Loading...
03-12-24 PkC Meeting MinutesCITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB RD PARK COMMISSION MEETING SHOREWOOD CITY HALL TUESDAY, MARCH 12, 2024 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING Chair Hirner convened the meeting at 7:03 p.m. Roll Call Present: Chair Hirner, Commissioners Garske, Wenner, and DiGruttolo; City Council Liaison Maddy; City Administrator Nevinski Absent: Commissioner Bahneman Chair Hirner explained that the Commission would official welcome incoming Commissioner Mary Bahneman to the next meeting since was ill and unable to attend tonight’s meeting. Review Agenda DiGruttolo moved to approve the agenda as written. Wenner seconded the motion. Motion carried 4-0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Park Commission Meeting Minutes of February 13, 2024 Commissioner Wenner referenced page 7 and asked if Commissioner DiGruttolo was talking about a work session or a joint session with the City Council. Commissioner DiGruttolo explained that her idea was for a joint work session with the City Council. Commissioner Wenner suggested that this be clarified that the intent would be for the joint work session to be held with the City Council. Wenner moved to approve the minutes of the February 13, 2024 meeting as amended. DiGruttolo seconded the motion. Motion carried 4-0. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR Barry Brown, 6050 Burlwood Court, explained that he has been speaking to the City Council for a few months and had given what he felt was an important presentation at a meeting in January. He stated that he did not believe anyone on the Park Commission had attended that meeting so he wanted to repeat the information he had shared at the City Council meeting in January. Mr. Brown repeated the statement he had shared with the City Council on January 22, 2024, as follows: ‘This was the fifth time he has been before the Council speaking on buckthorn in Freeman Park and the health effects of large scale foliage spraying. He stated that over the past month, he has been in touch with researchers at the DNR, Mississippi Valley Conservatory, Professor Mike Schuster at the University of Minnesota who has six-hundred buckthorn study plots in one- hundred locations around the Twin Cities, Laura VanRiper, DNR who is the individual who authored the brochure referenced in the proposal from Public Works to the Council. He explained that those discussions led him to discover that the main ingredient in Garlan 3 and Garlan 4 causes severe birth defects in rats at relatively low levels of exposure with the most common adverse effect in the kidneys for all species tested. He stated that another product that the City is considering is glyphosate which was studied by the U.S. Department of Health and in data gathered from humans and animals they found it causes respiratory issues, gastrointestinal issues, neurological, reproductive, and cancer . He referenced the Garlan 3 and Garlan 4 material data safety sheets have a warning label on them of ‘danger’ and has an acute toxicity to fish and aquatic organisms. He noted that with two-hundred thirty micrograms, it can kill bees within forty-eight hours which is essentially one-third of one single grain of salt. He read aloud information from the Minnesota Department of Health regarding triclopyr and its potential health effects and from Governor Walz related to pesticide usage. He also referenced information from the Minnesota Conservation Volunteer magazine and Professor Mike Schuster related to repeated cutting of the buckthorn. He acknowledged that these scientific reports all have counter findings which is common with scientific findings, but he feels with all of these findings he doesn’t understand why any reasonable person would take the risk for such a large scale foliar project of thirty acres, which is right behind his home. He urged the Council to provide clear direction to residents and staff on this issue.’ He stated that they have a number of people who have volunteered to work on March 23, 2024 from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon on assisting with the debris removal related to buckthorn removal at Freeman Park. He noted that they were also planning another volunteer event on April 27, 2024. He recommended that the volunteers wear work or hiking boots, work gloves and also have eye protection. He stated they may bring small tools like a pruning saw or clippers, but asked that they not bring any mechanical equipment such as a chain saw. He noted that there are waiver forms available on the City website. 4. NEW BUSINESS A. Elect Chair and Vice-Chair Commissioner Wenner stated that she would like to be considered for the Chair position. Garske moved to appoint Commissioner Wenner to serve as Chair of the Park Commission for 2024. DiGrutollo seconded the motion. Motion carried 4-0. Commissioner Garske stated that he would be interested in serving as Vice-Chair. Wenner moved to appoint Commissioner Garske to serve as Vice-Chair of the Park Commission for 2024. DiGruttolo seconded the motion. Motion carried 4-0. B. 2024 Work Plan and Schedule Chair Hirner reviewed the proposed draft 2024 schedule of the work plan for the Park Commission. City Administrator Nevinski noted that the City works on the budget around the same time as they are slated to review the CIP and noted that having an idea of what the Park Commission feels is important for park improvements are very helpful to their process. Commissioner Wenner noted that one of her suggestions was when reviewing the work plan was to have more preparation before the park tours. She stated that she felt it would be helpful to have the CIP budget as early as possible in the year so as they are meeting they can have their eyes on what the budget is. Commissioner DiGruttolo asked if it may be possible to have the park tours as a work session so they don’t take up a whole meeting timeslot. Commissioner Wenner stated that she agreed and explained that she had written notes that the Commission should really review the master plans for the parks along with updates for things like the IPM. She stated that the Commission has a lot more to review in 2024 with those new duties including the IPM oversight. She suggested that in May, at their regular meeting, they review master plans and updates and then have separate breakout sessions for the actual tours. Commissioner Garske stated that he felt the CIP would need to be done after the park tours because they wouldn’t know the conditions of the parks until they completed the tours. Commissioner Wenner clarified that she was not implying that they would make any decisions related to the CIP during the park tour, but would like to have the information so they can keep their eye on what had been budgeted the prior year and where the money would be going. She noted that she believed that Southshore has a plan coming up that they will have to address. City Administrator Nevinski stated that the Commission should talk about that as part of the work plan and apologizes for leaving that off the proposed list. He stated that there is no money budgeted in 2024 for Southshore Park, but the plan was for former Parks and Recreation Director Crossfield to have started work on engagement. He stated that with her departure and the process to get a new Manager on board, that is in a bit of flux, but noted that there has been a little bit of money allocated in the 2025 IP for Southshore Park planning. Chair Hirner explained that this money was intended to just get started on the planning process and believes the actual money to dedicate to Southshore Park was in either 2026 or 2027. Commissioner Wenner stated that she thinks this information would be helpful to have at the actual meetings when they are discussing these things. She noted that they could also review their discussion points from last year because she believes they had thrown around some ideas such as a pickle ball court and other possible amenities that may better serve the nearby senior community. Chair Hirner asked if the Commission felt it would be helpful for them to move the park tours earlier in the year, for example, April and May rather than May and June. He stated that he believes part of the reason for their scheduling was related to weather and having to wait until the snow had melted. City Administrator Nevinski stated that one complication with that idea is where the City is in the process of hiring the new Park and Recreation Manager. He stated that he is hopeful that the City Council will formally approve an offer on March 25, 2024. He explained that having someone in this position by mid-April is possible, but may be a bit tight. He stated that he also feels that there would be a lot of value in having that individual at this meeting and would also be a great opportunity for them to get to the know the Commission better. He noted that they could perhaps adjust the meeting to later in April if they wanted to move it earlier. Commissioner DiGruttolo asked about her idea of holding the park tours on other dates rather than using up a meeting date for that purpose. Chair Hirner stated that they can do that, but need to remember that they are public meetings and would require a quorum notice. Commissioner Wenner asked if that would be a problem for staff. City Administrator Nevinski noted that it would be added another meeting to an already busy schedule. He suggested that the IPM work plan be moved to a different month because he did not believe much would change from what had been put together last year. He clarified that he really likes the idea of moving the park tours earlier in the year, but remains worried about the new Park and Recreation Manager hiring timeline. He stated that Commission could add another night for a meeting because in past years there have been times when they have ended up cancelling meetings for various reasons. He asked if the Commission had tried to tour all the parks in one meeting. Commissioner Garske stated that it would not be possible due to geography and in order to be able to give them each property time. He asked what other items staff would like to have the Commission add to their work plan. Commissioner DiGruttolo stated that she would like to see the review of the SCEC Rental Fees moved earlier on the calendar in order to ensure it is ready for the City budget conversations. She suggested that they move it to June or July and noted that may also be good timing with the new Park and Recreation Manager. Commissioner Wenner stated that she agreed and suggested that perhaps they combine that discussion with the CIP in July so the entire meeting is spent going over budget items. Chair Hirner stated that they should make sure that they allow the new Park and Recreation Manager to get their feed on the ground because he assumes they will have things they want to accomplish as well. City Administrator Nevinski reminded the Commission that the City had just increased the fees at the beginning of 2024 so they would not have a full year’s worth of data to review. Commissioner Wenner confirmed that that SCEC funds were not part of the Park Commissions budget. She asked if it was in their purview to be setting the rates for that facility. City Administrator Nevinski stated that he thinks it had been included because it is part of the City’s Park and Recreation program. Commissioner Wenner asked if the Park Commission was involved in programming for this space. Commissioner DiGruttolo stated that in reading about the Park Commission’s responsibilities, it does say that they will recommend to the Council feasible means of financing long-term requirements for the future of park and recreational needs of the City and recommend operational and CIP for the ensuing year. She stated it did not say anything about programming. Commissioner Wenner stated that she felt some of the fees, in her opinion, were exorbitantly priced for very low programming. She stated that she just questions where the Commission is supposed to weigh in on that type of thing. Councilmember Maddy stated that the SCEC when discussing the rates and expectations, he would love to have the input of the Commission. He stated that he also feels that the rest of the Council would be happy to take in whatever the Commission wants to recommend or give input on. He noted that there is a new Park and Recreation Manager coming on board and that individual may want to do something different. He stated that for now, he would be comfortable with the Commission taking on the responsible for reviewing the SCEC fees and rates. Commissioner Wenner reiterated her question of whether the Commission felt that they should also review the SCEC fees in July when they are considering the CIP. Chair Hirner reviewed the past process for this type of discussion and noted that his concern is that if they bring this discussion much earlier in the year, they will not have a full year of data related to the currents rates, but will also have a brand new staff member who will be ‘drinking from a fire hose’. He asked where the Commission would expect this individual to put their time within this process and also get up to speed in order to help the City the best they can. Councilmember Maddy stated that the Council set the new rates at the first meeting of the year in January, so even if they think a change needed to be made, it would not happen until January unless there was some urgency to the change. He stated that, to him, that means there is not a lot of pressure to figure out the new rates earlier in the process because they won’t take place until January anyway. Commissioner DiGruttolo stated that she would like to see the Commission become proactive rather than being reactive. She cautioned that if they are always reacting to things they will never be able to get ahead. She stated that she didn’t think it would be too early to talk about it and make recommendations in time to allow the Council to think about it and not feel pressured, as well. She reminded the Commission that they were just a recommending board and the Council would make the final decisions. Commissioner Garske stated that he thinks it is a bit too early to discuss the fees and would still have time if they waiting until September. He expressed concern that they would be asking too much from staff to front load the year with these topics. City Administrator Nevinski noted that the City was also without a Finance Director right now as well. He stated that the rate structure recently changed for 2024 and as Councilmember Maddy said, the fees are typically set at the end of a year or the very beginning of the following year. He stated that if necessary, the City could change their fees mid-year. Commissioner Garske suggested that rather than the Commission discussion and making recommendations about fees, perhaps they could just ask for a report earlier in the year about things like the booking rates and if staff felt like the rate changes were working the way they had desired. He asked if Commissioner DiGruttolo felt that would be a proactive approach. Commissioner DiGruttolo stated that she did not feel it would be proactive, but the Commission cannot ‘get out ahead of their skis’, so if staff is not able to fit that in, she understands. She reiterated that she feels that going forward, the Commission should really strive harder to get things done earlier in the year so staff and the City Council have time to react and plan. Chair Hirner brought the conversation back to the proposed work plan schedule for the Commission. He noted that additional items that were listed on the second page of the staff report: Natural Areas Maintenance Plan; Volunteer Events; South Shore Senior Partners and Athletic Associations; and South Shore Community and Event Center. Commissioner Wenner stated that she would also like to add Trees and Plants because she thinks there needs to be some time spent going through the City’s policies. Chair Hirner asked if that was an appropriate topic for the Park Commission to undertake. He asked if that would be going beyond the scope of their duties. City Administrator Nevinski stated that the Tree Preservation Policy is really geared towards private development and agreed that it was a dated document that needs to be updated. He stated that he knows that Planning Director Darling has begun working on it and has gotten some input from Commissioner Wenner and believes that it is the best place for this to originate because the Planning staff will be the ones administering it. He stated that he does believe that periodically there are things that come to the Commission that are development related. He clarified that he did not think it would be inappropriate to have some discussion and consultation from the Commission on this, but was not sure that the right spot for it may not be for it to reside there, but the Commission would not be cut out of the process. He stated that he can talk more about this issue with Planning Director Darling and solicit her input. Chair Hirner stated that he would like to have that clarification from staff. Commissioner Wenner stated that she feels it is important and would like to make another plug to include it on the Commissions agenda. She stated that the City has a contract with Davey for forestry and she feels that it is important for the Commission to know what the deliverables are and feels they should also get to review that contract before it is renewed. She stated that in the last few sessions where they were getting input from the community related to the IPM, they have heard from a lot of residents that they are interested in educational opportunities like volunteer or outreach events. She stated that she feels those kinds of events could pretty easily be pulled together, but in order to pull together some of these volunteer events, she feels that everyone needs to be on the same page with regard to things like the status of the City’s trees and the policies. Commissioner Garske stated that Commissioner Wenner has been asking to discuss this for over a year and would agree that they have the discussion even if the Commission isn’t directly involved in setting the policy. City Administrator Nevinski noted that this discussion will be something that is driven by staff and noted that one of the directives staff has received with the Council is to update the City Code. He stated that this topic fits in under that discussion as a supporting document, but noted that he does not know when they could include it on the schedule. He stated that he felt pegging this as an ‘objective’ of the Commission would make sense even if it is essentially unscheduled. Commissioner Wenner stated that she would be happy even if it was just included in draft form. Commissioner Garske suggested that they also add in the Eddy Station concession stand because they haven’t talked about that for a while. City Administrator Nevinski stated that the contract has already been renewed. Commissioner Wenner stated that they had also talked about athletic associations because there was an issue with how much they were contributing with things like maintenance and how they were taking care of the facilities. She noted that it has been brought up that there is not a damage fee included in the contract terms which may be something to discuss including as part of their discussion. Chair Hirner stated that he thinks the task of looking at all those contracts would be the new Park and Recreation Manager. City Administrator Nevinski noted that it could also be the Park and Recreation Manager’s task to get contracts in place that are needed. Commissioner Wenner noted that it had been included as an item on the staff report and she was just suggesting that this would be a legitimate topic for discussion. She noted that it could, perhaps, take place at the end of the year when they are able to look back and see how torn up the fields may be and then plan for the following year. She suggested that this be added to the work plan for October and noted that she would suggest putting trees and pollinators in January. She noted that she thinks that January may also be a good time to review the natural area maintenance plan as well. Chair Hirner stated that thinks it may be a better idea to spread it out and not put it alongside the tree discussion. He suggested that they discuss the natural area maintenance plan in November because many times the December Commission meeting ends up getting cancelled. Commissioner Garske stated that he would also like to find a time to discuss possible educational and awareness opportunities to the parks. He explained that he would just like to be able to spend time brainstorming ideas and make some recommendations to the Council. Commissioner DiGruttolo suggested that they discuss that at the same time they discuss the SCEC rental fees and programming because she felt that would be considered ‘programming’. Commissioner Wenner asked if they had added ‘programming’ to their topics. City Administrator Nevinski stated that there has not been a lot of programming in the City other than a lot of reliance on Minnetonka Community Education in the past. He stated that former Park and Recreation Director Crossfield was trying to grow and experiment with different options before she left and found some were and others were not successful. He stated that he did not feel that programming was going to be a heavy portion of the Park and Recreation Manager’s duties. Chair Hirner stated that that incoming candidates all have their own ideas and assumes that when they are hired they will come in and take a look at everything and see what they want to focus on and may want to change. He reiterated that he felt that the Commission needed to give this individual the opportunity to bring this before they try to push a lot of other things at them. Commissioner Wenner stated that as a Master Naturalist, part of their director is for education and explained that she would be willing to do seasonal things like a session on ‘No Mow May’ and provide this kind of program and educational benefit. She shared other possible examples of educational topics that she would personally be willing to teach. Commissioner DiGruttolo stated that if they wait until the new Park and Recreation Manager has filled the entire ‘dance card’, and then brings them the Commission’s ideas, there won’t be room and can picture them saying, “I wish you would have brought them to me before I filled in the whole dance card.” She stated that they are just suggesting that they give some ideas and feels that if the Commission doesn’t give them the opportunity to fit some of these things in they will, once again, be behind and it will get pushed to ‘next year’. She explained that she had only been on the Commission for a few months and it seems like the answer is frequently ‘we will get to it next year’, or, ‘it is too late now, we will just get it next year’. She stated that it is not the Commissions job to tell anyone what to do but they can offer advice and share this information. She noted that she did not see how it would be a problem for the Commission to give advice or offer feedback. She stated that she did not think that Commissioner Wenner was trying to imply that the Commission was going to tell the incoming Park and Recreation Manager what to do, but would simply share their thoughts with them. Commissioner Garske asked if the work plan can be adjusted after the new Park and Recreation Manager joins the City or if it was a situation where once it is adopted it is set. City Administrator Nevinski explained that he believed the work plan was a malleable document and is intended to be a guide and does not mean that these are the only things that the Commission can discuss. He urged the Commission to understand that there is a limit in how many things they will be able to tackle because they do not have a large staff or endless resources. He stated that he believes having some big picture ideas within their work plan and some potential target dates as well as lists of other items would be fine. He stated that based on his experience in government, getting things on the radar is the first step in the process. Commissioner Wenner suggested that they add a work plan item that is just broadly Community Outreach and have a brainstorm session. Councilmember Maddy stated that in his experience the Commissions have never fully adhered to what was included on the lists and would agree that it is a guide. He stated that he thinks they are talking about two different things because things like deciding on programming is something that will take some time but thinks once they get the new Park and Recreation Manager in place he thinks they can sit down and have an introductory session and share their ideas about programming. He stated that it could almost be like a ‘meet and greet’ session in May where the Commission shares some of this kind of feedback and finds out where the new Park and Recreation Manager would like to head. He explained that he did not feel the Commission needed to be too serious about what is included on this list and can cover many of them with the new Manager. He stated that perhaps what should be on the list I finding a way to mention the new Manager with the existing Commission and make sure they are all on the same page moving forward. Pat Arntz, from the audience, shared that she is sitting here feeling as though somebody dumped a puzzle on the floor. She asked if there was a clear delineation as to how this new Manager will work with the Commission or was the plan to wait until that person comes and spends 6 months getting acclimated. She stated that they keep saying that they are waiting for this new Manager to come but asked what they actually meant. She asked if, the Park Commission, as an advisory board was only supposed to advise on the ideas that this new Manager had. She reiterated that she is very confused by the conversation the Commission is having and explained that she did not see any cohesion. Chair Hirner explained that the incoming Park and Recreation Manager would be on City staff and the Park Commission has been an advisory board that typically have happened when ideas are brought to them for things that need to be accomplished. He noted that they then give their recommendations to the Council based on the information that they gathered. Pat Arntz, from the audience, noted that she was not seeing any freedom to think and brainstorm about new things initiated by the Commission. She stated that she was only seeing the Commission react to this Park and Recreation Manager. Chair Hirner explained that this is what the work plan was for and clarified that the Park Commission was not responsible for everything in the City of Shorewood. Pat Arntz, from the audience, stated that she served on the Commission for 8 years, so she understands that but also encouraged the Commission at that time to come up with ideas, which the Council supported. She shared examples of ideas that had originated with the Park Commission that were able to come to fruition. She explained that she was not feeling that same kind of feeling now which concerns her. Chair Hirner stated that he feels that the Park Commission has done that many times over the years. Mr. Brown stated that something he feels may be beneficial is, when they are going through things like the SCEC fees, is to ask staff what is working and what isn’t because they always have great ideas. He stated that there may be things that are just not working that could be taken out and nobody would hardly notice but that would mean that they would be able to take on some additional items. Chair Hirner stated that he thinks if the Commission wants to put something on the agenda as New Business, then they can at any time. Commissioner Wenner asked for clarification that they can do that, as a Commission. City Administrator Nevinski stated that he believes that there is a back and forth situation because staff generally assembles the agendas but agreed that they can give input to staff on items that they would like to see included on future agendas. He stated that once the Commission puts together their workplan it needs to go to the Council to ratify it or tweak it if they feel it is necessary and noted that the Commission and staff both take their direction from the City Council. He stated at this point, the Commission just needs to decide what they want to put on paper. Chair Hirner reviewed the proposed work plan that was revised based on tonight’s discussion. Commissioner Wenner explained that last year, she had felt unprepared for the park tours and suggested that in April, the Commission take some time to have a discussion in order to prepare for the tours and talk about things they will be looking for, review of master plans, reviewing the CIP budgets, the IPM work plan, and understand the current goals and priorities for each park. She stated that she is also happy to have them throw in anything related to trees and natural areas. Commissioner Garske stated that he felt that was a great idea and would be a great use of time. He noted that having this kind of conversation prior to the park tour would be very beneficial. City Administrator Nevinski explained that he wasn’t sure that staff had the capacity to pull together all of that information by the April meeting. He noted that in their binders he believes that the Commission already has the master plan and if they don’t he will make sure they get it. He stated that they could pull some information together for review prior to the tours perhaps in the May/June timeframe. Chair Hirner stated that he believes that makes sense and noted part of the issue is with staffing changes and thinks that getting this information in order to reset a baseline is not a bad idea. He reviewed the draft workplan and schedule, as discussed. City Administrator Nevinski stated that staff will update this document and bring it back for the Commission’s final recommendation at their next meeting. OLD BUSINESS STAFF AND LIAISON REPORTS / UPDATES City Council Councilmember Maddy reviewed recent Council discussion and actions as reflected in the recent meeting minutes. He reviewed the specific duties of the Commission and noted that if they wanted to be more involved in programming and event planning that could be something the Council could assign to them and have further conversations once the new Manager is in place. Staff City Administrator Nevinski reviewed recent tasks and activities staff has been focusing on. He noted that he is excited about the upcoming volunteer event at Freeman Park and is hopeful that may be something that the City can grow and have more of. 7. ADJOURN Garske moved to adjourn the Park Commission Meeting of March 12, 2024 at 8:27 p.m. Wenner seconded the motion. Motion carried 4-0.