just a second. Uh, the volume was not up enough. Okay. Okay. Now, we're ready, sir. You hear me? Yes, sir.

Okay, great. Thank you very much. Um I'm speaking on the winter sports park because I may um not be available later when it is um addressed. Um uh my mother Marggo is also attending in person. U my family has lived at the top of the sledding hill for 56 years. So we have a daily bird's eye view of the park. Um and we plan to be there for decades to come. Um we are big fans of the park. love seeing it used to its full potential, which it has not been for years, especially since the ski hill and ropetoe were decommissioned and the sledding hill was cut short. It's great to have a master plan for the development of the park, but we have particular concerns about the spending prioritization outlined on page 30. We feel strongly that the first priority should be restoring the ski and sledding hills for the use of the general public and also focus on improvements to the main ice rink. These are much smaller budget items with broad appeal than the $4 million proposed hockey pavilion. A few questions that I asked will be addressed today when it um when it is on the agenda. Um in light of the last outcome of the last meeting, can someone please explain what the objective of today's presentation is and the hope and hope what will be approved? Can you please ex identify [snorts] who is driving this process? Can you please explain the purpose of the portable rope toe that is proposed and is it different than the magic carpet mentioned in the master plan drawings and is it for use by the public for skiing and sledding? Can you explain why the hockey rink and pavilion and shelter are the number one priority on page 30 when they were not even in the community survey last year? Was the master plan modified after being uh after the input from the community? And if so, what were the changes?

And can you please explain what approval of this master plan means? Is it a commitment to al ultimately build everything according to the spending priorities on page 30? Or is it a general long-term blueprint for all of the opportunities available for the development of the future? Finally, I propose modifying and remove or removing the priority spending list from the proposal and address it separately. Um, so thank you for um allowing me to speak. We are big fans of the park. Thanks so much.

Thank you. Hopefully some of your questions will be answered as we go through tonight's meeting. [clears throat] If not, please feel free to contact city manager. Uh, and I think we'll be able to give you more information on those questions. Anyone else wish to speak to council at this time? There being none, I will go to now city manager's report. I'm turn over to city manager Horn. Thank you, mayor, council members. Good evening. Um, few things to highlight in my report uh this evening. want to take the time to celebrate some staff uh milestones starting with February birthdays for the month of February. In our public safety department, Eric Hoy uh celebrates a birthday uh tomorrow. Uh Matt Miller in the public works department uh celebrates a birthday on February 12th. Director Carr, public safety director, uh celebrates a birthday this month on February 13. and our parks and recck director Kendall Clingelith celebrates a birthday later this month on the 26th. Um on February work anniversaries uh this month, Christine Hoff um assistant in the parks, public works and planning and zoning department celebrates four years with the city this month. Gina Ellenburgger in the public safety department, nine years. Um Kevin Marchowitz, uh public works, 14 years. John Dutch, public safety, 21 years. And John Hmel, parks and wreck, 24 years. Uh this month. Wanted to give city council an overview of the um uh training I went to last a couple weeks ago now on January 21st through the 23rd. This was the Michigan Municipal Executives Winter Institute.

It was held at uh the Grand Resort in Trevor City. I was able to attend a number of uh general sessions and breakout sessions. The power of sustaination was a general session. Um harnessing AI for community and professional advocacy. Leveling up unlocking life 2.0. And just to give you a little bit of background, these are city managers across the state of Michigan. So, this professional organization does a really good job in my opinion of trying to assist managers with um um the mental health aspect of what we do. Our jobs are not physically taxing, but they can sometimes be mentally draining. So, this conference does a great job of kind of building um building us back up, kind of giving us some tools to um uh to address some of our maybe some mental health challenges that we experience. So that's what that session was was on. How to n how to communicate through change and uncertainty. Uh we had MML there to give us a legislative update. Um recognizing and avoiding ethics. Quagmireers. Um effective budget communication strategies. Unearthing the truth. Cedar Springs encounter with forever chemicals. they had a very um significant issue with PAS um contamination in their community and so they shared a kind of a case study that of their um how they were going through that process. And then a big one that we all kind of really need to um continue to work on champion civility uh in our communities and tools to um provide communities on how to address those things. So very well put together. I appreciate the opportunity to attend and to to bring some things back to to our community. Um Friday we have the annual state of the community, the Paskki Chamber um

event. Um they're putting this back at the casino, Adawa Casino. Um this would be Friday the 6 starting at 1:00. I will be one of the panelists along with my colleague at the county Dave Ber talking about um uh governmental issues, projects that we've been working on and what what lies ahead in both the city and the county. So, I'm looking forward to joining Dave on that panel as well as several others uh that will be presenting uh from a variety of topics. Again, that's f this Friday the February 6th. Um Kendall has organized through our vendor for the skate park a design workshop that'll be held on February 10th um from 6:00 to 8:00 here in the community room. So anyone that's interested in working very closely in putting some design concepts together for our skate park. Um, we would encourage folks to participate in that workshop, provide some ideas, some some uh feedback on how we can really reimagine that space. Uh, so again, that's February 10th from 6:00 to 8:00 in the community room. And just an overall reminder in a couple weekends, uh, our winter wonderland weekend is coming up February 13th through the 15th. A lot of, uh, activities in and around downtown. Uh the winter sports park will have their kind of annual um um contest with a uh cardboard um uh what do they call that Kendall? A cardboard race.

Sled race. Cardboard sled. Okay. Thank you. Cardboard sled race. And there'll be bump jumpers that'll be there to um participate on a bump jump uh uh contest as well. So, if you've never seen that uh in person, that's really a sight to to see as well. So, really encourage folks to get out, embrace our wonderful winter weather that we have up in our region and really participate and support local businesses. So, any questions for me?

Um just a comment. I I hope that we can contact uh the schools and let them know about the uh about the design for the winter sports for the uh Riverbend skate park. Uh maybe going through Miss De Moore's group to make sure that they get it out that students the kids that are use utilizing that know Miss De Moore. Well, we have um Eloise Jones here and Ameilia Schuman here tonight from the Paskki Youth Advisory Council. So, they have been advised to carry that message up to Paskki High School. Thank you. Very good. Anything else? Mr. Knob,

just to follow on with that, I understood that there was a skateboard club or a group specifically. Is there such an organization? And are they being reached out to as well? specifically. Kendall's been meeting with um I don't know three or four folks from that group. Good. They helped us uh when we did an R RFQ to select a vendor, they were part of that review process and helped us kind of select or at least come to back to city council with a recommendation. So, they were part of that scoring uh process.

Thanks. Anyone else council wish to speak on this or does the public I mean sorry being [clears throat] none we'll go to considerations of appointments to the boards uh first one is uh Mr. Wagner. Uh I bring him forward for the parks and wreck commission. He was on city council in the past. He uh believes in developing long and short-term recreational and sports activity needs for the city. He's been involved with uh multiple organizations. uh, Habitat for Humanity, CS Lewis, uh, Sunrise Rotary, Big Water Creative Arts, um, Michigan State Athletic Council, um, as well as others. Mr. Moore,

I'm happy to make a motion to nominate Brian Wagner to the Parks and Recreation Commission. I support another fellow Ward Three involved Okay. Any discussion? I go to Miss Beck for roll. Deore. I knock I Wilmont. Murphy. Mr. Wagner, could you stand up? And thank you for serving.

Next is a new individual on a board. Um it's Greg Prttengeear. He uh recently moved to town several years ago, but uh worked for GM. He's uh been hired and is now working at Crooked Tree as a facilities manager. Uh trying to understand the balance and believes in balance between improving and preserving the history of the past. Like I say, he worked in the auto industry for 40 years. Uh he says he feels that what he would bring the to the to the uh zoning board of appeals would be uh problem solution and discovery of solutions uh and feels that he'll bring those skills.

Um Mr. Mayor, I move for uh appointment of Mr. uh Potton Geller to uh uh fill the expired term on the zoning board of appeals. Support discussion. I go to Miss Beck for roll. Wilmott. Yes. De Moore. I knock I Murphy. Hi. Yes. Yes. I know. Thank you very much.

Okay. We've got two individuals. Again, if there are positions that you there are positions that I'm be coming up in April. If you feel in looking at the board and commission that you would like to uh discuss or have someone contact, please do. I meet with anybody that applies for the board uh personally um and go from there. [clears throat] Again, not every board is has opens every year. There's a rotation of those 63 positions. Now we are at new business and this is to hear the winter sports park master plan presentation possible adoption of a proposed resolution approving the plan. Now before we get deep into this, Miss Walker is not here. I had a conversation with her yesterday. I kind of put it to her. I feel it's important that we all are here on this. This is an important process for the city. And she stated she would be online watching. She felt that it would be fine to go through but asked that we do no approval of any any action until two weeks from now. Council, do you you're okay with that?

Is there is there a deadline on anything? Are we going to get anything screwed up on anything? No. Um I I have no problem with it. I think there are items that we can discuss tonight. Yeah. In advance of uh

No, she was fine with it. She said, "Go ahead, discuss it. I'll be online watching what's going on. May not participate." She's at a conference out west in her job process that she works in. And I said, "Fine. Then uh we will I'll ask councel to not make motion to this either way up down in between anything until we allow her to at least have a participating piece to this." And I I felt that was Uh I I want to give that offer to any of you at council. I think there's issues that we approach that I think all five of us come up with a better solution than just three or four of us. So moving on, I'm going to turn it over to city manager Horn or is it to Mr. Plain Smith?

Yeah, I'm going to John, you're doing it tonight. Um I'm gonna ask John to make his way up. Uh John Eelangelie. John's our uh contractual planner and also a a principal at Becket and Raider um uh who put together the master plan along with um the city team uh Kendall and his parks and wreck um commission and we've had a number of community engagement efforts uh during this process that John will pick up on but uh we'll turn over to John for now. Uh thanks Shane, mayor and council and community. I've put together a brief slideshow that just summarizes the process that we used and how we came up with the uh the activities that are proposed in the u in the winter sports park master plan. Uh the process uh probably took around 8 months to go through. Um the uh the master plan itself, there's an introduction to the master plan process. Let me emphasize this is a master plan that has activities. There's really nothing that's being suggested at any time. These activities could be funded over a number of years with a number of different funding programs. But the purpose of the master plan is to allocate within the park appropriate level of activities. So we are not duplicating things or tearing things up as new activities are installed. That's the purpose of a a parks master plan is to have a vision of where things should be allocated and then over a period of time uh depending on community priorities and funding priorities those are implemented. I'll talk about the engagement process uh the conceptual plans that were developed and the preferred master plan and the CIP program which is a suggested budget. Sarah if you hit the next slide. The uh Winter Sports Park dates back to 1901

when the property was acquired by the city uh and has been a kind of a historic legacy park for the community. Uh during our investigations uh into the background of the park, we were surprised to find out that at one time it was called Swan Lake. Another time it was a zoo, and then it was eventually converted into a winter sports park back in the 1920s. Uh it was the site of the Paskki Winter Carnival and prior to speed skating being now an indoor activity since 1994. Uh at at one point in time the national speed skating championships were held here in Paskki uh when speed skating was an outdoor sport. Uh today it's an indoor sport. Um and uh so the times have changed but historically there was a speed skating competitions that were held here in Paskki at the winter sports park. Uh back in the mid90s uh the last improvement to the park was the lodge and the ice rink and that was 30 years ago. Um and you had discussion a couple of weeks ago on improvements to both the hockey rink and the uh proposed shelter. Go ahead Sarah. Uh here's a couple. This is a picture from the uh Little Traverse Museum photo collection which is has a fairly robust array of photography on the winter sports park over the years. Uh this is when a postcard that was called the Swan Lake before it was referred to as the Winter Sports Park. Go ahead, Sarah. These are pictures of folks that used the park for uh u uh snowshoeing and sledding. Go ahead, Sarah. Uh this was a uh part of the winter carnival. This was a rather large uh ice sculpture that was like 125 ft in width and 35 ft in height

and it was lit. Go ahead, Sarah. And this was the tobagen run uh at the winter sports park prior to the construction of US 31 because part of the hill was removed to fi to provide the fill for the bypass on 31 along uh Lake Michigan. So that's why the picture here people look and go, "Wow, it's a pretty pretty significant hill." Part of it was removed uh to build US 31. Go ahead, Sarah. And this is the uh uh uh some of the activities that were there during the carnival and some of the uh uh winter sports that you're going to have coming up in a couple of weeks as well. Bump jumping was something that's indigenous to city of Paskki in the winter sports park. Go ahead Sarah. The uh the last major improvement was 30 years ago as I mentioned the ice ice rink and the lodge building. There have been some minor upgrades to park facilities, but there there's been a lot of community interest in the winter sports park facility uh as a major recreation activity for the community. Go ahead, Sarah. Uh this is the time frame. We started in late fall of 2024. Uh the city commissioned a u a topographic survey by Benchmark Engineering out of Harbor Springs to provide the base information. In March of 2025, we had a neighborhood meeting and then we progressed into a community survey in May, eventually an open house which we had over in the community room in in August. Uh then we had a post openhouse community survey that lasted for about six weeks and then based on that information, we were able to prepare a preferred master plan. In November, it was presented to parks and wreck. December, we finalized the plan. And now here we're at a presentation before the city council. The uh as part of the process, we

prepared a project website which was available to the community. We listed some of the master plan uh concepts on there as well as community surveys. Uh those were uh accessed by uh URL code and by the QR codes that we had on all of the uh advertisements and program boards. Go ahead, Sarah. uh community engagement. We started with a neighborhood meeting. Approximately 60 property owners that surround that abut the winter sports park were invited to come to their own neighborhood meeting so we could talk about what their concerns and issues were and what they thought their expectations for the park are. And then from that we had a community openhouse once we prepared a number of concepts based on the survey that we results that we got back from the community and then people came in and discussed with us what they what [snorts] we didn't like. The process that we used as part of this master plan was a master plan by subtraction. Uh we had the community survey which we had approximately 400 residents from the city and a little bit more from outside the city take the survey. We had close to 900 respondents um that were split between non uh residents and residents. And based on the information that we received from the survey and all the written comments and the open responses from the question, we put together we tried to put together all the activities that everybody had suggested and we broke those up into what were would be summer activities and they were short shown on a summer board and then we had winter activities which were shown on a winter board. And then we asked people basically as they came to the open house we had a survey and we asked them to basically subtract those activities that they did not prefer in the park and based on those selections then we were

able to kind of filter that down to the preferred master plan. Uh over the course of the u process we had a number of survey flyers. We had boards here in the lobby that suggested or invited people to take the survey. They could take it here in print form. they could take it electronically. Uh [snorts] we also had the boards on display over at the public library where uh they were gracious to put them in their lobby. Uh we tried to encourage as much uh activity in terms of the uh survey process as possible in addition to with the assistance of the city of putting notification in the utility bill so people could see the notice for the survey in the the utility bills. And then also we had several ads that were in the Paskki News Review. So we we used a series of different outlets to try to get the information out to acquire as much input as possible. Go ahead, Sarah. Uh this is the community engagement. We had 60 adjacent property owners. We had 10 residents that attended and gave us input on what what they what they liked, what they didn't like, what they thought should be added uh to the uh neighborhood park, which was more of an intimate [clears throat] setting where there was discussion one-on-one with the neighbors. And we had that for about a 2-hour uh period of time. And we actually had that at the lodge in March. Uh so the neighbors could come down to the facility and and speak with us. When I say us, it was the design team plus Kendall. Shane was there uh as part of the city administration group. Go ahead, Sarah. The community engagement uh process, I've talked about that again. Go ahead. And the community survey, which we we had in May and June, which was primarily electronic, but we also had written comments uh that was advertised in the

news review and the city utility bills. And again, we prepared these boards that we had on display to encourage and we received close to 900 responses pretty much equal between non-resident and resident. That gave us quite a bit of input. uh some of the key uh some of the data metrics that came out of the survey. Uh we had uh 819 responses, 367 from the city, 452 from outside the city, primarily from Bear Creek and Resort Township. 75% of the respondents said they visited the park in the last 6 months, both in the winter and the summer. 82% of the respondents said that they would vote in favor of a millillage to fund park improvements, either likely or very likely. A lot of the common activities that people said that they used the park for were sledding, skating, hiking, and dog walking. Of course, these are a combination of winter and summer activities. Uh in the summer, uh people use the park primarily for like youth day camp, playground area. Um, and some other suggestions that came out of the survey was maybe to possibly use the park for an outdoor amphitheater. Go ahead, sir. Uh, when we had the community openhouse, we did have a survey card and we had each of the activities listed numerically and we asked people to select what they did not want in the future in the park. So, it was a master plan by subtraction because we had well over 20 different activities and people were asked to basically cross off the ones they didn't think were appropriate. Go ahead, sir. And then after the survey, after the community openhouse was completed, we continued with that survey online for an additional six weeks. And again, we had boards uh introducing that post community survey here in the lobby and at uh the uh the public uh library lobby as well. And then we asked the same

questions. We had survey cards at both locations. Plus, people could scan the QR code and they could take the survey online if they preferred. Go ahead, Sarah. And then as a result of that uh we came up with with the concept and then we came up with a preferred concept and go ahead Sarah and this was the card that was used. We had 23 activities uh that were listed and this was input from the community on the various activities. Uh some of the activities were for example people wanted increased access to the park uh something other than just winter sports park uh lane. Uh so we provided some ideas for that. Uh we people did want an amphitheater. We provided that. Some people said they wanted an exercise course. Those were provided. Eventually [snorts] those were the ones that were that came that were that were subtracted. So what was subtracted from the long list was the access points on Lake Street, the access point on Bay View Drive, the amphitheater was uh was was subtracted. The parkour exercise course was subtracted. Uh so there were a number of activities that were subtracted. One of the other ones subtracted was the magic carpet conveyor in lie of a a tow rope system. Go ahead Sarah. So some of the most controversial aspects that came out of the open house and the openhouse survey were the expansion of the parking lot, the addition of pickle ball, the parkour track, and the amphitheater. Uh mixed reactions were kind of neutral. People really didn't care one way or the other was event and display patio, the fire pits, the location of the playground complex, and the magic carpet uh for the skiers and the and the tubers. Least controversial was the ice skating rink, skating access, stabilized the nature trails, the lodge building upgrades. People felt that needed to be

upgraded and they wanted the ski hill tow rope restoration. And [snorts] in lie of the one that's there now, which is pretty much at least from a technical point of view, looks like it's going to be very expensive to rehabilitate because of its condition. We did put into the master plan a portable ski uh rope uh uh tow rope that can be installed and can be maneuvered from hill to hill uh depending on what the uh uh the activities are. Go ahead, sir. So we we showed summer and winter activities and opportunities uh based on community input and then hit the next slide. And then we came up with the preferred master plan where we subtracted the activities that people determined were uh something that they did not prefer to come up with the preferred master plan and then based on that uh we prepared a a capital improvement budget for the uh for the master plan. Uh, one of the comments that was made prior to the meeting here that I want to clarify, uh, on page 30 where we had the sequence of events, [snorts] we we never included in the community survey the shelter over the ice ar hockey arena uh, ice hockey facility or the uh, or the improvements to the ice rink itself. The reason being is council had already taken action over the prior to the master plan in terms of authorizing the DNR grant uh to go after money for the project. They had authorized design and engineering for the project, authorized bidding of the project. So at the time this was prepared, those actions were already moving along and in anticipation of that project happening, we put that that was probably out of the gate was going to be one of the first projects done because it just appeared based on the actions that were being taken that that was the direction it was going in. So it wasn't a bait and switch at all.

We just incorporated a project that the city had been working on for the last four years into the master plan. Really the goal of this plan was to take a look at other activities besides the hockey hockey rink and the proposed shelter facility because those were already under community conversation pre prior to the the preparation of this master plan. As I mentioned, the plan's got a lot of activities on it. Some of them are are costly, some are not costly. Many of them are grant eligible. We don't this this is a master plan that would get funded over a number of years. Um, but I don't want to give anybody the impression that once the master plan is approved, the city's going to write a check in order to get all the improvements done. It's a master plan. It's a long-term vision, and that's the reason why the plan was done. Thank you, your honor.

Sure. When we start talking about stuff, it's just numerical the numbers. Yeah, I see on page 30 it says number two is playground and splash pad 995 already already got that we go down to the next page and it's only 521. That's right. It's really 521. It was just a uh it's not it's not the it's not the higher number. Okay. Yeah. I just wanted to clarify that. Yes. Well, and similarly on that page number 14 is not in dollar format. So totals at the bottom of the page are completely wrong.

The the total the total the way this you can't add them up this way and come the numbers of the totals there was a dot instead of a comma. Yes. So I mean yes we noticed that. Yeah. Those are 32 or is it not 32? It is not. Which one? The sub the subtotal of all components. The total of all components is you have 3.2 million. Yeah. It's not that it is not

the the number on the the sheet which we we we found after the publication was the detailed estimate was prepared in in Excel. The the the summary table was prepared basically in word and uh page 30 and page 30 and 31. So the the one table table two was prepared in word and the numbers were transcribed and obviously transcribed like the play playground and splashpad number was wrong and there should have been a comma rather than the 406.250 uh but we'll we will make the change uh based on the more detailed uh cost estimate. Are you saying that since they were transcribed that the 3,24,945 for the subtotal is correct? The subtotal is 3,525,441 when you when I when you balance the number. So the splat the splash pad number is around 500,000 more in one chart than the other one. And that's the reason for the difference in the uh in the total. We will have that fixed on the uh the revised copy.

474,000. Yeah, we'll we'll have it revised. So, both of the charts jive. One was done and then the number was transcribed and obviously transcribed wrong. 474,000 off of the site improvement total that is listed there. Actually, you would take it off of the subtotal because of the 10% that 10% contingency. Yeah. Follow. No. Well, I I I follow you, but I'd like somebody to add the column numbers and confirm it. Yes.

Are you asking for the the correct numbers now? We'll get it corrected. We'll get it correct. You You're not going to vote on your resolution in two weeks. We'll have it corrected for your next meeting. Okay, I'll go to De Mo first.

So, thank you, Mr. Echo Angelie. Respectfully, the explanation that you gave for the exclusion of the pavilion project doesn't sit well with me. In December of 2024, December 16 to be specific, at a city council meeting, I made an extended statement that included the following. I believe that the winter sports park pavilion project is best considered as a part of the overall winter sports park master planning process. This will give full and fair consideration to all aspects of the community gem that is the winter sports park. That was the night that the council voted four to one for the bids to be extended. So, it was clearly in the vapors that at least one of us, and I can't speak for others, were interested to know from a data perspective what the public felt about the pavilion as an aspect of this process. So, I'm very confused at this point, how that did not go forward yet. in the master plan at page 30. The approximately $4 million pavilion project is now back in the master plan when it was not a part of the master plan community survey.

Well, I I thought I had I thought maybe I explained it. Maybe I didn't explain it in detailed enough. The majority of council, I don't keep track of who votes for what, but my understanding is the majority of council had authorized the DNR grant to provide some of the funding for the shelter. The city the city council had authorized the city administration to proceed with design and engineering. The city council had had directed the city administration to go off for bid on the project. This was all in advance of preparing this that project has been going on for almost 40 years and has gone through a number of community conversations. What we did here in this master plan, we put that project aside because it's already on its own track and we wanted to see and investigate with the community what the other activities for the park were. Now, during some of the meetings, both the neighborhood meeting and the community meeting, room meeting, a couple of residents had asked me, "Well, when you do prepare the final plan and the cost estimate, are you going to include the estimate for the arena, the ice hockey arena, and the shelter if you know it at that time?" So, there's a full capital budget for the entire park and that's what we did. That's why we just included it in as a lump sum, not a detailed estimate, but the estimate that the engineers had prepared as part of the bid process in order to show the public what the full scope economically was of the park. So that was the reason that we didn't ask the community about the arena or the shelter is because for the last four years that's already been in the public arena and being discussed here at at at this council meeting at these council sessions. Can can you explain to me what

the downside would have been since you had that whole process in place, 23 items listed to put a 24th item on that list to get clear data about the public's perspective on that aspect? I thought there was already the public aspect on that project based on all the other conversations and approvals that the council went through. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Navar.

This is obviously a point of contention and I know I'm I'm trying to obvious I wasn't here. Um, did we spend money and approve to spend money on any of the design during these four years of doing this? Did we spend money

and have grants? And so this council did approve to spend money on this. So why wouldn't it have been already kind of I mean in all due respect to everybody, I'm kind of understanding what John's saying is if it was already we're spending money four years into it. Doesn't seem like we should be beating them up now for excluding it because you have a record to say that we were doing it to it. I was under the impression, I believe I was on city council, was that no city money was going to go to the cost of the pavilion. No city money was going to go to the cost of the pavilion. It was going to be paid for by Rotary, some grants and some donations. And then when we come up now that we come back and the cost is uh you know Well, the pavilion itself is uh 1.8 8 million and it went from you. They were going to raise the board up there said 1.4 four whatever they ended up with 800,000 the city by the time this had got through there wasn't enough funds to pay for it was understood that city council had I I am sure stated we were not going to be footing the bill for this because we had organizations that wanted to do it over time it just grew and grew to the point now where it's not very feasible

and then the last meeting we had we basically couldn't move forward forward with anything on the spending of it. So clearly there is a little bit of a pause on this whole thing whether it was in the survey or not that's somewhat irrelevant at this point as though it's but it is an important matter to be talked about.

I think ultimately I've spent a lot of time on this. I've been here for a long time. I believe the best way to approach some of this is to go with a millillage to the public not with three separate areas are somehow addressing because we have we have a lot of areas to address. We have neighborhood parks that have not been upgraded in 2030 years. We have a window sports park that has not been upgraded for 30 years. I think we can do a combination of upgrade of all three of those neighborhood parks, the winter sports park, the basics, and I think we need to go through and we need to cut and paste some of this stuff that's on here because I know talking to some of you and I agree there is stuff up here that I I not really ready to fly with. However, I think people should have a say on whether they want a pavilion, whether they want a chilled ice, but I also think they should have a say on are we going to upgrade our parks at our winter sports park. I believe we should have skiing at the winter sports park. I think we could have lessons there for kids that just that it's it's a cheap way for kids to get experience without having to go travel. And I think that's

a plus to this community. And so I'm of the feeling that this is a part this this master P plan that we're talking about right now park. I think it's real important that we identify what are the real priorities to get each of these four parks, five parks up to snuff, including the winter sports park without going overboard and going into big debt. And I think people will support that if we are conscientious about one thing and that's not overbuilding stuff, not paying a half a million dollars for a parking lot. I think we could do some better things for the people in Kaskki by doing this approach. And that's that's what I'm going to propose as we get going through this process. And I think your honor to just bolster your your argument is that we did ask a question in the survey about people's willingness to support a park millillage.

But the problem is with that there's no dollar sign there. That's correct. Yeah. But you you' need a dollar sign on this stuff because otherwise people you know should we have a rope tow or should we have chairlifts there at the state park? I mean, you could ask, should we have a chairlift there? And you're going to get some people in Paskki raising their head saying we need a chairlift up there. Exactly. So, I think we have to use these people have been elected. I think they need to use common sense.

That's why they were elected for common sense use to come up with a plan that is acceptable to the community so we can get this a millage passed for the Wish Sports Park and our our other other parks that we have. That's my stand. I'm sticking to it. Mr. Mr. Mr. Wilmont. Thank you, John, for your presentation. Are you you good with me right now? Um, no, I have some I have some questions. Okay. Questions.

Um, and I agree with the mayor's statement that given [clears throat] the nature of what we want to do at the Winter Sports Park and we do want to do these things. I think that that's pretty much of a consensus, at least most of these things. um is how to fund it. And that gets back to the question of the pavilion as well because we're we're we're uh uh we are incomplete in our thought process as to how to fund uh that initiative at this stage of the game or refrigeration or any of the other questions. So what is key to uh funding all of these ideas with a millillage is being able to clearly articulate to the public what the proposed improvements are and how much they cost. And of course cost was not estimated cost of course and it you know may vary if we do it in year one or year five and we understand but a perspective to give the citizens an opportunity to establish their priorities which ultimately will be done in the form of a ballot uh a millage ballot. But between now and then, we need more data as council people on various questions, including how the pavilion idea and the refrigeration of the ice stacks up against these other potential priorities. And so I consider the winter sports park master plan incomplete at this time and would propose when we do take action to send it back to parks and wreck with our thoughts and our feedback of what it needs to comprehensively give us the data that we need to set forth to the public because it doesn't currently give that to us. And the mayor is adding another dimension that the other improvements in the other parks um

ought to be included in the same millillage. And we've we've had discussions about that. And honestly, I don't know whether it's appropriate to do separate millage for the winter sports park given the nature of its size and proportion relative to all of the other parks improvements. I don't know whether it's two millillage questions or one and will need expertise from uh the millillage consultant that the parks and wreck has seen but the council has not heard that presentation that was made to parks and wreck. So again our data for how to evaluate this and move this forward much less approve this plan in its current form is incomplete. Uh, so what I'd like to do and suggest is that council give parks and wreck the feedback that they need on the plan as it's currently written and see its next iteration. Thank you.

I know I'm I I'm mixed on whether to send it back or they've sent us the best recommendations for us is to just go through and cut and paste and say this is what we're going with. But it but it doesn't include any feedback from the public on the pavilion, on ice rink, on snow making equipment. We don't we don't have any data to compare to the other things listed in this in this winter sports park plan at this time. No, I think I think downhill skiing if that's what the interest has spoken or has been a highlight of I think a snow making. Do we have kind of do we have snow making? Do we have anything for snow making at all?

No. There was one fan that was from the 60s. It's not. Okay. That is no longer Okay. At one time, Nubs or Bo had talked of used equipment or something. We'll have probably $400,000 in infrastructure improvements before we could do anything like that. because we need water and water and electricity. Understood. But again, this reiterates the fact that this is an incomplete plan. We have incomplete citizen feedback data and the citizens have not present been presented with any dollar figures to help them consider their list of priorities as well.

Your honor, with all due respect, this engagement process that we went through was exhaustive. I understand. We did neighborhood, we did community, we did post community, we did open houses, we did we did a number of surveys. So for for for somebody to say that this this plan does not include community feedback is is is wrong. There was a there was a lot of community feedback that went into this plan in terms of a number of different venues and opportunities for people to come in. making is they weren't the pavilion and the chiller was not included in the nor snow making

nor snow making was included in the public survey of of of questions that people would address I think am I correct is that what you're trying to say that's exactly there's two yeses so I tried to so in the four years that we've been talking about this the public hasn't weighed in at all in that fouryear period

data is different than anecdotal information. Relative to these components, we have anecdotal information. I would agree with that. But the bigger question is again, what was the downside of simply including that? Because we have that information now. But for me, and with due respect to Mr. Nocttrab who kind of said, you know, it's not relevant. It's extremely relevant because the pavilion project was not a part of the community input, but now it's included in a master plan developed as part of community input. That's problematic.

Well, but why wouldn't it be included in the master plan if it was an activity or a project that was already underway by the city? because you didn't gather to support any data to support its inclusion. And excuse me, Mr. Additionally, not only did you put it in without any data, you prioritized it as the number one proposed activity sequencing because the council had already bid through it and the only thing left was making a decision.

So, can say is as of last meeting there was not we were not able to move it forward.

I guess the purpose of the master plan I'll just say this in conclusion was the the ice arena and the pavilion were projects that had already been tenatively sanctioned by the city and were moving down its own track. This master plan was to take a look at other activities in the park in terms of their upgrade and improvements. At the very end, we just took the numbers from the engineers for that project and we put them in here to give the community an overall understanding of what the total capital project was going to be. That was it. Very simple.

The council then has a choice of not keeping for this approval process. does not have they can pick and choose what they want to put into the capital improvement. Absolutely.

It's your choice. All of these things listed are your choice. If successful with a motion next week or the week after, whatever you say is it goes basically is what this is. Capital improvement plans are a wish list. I think in the past sometimes we're too free with putting everything in the world on this wish list and I think we need to be more more specific on our wish list so that we have so that they're achievable so that we have a a way of of achieving them. I think that's important. So

thank you your honor. I'm Mr. Nrop Tina um characterized my u irrelevant comment. I I feel really compelled to to say I think you either I didn't articulate it right or you're you're twisting my words.

Um what I was saying was irrelevant is the notion that it wasn't in there for you to keep saying what was the downside while it wasn't considered. John articulated why his group didn't put it in there. You can't change that now. We Let me just finish. It it has been become very clear through particularly this last the last council meeting the money's gotten bigger. You know like John said it was going to be funded by the Rotary fund. Things have all got changed. There's been some people kind of rechallenging the pavilion. And I think we need to revisit that whole notion of that. But to to to go on and say to argue about something that we can't change that part is irrelevant. So the that was the the one thing and and the I want to just finish what I had my point here and I'll turn it right back to you. Um the the what I understand is the what we've been officially asked to do is to is to adopt this master plan. And what John is suggesting is I'm trying to follow all this stuff is that it's up to the council to pick and choose where the priority stuff and and in and that and then that becomes a master plan just like these other things that we have a lot of other priorities on that that are there that I think are important like the wheelway that we had a whole bunch of people having an interest in the other parts that John has said that's all comes into the funding of it. So it seemed like decision one is get this right that we like that we can all agree to that's it. Decision two I love the millage idea. Then we talk about funding on a larger scale. But I I just I think where where we're headed and what John is suggesting makes all the sense in the world. We need to get more feedback from the from the community.

As Charlie mentioned, Mr. Wilmont mentioned um if you if council feels that they would feel better about getting a public survey on snow making on the uh pavilion and on the chiller. I don't have a problem with that. Um, I re remind people of several things. If we are ever going to go for a millillage, I feel it's only fair and correct to go in a November year of the of a year, not to go in a May or some off season. I think it's important to allow everybody in the public to be cognitive of this. I also know we're on a time limit of getting this thing going. Um I think the you know I I think we need to move forward on some of this. Uh Mr. Wilmont, I agree and I think that um uh right now uh if it's not being spoken um it's being thought that we want to target this November as a millage ballot question for with regard to parks and wreck, but there's quite a lot of stuff that needs to happen before we're ready to go there. And it it seems to me that yes, we have a litmus list here of uh that we can all weigh in in in on individually based on the feedback that we've gotten anecdotally from the community based on the status the stats that we have from the winter sports park survey to date. But we need to include to be holistic in the entirety of the winter sports park concept. We need to start including the possibility of a shelter of some kind for the rink, potential of refrigeration for the rink and and the snowmaking equipment and have those numbers at our disposal to

consider along with everything else on this list. And then my recommendation would be um uh to take that those highlights and then send them back with our priorities attached for a rewrite of this plan. While we are working on the other parks plan to get a a specific itemized list for those improvements as well, I'm going to do is open it up for discussion on some of these items. I think it's important we need to move forward on this. We can beat around the bush. Um, you have a map that showed a lot shows where it would be addressed at on the You have this map.

Yes. Right. You probably need to have this out or if it helps. Okay, next is persist parking lot expansion. Um, somebody did come uh would you like a simple yay or nay from council members? Well, I guess sure the the reasoning for it. This is just considered a poll of our current opinions, right? Your current opinions.

How many are in favor of leaving it there?

Not I. I'm having a real trouble trying to figure out how to do this in in my mind. I don't have when I have when we're presented in a master plan, it's supposed to be the result of a whole bunch of people come together and to go one by one. I'm going to defer to to you guys. I I don't have the same feel, you know, I got some major I got some dollar figures that I don't like the spending all this money that is important to me. I don't think we can go get a millillage for $25 million to get wheelways and $8 million and all. I think we got that, but I can't personally, John, comment other than my own personal opinion. Okay,

missed more. So, if you look back to the data, um I'm looking here at the comment card summary, although I have some questions because it says total response is 87. My question was, are these only from the August 19, 2025 openhouse event or were the balance of the physical parts included there? However, having said that, um, it says in there, quote, "Parking lots were the most contentious issue with a high dis disapproval rates regarding components 1, 22, and I think 23." And this references component one. Um, one of the key recommendations in the comment cards summary was number one, eliminate contested parking proposal. the community clearly doesn't see the need for additional parking and strongly opposes neighborhood impact. So the second one, I don't know if that speaks to all of them or just components 22 and 23, but the other comment in there referenced component one, which would be this one to the extent that's helpful.

Dan, could you speak on the parking lot expansion? need for it.

I think what that's referring to is we would take up some of the existing parking with doing some ADA sidewalk modifications because right now it's very difficult to get up into the lodge from the parking lot. So, doing some modifications to the parking lot to bring in more accessibility options would take up some of the existing parking. Um, so that's that's that. It's not talking about the neighborhood parking lot expansions. And I guess at this point from staff standpoint, it would just be good for us to know what are the things on this list that you want to keep on here.

That's easier to do it that way versus redlinining things out. No, that's fine, too. What we're just going through what what to keep or what. Yeah. At this point parking, Mr. No. No.

For right now, we'll cross out and I'm saying for right now we come back. This is just a step by step. Playground and uh and splash pad. I think splash pad cost about 170,000 is I broke it down to about 170,000. Um, which leaves uh 350,000 for the playground apparatus, etc. I think a playground apparatus and stuff at that park would be fine. Um, I question the splash pad at this point. Mr. Wilma

um with regard regard to the uh item number two playground and splash pad u my reading of the data from the survey was not highly supportive of this and therefore it's not on my list of top priorities I agree and if because there are playgrounds there's one at the waterfront etc and if you're going to do a splash pad I put it near the waterfront not in the winter sports park

we do we do have playground apparatus at this at the the waterfront. My my contention is I believe every neighborhood park should have a playground type of setup for children. Every single park, Curtis, Lockwood, Washington, and this park should also have it where a mother and dad can take their kid down and uh they've got some playground equipment. It's cheap. I I think it lasts a long time. I'm That's why I'm in favor of it. I understand you're not. So I guess at this point we'll cross it out at this Mr.

No, I I think John on on that I I I agree with you. I think it makes sense to leave the the playground in. I also agree with the notion of the splash pad if we're going to have it go down by the waterfront. here. Same here. I totally agree that doesn't So that means possibly when it starts going to what we start looking at neighborhood parks to see going to this as a quote unquote neighborhood park piece.

Um I just to be clear, we're not voting on these elements. We're just you're just polling us for our opinions at this stage for feedback potentially. We have Miss Walker coming back next week. I guess you know general general discussion on this downhill uh short slope, downhill long slope, portable rope till I'm I'm just going to list all three of those. Anybody have any opinion on those? Mr. Not Mr. Wart?

I I'm not clear on what the portable ropetoe is. Uh but clearly the the slopes, the ski slopes and some form of lift if not on the the top the the long slope but also both slopes I'm I'm totally in favor of and it's supported by the data on the surveys

as am I I I think this it's nice to have a rope a toe going up to the sledding hill but that means if you're a skier you get off that and you have carry your skis up another 50 60 feet up the hill to to ski the whole hill. I believe a rope toe going back where it was or thereabouts is the way to go. Mr. more.

So, uh I'm not a skier, but I have a question on page 27 because when it talks about this, it says um portable toe protoe rope system for transporting personnel and equipment to begin participation on the downhill short and long slopes. So, I don't understand what that means. Is that for what word are you looking at? Is it for personnel or is it for participants or both? The word probably should have read participants. Is that correct? Yeah. Tow rope would get sledders. It would get skiers up to the top of the hill.

Okay. And then the second thing is a constituent mentioned to me um given that the magic carpet was a middling um choice that apparently and again I don't know this I'm not a skier that can be used to facilitate skiing for folks who are um disabled and if that's correct I wonder that that might be something we would consider again outside my area of expertise. Now, from the feedback that I received after speaking with Kendall further, the the magic carpet is a considerably more expensive way of taking people to the top of a hill. On the other hand, if you're dealing with disabled people or you're dealing with toddlers on a on a sled, it's a much more efficient way and the state-of-the-art for the way that real ski slopes do it and their bunny hills. Uh the rope toe is really more appropriate for where the old rope toe used to be for skiers that can latch onto it and and take a ride to the top of the hill. Does that help? Actually, the tow rope based on the manufacturer can be used for both sled sledding tubes and skis. We'd have to we'd have to manage that. So only one use can be using it at a certain time. So there'd be times where skiers can use it, times where sledders, tubers could use it. Um the the downside of a magic carpet based on cost is one and then two you you in the summer you would have this in the middle of your slope where you potentially could not use it for something else versus the portable tow rope you can take down during the summer and store it and still have that slope to do other things with. So

there a portable that will go all the way to the top. Yes, there is a portable that go to the top. And what's how does that differ in the cost on on what we've got here? I guess that's a homework piece. No, that's that's the cost to get you to the top of the hill. This this one on this 10,000. This one on this sheet right here will actually go all the way up to the very top here where the ski without having to walk there. Yes. And we'll stretch out that far. Yes. And angle different. Oh, I'm sorry. Miss M missed the

And as far as other potential uses of the hill in the summer, what what are we thinking of there?

I mean, we've even tossed around ideas like um u slides like a slide you could put on the hill in the summer months that you could use it. Obviously, we don't have anything now, but um and maybe it's not a big deal. Maybe that's not an issue that we have this going up the middle of your your slope in the off season. Um, but there are electrical requirements as well for a for that piece of equipment. And I I would just say if you're going to invest that much in uh in a mechanism to get you to the top, you're really now into snow making. Because if we have a situation where we have a $400,000 piece of equipment that we can't use because the hill is green or brown because we haven't got snow cover, we have to have the ability then to coat that hill with snow. Um, so I think if you're if you're buying a if you're buying a magic carpet, we're in the mode of snow making.

I'm going to ask council, are you interested in having city manager Mr. Congo Smith, the parks and wreck, John uh working to get us the price on the snow makings to totally and the rope tilt to the top as well. Absolutely. We have that. Those numbers already exist. We already have that. All right. Yeah. So, that could be Could that be shared then at the next meeting when we we meet next week? I mean, I think you already have that, but we can reshare that with you. I think we should.

The the thing to keep in mind, I've heard some folks concerned about um noise and and kind of things going on down in the pavilion potentially. Snow banking is not a quiet operation. This is going to be in the middle of the night, 2:00 in the morning, 3:00 in the morning. There's going to be lights on. There's going to be machines that are that are fans that are blowing snow. There's going to be groomers that are out there, you know, making sure that the hillside is is covered and groomed appropriately. So, just want neighbors to understand and know if we're in the snow making mode that that's a little going to be a little disruptive. So, just laying that out there.

Um, you also mentioned lights. Are we do we need improvement in the lighting system for that? I don't know about our lights. Um I haven't heard that, but we will have to have lights on um to be able to work safely in the middle of the night for sure. So, so we have numbers for that for next week discussion. Um you see 39,000 for the uh bowl receiving bowl doing some landscape on the hill.

Yeah. I I was curious for a better explanation of why the reshaping of the hill is considered to be appropriate. I mean, I understand the bowl at the bottom, but the reshaping there's quite a a lot of dollars here invested in reshaping the hills. And I'm curious to know why.

Yeah, right now if you go down the hill, you have a tendency to want to go toward the woods. Um, so trying to contour that hill so you we don't have anybody going into the wooded area where we kind of have a a path. We've talked about if we're going to do sledding, do we want a dedicated um like a tubing run, like a a a shoot that you you would stay in um similar to what the picture we showed earlier, but we we've talked about at least internally about having a couple runs where it would be dedicated for tubing. uh that you can sit in and and do your thing. That's where the receiving bowl comes in because what we don't want obviously is kids to run into the parking lot as we can all imagine. So the receiving bowl would slow that uh inertia down and and that's where you would collect u everyone down in that area and you'd get back on the tow rope and go back and and do it again. So that's why we think contouring is it's it's not I don't think it's overly pricey to recontour the hill. We probably should do that regardless of what we do here. I think that needs to be done anyway. Um we have we have the the data now, surveying data to know kind of what we need to do. Um so now it's just a matter of engaging a contractor to to to do that work. So in the big scope of this project that's pretty minor. I'm looking at the next one is expanding the the deck lot the lodge deck.

Um I mean at about 300,000 do I keep going or is there somebody who wants to say yes or no to it or

I I would I would support that. Uh the one comment that I have had from the public and it's more the event and display patio, but they were concerned about expansion in the direction of where the big rink on the lawn is because any encroachment in that area might compromise the speed skating uh uh distance that is needed. So I would be I would make a note to be very careful of that because uh speed c skating seems to be historically important and uh something that we want to support going forward. Shane, do you have anything?

No, I think we would certainly we don't want to encroach into that area either. Um but I think reimagining this would not be just simply taking a deck board off and putting a new deck board on. We want to really reimagine that space. um incorporating some I like you talked about some outdoor heating elements. So if your if you're a parent watching your your child skate, there's a place to get warm. If you your child wants to get warm, they don't have to go in the lodge. They can kind of be out and make it more of a a community feel. I think that would be that would be a neat thing to have out there. I support that, mayor. You guys, too. The deck. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah,

I also heard from a constituent a concern about the fire pits encroaching uh into the big rink as well, if I remember correctly. We're not there yet. Well, then there's the uh 120,000 for the event and display patio. I'm a no on that. I'm a no. At this point, it's a no and we'll see what we go with it. The fire pit I'm a no.

I'm probably a no. TBD on that one. Okay, the discussion next time. Next is multi-purpose uh field. It's on page 34 uh 340,000.

I'm a yes. Can I ask some information on that chain with that? Um, what area of the winter sports park will that be going into the woods area or that's where the skating rink is now? Correct. Purpose field. How's it going to change for one of you want to take that?

Anyone? Anyone? 340,000 for the field that's going to be on the where the ice rink is. I'm just a little clarity of it of little clarity. The number 10 is the uh multi-use area. That was the area where you have the skating ring. During the summer, it was envisioned that that area could be used for soccer. Uh so it's just it's a it's a it's a multi-purpose area. So, but isn't it used for that now? Yeah. The number 10. Yeah, it's used for that now. That's the uh used for that now. Yeah. So we have

that would that be artificial turf? Is that what No, it would not be 30 340,000 there. What what's what's going to it it it would call some for some grading and and establishment of new natural turf because of some of the area towards the woods. It it's not in the best shape. So it would it be you know if you have a soccer field which would then be used in the winter for for skating it has to be level level now. Uh no not not not not fully level now.

No not in the back part along the the uh the eastern edge is kind of mushy in terms of the uh but that's that's due to that's due to springs. Yeah. Correct. Yeah. Right. at least 65 years it's been that way. Yeah. What are you proposing to do something about that area?

So almost 34 almost drainage system. There are pieces of a drainage system. We know we have specific areas here and here pipes underneath this field. Excuse me. The rest of this drier and actually a little easier to fill ice.

So, what you're saying is this isn't really we're looking at a multi-purpose sports field. What we're doing is taking and improving the drainage instead of read improving the drainage on the sports park. Right. Okay. Yeah. Just so they understand what we're doing. Miss Miss Timmore. So what part of the 340,000 odd dollars is to solve the drainage problem versus other things? Let me ask him. Well, except for the furnishings. Oh, except for what furnishing. What's

there's going to be time for public comment. No, at the at the appropriate time. Okay, keep going, Mr. N. At the matter of principal, I didn't think it was I was a no on that because we have other we have other land around, but in listening to what the explanation, I can see why we would spend something to fix it up. So, I can too. I'm a yes for that you guys. Yes. Yes. Yeah. Moving on. So, a good one. Moving on. Skate access runway. I'm I'm for that. I I I know this is what we're talking about. Employer. Yes.

Moving right along. Stabilized natural trail and lawn removal. Um 325 thou uh no 13,000. Oh, wait. Number 12. 59. Oh, number 12 is 59. I'm sorry. 60,000 for uh stabilizing natural trail and lawn removal. That's tree and brushing it at trail grading granular trail surfacing. I support. Yes. Okay. Moving on. Rope [clears throat] uh remove ropeto building $13,000. What else you going to do with it?

I support. Moving along. Lodge improvements. Um lodge improvements. I support ADA ADA upgrades 320,000. I support Mr. Moore. It says 46,250. Is that wrong? No, that's right. You're right. It's up on the next page. Next page, Mr. Mayor. Top of page 25.

Yes, it I'm sorry. It carries on to the top of the right page. the large improvement for ADA etc is 325 and then you have um general condition design engineering and construction another 50,000 for that for design four that in this yes and this is just to upgrade it that's the reason to make it look nicer yep And that's one of the ADA bathrooms upgrading ADA is one thing, but is it doing anything other than providing ADA?

Rooms all associated with the ADA if it's needed. Yeah, it just it's a lot of money. So if it's needed, I'm okay with

a lot [clears throat] lawn activity lawn, which is number 15 on your sheet. $24,000. What kind of activity are we talking about on that? I I'm assuming looking at it without without any feedback from those guys that these other improvements are going to mess up the lawn. Now you need to resell it.

It it' just be a flat area for lawn games, broet, blonde bowling. We would have obviously that equipment in the lodge that people could check out. Sounds good. I say leave it guys. I'm okay with leaving it on. The whole condition is we're doing this not to approve anything. We are right now. Yeah. This isn't approving anything.

This is saying if we could do it if we can do it financially, which we feel we are good about could probably possibly do it. Leaving this in. The next one is we uh restroom building including sidewalk. Um restroom building is uh 370,000 130,000 of the half of it. If you go to page 35, you can pull out you see where the building is listed at 370. I'm I'm wondering about the need here. There's already restrooms in the main. Yeah, it's just a convenience thing having one outside versus inside

as a potential future. That's no is a good answer. Yeah. All right. Remove. So that's a no at this point. Taking that out. Well, we're we're taking it out of this discussion, but it will be coming back in discussion next week because we'll be walking through this one more time. Remove ropetoe apparatus. Uh $6,000. There's none of it that can be used as what we have now, is there? This is basically trash, right? All right. I'm fine with removing it. I am too.

I see Joe said yes. Number 18, maintenance building of for snow groomer and ice making equipment, that comes to $100,000. Well, assuming we add that equipment into the into the list, I support it. Yes. Assuming that that is needed. Yes.

So, that comes Let's not talk about the cost right now. We'll be talking about that next week. You guys, we've covered it as we went down. We need some changes on some of this number-wise. [snorts] Um, not included some of this. I believe it's important to put this hockey rink The minimal that we do, the very minimal that we do is put the hockey ring back. If it needs cement, you do the cement floor. If it needs boards and glass, you can do the boards and glass. I believe that that should minimal. If we're not doing chiller and we're not doing a pavilion, the minimal amount is to get the hot ring back usable condition for people to use. Mr. Moore Yeah. So, I just want to make clear that for me if the this kind of second major division of the hockey rink improvements estimated at 3.745 million is left in here. I will not vote to move this forward. Now, if we get to a millillage and you want to have two separate categories where the things that have received public comment are a portion of the vote and then you have a separate item designated for the hockey rink, the chiller, and the pavilion so that people have the opportunity to vote on that separately, that's a different story. But as far as embedding it in here because it was not informed by community input data, I wouldn't move it forward with this in there.

I'm for maintenance and taking care of what we've got. And that hockey rink has been utilized for 50, 60 years. And I think it behooves us to fix the hockey rink up at least to make it usable, safe and usable like it has been in the past. And it does not mean to Taj Mahal, but it means getting it back so it's usable in a safe manner and condition for people to use it. So therefore, I believe that that piece of it should be put into the winter sports park if we were to go for a millillage. It's a part of the winter sports park package because that is is a a vital part of as downhill skiing as sledding and the ice skating and the hockey rink. There's four things that are very vital to I think the winter sports part and the hockey rink is one of them. Mr.

I I tend to agree with you. I'm I think what I if I'm hearing what you're what your objection, Tina, is is the pavilion and the and the chiller system out. Are you also objecting to just anything we do in this with the with the rink? Okay. So, are you in agree my understanding you're in agreement with how John outlined it? That's okay with you. I just have to hear and see what that looks like. Okay.

Because I'm I'm kind of with you about not putting the pavilion and the chiller stuff in for now and have that somehow separately till we determine who wants and who doesn't want it and the financing of it. But the first part of what you said, John, makes total sense because that is a a fundamental part of the winter park. It's that should be first class. One of the four pieces should be there. Skiing, sledding, skating, and in the hockey rink. I I believe those four pieces are are the main pieces of this and we need to maintain it. We have it. Gosh sakes, let's let's fix it.

I don't disagree with you at all. I'm curious to know in its current form without a cover, how many days of utilization in this one of the snowiest and coldest winters that we've had in a while, how many days of utilization has there been this year so far on that rank? Kendall, can you give how How long has kids have been on there? Since what? The 1st of No, December at least. Or no, the hockey rink u January. Okay. So, no longer snow. So, you're saying that the hockey rink has been open every day since the beginning of January?

Well, not every day. Again, when we get we get a foot of snow, our priority is to open up the the large ring, which takes a lot of resources to do that, you know, get to the to the hockey ring. So, um, but it's certainly been open when feasible,

right? We walk through this. I think this gives us some ideas for the next meeting that we kind of come up and come up with some solutional more ideas narrowing this down. Um the the city does have numbers for the components of the snowmaking. Would you like to have those numbers presented tonight? You want to present them tonight? I don't have them with me right now. I have the ones you gave me. Are you talking of the snow making and the magic carpet? No, just the snow making. There are several components. There's the water, electrics, the snow makers and the groomers combined. The number I was given was 575,000.

Magic carpet about a half a million. Correct.

All of those components I would hope would last a long time is what I look at it as. This is an investment. This downhill skiing is a long-term investment. Um, this isn't this equipment isn't going to break down. I would and we'd get some good use out of it. That's um so we've got some numbers to look at. Go back to your constituents if you wish. Um and we'll move this on to the next meeting. I'm going to Are you done speaking? All of you are good right now. Then I'm going to go to the public. Anyone in the public wish to speak to city council? What I would like is your full name, address council, not the audience, and go.

Good. Thank you. Brian Wagner, if you need the address,

we still do that. We don't do that anymore. So, Brian Wagner, City Powaski, again, I appreciate um the opportunity to serve again on Parks and Wreck. I look forward to that. A comment from my five years on city council that I think I've shared in the past. It's been a while, but most of my experience is business and I see some similarities in council serving as a um an advisory board basically to the city and I I appreciate that. One of the things I learned was uh strategic planning in business where it's typically looking out 3 to five years and I learned that these master plans are one of those in a way. Um I think I think the master plan for the city was eight years if I recall. It was a arduous process and with that with a strategic plan you're not in a master plan you're not approving the budget. Um it's it's approving direction. It's approving a lot of projects. And I really appreciate with this one we struggled for a lot of years to get input like we did on this survey. This this is amazing. Um we struggled to get input from many people and we worked on the the colleg's uh master plan and we had some people really concerned about where dormitories were going to be and I learned when that came up they're going to be dormitories just the way it's drawn like this doesn't mean it's going to end up that way and each year as a budget comes up and as a plan comes up parks and wreck will say we got three projects that are going to fit in this park and that park and that park that we think can be budgeted and then there's a whole list of unbudgeted items that are in the plan and that's where a lot of this will go and the ones that are in will get bid out and they're going to be different numbers than we're we're talking about today. So I I just caution that that this is not um not approving budgets, not approving specific projects. It's really directional and I hope I'm not talking down to anybody with that, but

that's just my learning I wanted to share. Thank you. Anyone else? Wish council, please step forward.

Hi everyone. Kate Marshall, 10:15 East Mitchell. Um, just a couple things. Um, I have some concern. I don't know how many outdoor activities are being added in the summertime. But if we continue to have daycare there, the public's ask access to the winter sports park is limited. Um, I can tell you that I have come down from the Bay View Woods going to go up to my house and been scolded and kind of yelled at by staff who said, "You cannot be here. We have daycare in progress." And I said, "But I live there and I'm a taxpayer." So, it's it's something to think about if you're going to talk about adding activities in the summertime and will the public be able to be in the park when day camp or daycare is going on. The other thing, um, thank you Charlie for acknowledging the importance of speed skating. Outdoor speed skating is something that continues. Um, it's not only an indoor sport. So, it's really important that you keep that rink wonderful for the outdoor people. Thank you.

Anyone else wish to speak to council, sir? Ladies first. Lady first. Okay.

Go ahead, Miss Todd. I'm Margot Todd and I live right above the winter sports park and I'm just hoping we can get back to where we were, do the things that will bring us back when that park was humming. We have lived on that hill for 56 years and loved every minute of it. The lights, the music, everything. And we're just hoping we can get back so families can come and have fun. They don't need a lot of bells and whistles. They just need access to the park and the rope toe has always gone up the side, not the middle of the hill either. So, nobody would hit any of the foundation of it. So, and that that path is read available there. But and I have to say even in the summertime, the activities that are there are good and it's fun and it's it is a safe place for for a daycare. I'm sorry you've had issues, but I've enjoyed it. It's it's a happy time. I can hear the laughter and I can hear everything that's going on. So, let's get back to where the place was just buzzing all the time and lots of activity. So, I appreciate the time and effort you're putting into this. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else wish to speak? Monson [clears throat]

Keith Mson 1034 Wakazoo second ward. Uh this is my second goound. with this. Um I was at the parks and recreation uh commission meeting last fall uh when Mr. Nudson from Becket and Raider presented this. Um the results [clears throat] of that were I had I raised my issues with the configurations that we have on the drawing um and basically discussed with him uh why they were there. And then uh after that discussion um a vote was taken by the commission. All in favor? I. And that's why this is here tonight from them. Uh so I'm going to raise the same points I did uh last fall about this. Um, I would like to uh thank the uh lady for mentioning that speed skating is still an outdoor sport. Um, I'm glad some people know that. So, that's where my concerns uh lie here. Uh, just to the east of the lodge, we have the fire pits. We have the uh extension of uh the ramp out to the skating rink. Uh those all impede on our current 250 meter outdoor rink. That's uh someone the gentleman from Becket and Raider mentioned that uh national speed skating races were held here. Well, guess what? state outdoor speed skating championships are still held here and I've part participated in them not too

many years ago. So, anything that encroaches out onto the rink in its present form uh will take away from that and you'll no longer be able to have that 250 meter rink. So, why are they there? I don't know who puts them there or I assume it's the architect. Uh fire pits could be moved elsewhere. Not too many years ago, the fire pit was right out uh in front of the current deck and I think people enjoyed it there. Uh the other thing is the extension of the deck. Right now, the ramp coming out to the ice is 24 ft long. And it looks like in the drawing, that would be the extension of the new deck. Would be 24 ft. Well, if you've been up there recently, there's a [clears throat] snow bank about four or five feet high that's extending 30 feet out onto the rink. Now, well, we've had a lot of snow this year. Where's that all going to go? So, it could end up on this new deck. So there's a problem. So we need to think that through. Okay. Uh so I'm going to move on to uh the rope toe. Um I'm not against improvements at the winter sports park. What I'm for is using the assets that are there that are underutilized. For 10 years, I've talked to people uh city workers at the park all the way up to the mayor about reinstating the rope toe. So, I just learned tonight that uh the city is willing to spend $19,000 to remove uh what's left of it there. And I've done previous research that

I've presented. A new rope is about $3,300 and a motor is $3,000. So, I'm wondering why uh the city is willing to spend 19,000 to remove what's there, one that could be fixed up for about $10,000. Um, so we have a great asset in the ski hill and it's just lying there doing nothing. So, uh, because I feel so bad about that, I go up there every once in a while and ski down. But after about six trips walking up in my ski boots, I've had it. That's it. So, I would like to see the rope toe uh reinstated. Um, I've heard every excuse under the sun that you can possibly think of for not fixing it. And I think they're all all could be refuted. Um, so I mentioned the parks and recck commission uh and how uh things that come up there tend to get approved and passed on and now we can go home. What I'd like to see is some of the commissioners, a couple of them get together and actually become real friends of the winter sports park and put their heads together and say, "Oh man, we have this great ski hill that's hasn't been used for 10 years and but oh, we'd have to pay somebody uh the city would have to hire somebody to go up there and monitor it." I know where the sign is at the entrance to the park where they want you to contribute to the pavilion. Let's put up a sign and ask for volunteers that would help kids learn to ski that could monitor the rope toe. And my time is up.

Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Monson.

Anyone else wish to speak to council at this time, please? Lady in the front. I am Sue Vanvener and I live in Ward 2 in Pitaski. Um, well, I scratched all the notes I originally had because a lot of it was explained to me by the uh presentations tonight, but I do want to say that I love, appreciate, and admire everything that the city has done to promote walking and biking and being outside um so that we all can enjoy h what are desira what makes this such a desirable place to live. Um but while I was looking at those plans um before this meeting, I got the impression that a lot of those suggestions were coming from seeing the park as potential rather than what has always made it such a special place. Um a place where kids could go to learn to skate, learn to ski, and go sledding. My kids all learned to ski there and they probably wouldn't have but for um the volunteers um I remember um Riley Turkot teaching my kids to to ski down there and we rented skis from through this the parks and wreck program for five bucks. Probably wouldn't be that cheap nowadays. So, I want to thank you um all for acknowledging that and reconsidering what this plan should be all about. I agree with Mrs. Todd that it doesn't have to be complicated. Retaining those um activities that have been legacy to the park is should be our first prim priority. Um, and I also think that we should have a rubric for evaluating all

future plans for the park with one key criteria, which is what's best for kids and families, all of them. That would ensure that any decisions we make would truly um reflect our commitment to both. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else wish to speak?

Please. Good evening, council, and thank you so much for listening to all this and taking all this time on this big project. My name is Denise Cruz, Ward One on Mitchell. Um, I've been a resident here for three years now and I really love this city and I love my neighbors and everything about it and just the culture. There is definitely a culture here of community and the winter sports park is amazing part of it and I think what I'll have to agree with Sue that it's it's the simplicity of it. Uh we don't need an Olympic facility you know that's totally expensive and outrageous. I mean, I saw email from Tina uh and she said, "I'm sorry, this is back to back and I didn't know what she was talking about." And then I went to read the 128 email and she attached this proposal, this master plan. And I'm I was shocked. I thought from the meeting on the 19th, it was already a we're not going there. We're not moving forward. And I was kind of relieved. I just thought there was just way too much money to put into that project. And I do having sit here now to listen to you all uh talk about it. I think that there's a lot of things that need to be sorted out things that are needed in each park to consider and simplify it. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Anyone else wish to speak to council at this time? Please come on down. Mr. Russell. Hi.

Hi. My name is Ed Russell and I'm with the Paskki Speed Skating Club and I've been affiliated with the club for about 30 some years now. And just wondered I saw on the plans there the and the concerns and um about the the soccer field area and if we knew how large that's going to be. Um, currently we have a 250 meter track that we use. And to to have a 250 meter track, we need at least 120 yards in length and 65 to 70 yards wide to make that. And as it is now, we just get our track in there as it is now. They've talked a little bit about um excavating the back end and then pulling back further. And if they could, you know, give us um an idea of what that field soccer field dimension is, that'd be be great that we could keep that, you know, that distance so we could maintain that 250 meter oval. Um would be would be the ideal thing for for the speed skating group. Um, I did want to take this time to thank the uh the recck department and the people that worked on at the winter sports park. Um, obviously we spend a lot of time down there um in the winter and we're very appreciative of all the work that they do and what they've done over over these years. I remember being down at that rank in the 60s and 70s and I know other people that are here now, you know, were down there during some of those times and stuff, too. But that park has been there for a long time and it's been, you know, servicing the public for a long time. So, I just want to say that um we're very grateful for that because without the recck department and without the workers there, you we wouldn't have the ice in

in the park to to skate on too. So, thank you for your time. Uh, Pendle, where there is no concern about the rink being smaller than the 350 meter track. Is that correct? 250. 250, I'm sorry. 250. As long as weather cooperates. Yeah. Cooperates with But but with the new with this plan of this possible tiles and stuff, that's simply going to make it better than worse. Is that correct? Yeah. It'll make it better and worse. And you know, this stuff isn't all to scale either. Right.

Right. These are components. These aren't, you know, this isn't going to be 60 ft this way, 60 ft this way. All we're doing is talking about the components, the improvements in here. So that that's what this plan is. Okay. That that field back there does not drain well. It's I don't think it's been addressed from a grading standpoint. It it should get some new drainage and some new soil and um so we have the ability to do that as long as the weather cooperates with us. Thank you. Miss Mura has a question for you, Kendall.

Yeah. And I don't know if this one's for you, Kendall, or one of the guys, but are you then saying that the expanded lodge deck and the fire pits would not extend into the rink and the rink would still be able to be maintained at that 250 meter track oval.

I'm saying that when we design that rink, we keep we keep that in mind. So, we have that ability that we don't know how big that deck is going to be, but we know that we want a new one, that we need a new one. So, we can design that deck to be a size to accommodate the rink size, but it may not look like that on this picture because that's all that is is a picture right now. But the intention is to maintain the rink size at that 250 meter track oval to be able to maintain speed skating. That is the intent. Yes. That's what we would that we would love to do that.

Thank you. Anyone else has a comment or question that they have for council?

Please. [clears throat] Nancy Dwan. I live in Ward 2 and I took the time to write my thoughts and none of them pertain. So I so so I'm going to just wing it and make it short. And to start with what I was going to talk about that is really been addressed and I'm pleased to know it. Um I was going to focus on the pavilion. I was going to focus on the process. I was going to focus on the um what I've talked about before that the public as Ms. De Moore indicated were not a part of that big piece. I'm thrilled that there's this master plan with really cool stuff in it and a lot of things to enhance the winter sports park, but I agree with many of the other people today that spoke that the simpler the better, bringing it back to what we know and what we what we knew. Uh, just to say um Ed Russell's the leader of the speed skating club. I was in that club many many decades ago and one of the other members is Patty Tank who was Patty Steel. Correct. Patty Steffle um is the daughter of Bill Steel who was my coach in the 70s and Bill Steffle competed in I think I might be misspeaking into the 70 and 80year category for um competition. So there's a long history of people that are in in a continuous history of speed skating here. So I do want to speak up and I really appreciate this discussion of the length that's needed for the rink and the uh the director indicating that the the intention is to maintain that that rink size for the outdoor competition. Um, I just want to say in in conclusion is that I think it's really important for the public to have a say and I think we have had a say in many aspects, but the topic of the pavilion has not been one of those. And I think there's some less than transparent things that have gone on with respect to the purpose of the pavilion. And when I see some of these items on the master plan, such as that deck and the all these other things that don't really seem critical to the

purpose of bringing the rink back to its former glory, I I I'm suspicious that there's some idea that goes along with the pavilion to make that whole venue a for pay venue. And I object to that. I think this park should be for free for the public, whether it's residents or otherwise. And by the way, the master plan that didn't include the pavilion was answered by more people that were out of the city that were in the city. So I'm not just speaking from the resident viewpoint, but I am speaking as a taxpayer. So I do want to have a say and obviously other people outside the city felt that they wanted to have a say as well and they should. So thank you for being here and revisiting. I think that's really what I want to conclude for revisiting all of you. Thank you so much for revisiting what you're here for and this master plan. I thought it was going to be a vote, yes or no. And it's clear that many of the items were brought up to question. And regarding the grading that might be necessary to keep that 250 meter length of speed skating size rink, um that item that was for the sports field, it was 500,000. I I can't remember the number. Maybe it was 350. I would suggest that that should go towards the grading for that purpose. and maybe it has some other benefits as well. But if we can't keep that 250 meter length because we've got this problem down there with the drainage, then I think it's good money to put in um to correct that grading issue.

You saw city council support that, right? You saw that. You saw that. No, no, I'm just reiterating. I'm not countering feeling you're chastising us for not, but you saw that we supported that. No, no, no. I I said I appreciated all the minutia, all the discussion of the parts on including that one and I especially appreciated that because that was taken note. You were asking questions about the use of that that line item or the money. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else wish to speak to council,

please? I'm Katherine Shu and I'm in Ward 4. And um first of all, thank you all for what you do. And I would just like to say that first of all, I had no idea when I filled out the survey about the hockey rink. None. So if I had not been here last week, I would not have been aware. And I just wish so many other community members would come to these meetings so they could find out what was happening in our city. And mostly I want to comment I'm so would love to have a magic carpet. And that would be because now I am a noo-noo and I have a grandson and I would like to be able to sled with him. I would like to be able to ski with him and it would just make doing that much easier. And so I know a lot of money is being talked about for the the hockey rink and it seems like small potatoes to have a magic carpet so that many of us could enjoy sledding and skiing. And that's my comment. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else wish to speak to council at this time online? Do we have any Miss Beck? Yes. I know we do, but we'll we'll run through them as we go.

Mlanes, you're up. Can you hear us? Yes, I can. Jim,

fantastic. This is Jim Mlan. We're in Ward one. Um, I guess I just want to first just kind of call out the process and you guys have there there's no doubt you guys have done a lot to actually be inclusive into all this process um of getting people's voices heard and um I think that that's awesome. Uh it gave me a big understanding of some of the recommendations. I love pickle ball and I understand that the the local residents around the park think that that's too loud and I wouldn't have factored that in. So I think that that insight is really valuable. Um I think it goes for the concerts and some of the fire pits and just just the noise and the distraction in in that area. So it I really appreciate that part of the process. What what really concerns me is just the disconnect with what was the preferred plan. And it had to do with the parking and the pavilion and the splash pad and the snow making and just lack of operating costs that that are going to kind of knit that whole thing together. So I guess we're just kind I'm not going to echo what everyone else has said, but I'm going forward I'm really interested in what the clear next steps of this process are. How are we going to actually get to the point? A lot of this has been going on for four years. How are we going to get to the point where we have very clear direction, very clear recommendations, very clear understanding of what's going to happen and then how is that going to be accurately communicated throughout the community. Um, that's my comments.

Thank you. Next. No one.

Anyone else? Okay, thank you for your input. We will be revisiting this uh in two weeks. Welcome to come back and join us. Um you have abilities to contact city manager, city council, myself, uh give feedback, Kendall Clinton Smith if you wish or John I. Thank you. Next is the adoption of the proposed resolution approving submission of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources Waterways Infrastructure Improvement Grant application for Marina Dredging. I take it over to city park director Kendall Klingan.

Okay. Thank you. Um this is to approve submitt uh to the waterways grant for marina dredging. Uh pretty straightforward. We are anticipating potentially another foot or down a foot or two um uh water water levels um below where they are now or below below average. So 5 years ago, we were we we were concerned that the the the docks were underwater and now we're concerned we can't get um boats in areas of the marina. So this is a this is a need. Um I did include this map in the packet. I know it's hard to read, but this is a bometric survey that I had done of this past fall. And you can see the areas that are the the lighter greens and the reds um are are are too shallow for a lot of these boats to come in. Uh particularly between the C and D here which are over here. Um we get large boats sometimes some 70 80 footers that stay over here and we have to try to get know the the channeled out so we can get both that they're not um on the bottom land. Certainly, there are areas throughout stretching throughout the marina that we'd like to get to that seven or seven and 1/2 ft. Um and uh yeah, we haven't done it and since 2013, so it's been a while since we've had dredging. Historically, if you look at the the tide levels, it's or rather the water levels, they tend to historically are on about a 30-year cycle.

The last 10, they've been record low to record high. So, it's very challenging to try to work with mother nature and uh a little frustrating as well. So, this is simply an ask uh to to um submit a grant to the water Commission. Mr. De Moore. Thank you. Kendall, do you have any idea of the anticipated cost of the project? Do we expect it would be covered with the grant and the match? Well, uh, in the memo, I'm I'm anticipating about $400,000 with a 50% match. So, it' be 200,000 city, 200,000 waterways commission,

right? And we're anticipating that that $400,000 would cover the task. I I would certainly hope so. Um it it's um so the what we are able to do we are working with Eagle right now to get our permit uh permit submitted and um and approved and and we were just informed because the last time we went through this process they had different procedures and policies in place. So the um um there's a different division of the DNR that's requiring us to do additional additional soil borings in more the channel area because that's a a section 2011 which was a super fun site. So they're concerned about contamination. So we have to come back in and we have to do some more some more dredging. Um, what that may mean is we may have to do more. Um, and it may mean that we may we might be able just to do what we're hoping to do. Uh, which which is anticipated about 10,000 square yards, which is quite a bit,

but that in that includes the river as well because the river is really really shallow. It's too shallow. Um, and and last time they didn't dredge the river. it was just the marina bed. So, uh once we get the permit, it is a five-year permit. So, we are able to go through the dredging process without having to go through the through the state approvals once it gets once it gets approved. And the match comes from the marina reserves fund. Correct.

Right. So, during the budgeting process, I feel like we talked about this. I feel I feel like Mr. Knuckrub may have raised it. Is that the same issue or is this a different issue than we talked about? It may be because I feel like the number was 300,000.

Okay. So, so we originally talked about doing the um electrical upgrades on on B. So, this is going to take place of that because this is more of an urgent this is more of a need. Um and unfortunately, the waterways commission has less funding this year than in years past. So it it I don't want to submit two grants to compete against each other. I think the priority right now is we have to get this dredged out so we're able to get our boats in and out safely and and we can address the we can address the electrical issue uh next year.

Thank you. Where do you haul the massive amounts of material location that we take it or uh last? Yeah, put in a hole if we could. Yeah. Well, well, good idea. Yeah, if um in a second, so

Yeah. Well, I I would uh I would I would be in favor of that. Um, last time we put it in the Bear River Valley kind of behind Gibson's there off of uh what Baxterish area and uh it appears that we can do that again if that's the location that we decide. We also talked about perhaps helping take those spoils up to the winter sports park to help with the contouring. Um, you know, which would which could just it would save costs. So, so those are Yeah. So, those are what we're thinking weighing it in right now. Sounds good. Yeah. I do. I have a motion for this. A question, Mr.

A question. Yeah. Just I was all ready to say yes. Yes. Yes. But now I'm I'm got a little confused. During the budget process, we talked about the electrical issues. Correct. That was creating some problems with people not coming in here. And I know I was concerned about that because that's a revenue producing highlight for us. A big uh thing for for our city. So is the electric upgrade completely off and we're only going to do this this year? The electric upgrade is is is not going to I'm not going to submit a grant for the electric upgrade. And and how much is the electric upgrade? Uh we were estimating that at 300.

Okay. So what we approved in the budget was the electric not but I thought we were doing the dredging too. Well, I think that was part of a later discussion. You approved both pending pending grant approval. So, we believe we're best suited to move forward with the grant for dredging right now than to try to have two competing grant uh proposals um against each other. So, that's kind of where it's at. That was the direction. That was the direction. Yep. Yes. So, just point of clarity, I thought the 300,000 you thought was a good idea to include in the budget and that we had included that part in the budget.

We did, but there was a stipulation essentially. We don't want to we're likely get a grant for the electrical, so we might as well wait until the next cycle instead of certainly we can go forward without a grant if that's the desire of city council and just do it. Um, but we think we're likely to get a grant. Let's just wait a cycle. Wait another season. And [clears throat] the clarity on the safety with the electrical is it's not it's not a safe it's not a safety issue. It's not a safety issue. Correct. It was a design issue. Thank you.

I would be happy to make a motion to um proceed with the grant. I have a motion from Mr. N, a second from Mr. Wilmont. Any other discussion? Council, does the public wish to weigh in on this? There being none, I go to Miss Beck for roll. No, I I motion passes 4 zero. Thank you.

We have two other items on the agenda for tonight. The first one is the first reading of a proposed ordinance. The first reading won't be uh adopted. uh proposed ordinance amending chapter 3 advertising regulating hand bills. I turn it over to city manager Horn for this update. Mayor, I'm going to turn it over to our city clerk who worked directly with our city attorney on this item. So, I'll turn over to Sarah.

Sure. So, as many of you may have recalled, Charlie, I think you may have been in the audience, but last fall we uh discussed door-to-d dooror solicitation, canvasing, distribution of hands, etc., and what the city could regulate and what we had the authority not to. Uh she provided a memo which we did include again um basically distinguishing that um commercial and non-commercial handills are communication a form of communication and they advised us to um amend chapter 3 advertising to remove or revise any language that could uh potentially be unconstitutional. So, two sections. Uh, city attorney did draft the ordinance that's in our packet. So, section 319 and sections 324. So, section 319 basically revises to allow the distribution of any hand, but does not um make it legal to basically scatter, throw, litter. So, that would be unlawful. And then section 324 would be eliminated altogether and deleted because our current ordinance puts time place in a manner like restrictions on when they can be distributed. So um city attorneys thought that that would most likely be unconstitutional by the courts and your direction council was to revise it and it's just brought back of you for consideration. first reading.

Any questions? Otherwise, we go to second reading next in two month two weeks and we move from there. You need a motion? Don't need a motion. Just a good You're all good with it. Public wish to weigh in on this. There being none, we move to the last article of the day. It's old business is discussion of the city council meeting preparation procedures policy. We are not going to get through all of this. This is again discussion. This is not the adoption of it. This is a discussion thereof. I turn over to city manager horn.

Mayor, one maybe recommendation. We're we're over two hours in. Um and we just um Council Member De Moore was gracious to kind of put um kind of compile all of your feedback into one document which you have in front of you. And with Council Member Walker not with us this evening, we could table this and there's no timeline on this. We can unless you want to start walking through comments, that's fine. But my recommendation

I couldn't agree more. I think uh I would wish Miss Walker to be here to enjoy the walk through. Hate to have her miss this opportunity. I I and I'm happy if you are to table this to the next meeting. Thank

All right. one one one piece of information I think that may be helpful for me for staff and I don't I don't know where council would like to go on this but if I could make a recommendation on maybe a subcommittee to assist staff in going through winter sports park items looking at the general millage question I think would be helpful if I had a small subcommittee of council to work with and maybe have a couple parks commission members along with staff to start walking through these uh proposed changes to start putting together some some guidance um going forward. So, it's not when we do bring it back in front of the full board, it's not kind of we're starting from scratch, but I'll I'll just throw that out there as a

I I I would be happy to serve on that. Um I don't know how council feels though, how council feels about this uh going this way. I don't know. Council, give us some feedback. Mr. nrop,

you know, um, the whole discussion of how we fund this, I'm hoping that the millillage isn't just the water park. I'm hoping the millillage is because I don't think we'll have lots of shots at the at the voters for things other than the and and and I I am I am hoping that we look at other parks. I'm hoping that we consider the the the the real way and not have the entire focus of this village be to do the water park only to get it all funded. So you mean I mean yeah that's not my intent.

Okay that's I think I just hear city manager saying that's not his intent as I I spoke earlier tonight that that wouldn't be my intent would be we need to we need to do something to address parks that have not been addressed in 20 to 30 years. Mr. Wilmont.

Um, as an alternative, uh, Shane, would it be uh would it be a consideration to have a joint working meeting between city council and parks and wreck at some point in time between now and when these these items are uh I mean, yeah, I always think there's value of getting bodies together. I don't necessarily usually find them to be overly uh impactful, you know, from an action item standpoint. Um, I think having a smaller working group that rolls up their sleeves and dives into things and then whoever the two of you are, you come back and really champion kind of what the committee has put together and work with the rest of your um um the body up here to kind of get consensus. Um, that's just an option. We don't have to do that, but um or having more work sess work sessions and I I know I'm beating this to death a little bit, but I'm a fan of work sessions. I think we you can get a lot of things done that obviously there's still a public meeting. Everything is clearly still very much public, but we're I'm not asking you to vote on anything. So, it's a little more relaxed. We can get around the table and kind of again roll up our sleeves and dive into things instead of sitting up here and being more formal. Um, I'm a fan of that. Um, I'd love to see us do more of that.

I think I think that would be probably as good as anything is having a let's have a a work session with city council because ultimately it's going to be on our shoulders. Yeah.

I feel that it would be more beneficial the less the numbers u the five of us coming in for a work session. I guess I if you're interested miss before I bring that up Mr. Moore you want to say something? No, I I prefer a work session. I think all voices need to be at the table as opposed to a smaller group that's going to champion something. And I will second what Mr. Nocttra said even though it's not a motion. Um, I think that all the parks need to be considered in a global context because what we decide for each park adds up to a number were we to do a millillage that we have to feel comfortable putting out there to the public. So just settling on one before we consider the others, I don't think that's a good approach to take. Uh, I think we need to assess each globally and then make a decision. Thank you,

Mr. Wilma.

Well, I don't want to slow down the progress that we've been that's been made with regard to the winter sports park. I think a a working session to really get the winter sports park master plan and the priorities of that master plan. Even though I understand that the dollars today are only uh um only valuable from the standpoint of comparing one of these items versus another item, not necessarily reflective of the future cost when they finally get scheduled. But nevertheless, having having tightening up the winter sports park plan and its priorities for city council, I think is the priority. At the same time, I don't disagree with you. We also need to have the same level of detail in the remaining asks of the parks and recck group. But I would suggest that maybe the first working session just focus on finalizing the priorities for the winter sports park and moving forward from there.

Mr. Moore, I'm fine with that as long as there's an understanding that what we've quote finalized will be tentative depending on the needs of the other parks. So if the needs of the other park warrant, there may be items at the winter sports park that we say, you know, in the context of the whole, we now will not move forward with an aspect. So I

I would not propose to move forward with the winter sports park by itself without consideration of all of those other elements. But furthermore, I I'm not I've never done a millillage before. I'm the newbie here. I don't know whether that should all be one millillage or two millages. And we need some expert cons consultation on millages and success at the ballot box too at some point in time. So to me the millage question is a down the road question. It is. Yeah. And it and it ultimately may not be November. Maybe it may not we may not be able to get there.

We may not have Yes. Maybe it's the following November. But the problem but the process is is we've got to start somewhere. in the somewhere is let's get a what do we want with winter sports park for this capital improvement plan for it what do we want with the other local parks and then sit down and have another work session to decide what does a millillage look like and is it affordable to people how much is it going to cost when Joe Schmo comes up here and says how many mills is it and knowing each mill costs $250 per $250,000 value of your house so I Let's Let's Do you want to schedule something right now? Sure.

Let's please. You didn't bring, you know. Well, I guess we'll just hopefully you'll work it out. I think that that's the again the value of a and I get I get what everyone's saying is you all are elected. Um the value of a subcommittee, small committee is we can work we can meet three times a day um and try to start working on kind of putting f final documents together to get in front of you all. But working on five different schedules is sometimes challenging because we're a ways out. And and are you guys good with uh are you good with uh February the 9th of Monday meeting? Must have a calendar.

It's a week from today. Can we do the 10th? The 10th. Yak meeting and parks and wreck. The 10th and Tuesday. The 10th. I'm fine with that. What? What time are you looking at? Six o'clock. That'll be same time. I should be able to do that as a working session. Working session. I'm I'm fine with that. And in the meantime, if if you and or Kendall have any questions you want to bounce off as far I'm not a subcommittee, but as an individual, please feel free to call anytime and we can schedule time to go over your thoughts.

I'd hope we get it send the questions to him. he can share it through with without responses from us that we'll share what we're what questions there are. Mr. Knob, just I I I love your process, John, and how you're doing it. And I hope we keep it on task and focused on it. So this first work session is merely to to redo this prioritization of the work. We all only not about how much it cost not how much it cost not how much it's going to how we're going to get the money nor necessarily any prioritization of it. No, just to get the plan in there. Get the plans going. Well,

well, there is a priority because there's some things that are not, you know, some things are not going to be probably affordable. So therefore we have to take in some consideration of portability. Yes. Okay. All right. Perfect. You good with this? Yes. All right. So right now it's the 10th at 6 o'clock. We'll let public know that that's happened. It's a work session. Um I think I think this is the way to go. Let's let's get let's try this. If it doesn't work, we'll go to smaller. this subject to Councilman Lindsay's Walker's availability on that date as well? Yeah, good question. Um, yeah, we'll certainly reach out to her because everybody needs to be there.

Next, city council comments starting in W three with Mr. Namrop.

Mine isn't long, but I I I did want to um kind of let the world know that uh I'm having a a what I'd refer to as a town hall meeting uh on February 14th at 10:00 a.m. at the pre First Presbyterian Church to talk about and and I want to get feedback on all these issues that we've been talking about as well as zoning issues, things that are coming for uh for for my ward. So, if anybody is aware of anybody in ward three, um it is going to be at fe on Valentine's Day at 10 o'clock and I would love to get as many people there. Where's it at? uh First Presbyterian Church to try to get some input from the community on the subject tonight and other things, zoning, other things we got going on.

That's down across from Crooked Key across from Crooked Tree in Division Street. Okay. 10:00. Uh next, Mr. Wilmont, W two. No, I really have no comments or updates other than to say that um I'm going to propose I am going to plan on sending out to the email distribution list for W 2 a list of all of these items with regard to Winter Sports Park and ask for people's input and priority. Okay,

Ward one, Mr. Moore. Um, so this Saturday, February 7th, at the public library, 1 to 3 in the basement classroom, I will be having a listening session. The goal is to listen. There will be no presentation, but anybody who'd like to come, I mean, it's primarily for Ward One, but all are welcome to be there. Thank you. And my uh last comments are I like the way the city council is working together. Uh we all bring a different piece to the puzzle. I think if we all work together, I think we'll end up with some great things for the city of Pataski. It takes a team effort. It takes a village. And uh hopefully staff can continue to put up with us. Well, we don't we at times don't make this easy and we don't make it easy on ourselves, but we're all working together for one good and that's for the city of Paskki to flourish, to bloom, and to continue to just offer more things to people. Uh I I got to throw in one special thing. 1965, Terry McDermott gave me a red ribbon up at the Winter Sports Park. He'd won the silver medal in the Olympics for the quarter mile. I think it was a mile. And he was up here and presented to everybody that was in the skate park group. I don't know if Mr. Mson was there. He might not have been old enough at the time. Uh gave us all a medal, a ribbon for uh being a participant in the winter sports park uh uh skating skating contest up there. So there you go. So

you still have it. [laughter] I'll look for it and bring it in. If I do, I'll wear it. I'll wear it next month. Okay.