[00:00:01] LET ME KNOW WHEN WE'RE READY. [ROLL CALL] ALL RIGHT, GREAT. GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE. I CALL TO ORDER THE BOARD STUDY SESSION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT FOR MAY 19TH, 2026 AT 9:36 AM. DIRECTOR MERCURIO IS APPEARING REMOTELY. DIRECTOR MERCURIO, CAN YOU PLEASE CONFIRM THAT NO OTHER INDIVIDUAL 18 YEARS OR OLDER WILL BE PRESENT IN THE ROOM WITH YOU AT YOUR REMOTE LOCATION? SOUND? COULD YOU TURN YOUR SOUND ON, PLEASE? OKAY. HOLD ON JUST A SECOND. THERE IT IS. OKAY. SO AGAIN, CAN YOU RESPOND TO, THERE'S NO ONE, NO INDIVIDUAL 18 YEARS OR OLDER PRESENT WITH YOU? NOPE. OKAY, AND THEN JUST PLEASE REMEMBER TO LEAVE YOUR VIDEO ON WHILE THE BOARD IS IN SESSION. LET'S GO AHEAD AND START ROLL CALL. DIRECTOR ECHOLS. DIRECTOR DECHAMBEAU. HERE. DIRECTOR ESPANA. HERE. DIRECTOR MERCURIO. HERE. DIRECTOR WASPY. HERE. DIRECTOR COFFEY. HERE. DIRECTOR TSIEN-WONG. HERE. LET'S FIRST START WITH THE LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT, AND DIRECTOR WASPY WILL READ THAT. THANK YOU. AS WE GATHER HERE TODAY, WE THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT ALL OF THE LANDS WITHIN EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT ARE THE ANCESTRAL LANDS OF THE EAST BAY OHLONE, BAY MIWOK, AND NORTHERN VALLEY YOKUT, WHO ARE POLITICALLY ORGANIZED AND REPRESENTED BY A NUMBER OF TRIBES TODAY. WE MAKE THIS RECOGNITION AS A WAY TO RESPECT AND HONOR THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES WHO FIRST CULTIVATED AND INHABITED THIS LAND. THE PARK DISTRICT IS COMMITTED TO IDENTIFYING WAYS TO WORK AND CONSULT WITH EAST BAY TRIBES AS WE RECOGNIZE THAT THESE TRIBAL CITIZENS REMAIN CONNECTED TO THEIR LAND AND CULTURE. GREAT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. AND SO NOW WE'LL [PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA] MOVE ON TO AGENDA ITEM B, OUR PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC MAY PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT EITHER IN PERSON OR VIA ZOOM. THOSE ATTENDING IN PERSON SHALL SUBMIT A SPEAKER CARD TO THE CLERK'S STAFF OR OTHERWISE INDICATE THEIR DESIRE TO SPEAK ON A NON-AGENDA ITEM. THOSE ATTENDING VIA ZOOM MAY USE THE RAISE HAND FEATURE. SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED WHEN IT IS THEIR TURN TO SPEAK. EACH SPEAKER WILL BE PROVIDED UP TO 3 MINUTES TO ADDRESS THE BOARD. A COUNTDOWN TIMER WILL BE DISPLAYED FOR THE SPEAKER'S CONVENIENCE. WE CURRENTLY HAVE 3 HERE, AND THEN WE HAVE 2 IN THE ZOOM ROOM. BARBARA SMITH. HI, PRESIDENT SANG WONG, DIRECTORS. MY NAME IS BARBARA SMITH, AND I'M A COACH WITH THE WILDCAT MIDDLE SCHOOL MOUNTAIN BIKE TEAM. I'M HERE TODAY TO SPEAK ABOUT THE PROPOSED WILDCAT BIKE TRAIL. I FIRST SPOKE TO THE BOARD ABOUT THE TRAIL PROPOSAL 4.5 YEARS AGO. I SAID THEN THAT LOCAL YOUTH MOUNTAIN BIKE TEAMS HAVE BECOME MAJOR USERS OF TILDEN WILDCAT PARKS, WITH YOUTH AND COACHES RIDING THE TRAILS MULTIPLE TIMES A WEEK. PARK DISTRICT TRAILS HAVE HAD AND HAVE BECOME CONGESTED, PARTICULARLY IN WILDCAT AND TILDEN PARKS, AND SO NICA COACHES AND BTC-EB PROPOSED A NEW BIKE-ONLY FLOW TRAIL IN WILDCAT CANYON, AN AREA WITH EASY ACCESS FOR NEARBY UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES AND WHERE A TRAIL CAN BE BUILT WITH MINIMAL ENVIRONMENTAL DISTURBANCE TO THE EXISTING GRASSLAND HILLSIDES, WHICH ARE IMPACTED CURRENTLY BY GRAZING CATTLE. I STATED THEN THAT THE MOUNTAIN BIKING COMMUNITY IS WILLING TO PROVIDE FUNDING AS WELL AS LABOR FOR TRAIL STEWARDSHIP AND MAINTENANCE. THESE THINGS ARE STILL TRUE. AS YOU MEET TODAY TO TALK ABOUT FINANCIAL PLANNING FOR THE DISTRICT, IT'S CLEAR THAT GRANTS AND DONATIONS ARE AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE DISTRICT'S ABILITY TO MEET ITS MISSION. MY HUSBAND, COURT COOPER, AND I DISCUSSED WITH THE REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT SORRY, THE REGIONAL PARK FOUNDATION SEVERAL YEARS AGO. WE ARE INTERESTED IN FINANCIALLY SUPPORTING THE CONSTRUCTION OF A BIKE-ONLY FLOW TRAIL IN WILDCAT CANYON. AS WE WROTE TO YOUR BOARD IN MARCH, WE RESPECT THE FOUNDATION'S PROCESS AND WILL FURTHER DISCUSS, DISCUSS DONATIONS FOR THE PROJECT BY US AND THE BROADER COMMUNITY WHEN AND IF A TRAIL IS APPROVED BY THE BOARD. COURT IS A [00:05:03] FOUNDER AND WE ARE BOTH COACHES OF THE WILDCAT COMPOSITE MIDDLE SCHOOL MOUNTAIN BIKE TEAM, WHICH HAS NURTURED OVER 500 YOUTH RIDERS FROM RICHMOND, EL CERRITO, ALBANY, AND BERKELEY FOR OVER 12 YEARS. OUR WILLINGNESS TO DONATE TO THE FLOW TRAIL IS MOTIVATED BY OUR FIRSTHAND EXPERIENCE OF THE WAY YOUTH MOUNTAIN BIKING HELPS YOUNG PEOPLE BUILD CONNECTION WITH NATURE, PHYSICAL AND MENTAL HEALTH, RESPECT FOR OTHER TRAIL USERS, A LOVE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP, GRIT, SELF-RELIANCE, AND COMMUNITY. WE'RE KEEN ADVOCATES FOR THE PROPOSED WILDCAT BIKE TRAIL, WHICH WILL BENEFIT YOUTH RIDERS AND THE WIDER COMMUNITY OF PARK USERS BY CREATING SPACE ON OTHER TRAILS. WE SUPPORT RIGOROUS ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND HEALTHY DISCUSSION OF THE PROJECT'S MERITS. MEANTIME, WE APPLAUD THE DISTRICT FOR WORKING TO IMPROVE TRAIL ACCESS FOR ALL USERS. THANK YOU. BRUCE BAIRD. PRESIDENT SAN WONG, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, MY NAME IS BRUCE BAIRD. I'M THE CHAIR OF TRAC, TRAILS, TOURISM, ACTION COMMITTEE. I'M HERE TODAY TO ADDRESS COMPLETING THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY TRAIL ON THE POINT SAN PABLO PENINSULA. THE BAY TRAIL PLAN CALLS FOR A 4-MILE WALKING/CYCLING TRAIL EXTENDING NORTH THROUGH RICHMOND-SAN RAFAEL BRIDGE TO THE POINT SAN PABLO HARBOR. IT'S VERY EXCITING. AS WE'RE HERE TODAY, 2.5 MILES OF NEW TRAIL IS BEING BUILT FROM THE BRIDGE PAST POINT LOTTIE BEACH PARK AND THE WINEHAVEN HISTORIC DISTRICT. ALONG THE SHORELINE TO THE NORTHERN BORDER OF THE POINT MOLAHTI PROPERTY. THE NEXT STEP IS EXTENDING THIS BAY TRAIL FROM POINT MOLAHTI AROUND POINT SAN PABLO TO THE POINT SAN PABLO HARBOR. CHEVRON HAS AGREED TO PROVIDE ACCESS ACROSS ITS LAND BETWEEN POINT MOLAHTI AND POINT SAN PABLO. SO THE REMAINING CHALLENGES ARE SECURING ACCESS ON THE 20-FOOT-WIDE BELTLINE RAIL CORRIDOR AND CREATING SAFE, INVITING PUBLIC ACCESS AROUND POINT SAN PABLO ITSELF TO THE HARBOR. THE DISTRICT'S MASTER PLAN CALLING FOR A POINT MILATI REGIONAL SHORELINE PARK WAS ADOPTED IN 2013 BEFORE POINT SAN PABLO PORT INFRASTRUCTURE WAS CLEANED UP AND REMEDIATED. TODAY, THE MOST EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT PATH FORWARD WOULD BE TO INTEGRATE POINT SAN PABLO INTO PLANNING FOR A PARK AT POINT MILATI. LINKED BY THE BAY TRAIL EXTENDING TO THE POINT SAN PABLO HARBOR. THIS WOULD ADD 47 ACRES TO THE 276 ACRES OF DRY LAND AT POINT MILATI. POINT SAN PABLO IS NOT AN ISOLATED PARCEL. IT'S A NATURAL EXTENSION OF A LARGER SHORELINE LANDSCAPE DEFINED BY DRAMATIC SCENERY, LAYERED MARITIME HISTORY, ECOLOGICAL VALUE, AND PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE SHORELINE. WHICH IS INCREASINGLY RARE IN THE BAY AREA, ESPECIALLY PLACES WHERE THOUGHTFUL PLANNING CAN PRECLUDE INTENSIVE PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT AND FORECLOSE FUTURE POSSIBILITIES. THE POINT SAN PABLO PENINSULA CREATES AN OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE ONE OF THE BAY AREA'S GREAT SHORELINE PARKS, A CONTINUOUS PUBLIC LANDSCAPE STRETCHING FROM POINT MOLLOTTI TO POINT SAN PABLO. PLEASE GO FOR IT. KEVIN SMALLMAN. GOOD MORNING, BOARD AND STAFF. THE GOAL OF PARKS IS TO BRING LIGHT INTO THE HUMAN HEART, AND YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE TO BE WEALTHY TO EXPERIENCE THAT. I ENCOURAGE THE DISTRICT TO CONTINUE TO FIND WAYS TO PRIORITIZE TOUCHPOINTS INTO THE PARKS, INCREASING OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE PUBLIC TO USE OPEN SPACES AS A PUBLIC GOOD. THE POINT I WAS TRYING TO MAKE AT THE FIRST CAPITAL STUDY SESSION WAS IT'S ABSOLUTELY CRUCIAL TO OUR COMMUNITY'S HEALTH, AND WE'RE NOT THERE YET. I THINK ABOUT MY OWN EFFORTS TO HAVE A FUN DAY OUT IN THE PARKS HAPPEN ON A REGULAR BASIS. MY TOWN IS SANDWICHED BETWEEN A HILLS PARK AND A SHORELINE PARK. I HAVE A PARTNER AND A KID WHO ARE PUMPED TO GET OUTSIDE ON ALMOST ANY DAY WE CAN MAKE IT FIT. WE HAVE PARKS CLOSE TO HOME, BUT SOMETIMES IT TAKES HOURS TO GET MY 3-YEAR-OLD PRIMED AND OUT THE DOOR. THE HILLS PARK WE CAN RIDE TO, AND THE SECOND WE'RE ABLE TO GET OUT THE DOOR, THE ADVENTURE BEGINS. THE ADDITIONAL 20 TO 30 MINUTES TO GET IN A CAR TO DRIVE TO THE BAY TRAIL ON THE OTHER SIDE OF TOWN MAKES A MEANINGFUL DIFFERENCE IN HOW WE ARE ABLE TO ACCESS OPEN SPACE. THE ADDITIONAL TIME IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GETTING [00:10:02] OUTSIDE OR NOT. PROXIMITY IS A HUGE, SORRY, PROXIMITY HAS A STRONG CORRELATION TO ACCESSIBILITY. WITH ALL THIS CONTEXT, I WANT TO APPROACH THE RECENT COMMENTS ABOUT THE LAKE TEMESCAL PROJECT CPI SCORE AND THE OPPOSITION TO ITS EQUITY SCORE. SEEING THERE'S A BUS STOP NEAR THE PARK AS A PREMISE FOR PROVIDING EQUITABLE ACCESS MADE ME CRINGE. THE 80-MINUTE BUS RIDE FROM EAST OAKLAND TO LAKE TEMESCAL AND BACK MAKE A MEANINGFUL DIFFERENCE IN HOW THAT PARK IS ACCESSIBLE. I WANT TO DEFEND THE CPI GRADING RUBRIC. I SEE IT AS A PRETTY OBJECTIVE METRIC, A THRESHOLD OF WHAT A PROJECT IS OR IS NOT DOING. I APPRECIATE THE DISTRICT HAVING CLEAR CRITERIA TO DEFINE WHAT GEOGRAPHIC EQUITY AND SOCIAL EQUITY MEANS. I DEEPLY WANT TO SEE PARKS CLOSE TO ME IMPROVE, BUT I REFUSE TO ADVOCATE FOR THOSE UPGRADES AT THE EXPENSE OF COMMUNITIES LIVING IN OUTDOOR RECREATION DESERTS. LARGE SWATHS OF THE BAY-FACING EAST BAY FLATLANDS REMAIN UNDERSERVED BY THE PARK DISTRICT FOR VARIOUS REASONS. HOW DO WE CONTINUE TO FIND WAYS FOR EVERYBODY TO TOUCH THE OUTDOORS? TURNING ATTENTION TO ANOTHER PART OF THE EQUITY AND ACCESS VENN DIAGRAM, ONE OF THE BOARD MEETINGS CANCELED THIS MONTH WAS A 5 PM START TIME. IT WAS MARKED ON MY CALENDAR TO ATTEND. THESE MEETINGS ARE NOT ACCESSIBLE TO ME AND MANY OF THE OTHERS WHO WORK DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. I WOULD GREATLY APPRECIATE RESCHEDULING A SECOND LATE START BOARD MEETING FOR SOME POINT THIS YEAR. THANK YOU. SCOTT BARTERBAUGH, YOU HAVE 3 MINUTES. WE CANNOT HEAR YOU. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT ON BEHALF OF THE BICYCLE TRAILS COUNCIL OF THE EAST BAY. WE ARE RESPONDING TO A NUMBER OF RECENT PUBLIC COMMENTS OPPOSING THE WILDCAT BIKE TRAIL PROJECT. THE PROJECT WILL BENEFIT ALL TRAIL USERS BY DISPERSING AND SHIFTING CURRENT USE TO THE NEW TRAIL, MEANING LESS ENCOUNTERS WITH BIKES FOR MOST HIKERS. SOLITUDE CONSISTENTLY RANKS HIGH WITH TRAIL USERS AS A DESIRED EXPERIENCE. THE ADDITION OF A TRAIL FOR MOUNTAIN BIKES SHOULD REDUCE THE NUMBER OF ENCOUNTERS WITH MOST HIKERS AND INCREASE THEIR SOLITUDE. IT WILL BE VALUABLE TO ADD A HIGH-QUALITY TRAIL THAT WILL DELIVER A PARTICULAR TYPE OF DESIRED TRAIL USER EXPERIENCE, BUT IT ALONE WILL NOT RAISE THE OVERALL TILDEN AND WILDCAT TRAIL SYSTEM EXPERIENCE TO THE POINT OF CONSISTENTLY DRAWING RIDERS FROM AROUND THE BAY AREA OR BEYOND. A FLOW TRAIL IS PASSIVE, NON-INTENSIVE RECREATION, COMPLETELY IN LINE WITH THE DISTRICT GUIDELINES FOR A NATURAL AREA CLASSIFICATION. IT'S NOT A SPORTS FIELD, POOL, PLAYGROUND, GOLF COURSE, CAROUSEL, STEAM TRAIN, OR PICNIC AREA. IT IS FULLY COMPATIBLE WITH A NATURAL AREA CLASSIFICATION AS ARE THE TRAILS LAST BUILT AT CROCKETT HILLS AND PLEASANTON RIDGE THAT WERE DESIGNED AND BUILT WITH BIKES IN MIND. THE WILDCAT BIKE TRAIL IS NOT AN INTENSIVE AMUSEMENT PARK THRILL RIDE AS THE HYPERBOLE PORTRAYS IT. IT IS A TRAIL DESIGNED WITH BIKES IN MIND AND IT'S COMPLETELY REASONABLE IN THE NATURAL AREA. THERE'S BEEN CONCERN WITH THIS TRAIL MAKING WILDCAT A SITE FOR NICA RACES AND ATTRACTING LARGE EVENTS. THIS TRAIL WILL NOT MAKE WILDCAT REGIONAL PARK SUITABLE FOR NICA RACES DUE TO SEVERAL ASPECTS. THE EXISTING ROAD AND TRAIL SYSTEM, ALONG WITH THE ADDITION OF THE PROPOSED TRAIL, DO NOT MEET THE NEEDS FOR A NICA RACE COURSE. ADDITIONALLY, SUPPORT FACILITIES FOR PARKING AND RESTROOMS ARE NOT SUFFICIENT TO HANDLE AN EVENT OF THE SIZE OF THE NICA RACE. THE PARK DISTRICT WOULD NEED TO PERMIT ANY RACE EVENTS, AND THE DISTRICT IS STRINGENT IN THEIR REVIEW OF EVENTS AND THE IMPACT ON PARKS AND WOULD NOT PERMIT AN EVENT IF THE PARK COULD NOT HANDLE IT. THERE'S ALSO BEEN CONCERN WITH THE IMAGES OF WOODEN BERMS, ROLLERS, AND OTHER BUILT FEATURES. WOOD AND METAL FEATURES ARE AN OPTION THAT REDUCE MAINTENANCE AND EROSION. ALL TRAILS HAVE AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT NO MATTER WHO USES IT. WOOD AND METAL FEATURES ARE A MODERN MEANS TO REDUCE THIS IMPACT, REQUIRE LESS MAINTENANCE, AND IN MOST CASES REDUCE THE LONG-TERM COST OF OWNERSHIP. FEATURES CONSTRUCTED OF WOOD AND METAL ARE A COMMON ELEMENT TO MANY EXISTING HIKING TRAILS. STAIRWAYS, BRIDGES, BRIDGES, RETAINING WALLS, HARDENED STREAM FORDS, AND PUNCH-INS ARE ALL EXAMPLES OF BUILT METAL, WOODEN, AND CONCRETE TRAIL FEATURES. THESE FEATURES DON'T STRIKE [00:15:01] FEAR INTO THE HEARTS OF REASONABLE PEOPLE, CREATE THRILL RIDES, OR SCAR THE LANDSCAPE. NOR SHOULD THE WOODEN AND METAL FEATURES THAT MAY BE USED ON THE WILDCAT BIKE TRAIL. THEY DO MAKE FOR SUSTAINABLE ACCESS INTO OUR AMAZING OPEN SPACES BY PEDESTRIANS, EQUESTRIANS, AND CYCLISTS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. KELLY ABREU. THANK YOU. I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT EVERY SPEAKER TODAY, INCLUDING ME, IS GOING TO ASK FOR ACCESS TO HIKING AND BIKING AND HORSE RIDING TRAILS. MY REQUEST TODAY, OUR REQUEST IS DIFFERENT. SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF MISSION PEAK CONSERVANCY, OUR REQUEST DATES BACK TO ABOUT 2008 WHEN PROPERTY OWNERS FILED SUIT AGAINST THIS PARK DISTRICT SEEKING TO PREVENT THE OPENING OF VARGAS PLATEAU REGIONAL PARK. IN 2012, WHEN YOUR GENERAL MANAGER AND YOUR GENERAL COUNSEL SIGNED A LEGAL CONTRACT AGREEING TO SHUT DOWN, TO SUPPORT THE CLOSURE OF A HIKING, BIKING, AND HORSE RIDING TRAIL IN, LITERALLY IN, VARGAS PLATEAU. YOU WANTED TO GIVE IT AWAY, TO BLOCK IT OFF, TO STOP THE PUBLIC ACCESS TO THIS EXISTING HIKING, BIKING TRAIL AND ROADWAY THAT HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR 150 YEARS. AND YOU, YOU ACTUALLY WROTE A LETTER RECENTLY IN SUPPORT OF THIS TRAIL CLOSURE. WELL, AS WAS REPORTED JUST DAYS AGO IN THE SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS IN A HEADLINE, "IS THIS THE END FOR THE FREMONT GATE CONTROVERSY?" THAT'S ON MAY 15, 2026. HEARING OFFICER ORDERS PROPERTY OWNER TO TEAR DOWN MORRISON CANYON ROAD GATE. THE HEARING OFFICER FOUND THAT THE ACT OF BLOCKING OFF THE TRAIL WAS ILLEGAL. ILLEGALLY BLOCKED THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY IN THE JURISDICTION OF THE CITY OF FREMONT. AND THAT LETTER THAT YOU WROTE, THAT CONTRACT THAT YOU SIGNED IN 2012, THAT WAS AN ILLEGAL ACT. THAT WAS AN ILLEGAL CONTRACT THAT YOU ENTERED INTO. AND YOUR SUPPORT FOR BLOCKING OFF THIS TRAIL IS AN ILLEGAL LETTER OF SUPPORT. YOU ENTERED INTO AN ILLEGAL CONTRACT, AND OF COURSE YOU ARE UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO SUPPORT ILLEGAL ACTS. IN FACT, YOU ARE REQUIRED BUT YOU SHOULD RESCIND YOUR SUPPORT FOR THE ILLEGAL CONTRACT, RESCIND THAT LETTER, AND SUPPORT THE REOPENING, THE CITY OF FREMONT'S REOPENING OF THIS 150-YEAR-OLD HIKING, BIKING, AND HORSE RIDING TRAIL. THAT CLOSURE, GATE CLOSURE, IS REALLY ONE OF THE MOST EGREGIOUS AND OUTRAGEOUS AND ILLEGAL ACTS THAT'S EVER HAPPENED IN THE 150-YEAR HISTORY OF VARGAS PLATEAU. AND YOUR PARK DISTRICT SHOULD HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. YOU NEED TO GET OUT OF THAT CLAUSE OF THE CONTRACT. YOU NEED TO START READING THE NEWSPAPER AND DISASSOCIATE YOURSELF FROM ANY AND ALL ILLEGAL ACTIONS THAT ARE HAPPENING OUT THERE AT THE VARGAS PLATEAU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. CYNTHIA KUPKA. HI. GOOD MORNING, BOARD MEMBERS. I'D LIKE TO COMMENT ON THE PROPOSED MOUNTAIN BIKE FLOW TRAIL. I WALK THE MAIN TRAIL IN WILDCAT CANYON PRETTY MUCH EVERY DAY. I'M WORRIED THIS PROJECT WOULD CHANGE THE FEEL OF THE MAIN TRAIL NETWORK AND AFFECT THE EXPERIENCE OF HIKERS, WALKERS, AND FAMILIES WHO USE IT NOW. I THINK ADDING THIS HIGH-INTENSITY MOUNTAIN BIKE TRAIL WOULD MAKE THE AREA LESS PEACEFUL AND LESS SAFE. PLEASE PROTECT THE SHARED QUIET CHARACTER OF WILDCAT CANYON SO IT CAN BE ENJOYED BY EVERYONE FOR DECADES TO COME. THANK YOU. SHARON, YOU HAVE 3 MINUTES. IF YOU CAN UNMUTE YOURSELF. SHARON, WE SEE THAT [00:20:04] YOUR HAND IS RAISED. YOU HAVE 3 MINUTES. CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF? SHARON, YOU'RE UNMUTED. OKAY. WE'LL MOVE ON. OKAY, THAT'S ALL FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. THANK YOU EVERYONE FOR PARTICIPATING IN PUBLIC COMMENT. SO WE WILL NOW MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT ITEM, WHICH IS AGENDA ITEM C, ANNOUNCEMENTS. I DON'T BELIEVE WE HAVE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS TO MAKE, SO WE WILL CONTINUE ON TO [BOARD PRIORITIES SESSION #3] AGENDA ITEM D, WHICH IS OUR BOARD PRIORITY SESSION. AND WE HAVE D1, THE FISCAL LANDSCAPE AND PROPOSED 2027 BUDGET PROCESS. AND I'LL JUST, YOU KNOW, START SOME THINGS OFF HERE ABOUT WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY. AND IF WE WANT TO I BELIEVE IT MIGHT BE SLIDE 5. WE CAN GO AHEAD TO SLIDE 5. SO JUST TO REVIEW, I KNOW WE DID THIS LAST WEEK WHEN WE WERE HERE, BUT WE SET UP THESE FINAL 3 SERIES IN CONJUNCTION WITH OUR PREVIOUS 3 WITH THE BOARD RETREAT IN JANUARY TO KICK OFF THE NEW YEAR. OUR LAND ACQUISITION STUDY SESSION IN FEBRUARY, AND OUR TRAIL STUDY SESSION IN MARCH. AND SO NOW WE ARE HERE IN MAY, AND WE HAD A SERIES OF THREE. SO IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, WE STARTED OFF WITH OUR CAPITAL PROJECT STUDY SESSION ON MAY 1ST, AND THEN LAST WEEK WHEN WE WERE HERE, WE DID OUR BOARD PRIORITIES STUDY SESSION ONE. AND SO NOW TODAY WE'RE GOING TO BE REVISITING CAPITAL PROJECTS AND BOARD PRIORITIES STUDY SESSION TWO, AND REALLY THE PURPOSE OF TODAY IS TO REALLY HELP CONNECT THIS SERIES OF WORKSHOPS TO OUR BUDGET PROCESS. AND TODAY CONCLUDES THE WORKSHOPS THAT WE'VE TYPICALLY DONE EACH YEAR. THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE MAY NOT HAVE ANOTHER SPECIAL WORKSHOP AT SOME POINT, NOT THAT I HAVE ANY ANTICIPATED FOR 2026, BUT THIS IS OUR TRADITIONAL SERIES OF WORKSHOPS, THESE 6 SESSIONS, AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY. ALRIGHT, AND SO NOW MOVING ON TO THE NEXT SLIDE, I'M GOING TO HAND IT OVER TO OUR ACTING GENERAL MANAGER, MAX KORTEN. WELL, GOOD MORNING, AND I'M EXCITED ABOUT THIS SESSION. YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF WORK PUT INTO THIS FROM YOU ALL AS A BOARD, WORKING WITH OUR FACILITATOR MEGAN AND KAREN, AND THEN ALSO FROM OUR TEAM. AND THIS, YOU KNOW, WE DID SOMETHING A LITTLE DIFFERENT WITH THESE SESSIONS THAN WHAT WE'VE DONE BEFORE, AND I THINK OUR GOAL HERE WAS TO BE RESPONSIVE TO SOME OF THE IDEAS AND OPPORTUNITIES THAT YOUR BOARD BROUGHT TO US AS STAFF, AND THOSE ARE REALLY TO BE MORE OF A PART OF OUR BUDGET PROCESS AND BE MORE ENGAGED. SO THAT FIRST SESSION WAS RESPONDING TO A DESIRE TO, YOU KNOW, ENGAGE AROUND THE PRIORITIZATION PROCESS AND HOW DO WE EVALUATE PROJECTS AND BUILD OUR CAPITAL PROJECTS LIST. AND WE DOVE INTO IT. I FEEL LIKE WE GOT PART OF THE WAY, AND TODAY WE'RE GOING TO GET FURTHER IN SORT OF UNDERSTANDING WHAT THOSE IDEAS ARE, AND THEN WE'LL TALK ABOUT NEXT STEPS. AND THEN AT OUR LAST SESSION, IT WAS REALLY HELPFUL TO ME. WE KIND OF STEPPED BACK AND HEARD WHAT IS THE REALM OF THINGS THAT YOU ALL AS BOARD MEMBERS ARE INTERESTED IN, CONCERNED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, BOTH YOUR GOALS FOR THIS YEAR BUT ALSO YOUR BROADER GOALS AND INTERESTS. AND THAT'S SOMETHING I THINK HAS BEEN REALLY HELPFUL FOR ME AND STAFF. WE'VE BEEN, YOU KNOW, WE HEARD THAT AND WE'VE BEEN SORT OF THINKING ABOUT HOW DO WE INCORPORATE THAT INTO OUR WORK BOTH IN THESE SESSIONS AND BEYOND. I WANTED TO SPEND A MINUTE TALKING ABOUT THE PARKING LOT. SO, YOU KNOW, ONE THING THAT WE'VE HAD UP HERE IS SORT OF A PLACE TO PUT IDEAS THAT DON'T FIT PERFECTLY INTO THESE SESSIONS. AND SO I JUST WANT TO SORT OF PROVIDE COMMENT THAT WE'VE HEARD THOSE THINGS. I FEEL LIKE THIS IS SORT OF LIKE IN THE BOARD MEETINGS WHEN YOUR BOARD BRINGS UP WHAT ARE SOME FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS THAT YOU'RE INTERESTED IN. WE'RE LISTENING TO THOSE AND WE'RE WORKING ON HOW TO INCORPORATE THEM INTO THE FUTURE. SO I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT A FEW. IMPROVE COMMUNICATION AROUND PROJECT UPDATES. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON, KATIE AND OUR WHOLE TEAM IS THE DASHBOARD TO PROVIDE UPDATES ABOUT ALL OF OUR PROJECTS BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T HAD GREAT TRANSPARENCY AROUND THAT IN THE PAST. THE OTHER THING THAT OUR TEAM IS ACTIVELY DOING IS, IS INCREASING THE WAYS THAT WE TALK TO YOUR BOARD ABOUT PROJECTS [00:25:01] AND PROVIDE UPDATES BOTH AT REGULAR MEETINGS AND WITH THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE BECAUSE I THINK WE'VE KIND OF UNDERUTILIZED THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE IN THE PAST. SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'RE SORT OF ACTIVELY RESPONDING TO THESE IDEAS THAT ARE COMING FROM YOUR BOARD. ANOTHER ONE THAT CAME UP IS A DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW CRITERIA ARE DEFINED. THAT'S, THAT'S SOME OF THE STUFF THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY, THIS AFTERNOON, IS GETTING INTO THE CPP CRITERIA AND KIND OF DIGGING A LITTLE BIT DEEPER BECAUSE I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE REALLY GET THIS RIGHT. ANOTHER ONE IS WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH PARK RESIDENCES. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I THINK WE ALSO HEARD AS A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM AND I JUST APPROVED IT IN OUR QUEUE TO COME TO THE OPERATIONS COMMITTEE OF YOUR BOARD TO GIVE AN UPDATE AND GET FEEDBACK ABOUT OUR PARK RESIDENCE PROGRAM. ANOTHER ONE THAT WAS HERE WAS INVENTORY OF BIODIVERSITY, UNDERSTANDING MORE ABOUT ENDANGERED SPECIES AND TREES AND WHAT'S GOING ON IN OUR PARKS. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE ALSO HEARD AND OUR TEAM, MATT HAS BEEN WORKING ON WITH HIS TEAM AND IT'S GOING TO COME TO THE NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE OF YOUR BOARD. ANOTHER ONE WAS CONSIDER OPPORTUNITIES FOR REVENUE ENHANCEMENT, AND THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT TODAY. AND IN FACT, WE HAVE AN EXERCISE WITH YOUR BOARD TO HELP GUIDE US AROUND REVENUE ENHANCEMENT. INVENTORY, A PRESENTATION ON TOXIC LANDS, THAT'S ANOTHER ONE THAT WE HAVE ALSO HEARD, AND MATT AND OUR TEAM ARE FOLLOWING UP ON A BOARD PRESENTATION FOR IN THE FUTURE ABOUT THESE DIFFERENT INDUSTRIAL SITES THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, PRIOR INDUSTRIAL SITES THAT WE MANAGE AND HOW WE WORK ON THOSE. AND THEN THE LAST ONE, AND I REALLY HEARD THIS LOUD AND CLEAR AT OUR LAST SESSION, WAS HAVING ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY FOR YOUR BOARD TO ENGAGE MORE DEEPLY ON THE DISTRICT PLAN. I THINK THAT'S ONE WHERE, YOU KNOW, I AGREE THAT WE NEED AN OPPORTUNITY FOR TO DIG IN ON SORT OF WHAT ARE THE NEXT STEPS OF THE DISTRICT PLAN, WHERE ARE WE HEADED. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOUR BOARD IS DRIVING THAT PROCESS, THAT YOU'RE IN THE LEAD, AND THAT YOU KNOW WHERE WE'RE GOING. SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'RE WORKING ON FOR THE FUTURE. IN TERMS OF FUTURE WORKSHOPS, I'M SURE WE'LL HAVE ONE. THAT'S, THAT'S ONE OF THE ONES I HEARD LOUD AND CLEAR THAT YOU WANT. I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE DO THAT. SO THAT IS, THAT'S SORT OF FOLLOWING UP ON THOSE THINGS, LET'S SEE, WHAT ELSE DID I HAVE ON MY PLATE HERE? OKAY. SLIDE NUMBER 8. ARE WE THERE? OKAY. SO TODAY WE'VE, YOU KNOW, WE'VE FOLLOWED UP ON SOME OF THESE ITEMS. THE THING THAT WE'RE REALLY DIVING INTO TODAY IS OUR FISCAL LANDSCAPE AND OUR OPERATIONS. OPERATIONAL BUDGET. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE LIKE TOUCHED ON A LITTLE BIT, BUT ONE THING I HEARD FROM YOUR BOARD IS A DESIRE TO HEAR MORE AND GET MORE DEEPLY INVOLVED IN UNDERSTANDING HOW DID WE GET WHERE WE ARE TODAY. WHAT ARE THE FACTORS THAT HAVE CREATED SOME OF THE CHALLENGES FOR OPERATIONAL BUDGET, TO REALLY UNDERSTAND IT. AND I FEEL SO LUCKY THAT KATIE HAS WORKED WITH OUR TEAM TO PUT TOGETHER A SLIDESHOW THAT I REALLY ILLUSTRATES THE COMPLEXITY, BUT IN A WAY THAT IS, I MEAN, FOR ME, EASY TO WRAP MY HEAD AROUND. SO I THINK IT'S, IT REALLY SHOULD BE HELPFUL. AND THEN THE OTHER THING THAT WE HAVE TODAY IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE US REALLY LIKE HIGH-LEVEL FEEDBACK ABOUT, ABOUT WHERE WE'RE GOING AND UNDERSTANDING WHAT OPPORTUNITIES THERE ARE BOTH TO REDUCE EXPENSES AND POTENTIALLY INCREASE REVENUES. SO THAT'S SOMETHING WE REALLY WANT TO HEAR YOUR FEEDBACK. THERE'S AN ACTIVITY THAT WE'RE GOING TO DO TOGETHER TO DIVE INTO THAT AND THAT WILL REALLY HELP US SET UP FOR NOT JUST THIS BUDGET BUT THE NEXT FEW BUDGETS. AND THEN LET'S SEE, MAYBE THIS IS SLIDE 9. IN ADDITION TO THAT FISCAL LANDSCAPE, WE'RE GOING TO DIVE BACK INTO THE CPP FRAMEWORK. I WANT TO REALLY MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOUR BOARD'S LOOKING FOR WITH THAT. AND THEN THE LAST THING WE'RE GOING TO DO, WE'VE GOT THIS LIKE TIMELINE UP THERE THAT'S GOING TO BE UP THERE ALL DAY IS DIVE INTO WHAT IS THE PROCESS FOR DEVELOPING THE BUDGET, AND THEN ALSO WHAT'S THE PROCESS IN THE FUTURE FOR SORT OF HOW WE INCORPORATE SOME OF THESE BIGGER IDEAS THAT WE'VE HEARD FROM YOUR BOARD. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GOT THIS RIGHT AND THAT THIS TIME IS WE'RE DEVELOPING SOMETHING THAT'S REPEATABLE IN THE FUTURE AND UNDERSTANDING WHAT ARE THE ELEMENTS THAT ARE WORKING WELL AND HOW CAN WE JUST KEEP FINE-TUNING THIS PROCESS INTO THE FUTURE. DID I MISS ANYTHING, MEGAN? I THINK YOU GOT IT. OKAY. THANKS, MAX. GOOD MORNING, EVERYBODY. MY NAME IS MEGAN FLUKE. I'LL BE HELPING FACILITATE TODAY ALONG WITH MY COLLEAGUE, KAREN MCNAMARA. OUR ROLE [00:30:01] TODAY IS JUST TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE GETS HEARD, THAT WE ROUGHLY STICK TO THIS AGENDA AND GET OUT ON TIME, AND ALSO UPHOLD OUR WORKING AGREEMENTS, WHICH I'LL SPEAK TO NEXT. I JUST WANT TO REMIND US ABOUT THE PARKING LOT IN THE BACK. EVERYBODY HAS POST-ITS, SO IF THERE'S ANY ITEM THAT COMES UP THAT YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE HAS SPACE BUT DOESN'T FEEL LIKE IT FITS WITHIN THE AGENDA TODAY, FEEL FREE TO YOU COULD IMMEDIATELY JUST THROW IT UP IN THE PARKING LOT WITH THE POST-IT, OR SPEAK IT AND PUT IT UP ON THE PARKING LOT. SO FOR THE WORKING AGREEMENTS, BEFORE WE GO FURTHER, WE'VE BROUGHT THIS UP THE PAST TWO SESSIONS, STARTED THESE IN JANUARY. AS FAR AS I UNDERSTAND, THEY HAVEN'T BEEN REFINED. IT'S JUST BEEN LIKE, YEP, SOUNDS GOOD. BUT WANTED TO GET, WELL, AND WE'LL HAVE A CHANCE AT THE END TO GET YOUR FEEDBACK ON ANY EDITS YOU'D LIKE TO SEE TO THESE. THEY'RE CONSIDERED IT'S AN ORGANIC SET OF AGREEMENTS THAT CAN CHANGE OVER TIME. THESE ARE YOURS, AND I WANTED TO ASK THE BOARD IF WHICH OF THESE AGREEMENTS MATTERS MOST TO YOU TODAY. IF THERE'S ONE THAT YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK OUT, THIS IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY. I'LL START SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE THIS IN SILENCE. AND I HAVE BEEN THINKING ABOUT THIS TOO. SO I THINK NUMBER 2, RESPECTING CARE, IS REALLY IMPORTANT. TO LISTEN AND SPEAK WITH CURIOSITY AND COMPASSION AND LOOK FOR THE BEST IN OTHERS AND GIVE THE BENEFIT OF DOUBT TO OTHERS, I THINK IS REALLY IMPORTANT FOR US TO CONSIDER. YOU KNOW, WE EACH MAY HAVE OUR OWN INDIVIDUAL COMMUNICATION STYLE, AND SO TO RECOGNIZE THAT OTHERS MAY HAVE DIFFERENT WAYS OF COMMUNICATING DOESN'T MEAN THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU SHOULD NOT LISTEN TO THEM OR TRY TO HAVE SOME SORT OF CONFLICT. INSTEAD, TRY TO LOOK FOR THAT BEST IN OTHERS. THANK YOU. DIRECTOR SAN WONG. AND I'LL PIGGYBACK ON THAT BECAUSE I'M LIKING NUMBER 7 TODAY. I THINK A LITTLE TENSION IN OUR LAST SESSION. I'D LIKE TO PRACTICE A LITTLE MORE JOY AND PRESENCE. SAME THING, JUST BECAUSE WE WE CAN AGREE TO DISAGREE AND NOT PERSONAL ATTACK EACH OTHER'S IDEAS, PROJECTS, UNDERSTANDING OF THEM. SO I LIKE THAT ONE. GOOD GOVERNANCE REQUIRES US TO SLOW DOWN, APPRECIATE YOUR COLLEAGUES, AND LAUGH. WONDERFUL. ON THAT NOTE, I WILL SAY, UNFORTUNATELY, I WAS IN KAUAI LAST WEEK AND THE DISTRICT WASN'T WILLING TO SEND YOU ALL TO I DO HAVE MACADAMIA NUTS TO SHARE IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE THAT. YEAH, I WANTED TO PIGGYBACK ON THAT TOO BECAUSE I HAD THE SAME THOUGHT, ONLY I'M GOING TO FOCUS ON COLLABORATIVE INNOVATION. SO REFLECTING ON LAST TIME'S SESSION, I WAS THINKING ABOUT TIMES WHEN I OR SOMEONE ELSE COULD HAVE, YOU KNOW, STARTED OUT BY FINDING THAT PEOPLE PIECE WHERE YOU AGREE, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY PEOPLE HEAR BETTER WHEN YOU DON'T JUST SAY YES, WHEN YOU DON'T IMMEDIATELY GO TO YOUR POINT OF VIEW, BUT YOU SAY, YES, I AGREE WITH THAT, AND THEN GIVE YOUR POINT OF VIEW, WHICH MAY BE 90%, OR MAYBE EVEN IF IT'S ONLY 10% ALIGNED. THANK YOU. I THINK NUMBER 8, BRINGING A DISTRICT-WIDE MINDSET. THAT IS VERY IMPORTANT. SEEMS LIKE WE'RE GOING TO GET DOWN TO THE NUTS AND BOLTS HERE, AND IT SEEMS LIKE WE'VE GOT ABOUT, WE NEED 100 BOLTS AND WE'VE GOT ABOUT 10 IN OUR BAG. SO WE'VE GOT TO LOOK REGIONALLY AND THINK OUT OF OUR WARDS, IN MY OPINION, AND THINK WHAT'S BEST FOR THE DISTRICT. JOHN, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING? NOTHING THAT HASN'T ALREADY BEEN SAID. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, WELL, IF THERE'S NOT ANYTHING ELSE, I WILL SAY DIRECTOR MERCURIO, ALMOST ALL OF THE ITEMS TODAY, IT SHOULD BE PRETTY EASY FOR YOU TO ENGAGE ON ZOOM. THERE ARE A COUPLE THAT WILL HAVE LIKE STICKERS AND THAT TYPE OF THING, AND JUST AS AN A HEADS UP, I HAVE A TEXT THREAD WITH DIRECTOR MERCURIO SO WE CAN GET HIS STICKERS ON THE WALL EVEN THOUGH HE'S NOT HERE IN PERSON. AND ALSO, JUST AS A REMINDER, YOU DO HAVE A PACKET WITH EVERYTHING PRINTED OUT. SO ALL OF THE SLIDES THAT ARE UP TODAY ARE IN THIS PACKET, INCLUDING THE SLIDES THAT KATIE IS ABOUT TO PRESENT. I THINK WITH THAT, WE CAN TURN TO THE FULL FISCAL LANDSCAPE. [00:35:06] AND IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL JUST TO SAY QUICKLY, SO THERE'S ABOUT 30 MINUTES FOR THIS PRESENTATION, AND THERE WILL BE TIME FOR QUESTIONS DURING IT, AND THEN WE HAVE 50 MINUTES FOR BOARD DISCUSSION. YEAH. I'LL JUST PREFACE IT BY, YOU KNOW, ONCE AGAIN JUST SAYING WE'RE GOING TO SPEND A LITTLE BIT OF TIME LOOKING BACKWARDS AND KIND OF UNDERSTANDING HOW WE GOT WHERE WE ARE AND KIND OF DIVING INTO THAT. AGAIN, FEEL FREE TO ASK QUESTIONS. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU GET YOUR QUESTIONS ANSWERED. AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO KIND OF LOOK FORWARDS. AND I THINK THIS ISN'T LIKE DOOM AND GLOOM. WE'RE NOT LIKE WE HAVE AN UNSOLVABLE PROBLEM. I THINK WHAT WE'RE BRINGING YOU IS ACTUALLY THE SOLUTION TO AN ISSUE. WE'VE GOT OPTION A AND OPTION B. THE OPTION A IS WE'RE IN TROUBLE, AND OPTION B IS WE'RE GOING TO BE FINE. SO, I THINK WE WANT TO BE FINE, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE TO, TO ACCOMPLISH. SO I'LL TURN IT OVER TO KATIE. GREAT, THANK YOU, MAX. GOOD MORNING, PRESIDENT SAN WONG AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS. KATIE DIGNAN, ACTING ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER OF FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES, CFO, TO PRESENT ON THE PARK DISTRICT'S CURRENT FISCAL LANDSCAPE AND PROPOSED A 2027 BUDGET PROCESS. AS ACTING GENERAL MANAGER MAX KORTEN MENTIONED THIS MORNING, I'M GOING TO TAKE YOU ON A HISTORICAL LOOK BACK OVER THE LAST 6 YEARS, WALKING THROUGH OUR REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE TRENDS, THE STRATEGIC DECISIONS THAT HAVE SHAPED OUR FISCAL POSITION, AND THE CAPITAL INVESTMENT PICTURE. I WILL THEN TOUCH ON 2 FORWARD-LOOKING SCENARIOS AND A MENU OF OPTIONS FOR THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION. BEFORE I DO, I WANTED TO OFFER SOME BRIEF REGIONAL CONTEXT. STRUCTURAL DEFICITS ARE NO LONGER ISOLATED TO A HANDFUL OF AGENCIES. ACROSS THE BAY AREA, LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, SPECIAL DISTRICTS, TRANSIT AGENCIES, AND UTILITIES ARE FACING THE SAME UNDERLYING CHALLENGES: ONGOING EXPENDITURE GROWTH OUTPACING RECURRING REVENUE. AGENCIES ARE INCREASINGLY RESPONDING THROUGH SERVICE PRIORITIZATION, ORGANIZATIONAL RESTRUCTURING, VACANCY MANAGEMENT, DEFERRED CAPITAL INVESTMENT, AND PURSUANT OF NEW REVENUE SOURCES. THE PARK DISTRICT'S FISCAL CHALLENGES ARE PART OF A MUCH BROADER REGIONAL TREND AFFECTING NEARLY EVERY PUBLIC AGENCY IN THE BAY AREA. WE ARE NOT ALONE IN THIS CONVERSATION, AND THE TOOLS OTHER AGENCIES ARE USING ARE LARGELY THE SAME ONES WE'LL BE DISCUSSING THIS MORNING. SO WITH THAT, I'LL MOVE INTO THE GENERAL FUND REVENUES VERSUS EXPENDITURES. THE PARK DISTRICT OPERATES OVER 50 FUNDS, INCLUDING SPECIAL REVENUE AND PERMANENT FUNDS, INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS, PROJECT FUNDS, DEBT SERVICE FUNDS, AND A VARIOUS OTHER PROGRAM FUNDS, EACH WITH DEDICATED RESTRICTED USES. FOR THE PURPOSES OF TODAY'S DISCUSSION, WE'RE FOCUSING EXCLUSIVELY ON THE GENERAL FUND BECAUSE IT'S OUR PRIMARY DISCRETIONARY FUND AND THE ONE WHERE WE HAVE THE MOST FLEXIBILITY TO MAKE DECISIONS. WHEN WE LOOK AT THE REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE TRENDS OVER THE LAST 6 YEARS AS DISPLAYED ON THE SLIDE, A FEW THINGS STAND OUT. ON THE REVENUE SIDE, FOLLOWING COVID, WE EXPERIENCED SIGNIFICANT PROPERTY TAX GROWTH AND INTEREST EARNINGS, UH, 6% REVENUE GROWTH IN FY 2022, A NOTABLE SPIKE OF 16% IN FY 2023 DUE TO AN INCREASE IN PROPERTY TAX AND IN INTEREST, AND 6% AGAIN IN FY 2024. PROPERTY TAXES DECREASED A BIT, BUT INTEREST INCOME INCREASED. THIS GROSS WAS MEANINGFUL TAILWIND DURING THAT PERIOD. AND I FORGOT TO POINT OUT, SO REVENUES ARE IN GREEN, EXPENDITURES ARE IN RED. FOR FY 2025 AND FY 2026, THESE ARE BUDGETED FIGURES. FIGURES, AND I WANT TO FLAG SOMETHING IMPORTANT. WE DO NOT BUDGET FOR INVESTMENT EARNINGS DUE TO THE VOLATILITY AND UNCERTAINTY OF THE MARKET. THIS IS A CONSERVATIVE AND LONGSTANDING PRACTICE. IN REALITY, INVESTMENT EARNINGS HAVE BEEN MATERIAL. AS OF DECEMBER 31ST, 2025, THE DISTRICT HAD REALIZED APPROXIMATELY $8.9 MILLION IN INVESTMENT EARNINGS. WE'RE CURRENTLY COMPLETING OUR 2025 AUDIT, BUT BASED ON Q4 UNAUDITED FINANCIAL REPORTS PRESENTED TO THE BOARD FINANCE COMMITTEE ON APRIL 8TH, WE'RE PROJECTING FY 2025 GENERAL FUND GAP OF APPROXIMATELY $4.7 MILLION, SIGNIFICANTLY BETTER THAN THE $13.5 MILLION THAT I'VE REFLECTED ON THIS SLIDE TODAY, LARGELY DUE TO THOSE INVESTMENT EARNINGS AND VACANCY SAVINGS. SO LOOKING AT THE CHART TO THE RIGHT, THE SURPLUS AND GAP CALLOUTS ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE SLIDE, SO WE HAD SURPLUSES IN FY 2020, 2022, AND 2023. YOU CAN SEE THE NUMBERS REFLECTED. A SMALL GAP OF $0.5 MILLION IN 2021, BASICALLY BECAUSE OF COVID THE GAP WIDENED MATERIALLY [00:40:02] TO $15 MILLION IN FY 2024. PROJECTED $13.5 MILLION FOR FY 2025 IN THE BUDGET, BUT AS I JUST MENTIONED, THE ACTUAL PROJECTED IS LOOKING AT ABOUT $4.7 MILLION PER QUARTER 4 REPORT. AND FOR 2026, WE'RE LOOKING AT $10.1 MILLION PROJECTED. ATTACHMENT A, STARTING ON PAGE 12 OF YOUR PACKET, PROVIDES A MORE DETAILED BREAKDOWN OF REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES FROM 2020 THROUGH 2026, DRAWN FROM THE PUBLISHED ADOPTED BUDGET BOOKS, EACH OF WHICH INCLUDES A HISTORICAL LOOK BACK OF PRIOR YEARS' ACTUALS. YES, DIRECTOR SAN JUAN. I JUST WANT TO REPEAT FISCAL YEAR 2024. SO I KNOW YOU'RE RIGHT NOW IN THE MIDDLE OF COMPLETING THE AUDIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025, BUT 2024, ARE THOSE BOOKS CLOSED? SO IS THE OFFICIAL GAP THE $15 MILLION? THAT'S CORRECT AND I WILL GO INTO MORE DETAIL ON, ON THAT GAP AND WHAT CONTRIBUTED TO IT IN THE FORTHCOMING SLIDES. YES, DIRECTOR. STILL AT THE BIG PICTURE, AND I THINK I RECALL THAT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025, WE WERE ABLE TO PLUG THE FULL GAP SOME OTHER WAY. DID WE MOVE MONEY FROM SOMEWHERE? I MEAN, WE DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE... SO WE STILL HAVE A $4.7 MILLION GAP, RIGHT. BUT MOST OF IT WAS INVESTMENT EARNINGS, AND THEN WE HAD VACANCIES, AND SO THAT'S WHY IT WAS NOT THE AMOUNT 13.5. AND IF WHAT YOU'RE ASKING IS LIKE, COULD WE PAY OUR BILLS? YES. LIKE, I THINK WE JUST, WE END UP SPENDING FUND BALANCE, RIGHT? YES. THAT'S WHAT I WAS ASKING. WE ACTUALLY JUST WENT IN $4.7 MILLION, BUT WHAT THAT MEANS IS WE JUST TIP INTO OUR FUND BALANCE. WE TIP INTO IT LESS. YEAH, RIGHT. OVERALL, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DO TO MAKE UP FOR A FEW YEARS, BUT IT'S NOT SOMETHING SOMETHING YOU CAN DO FOREVER. THAT'S WHY WE'RE DOING THAT. YEAH. AND SO WE HAVE THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS. THAT'S A VERY IMPORTANT NOTE, AND SORRY FOR NOT MENTIONING IT SOONER, IS THAT WE HAVE THROUGHOUT HERE MAINTAINED OUR 32% RESERVE OF FUND BALANCE, AND WE STILL ARE PROJECTED TO. SO THE WAY THAT WE HAVE BEEN DOING A BALANCED BUDGET IS WHEN WE ARE PROJECTING THESE LOSSES IN THE BUDGET PHASE, WE ARE MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE ADEQUATE FUND BALANCE UNRESTRICTED RESERVES TO MEET THESE GAPS. YEAH, YOU JUST TOUCHED ON SOMETHING THAT IS IMPORTANT, I THINK, AND THAT IS TO ALLOW US AND OUR PUBLIC TO KNOW ABOUT THE SUBSTANTIAL RESERVES THAT WE BUDGET EVERY YEAR. I MEAN, IT'S A HUGE BUDGET RESERVE. AND AS WE LEARNED ON THE FINANCE COMMITTEE LAST YEAR, WE HAVE A WHOLE PANOPLY OF FUND BALANCES. THAT'S CORRECT. THAT ACTUALLY ENLARGE THOSE RESERVES. SO I JUST THINK THAT'S SOMETHING IMPORTANT TO TOUCH ON AT SOME POINT. YES, DULY NOTED. AND I THINK LIKE WHAT WILL BE IMPORTANT WHEN WE COME TO PRESENT THE ACFR TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE AND TO THE FULL BOARD LATER THIS YEAR. SURE. THERE'S A WHOLE SECTION IN THE ACFER THAT GOES THROUGH OVER THE LAST 10 YEARS, AND YOU CAN LOOK AT 2024 TO SEE WHAT THE FUND BALANCES HAVE HISTORICALLY BEEN. AS OF LAST, LIKE, AS OF 2024, WE CLOSED WITH OVER $90 MILLION. OUR ROUGH PROJECTIONS FOR 2025 IS WE'RE IN THE REALM OF $70 MILLION. SO THAT JUST KIND OF GIVES YOU HISTORICAL LOOK AT HOW WE'VE BEEN MANAGING OUR FUND BALANCES. AND I CAN MAKE SURE TO SEND THE WHOLE BOARD KIND OF WHERE THOSE PAGES ARE SO YOU CAN SEE HISTORICALLY HOW WE'VE BEEN PERFORMING. OKAY, SO THE CONTRIBUTORS TO THE STRUCTURAL DEFICIT ARE NOT THE RESULT OF ANY SINGLE DECISION. THEY ARE CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF A SERIES OF STRATEGIC CHOICES MADE SINCE 2020. EACH OF WHICH WAS MADE ON ITS OWN MERITS AND WITH THE BOARD'S AUTHORIZATION. AT A HIGH LEVEL, THE KEY DRIVERS ARE A SIGNIFICANT EXPANSION OF OUR WORKFORCE, WHICH I'LL GO INTO MORE DETAIL IN THE NEXT SLIDE, OF 122 NEW POSITIONS SINCE 2020. WE HAD GROWTH IN SALARY AND BENEFIT COSTS REFLECTING BOTH THE LARGER WORKFORCE, INCREASED BENEFITS, AND CALPERS OBLIGATIONS. STRATEGIC CAPITAL INVESTMENTS, INCLUDING THE PERALTA OAKS NORTH PROJECT AND THE ERP SYSTEM REPLACEMENT. ONE-TIME ITEMS INCLUDING A $6.825 MILLION CALPERS UNFUNDED LIABILITY PAYMENT AND $2.6 MILLION IN ELECTION COSTS. A DECLINING VACANCY RATE THAT HAS REDUCED THE BUILT-IN SALARY SAVINGS THAT HISTORICALLY CUSHIONED THE BUDGET. [00:45:02] TRANSFER OF 12 FIRE FUELS POSITIONS FROM PROJECT FUNDING TO THE GENERAL FUND. AND BROAD INFLATIONARY, SORRY, I CAN'T SAY THE WORD, INCREASES ACROSS SERVICES, UTILITIES, FUEL, AND INSURANCE. I'LL GO INTO MORE DETAIL IN THE FOLLOWING SLIDES. SO FIRST ONE, LET'S FOCUS ON STAFFING BECAUSE IT'S THE SINGLE LARGEST DRIVER OF EXPENDITURE GROWTH. FROM 2020 TO 2026, WE'VE ADDED 122.9 POSITIONS, A 14% INCREASE IN TOTAL AUTHORIZED FTE. THE SALARY AND BENEFIT COST IMPACT OF THAT GROWTH HAS BEEN SIGNIFICANT. IN 2020, THE SALARY AND BENEFITS, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE BOTTOM CHART IN, IN RED, WAS $99.4 MILLION. FOR 2026 BUDGET, WE'RE NOW AT $153.7 MILLION FOR SALARY AND BENEFITS. THIS IS AN INCREASE OF OVER 55% OVER 6 YEARS. I WANT TO NOTE THAT IN 2026, THIS INCLUDED A SIGNIFICANT ORGANIZATIONAL RESTRUCTURING, CREATING THE NEW FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE DIVISION BY CONSOLIDATING MAINTENANCE AND SKILLED TRADES FROM OPERATIONS AND DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION FROM ACQUISITION, STEWARDSHIP, AND PLANNING. THIS MAKES DIRECT YEAR-OVER-YEAR DIVISION COMPARISONS DIFFICULT AFTER FY 2025, SO THAT'S WHY THE CHART ON THE BOTTOM IS JUST LOOKING THROUGH FY 2025. BUT THE OVERALL TRAJECTORY IS CLEAR FROM THE CHART. SO OPERATIONS, 66 NEW POSITIONS TO SUPPORT PARK SERVICES AND MAINTENANCE, 22.7 FOR PUBLIC SAFETY, 14.7 FOR PLANNING, STEWARDSHIP, DESIGN, AND CONSTRUCTION, FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES HAD 8.5 NEW POSITIONS. 6 OF THOSE WERE IN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, AND THEN 3.8 IN HUMAN RESOURCES, MAINLY TO SUPPORT OUR RISK MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONS. FOR DETAILS, REFER TO ATTACHMENT B ON PAGE 32 OF YOUR PACKET, WHICH PROVIDES A DETAILED TENURE BREAKDOWN BY FUNCTION FOR THOSE WHO WANT TO LOOK DEEPER AT THE STAFFING HISTORY. ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS SLIDE BEFORE I MOVE FORWARD? YES. THIS DOESN'T INCLUDE SOME DEPARTMENTS LIKE THE GENERAL MANAGER'S DEPARTMENT, CORRECT? IT DOES. IT DOES. YES. WOULD THAT BE UNDER FMS? NO. IF YOU GO TO ATTACHMENT B ON PAGE 32, YOU CAN SEE THE GENERAL MANAGER'S OFFICE IS CALLED OUT AS ITS OWN LINE ITEM. IT'S DIFFICULT THOUGH, I'LL POINT OUT, BECAUSE THERE WAS SO MANY REORGS OVER TIME. AND SO I TRIED TO LIST THAT AT THE BOTTOM OF IT, OF THE ATTACHMENT. SO YOU COULD SEE LIKE WHAT WAS HAPPENING BECAUSE LIKE GOVERNMENT AND LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS WAS IN THE GENERAL MANAGER'S OFFICE. NOW THEY'VE MOVED OUT. THERE WAS SOME LEGAL POSITIONS. I WASN'T HERE IN 2023, BUT I GUESS THERE WAS ALL OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF AT ONE POINT WAS LIKE IN THE GENERAL MANAGER'S OFFICE AND THEN IT GOT BROKEN OUT TO OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND THEN SOME POSITIONS, UH, WERE TAKEN AWAY. SO I THINK YOU'RE NOT SEEING A BIG INCREASE IN THE GENERAL MANAGER'S OFFICE IF YOU LOOK OVER THAT TIME PERIOD. AND I THINK THERE WAS A LOT OF REORGS THAT OCCURRED HISTORICALLY, MAINLY IN 2023 IS WHEN WE ADDED SOME ADDITIONAL POSITIONS IN THERE, SUCH AS CREATING THE OFFICE OF EQUITY AND OTHER THINGS OF THAT NATURE. WELL, WHEN YOU SAY CHANGES, YOU MEAN LIKE NUMBER OF FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES, BUT MAYBE IF WE WERE TO LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE SALARY SCHEDULE, IT MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. CORRECT. BUT ON THAT ATTACHMENT, YOU CAN SEE THE BREAKOUT FOR THE GENERAL MANAGER'S OFFICE IN THAT LINE. BUT I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THE GOVERNMENTAL AND LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS IS WHAT KIND OF LIKE SKEWS IT A BIT. AND THIS OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE MOVE, IT LOOKED LIKE THAT HAPPENED IN 2023 AS WELL. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS SLIDE? KATIE? YEAH. COULD YOU TELL ME ONCE AGAIN, I'VE FORGOTTEN, WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THE GENERAL FUND GOES FOR SALARIES AND BENEFITS? OH MY GOSH. IT'S LIKE 84, 86. IT IS IN THE 80S, AND I DIDN'T COMMIT THAT TO MEMORY THIS MORNING. I'M SORRY, BUT IT'S THE MAJORITY OF THE OF THE BUDGET, I THINK IF I HAVE THIS SLIDE RIGHT HERE, JUST A SECOND. LET ME PULL FOR 2026. TO THAT POINT, AS KAY MENTIONED, THIS IS THE BIGGEST DRIVER OF SORT OF THOSE CHANGES IN THE BUDGET BECAUSE THESE HAVE SUCH A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. YEAH, SO FOR 2026, WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN AT. I'LL PULL THE NUMBER FOR YOU, DIRECTOR WASPY. IT'S IN THESE ATTACHMENTS THAT I'VE PUT IN THE PACKET. I JUST DON'T HAVE IT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. OKAY, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, SO STRATEGIC CAPITAL INVESTMENTS. BEYOND THE OPERATING COST DRIVERS, THE BOARD HAS MADE A SERIES OF STRATEGIC CAPITAL DECISIONS OVER THE PAST [00:50:01] SEVERAL YEARS THAT HAVE DRAWN ON OUR GENERAL FUND UNASSIGNED FUND BALANCE AND CREATED NEW LONG-TERM ANNUAL OBLIGATIONS. I WANT TO WALK THROUGH EACH ONE. IN 2012, THE BOARD MADE A STRATEGIC DECISION TO ADDRESS THE DISTRICT'S AGING ADMINISTRATIVE AND PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES, ISSUING A $25 MILLION PROMISSORY NOTE. THIS WAS DRIVEN BY THE SIGNIFICANT GROWTH IN LAND MANAGEMENT, STEWARDSHIP, AND PARK OPERATION RESPONSIBILITIES RESULTING FROM THE SUCCESS OF MEASURE AA. WHICH ADDED 34,000 ACRES AND 100 MILES OF TRAIL. AND THE PLANS FOR MEASURE WW BOND FUNDS, DEBT SERVICE ON THAT 2012 NOTE CONTINUES AT APPROXIMATELY $1.42 MILLION PER YEAR THROUGH 2037. THE IMPROVED PERALTA OAKS NORTH PROJECT, OUR NEW PUBLIC SAFETY AND ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS, WAS PUT OUT TO BID IN EARLY 2024. BASED ON CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATES, THE BOARD AUTHORIZED THE TRANSFER OF $21.6 MILLION IN UNASSIGNED FUND BALANCE, THE ISSUANCE OF $39.5 MILLION IN PROMISSORY NOTES FOR CONSTRUCTION WITH DEBT SERVICE OF APPROXIMATELY $2.7 MILLION PER YEAR THROUGH 2044, AND AN ADDITIONAL $4.96 MILLION IN OCTOBER OF 2025 TO ADDRESS UNFORESEEN CONDITIONS DISCOVERED DURING DEMOLITION CONCEALED BUILDING SYSTEMS THAT HAD DETERIORATED BEYOND WALLS AND CEILINGS IN A BUILDING THAT HAD SAT LARGELY VACANT FOR OVER A DECADE. A COMPLETE ACCOUNT OF ALL BOARD ACTIONS RELATED TO THE PERALTA OAKS NORTH PROJECT IS PROVIDED AS ATTACHMENT C ON PAGE 35 OF YOUR PACKET. THE ERP SYSTEM REPLACEMENT. THE DISTRICT HAD BEGUN ITS ERP REPLACEMENT PROCESS IN 2024. OUR CURRENT SYSTEM, CENTRAL SQUARE, ORIGINALLY IMPLEMENTED IN 2000 FOR FINANCE AND 2002 FOR HR AND PAYROLL, HAS REACHED THE END OF ITS USEFUL LIFE. DESPITE YEARS OF UPGRADES AND THIRD-PARTY ADDITIONS, THE SYSTEM'S LIMITATIONS HAVE BECOME OPERATIONALLY SIGNIFICANT, INCLUDING PAYROLL PROCESSING ERRORS AND INEFFICIENCIES, DELAYS IN VENDOR INVOICE PROCESSING, CHALLENGES WITH POSITION MANAGEMENT AND BUDGETARY CONTROL. THESE ISSUES HAVE BEEN RAISED IN PUBLIC COMMENT AT MULTIPLE BOARD MEETINGS AND HAVE CREATED REAL OPERATIONAL RISK FOR THE DISTRICT. IN OCTOBER 2025, THE BOARD AUTHORIZED CONTRACTS WITH WORKDAY, STRATA, CAN-AM TECHNOLOGIES, AND SDI PRESENCE, FUNDED BY LITTLE OVER $8 MILLION IN UNASSIGNED FUND BALANCE. TAKEN TOGETHER, THESE STRATEGIC INVESTMENTS HAVE CREATED LONG-TERM ANNUAL OBLIGATIONS OF APPROXIMATELY $7.1 MILLION A YEAR, WHICH ARE OUTLINED IN THE 2020 2012 PROMISSORY NOTE, 2024 PROMISSORY NOTE, AND COMBINED STAFFING, SOFTWARE, UTILITIES, AND SERVICES FOR IPON AND ERP ARE ABOUT $3 MILLION ANNUALLY. ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE? IT SAYS $2.25 MILLION HERE. I WAS JUST WONDERING, IS THERE SOMETHING ELSE? OR WHAT AM I MISSING? THE ONE RIGHT ABOVE IT, THE SOFTWARE COST. IT'S THE $800,000. THE $800,000 FOR THE SOFTWARE COST. YEAH. SO THAT'S LIKE INCLUDES STAFFING TO SUPPORT, YOU KNOW, MAINTAIN THE FACILITY. YEAH. OKAY, TURNING TO OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. WE CURRENTLY HAVE OVER 100 ACTIVE CAPITAL PROJECTS WITH A TOTAL ESTIMATED COST OF $537 MILLION AND AN UNFUNDED GAP OF $181 MILLION. ATTACHMENT B, BEGINNING ON PAGE 36 OF YOUR PACKET, DETAILS EVERY PROJECT INCLUDING STATUS, PHASE, CPP SCORE, CURRENT FUNDING, ESTIMATED COST, FUNDING GAP, FUNDING SOURCES. AND WE'VE ALSO ADDED TWO COLUMNS TO REPRESENT IF IT'S IN A MEASURE WW INVESTMENT AREA AND IF IT'S ELIGIBLE FOR OUR MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT FUND. THE TABLE ON THIS SLIDE HIGHLIGHTS THE MOST SIGNIFICANT UNFUNDED GAPS THAT ARE ABOVE $3.4 MILLION. I'M NOT GOING TO READ THROUGH EVERY ONE OF THE PROJECTS BECAUSE I THINK EVERYONE ON THE BOARD IS AWARE OF THOSE PROJECTS. OUR CHALLENGE IS THE LIMITED MENU OF FUNDING SOURCES AVAILABLE TO ADDRESS THE THIS GAP. MEASURE WW HAS EXISTING COMMITMENTS, AND THE MAJORITY OF THE REMAINING FUNDS ARE DESIGNATED FOR LAND ACQUISITION. OUR INTERNAL SERVICE FUND FOR MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE RENOVATION REPLACEMENT PROVIDES APPROXIMATELY $2 TO $4 MILLION ANNUALLY. THE CURRENT FUND BALANCE IS ABOUT $9.4 MILLION, AND WE'RE SUPPOSED TO MAINTAIN A HEALTHY RESERVE. GRANTS ARE BEING ACTIVELY PURSUED, BUT THEY'RE HIGHLY COMPETITIVE, TIME-CONSTRAINED, AND GENERALLY NOT AVAILABLE FOR MAINTENANCE AND INFRASTRUCTURE REPLACEMENT WORK. AND AS JUST PRESENTED, WE DON'T HAVE DISCRETIONARY GENERAL FUND CAPACITY AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME. THE [00:55:03] BOARD AUTHORIZED OVER $48 MILLION IN CAPITAL FUNDING IN 2026, AND PROJECTS ARE ACTIVELY MOVING FORWARD IN DELIVERY. GIVEN THIS LANDSCAPE, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE BOARD TAKE FY 2026 AND FY TO STEP BACK AND REFLECT ON THE CAPITAL PORTFOLIO. RE-EVALUATING UNFUNDED PROJECTS, ESTABLISHING PROJECT TIERS, REVISIT THE CAPITAL PROJECT PRIORITIZATION POLICY, AND CREATE A CLEAR PROCESS FOR ADVANCING IDEAS TO THE CIP, AS YOU'VE BEEN EXPRESSING IN THE PREVIOUS BOARD STUDY SESSIONS. SO AGAIN, JUST TO HIGHLIGHT WHAT WE'RE SAYING HERE IS SINCE WE DON'T HAVE ANY NEW FUNDING THIS YEAR IN OUR BUDGET FOR PROJECTS, WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING IS THAT AT THIS TIME IT'S A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO LIKE LOOK MORE DEEPLY INTO HOW WE PRIORITIZE PROJECTS, HOW WE WORK TOGETHER, ALL THE THINGS THAT YOUR BOARD BROUGHT UP IN THE PREVIOUS SESSIONS AROUND THIS. AND THAT WILL REALLY HELP OUR STRATEGIC FOCUS ON PROJECTS IN THE FUTURE. AND AT THIS TIME, YOU KNOW, WE CAN FOCUS ON GETTING OUR OPERATIONAL BUDGET, YOU KNOW, MORE FOCUSED AND BETTER PLACE AT THE SAME TIME. OKAY.SO I'M GOING TO MOVE INTO THE TWO FORWARD-LOOKING SCENARIOS, BUT I JUST WANTED TO SEE IF THERE WAS ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE HISTORICAL PIECE THAT I JUST WENT THROUGH BEFORE I MOVE FORWARD. I GUESS THAT BEING SAID, OUR TEAM IS STILL WORKING ON, WE HAVE SO MANY PROJECTS IN THE PIPELINE. WE ARE GOING TO BE BUILDING SOME OF THE MOST AMAZING PARKS IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS AND OPENING THEM. SO I THINK, AGAIN, I DON'T WANT TO PAINT THIS AS DOOM AND GLOOM. WE'RE TRYING TO BE REAL, HONEST HERE. WE HAVE A PATHWAY TO BE SUCCESSFUL. AND THERE'S GOING TO BE SUPER COOL THINGS HAPPENING AT THE SAME TIME. WE'RE TRYING TO JUST BE HONEST ABOUT THE SITUATION. YEAH. AND OF THOSE 100, THERE'S ONLY A PERCENTAGE OF THAT THAT I'VE OUTLINED IN THE REPORT, AND YOU CAN SEE FOR DETAIL, THAT AREN'T FULLY FUNDED. THERE'S A NUMBER THAT ARE FULLY FUNDED MOVING FORWARD IN PROJECT DELIVERY, AND YOU CAN SEE WHICH THOSE ARE. AND THEN THE ATTACHMENT, THE ONES THAT ARE HIGHLIGHTED IN GRAY ARE THE ONES THAT HAVE THE FUNDING GAP. BUT WE'RE STILL TRYING TO WORK THROUGH THOSE NUMBERS, IDENTIFY IF THERE'S, FOR SOME OF THE SMALLER ONES, IF THERE'S VALUE ENGINEERING OPPORTUNITIES, IF THEY ARE ELIGIBLE FOR MER FUNDING AND WE HAVE SOME BALANCES. LIKE MAX SAID, WE'RE MOVING THE THINGS FORWARD THAT WE CAN AND EVALUATING THOSE THAT HAVE GAPS. I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I THINK THIS IS FABULOUS BETWEEN THE STAFF REPORT AND THE COLUMNS. I LOVE WHEN WE'RE ABLE TO REALLY LOOK YEAR TO YEAR AND SEE WHERE AND GET INTO THE NUMBERS. I THINK YOU'VE DONE A FABULOUS JOB. AND THEN TODAY IN FRONT OF US AND WHAT YOU'RE PRESENTING VISUALLY, I REALLY APPRECIATE IT. I FEEL LIKE I'M REALLY UNDERSTANDING A LOT OF THE QUESTION MARKS I HAD SPINNING AROUND IN THE GRAY ZONE ARE MAKING A LOT OF SENSE TO ME. SO I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU TAKING THE TIME, LAYING THEM OUT, BOTH THE NUMBERS, THE VISUALS, AND HELPING BRING US ALONG WITH THE INFO WE NEED TO MAKE DECISIONS. SO I'M REALLY APPRECIATING THIS. THANK YOU. GREAT. THANK YOU. KATIE. JUST A TIME CHECK, DOES 10 MINUTES ABOUT ENOUGH TIME, OR HOW MUCH MORE TIME DO YOU THINK YOU HAVE FOR YOUR PRESENTATION? YEAH, I THINK 10 MINUTES SHOULD BE GOOD. OKAY. SO MOVING ALONG. TWO FORWARD, LOOKING AHEAD, I PREPARED TWO HIGH-LEVEL SCENARIOS. BOTH USE THE SAME REVENUE PROJECTIONS AS A BASELINE. SO IN THIS SLIDE, THE REVENUE IS THE RED LINE. SCENARIO 1 IS THE PURPLE, AND SCENARIO 2 IS THE YELLOW-ORANGE. SO FOR SCENARIO 1, IF WE TAKE INTO ACCOUNT CURRENT PUBLIC, PUBLIC SAFETY LABOR NEGOTIATIONS, PROJECT A 3% COLA, HOLD NEW POSITIONS TO REVENUE-NEUTRAL ADDITIONS ONLY, AND IMPLEMENTED TARGETED EXPENDITURE REDUCTIONS TO ABSORB THE NEW OBLIGATIONS COMING FROM PROJECT COMPLETIONS, SCENARIO 1 SHOWS THE DISTRICT RETURNING TO A POSITIVE POSITION BY 2030. IT REQUIRES DISCIPLINE AND SOME DIFFICULT CHOICES, BUT THE TRAJECTORY IS FAVORABLE. IF WE LOOK AT SCENARIO 2, IF WE INCREASE STAFF TO SUPPORT OPTIMAL OPERATIONS FOR NEW PARK OPENINGS, INCREASE FUNDING TO ADDRESS THE DEFERRED MAINTENANCE BACKLOG, AND MAKE NO CHANGES TO REVENUE PROJECTIONS, THE DISTRICT IS PROJECTED TO CARRY AN ANNUAL GAP OF APPROXIMATELY $20 MILLION FOR THE NEXT 3 YEARS WITH NO CLEAR PATH TO BALANCE WITHIN THE PROJECTION WINDOW. THE MESSAGE FROM THESE TWO SCENARIOS IS STRAIGHTFORWARD. THE DECISIONS WE MAKE IN 2027 ABOUT EXPENDITURES AND REVENUES WILL DETERMINE WHICH TRAJECTORY WE ARE ON. THAT BRINGS US TO THE MENU OF OPTIONS WE'VE PREPARED AND THE QUESTIONS WE WANT TO BRING TO THE BOARD THIS MORNING. SO BEFORE WE GET INTO THE OPTIONS, TO GIVE YOU A SENSE [01:00:01] OF WHAT WE'RE ALREADY LOOKING AT ON THE EXPENDITURE SIDE FOR FY 2027 AND FY 2028. BEFORE ANY DECISIONS ARE MADE, WE HAVE A SET OF KNOWN COST INCREASES COMING. SO WHEN WE LOOK AT OUR NEW PROGRAM AND CAPITAL OPENINGS FOR FY 2027, WE HAVE IMPROVE PERALTA OAKS NORTH. WE HAVE OUR ERP SYSTEM, BOTH WHICH I JUST COVERED IN THE EARLIER SLIDES. WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR A NEW RESERVATION SYSTEM THAT WE SHOULD BE COMING TO THE BOARD WITH IN AUGUST. WE HAVE DOOLIN CANYON, POINT MULATTI, THE FIDDLENECK GROUP CAMPGROUND AT SIBLEY, AND THE TIDEWATER DAY USE FACILITY AT MLK SHORELINE. IN FY 2028, WE HAVE DEER VALLEY, THE FORMER RODDY RANCH PROPERTY. WE HAVE SOUTH OF BAILEY ROAD AT THURGOOD MARSHALL. WE HAVE OYSTER BAY PUBLIC ACCESS. WE HAVE THE IMPROVED KELLER BEACH AT MILLER-KNOX. WE HAVE POINT PINNELL SERVICE YARD, AND WE ALSO HAVE POINT ISABEL RESTORE AND STABILIZE AREA AS THE MAJOR PROJECTS. AT LAST WEEK'S FINANCE COMMITTEE, OUR RISK MANAGEMENT TEAM PRESENTED THAT INSURANCE PREMIUMS ARE ESTIMATED TO INCREASE BY $1.8 MILLION, A 27% INCREASE. THIS IS BEING DRIVEN BY PROJECTED CLIMATE CHANGE-RELATED DISASTERS AND BROADER MARKET CONDITIONS THAT ARE AFFECTING PUBLIC AGENCIES ACROSS THE STATE. WE ALSO CONTINUE TO EXPERIENCE SIGNIFICANT INCREASES IN FUEL, UTILITY COSTS, SERVICES, AND SUPPLIES. THE ONGOING CONFLICT IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND BROADER ECONOMIC CONDITIONS ARE KEEPING THESE COSTS ELEVATED WITH NO NEAR-TERM RELIEF IN SIGHT. SO WHEN WE LOOK AT FY 2027 PICTURE, WE'RE NOT STARTING FROM A FLAT BASE. WE'RE STARTING FROM A BASE THAT ALREADY HAS MEANINGFUL NEW COST BUILT IN. THIS IS THE CONTEXT FOR THE OPTIONS WE'RE ABOUT TO PRESENT. SO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO ADDRESS THE EXPENDITURE SIDE, STAFF HAS DEVELOPED A MENU OF POSSIBLE OPTIONS FOR EXPENDITURE REDUCTIONS. I WANT TO BE CLEAR, THIS IS NOT AN EXHAUSTIVE LIST, AND WE'RE NOT PROPOSING TO IMPLEMENT ALL OF THESE TODAY. THE PROPOSAL DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY REDUCTION IN STAFF OR FURLOUGHS. THE INTENT IS TO GAUGE THE BOARD'S DIRECTION SO WE KNOW WHERE TO INVEST OUR ANALYTICAL TIME AND RETURN WITH FULLY DEVELOPED PROPOSALS. SO, JUST MOVING THROUGH THE LIST, THE KEY ITEMS TO HIGHLIGHT IS A, REDUCE SUPPLIES AND SERVICES BY 5%. THIS WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY $2 MILLION IN SAVINGS THROUGH IMPROVED PROCUREMENT AND SPEND CONTROLS. REDUCE OVERTIME, COMP TIME, AND STANDBY BY 10%. THIS WOULD BE ACHIEVED THROUGH IMPROVED SCHEDULING, SUPERVISOR TRAINING, AND MONTHLY MONITORING. THIS IS ABOUT BETTER MANAGEMENT, NOT CUTTING SERVICES. DEBT RESTRUCTURING. WE'RE CURRENTLY IN THE PROCESS OF SELECTING A NEW FINANCIAL ADVISOR, AND SEVERAL OF THE FIRMS THAT HAVE SUBMITTED PROPOSALS HAVE IDENTIFIED POTENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES TO RESTRUCTURE OUR EXISTING DEBT OBLIGATIONS. WE ARE STILL EARLY IN THE PROCESS, BUT PRELIMINARY INDICATIONS SUGGEST RESTRUCTURING COULD YIELD SAVINGS OF SEVERAL HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS PER YEAR. WE'LL KNOW MORE ONCE THE ADVISOR IS SELECTED AND A FULL ANALYSIS IS COMPLETED. OTHER OPTIONS, NEW POSITIONS TO BE REVENUE-NEUTRAL, SO NEW ROLES FUNDED BY REPURPOSING EXISTING VACANT POSITIONS OR TRANSITIONING CONSULTANT WORK TO INTERNAL STAFF. TRANSITION SELECTED BIOMONITORING WORK FROM CONSULTANTS TO SEASONAL STAFF WITH APPROPRIATE JOB CLASSIFICATIONS. A LONGER-TERM STRUCTURAL CHANGE THAT CAN MEANINGFULLY REDUCE COSTS. CONSULTANT COST OVER TIME. AND THEN THE LAST OPTION IS SHIFTING PROGRAMMING TO PARK SITES. THIS MIGHT MEAN PHASING OUT SERVICES DELIVERED AT EXTERNAL AGENCIES, WHICH WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW, OR LOOKING AT PARK LOCATIONS, HOURS OF OPERATIONS, OTHER ITEMS THAT IMPACT SERVICES. SO ALL THINGS THAT WE COULD POTENTIALLY LOOK AT. SO THAT'S ON THE EXPENDITURE SIDE. THEN WHEN WE MOVE TO ON THE REVENUE SIDE, WE HAVE PREPARED A MENU OF POSSIBLE OPTIONS. AGAIN, NOT EXHAUSTIVE. WE'RE JUST HERE TO UNDERSTAND WHICH OF THESE THE BOARD WANTS US TO DEVELOP FURTHER. SO PARKING AND VENTEC EXPANSION. OUR AVERAGE 2-YEAR PARKING REVENUE COLLECTION HAS BEEN APPROXIMATELY $2.1 MILLION ANNUALLY. BASED ON A ROUGH ESTIMATE, VERY, VERY ROUGH. JUST PUT IT TOGETHER IN A COUPLE OF DAYS, SO DON'T HOLD ME TO IT. THE COMBINATION OF ADDING NEW VENTEC MACHINES, CONVERTING EXISTING KIOSK SITES, AND EXPANDING TO TWO NEW PARK LOCATIONS COULD INCREASE PARKING REVENUE BY $700,000 TO $1 MILLION ANNUALLY. I WANT TO BE TRANSPARENT ABOUT WHY SOME OF OUR CURRENT KIOSK SITES ARE UNDERPERFORMING. IT'S A STAFFING ISSUE, NOT A DEMAND ISSUE. PARK OPERATIONS PRIORITIES MEAN THAT STAFFING KIOSKS IS NOT ALWAYS FEASIBLE, WHICH RESULTS [01:05:01] IN LOWER COLLECTIONS AT MOST SITES. DEL VALLE IS THE EXCEPTION. WE COLLECT APPROXIMATELY $500,000 PER YEAR THERE, AND IT'S WELL MANAGED. AT THE OTHER SITES, WE ANTICIPATE SIGNIFICANT REVENUE INCREASES SIMPLY FROM REPLACING KIOSKS WITH VENTEC MACHINES, WHICH DO NOT REQUIRE STAFFING TO OPERATE. AT DELVAL SPECIFICALLY, WHILE WE DO NOT EXPECT A DRAMATIC REVENUE INCREASE, IMPLEMENTING VENTEC WOULD MEANINGFULLY ADDRESS THE TRAFFIC FLOW ISSUES WE ARE CURRENTLY EXPERIENCING. THE COST OF A VENTEC UNIT WITH INSTALLATION IS APPROXIMATELY $20,000, A COST THAT WOULD BE RECOVERED WELL WITHIN THE FIRST YEAR OF OPERATIONS AT MOST SITES. THE NEXT OPTION IS LLD AND ZONE OF BENEFIT FUND REALIGNMENT. WE CURRENTLY HAVE APPROXIMATELY $200,000 IN LLD AND ZONA BENEFIT FUNDS THAT COULD BE SHIFTED FROM SUPPLIES TO STAFF SALARIES, REDUCING THE GENERAL FUND BURDEN FOR THOSE AREAS. I DO WANT TO FLAG THAT THE SHIFT WOULD HAVE SOME OPERATIONAL IMPACTS THAT WE WOULD NEED TO WORK THROUGH CAREFULLY, BUT IT'S A VIABLE OPTION WORTH ANALYZING. FEE SCHEDULE ADJUSTMENTS. FOR CONTEXT, IN 2025, THE DISTRICT COLLECTED APPROXIMATELY $5 MILLION IN OTHER FEES. IN 2023, LISA AND HER TEAM ENGAGED MATRIX CONSULTING TO CONDUCT A COMPREHENSIVE FEE STUDY. THE STUDY ASSESSED EVERY FEE IN OUR FEE SCHEDULE, COMPARING WHAT WE CHARGE AGAINST THE ACTUAL COST TO DELIVER THAT SERVICE, GIVING US A COST RECOVERY PERCENTAGE FOR EACH FEE. IT'S TYPICAL FOR PUBLIC AGENCIES TO ACHIEVE 30 TO 50% COST RECOVERY, MEANING THE AGENCY SUBSIDIZES THE REMAINDER AS A PUBLIC BENEFIT. THE PARK DISTRICT AVERAGES ABOUT 36% COST RECOVERY, WHICH IS WITHIN THAT NORMAL RANGE. WE'VE MADE SOME ADJUSTMENTS IN 2024 AND 2025 BASED ON THAT STUDY, BUT THERE REMAIN MANY OPTIONS ON THE TABLE AS OUTLINED HERE. WE COULD ADJUST FEES FOR FACILITY RENTALS, SPECIAL EVENT PERMITS, AND DAY CAMPS, PICNIC SITE RESERVATIONS AT NEW PARK LOCATIONS, GROUP AND INDIVIDUAL CAMPING RESERVATIONS, ALIGN FEES MORE CLOSELY WITH THE ACTUAL COST OF SERVICE DELIVERY, EXPAND FEE COLLECTION HOURS AND DAYS AT PARKS CURRENTLY LIMITED TO MAY THROUGH SEPTEMBER OR WEEKENDS ONLY, FRAMED AS ALIGNING FEE COLLECTION WITH ACTUAL PARK USAGE PATTERNS. WE COULD INCREASE A SURCHARGE FOR FOR-PROFIT USERS, INCREASE A SURCHARGE FOR OUT-OF-DISTRICT USERS. THE FEE STUDY GIVES US A SOLID ANALYTICAL FOUNDATION TO BUILD FROM. IF THE BOARD DIRECTS STAFF TO PURSUE FEE ADJUSTMENTS, WE WOULD RETURN WITH SPECIFIC PROPOSALS BACKED BY COST RECOVERY DATA RATHER THAN ACROSS-THE-BOARD INCREASES. AND TO HELP WITH JUST TO SEE ON THE PARKING FEE, THANKS TO OUR GIS UNIT, THEY QUICKLY PUT TOGETHER A MAP FOR US TODAY WHICH SHOWS ALL OF THE EXISTING KIOSKS IN ORANGE WITH A K. THE EXISTING VENTEX WITH A V IN PINK, AND THEN EXISTING KIOSK AND VENTEX TOGETHER AT OUR DIFFERENT LOCATIONS. THEN THE BLUE STARS ARE THE PROPOSED VENTEX. AND THEN WE ALSO JUST WANTED TO SHOW IN TERMS OF ACCESSIBILITY FOR THE PARK, WE HAVE TRANSIT STOPS WITHIN A 10-MINUTE WALK OF A PARK ENTRANCE. SO WE HAVE THE PURPLE CIRCLES ARE RAIL AND THE BLUE ARE BUSES. SO WITH THAT, I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE WE HEAD INTO OUR EXERCISE. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE DIRECTORS? THIS IS ALL REALLY HELPFUL. I THINK AT SOME POINT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE, AND I GUESS THAT'S WHAT STAFF IS SAYING, IT'S GOING TO COME AT SOME POINT, THE VENTEC, THE FEE SCHEDULES, BUT IT FEELS A LITTLE, BUT I KNOW IT'S NOT, THAT WE'RE PASSING ON THE COST TO OUR USERS, BUT IN FACT THAT OUR EXPENSES HAVE GONE SO UP WE HAVEN'T KEPT UP WITH THEM. SO FOR ME, A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL ON THE LAST 5, 10 YEARS ON THE, YOU KNOW, JUMPING INTO THIS. IT SEEMS LIKE, YEAH, THAT MAKES SENSE, WE NEED TO INCREASE OUR REVENUE. BUT TO ALIGN WITH THE NEW COSTS. BUT IT WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL FOR ME TO SEE A LITTLE BIT MORE, LIKE, HAVE WE NOT CHARGED FOR 20 YEARS KIND OF THING, SO THAT I CAN GET MY HANDS AROUND HOW FAR BEHIND WE ARE, AND THIS IS REALLY A CATCH-UP, NOT A PASS-ON. I THINK THAT IS A PERFECT SEGUE TO WHAT THE ACTIVITY IS, BECAUSE WHAT WE'RE ASKING YOUR BOARD IS YOU'RE TOTALLY RIGHT, WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION INFORMATION FOR YOU TO MAKE. I DON'T EVEN KNOW, LIKE, DO I THINK THIS IS A GOOD IDEA OR NOT? NOT SURE. I THINK WHAT WE'RE ASKING AND WHAT WE'LL DO IN THE NEXT ACTIVITY IS SORT OF A GUT CHECK. DO YOU [01:10:01] THINK THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD PURSUE BUT WITH MORE INFORMATION AND GET YOU INFORMATION TO BRING BACK TO YOUR BOARD FOR A POTENTIAL DECISION IN THE FUTURE? IS THIS SOMETHING WHERE YOU'RE LIKE, I'M NOT SURE THAT I SUPPORT THIS, NEED MORE INFORMATION, BUT LIKE, YOU KNOW, MEGAN'S GONNA HAVE THESE CATEGORIES BETTER THAN I DO. AND THEN, BUT THE LAST ONE IS LIKE, NO, NOT INTERESTED, DON'T EVEN WASTE YOUR TIME ON IT, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT YOU SHOULDN'T SPEND TIME ON. SO LIKE, THAT'S SORT OF, BUT YOU'RE, IT'S PERFECT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. YEAH, AND JUST TO PIGGYBACK OFF OF THAT, IS THIS LIKE, THIS IS, THESE ARE JUST LIKE ROUGH SHOTS AT LIKE WHAT IT COULD POTENTIALLY BE, BUT DIDN'T WANT TO DEVOTE ANY STAFF TIME AND RESOURCES TO GETTING THAT HISTORICAL INFORMATION, COMING UP WITH THE REVENUE PROJECTIONS AND THE REST OF IT IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE BOARD ISN'T EVEN WILLING TO ENTERTAIN. KATIE, WE CAN TAG TEAM A LITTLE, LITTLE BIT HERE AS WE DIVE INTO THE BOARD ENGAGEMENT PORTION. SO THERE'S SORT OF TWO DIFFERENT PARTS. WE HAVE THE FIRST PART, WHICH IS WHERE DOES THIS MATCH WHERE YOU EXPECTED? WHERE DOES IT SURPRISE YOU? JUST TO GIVE YOU A CHANCE CHANCE TO HAVE LIKE A GUT CHECK AS TO ANY FEEDBACK, ANY PERSPECTIVE THAT YOU WANT TO SHARE AROUND KATIE'S PRESENTATION. THE NEXT QUESTION, IS THERE ANYTHING YOU THINK STAFF MIGHT BE MISSING OR SHOULD CONSIDER AS THEY EXPLORE REDUCING OPERATIONAL COSTS AND EXPANDING REVENUE OPPORTUNITIES? THIS IS THE BOARD'S CHANCE TO WEIGH IN ON ADDITIONAL IDEAS. KATIE'S PRESENTED MANY IDEAS AS TO THAT, THAT STAFF ARE OPEN TO EXPLORING FOR REVENUE INCREASE AND ALSO POSSIBLE EXPENDITURE REDUCTIONS. AND WE WANT TO GIVE THE BOARD THE CHANCE TO ALSO SAY, HOW ABOUT THIS IDEA? HOW ABOUT THAT IDEA? WHAT WE'LL DO IS JOT DOWN THOSE IDEAS ON A POST-IT, AND YOU CAN SEE, I THINK IT'S SLIDES 9 AND 10 THAT KATIE PRESENTED, THEY'RE PRINTED UP ON THE WALL IN THIS ROOM OVER TO YOUR RIGHT, AND WE CAN POST YOUR ADDITIONAL IDEAS ON POST-ITS. ONCE WE HAVE THE BOARD'S FEEDBACK ON THOSE FIRST TWO QUESTIONS, KAREN'S GOING TO GIVE YOU SOME STICKERS, AND WE'LL SHIFT TO THE NEXT PART OF THE ACTIVITY WHERE YOU'LL HAVE A CHANCE TO WEIGH IN AS TO, YOU KNOW, WHAT YOU THINK STAFF SHOULD DEVELOP FURTHER AND INCLUDE AS A PROPOSAL IN THE BUDGET WITH THE GREEN STICKER, WITH AN ORANGE STICKER THAT THE BOARD WOULD LIKE MORE ANALYSIS FROM STAFF BEFORE BUILDING A PROPOSAL, THAT YOU WANT MORE INFORMATION OR YOU'RE ON THE FENCE. AND THEN PINK OR RED IS NOT AT THIS TIME. AND WE'LL GET A FEEL FROM THE STICKER ACTIVITY WHERE THE BOARD IS, IF THERE'S ALIGNMENT, DISAGREEMENT. BUT BEFORE WE DO STICKERS, SORRY, NO STICKERS YET, WE WANT TO GIVE THE BOARD WE'RE GOING TO SEE IF WE CAN SAVE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME HERE, SO TRY TO KEEP IT TO 2 MINUTES IF THAT WORKS, BUT IF WE NEED MORE TIME, WE'LL FIGURE IT OUT FOR THOSE FIRST 2 QUESTIONS. SO WHERE DOES THIS PICTURE MATCH WHAT YOU EXPECTED, AND WHERE DOES IT SURPRISE YOU? AND THEN SECONDLY, IS THERE ANYTHING YOU THINK STAFF MIGHT BE MISSING OR SHOULD CONSIDER AS THEY EXPLORE REDUCING OPERATIONAL COSTS AND EXPANDING REVENUE OPPORTUNITIES? DOES IT MAKE SENSE WHAT I JUST SAID? DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS PART BEFORE WE DIVE IN? THUMBS UP FOR MIDWAY. IS IT FEELING CLEAR? OKAY, I SEE SOME THUMBS UP. I SEE SOME NODS. OKAY, GREAT. ALL RIGHT, WHO'D LIKE TO START? I GUESS I'LL START TO TRY TO GET THE BALL ROLLING. THANK YOU. I GUESS I HAD ONE QUESTION. SO THE REDUCING SUPPLIES AND SERVICES ON THE EXPENDITURE REDUCTION BY 5%, WHAT ARE SOME EXAMPLES OF SUPPLIES AND SERVICES IN HERE POTENTIALLY? SO THIS WOULD JUST BE PARK SUPPLIES LIKE BUYING LUMBER, THINGS OF THAT NATURE. IT COULD ALSO BE JUST LIKE STATIONERY FOR INR. LIKE HISTORICALLY THOUGH, LIKE WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE Q5, YOU CAN SEE THAT WE'RE NOT, LISA, YOU WANTED TO SPEAK? YEAH, CHEMICALS FOR THE POOLS, OTHER THINGS FOR PUBLIC SAFETY, TRAININGS. THOSE ARE OTHER KIND OF GENERAL CATEGORIES. SORRY. AND IT GOES FOR ALL OF OUR GROUPS. SO IT'S NOT LIKE THOSE ARE OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES, BUT LIKE, YOU KNOW, I'M SURE THERE'S SERVICES, BIOLOGICAL SERVICES, PLANNING SERVICES, YOU KNOW, DOING MONITORING, YOU KNOW, LIKE ALL DOING SURVEYS, LIKE ALL THOSE TYPES OF THINGS. THESE ARE SEPARATE FROM PROJECTS. SO A PROJECT WILL HAVE ITS OWN BUDGET. THIS IS LIKE AN AS-NEEDED THROUGHOUT YEAR, YOUR OPERATIONAL BUDGET FOR ALL [01:15:01] OF OUR DIFFERENT DIVISIONS. SO CONSULTING SERVICES IS ANOTHER ONE. WE ALSO HAVE LIKE, THINK OF LOBBYISTS, LIKE JUST ALL THE DIFFERENT VARIETY OF THINGS THE PARK DISTRICT DOES. PRINTING. WE HAVE HUGE EXPENSES FOR PRINTING. LIKE ANOTHER SUPPLIES IS FISH. LIKE WE SPEND $500,000 ON, ON FISH STOCKING OUR DIFFERENT RESERVES. SO THOSE ARE JUST KIND OF SOME EXAMPLES FOR YOU. KATIE, WOULD THAT ALSO INCLUDE COMPUTERS? YEAH, YOU CONTINUE ON. YOU'RE DONE. WELL, I JUST HAD ONE MORE ON THE PARKING FEE EXPANSION, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE I'VE ALWAYS THOUGHT ABOUT THIS, HOW CURRENTLY WHERE WE COLLECT FEES AND WHERE WE DON'T COLLECT FEES, IT SOMETIMES IT DOESN'T FEEL I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND THE LOGIC, I GUESS, AND MAYBE SOME OF IT MIGHT BE HISTORIC, BUT I'VE ALWAYS LOOKED AT, YOU KNOW, COYOTE HILLS COMPARED TO TILDEN. YOU KNOW, WHY DO WE COLLECT FEES AT COYOTE HILLS BUT NOT AT TILDEN, AS ONE EXAMPLE. AND CERTAINLY THAT COULD BE A CONVERSATION TO HAVE ANOTHER DAY, BUT, YOU KNOW, IT'S EITHER WE CHARGE FEES EVERYWHERE OR WE REALLY THINK ABOUT WHERE WE CHARGE FEES. YEAH. AND I THINK YOU'RE BRINGING UP A VERY GOOD POINT BECAUSE I HAVE NEVER GOTTEN AN ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION OF WHY WERE CERTAIN PARKS CHOSEN AND OTHERS NOT. AND I DON'T THINK IT'S EVER BEEN REALLY ANALYZED OF WHERE THAT WAS. AND SO EVEN WHEN WE DID THE STUDY AND WHEN WE COME UP LATELY, IT HASN'T, NOTHING'S COME OUT TO RESONATE LIKE, WHY WAS THIS PARK CHOSEN AND THESE OTHER ONES NOT INCLUDED BUT IT'S JUST BEEN A PRACTICE, AND SO WE'VE JUST CONTINUED THAT PRACTICE. YEAH, I THINK THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION TO ASK BECAUSE I'VE WONDERED THAT TOO. ALTHOUGH I HAVE TO SAY, JUST PHILOSOPHICALLY, I DON'T LIKE THE IDEA OF PEOPLE HAVING TO PAY FOR PARKING BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE OUR PARKS SHOULD BE FREE AND OPEN AND PEOPLE SHOULD BE ABLE TO COME AND PARK AND ENJOY IT. AND I MEAN, UNLESS THERE'S SOMETHING SPECIFIC ABOUT THE PARK, AND THIS IS WHERE THE QUESTION IS, THAT WOULD REQUIRE US TO CHARGE PEOPLE OTHERWISE, I REALLY FEEL LIKE OUR PARKS SHOULD BE AS OPEN AS POSSIBLE. I ALSO HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THE SERVICES AND SUPPLY REDUCTION. SO ARE YOU SAYING, LIKE SOME OF THE EXAMPLES YOU GAVE OF SUPPLIES, ARE YOU SAYING THEY'RE BEING POTENTIALLY OVERUSED? I MEAN, SOME OF THOSE THINGS SOUND PRETTY IMPORTANT, LIKE, YOU KNOW, KEEPING OUR POOLS CLEAN AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO I JUST SAY WE HAVEN'T DONE ALL THE ANALYSIS OF THIS. SO THIS IS REALLY LIKE, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO ANSWER LIKE ALL THE QUESTIONS ON LIKE, HOW HAVE WE USED THIS FUNDING IN THE PAST OR NOT? THIS IS JUST TO SEE LIKE, IS THAT SOMETHING WE SHOULD CONSIDER? AND THEN WE CAN DO THE ANALYSIS TO INFORM, YOU KNOW, A POTENTIAL, YOU KNOW, DECISION FROM YOUR BOARD. SO I DON'T KNOW, YOU KNOW, THERE MAY BE SOME AREAS WHERE WE'RE UTILIZING IT FULLY AND SOME AREAS WHERE WE ARE NOT, AND THERE MAY BE, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, THAT THERE COULD EVEN BE VERSIONS OF THIS AT, YOU KNOW, IF YOUR BOARD WAS LIKE, YES, LOOK INTO IT, WE COULD LOOK INTO IT AND SAY, HEY, OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO REDUCE THE BUDGET IN THESE AREAS BUT NOT THESE OTHER AREAS. SO WE ARE JUST LOOKING FOR, SHOULD WE LOOK INTO IT MORE? >> YEAH. AND THIS IS A STANDARD PROCESS, I THINK, WHERE MAX COMES FROM, WHERE I HAVE COME FROM IN OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES. AGENCIES, LIKE, THIS IS USUALLY THE STANDARD. AND I DON'T THINK THE PARK DISTRICT HAS NEVER, LIKE, BEEN IN THIS SITUATION BEFORE. AND SO IT HASN'T BEEN TO LOOK BACK AND LOOK AT HOW WE BUDGETED SERVICES AND SUPPLIES AND REALLY DO A DEEP DIVE INTO THAT TO SEE WHERE THE OPPORTUNITIES MIGHT BE. THE NEXT STEP WOULD BE WORKING WITH EACH OF THE DIVISIONS TO GO IN AND DO IT. THEY WOULD NEED TO RECOMMEND WHAT THEY WOULD BE PROPOSING AND WHAT THE IMPACTS WOULD BE. >> AND ALSO QUICKLY STEP IN AS YOUR FACILITATOR TO SAY THE PAST TWO COMMENTS ARE SUPER VALUABLE. AND I WOULD SAY, LIKE, BASED ON WHAT I'M HEARING, FOR THE NEXT PORTION, YOU'D PROBABLY, ON SUPPLIES AND PARKING, HAVE AN ORANGE STICKER FOR I'D LIKE MORE INFORMATION. RIGHT NOW, FOR THIS PORTION, WE'RE WORKING TO REALLY GET, IF THE BOARD HAS ANY ADDITIONAL IDEAS THAT YOU'D LIKE TO OFFER OR SUGGEST, THIS IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO BRING THAT FORWARD SO THAT IN ADDITION TO WEIGHING IN ON STAFF'S IDEAS, WE WANT THE BOARD TO ALSO HAVE A CHANCE TO WEIGH IN ON YOUR COLLEAGUES' IDEAS TOO. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? QUESTIONS? THIS PORTION OF THE ENGAGEMENT THAT YOU'RE PURSUING OR WE'RE PURSUING IS FOCUSED ON OPERATIONAL BUDGET ISSUES. CORRECT. AND SO HOW DO WE GET BACK TO CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PRIORITIZATION? THERE WAS A [01:20:01] REFERENCE TO IT IN ONE OF THE SLIDES. YEAH, GREAT QUESTION. SO OUR AGENDA TODAY IN THE MORNING, RIGHT NOW WE'RE GETTING SOME PEOPLE FEEDBACK AROUND HOW TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ON THAT TRACK, ONE, WHERE WE GET BACK INTO A GOOD PLACE WITH OUR OPERATIONAL BUDGET. THEN WE'RE GOING TO JUMP BACK INTO CAPITAL PROJECT PRIORITIZATION, AND WE'RE GOING TO END WITH TALKING ABOUT THE PROCESS, OUR BUDGET PROCESS. IS THAT RIGHT, MEGAN? SO THE PROJECTIONS, THOUGH, THAT YOU PRESENTED, WELL, LET ME GO BACK TO THE HISTORY YOU PRESENTED, THAT IT'S BEEN ON THE CAPITAL SIDE THAT WE'VE HAD A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT BECAUSE OF COSTS GOING UP FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS. AND I APPRECIATED DIRECTOR SAN WONG'S ANALYSIS SHE DID IN CONNECTION WITH OUR LAST SESSION ABOUT WHAT SHE OBSERVED ABOUT THE IMPACT OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING. I GUESS THIS IS TO, YOU KNOW, WHAT DO YOU EXPECT? AND JUST BASED ON OLIVIA'S ANALYSIS, WHICH, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTOOD WHAT WAS HAPPENING. IT'S NO SURPRISE THAT WE'RE TO SOME EXTENT IMPACTED BY THE INCREASED COST IN THAT PROJECT. I MEAN, I KNOW YOU'RE EMPHASIZING THAT IT'S NO ONE FACET OF OUR SITUATION. BUT THAT ONE REALLY STANDS OUT. AND AGAIN, APPRECIATE OLIVIA'S ANALYSIS. IN TERMS OF WHAT WE MIGHT BE MISSING, AGAIN, IT KIND OF GOES TO CAPITAL. AND I'M WONDERING IF THE IMPACT ON OUR GRANT OPPORTUNITIES HAS BEEN SIGNIFICANTLY IMPAIRED BY THE CURRENT CURRENT FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. SHOULD WE EXPECT THAT IF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CHANGES AT SOME POINT, MAYBE IN '28, '29, THAT SOME OF THOSE OPPORTUNITIES WILL COME BACK TO US? YOU KNOW, I'M THINKING OF ALL THOSE PROJECTS OUT THERE THAT ARE ORDINARILY ELIGIBLE FOR ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION, FOR INSTANCE, TRAILS. THAT WE'RE NOT GETTING FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. SO I WOULD LIKE TO BEAR IN MIND THAT AT SOME POINT WE MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER THE IMPACT OF THAT LACK OF FEDERAL GRANT MONEY COMING TO US MIGHT CHANGE IN THE FUTURE. JUST A THOUGHT. WE'RE LOOKING FOR OTHER SUGGESTIONS ABOUT PLACES WHERE REDUCTIONS COULD BE MADE? IS THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE? >> YES, DIRECTOR MERCURIO. SO IF THERE'S ANY OTHER IDEAS IN ADDITION TO WHAT STAFF HAS PRESENTED ON THE LAST TWO SLIDES. YEAH, SO MY SUGGESTION, AND MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THIS CORRECTLY, THE 5% REDUCTION FOR SERVICES AND SUPPLIES IS FOCUSED LITERALLY ON THOSE, ON THAT CATEGORY, WHICH INCLUDES A WHOLE BUNCH OF DIFFERENT THINGS, BUT THAT'S CORRECT, CORRECT? CORRECT. YEAH, SO I WOULD SUGGEST EXPANDING THAT TO 2.5% TO ANYTHING ELSE THAT THEY CAN IDENTIFY BY DEPARTMENT. SO WITH THE DEPARTMENT, NOT SOMEBODY ON HIGH, BUT THE DEPARTMENT THEMSELVES FINDING THAT OTHER 2.5%. AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, SO THE BASICALLY ALL OF OUR DIVISIONS, THEY HAVE TWO MAIN PORTIONS OF THEIR BUDGET, THEIR SERVICE AND SUPPLY BUDGET, AND THEN THEIR SALARIES AND BENEFITS. REALLY, I DIDN'T REALIZE SERVICES AND SUPPLIES WAS THAT BROAD. NO, FORGET IT. NO, TOTALLY FORGET THAT. NO, IT'S ALL GOOD, ALL GOOD. ANOTHER QUESTION. HAS THE DISTRICT CONSIDERED EXPANDING SOLAR AS A MEANS OF REDUCING ENERGY COSTS? YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THAT ONE SOLAR ARRAY. I THINK WE CAN PUT IT ON THIS LIST. YEAH. AND THERE ARE FIRMS OUT THERE THAT FINANCE IT. YEAH. COOL. I THINK THAT IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, I THINK IN ALAMEDA COUNTY, AVA ENERGY WILL EVEN ENTER INTO AGREEMENTS WITH PUBLIC AGENCIES LIKE EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT TO EITHER PROVIDE FUNDING AND/OR HELP WITH THE PROJECT. BUT I THINK THAT AVA ENERGY, WHICH IS THE COMMUNITY BENEFIT ORGANIZATION FOR ALAMEDA COUNTY. YEAH, WE'VE GOT THAT PROGRAM. WE'VE GOT HUGE PARKING LOTS ALL AROUND US RIGHT HERE. AND UP THE STREET. [01:25:04] CAN YOU WRITE AVA ENERGY WITH THE SOLAR, AT LEAST FOR ALAMEDA COUNTY? YEAH. I THINK JUST OVERALL, YOU KNOW, I THINK A LOT OF THIS IS EXPECTED, BUT I REALLY APPRECIATE SEEING IT IN FRONT OF US. SO I GUESS SOME OF THE SURPRISES WERE I APPRECIATED SEEING SOME OF THE O&M ONGOING. THAT'S INTERESTING. I MEAN, I HAD ON MY RADAR THAT THIS BUILDING WAS ADDED UP AND I HAD IT IN THE BACK OF MY HEAD. WE'RE OVER $100 MILLION, BUT TO ACTUALLY SEE SOME OF THAT. SO I DON'T KNOW HOW, IT WAS A LITTLE BIT ALONG WITH WHAT COLIN SAID OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY. I MEAN, IT'S AMAZING WHAT WE CAN SPEND AND SAVE ON HUGE BUILDING COSTS. BUT IT REALLY SEEMS TO DIRECTOR WASPY'S COMMENT AND WHAT WE'VE SEEN, IT'S REALLY ABOUT STAFFING. AND THAT'S REALLY A DIFFICULT, AWKWARD, TERRIBLE ONE, WHICH I THINK IS IN OUR OPTIONS COMING UP. AND WHO WANTS TO CUT THEIR SUPPLIES? THEY NEED TO DO THEIR JOBS. BUT WHAT I'VE SEEN OPPORTUNITY TO DO EITHER A LEAN OR AN ISO 9000 ANALYSIS OVERALL. LIKE, STAFF HAS DONE FABULOUS, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF AT SOME POINT, YOU KNOW, WHAT ARE WE MISSING OR WHAT SHOULD WE CONSIDER? I HAD MENTIONED SORT OF, AND I THINK DIRECTOR PRESIDENT SAN WONG MENTIONED TOO, SOME TYPE OF TASK FORCE OR SOME TYPE OF CONSULTANT TO HELP US FIGURE OUT WHERE CAN WE CUT THE LEAN, THE ISO 9000, IS WHAT SORT OF COLIN WAS TOUCHING ON. IF WE REALLY LOOK AT OUR SYSTEMS, WHERE CAN WE SAVE? I CERTAINLY AM IN THE ORANGE STICKER CATEGORY OF STUDYING ALL OF THIS MUCH FURTHER, WHETHER THROUGH A REVENUE ENHANCEMENT, WHETHER IT'S EXTRA AD HOC MEETINGS, SUBCOMMITTEE, TO REALLY TRY TO KEEP DIGGING INTO WHAT YOUR DOING. THE ONE THAT INTERESTS ME TOO AT THE BOTTOM IS THE STAFFING AND THE SHIFTING OF PROGRAMS. I REALLY APPRECIATED WHAT, YOU KNOW, FIRE DID RECENTLY, REALLY HEARING FROM THE DEPARTMENTS OF THEIR CREATIVE IDEAS OF, OH, YOU KNOW, IF WE STEP BACK AND LOOK AT THIS, WE CAN MOVE THIS ALL AROUND AND FIND OTHER WAYS. SO I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF OPPORTUNITY THAT WE COULD BE MISSING WITH SOME MORE DIGGING INTO ALL OF THESE. I'M NOT SURE ANY OF THEM, I WOULD SAY NOT AT THIS TIME. I THINK EVERYTHING'S ON THE TABLE FOR ME, HONESTLY. I MEAN, I HATE TO SAY THAT, BUT I THINK THAT COMES WITH, WITH SOME KIND OF, YOU KNOW, OPPORTUNITY. BUT THERE ARE THINGS WHERE WE MIGHT BRING MORE IN-HOUSE. I THINK, YOU KNOW, BUILDING AND YOUTH DEVELOPMENT AND STAFF DEVELOPMENT IS A REAL PLUS. I REMEMBER WE DID THAT IN AND OUR CITY IS LIKE, WHY ARE WE SENDING ALL THIS MONEY OUT TO CONSULTANTS WHEN WE COULD TRAIN OUR STAFF AND DO IT IN-HOUSE AND THEN THEY'RE FULL-TIME AND THE REST OF THEIR DAY IS ALSO AVAILABLE TO PICK UP OTHER JOBS. SO THAT'S PRETTY INTERESTING TO ME. I THINK IT WAS TAKEN WRONGLY THE LAST TIME I SAID IT. I'M GOING TO TRY AND SAY IT AGAIN TODAY, SEE IF IT IS TAKEN A LITTLE BIT MORE OPENLY OR FRIENDLY. AND WHAT DID I SAY EARLIER? PRACTICE JOY AND PRESENCE AS I MAKE THIS COMMENT. BUT AT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, I MEAN, IF YOU'VE GOT SOMEBODY LIKE THAT WANTS TO GO HOME 2 HOURS EARLY AND SAVE ON, YOU KNOW, CHILDCARE, FOR INSTANCE, IF YOU OFFER IT UP TO STAFF, WE DID THIS AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL TO BALANCE OUR BUDGET. STAFF IS 80-SOMETHING PERCENT OF OUR BUDGET, BUT YOU'D BE SURPRISED IF PEOPLE SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, I WOULDN'T MIND GOING HOME AT 3 O'CLOCK EVERY THURSDAY AND FRIDAY AND SAVE ON MY BABYSITTER BILL OR WHATEVER, AND I'D BE WILLING TO DO THAT WITHOUT PAY BECAUSE I'M GOING TO SAVE ANOTHER, YOU KNOW, $500. SO TO GET CREATIVE, I GUESS, IS WHAT I'M SAYING. OR SOMEONE SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT, I'M GOING THROUGH A LOT WITH MY FAMILY. I WOULDN'T MIND TAKING EVERY FRIDAY OFF WITHOUT PAY WHILE I, YOU KNOW, SOLVE THIS ISSUE THROUGH MY DIVORCE OR WHATEVER THEY'RE GOING THROUGH. AND IT WAS AMAZING. WHAT WE WERE ABLE TO BALANCE THE ISSUES OF FEDERAL CUTS AND MONEY. SO, I DON'T KNOW, I'LL THROW THOSE KIND OF OUT THERE AS EVERYTHING'S ON THE TABLE, LIKE I SAID. I'M NOT SURE I HAVE ANY NOT AT THIS TIME. SO, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND YEAH, WE WILL HAVE A CHANCE FOR YOU TO WEIGH IN A LITTLE BIT MORE DEEPLY ON THE DIFFERENT STICKERS. RIGHT NOW, IT'S REALLY, KAREN IS CAPTURING ALSO THE IDEAS. THAT ARE COMING FROM YOUR BOARD FOR ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE THE BOARD TO WEIGH IN ON. SO THANK YOU FOR THOSE IDEAS. AND DOES ANY DIRECTOR WHO'S OFFERED IDEAS SEE THEIR IDEA NOT UP THERE? I THINK KAREN'S DOING A GOOD JOB. OKAY. I'D REALLY LIKE TO LOOK AT THE UTILITIES AND FUEL, [01:30:02] BECAUSE THIS IS SOMETHING THAT POTENTIALLY COULD GO UP HIGH FOR A LONG TIME. SO THERE MIGHT BE SOME, LIKE, MORE INITIAL INVESTMENT, BUT JUST LOOKING AT HOW OVERALL THE AGENCY CAN REDUCE ITS DEPENDENCE ON FUEL. SO WHAT TYPE OF PARTICULAR CONVERSIONS THERE MIGHT BE IN VEHICLES AND OR OTHER AREAS JUST TO SEE HOW WE CAN REDUCE OUR DEPENDENCE ON FUEL AND NATURAL GAS. AND THEN AS FAR AS WHEN COLIN MENTIONED EARLIER, ELECTRICITY SAVINGS, SO ARE THERE NEW INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES THAT WE COULD USE TO REDUCE DEPENDENCE IN THE LONG TERM SO THAT WE'RE NOT SUBJECT TO THESE DIFFERENT TYPE OF POLITICAL ECONOMIC SWINGS THAT ARE IMPACTING THOSE PRICES. AND THEN FOR INSURANCE, ARE THOSE INCREASES IS JUST SET OVER TIME. IS THERE ANY OPPORTUNITIES BECAUSE LIKE WE'RE DOING PROGRAMS LIKE FUEL REDUCTION, ARE THERE IMPLEMENTATION OF ANY OTHER PROGRAMS THAT SHOWS THAT WE'RE MANAGING OUR PARKS IN A WAY TO MAKE THEM CLIMATE RESILIENT THAT CAN OVERALL REDUCE OUR INSURANCE PREMIUMS. THOSE ARE SUGGESTIONS. AND IF I RECALL CORRECTLY, I BELIEVE THAT 27% INCREASE WAS THE WORST CASE SCENARIO. THAT'S CORRECT. HOPEFULLY IT WON'T BE THAT BAD. I UNDERSTAND STAFF HAS TO BUDGET FOR THE WORST CASE, BUT HOPEFULLY WE WILL HAVE IT. AND I THINK FOR YOUR QUESTION IN PARTICULAR, DIRECTOR ESPANA, IS WHEN WE BRING FORWARD THE INSURANCE REPORT, WE CAN MAKE SURE WE ADDRESS THOSE POINTS. IT IS RIGHT NOW ON CONSENT, BUT WE COULD MAKE SURE THAT THOSE POINTS GET ADDRESSED SO THAT YOU COULD GET ANSWERS TO THOSE QUESTIONS. DIRECTOR WASPE. OKAY. DEBT REFUNDING, THAT BRINGS TO MY MIND THE QUESTION OF HOW WE CAN UTILIZE RESERVES. I WOULD URGE YOU FOLKS TO CONSIDER RESERVES TO TAKE CARE OF ISSUES THAT HAVE CAUSED US ISOLATED IMPACT. SO AN ISOLATED IMPACT IS THE COST OVERRUNS ON THE PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING, WHICH I PRESUME EXPANDED OUR DEBT. AND I THINK STRATEGICALLY USING RESERVES INSTEAD OF JUST SITTING ON THEM EVERY YEAR. I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND, DIP INTO SOME OF THE RESERVES. SO I THINK WHAT WE DID WAS VALID AND A GOOD USE OF RESERVES, AND THAT MANAGEMENT SHOULD CONSIDER WHAT OTHER STRATEGIC USE OF RESERVES WOULD BE AVAILABLE. YOU DON'T WANT TO USE RESERVES TO ADDRESS A STRUCTURAL DEFICIT, BUT YOU CAN USE RESERVES TO ADDRESS ISOLATED IMPACTS THAT WE'VE TAKEN. THAT'S MY THOUGHT, INCLUDING BRINGING DOWN DEBT. DIRECTOR WASPY, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU'D LIKE TO ADD? YES,I DO. I JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT FIRST OF ALL, I'M BASING EVERYTHING I'M DOING ON THE FACT THAT IF 86% OF OUR GENERAL FUND IS FOR SALARIES AND BENEFITS THAT DOESN'T LEAVE US A WHOLE LOT TO DO STUFF. EVERYTHING I'M DOING IS BASED ON PASSING A TAX MEASURE TO CORRECT THAT IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS. SO SOME OF THE STUFF IS VERY SIMPLISTIC IN MY OPINION. PERSONALLY, I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF MAKING PEOPLE THAT WANT TO COME TO PARKS, WHICH WE'RE TRYING TO GET EVERYBODY TO COME TO PARKS, PUTTING UP A ANOTHER BARRIER BY HAVING MORE FEES. THIS WAS OUR DOING. THIS IS ALL PRETTY MUCH IN OUR ERA THAT WE CAME INTO THESE DEFICITS. SO TO START, I WOULD LOOK INWARD. I WOULD LOOK INWARD TO EVERYTHING WE DO. EVERYTHING SHOULD BE LOOKED AT OF WHAT WE'RE DOING. WE TALKED ABOUT SERVICES AND CUTTING THEM BY SUPPLIES AND [01:35:02] SERVICE BY 5%. DOES, YOU KNOW, EVERY TIME WE HAVE A... EVERY TIME DAVID COMES AND TALKS ABOUT REPLACING COMPUTERS, WHICH I THINK WE DO EVERY 3 YEARS, WE DO A THIRD OF OUR COMPUTERS EVERY 3 YEARS. AND THEN I ASK THE QUESTION, HOW MANY COMPUTERS DO WE HAVE IN THE PARK DISTRICT? AND THEY SAY IT'S 1,000. AND I'M THINKING, MY GOD. AND IT'S MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, I REMEMBER ON MY CREW, VERY SIMPLISTIC GROUP. WE HAD A SPECIFIC JOB. AND THAT JOB WAS TO GET INTO A TRUCK AND DO SOME STUFF AND LEAVE. THEY WERE NEVER IN THE OFFICE. EACH ONE OF THEM GOT, INDIVIDUALS GOT COMPUTERS. ALL 5 OF US GOT COMPUTERS. DO WE NEED THAT MANY COMPUTERS? AND THE ONLY THING I CAN HEAR PEOPLE GO IS, "WELL, EVERYBODY'S GOT TO DO THEIR TIME CARD ELECTRONICALLY." WELL, IN MY OPINION, ONE COMPUTER CAN DO THAT ON A FRIDAY IN 10 MINUTES. THE WHOLE STAFF CAN DO THEIR TIME CARD ON ONE COMPUTER. I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD LOOK AT. I THINK WE SHOULD LOOK AT THE REPLACEMENT OF COMPUTERS. IF WE DO COMPUTERS REPLACEMENT EVERY 3 YEARS, CAN WE EXTEND IT TO 4? I'M NOT A TECH GUY, SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT CAN HAPPEN, BUT I THINK THAT WOULD BE A SAVINGS OF, WHAT IS THAT, 25%? I'M NOT A MATHEMATICIAN EITHER, BUT IF WE EXTEND IT ANOTHER YEAR, WE WOULD HAVE A SMALL SAVINGS. I THINK VEHICLES AND I ASKED THAT QUESTION ALSO WHEN OUR GREAT EQUIPMENT MANAGEMENT FOLKS PROVIDE US WITH GREAT, GREAT EQUIPMENT, BUT MY QUESTION HAS ALWAYS BEEN, WHEN THE STANDARD HAS ALWAYS BEEN, WE'RE CUTTING IT LOOSE AT 10 YEARS OR 100,000 MILES, I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S STILL THE STANDARD, BUT IT USED TO BE, AND EVERY TIME I LOOK AT MY CAR, AND EVERY MECHANIC I LOOK AT, HE GOES, "YOUR CAR'S GOING TO GO 200,000 MILES EASY." CARS ARE BUILT TO GO 300,000 MILES NOW. CAN WE EXTEND THAT REPLACEMENT BY 1 YEAR AND SAVE WHATEVER THAT OR 2 YEARS IF POSSIBLE. ENERGY EFFICIENCY, I THINK, IS REALLY IMPORTANT. I THINK WE, YOU KNOW, BUILDING OUT SOLAR ARRAYS THROUGHOUT THE DISTRICT IS EXPENSIVE AND DIFFICULT. I THINK IF WE JUST LOOKED INSIDE, DID AN ENERGY SURVEY, SEE HOW MANY LIGHTS ARE ON ALL NIGHT LONG EVERYWHERE IN THE DISTRICT, WHY, AND CAN THEY BE REPLACED. WITH LIGHTS THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, GO ON WHEN PEOPLE ARE INHABITING. WE COULD DO THAT HERE TOO, YOU KNOW, WALK INTO A ROOM, LIGHTS COME ON. STOPWASTE CAN DO A SURVEY FOR US, AND THEY HAVE IN THE PAST. I KNOW WE DON'T GO TO T8 LIGHTING ANYMORE. I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT T8 LIGHTING IS, BUT FOR FLUORESCENCE, THERE'S VERY, VERY ENERGY-EFFICIENT LIGHTING THAT CAN OCCUR. WE SHOULD DO A TOUR OF THE STOP WASTE FACILITY. IT'S AN AMAZING AND WE COULD SAVE A TON OF MONEY THERE BY LOOKING INSIDE, NOT DOING MILLION-DOLLAR PROJECTS OR MORE FOR SOLAR. YOU KNOW, THE WHOLE ISSUE CAME UP, WE'VE BEEN FINANCED, WE DID AN AUDIT. FOR THE PARK DISTRICT TO BE USING BOTTLED WATER, I DON'T GET IT. I JUST DON'T GET IT. WE'RE IN THE HETCH HETCHY WATER, AND SOME OF OUR PLACES IN EAST BAY MUD, WHICH ARE CLAIMED TO BE THE BEST WATER IN THE WORLD. I THINK WE REALLY OUGHT TO LOOK INTO THAT. AND THAT'S, AGAIN, A MINOR SAVINGS, BUT IT'S DOING SOMETHING. AND AGAIN, I DON'T WANT TO PENALIZE OUR EMPLOYEES. I DON'T WANT TO SAY NO OVERTIME. WELL, SOMETIMES WE NEED OVERTIME. THAT SEEMS VERY EASY. I DON'T WANT TO HAVE EXCESS OVERTIME, BUT I DON'T WANT TO HAMMER THE EMPLOYEES. I THINK WE CAN LOOK INTERNALLY AND DO SOME SMALL THINGS, MANY SMALL THINGS, TO MAKE THIS GET BETTER. DISTRICT RESIDENCES. I THINK WE NEED TO GET BACK TO DISTRICT RESIDENCES. I KNOW IT'S IT COULD BE A NEGATIVE, BUT I UNDERSTAND THE MAINTENANCE OF THEM, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW IT PENCILS OUT, BUT I THINK IT'S A GOOD THING OVERALL FOR THE DISTRICT. WE CAN MAKE SOME MONEY DOING THAT. I'M GOING BUILD IN-HOUSE. I LOOK AT SOME OF THESE PROJECTS, AND IT JUST SUGGESTS THAT THE GUERIN BARN IS GOING TO COST $350,000 TO PAINT. I KNOW THERE'S SOME REPAIRS INVOLVED, BUT IN-HOUSE, WE CAN DO THAT IN-HOUSE. AND I KNOW WE CAN DO IT FOR HALF THE PRICE OF THAT OR LESS. BUILDING 4 DOCKS IS LISTED, REPLACING THE BOAT OR FISHING DOCKS AT LAKE CHABOT. THAT'S A PROJECT THAT I USED TO DO, AND IT'S SO SIMPLE. YOU DO IT UP IN THE SOUTH COUNTY CORP YARD WHERE ALL YOUR EQUIPMENT'S THERE, RIGHT THERE. YOU HAVE A CRANE THAT THE ROADS AND TRAILS CREW HAS. YOU BUILD IT ON-SITE, AND YOU TAKE IT DOWN TO THE LAKE AND PUT IT IN. THAT COULD EASILY BE DONE IN-HOUSE AND SAVE A LOT OF MONEY. AND THERE'S MANY PROJECTS THAT COULD DO THAT. ANOTHER THING, JUST MINOR STUFF, I THINK WE SEEM TO HIRE PEOPLE, OR WE WERE LED TO BELIEVE THAT WHEN WE HIRED EXECUTIVE STAFF, THAT THEY ALWAYS HAD TO COME IN AT THE F-LEVEL STEP LEVEL, ALWAYS HAD TO COME TO THE TOP. THAT SEEMED TO BE A PATTERN FOR THE LAST 3 OR 4 YEARS. YEARS. IN FACT, AND I THOUGHT THERE WAS ALSO A POLICY THAT, I COULD BE WRONG, THE BOARD, ANYTHING OVER LEVEL C HAD TO BE APPROVED BY THE BOARD, AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S OCCURRED [01:40:02] IN THE LAST TIME OR TWO. AND ONCE AGAIN, VERY MINOR SAVINGS, BUT IT'S GOING THERE. PAYING RENT AT THE CROWLEY PROPERTY, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT. I STILL DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT, AND I NEVER WILL UNDERSTAND IT AS LONG AS WE KEEP DOING THAT. SMALL, $3,000 A MONTH OR WHATEVER IT IS, BUT IT IS SOMETHING. I THINK WE DID A GOOD JOB OF HANDLING THESE OVERTIME AND STANDBY PAY, JUST INTERNALLY LOOKING AT IT, NOT PENALIZING ANYBODY, BUT WE DID IT IN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, POLICE DEPARTMENT NEGOTIATIONS. THAT'S IT. THANK YOU. I THINK WE SHOULD SHOP AROUND. I KNOW WE'RE WITH PRISM, BUT IF THEY'RE GOING TO RAISE OUR RATES BY 27%, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING SHOULD INITIATE US SHOPPING AROUND. WE MAY NOT GET A BETTER DEAL, BUT I THINK WE SHOULD BECOME MORE WARY OF DEALS, SO TO SPEAK, OR SALES. I DON'T KNOW, THEY MAY HAVE SALES IN THE INSURANCE INDUSTRY, BUT I THINK WE SHOULD LOOK AROUND. THANK YOU. DENNIS, DO YOU RECALL THAT REPORT WE ASKED FOR 5 OR 6 YEARS AGO ON WHETHER IT WOULD BE FEASIBLE AND COST-EFFECTIVE TO BRING MORE OF OUR PAVING PROJECTS IN-HOUSE? I DEFINITELY REMEMBER THAT ONE. YEAH, AND IT NEVER GOT TO US. NOPE. MAYBE WE SHOULD RESURRECT THAT REQUEST, THAT WE DO AN ANALYSIS OF WHETHER IT BE ECONOMICAL TO DO MORE OF OUR PAVING IN-HOUSE. IN OTHER WORDS, EXPAND THAT ABILITY TO DO IT IN-HOUSE, BECAUSE WE SPEND AN AWFUL LOT OF MONEY ON CONTRACTORS. AND I REMEMBER JIM O'CONNOR SAYING THERE WAS AN ASSESSMENT MADE AND IT WENT TO THE GM'S OFFICE AND THEN NEVER GOT BACK TO US. IN FACT, ALL PROJECTS THAT, YOU KNOW, ARE UNDER THE LEVEL THAT WE WE CAN'T GO ABOVE, ANY MAINTENANCE PROJECT COULD BE AT LEAST LOOKED AT AND HAVE IT CATEGORIZED AS NAH, WON'T WORK IN-HOUSE, MAYBE IT WILL. THANKS, COLLEEN. I JUST WANTED TO SPECIFICALLY ADD, I WAS TRYING TO GET THIS IN HERE FOR A FEW MINUTES HERE, BUT THE NEW POSITIONS REVENUE NEUTRAL, I THINK IF WE'RE GOING TO EXPLORE THAT, THAT'S DEFINITELY A PLACE WHERE WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT NOT JUST CONSULTANT WORK BUT CONTRACTOR WORK. I FEEL LESS COMFORTABLE ABOUT REPURCHASING EXISTING VACANT POSITIONS, BUT I DEFINITELY THINK TRANSITIONING CONSULTANT WORK OR CONTRACTOR WORK TO INTERNAL STAFF, THAT'S WHERE IT SHOULD BE TO BEGIN WITH, TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE. SO DEFINITELY WOULD WANT TO LOOK THERE FOR COST SAVINGS. SO I DISAGREE. I THINK WE HAVE OPPORTUNITY TO MAYBE LOOK AT EXISTING VACANT POSITIONS, PARTICULARLY UNREPRESENTED MANAGEMENT POSITIONS IN THE GENERAL MANAGER'S OFFICE. I BELIEVE WE HAVE AT LEAST 3 VACANT POSITIONS, AND THIS IS BY NO MEANS REFLECTS THE PREVIOUS INDIVIDUALS WHO HELD THOSE POSITIONS. I THINK THEY EACH DID A GREAT JOB AND CONTRIBUTED A LOT TO EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF WE NEED THOSE 3 POSITIONS GOING FORWARD. AND ON THE CONSERVATIVE END, I THINK THE COST SAVINGS IS PROBABLY FOR THOSE 3 POSITIONS, MAYBE $700,000 TO $800,000. >> MAYBE WE CAN JUST MAKE 2 DIFFERENT BUCKETS, SO ONE THAT'S EXPLORING BRINGING CONTRACTED WORK IN-HOUSE AND ANOTHER ONE THAT'S EXPLORING REPURPOSING EXISTING POSITIONS. DOES THAT SOUND FAIR WAY TO CAPTURE BOTH THE IDEAS, AND BECAUSE YOU'LL GIVE FEEDBACK ON BOTH OF THEM. WE'RE GONNA HAVE A CHANCE SOON. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOUR IDEA GOT ON THE BOARD, DIRECTOR ECHOLS. IS IT UP THERE? OKAY. I THINK, IS IT IN ONE OF THOSE? OKAY. WELL, THE CONTRACTOR WORK ISN'T IN THERE, SO THAT'S WHAT I WAS SPECIFICALLY TRYING TO TALK ABOUT. YEAH, WE CAN MAKE IT, WE'LL MAKE IT TWO SEPARATE ONES SO THAT WE CAN CAPTURE THAT. AND ADD THEM TO THAT SO YOU CAN VOTE ON THOSE. YEAH, WELL, I GUESS IN MY, MY THOUGHT ON THE REPURPOSING EXISTING VACANT POSITIONS, OLIVIA RAISES A GOOD POINT. I THINK WHAT I WAS REALLY THINKING ABOUT, AS I WAS JUST THINKING ABOUT FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF STAFF POTENTIALLY, THAT IF YOU'RE, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE ALREADY TRYING TO MAKE DO WITH LESS AND THEN SOMEONE GRABS THAT ONE VACANT POSITION OPEN ON YOUR TEAM AND REPURPOSES SOMEWHERE ELSE BECAUSE THEY THINK GET YOU TO GO THERE. THAT CAN BE A REAL HARDSHIP FOR PEOPLE. SO I MEAN, THAT'S LIKE FREEZING IT OR TAKING IT AWAY. IT IS TAKING IT AWAY ALTOGETHER, SO THAT'S EVEN WORSE. SO YEAH, I GUESS IT'S OKAY TO LOOK BROADLY, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY AT THE MANAGEMENT POSITIONS AND OTHER POSITIONS ACROSS THE BOARD. WE HAVE ADDED A TON OF MANAGEMENT POSITIONS, BUT I, YOU KNOW, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE SENSITIVE TO THE FACT OF JUST BECAUSE A POSITION JUST [01:45:02] BECAUSE A POSITION IS VACANT DOESN'T MEAN THAT IT'S NOT NEEDED, AND, YOU KNOW, TAKING IT FROM ONE TEAM AND PUTTING IT SOMEWHERE ELSE IS NOT SOMETHING TO DO LIGHTLY. SO WHAT I'D LIKE TO SUGGEST IS THAT WE TRANSITION OVER TO THE STICKER PORTION. THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR THE IDEAS GENERATED. KAREN HAS CAPTURED ALL OF THEM ON THE LARGE POSTER BOARDS AND ALSO ON THESE POST-ITS. AND KAREN, ARE YOU GOING TO GET THEM OVER TO THE... YEAH, SO SHE'LL BE PUTTING THEM OVER ON THE TWO POSTERS OVER HERE ON POST-ITS. YOU'VE EACH BEEN GIVEN A COUPLE OF PADS OF STICKERS. IF YOU CAN GO OVER AND NOTE WITH THE STICKER IN A GREEN STICKER IF YOU THINK IT SHOULD BE DEVELOPED FULLY FOR THE 2027 BUDGET, JUST YOU'D LIKE STAFF TO BUILD THE PROPOSAL INTO THE BUDGET. WITH AN ORANGE STICKER, IF YOU THINK THAT YOU'D LIKE TO HAVE STAFF STUDY IT FURTHER BEFORE DECIDING, THAT YOU WANT MORE ANALYSIS FROM STAFF BEFORE BUILDING THEIR PROPOSAL, YOU WANT MORE INFORMATION, OR YOU'RE JUST ON THE FENCE AND YOU DON'T KNOW RIGHT NOW. OR RED, NOT AT THIS TIME, I THINK THIS IDEA SHOULD BE SET ASIDE FOR 2027. IF YOU NEED MORE STICKERS, LET ME KNOW. PLEASE DON'T VOTE ON ONE IDEA MORE THAN ONCE. AND WHY DON'T WE DO THIS JUST BECAUSE SINCE OUR TIME IS A LITTLE BIT NEEDS TO BE ADJUSTED A LITTLE BIT TODAY. WHY DON'T WE SHIFT INTO A... WE'LL CALL IT LIKE A 15-MINUTE BREAK, BUT DO YOUR STICKER EXERCISE AS A PART OF THE BREAK, AND WE'LL COME BACK. WHY DON'T WE EVEN DO LIKE 11:40? SOUND GOOD? SOUNDS GREAT. OKAY, COOL. ALL RIGHT, WELCOME BACK EVERYONE. REAL QUICK, I DO WANT TO ADDRESS PUBLIC COMMENT. SO WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO SET THINGS UP WHERE WE WILL HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THIS ITEM D1, AND WE'RE GOING TO PROBABLY SPLIT IT BETWEEN LIKE THE END OF THE MORNING AND AFTER LUNCH. SO I KNOW THERE'S A FEW FOLKS THAT PEOPLE ONLINE WOULD LIKE TO PARTICIPATE IN PUBLIC COMMENT AFTER LUNCH. AND SO FOR ANYONE ONLINE THAT WOULD LIKE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT, THAT IS GOING TO BE AN OPPORTUNITY. SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE D1, WE'RE GOING TO SPLIT THAT PUBLIC COMMENT TO BEFORE OUR LUNCH BREAK AS WELL AS AFTER OUR LUNCH BREAK. SO WE'LL CONTINUE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD IN THAT MANNER. ALRIGHT, SO NOW WE'RE BACK. GREAT. ALRIGHT, WELCOME BACK. FOR THOSE OF YOU, YOU CAN TURN OVER AND SEE THE DOT EXERCISE THAT WAS DONE DURING THE BREAK. AND I SEE LOTS OF GREENS AND ORANGES SIGNALING YES, YOU KNOW, STAFF, I THINK IT WOULD BE GREAT TO HAVE YOU DEVELOP THE PROPOSAL, OR I WANT MORE ANALYSIS FROM STAFF BEFORE BUILDING THE PROPOSAL, OR I'M ON THE FENCE. THERE ARE A COUPLE OF REDS, AND I'VE BEEN ASKED BY STAFF, FOR THOSE WHO HAVE ADDED RED STICKERS, IF THEY CAN ADD A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL TO THEIR THE REASONING WHY. I ADDED RED TO ADVENTECH AT ALL NEW PARKING LOTS, AND I DIVIDED IT UP AS FAR AS ORANGE BEING, SO I DID RED AND ORANGE, UH, ORANGE BEING DEER VALLEY AND POINTE MILATE, BUT EXCLUDING TIDEWATER MLK OYSTER BAY AND THIRD GOOD MARSHALL. THE WHOLE INTENT OF THE EXPANSION OF TIDEWATER WAS TO JUST ADDRESS ACCESS OF DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES THAT HAD BEEN HISTORICALLY DIVIDED WITH THE FREEWAY, WITH HAVING ACCESS TO PARKS. SO TO CREATE THAT WITH THAT INTENT. TENT AND THEN CHARGE FOR PARKING. AND I JUST THINK IT'S IN CONTRARY. AND OYSTER BAY HAS NOT HAD SIGNIFICANT PLACE TO PARK FOR YEARS. SO TO PROVIDE WITH A NEW AMENITY AND THEN CHARGE PARKING, I JUST FEEL LIKE IN THOSE TWO AREAS THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU NEED TO THINK ABOUT A LITTLE BIT MORE, BUT ESPECIALLY FOR TIDEWATER, I JUST THINK AS FAR AS IT'S AGAINST THE INTENT OF WHAT THE EXPANSION IS FOR. THANK YOU. DID ANYBODY ELSE PUT UP A RED STICKER THAT THEY WANT TO ADD ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO OR ABOUT? YEAH, I THINK I PUT A RED STICKER. RED STICKER IN AT LEAST TWO PLACES, MAYBE MORE, BUT ONE OF THEM IS THE ONE THAT DIRECTOR ESPANA WAS JUST TALKING ABOUT, PUTTING ALL OF THESE PUTTING PARKING WHERE ALL OF THE STARS ARE. I THINK THAT IN GENERAL, AS I SAID EARLIER, I'M PHILOSOPHICALLY OPPOSED [01:50:01] TO CHARGING PEOPLE FOR PARKING TO COME TO OUR PUBLIC PARKS. SO I WOULD HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THAT. MINE AREN'T QUITE AS NUANCED AS DIRECTOR SPANIER'S, SO I WANT TO APPRECIATE HOW SHE'S REALLY SAID, OKAY, THESE PARTS AND NOT THESE PARTS. I'M JUST SAYING, AND JUST IN GENERAL. I THINK THERE WAS ONE, EXPAND FEE-BASED PARKING TO UNMETERED HIGH-USE AREAS WITH EXISTING INTERNET. SO IS THAT EVERYWHERE? I WASN'T I'M NOT 100% SURE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THAT AND THE ONES WHERE WE SAID ALL NEW. I GUESS ONE IS ALL NEW PARKING LOTS AND THEN THE OTHER ONE IS ALL PARKING LOTS. THEY'RE ALL PARKING LOTS EVERYWHERE, PRETTY MUCH. YEAH, DIRECTOR ECKEL. SO ON THE MAP, IT WOULD BE THE ONES THAT DON'T EXIST, LIKE DON'T HAVE THE KIOSK OR THE VENTEX CURRENTLY. AND WHAT WE LOOKED AT WAS MAINLY ALONG THE SHORELINE BECAUSE OF EXISTING INTERNET CONNECTIVITY AVAILABILITY FOR THE VENTAX, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, TILDEN. AND IS THERE CONNECTIVITY FOR TILDEN, OR WOULD YOU HAVE TO... WE FOUND THE VENTAX CAN ALSO WORK THROUGH STARLINK. THERE'S A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A PRICE FOR IT, BUT AS LONG AS YOU CAN SEE THE SKY, YOU CAN CONNECT IT TO THE SATELLITE FOR THE CONNECTIVITY. I JUST I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT I DID PUT GREEN FOR CONVERTING KIOSK-BASED COLLECTIONS. SO AS FAR AS WE ARE LOSING OPPORTUNITIES WHERE, WHERE IF WE HAD THAT MACHINE UP AND THEN IT WOULD ALSO ALLOW US TO USE STAFF DIFFERENTLY AT THE PARK, SO THAT I SUPPORT. AND THEN EXPANDING 2, WHERE IT'S 1, EXPANDING THE FEE-BASED PARKING TO UNMETERED HIGH-USE AREAS. YEAH, SO I DO SUPPORT 1 AND 2. IT'S JUST WHERE IT WAS 3 WITH THE NEW PARKING, I THOUGHT THAT THOSE SHOULD HAVE ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATION. SO WITH THE VENTEC MACHINES, I ASSUME WILL BE ELIMINATING STAFF, WHICH ONCE AGAIN, I'M ASSUMING A NUMBER OF THINGS. OKAY, SO WE'LL INCORPORATE THE STAFF IN MORE MEANINGFUL WORK SO THAT THEY CAN BECOME BECAUSE THESE ARE, THESE ARE USUALLY, HOW DO WE SAY, LOWER-LEVEL EMPLOYEES WHO ARE WORKING THEIR WAY INTO THE DISTRICT. AND YOU CAN WORK YOUR WAY FROM THE GATE ATTENDANT OR IN A KIOSK TO BEING A PARK RANGER. OKAY, GOOD. SO WE COULD INCORPORATE THAT BACK INTO HAVING MORE WORK BEING DONE IN THE FIELD. EXCELLENT. I DO HAVE A QUESTION OF, IN SOME CASES, WHERE, YOU KNOW, I REALLY LIKE THE IDEA OF SOMEBODY GREETING YOU IN A UNIFORM SAYING, "HI, THIS IS YOUR PARK, BLAH BLAH BLAH." ANSWER SOME QUESTIONS, HAND OUT A BROCHURE, WELCOME THEM TO THE PARK DISTRICT. THE MACHINE KIND OF MAKES ME WANT TO KICK THE MACHINE WHEN I SEE IT, BUT I GUESS WE HAVE TO SUCK IT UP AND DO THAT. BUT I THINK WE SHOULD CONSIDER THAT WHEN WE DO IT IN INDIVIDUAL PARKS. YEAH, I JUST SAY THIS IS SUPER HELPFUL. I THINK WE WERE, AS STAFF, THINKING A LOT OF THESE ACTIONS. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THIS IS GREAT. SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE FEEDBACK HERE IS GOING TO BE USED BY STAFF TO INFORM THE 2027 BUDGET, TO INFORM THE OVERALL WORK OF THE DISTRICT, WHETHER IT'S FOLDED INTO THE 2027 BUDGET OR FOLLOWING YEARS' BUDGETS, AND JUST GIVING GENERAL DIRECTION TO STAFF. AND IT ALSO COULD BE FOLDED INTO THE FUTURE GENERAL MANAGER'S WORK PLAN. CORRECT. AND WE WOULD BRING, YOU KNOW, PRETTY MUCH ALL THESE ITEMS BACK TO YOUR BOARD FOR CONSIDERATION IN THE FUTURE, YOU KNOW, AS THE TIME IS RIGHT. AND REALLY OUTLINE, DIRECTOR WASBY, THE IMPACTS. SO WHAT'S THE BENEFIT? WHAT'S THE CON? LIKE, WHAT'S THE CONS? AND LIKE, FOR YOUR POINT EXACTLY ABOUT VISITOR EXPERIENCE, LIKE, HOW WOULD WE ADDRESS THAT? AND I CAN IMAGINE THE BOARD SPENDING MUCH MORE TIME HERE. THAT SAID, IS THIS FEELING RELATIVELY COMPLETE FOR STAFF TO NOW TAKE AND TAKE ACTION ON? OR IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU WOULD LIKE BEYOND WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN SAID TO BE BROUGHT BACK TO THE BOARD FOR DEEPER CONVERSATION SO THAT WE CAN MOVE TO THE NEXT ITEM? CAN I JUST ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION? UNDER FEE SCHEDULE ADJUSTMENTS, IT SAYS ADD PICNIC SITES AND CAMPING RESERVATIONS AT NEW PARK LOCATIONS. DOES THAT MEAN LIKE NEWLY OPENED PARKS OR DOES THAT MEAN JUST WE ARE GOING TO LOOK AT ALL PARKS AND JUST TRY TO DECIDE? WHERE WE WOULD PUT THEM, OR DOES IT MEAN ALL PARKS FULL STOP? I THINK IT CAN MEAN BOTH OF THOSE,RIGHT? LIKE, FIND- LOOKING [01:55:01] AT NEW RESERVABLE SITES WITHIN EXISTING PARKS OR NEW RESERVABLE SITES WITHIN NEW PARKS. SO I THINK IT'S JUST, IT'S JUST CONSIDERING EXPANDING RESERVABLE SITES. AND WITH THE PICNIC SITES, THAT WOULD BE LARGE GROUP, OR THAT WOULD BE EVERYBODY? IT COULD BE, IT COULD BE RESERVABLE LARGE PICNIC AREAS, OR IT COULD COULD BE RESERVABLE MEDIUM-SIZED OR SMALLER PICNIC AREAS. SO IT'S JUST THINKING ABOUT IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ADDITIONAL RESERVABLE SITES. AND AGAIN, YOUR BOARD IS NOT DECIDING ON ANY OF THESE THINGS. IT'S JUST HELPING US UNDERSTAND WHETHER TO LOOK AT THEM FURTHER AND COME BACK FOR A DECISION TO YOUR BOARD. YEAH, I MEAN, I FEEL LIKE WITH BOTH OF THOSE, WELL, CAMPING RESERVATIONS, I THINK WE ALREADY DO HAVE FEES, RIGHT? YEAH, WE DO. ONE OF THE PROJECTS IS FIDDLENECK THAT'S COMING FORWARD. SO IT WOULD BE THE CAMPGROUND IN SIBLEY. AND SO, YOU KNOW, FOR THAT NEW FACILITY THAT'S OPENING UP, ARE WE GOING TO EXPLORE? ARE WE GOING TO BE CHARGING OR NOT CHARGING? WHAT, YOU KNOW, SHOULD WE COME BACK AND GIVE THE BOARD OPTIONS? YEAH. OKAY. WELL, JUST MY TWO CENTS. SENSE ON THAT. YES, I THINK IT'S FAIR TO CHARGE PEOPLE FOR CAMPING AND FOR LARGE PICNICKING SITES, BUT I MEAN, REALLY, I'D BE CAREFUL ABOUT, YOU KNOW, DRAGGING A LOT OF PICNIC SITES INTO THE NET BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE WANT TO JUST GO AND SPONTANEOUSLY HAVE A PICNIC. IF YOU HAVE TO... FOR A LARGE GROUP, YES, THEY NEED TO RESERVE IN ADVANCE AND PAY A FEE, BUT OTHERWISE I THINK MOST OF OUR PICNICKING TABLES AND SITES SHOULD BE AVAILABLE. AVAILABLE FOR THE PUBLIC JUST TO COME AND USE. OKAY. AND IT'S THE SAME THING WITH THE NEW, LIKE DEER VALLEY, SOUTH OF BAILEY. LIKE, ARE THESE SITES WE SHOULD BE, YOU KNOW, DOING MORE RESEARCH ON AND COMING BACK TO SAY IF WE WERE GOING TO CHARGE FOR GROUP, ALLOW GROUP PICNIC RESERVATIONS? IT'S NOT A RED, BUT IT'S A GREEN TIMES 2. SO IT'S IMPLEMENTING THE INCREASE OF SURCHARGES. WE REALLY NEED TO LOOK AT CORPORATE OR FOR-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS THAT COME IN THE PARK FOR FILMING, HAVING RACES, AND CHARGING THEM A FEE THAT, I MEAN, BECAUSE SOME OF THAT WORK, THEY'RE USING THE PARK AS A RESOURCE TO BENEFIT THEIR ORGANIZATION, AND WITHOUT US AS A RESOURCE, THEN WHAT THEY'RE DOING CANNOT BE DONE. AND THERE SHOULD BE MORE OF A FEE TO IT AND MORE OF A SO I THINK EXPLORING WHAT THAT COULD BE. IF ANYONE'S FILMING IN THE PARK, I THINK FILMING FEES FEES, BUT IT'S REALLY DOING SOMETHING THAT'S DIFFERENT BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, ARE YOU AN AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAM OR A SCHOOL THAT'S PUTTING ON AN EVENT HERE VERSUS A COMPANY, AND REALLY SEEING HOW WE CAN INCREASE THE FEES ON THAT SIDE. AND I DO UNDERSTAND THERE ARE GOING TO BE SOME VALUE-BASED FEES THAT AS AS A PARK DISTRICT THAT WE ARE ALWAYS GOING TO WANT TO SUBSIDIZE BECAUSE THEY ALIGN WITH OUR MISSIONS AND OUR VALUES. BUT I DEFINITELY THINK AS FAR AS WHAT WE HAVE SEEN IN THE PAST IN OPERATIONS COMMITTEE THAT THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY THERE. SO GREEN TIMES 2. I AGREE. WELL, I JUST SAY THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THIS IS SUPER, SUPER HELPFUL. I THINK I APPRECIATE KATIE IN PRESENTING LIKE THERE'S TWO PATHS FOR US, RIGHT? WE CAN CONTINUE KIND OF THIS EXPENDITURE GROWTH THAT'S UNSUSTAINABLE, BUT THERE'S THIS OPPORTUNITY TO KIND OF COURSE CORRECT AND IN JUST A FEW YEARS GET OURSELVES TO A PLACE WHERE WE HAVE EXTRA GENERAL FUND MONEY THAT CAN GET PUT TOWARDS PROJECTS AND ONE-TIME EXPENSES AGAIN SOON. SO I THINK THIS REALLY HELPS US TO GUIDE OUR WORK TO GET THERE, AND WE'LL BE COMING BACK WITH ADDITIONAL SORT OF DECISION-MAKING MOMENTS. BUT I JUST WANT TO APPRECIATE YOU ALL BECAUSE THIS IS HARD WORK AND THESE THINGS HAVE TRADEOFFS. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. CAN I JUST SAY ONE LAST THING? AND I THINK THE REASON WHY WE WERE ALL RUNNING OUT OF GREEN CIRCLES IS BECAUSE WE VALUE OUR STAFF'S EXPERTISE, AND WE'RE REALLY LOOKING FOR PEOPLE TO LOOK INTO THEIR DEPARTMENTS BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONES WHO ARE DAY-TO-DAY ON THE JOB AND TO COME UP WITH DIFFERENT IDEAS. AND I THINK WHAT WE DO OR AT LEAST WHAT I DO ENJOY TODAY [02:00:01] IS LIKE UNDERSTANDING AND UNDERSTANDING THOSE DIFFICULT CHOICES THAT OUR DIFFERENT DIRECTORS, OUR DIFFERENT DIVISIONS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE. AND THEN LOOKING TO SEE IF THERE WAS SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ABLE TO ADD IN THIS, OR MAYBE THERE WAS AN IDEA. SO THIS, I THINK, WAS A GOOD PROCESS, AND THANK YOU FOR LAYING IT OUT IN A WAY THAT THAT'S REALLY UNDERSTANDABLE. AND I THINK THESE DIFFERENT MATERIALS TOO, ESPECIALLY THE SLIDES, WILL HELP EVERYONE ELSE WHO'S TUNING IN OR WHO WILL TUNE IN LATER TO THIS TO REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT HAS HAPPENED OVER TIME AND HOW WE NEED TO MAKE FORWARD SO WE'RE NOT IN A SIMILAR POSITION TO SOME OF THE OTHER AGENCIES. THAT'S A REALLY WONDERFUL PLACE TO END, JUST CAPTURING THAT SPIRIT OF STAFF HAS BROUGHT FORWARD THESE IDEAS. AND WHAT I HEARD BOTH FROM YOU AND ALSO FROM ANOTHER DIRECTOR ON THE BREAK IS A GENERAL SENSE OF SUPPORT OF STAFF IN THEIR COLLECTIVE BEST JUDGMENT AROUND HOW TO MOVE FORWARD WITH ALL OF THESE IDEAS. I'M IMAGINING THAT SOME WILL BE EASIER TO ANALYZE AND SOME WILL BE A LITTLE BIT HARDER, AND THAT YOU'RE GOING TO COME BACK TO THE BOARD AS A PART OF THE BUDGET PROCESS WITH HERE'S WHAT WE'RE ABLE TO DO AND HERE'S WHAT WE'RE DELAYING. OKAY, WHY DON'T WE TRANSITION? YOU WANT TO TRANSITION THIS? YEAH. WE WILL NOW DO PUBLIC COMMENT. LET'S GO AHEAD AND HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THOSE WHO ARE IN THE ROOM, AND THEN IF THERE'S ANYONE ONLINE THAT REALLY WANTS TO DO PUBLIC COMMENT NOW BEFORE WE BREAK FOR LUNCH, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. OTHERWISE, WE WILL CONTINUE PUBLIC COMMENT TO AFTER LUNCH, SO THERE WILL BE AN OPPORTUNITY, BUT YOU ONLY GET TO SPEAK SPEAK ONCE, SO WE WILL BE KEEPING TRACK. SO YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO DO TWO PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR THIS PERIOD. I WILL SAY WE'RE NOT BREAKING TO LUNCH NEXT. WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING THE CPP FRAMEWORK NEXT. OKAY. OKAY. PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS TOPIC, RIGHT? OH, OKAY. SORRY, I WAS CONFUSED WITH THE AGENDA. OKAY. I THINK THE FOLKS THAT WANTED TO DO THE REMOTE COMMENT WAS FOR ITEM 2, WHICH IS THE NEXT AGENDA. PERFECT. OKAY, SO I'M NOT SO SURE ABOUT THAT, BUT YOU TOO, YOU'RE PRETTY SURE? OKAY, GOOD. COOL. OKAY, ALL RIGHT, LET'S GET THROUGH, LET'S GET THROUGH PUBLIC COMMENT AND SEE WHERE THAT TAKES US. AS A REMINDER, OKAY, THERE, THERE'S SOMEONE IN, IN THE ZOOM ROOM AND IN PERSON, AND YOU CAN ALSO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENTS THROUGH CLERK OF THE BOARD THANK YOU. CLERK OF THE BOARD AT EBPARKS.ORG. SO, KEVIN SMALLMAN. THANK YOU, BOARD AND STAFF. SO DURING, I GUESS, THE LAST PORTION OF THIS STUDY SESSION, SOME THOUGHTS CAME TO MIND. ABOUT PARKING FEES AND LIKE WHAT IS A PARKING FEE AND WHY DOES THAT LIKE SEND A RED FLAG INTO MY BRAIN. IN LIKE MY WORLD OF TEACHING PHYSICAL EDUCATION AND BEING AN EDUCATOR, OUR JOB, LIKE MY JOB IS TO MAKE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR MOVEMENT AND ACTIVITY AND HEALTH AS ACCESSIBLE AS POSSIBLE. SO AS A TEACHER, WE'RE LIKE CONSTANTLY THINKING ABOUT BARRIERS TO ENTRY, THINGS THAT ARE GETTING IN THE WAY. AND THE PARKING FEE THING FEELS LIKE INITIALLY TRIGGERS A RED FLAG OF A BARRIER TO ENTRY. I THINK, THERE'S LIKE, THERE'S A SOCIOECONOMIC CONVERSATION THERE, BUT THERE'S ALSO JUST LIKE, I CAN PAY TO GO AND GET INTO A PARK. BUT IT DOES SOMETIMES QUESTION, WILL IT BE A BARRIER FOR ME TO WANT TO DO IT THAT DAY IF IT'S A SHORT TRIP, OR IF IT'S JUST ME, DOES IT DICTATE WHICH PARKS I CHOOSE TO GO TO? SO I THINK ABOUT THAT PART OF IT AND JUST IN GENERAL, LIKE, I WANT PEOPLE TO HAVE TO THINK ABOUT, "I WANT TO GO INTO A PARK. LET ME JUST DO IT," RIGHT? LIKE, LET'S TAKE AS MANY OF THOSE BARRIERS OUT OF THE EQUATION AS POSSIBLE. AND AS A TAXPAYER, I'M LIKE, MY GUT CHECK IS THAT SEVERAL MILLION DOLLARS YOU TALKED ABOUT RAISING FROM PARKING FEES IS KIND OF SMALL CHANGE IN COMPARISON TO THE OPERATING BUDGET AND WHAT WE'RE ALREADY PAYING AS TAXPAYERS. SO LIKE, INTEGRATE IT INTO YOUR NEXT BOND MEASURE, MAKE ME PAY FOR IT, AND MAKE IT EASIER FOR EVERYBODY TO GET THERE AND DO THE THING AND ENJOY THE PARK. SO IF YOUR GOAL IS GETTING AS MANY PEOPLE INTO THE PARKS AS POSSIBLE AND ENJOYING THE SPACE AND LOVING THE PARKS, LIKE, WHAT IS EVERY ELEMENT THAT HELPS YOU ACHIEVE THAT GOAL? THE OTHER ONE THAT HASN'T BEEN TALKED [02:05:02] ABOUT TODAY IS LIKE THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM LAST YEAR OF MEASURE WW FUNDING AND HOW CAN LIKE THAT SCROOGE MCDUCK-SIZED MOUNTAIN OF MONEY BE USED FOR SOMETHING TODAY INSTEAD OF TOMORROW. AND I HAVEN'T HEARD ANY CONVERSATIONS ABOUT IT IN THESE THREE STUDY SESSIONS. I'M WONDERING A LITTLE BIT WHY. AND IN MY BRAIN, LIKE, I LOOKED AT THE WW PROJECT LIST. THERE'S LOTS OF GREAT PROJECTS ON IT. IT DOESN'T LIKE, MY GUT CHECK IS THERE ISN'T ENOUGH MONEY TO DO ALL OF THOSE PROJECTS ANYWAYS, LIKE, BOTH IN ACQUISITION ACQUISITION AND IN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS. SO WHY DO THE ACQUISITION PROJECTS GET TO KEEP THEIR POT OF MONEY, BUT THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS, WHICH COST MORE THAN WE THOUGHT, NOT GET MORE MONEY? ANYWAYS, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. KELLY ABREU, ARE YOU SPEAKING ON D1? ALL RIGHT. WELL, IF WE'RE GOING TO GET INTO PARKING, I'M ALL IN ON PARKING. PARKING HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE NUMBER ONE ISSUE AT MISSION PEAK. AND THE LEADING EXPERT WORLDWIDE WHO WROTE THE BOOK, LITERALLY WROTE THE BOOK ON PARKING, HIS NAME IS PROFESSOR DONALD SHOUP OF UCLA, DISTINGUISHED PROFESSOR OF URBAN PLANNING. THE NAME OF THE BOOK. THE HIGH COST OF FREE PARKING. IRONICALLY ENOUGH, INSANITY IS ALL OVER AMERICA WHEN IT COMES TO PARKING. FOR EXAMPLE, AT THE EAST DUBLIN-PLEASANTON BART STATION, ALAMEDA COUNTY BUILT A $35 MILLION WHITE ELEPHANT, COMPLETELY USELESS PARKING LOT RIGHT NEXT TO THE BART STATION BECAUSE THEY HAD 02,000 PARKING SPACES ALREADY THERE. AFTER THE PANDEMIC, THOSE PARKING SPACES WERE MOSTLY EMPTY. AND THEN THEY BUILT ANOTHER 500 FOR $35 MILLION. THIS IS INSANITY. PEOPLE THINK THAT YOUR PARK DISTRICT SHOULD HAND OUT FREE PARKING. IN FACT, THE EXACT OPPOSITE IS TRUE. YOU SHOULD BE CHARGING MONEY, CHARGING PEOPLE MONEY WITH THE GOAL OF HAVING LIKE A 15%, AND THAT'S A VERY CALCULATED ECONOMIC BUSINESS MOTIVATION TO HAVE 15% EMPTY SPACES. AND YOU SHOULD HAVE VARIABLE PRICING. PEOPLE, THEN THE LAST PERSON TO SHOW UP AT THE PARK IF THEY HAVE ENOUGH MONEY, WILL PAY THE FEE, WHATEVER THE MARKET-BASED DEMAND FEE. THAT'S HOW THEY DO BTS CONCERT TICKETS NOWADAYS. IF YOU WANT TO GO WATCH ANYTHING, ANY LIVE PERFORMANCE OR AN NFL FOOTBALL GAME OR THE WORLD CUP, YOU WILL BE CHARGED MARKET-BASED PRICING. AND YOU CAN DO THE SAME THING WITH YOUR PARKING SPACES. AND BY THE WAY, THE IDEA OF DOING YOUR OWN PAVING, IF DOING YOUR OWN PAVING WAS SO GOOD AND PAYING YOUR OWN LABOR. THE CITY OF FREMONT HAS 500 MILES OF ROADS AND THEY PAY OUTSIDE CONTRACTORS. ALAMEDA COUNTY PAYS OUTSIDE CONTRACTORS. I DON'T KNOW WHY EVERYBODY ISN'T PAYING DOING IT THEMSELVES, BUT APPARENTLY IT'S BETTER TO HIRE CONTRACTORS. I DON'T KNOW WHY. AND THEN IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MONEY, THE BIGGEST PROJECT THAT YOU'RE RUNNING IS RIGHT HERE ACROSS THE STREET. THIS THING IS ABOUT A LITTLE OVER HALF DONE. I JUST DID A SURVEY OF 1 OR 2 OF YOUR WORKERS, AND IT'S A LITTLE OVER HALF DONE. AND THIS THING COSTS A LOT OF MONEY. I NOW HAVE A COMPARISON FOR YOU. FREMONT IS PROPOSING TO DO A $50 MILLION EVENT CENTER, WHICH IS A BIG FANCY PUBLIC BUILDING THAT REQUIRES A LOT OF PUBLIC SAFETY IN IT, AND THAT'S $2,800 A SQUARE FOOT. AND I THINK IF IF YOU FIGURE OUT HOW MUCH YOU'RE PAYING PER SQUARE FOOT FOR THIS THING, YOU MIGHT BE AT THAT NUMBER BY NOW, IN WHICH CASE YOU'RE NOT DOING THAT GREAT BECAUSE $2,800 IS A CADILLAC NUMBER FOR THE PRICE OF NEW CONSTRUCTION. AND THIS THING IS NOT EVEN NEW CONSTRUCTION. IT'S RECONSTRUCTION. OR IF YOU CAN BEAT THAT, IF YOU CAN GET WELL BELOW THAT, YOU'RE DOING GREAT. AND WE'LL SEE WHEN IT GETS DONE. THANK YOU. MR. PEEPLES, IF YOU CAN UNMUTE YOURSELF, YOU HAVE 3 MINUTES. THIS IS BOB PEEPLES. I WANT TO THANK THE STAFF FOR, YOU KNOW, A VERY COMPREHENSIVE AND USEFUL ANALYSIS AND, YOU KNOW, BASIS FOR MOVING FORWARD TOWARDS 2027 AND FUTURE YEARS. I'M, YOU KNOW, COMMENTING ON THE FIRST PART THAT WAS COVERED THIS MORNING, I THINK YOU'RE WORKING ON THE MARGINS ON A LOT OF THESE COSTS, YOU KNOW, TO TRY TO PARE SOME COSTS HERE AND THERE. AND I'M NOT DISAGREEING WITH THAT. I [02:10:01] THINK IT'S GOOD. I THINK YOU NEED TO ALSO BEGIN TO IDENTIFY NEW SOURCES OF FUNDING, BOTH FOR OPERATIONAL COSTS AND FOR CAPITAL COSTS. THE OPERATIONAL COSTS, YOU KNOW, ARE LIKELY TO CONTINUE TO INCREASE, YOU KNOW, UNLESS THE DISTRICT IS ABLE TO ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE DRIVERS THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED. THEY, AS I SAY, WE NEED TO BE LOOKING FOR NEW SOURCES OF FUNDING. AND I WOULD SUGGEST THAT AN ADDITIONAL SCENARIO, BUDGET SCENARIO TO LOOK AT, WHICH WOULD BE TO PULL THE FUNDING FOR FISCAL '27 AND '28 FROM SCENARIO 1 THAT WAS PROPOSED AND THEN DURING THAT, THE NEXT 3 YEARS, 2 AND A HALF YEARS, WHATEVER IT IS, LOOK VERY CLOSELY AT TRYING TO COME UP WITH ADDITIONAL FUNDING SOURCES, BE IT A BOND MEASURE, A PARCEL TAX, A MORE EFFECTIVE GRANT PROGRAM THAT CAN DEAL WITH THE VAGARIES OF THAT PROGRAM AND THE SHORT TIMEFRAMES THAT ARE INVOLVED, AND POSSIBLY SOME OTHER MEANS. YOU KNOW, ASSESS THEM, MAKE SOME DECISIONS ABOUT WHICH ONES WOULD BE DESIRABLE TO GO FORWARD, BOTH FOR OPERATIONAL AND FOR CAPITAL COSTS, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, IF NECESSARY, SEEK THE VOTER APPROVAL FOR ADDITIONAL BOND MEASURES OR PARCEL TAXES OR WHATEVER IT IS. THAT WOULD INCREASE THE FREEDOM OF HOW MUCH MONEY COULD BE SPENT IN FUTURE YEARS, YOU KNOW, FISCAL '29, '30, AND BEYOND. AND IT WOULD HAVE A MUCH MORE SECURE SOURCE AND MUCH MORE PREDICTABLE SOURCE OF FUNDING TO COVER THOSE WHAT ARE GOING TO BE INCREASING COSTS, I THINK, NO MATTER HOW YOU LOOK AT IT. THANK YOU. SCOTT BARTABOW, YOU HAVE 3 MINUTES. THANK YOU, BOARD AND STAFF, FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT. I'D LIKE TO THANK STAFF FOR THE THOROUGH PACKAGE THAT WAS PUT TOGETHER AND THE PRESENTATION AND THE BOARD FOR THE ENGAGEMENT ON THE DISCUSSION. I THINK THIS HAS ALL BEEN VERY WELL DONE AND MUCH APPRECIATED. I WOULD ECHO QUESTIONS ON WHY THERE HASN'T BEEN MUCH DISCUSSION ABOUT WW AND THE FLEXIBILITY THERE. TODAY, IT WAS SHOWN A NUMBER OF DEVELOPMENT-TYPE PROJECTS, PROJECTS THAT THE BOARD HAS DISCRETION ON WITH WW FUNDS. THAT THEY COULD BE SPENDING ON THAT. AND I THINK AT SOME POINT IT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR THAT TO BE ADDRESSED LATER TODAY, HOPEFULLY. AND I'M SURE IT WILL COME UP IN SUBSEQUENT BUDGET DISCUSSIONS. I WOULD ECHO THE COMMENTS BY MR. PEEPLES ON, YEAH, FUTURE BOND MEASURES AND PARCEL TAX. AND YOU HAVE SPOKE TO THAT BEFORE, BUT I WOULD SEE THAT NOT SO MUCH IN 2027 AND 2028, WHICH SEEMS TO BE THE FOCUS ON TODAY'S WORKSHOP ON SHORTER-TERM FUNDING. BUT YEAH, LONGER, THOSE ARE SIGNIFICANT STRUCTURAL ISSUES AND THAT'LL BE CHALLENGING. TO PIGGYBACK ON THE PARKING, I THINK MR. ABREU AND HIS COMMENTS ABOUT KIND OF THE ECONOMICS OF THAT, I THINK THAT STRICTLY APPLIES VERY WELL IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT STREET PARKING IN URBAN AREAS. HOWEVER, WITH THE PARK DISTRICT, I THINK THE OBJECTIVE THERE IS TO GET PEOPLE OUT INTO THE PARKS. AND I UNDERSTAND, YES, THAT THAT COULD GENERATE PERHAPS SEVERAL MILLION IN REVENUE. BUT I THINK IT WOULD NEED TO BE USED JUDICIOUSLY SUCH THAT IT DOES NOT PREVENT A BARRIER FOR PEOPLE USING THE PARKS. AND I THINK RECOVERING THAT REVENUE THROUGH OTHER MEANS WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE THAN PARKING FEES. SO THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT, AND I APPRECIATE ALL YOUR EFFORT. NO MORE PUBLIC COMMENT. ALL RIGHT. I THOUGHT WE WERE BREAKING FOR LUNCH AROUND THIS TIME, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE WE MAYBE HAVE ANOTHER 45 MINUTES UNTIL LUNCH, IS THAT RIGHT? YEAH, I THINK WE CAN GET THE NEXT ITEM DOWN TO 45 MINUTES, OR WE CAN BREAK FOR LUNCH AND THEN HAVE THIS ITEM AFTER. I THINK THAT MIGHT BE GOOD BECAUSE I THINK WE DID PROMISE SOME FOLKS THAT WERE HERE THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO COMMENT ON THIS ITEM. SO THEN WE WON'T CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT, AND IF THEY'RE THERE AFTER LUNCH, THEN THEY'LL BE WELCOME TO MAKE COMMENT. [02:15:02] AND WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO DO A 30-MINUTE LUNCH. YEAH, WHY DON'T WE DO A 30-MINUTE LUNCH, SO UNTIL 12:45? YEAH. COOL. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. GREAT. ALL RIGHT. WE ARE CONTINUING PUBLIC COMMENT, SO WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS CALL US BACK TO ORDER BECAUSE I BELIEVE WE DO HAVE A FEW PUBLIC COMMENTS. THIS IS FOR ITEM D1. WE WILL ALSO HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEM D2. ANYONE WHO HAS ALREADY COMMENTED DURING PUBLIC COMMENT FOR D1 WILL BE INVITED FOR ITEM D2, BUT UNFORTUNATELY WE AREN'T ACCEPTING ADDITIONAL SECOND COMMENTS FROM THOSE WHO HAVE ALREADY PREVIOUSLY COMMENTED FOR D1. AMELIA MARSHALL, IF YOU ARE GOING TO BE COMMENTING ON D1, PLEASE, PLEASE PROCEED NOW. YOU HAVE 3 MINUTES. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS AMELIA MARSHALL, SPEAKING TODAY AS AN INDIVIDUAL. MAY I REMIND THE BOARD THAT IN A RECENT MEETING, A PARK STAFF PERSON CAME FORWARD TO SPEAK AGAINST THE PILOT PROGRAM FOR CASHLESS PARK ENTRY. IT WAS SIGNED AT THE FRONT DOOR. I BELIEVE THAT THIS WOULD BE ENHANCED BY THE IDEA OF USING THESE VERITECH MACHINES THAT WOULD PRESUMABLY BE CONNECTED TO STARLINK. FOR THOSE UNFAMILIAR WITH STARLINK, IT IS A SWARM OF SATELLITES, AN ENTERPRISE PARTLY OWNED BY TECH OLIGARCH ELON MUSK, AND THOSE SATELLITES ARE HATED BY ASTRONOMERS. I FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THE SWEEPING GENERALIZATION THAT THE PUBLIC HATES PAYING FOR PARKING, AND IT WOULD CERTAINLY BE A BARRIER TO ACCESS, PARTICULARLY THE FOLKS THAT THE PARK STAFF PERSON WAS ALLUDING TO TRADITIONALLY UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES WHO ARE A PRIORITY FOR GRANTING ACCESS TO THE PARK DISTRICTS. IF THE BOARD WANTS THE PUBLIC TO LOVE THEM AND VOTE FOR A FUTURE TAX MEASURE BOND ISSUE, IT WOULD BE A BAD IDEA TO DOUBLE DOWN ON PARKING FEES. IT WOULD BE PENNYWISE AND POUND-FOOLISH. I CAN SEE MAJOR CHARLES LEE TILDEN ROLLING OVER IN HIS GRAVE IF THERE WERE SUDDENLY MARKED PARKING METERS IN TILDEN PARK. PARK AND PARKING CONTROL OFFICERS WRITING CITATIONS. SO I WOULD SAY, LOOK FOR OTHER SOURCES OF REVENUE ENHANCEMENT. THANK YOU. AND THAT'S IT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AT THIS TIME. OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU, EVERYONE. WE WILL NOW PROCEED WITH THE AGENDA. ALL RIGHT. SO FOR OUR NEXT PIECE, WE'RE GOING TO BE TURNING TO THE PRIORITIZATION FRAMEWORK. THIS A CONTINUATION OF THE CONVERSATION STARTED ON MAY 1ST. FIRST OFF, WE HAVE A QUICK PRESENTATION FROM MAX WITH REGARDS TO WHAT WAS HEARD FROM THE BOARD, AND I BELIEVE THERE'S AN ATTACHMENT TO YOUR AGENDA WITH MORE INFORMATION ON THAT, BUT I'LL TURN IT OVER TO MAX TO SPEAK MORE. THANK YOU SO MUCH, MEGAN. I'M GOING TO BE A LITTLE BRIEFER THAN I WAS PLANNING JUST TO, LIKE, KEEP US ON TRACK HERE, BUT, YOU KNOW, GENERALLY, I JUST WANT TO START BY APPRECIATING THE DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD ON MAY 1ST ABOUT THE CPP. AND I THINK THERE WAS A FEW THINGS JUST TO NOTE. ONE WAS THAT ALL OR NOTHING SCORING WAS CHALLENGING. AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I KNOW I FEEL MYSELF TOO IS THAT WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO DO MULTIPLE BENEFIT WORK IN THE DISTRICT. AND SO BEING ABLE TO HIGHLIGHT PROJECTS THAT MIGHT HAVE, YOU KNOW, SOME NATURAL RESOURCE VALUE, SOME RECREATIONAL VALUE, AND THE NUANCES IN THAT WERE NOT WELL DEPICTED IN OUR EXISTING CPP. SO I JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT ESPECIALLY AROUND EQUITY AND NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION, IT FELT LIKE THERE WAS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR MORE DYNAMIC SCORING. I ALSO WANTED TO CALL OUT THAT THERE WERE SOME TOPICS THAT WERE ADJACENT TO EQUITY THAT MIGHT DESERVE A SEPARATE CATEGORY, THAT THERE WAS I HEARD BOTH THE DESIRE TO LIKE KEEP EQUITY REALLY FOCUSED ON WHAT THAT IS, BUT THEN ALSO TO CAPTURE SOME ADJACENT TOPICS LIKE HOUSING AND TRANSIT AND ACCESS THAT COULD HELP INFORM DECISION-MAKING AS WELL. AND THEN THE OTHER THING THAT I HEARD WAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO LIKE CONSIDER HOW WE WEIGHT PROJECTS. AND THAT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT MIGHT BE CONSIDERED IS THAT HAVING [02:20:01] EXISTING FUNDING OR OPPORTUNITIES FOR FUNDING, YOUR BOARD MIGHT WANT TO WEIGHT THAT HIGHER, ESPECIALLY IN THIS TIME WHERE WE DON'T HAVE OTHER FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES. SO I, YOU KNOW, I THINK I'LL KIND OF LEAVE IT THERE JUST TO HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE HEARD IN THAT FIRST SESSION. AGAIN, THERE'S MORE IN YOUR PACKET ABOUT ALL THE THINGS THAT WE HEARD AND MAYBE WE CAN JUST MOVE FORWARD TO SORT OF WHAT WE'RE INTERESTED IN DIGGING INTO A LITTLE DEEPER TODAY. DOES THAT SOUND GOOD? ORIGINALLY WE HAD PLANNED TO HAVE A 45-MINUTE BOARD DISCUSSION. JUST TO KEEP TO TIME AND GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF A BREAK BETWEEN YOUR CLOSED SESSION, WE'RE GOING TO WORK TO KEEP TO 25 MINUTES FOR THIS PORTION. AND TWO OF THESE QUESTIONS YOU SEE ON TOP, WHICH OF THE CURRENT 10 CRITERIA SEEM OVERWEIGHTED, WHICH SEEM UNDERWEIGHTED, WHAT IS MISSING OR NOT REPRESENTED, ARE THERE ANY COMMUNITY OR VOTER PRIORITIES THAT SHOULD BE SHAPING THESE CRITERIA BUT AREN'T YET. THESE TWO QUESTIONS WERE GOING TO BE GETTING INTO ON MAY 1ST, BUT WE JUST DIDN'T HAVE THE TIME AND WE WANTED TO BRING THEM BACK JUST IN CASE THERE WAS MORE THAT YOU HAD TO SAY ON THIS. AND ALSO ON MAY 1ST, SOMETHING THAT CAME UP A FEW DIFFERENT TIMES THAT THE BOARD WANTED TO BRING BACK AND WE THOUGHT LET'S JUST BRING IT BACK TODAY FOR THE BOARD TO HAVE A CHANCE TO START WEIGHING IN ON THIS IS WHAT DO YOU WANT STAFF TO KEEP IN MIND WHEN POTENTIALLY REVISING CRITERIA DEFINITIONS? SO THESE ARE SOME BIG QUESTIONS. YOU HAVE ALREADY HAD A CHANCE TO START WEIGHING IN ON THEM, BUT WE WANTED TO GIVE YOUR BOARD A CHANCE TO SPEAK MORE TO THESE QUESTIONS. IS THAT CLEAR? AND JUST 3 MINUTES. FEASIBLE RIGHT NOW? AND KAREN WILL BE TAKING NOTES AS YOU SPEAK. ALL RIGHT, WELL, LET'S GIVE IT A TRY. ARE THERE ANY YEP, I'LL PAUSE. OLIVIA, IS THERE ANYTHING DO YOU WANT TO GET US STARTED? SURE, LET'S SO WE'RE WHAT, GOING TO HAVE ABOUT 20 MINUTES FOR BOARD COMMENTS AND DISCUSSIONS. SO IS THERE ANYONE THAT WANTS TO JUMP IN? I GUESS AS A REFRESH, SO WE'RE GOING BACK TO REMEMBER WHEN WE WENT THROUGH EACH OF THE SCORING CRITERIA FOR THE PROJECTS? WE HAD A PRETTY ROBUST DISCUSSION ON MAY 1ST. SINCE THEN, WE ALSO HAD OUR BOARD PRIORITIES WHERE WE WERE ABLE TO TALK ABOUT SOME OF THOSE PROJECTS. AND SO NOW IS OUR TIME TO KIND OF COME TOGETHER AND REALLY HELP PROVIDE STAFF DIRECTION. ELECTRICITY! ISN'T THAT FUN? ENERGY SAVINGS. WE'RE STREAMING. HELLO? IT'S NOW WORKING. [02:25:55] JOHN, CAN YOU HEAR US? I CAN. OKAY. WE HAD A POWER OUTAGE. HOLD ON. JOHN, DON'T WORRY, WE PAUSED THE MEETING TO GET BACK ONLINE. ALL RIGHT. SO YOU HAVE NOT MISSED ANYTHING. OKAY. EXCEPT FOR THE POWER OUTAGE. I HEARD THAT SURPRISED REACTION TO IT. IT SOUNDS LIKE WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO CONTINUE BECAUSE THE RECORDING IS STILL HAPPENING AS LONG AS DIRECTORS HAVE THE QUESTIONS IN FRONT OF THEM. DOES EVERYBODY HAVE THE QUESTIONS IN FRONT OF THEM? THEY'RE IN YOUR BINDER. AND IF YOU DON'T, COULD YOU GIVE A LITTLE WAVE IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE QUESTIONS? IT'S RIGHT BEFORE LUNCH. WE DON'T NORMALLY EVEN GET TO SEE THE SCREENS, BUT WE DO NORMALLY HAVE LAPTOPS, SO THIS IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. ARE PEOPLE OKAY WITH NOT SEEING THE SO WE'RE ONLINE, THE TECHNOLOGY IS WORKING EXCEPT FOR OUR SCREENS. I DON'T SEE ANY OBJECTIONS FROM MEMBERS [02:30:01] OF THE BOARD, LET'S TRY TO MOVE FORWARD AND SEE HOW IT WORKS. SO WE ARE LOOKING AT THIS ONE SLIDE WITH THE QUESTIONS, AND WE'RE HELPING OUR NEIGHBORS FIND THE SLIDE, SO MAYBE JUST ONE MORE MOMENT. CAN YOU GO THE OTHER DIRECTION, LINDA? IT'S THE SLIDE RIGHT BEFORE LUNCH. OKAY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND GIVE IT A TRY AGAIN. ALRIGHT. SO WE ARE ON THESE QUESTIONS. I THINK SOME OF THE BIG ONES WERE WHAT'S MISSING OR NOT REPRESENTED, ARE THERE COMMUNITY OR VOTER PRIORITIES THAT SHOULD BE SHAPING THESE CRITERIA BUT AREN'T YET? AND THEN THE BIG ONE WAS WHAT DO YOU WANT STAFF TO KEEP IN MIND WHEN POTENTIALLY REVISING CRITERIA DEFINITIONS? I'LL TRY TO START WITH SOMETHING THAT MIGHT BE A LITTLE, HOPEFULLY A SOFTBALL HERE. I THINK LINDA BROUGHT IT UP INITIALLY WHEN WE WERE MEETING ON MAY 1ST. BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS AN INTERESTING POINT ABOUT THE TOTAL SCORING IS WHAT, 135 OR 140 POINTS, BUT IS THERE A WAY TO MAKE IT 100 POINTS? YES. YES. WE CAN DO ANYTHING. AND JUST TO KEEP TO TIME, LET'S SAY WE HAVE ABOUT 20 MINUTES FOR THIS, SO IT'S 1:05 NOW. NOW, AND SO UNTIL ABOUT 1:25. AND IF YOU CAN KEEP YOUR COMMENTS TO ABOUT 3 MINUTES, THAT WOULD BE APPRECIATED. ALL RIGHT, I'LL TRY TO KEEP THE BALL ROLLING FOR US. SO THIS ONE MIGHT NOT BE AS MUCH OF A SOFTBALL AS THINKING ABOUT THE POINTS STRUCTURE, BUT I THINK, COLIN HAD ALSO BROUGHT UP A REALLY GOOD POINT ABOUT ROTARY CLUB AND YOU KNOW, I THINK THE OBJECTIVE NATURE OF HAVING THE SCORING CRITERIA IS HELPFUL, BUT INEVITABLY THERE'S ALWAYS SOME DIFFERENT PROJECTS THAT MAYBE, YOU KNOW, THERE MIGHT BE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE SCORING. AND WHILE I THINK IT'S, YOU KNOW, THIS IDEA OF ALWAYS HAVING AN OBJECTIVE, NEUTRAL EVALUATION, THERE'S ALWAYS INHERENTLY SOME TYPE OF BIAS IN THAT, SO THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME PART OF THE PROCESS WHERE I THINK COLLINS' ROTARY POINT CAN COME INTO PLAY, OR MAYBE SOME OTHER CRITERIA CAN COME INTO PLAY. AND I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS WE TALKED ABOUT IS LIKE, THE SCORING IS JUST THERE TO SUPPORT YOUR BOARD, BUT YOUR BOARD HAS A SIGNIFICANT EXPERTISE KNOWING THE COMMUNITIES YOU REPRESENT. SO YOU'RE LIKE, YOU DON'T HAVE TO JUST MOVE EXACTLY WHAT SCORES THE HIGHEST FORWARD. YOU CAN TAKE TAKE THAT INFORMATION AND THEN PUT ON TOP OF THAT, THAT UNDERSTANDING OF THE COMMUNITY THAT YOU BRING. AND THAT'S TO ME, THAT'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO INCORPORATE THAT TOO. FOR THE NOTATION, ROTARY IS A COMBINATION OF JUST SHEER DEMAND FOR AN EXPERIENCE OR ITS POPULARITY? SO I WILL SHARE ALSO IN THE PAST, YOU KNOW, THERE'S THE PROCESS THAT WE HAD LOOKED AT. SO I THINK THAT MIGHT BE ANOTHER THIRD POINT THAT FLOWCHART WHERE IT SHOWED LIKE BOARD INVOLVEMENT. AND I THINK LIKE THE INITIAL POINT OF BOARD INVOLVEMENT WAS DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS. SO I THINK ALSO UPDATING THAT PROCESS FLOWCHART. AND I THINK WHERE THIS, QUOTE, ROTARY, OR LIKE THE, THE DEMAND AND THE POPULARITY COME INTO PLAY, WHERE THAT MIGHT BE IN THE FLOWCHART. BECAUSE I THINK OVER THE PAST 5 YEARS, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN WAS OR 4 YEARS, THIS WAS PASSED IN 2022, WAS THAT THE SCORING FOR THE CAPITAL PROJECTS IS WHAT WAS USED TO MOVE CAPITAL PROJECTS FORWARD, AND THERE WASN'T ANY IN THE PROCESS, LIKE INPUT POINTS. BOARD INPUT POINTS. ALRIGHT, HOPEFULLY SOMEONE ELSE IS READY TO JUMP IN. I'M JUST TRYING TO HELP, YOU KNOW, STIR THE POT, I GUESS. WELL, I'LL TRY TO KEEP IT. I WAS GOING BACK AND LOOKING AT MY NOTES SO I DON'T KNOW IF I'M GOING IN THE FLOW HERE, BUT I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I FELT, I GUESS, I WOULD BE MISSING IS POINTS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH OUR PLAN, OUR MASTER PLAN. LIKE, IF IT'S ALREADY BEEN LISTED IN THERE BEFORE, IT'S ALREADY BEEN AROUND SINCE 2013, IT'S BEEN IN 3 MASTER PLANS, YOU KNOW, THAT MAYBE I GUESS WE'RE GOING TO BE UPDATING IT, SO YOU COULD ALSO SAY, WELL, [02:35:02] LINDA, THAT'S NOT A GOOD MEASURE, BUT ALSO IF IT HAD A LAND USE PLAN SPECIFICALLY THAT SET IT ASIDE FOR HIGH AS A PRESERVE SPECIFICALLY. AGAIN, MISSION-DRIVEN. IS IT IN THE PLAN? IS IT IN THE LUP? HAS IT BEEN SET ASIDE AS A PRESERVE FOR A REASON? IT WAS GIVEN A HIGHER VALUE. ONE THING I LOOKED BACK THROUGH MY NOTES THAT WE HAD TALKED ABOUT THAT'S STILL MISSING IN HERE IS A SCORE FOR EDUCATION. IS THIS REALLY GIVING US SOMETHING FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS? DOES IT HAVE A HIGHER EDUCATION VALUE THAN ANOTHER PROJECT MIGHT HAVE? I THINK I ALSO HAD NOTED THAT COULD WE ADD FLEXIBILITY? SO INSTEAD OF A YES/NO, LIKE, COULD IT BE ON A RANGE FROM I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT INSTEAD OF IT BEING 20 OR NOTHING, COULD IT BE, YOU KNOW, COULD IT GET 13 POINTS? THERE WAS THE QUESTION WE ANSWERED, HOW IS IT GOING OVER 100? I THINK THE OTHER THING TOO IS MORE ABOUT PROCESS. SO I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT GOES, BUT WHO'S RANKING THEM AND CONSISTENCY. I THINK I USED THE EXAMPLE, I'VE DONE, YOU KNOW, FEDERAL GRANTS FOREVER AND I'M VICIOUS AND I NEVER GAVE ANYONE A SCORE OVER 89, BUT MY OTHER, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE WOULD SCORE THEM 99S. SO HOW CAN THE RANKING BE CONSISTENT? SO MAYBE THAT'S PART OF MISSING. ARE THERE COMMUNITY OR VOTER PRIORITIES THAT SHOULD BE SHAPING THESE CRITERIA THAT AREN'T? I THINK DEFINITELY YOU HIT ON IT EARLIER ABOUT HOW ARE WE GOING TO EQUATE EQUITY. I THINK EVEN SIMILAR TO CULTURAL RESOURCES, I THINK THERE ARE LISTS AND DEFINITIONS OUT THERE OF EJ COMMUNITIES. LIKE, I DON'T KNOW IF WE NEED TO INVENT OUR OWN, BUT DEFINITELY THE DEFINITION OF, YOU KNOW, ARE PEOPLE FISHING THERE FOR THEIR DINNER, CAN THEY GET THERE BECAUSE THEY THEY DON'T HAVE A CAR VERSUS MAYBE IT'S A WEALTHY COMMUNITY. SO I THINK ARE THERE PRIORITIES THAT SHOULD BE SHAPING THESE CRITERIA THAT AREN'T? SO I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S CRITERIA OUT THERE ALREADY THAT WE COULD USE. THAT'S, I GUESS, WHAT I'M ASKING. AND I GUESS YOU CAUGHT THAT THERE. OH, IS MY TIME UP? AND THEN THE OTHER ONE ON CRITERIA 2, I THINK THOSE COULD BE BROKEN INTO 2. SO CRITERIA 2 IS BOTH HABITAT AND CULTURAL. IT'S VERY EASY FOR SOMETHING TO HAVE A SHELL MOUND OR BE VERY IMPORTANT CULTURALLY BUT MAYBE NOT HAVE ANY ENDANGERED SPECIES IN IT. AND THEN THAT WOULD BE CRITERIA NUMBER 2, SEPARATE OUT. I GUESS, UNDERWEIGHTED. YEAH, SEPARATE THEM INTO TWO. THAT WAY THEY BOTH HAVE MORE EQUAL SCORING. AND THEN I HAD NOTED FROM LAST TIME ON CLIMATE PREPAREDNESS, IT'S INTERESTING BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW HOW THE CRITERIA OVERWEIGHTED. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S GETTING WEIGHTED TWICE. IF YOU LOOK AT NUMBER 4 AND NUMBER 8, THE WAY THEY'RE DEFINED, NUMBER 8, MULTI-BENEFICIAL, DOES START GETTING INTO EXPANDING THE LIFE OF THE FACILITY. WAIT, AM I LOOKING AT THE WRONG NUMBER 8. HABITAT PROTECTION, ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION, OR OTHER NEEDS. SO EVERYTHING I JUST SAID SORT OF GOES OUT THE DOOR WHEN YOU LOOK AT CRITERIA 8, MULTI-BENEFICIAL REUSE. SO SOMEHOW SEPARATING THEM, DEFINING THEM, AND I DON'T KNOW IF CLIMATE IS KIND OF TIED INTO THERE BECAUSE CERTAINLY ACCESS SEA LEVEL RISE. BUT I ALSO JUST WANTED TO ADD, IF IT HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS LIKE, LET'S SAY IT DOES HAVE SOLAR READY OR PURPLE PIPE OR SOMETHING SO THE CRITERIA I GUESS THAT MAY BE MISSING ON THE GREENHOUSE GAS OH, GEEZ. REDUCTION IN GREENHOUSE GASES SUCH AS SEQUESTERING, OR MAYBE IT HAS AN EFFICIENCY OR A SOLAR OR SOMETHING THAT WOULD HELP BRING THAT DOWN. AND ON NUMBER 5, I HAD FROM LAST TIME PARTNERSHIPS, NOT JUST SHEER DEMAND, BUT ALSO PERHAPS SHEER OPPOSITION. SHOULD BE CONSIDERED. I MEAN, WE SET AND DRIVE THE GOAL, BUT IF THERE'S SOME COMMUNITY [02:40:01] OPPOSITION, MAYBE THAT SHOULD SOMEHOW WEIGH INTO WHO THE PARTNERS ARE. ARE OUR ENVIRONMENTAL PARTNERS ON BOARD, OR ARE THEY AGAINST, OR AND THE LAST ONE I HAD, NUMBER 06, IS WHERE I THOUGHT TO PUT IT, ON OPERATING EFFICIENCIES. I THINK IT'S INTERESTING THAT SOME OF OUR PROJECTS ARE MEANT TO ADDRESS CLIMATE CHANGE, BUT THEY'RE ONLY GOING OUT TO 40 YEARS. YOU KNOW, IN THE OLD DAYS WHEN WE DID FLOODPLAIN ZONE PLANNING, IT WAS 100-YEAR FLOODS OR 200-YEAR FLOOD ZONES OR EVEN MORE THAN THAT. I THINK EVEN WITH SOME OF OUR SUPERFUND WHEN WE WERE LOOKING FOR WATER INFILTRATION THAT MIGHT MOVE TOXICS, WE WENT AS FAR AS, LIKE, 100, 200, 500-YEAR PREDICTIONS, WHICH ARE NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE. BUT NUMBER 6, OPERATING EFFICIENCY, IF THERE'S A LITTLE MORE SOMETHING BEYOND 40 YEARS AND TO GIVE SOMEHOW BREAK OUT THE SCORES. I THINK THAT'S ENOUGH OF, THOSE ARE ALL FROM THE LAST NOTES I HAD FROM THE LAST MEETING. I THINK THAT CAPTURED MOST OF THOSE. THANK YOU. AND IF IT'S HELPFUL TO FLAG IN YOUR PACKET RIGHT BEFORE ALL THE SLIDES, WE HAVE NOTES FROM WHAT WE HEARD FROM DIRECTORS ON MAY 1ST, AND SO WE'LL BE ABLE TO HOPEFULLY, IF THERE'S CONTENT THAT YOU SHARED THAT YOU'VE ALREADY SHARED ON MAY 1ST, HOPEFULLY WE'VE CAPTURED THAT THERE. AND WE REALLY WANT TO MAKE SURE DIRECTORS KNOW, LIKE, WE HEARD YOU ON MAY 1ST AND THIS IS ADDING TO THAT. IT SHOULD HAVE COME TO YOUR HOUSE, AND IT SHOULD SHOULD BE ALSO IN YOUR BINDER TODAY AT THE START OF THE SLIDES. SO IT LOOKS LIKE THIS. I DON'T SEE IT IN THE PACKET AT MY HOUSE. IF NOTHING ELSE, THE MAIN THING I JUST WANT TO EMPHASIZE IS THAT WE HEARD YOU ON MAY 1ST, AND WE'RE HOPING TO HAVE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BEYOND THAT. THERE IS THIS NEW QUESTION. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IF DIRECTORS HAVE ANYTHING THEY'D LIKE TO SHARE HERE AROUND WHAT YOU WANT STAFF TO KEEP IN MIND WHEN POTENTIALLY REVISING DEFINITIONS. THIS IS A NEW QUESTION THAT WE DIDN'T GET TO ON MAY 1ST. WELL, I GUESS I HAVE A QUESTION. SO I KNOW THE CRITERIA WE HAVE RIGHT NOW WAS PASSED BY RESOLUTION IN 2022. IF, IF THERE ARE CHANGES THAT ARE GOING TO BE MADE, IT WOULD COME BACK TO THE BOARD TO REVIEW. YEAH, THAT'S THE LAST PART OF TODAY'S AGENDA IS TALKING ABOUT THE PROCESS. SO YES, SO THEN I GUESS ONE THING THAT I'VE ALWAYS THOUGHT ABOUT WHAT PASSED IN 2022 DID NOT INCLUDE THE QUESTIONS FOR EVALUATION. SO THE BOARD NEVER APPROVED THOSE QUESTIONS FOR EVALUATION. WE ONLY APPROVED THE TOP LINE. SO I GUESS MAYBE WHEN IT COMES BACK TO THE BOARD, I THINK THAT THE RESOLUTION SHOULD INCLUDE EVERYTHING. I GUESS I'LL EXTEND, YOU KNOW, LINDA MENTIONED THE MASTER PLAN. I WOULD ALSO ADD TO THAT ANY OTHER AGREEMENTS, ANY OTHER MEMORANDUMS OF UNDERSTANDING, YOU KNOW, TAX SHARING AGREEMENTS THAT WE'VE GOT A NUMBER OF AGREEMENTS OUT THERE. YOU KNOW, I KNOW IT LOOKS LIKE THE EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT STARTED TO BE THIS COMBINED ALAMEDA AND CONTRA COSTA COUNTY ENTIRE COUNTY PARK DISTRICT, BUT IN REALITY IT WAS STITCHED TOGETHER OVER TIME. AND THROUGH THAT PROCESS WE HAVE DIFFERENT AGREEMENTS OUT THERE ACROSS THE TWO COUNTIES. AND THEN, LINDA, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU ON EDUCATIONAL VALUE. ARE YOU THINKING SPECIFICALLY IN REGARDS TO ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION AND HOW THAT'S PART OF OUR MISSION STATEMENT? YEAH, I THINK THAT, AND ALSO, YOU KNOW, I'M THINKING SORT OF YOUTH DEVELOPMENT TOO, LIKE HOW DO WE PREPARE THE NEXT GENERATION? I KIND OF SEE THOSE AS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. I THINK, DIRECTOR ECHOLS, YOU RAISED THE EDUCATION PIECE IN PARTICULAR. I REMEMBER WE WERE LOOKING THROUGH PROJECTS AND WE FELT LIKE... I AGREED WITH YOU THAT SOMETHING LIKE THE TILTON EEC SHOULD RISE TO THE TOP WHEN THERE'S THAT KIND OF EDUCATION. SO NOT ONLY I FORGET WHAT YOUR [02:45:02] QUESTION WAS NOW. YEAH, I WAS ALSO TRYING TO BRING UP THE MISSION STATEMENT. I THINK THAT WHEN WE REVIEW THIS AGAIN, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE CRITERIA, YOU KNOW, NEXT TO OUR MISSION STATEMENT AS WELL. I THINK ACTUALLY IT'S PRETTY CLOSE, BUT, YOU KNOW, JUST TO KEEP IT VERY MISSION-DRIVEN. SO WE HAVE ABOUT 7 MORE MINUTES FROM THIS FOR THIS ITEM, AND THERE ARE A FEW DIRECTORS WE HAVEN'T HEARD FROM YET. FOR THOSE DIRECTORS, I SEE DIRECTOR MERCURIO. OKAY. WE CAN'T HEAR YOU. GIVE THAT COMPUTER A MIC. MAYBE NOT ON MINE. YEAH, DIRECTOR MERCURIO. YES, SADLY THERE'S A HORRIBLE ECHO WITH THAT ONE. THAT'S NOT GOING TO WORK. YOU COULD JUST MUTE YOURSELF AND THEN HAVE YOUR SPEAKER ON. SO BECAUSE YOU'RE GETTING THE MIC FROM OH NO. YEAH, IT'S JUST BEEN WEIRD. ALL RIGHT, WE'LL TROUBLESHOOT A LITTLE BIT MORE, JOHN, BUT I THINK ELIZABETH IS ALSO READY. SURE. SO IN TERMS OF THINGS BEING UNDERWEIGHTED OR OVERWEIGHTED, I FELT PRETTY GOOD ABOUT WHERE IT IS NOW, AND ALTHOUGH WE MIGHT WANT TO MAKE SOME ADDITIONS. BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I DID NOTICE, AND I THOUGHT THAT THIS IS WHAT LINDA WAS GOING TO SAY, BUT SHE HAD A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT POINT. SO WITH THE CLIMATE PREPAREDNESS AND THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH, THOSE TOPICS ARE VERY DIFFERENT, BUT THE DESCRIPTIONS ARE AT LEAST SOMEWHAT SIMILAR. SIMILAR BECAUSE THEY BOTH ARE TALKING ABOUT INFRASTRUCTURE RESILIENCE. AND SO I WANT TO KEEP THEM BOTH, BUT I DO FEEL THAT WE SHOULD BE PRIORITIZING NATURE-BASED SOLUTIONS. SO I WANTED TO TRY TO WORK THAT IN SOME WAY TO THE EXTENT THAT THEY'RE NOT BOTH PRIORITIZING NATURE-BASED SOLUTIONS WE SHOULD BE. THE DESCRIPTION UNDER NUMBER 7 SAYS INCREASES INFRASTRUCTURE RESILIENCE TO NATURAL DISASTERS, IMPROVES WATER QUALITY AND/OR PUBLIC SAFETY. AND THEN THE CLIMATE PREPAREDNESS SUPPORTS NATURE-BASED INFRASTRUCTURE TO MITIGATE AND ADAPT TO CLIMATE CHALLENGES. SO THERE'S SOME OVERLAP THERE, AND IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO PRIORITIZE THE NATURE-BASED. NATURE-BASED SOLUTIONS. OH, AND THEN IN TERMS OF WHAT MIGHT BE MISSING, I WOULD JUST COMMENT THAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE HEARING FROM EVERYBODY IN THE COMMUNITY. WE HAVE A LOT OF FOLLOWERS HERE AND A LOT OF PEOPLE ACTIVELY INVOLVED, BUT I REALLY WANT TO CONTINUE TO SUPPORT EFFORTS WHERE OUR OUTREACH IS BROAD ENOUGH SO THAT WE'RE HEARING FROM FOLKS WHO AREN'T CURRENTLY USING OUR PARKS. THEY MIGHT BE INTERESTED BUT FOR WHATEVER REASON ARE NOT. AND, AND ALSO IN THE PLANNING PROCESS, I, I FELT LIKE THE NEW VOICES WAS IT WAS VERY IMPRESSIVE IN TERMS OF BRINGING TOGETHER NEW AND NEW VOICES AND OUR REGULAR CONSTITUENTS TO, TO CRAFT A PLAN THAT EVERYONE, EVEN IF THERE WAS SOMETHING EVERYONE DIDN'T LIKE, EVERYONE GOT ON BOARD WITH, INCLUDING ME, EVEN THOUGH I DIDN'T EVEN LIKE THE THINGS ABOUT THE PLAN, BUT I THINK WHEN A GROUP WORKS TOGETHER LIKE THAT AND EVERYBODY HEARS WHAT'S IMPORTANT TO EACH OTHER AND THEN EVERYONE GIVES UP A LITTLE BIT AND TO BE ABLE TO CRAFT A PLAN THAT ACHIEVES THOSE OBJECTIVES FOR MANY DIFFERENT COMMUNITY MEMBERS, I THOUGHT WAS REALLY A GREAT THING. CAN WE HEAR THIS? JOHN, WOULD YOU TRY ONE MORE TIME? HELLO? YEAH. WHAT? WE CAN HEAR YOU. OKAY. IT'S IRONIC BECAUSE [02:50:01] I WAS GOING TO SAY I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY. AND I YIELD THE REST OF MY TIME TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM HERCULES. NO, ACTUALLY, WHAT I WOULD SAY IS JUST TO REITERATE, YOU KNOW, SINCE I HAVE A FEW SECONDS HERE, I GUESS, THAT I WANT TO REITERATE THAT IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT FOR DIRECTORS TO HAVE A PLACE TO INPUT INTO THE SCORING PROCESS. BECAUSE AS I'VE SAID BEFORE, WE MIGHT KNOW SOMETHING, SOME NUANCE THAT IS NOT KNOWN TO THE STAFF BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I LIVE HERE AND THEY DON'T. YOU KNOW, THAT KIND OF THING. THAT'S ALL. YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE THE OTHER OPPORTUNITIES THAT WE'VE HAD TO PUT INPUT INTO THIS PROCESS, AND I APPRECIATE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO WORK ALL THAT STUFF IN ANYWAY. SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE. I'LL GO. WHERE DO YOU WANT TO GO? DOESN'T MATTER. I HAVE A CONCERN THAT WAS IDENTIFIED BY STAFF GOING INTO THIS PROCESS. I THINK, MAX, YOU MENTIONED IT, THAT STAFF HAS EXPERIENCED A PROBLEM WITH PRIORITIZING TRAILS, THAT THESE EXISTING CRITERIA WILL CONSISTENTLY RESULT WITH TRAILS BEING UNDERWEIGHTED. AND I DON'T KNOW HOW TO FIX THAT BECAUSE WHEN I THINK ABOUT PRIORITIZING TRAILS, A WHOLE SEPARATE LIST OF CRITERIA COME TO MIND. AND MAYBE WE SHOULD JUST HAVE A SEPARATE TRAIL PRIORITIZATION PROCESS, I DON'T KNOW, INTERNALLY WITH AMONG STAFF, AND SOMETHING THAT, AS JOHN POINTED OUT, HAS SOME BOARD INPUT. THAT'S THE ONLY THOUGHT I HAVE ON THE TRAIL ISSUE. I DID MENTION LAST TIME THAT THERE SHOULD BE A CRITERIA THAT WEIGHS THE RETURN ON INVESTMENT ISSUE. AND I POINTED OUT A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES. I BELIEVE 8, NUMBER 8, MULTI-BENEFICIAL USE, WAS DEVELOPED AFTER I POINTED OUT THE UNDERWEIGHT SCORE OF THE BLACK DIAMOND MINE PROJECT. THE TIMBER PROJECT BECAUSE IT DIDN'T TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS WE HAD PUT INTO THAT MOUNTAIN WITH THE STAIR PROJECT AND THE COAL MINE EXPERIENCE. IT DIDN'T TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THAT THIS WAS BLOCKING THE FULL EXPERIENCE THAT ALL THOSE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS INTENDED. AND THERE NEEDED TO BE A RETURN ON INVESTMENT. THAT RESULTED IN NUMBER 8. I DON'T THINK NUMBER 8 HAS THE LANGUAGE THAT REALLY CAPTURES IT. THE OTHER EXAMPLE I USED WAS THE POINT WILSON TO POINT PINAL GAP IN THE BAY TRAIL. AND THE RETURN ON INVESTMENT THERE ISN'T THAT OBVIOUS, BUT IT'S THE MILLIONS TENS OF MILLIONS THAT HAVE BEEN SPENT NORTH OF THAT GAP. FROM HERCULES AND EVENTUALLY TO CROCKETT. THE RETURN ON THE INVESTMENT THERE IS THE RETURN ON THE INVESTMENT IN THE BAY TRAIL AS IT TRAVERSES THE SAN PABLO BAY. THAT GAP SHOULD GENERATE A LOT OF POINTS JUST ON THAT CONCEPT. SO IF SOMEHOW I THINK CRITERIA 8 NEEDS TO BE REVISED TO CAPTURE THAT CONCEPT. I THINK YOU GOT IT RIGHT THERE. THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. OTHERWISE, I'M GENERALLY HAPPY WITH WHAT WE DID IN '22. SO I GUESS MY FIRST KIND OF QUESTION IS, AND THIS MIGHT BE GOING BACK TO STAFF, IS THERE'S A LOT ON THESE BOARDS FROM TODAY SESSION AND LAST SESSION. SO HOW DOES THIS ACTUALLY GET SHIFTED DOWN INTO NEW CRITERIA, AND HOW IS IT GOING TO BE DECIDED JUST KIND OF WHICH ONES ACTUALLY HAVE VALUE THAT WE SHOULD ADD TO THIS PROCESS? BECAUSE NOT ALL OF THESE SHOULD BE ADDED TO UPDATING THE CRITERIA EVALUATION SHEET. SO JUST KIND OF WONDERING, LIKE, HOW THAT DECISION WILL BE MADE, AND IS THERE ANY TYPE OF, LIKE, CRITERIA TO WEIGH IT? BECAUSE NOT EVERYONE MIGHT BE HAPPY WITH THINGS THAT ARE INCLUDED AND NOT INCLUDED. SO KIND OF HOW ARE WE GOING [02:55:04] TO MOVE TO. WHAT A NEW PRIORITIZATION CRITERIA EVALUATION SHEET LOOKS LIKE. YEAH, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. I THINK SOMETHING WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IN TERM WITH OUR TEAM IS AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT IT A LITTLE MORE IN THE LAST ITEM HERE, WHICH IS SORT OF LIKE NEXT STEPS. BUT I THINK OUR PLAN IS TO COME BACK TO YOUR BOARD WITH THE PROPOSED SCORING BUT WITHOUT LIKE... BEFORE DIVING INTO LIKE FULLY DEVELOPING ALL THE QUESTIONS AND EVERYTHING, I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS, THE INTERMEDIARY STEPS, WHICH I THINK YOU'RE POINTING OUT, IS COMING BACK WITH JUST A HIGH-LEVEL OVERVIEW OF WHAT WE'VE HEARD AND WHERE WE THINK WE'RE GOING TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ON THE RIGHT TRACK. BECAUSE THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF ANALYSIS INVOLVED IN DEVELOPING THIS. LIKE, YOU KNOW, WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT, WELL, YOUR BOARD HAD MENTIONED LIKE, PULLING THE ARENA NUMBERS AND FIGURING OUT HOW THAT COORDINATES WITH OUR PROJECTS. SOME OF THOSE, IT'S A, LIKE, A HEAVY AMOUNT OF ANALYSIS TO DO TO CALCULATE IT, AND I DON'T WANT TO, LIKE, HAVE US GO WAY DOWN ALL THESE ROADS UNTIL WE KNOW WE'RE ON THE RIGHT TRACK. SO I THINK OUR IDEAL IS THAT WE SYNTHESIZE ALL THIS INFORMATION AND COME BACK TO YOUR BOARD WITH A HIGH-LEVEL PROPOSAL OF WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO AND CHECK IN AND MAKE SURE WE'RE ON THE RIGHT TRACK AND AND IF SO, THEN WE WOULD DEVELOP IT FURTHER AND COME BACK FOR YOUR APPROVAL OF THE MORE DEVELOPED SCORING. OKAY. AND THEN THE SECOND COMMENT IS I CAN UNDERSTAND HOW A DIFFERENT PROJECT MIGHT HAVE RETURN AND VALUE TO A CERTAIN COMMUNITY. BUT THE PART THAT I AM MORE WORRIED OF IS WHEN WE START TALKING ABOUT VOTER PRIORITY OR TOPICS THAT SOUND MORE POLITICAL AND WHERE I FEEL LIKE WE EXPRESS THOSE IN WHEN WE'RE SPEAKING ABOUT WHAT OUR PRIORITIES FOR OUR DISTRICT BASED ON OUR EXPERIENCES. SO THOSE TYPE OF DIFFERENT, I THINK, CRITERIA THAT CAME UP, LIKE I HAVE CONCERN ABOUT MIXING THOSE BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE OVERALL THE PRIORITIZATION CRITERIA EVALUATION SHEET SHOULD BE SOMETHING THAT AS FAR AS THAT, YOU KNOW, IN THE PLANNING STAGE, THAT IS A TOOL AND THERE ARE DIFFERENT QUESTIONS THAT THEIR STAFF WOULD ACTUALLY ASK. OR BE REQUIRED TO CONSIDER BASED ON THE DIFFERENT PROCESS THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH. SO AS FAR AS, I KNOW THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT WE DEFINITELY WOULD LIKE THEM TO CONSIDER, BUT WHEN WE LOOKED AT THIS CRITERIA, I THINK MORE OF MY CONCERN WAS WHAT HAD CHRONICALLY SCORED LOW OVER TIME THAT WAS ACTUALLY A PRIORITY TO THE DISTRICT, AND HOW DO WE TWEAK THE EXISTING FORM, NOT NECESSARILY OVERBURDEN IT WITH A TON OF NEW CATEGORIES. SO, I WOULD ACTUALLY LIKE STAFF TO PRIORITIZE SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT THEY'VE IDENTIFIED TO US IN THE PAST ABOUT UNDERSCORING. AND UNDERSCORING WASN'T JUST TRELS, IT WAS ALSO SO INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS AND A FEW OTHER TYPE OF PROJECTS THAT WERE VITAL TO DO. SO HOW DO WE OVERCOME THAT? AND THEN I JUST FEEL LIKE IN SOME SENSE WE'RE PUTTING A LOT AND SOME OF THESE MAY BE IMPORTANT ON MORE OF A SUBJUNCTIVE. LIKE LOOK, BUT THERE IS CRITERIA THAT IS ADJACENT TO THE PRACTICE OF WHAT THE STAFF IS DOING. SO I DON'T WANT TO GET TOO FAR AWAY FROM THAT. THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS. OKAY. ANY CLOSING POINTS? DO WE FEEL READY TO WRAP THIS PIECE UP? WRAP UP, OR IS THERE ANYTHING THAT WE WANT TO CLOSE WITH HERE? NO, YOU'RE GOOD. I WAS GOING TO, AH, NO, OKAY. I AM OVERWEIGHTED, UNDERWEIGHTED, I THINK, BASED ON EVERYBODY'S BY PEOPLE TAKING BIG INTEREST IN THIS NOWADAYS. I THINK THE LACK OF MONEY, AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE SOME PRIORITIES. PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE MORE AND MORE INTERESTED. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE WHOLE THING AT 100 POINTS. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE, THERE'S 10 [03:00:01] CATEGORIES, I'D LIKE TO SEE THEM AT 10 WEIGHTED, 10 POINTS EACH FOR 100, AND THEN THROW OUT THAT ALL OR NOTHING, EITHER GET 10 POINTS OR NOTHING. I THINK WE COULD EASILY MAKE IT MORE UNDERSTANDABLE, MAKE IT BASED ON 100, OR A KILOGRAM OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, OR A METER. I THINK THAT WOULD MAKE IT EASIER I THINK THE STUFF THAT'S MISSING, I THINK, WELL, I'M THE OLD GUY HERE. I THINK METRO DISTRICT EQUITY. WE CAN FIND ALL KINDS OF PRIORITIES AND STUFF LIKE THAT, BUT IF THEY ALL TURN UP IN ONE WARD, YOU'RE NEVER GOING TO PASS A PARCEL MANAGER OR PARCEL TAX OR ANYTHING. I THINK WE NEED TO BE MINDFUL OF THE FACT THAT EVERYBODY DESERVES A PARK NO MATTER WHAT THEIR STATUS. EVERYBODY PAYS TAXES AND EVERYBODY VOTES, OR SOME PEOPLE VOTE, BUT THEY SHOULD HAVE EQUAL ACCESS TO THE PARK DISTRICT NO MATTER WHERE THEY ARE. I AGREE WITH MY FELLOW BOARD MEMBERS. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THIS PROCESS OF HOW, HOW THE EVALUATIONS TAKE PLACE. I'D LOVE TO SIT IN ON STAFF. I WOULDN'T MAKE ANY COMMENTS OR MAYBE THAT THE BOARD SHOULD BE ABLE TO SEE HOW THE SAUSAGE IS MADE, IN MY OPINION. AND THE COMMENT THAT THE BOARD HAS THE ABILITY TO CHANGE THIS ANYTIME THEY WANT, IT'S JUST A GUIDELINE. WELL, THAT'S A LITTLE, IN MY OPINION, WELL, I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO WORK. THE PUBLIC'S TOO AWARE. EVERYBODY SEEMS LIKE THEY'RE INVOLVED IN THIS PROCESS NOW. WE'VE MADE IT OPEN AND TRANSPARENT, WHICH IS GOOD, BUT NOW EVERYBODY'S GOING TO HAVE AN OPINION IF WE SAY, HEY, MY FAVORITE PROJECT SCORED 100, AND WE ALL GO, NAH, WE DON'T LIKE THAT ONE, WE'RE GONNA DO ANOTHER ONE. I THINK THEY'RE GONNA SAY, HEY, WHAT'D YOU GO THROUGH THE PROCESS FOR? THIS SCORED 100 AND YOU'RE GOING TO SOMETHING THAT SCORED 50. I DON'T KNOW IF WE DO THAT, BUT I REALLY DON'T THINK, I THINK WE NEED TO REALLY DEPEND UPON STAFF'S EXPERTISE AND BOARD COMMENTS BEFORE THE DEAL, AND THEN HAVE A SCORE AND TRY TO STICK TO IT. I ALSO AGREE THAT THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A CATEGORY FOR CHANGES OR OPPORTUNITIES OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT. LET'S FACE IT, IF I DIDN'T, THAT GOLDEN GATE FIELD SCORED 50, I THINK IT WENT TO 135 AFTER MAY REVISE, IN MY OPINION. SO, AND THINGS CHANGE ALL THE TIME, AND I THINK WE OUGHT TO BE, HAVE THE ABILITY TO CHANGE. I THINK, WELL, I THINK THERE SHOULD BE AN 11TH CATEGORY OF TRUE BULL IN MY RATING SYSTEM, BUT I THINK WE HAVE TO JUDGE THE LIABILITIES IN AN AREA TOO. WE'VE GOT TO BE REAL ABOUT IT. WE CAN'T JUST SAY, "OH, WE'LL BUY IT AND WE'LL GET SOMEBODY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES TO CLEAN IT UP FOR US." I MEAN, I THINK THAT SHOULD BE A CRITERIA OF WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE GOING TO GET INVOLVED IN SOMETHING BECAUSE, AS WE'VE SEEN FROM A NUMBER OF THESE AREAS, DIRECTOR DUCHAMBEAU HAS POINTED OUT, WE'LL BE MANAGING THESE PLACES FOR 100 YEARS AND SPENDING LOTS OF MONEY TO RE-MANAGE THEM OR RE-FIX THEM. OLIVIA? ELIZABETH. YEAH, YOU GO AHEAD. OH, I WANTED TO BECAUSE THE SUBJECT'S COME UP OF WW, AND THE WAY WW IS INCORPORATED INTO OUR POLICY, IT'S IN THE APPLICATION OF THE CRITERIA. SO THE POLICY THAT WAS ADOPTED IN '22 SAYS CRITERIA WILL BE APPLIED TO PROJECTS AS IDENTIFIED IN THE PARK DISTRICT'S MASTER PLAN, ADOPTED PLANNING, OR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT DOCUMENTS, OR WITHIN A VOTER COMMITMENT LIST SUCH AS MEASURE WW, MEASURE AA, MEASURE CC, AND MEASURE FF. SO IT'S IN THE APPLICATION AS THEY GO THROUGH EACH OF THESE EXERCISES THROUGH THE 10 CRITERIA, IT'S EXPECTED THAT THEY WILL BE APPLYING WW CONCEPTS AND WW FUNDING. THE CONCEPTS BEING GEOGRAPHIC LOCATIONS. SO THAT IS COVERED. I THINK IT'S BOTH THE OPPORTUNITIES IF THEY'RE WW ARE COVERED BUT NOT OTHER POTENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES. WELL, MY INTERPRETATION IS JUST HOW STAFF APPLIES EACH CRITERIA. RIGHT. IT'S SAYING KEEP IN THE BACK OF YOUR MIND WHAT FUNDING IS AVAILABLE. OKAY. FROM WW AND OTHERS. RIGHT. SO I GUESS THE QUESTION IS IF IT SHOULD BE MORE EXPLICIT. I HAD MEANT TO SAY THAT IN MY EARLIER REMARKS THAT, WELL, MAX STARTED OUT BY SAYING SOME OF THE THINGS THAT HAD COME UP BEFORE. ONE OF THEM WAS THAT THE FUNDING OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IF A PROJECT IS MORE VIABLE AND READY TO GO, THEN THAT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED WHETHER BEHIND THE SCENES OR IN THE BACKGROUND AS COLONISTS, OR POSSIBLY AS A CRITERIA ON THE FRAMEWORK. I THINK THAT'S [03:05:02] IMPORTANT. AND THE OTHER THING I WANTED TO SAY, THAT IN GENERAL, I LIKE THIS PRIORITIZATION FRAMEWORK. I THINK IN PARTICULAR THOSE FIRST 4 THINGS ON THE CRITERIA ARE THE 4 THINGS THAT ARE MOST IMPORTANT, EQUITY, HABIT, AND RESOURCE CONSERVATION, INCREASING, ENHANCING ACCESS, AND CLIMATE CLIMATE PREPAREDNESS. ALL OF THESE THINGS ARE IMPORTANT, BUT THOSE I THINK ARE THE PRIORITIES AND SHOULD BE WEIGHTED MORE THAN THE OTHERS. ELIZABETH LUANA JUST POINTED OUT TO ME THAT CRITERIA 10 DOES INCORPORATE ANY VOTER COMMITMENT LISTS, SO IT IS EXPLICIT. BUT PROJECT 10 IS 5 POINTS. YEAH. I THINK IT COUNTS FOR MORE THAN THAT. OR SHOULD. I KIND OF LIKE DENNIS'S IDEA ABOUT SCORING. AND I'LL JUST ADD AND MAYBE THIS IS A LOOPHOLE IN THIS, BUT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE AN ENTIRE SECTION OF EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY THAT'S NOT COVERED BY MEASURE WW OR AA OR CC OR FF. AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK WHEN THIS GETS MODIFIED, I WOULD INCLUDE THE 19 1992 TAX SHARING AGREEMENT WITH LIVERMORE AREA RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT? BECAUSE IF WE'RE HAVING THIS CRITERIA AND THESE POLICIES BASED ON, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S LISTED HERE AND WITH PARTICULAR FOCUS ON MEASURE WW, DOES THAT POTENTIALLY THEN, YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY LIKE UNDER, WHAT WAS IT, UNDERWEIGHT? UNDERWEIGHT ANY PROJECTS THAT ARE COMING FORWARD FROM THE AREAS THAT ARE NOT PART OF MEASURE WW? AND THAT MIGHT BE MORE OF A RHETORICAL QUESTION. ALL RIGHT. I WAS THINKING THAT WE WOULD WRAP UP THIS ITEM AND TURN TO THE NEXT ITEM. HOW DOES THAT SOUND TO THE BOARD? OKAY. ALL RIGHT, GREAT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR YOUR FEEDBACK. IT'LL ALL BE SUMMARIZED AND INCLUDED AS A PART OF WHAT WE HEARD ON MAY 1ST. AND MAX ALREADY SPOKE TO WHAT WILL COME BACK TO THE BOARD. AND ACTUALLY, NEXT STEPS IS A NICE SEGUE OVER TO OUR NEXT ITEM. MAX, DO YOU HAVE YOUR SLIDE TO SHOW HERE? I THINK SO, BUT I MEAN, IT'S ALSO, I THINK, LIKE THAT. IT'S THAT RIGHT THERE. SO YEAH, KAREN'S GOT IT. SO WE INCLUDED THIS SLIDE, I THINK IT'S IN YOUR PACKET, AND IT'S ALSO RIGHT THERE ON THE BOARD. SO, YOU KNOW, THIS NEXT ITEM, WANTED TO CHECK IN WITH YOUR BOARD ON SORT OF PROCESS. YOU KNOW, I WANT TO APPRECIATE THE TIME THAT YOU ALL HAVE TAKEN TO WORK WITH US ON THESE DIFFERENT DIFFERENT TOPICS, OUR OPERATIONAL BUDGET, OUR CAPITAL PROJECTS BUDGET, OUR SCORING. 3 THINGS I WANT TO CALL OUT THAT ARE SORT OF THINGS FOR STAFF TO WORK ON. ONE IS THE CPP, AND I MENTIONED THIS BEFORE, IS THAT WHAT OUR PLAN IS TO WORK ON SYNTHESIZING THE FEEDBACK WE HEARD AND COME UP WITH A PROPOSAL. TO BRING BACK TO YOUR BOARD IN THE LATE SUMMER OR FALL, SOMETIME AROUND AND THEN TO GET YOUR FEEDBACK TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ON THE RIGHT TRACK FOR IMPROVING THE CPP SCORING. THE OTHER THING THAT THAT WE'VE HEARD FROM YOU AND THAT WE'RE GOING TO WORK ON IS THE CAPITAL PROJECT INTAKE AND ADVANCEMENT PROCESS. ABOUT IS OUR PORTFOLIO TIERS. SO IT'S LIKE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU ALL BROUGHT UP WAS WE HAVE 100 ACTIVE PROJECTS. WE ALSO HAVE LIKE MANY MORE PROJECTS THAT ARE LIKE ON THE LIST OF, YOU KNOW, POTENTIAL WORK THAT'S EITHER LIKE BEEN IDENTIFIED IN A PLAN OR WE'VE DONE SOME PLANNING WORK AROUND IT OR IT'S BEEN DISCUSSED AND THEN THERE'S JUST SORT OF TIERS OF READINESS OF PROJECTS, WHETHER IT'S IN OUR WORK PLAN OR POTENTIALLY IN THE WORK PLAN, AND TO CREATE SOME MORE TRANSPARENCY AND ORGANIZATION AROUND WHAT THOSE ARE AND HOW THEY WORK AND HOW YOUR BOARD CAN BE MORE ENGAGED IN HOW PROJECTS ARE ADDED TO THAT BIGGER LIST, HOW PROJECTS MOVE FROM THE BIGGER LIST TO THE SMALLER LIST OF ACTIVE PROJECTS. THAT'S ANOTHER THING THAT WE WILL WORK ON. AND THEN THE LAST ONE IS JUST WE'VE HEARD SOME FEEDBACK AROUND BOARD DECISION POINTS AND REVIEW MILESTONES THROUGH THE LIFETIME OF A PROJECT'S DELIVERY. AND SO WANTING TO HAVE MORE OPPORTUNITIES [03:10:03] FOR YOUR BOARD TO BE ENGAGED. I THINK I MENTIONED THIS EARLIER WITH THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, BUT THAT'S ANOTHER THING THAT WE'LL COME BACK WITH A MORE SORT OF ORGANIZED AND TRANSPARENT TRANSPARENT PROCESS FOR HOW YOUR BOARD IS ENGAGED IN PROJECT PLANNING OVERALL. AND THEN THOSE ARE SORT OF BIGGER LONG-TERM ITEMS. THIS TIMELINE IS REALLY THIS YEAR'S TIMELINE FOR THE BUDGET. SO WE'VE HAD THESE PRIORITY SESSIONS, REALLY BIG PICTURE. THE NEXT STEP IS THAT I'M GOING TO WORK WITH KATIE ON ALL STAFF EMAIL ABOUT OUR BUDGET PROCESS IN THE NEXT COUPLE DAYS. AND THEN I'LL HOST SOME, YOU KNOW, MEETINGS WITH STAFF TO TALK THROUGH THE BUDGET AND OUR APPROACH. YOU KNOW, WE WOULD COME TO THE PAC FINANCE SUBCOMMITTEE IN AUGUST. WE'D COME TO THE PAC OVERALL IN LATER IN AUGUST. WE COME TO YOUR BOARD IN MID-SEPTEMBER WITH A HIGH-LEVEL SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED BUDGET. WE'D COME TO YOUR FINANCE COMMITTEE IN OCTOBER. THEN WE GO TO THE PAC FINANCE COMMITTEE, AND THEN WE'D COME TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS IN NOVEMBER, AND THEN FINALLY IN DECEMBER FOR THE HEARING. WHAT WE REALLY TRIED TO DO WITH THIS PROCESS IS START WAY EARLIER. SO NOT HAVE ALL OF THE ENGAGEMENT POINTS IN NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER. WE REALLY WANTED TO START EARLY TO MAKE SURE WE WERE ON THE RIGHT TRACK. AGAIN, THIS BUDGET WE'RE NOT PLANNING TO LIKE ADD A LOT OF NEW THINGS. IT'S REALLY HOW DO WE HAVE A COST-NEUTRAL BUDGET AND LOOK AT SOME OF THESE IDEAS FOR REDUCTIONS. SOME OF THESE WILL COME BACK TO YOUR BOARD AND COULD BE INCORPORATED IN THE BUDGET. SOME OF THESE MIGHT BE LONGER-TERM OPPORTUNITIES THAT WE COME BACK TO YOUR BOARD TO GET INPUT ON. IT COULD TAKE LONGER THAN THIS BUDGET PROCESS. DID I COVER EVERYTHING, MEGAN? KATIE, DO YOU MIND STOPPING SHARING YOUR SCREEN SO MY SCREEN CAN SHARE? THANK YOU. GREAT. ALL RIGHT, SO FOR THE FIRST QUESTION, WE'RE GOING TO ASK FOR YOUR BOARD TO ENGAGE WITH POST-ITS. YOU GET A CHANCE FOR SOME POST-LAUNCH MOVEMENT TO GO UP TO THE POSTER WE HAVE UP HERE OF THE BUDGET, THE BUDGET PROCESS. AND THE QUESTION IS, ARE THERE MOMENTS WHERE YOU'D LIKE THE BOARD TO HAVE MORE ENGAGEMENT OR LESS? SO IF YOU WANT TO JOT DOWN ANY IDEAS, IT MIGHT BE THAT YOU'D WANT TO REPORT ON WHERE YOU ARE WITH THE BUDGET BEFORE A VOTE, OR YOU WANT A TOUCHPOINT TO MEET WITH YOUR CONSTITUENTS IN YOUR WARD, OR YOU THINK THAT MAYBE SOMETHING COULD HAPPEN EARLIER OR LATER IN THE YEAR, OR EVEN JUST LIKE, THAT WORKS, LET'S JUST KEEP IT THERE. AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS THIS MIGHT IMPACT THE 2027 PROCESS, BUT SOME OF THESE DATES HAVE ALREADY HAPPENED, AND SO THE INPUT ALSO MIGHT BE RELEVANT FOR FUTURE YEARS TOO. SO I'LL INPUT WELCOME, AND WE HAVE ABOUT LIKE 10 MINUTES FOR THIS PIECE, BUT IF DIRECTORS ARE DONE SOONER, THEN THAT'S GREAT. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? YEAH. GREAT. SO YOU FEEL FREE TO ACTUALLY GET UP AND YOU CAN JUST PUT IT DIRECTLY ON IT, OR WE CAN WRITE IT. DO YOU HAVE A DART OR ANYTHING? YEAH, WE COULD HAVE RUNNERS. I MEAN, THE ONLY THING I WOULD WANT TO DO AND NOT A PINPOINT, BUT I LOOK AT THAT, AND GOD, IT'S EMBARRASSING. SO THE PAC IS GOING TO FIND OUT ABOUT THE BUDGET BEFORE WE ARE? YEAH. I MEAN, AND YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT TO HAVE ENGAGEMENT. I JUST WANT TO NOT BE SURPRISED. SO I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHAT IS PROPOSED. I ASSUME THAT JUNE, JULY 2026, ALL STAFF BUDGET PRESENTATION? DOES THAT MEAN THAT'S THE FINAL PRESENTATION OR IS THAT THE MAY REVISE OR IS IT YOU'RE ALMOST THERE. YOU'RE 99% THERE, RIGHT? SORRY, SAY IT AGAIN. IN THAT PURPLE OR IS THAT PURPLE? YEP. THAT'S THE ONE, KAREN. OH, SO NO, I'D SAY WE'RE LIKE THERE IN NOVEMBER OR DECEMBER. THAT LIKE RIGHT NOW, THERE'S NOBODY'S DONE ANY WORK ON THE BUDGET. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE AT? THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? I'M LOOKING AT THAT SCHEDULE. I'M SEEING THAT ALL STAFF IS GOING TO SEE A BUDGET PRESENTATION. I IMAGINE THAT'S GOING TO BE AFTER ALL THEIR STUDY SESSIONS AND STUFF LIKE THEY'RE GOING TO COME TOGETHER AND SAY, THIS IS THE, QUOTE, BUDGET WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO GET. AND WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH THE PAC. NO. SO THAT JUNE, THAT'S NOW. I'M GOING TO DO A PRESENTATION TO THE STAFF TO SAY, [03:15:01] HERE'S YOUR INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE BUDGET. SO, AND THEN THAT'S WHAT THAT IS. AND THEN WE CAN COME TO YOUR BOARD FIRST IN LIKE IN AUGUST OR WHATEVER. I THINK THE REASON WE WERE GOING TO GO TO THE PAC WAS NOT WITH LIKE A DEVELOPED BUDGET IN AUGUST. IT'S BECAUSE WE'VE HEARD FROM YOUR BOARD LIKE, HEY, YOUR BOARD HAS SAID TO US, WE'D LIKE TO HEAR WHAT THE PAC RECOMMENDS. SO THAT AUGUST VISIT WITH THE PAC IS NOT SO MUCH LIKE US PRESENTING ANYTHING, IT'S LIKE MAYBE PRESENTING SOME VERY HIGH-LEVEL IDEAS, LIKE, JUST LIKE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT TODAY, AND IT'S GETTING THEIR INPUT. SO THEN WHEN WE BRING THE SUMMARY TO YOUR BOARD IN SEPTEMBER, WE CAN SAY, HEY, WE HEARD THIS INPUT FROM THE PAC. SO THERE'S NOT ANYTHING REALLY DEVELOPED AT THAT POINT. THAT'S JUST MORE OF AN INPUT, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. SO, GOSH, I CAN'T READ THE NEXT ONE OVER. YEAH, I MEAN, SOMEWHERE ALONG THE LINE. I DON'T WANT TO BRING UP THE PAST, BUT I GOT A REORG 10 MINUTES BEFORE A MEETING STARTED IN NOVEMBER LAST YEAR. 10 MINUTES BEFORE A MEETING STARTED. I WAS SUPPOSED TO VOTE ON A REORG. ALL IN THE PAST, I KNOW, BUT THAT, THAT WAS NOT WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN THE FUTURE. I DON'T KNOW THAT I'M GOING TO HAVE ANY GREAT INPUT, BUT I'D SURE LIKE TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON BEFORE IT HAPPENS. I MEAN, HEARD. I THINK THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THIS IS TO HAVE NO SURPRISES. AND LIKE, AND REALLY, THESE LAST, YOU KNOW, 3 STUDY SESSIONS, YOU'RE GIVING US THE BROAD INPUT LIKE IF WE DO, IF WE BUILD A BUDGET THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN THE GUIDANCE YOU'RE GIVING US, THAT'S GOING TO BE WEIRD. THAT'S THE BEST WORD I'VE EVER HEARD. EXACTLY WHAT IT WAS. IT'S TRUE. YEAH, I MEAN, TO JUST PIGGYBACK ON THAT, LIKE, SO ALL THESE THINGS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT TODAY, THESE WOULD BE THE THINGS THAT WE WOULD BE DEVELOPING FURTHER AND PUTTING PUTTING NUMBERS TO IT AND COMING FORWARD WITH THIS HIGH-LEVEL SUMMARY. BUT REALLY, WE'RE CARRYING FORWARD THE EXISTING BUDGET, TAKING, YOU KNOW, THE INPUT THAT WE'VE RECEIVED OVER THESE STUDY SESSIONS. AND, YOU KNOW, LIKE YOU SAID, LIKE IN THE PAST WHEN WE CAME WITH THE BUDGET, IT WAS LIKE, WHAT IS THE PAC SAID? WHAT IS THE PAC RECOMMENDING? AND SO WE WANT TO GET TO THEM FIRST OF JUST, THIS IS WHAT WE DISCUSSED WITH THE BOARD DURING THE STUDY SESSIONS. HERE'S KIND OF SOME ROUGH OUT LIKE A HIGH-LEVEL SUMMARY OF WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. WHAT IS YOUR FEEDBACK ON THIS? HAVE WE GOTTEN SOMETHING WRONG THAT YOU WANT US TO TELL THE BOARD BEFORE WE TAKE THIS PROPOSAL TO THEM? INCORPORATE THAT, AND THEN THAT'S WHAT WE'D BE BRINGING YOU TO SEPTEMBER. BUT DIRECTOR WASBY, IF YOU WANT US TO COME TO YOU FIRST, DEFINITELY. THAT'S THE POINT OF THIS EXERCISE. WE SHOULD COME TO YOU FIRST, THEN GO TO THE PAC, THEN COME BACK TO YOU, ETC. AND JUST FOR THE SAKE OF TIME, THE REASON WE'RE ASKING FOR POST- POST-ITS IS WE WANT TO GIVE EVERYBODY THE CHANCE TO REALLY GET DEEP, AND THIS COULD EASILY BE A MUCH LONGER EXERCISE. WE HAVE A COUPLE MORE ITEMS WE WANT TO GET TO. SO JUST A THOUGHT AS YOU CONSIDER WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO SAY, OR IF YOU WANT TO PUT IT UP ON A POST-IT, THAT'S ANOTHER WAY OF PROVIDING INPUT. YEAH, IT'S NOT LABELED, SO GO TO 35 AND CAN I READ THAT, OLIVIA? OH, THIS ONE. THIS ONE? OKAY. I CAN'T SEE THAT. YEAH, COME ON UP. YOU CAN WALK ON UP. THAT'S THE INTENTION IS THAT YOU CAN WALK ON UP AND ENGAGE WITH THE POSTER. NO WORRIES. DON'T BE SCARED OF THE POSTER. I'LL JUST GO AHEAD AND READ WHAT'S HERE SO FAR. BOARD RECEIVES PROPOSED BUDGET, DEAL WITH REDUCTIONS IN STAFF PROPOSALS COMES AROUND THE SAME TIME, AND THEN REVIEW VACANT, UNREPRESENTED POSITIONS, SALARY SCHEDULE, [03:20:02] AND THEN SEPARATE THAT FROM THE BOARD BUDGET REVIEW. SO IT'S PART OF BUT SEPARATE. AND THIS SAYS THE BUDGET SHOULD NOT DRIVE POLICY, POLICY SHOULD DRIVE THE BUDGET. THESE ARE GOOD. THEY ARE GOOD, ACTUALLY. OKAY, SO THIS IS STANDARDIZED, A MID-YEAR BUDGET STEP IN THE PROCESS, AND IF NOT THIS YEAR, THEN IN THE NEXT YEAR. SO THAT WOULD BE AROUND MID-YEAR IS JULY-ISH. YEAH, OKAY, OKAY. 2 ROLES, RIGHT? YOU'RE THINKING LIKE MEASURE WW? YES. WELL, LAST YEAR WE HAD SO MUCH OF MEASURE WW WRAPPED INTO THE BUDGET PROCESS, THAT'S WHY IT CAME UP LAST YEAR. SO DENNIS IS SAYING HE DOESN'T WANT THE PAC TO SEE STUFF BEFORE US, BUT WHEN IT COMES TO WW, THERE ARE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE, AND I DO WANT THEM TO SEE THAT BEFORE US. BUT WE SHOULD DRIVE THE POLICY, BUT THEY'RE THE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE. IT'S CONFUSING ME. DID I SAY THAT? YOU SAID YOU DIDN'T WANT THE PAC TO SEE IT BEFORE US. YEAH, I THINK IF THERE'S LIKE A PROPOSAL OUT THERE. I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD DELIBERATE ON IT. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SEE IT. BIDGE ON IT. I MEAN, I COULD SEE, I CAN SEE US SAVING HALF A MILLION DOLLARS. SO I'M GOING TO TURN US TO THE NEXT QUESTION. UP ON THE SCREEN AND MAX, IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO THIS FURTHER UP ON THE SCREEN WE HAVE STAFF'S CURRENT PLAN FOR SEQUENCING THE GOVERNANCE WORK AHEAD. SO WE SEE CAPITAL PROJECT PRIORITIZATION CRITERIA FIRST, CAPITAL PROJECT INTAKE AND ADVANCEMENT AND THE CIP PROJECT PORTFOLIO TIER SECOND, AND THEN THE BOARD DECISION POINTS AND REVIEW MILESTONES THROUGH THE PROJECT DELIVERY THIRD. DOES THIS FEEL TO YOUR BOARD LIKE THE RIGHT ORDER OF PRIORITY? AND IF NOT, HOW WOULD YOU REORDER IT? YEAH, THIS SLIDE WAS ADDED YESTERDAY. IT WAS A NEW ITEM. IT'S NOT IN THE SLIDES PRINTED OUT. AGAIN, LIKE THE BASIC THING WE'RE ASKING IS LIKE WHAT WE'RE TAKING IS TRYING TO GET THE CPP RIGHT IS THE FIRST PRIORITY, THESE BIGGER ISSUES. SECOND ONE IS UNDERSTANDING SORT OF LIKE THESE TIERS OF LIKE THE PROJECTS THAT ARE AN IDEA, ONES THAT HAVE SOME PLANNING, ONES THAT ARE ACTIVELY ON THE LIST, AND SORT OF FLESHING THAT OUT AND KIND COMING BACK. AND THEN THE THIRD ONE IS LIKE, WHERE, LIKE, OPPORTUNITIES FOR ENGAGEMENT, RIGHT, IN THE, LIKE, PROJECT LIFECYCLE FOR THE BOARD AND SORT OF FLESHING THAT OUT, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. IS THE [03:25:04] QUESTION CLEAR? WE'RE PRIORITIZING 1, 2, 3. $1.3 BILLION BASED ON WHAT I THINK WE'RE HEARING. WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE IT RIGHT. YEAH, I GUESS I'LL JUST SHARE ONE OF THE POST-IT NOTES THAT I PUT UP THERE, AND IT'S ACTUALLY QUOTING DIRECTOR DECHAMBEAU DURING LAST YEAR'S BUDGET PROCESS FOR 2026 ABOUT HOW THE BUDGET SHOULD NOT DRIVE POLICY. INSTEAD, POLICY SHOULD BE DRIVING THE BUDGET BECAUSE IT FELT LIKE LAST YEAR'S BUDGET PROCESS. WE WERE DECIDING ON A LOT OF POLICY IN THAT BUDGET PROCESS. AND I GUESS THAT'S A REALLY HIGH-LEVEL, LIKE, PRINCIPAL IDEA. SO I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT FITS INTO THIS PRIORITIZATION 1, 02, 3 PER SE, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US KIND OF ESTABLISH THAT PRINCIPLE WHEN DOING OUR BUDGET SO THAT WHEN WE WERE HANDED THE DRAFT BUDGET, WE'RE NOT GIVEN SO MANY LIKE DIFFERENT POLICY DECISIONS THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE AS PART OF THE BUDGET. COULD YOU TELL US ONCE AGAIN WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH 123? IT'S JUST UNDERSTANDING, IS THAT THE RIGHT PRIORITY OF THOSE 3 ITEMS? HOW DOES IT RELATE TO THIS TIMELINE? THERE'S SORT OF 2 SEPARATE THINGS. SO THIS TIMELINE IS LIKE THE ANNUAL BUDGET PROCESS. THE OTHER ONE IS A TIMELINE THING TOO, WHICH IS LIKE WE HAVE THESE BIGGER BODIES OF WORK THAT YOUR BOARD HAS IDENTIFIED THROUGH THESE SESSIONS. AND SO IT'S UNDERSTANDING WE WANT TO WORK ON THOSE. WHAT SHOULD OUR FOR OUR TEAM, WHAT SHOULD WE WORK ON FIRST, SECOND, THIRD? YEAH, IT'S THE SAME TEAM WORKING ON ALL THREE OF THESE ITEMS. AND SO WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHICH ONE DO YOU WANT TO COME TO YOU FIRST, WHICH ONE SECOND, WHICH ONE'S THIRD, BECAUSE WE'LL HAVE TO LIKE PUT THE RESOURCES INTO DOING ALL THIS WORK TO COME TO WITH PROPOSALS AND PROCESS FOR YOU. SO WITH OUR LIMITED RESOURCES, LIKE WHAT SHOULD WE PRIORITIZE BRINGING TO YOU NEXT? WE HAD A VERY ABBREVIATED CAPITAL PLAN WORKSHOP IN OCTOBER AT FERN COTTAGE, RIGHT? SO IS THIS PART OF THAT PROCESS OR WAS THAT PART OF THIS PROCESS? OKAY, I DON'T KNOW, CAN I JUST SAY LIKE LAST YEAR'S BUDGET PROCESS WAS WHAT IT WAS. I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S A PART... WE DON'T HAVE THAT EVENT AS PART OF THIS YEAR'S PROPOSED BUDGET PROCESS, AND THOSE THREE THINGS ARE THINGS YOU ALL IDENTIFIED IN THESE LAST THREE DAYS FOR US TO WORK ON. SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND YOUR PRIORITY AMONGST THOSE THREE THINGS. WE'RE NOT COMING UP WITH A TIMELINE, WE'RE JUST COMING UP WITH AN ORDER. CORRECT, FOR THOSE THREE THINGS. YEAH, BUT WE COULD ADD IF IT'S PUT ANOTHER STUDY SESSION AS PART OF THE BUDGET TIMELINE, THAT'S SOMETHING YOU GUYS COULD PROPOSE UP THERE RIGHT NOW IS ALSO WHAT WE'RE SAYING AS PART OF THE TIMELINE. IF YOU WANT TO ADD ANOTHER STUDY SESSION INTO THIS TIMELINE, PUT A POST-IT UP THERE FOR THAT. CAN YOU EXPLAIN SEPTEMBER 15TH? THIS BOARD OF DIRECTORS SUMMARY OF PROPOSED BUDGET, WILL THAT BE AT A BOARD MEETING? CORRECT. THAT'S LIKE THE HIGH-LEVEL PRESENTATION. OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IN THE BUDGET. IT'S NOT LIKE THE DETAIL. WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN THE DETAIL DOWN YET. IT'S MAKING SURE WE'RE ON THE RIGHT TRACK AT A HIGH LEVEL. A POWERPOINT. YEAH. AND MAYBE IN A STAFF REPORT, NOT THE BIG BUDGET BOOK THAT YOU WILL GET ON NOVEMBER 17TH. BUT THAT BUDGET WOULD FIRST BE PRESENTED TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE ON OCTOBER 14TH. OKAY, SO I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THAT. IT GOES TO THE PAC IN AUGUST, RIGHT? YES, SO THE PAC, THERE'S NO BUDGET GOING TO THE PAC. IT'S JUST THE IDEAS LIKE THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT TODAY, I THINK, WAS TO SORT OF SHARE THOSE IDEAS AND GET THEIR INPUT SO THAT AS WE'RE DEVELOPING THE BUDGET AND WE'RE COMING TO YOUR BOARD, WE CAN TELL YOU WE'VE GONE TO THE PAC AND HERE WAS THEIR INPUT AROUND THE BUDGET. THEY'RE NOT LIKE RECOMMENDING ANYTHING SPECIFIC. BUT THEY ACTUALLY ARE THE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE AND SHOULD BE RECOMMENDING FOR WW. SO WE'VE GOT ON THE BUDGET, YOU'VE GOT OUR OPERATIONS TO DIRECTOR COLLIN, WE COMMENT, WE HAVEN'T REALLY CIRCLED BACK TO THE CIP STUFF AND THE WW. WHAT HAPPENED IS SUDDENLY WE HAD WW, SUDDENLY WE HAD A REORG, SUDDENLY WE HAD EVERYTHING. I DO THINK THE PAC HAS A ROLE IN THE WW THAT I WOULD LIKE THEM AS THE OVERSIGHT [03:30:01] COMMITTEE PER THE VOTER-APPROVED INITIATIVE TO GIVE US INPUT EARLIER THAN WE GOT LAST YEAR. FOR SURE. VERY DIFFERENT THAN THEY DRIVE THE BUDGET, BUT THEY DO OVERSIGHT WW. I THINK THAT'S BAKED IN FOR THIS YEAR, RIGHT? YES, IT IS. AND EVERY YEAR. AND WE WORKED ON IT LAST YEAR. AND AGAIN, SOME OF THESE ARE SO BROAD, PAC BROADLY IS CONFUSING VERSUS PAC AS OVERSIGHT. I GUESS MAYBE IF I CAN CLARIFY, SORRY, DIRECTOR DECHAMBEAU. SO, THERE IS A WW OVERSIGHT COMPONENT FOR THE PAC. WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING ANY MEASURE WW CHANGES THIS YEAR AS PART OF THE BUDGET. I HAVEN'T HEARD AN INTEREST IF THERE'S INTEREST IN THAT FROM YOUR BOARD. WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING THAT. THE PAC, WE ADDED THIS BECAUSE WE HEARD FROM YOUR BOARD THAT YOU WANTED TO HEAR RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE PAC EARLIER. THEY STILL HAVE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY THERE IN OCTOBER TO PROVIDE SORT OF FORMAL INPUT ON THE BUDGET, BUT WE ADDED THIS EXTRA STEP FOR THEM TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS, ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS. SO I THINK LIKE THAT'S JUST AN EXTRA TOUCHPOINT. AND BY AUGUST, IT ALSO MIGHT BE IN RESPONSE TO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOW AS WELL. SO SHARING, YOU KNOW, THIS 3-PART SERIES THAT WE'VE HAD, OR THE 6-PART SERIES IF WE INCLUDE THE EARLIER WORKSHOPS, YOU KNOW, KIND OF COMBINING THAT IN AUGUST TO THEN REVIEW WITH THE PAC, I BELIEVE, IS ALSO WHAT WILL BE HAPPENING. YEAH, AND JUST AN EXAMPLE, IF WE PURSUE ONE OF THESE PARKING VENTEC OPTIONS, WE TAKE THAT TO THE PAC AND GET THEIR FEEDBACK ON THAT BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T APPROACHED THEM ON THIS ISSUE, AND THEN WE'D BE BRINGING THAT WHEN WE COME TO THE BOARD IN SEPTEMBER. LIKE, THIS IS WHAT THE PAC THINKS OF THIS OPTION THAT WE'RE POTENTIALLY PURSUING FOR THE BUDGET. FOR THE RECORD, I THINK DELVAL IS AN EXCELLENT LOCATION FOR US TO REALLY PRIORITIZE VENTEC. YES. SO, GOING BACK TO THE IMMEDIATE TASK AT HAND THAT YOU REQUEST, I SHOULD SAY, SO I WOULD RECOMMEND PUTTING THE BOARD DECISION POINTS AND REVIEW MILESTONES AS NUMBER 2 BECAUSE TO ME, LIKE, HAVING INPUT IN AS IT GOES ALONG, AS A PROJECT GOES ALONG, IS SLIGHTLY HIGHER PRIORITY THAN KNOWING WHAT THE FUTURE CAPITAL PROJECT INTAKE AND ADVANCEMENT PROCESS WILL BE. SO I WOULD MOVE THAT TO NUMBER 2 AND MOVE THE CAPITAL PROJECT INTAKE TO 3 AND KEEP CAPITAL PROJECT PRIORITIZATION WHERE IT IS. SO WE HAVE A PERSPECTIVE ON THE FLOOR FOR DOING 1, 03, 2. HOW DO OTHER DIRECTORS HAVE PERSPECTIVE ON THIS QUESTION AS AS WELL. I HAVE A CLARIFYING QUESTION. I THOUGHT DIRECTOR COFFEY BROUGHT UP A REALLY GOOD POINT IN REGARDS TO TRAILS PRIORITIZATION. SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE CPP PRIORITIZATION, THAT'S JUST THE CURRENT CRITERIA, BUT IT PROBABLY WOULDN'T, WOULD IT INCLUDE TRAILS OR WOULD IT NOT? SO THAT'S MY CLARIFYING QUESTION. SO YEAH, I THINK, I GUESS NOT TO GO TOO DEEP IN THE WEEDS HERE, I THINK ANY TRAIL PROJECT THAT COSTS MORE THAN $100,000 WOULD BE PART OF THIS DIP, I THINK IN SOME WAYS OUR CHALLENGE ISN'T JUST THE SCORING, BUT HOW WE'VE CONCEPTUALIZED OUR TRAIL PROJECTS. SO I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WAS IMPORTANT TO NOTE. AND AMONGST ALL THESE THINGS, THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE CAN TAKE BACK. AND AS WE SYNTHESIZE ALL THE THINGS WE'VE HEARD, WE CAN INCORPORATE THAT INTO WHAT OUR RECOMMENDATIONS ARE TO COME BACK TO YOUR BOARD. I LIKE ELIZABETH'S SUGGESTION. THANK YOU. SURE, ME TOO. AND I HAVE A MORE CLERICAL SUGGESTION AS WELL BECAUSE I'M JUST LOOKING BACK AT THE TIMELINE AND I SEE PERHAPS WHERE SOME OF THE CONFUSION IS COMING FROM. WHAT I JUST HEARD FROM MAX WAS THAT THE PAC IS GOING TO BE MAKING SOME RECOMMENDATIONS AND THEY WON'T HAVE AN ACTUAL PROPOSED BUDGET. BUT WHAT IT ACTUALLY SAYS HERE ON AUGUST 17TH, THAT THE PAC FINANCE COMMITTEE WOULD GET A SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED BUDGET AND PARK ADVISORY FULL COMMITTEE WOULD GET IT ON THE 24TH OF AUGUST, AND THEN WE GET IT ON THE 15TH. SO I THINK THAT'S WHY PEOPLE WERE KIND OF LIKE WONDERING, AT LEAST FOR ME, I WOULD SAY, WELL, WE SHOULD, WE SHOULD GET TO SEE IT BEFORE THEM, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE IT'S JUST A HIGH-LEVEL BIG PICTURE. I UNDERSTAND IT'S NOT THE WHOLE BUDGET BOOK, BUT I THINK YOU'VE HEARD ALREADY FROM THE BOARD THAT WE DEFINITELY WANT TO KNOW WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED IN THE BUDGET BEFORE WE RECEIVE THE BIG BUDGET BOOK. IF IT'S ALL RIGHT WITH YOUR BOARD TO MOVE ON TO THE NEXT QUESTION. SO WE [03:35:02] HAVE AN EVALUATION EVALUATION AS WELL. IT'S ON THE BACK OF YOUR AGENDAS FOR TODAY, THE PIECE OF PAPER WITH THE BLUE ON THE BACK OF THAT. THERE'S A SERIES EVALUATION FOR HOW WE DID ON THE PAST 3 SESSIONS COMBINED. SO FEEL FREE IF YOU WANT TO, IT WOULD BE SO HELPFUL, I THINK, TO BOTH YOUR FACILITATORS AND ALSO STAFF AS, YOU KNOW, WE LOOK TOWARDS NEXT YEAR, YOU LOOK TOWARDS NEXT YEAR, AND PLANNING WHAT HAPPENS. BUT THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU TO VOICE YOUR PERSPECTIVE AS WELL. SO LOOKING BACK ON THE STUDY SESSIONS FROM MAY 1ST, LAST WEEK MAY 12TH, AND TODAY, IF YOU WANT TO WEIGH IN RIGHT NOW WITH ANY GENERAL FEEDBACK, WHAT YOU THINK WORKED WELL AND IS WORTH REPEATING. WE TRIED A LOT OF DIFFERENT LIKE WE TRIED MENTIMETER ON THE FIRST SESSION AND WE DID STICKERS ON THIS SESSION. SO WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE LESS OF OR MORE OF IN FUTURE YEARS AND JUST IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU'D LIKE TO SHARE? GO FOR IT. SO I'VE ENJOYED THESE 3 SESSIONS. I THINK THEY'VE WORKED WELL TOGETHER AND THEY'VE KIND OF GIVEN ME A FRAMEWORK FOR GUIDANCE ON THESE ISSUES THAT I DIDN'T HAVE BEFORE. LOOKING BACK ON THE PAST AND WHAT WE DID IN THE PAST, AND I DON'T MEAN THIS TO BE CRITICAL OF THESE THREE SESSIONS, THEY'RE JUST DIFFERENT. YOU KNOW, WHAT WE DID IN THE PAST WAS VERY MUCH DISTINGUISH BETWEEN PRIORITIZATION AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS. THEY WERE SEPARATE WORKSHOPS. THEY WEREN'T INTEGRATED. OTHER THAN, YOU KNOW, WE HAD THEM IN A SEQUENCE. AND THEN WE GO INTO BUDGET. WHAT WAS A LITTLE CONFUSING ABOUT THESE 3 SESSIONS WAS THE INTEGRATION OF, YOU KNOW, CAPITAL PRIORITIZATION AND BUDGET. I GUESS I'M JUST A CREATURE OF THE PAST. I LIKED HOW WE DID IT. WE DID IT IN THE PAST. AND WE HAD A PRIORITIZATION BROKEN INTO 2 WORKSHOPS. THE FIRST ONE WAS THE DIVISION HEADS CAME BEFORE US AND GAVE US THEIR INPUT. AND I WAS SOMEWHAT RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT BECAUSE I SPOKE TO THE GM, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE 1 WORKSHOP, WE OR 2 WORKSHOPS, WE WORK DOWN TO A TOP 10 LIST BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS. AND IT WENT ON A SHELF SOMEWHERE. AND WE WEREN'T INFORMED IN THE WAY WE HAVE IN THIS PROCESS BY STAFF OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT THEIR PRIORITIES WERE. BUT I REALLY LIKED THE SEQUENCE WE USED TO HAVE WHERE WE'D HAVE THE STAFF INPUT ON PRIORITIES AND THEN WE'D DO OUR OWN PRIORITIZATION PROCESS. AND I DIDN'T FEEL CONSTRAINED BY, YOU KNOW, THINKING ABOUT THE BUDGET. THE BUDGET WASN'T ALL THAT TIED INTO OUR PRIORITIZATION MEETING. I ALWAYS THOUGHT IT COULD BE DONE EARLIER IN THE YEAR, FOR INSTANCE. AND THEN WE'D HAVE THE WORKSHOP JUST ON CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT, AND THEN WE'D START THE BUDGET PROCESS. SO I THINK I LIKED IT WHEN THEY WERE DISTINCT WORKSHOPS. THAT'S MY ONLY INPUT. DO YOU THINK WE DID A BETTER JOB OF INTEGRATING OUR PRIORITIES INTO OUR BUDGET PREVIOUSLY? BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE DID. SO I WOULD SAY THAT THAT'S ONE REASON WHY WE TRIED TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT THIS YEAR. I CAN SEE DOING WHAT WE DID IN TERMS OF SEQUENCING FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT RIGHT INTO BUDGETING, BUT I'D VERY MUCH LIKE TO KEEP PRIORITIZATION DISTINCT AND MAYBE EARLIER. LIKE IN, LIKE, THE FIRST MONTH OF THE YEAR, MAYBE. AND I THINK I DO AGREE WITH THAT. MAYBE THERE COULD BE SOME ROOM AT THE JANUARY BOARD RETREAT FOR BOARD PRIORITIES. YEAH, I USED TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION WITH THE GM EVERY YEAR. IT'S JUST THE GM'S POSITION WAS THAT THE PRIORITIES FEED THE BUDGET, AND TO ME IT'S ALWAYS CLEARLY BEEN THAT PRIORITIES AREN'T BUDGET, THEY DON'T ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE BUDGET. WE WOULD DISCUSS CONCEPTS LIKE BETTER LABOR RELATIONS, LAND ACQUISITION, WHICH, BY THE WAY, I JUST REMINDED MYSELF OF WHAT I WANT TO SAY IN REFLECTING BACK ON THIS. THIS PROCESS WE HAVEN'T ENGAGED IN, OTHER THAN THE SESSION ON PRIORITIZATION, AND I THINK I GOT IN THERE, YOU KNOW, BY LAND. IT WAS JUST LIKE THAT. THAT PRIORITY GETS A LITTLE BURIED IN THIS PROCESS FOR SOME REASON. [03:40:01] I'M NOT SURE WHY. BUT AT FERN COTTAGE, ALL 7 OF US WENT AND PUT THE TOP PRIORITY ON LAND ACQUISITION. SO WE DO INCLUDE THE LAND ACQUISITION STUDY SESSION. IT'S REALLY 6 SESSIONS, RIGHT? SO WE HAD A LAND ACQUISITION SESSION IN FEBRUARY OR MARCH, RIGHT? AND THEN WE ALSO HAD A TRAIL STUDY SESSION, RIGHT? SO THAT THERE WAS SO IT GOES BOARD RETREAT. IF WE CAN SOMEHOW GET TO THE EARLIER SLIDES, THERE WAS 6. SO THERE'S BOARD RETREAT, LAND ACQUISITION, TRAIL, RIGHT, CAPITAL PROJECTS, BOARD PRIORITIES, AND THEN TODAY WE SPLIT BOARD PRIORITIES AND CAPITAL PROJECT AND BUDGET. ALL RIGHT, YOU'RE RIGHT, I LIKE HOW WE DID I LIKE HOW WE DO THE LAND SESSION AND A SEPARATE TRAIL SESSION. YEAH, I THINK THAT YOU DO HAVE A GOOD POINT WHERE MAYBE NEXT YEAR, IF WE WERE TO ITERATE UPON THIS, MAYBE WE CAN START TO LOOK AT THESE 6 SESSIONS AND MAYBE REORDER IT A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY. I THINK JANUARY IS A REALLY NICE TIME TO COME TOGETHER TO TALK ABOUT PRIORITIES, AND THAT COULD BE SOMETHING THAT'S TIED INTO THE BOARD RETREAT, AND THEN TRY TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A THROUGH LINE. I KNOW WHEN WE DID THE FEBRUARY LAND ACQUISITION AND TRAILS STUDY SESSION IN MARCH. MAYBE THEN WHEN WE COME BACK TO CAPITAL PROJECTS, WE HAVE A REVIEW EACH TIME OF WHAT WE HAD TALKED ABOUT PREVIOUSLY. SO I THINK THERE'S SOME LIKE ITERATIVE IMPROVEMENTS THAT CAN BE MADE TO HELP HAVE THAT THROUGH LINE AND ALSO THINK ABOUT ALL 6 TOGETHER. YEAH, I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT. AND THANK YOU FOR POINTING THIS OUT. FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO SAY I APPRECIATE THAT OUR FEARLESS PRESIDENT AND THE TEAM AND THE STAFF DID TRY SOMETHING NEW, AND I THINK IT SERVED ITS PURPOSE IN THE SENSE THAT IT OBVIOUSLY MADE VERY CLEAR, YOU KNOW, THAT THERE ARE TRADE-OFFS. WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE TRADE-OFFS, BUT WHEN YOU'RE ACTUALLY SORT OF FORCED TO, YOU KNOW, LOOK AT WHAT WE ALL WANT TO DO AND THEN SAY, WELL, WHAT WOULD YOU DO LESS OF, OR WHAT WOULD GO FURTHER DOWN THE LINE FOR FUTURE, OR WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, IT DOES BRING IT HOME. AT THE SAME TIME, I AGREE WITH COLIN. I LIKE THE OLD SYSTEM BETTER. I MEAN, I THINK IT WAS GOOD WE DID IT THIS YEAR BECAUSE IT'S GOOD TO FOCUS ON THESE ISSUES AT THIS POINT IN TIME. BUT I THINK IN TERMS OF BEING ABLE TO JUST HOLISTICALLY DESCRIBE WHAT OUR PRIORITIES ARE, WHETHER THEY'RE CAPITAL PROJECTS OR WHETHER THEY'RE POLICY. I MEAN, I STILL PUT ALL OF THEM ON MY SLIDE, BUT IT WAS A LITTLE DISJOINTED BECAUSE IT DID I FEEL A LOT OF TIMES THROUGHOUT THIS DISCUSSION WE WERE MOSTLY TALKING ABOUT A CAPITAL PROJECT FRAME, AND SO MUCH OF WHAT I CARE ABOUT AND OTHERS CARE ABOUT IS NOT NECESSARILY CAPITAL. IN FACT, ACTUALLY, SOME OF MY BIGGEST PROJECTS EVEN NOW ARE NOT EVEN ON THE LIST. ALSO THE POLICY ONES OBVIOUSLY AREN'T ON THE LIST. BUT SO THERE'S THAT. BUT I GUESS THE OTHER CHALLENGE WITH THIS ONE IS IT WAS WE WERE VERY AMBITIOUS IN TERMS OF WHAT WE TRIED TO COVER. I MEAN, I THINK THAT WAS INTENTIONAL BECAUSE THERE WAS A LOT TO COVER, SO WE TRIED TO, AND WE DID REMARKABLY WELL. BUT IT WAS HARD TO HAVE SUCH SHORT TIME ON SOME OF THESE THINGS BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE WE ONLY SCRATCHED THE SURFACE. AND, YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH ARE WE REALLY GETTING OUT OF THAT THAT'S MEANINGFUL? I MEAN, I'M GLAD THAT THAT, YOU KNOW, MAX AND OTHERS FEEL THAT THEY'RE GETTING SOME TAKEAWAYS THAT CAN GO BACK TO STAFF. BUT, BUT I DO FEEL LIKE SOMETHING GETS LOST TOO IN THIS KIND OF FORMAT. AND, AND AT TIMES IT WAS A LITTLE CONFUSING TOO, BECAUSE LIKE, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT CAPITAL PROJECTS OR PRIORITIES? OR LIKE, WHERE DO I PUT THIS? YOU KNOW, AND SO IT WAS AND I ALSO FELT LIKE WE WERE LIKE TODAY, I FEEL LIKE WE WERE JUMPING AROUND, NOT REALLY JUMPING AROUND, NOT IF YOU WERE, YOU KNOW, FOLLOWING THE AGENDA, BUT IT STILL FELT LIKE WE WERE JUMPING AROUND BECAUSE THERE WERE A LOT OF SORT OF SEPARATE TOPICS THAT WE WERE GOING TO TRY TO COVER, RELATED TOPICS BUT SEPARATE. SO THAT WOULD BE MY FEEDBACK FOR THIS WHOLE THING. BUT THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I MEAN, I THINK THIS WAS A GRAND EXPERIMENT, AND I WAS IMPRESSED AT HOW EFFICIENTLY IT WAS RUN, AND I REALLY LIKED ALL OF THESE DOCUMENTS, EVEN THOUGH IT'S HARD TO TO FIND THE ONES THAT YOU NEED IN THE MOMENT. THANK YOU. WE ALSO DID HAVE TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES WITH THE POWER GOING OUT, TOO. YEAH. I THINK I LIKE THIS FORMAT. I LIKE THE WAY THIS WAS DONE. I FELT LIKE THE BOARD WAS HEARD A LITTLE MORE. I THANK MAX AND STAFF FOR ACKNOWLEDGING SOME OF THE THINGS WE DID AND GIVING US FEEDBACK IMMEDIATELY AFTER. I LIKE THE IDEA THAT WE WERE CONCENTRATING ON OUR FISCAL REALITIES. AND, YOU KNOW, I LIKE TO SAY WHAT MY PRIORITIES ARE. I'D LIKE TO HAVE A DREAM SESSION ON THAT AND SAY IN JANUARY, [03:45:01] BUT THEN I THINK WE NEED REALITY AND WE NEED TO MAKE SOME DECISIONS. I THINK IT WAS GREAT. I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE SEEN ONE EXERCISE, AND THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN PICK A CAPITAL PROJECT, AND WITH THE PRIORITIZATION DOCUMENT WE HAVE, SEND STAFF, WHOMEVER'S IN CHARGE OR WHOEVER DOES THAT, IN ONE ROOM AND THE BOARD IN ANOTHER ROOM AND FIGURE OUT FOR THAT ONE CAPITAL PROJECT, LET STAFF SCORE IT, COME BACK AND SEE HOW AND THEN WHAT WE WOULD DO AND BUILD IN A SHORTFALL OF BUDGET AND FIGURE OUT HOW WE DO THAT AND COME BACK AND COMPARE IT AND JUST TO SEE HOW IT WOULD BE IN REALITY. THAT COULD ALSO BE A FUN BOARD RETREAT ACTIVITY, ACTUALLY. JUST TO SEE WHAT THE DIFFERENCE WOULD BE. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, WE COULD EVEN DO IT WITH A PRIORITY OR THE THE MODEL OF 135 POINTS VERSUS 100 POINTS AND NO MINIMUM SCORE. IT WOULD BE INTERESTING TO SEE IF ANYTHING CHANGED. THANK YOU. I DID FIND THE SESSION 2 A LITTLE BIT CONFUSING BECAUSE WHEN IT WAS TALKING ABOUT PRIORITIZATIONS, I THOUGHT IT WAS STARTING THE DISCUSSION ON THE PRIORITIZATION OF THE CAPITAL PROJECTS. SO IT WASN'T AS CLEAR THAT THESE WERE KIND OF OUR OVERALL OVERARCHING PRIORITIES, AND I THINK THAT WAS REFLECTED IN EACH BOARD MEMBER ANSWERED THE 3 QUESTIONS DIFFERENTLY. SO ON THAT PART, YOU COULD SEE THAT WE WEREN'T COMING TO THE SAME UNDERSTANDING. I DID LIKE, AS FAR AS GETTING TO THE DIFFERENT FISCAL OVERVIEW, I WAS ACTUALLY HOPING WE WERE GOING TO GET TO THAT FISCAL OVERVIEW SOONER BECAUSE DESPITE US HAVING DIFFERENT PRIORITIES THAT WE MIGHT HAVE SAID, YOU KNOW, LAST YEAR THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A PRIORITY OF THE BOARD, THERE IS ALSO THE FISCAL REALITY. AND BEING ABLE TO KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, LAND ACQUISITION IS SOMETHING THAT WE ARE FOCUSED ON, BUT THAT WE ARE GOING TO STILL TAKE THE APPROPRIATE MEASURES SO THAT THE PARK IS NOT HAVING THESE DIFFERENT OVERRUNS, I THINK, IS IMPORTANT. AND STARTING TO LOOK AT REALLY HOW DO WE MAKE DIFFERENT DECISIONS AND HOW DO WE REALLY LOOK AT THAT CAPITAL LIST OF CAPITAL PROJECTS AND HOW DO WE MAYBE POTENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, MOVE SOME OFF OR MAYBE REEVALUATE DECISIONS WE MADE. SO AS FAR AS I FEEL LIKE YOU CAN LOOK AT IPON AS WHAT TYPE OF LESSON IS THAT OVER TIME? BECAUSE THE BOARD DID APPROVE THE BUILDING, BUT WHAT DID WE LEARN FROM THAT OVERALL CONSTRUCTION PROJECT THAT PERHAPS WE COULD DO DIFFERENTLY IN THE FUTURE? BECAUSE WE DO HAVE A FEW OTHER LARGE BUILDINGS ON THERE, AND, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THAT'S LOOKING AT TILDEN, AND DO WE NEED THAT BUILDING OF THAT SIZE AND THAT COST WHEN THERE'S OTHER WARDS THAT DO NEED A VISITOR CENTER. SO I THINK WHAT I LIKE ABOUT THIS PROCESS IS WE HAD ACTIVITIES THAT KIND OF STARTED TO SHOW LIKE THE REAL TRADEOFFS. BUT THEN ALSO, I THINK IT GAVE LIGHT FOR BOARD MEMBERS. THESE ARE THE TRADEOFFS THAT, YOU KNOW, THE STAFF IS HAVING TO DEAL WITH AS THEY GO THROUGH THIS AND MAKE DIFFERENT RECOMMENDATIONS. SO THAT KIND OF INTERACTIVE PART OF IT, I DID LIKE. I WOULD ACTUALLY LIKE PROBABLY A BLEND OF THE OLD PROCESS AND THE NEW PROCESS. BECAUSE I THINK THEY BOTH HAVE PROS AND CONS. BUT I THINK THIS PROCESS GAVE MORE VOICE, AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT A LOT OF BOARD MEMBERS WERE ASKING FOR. I THINK WE JUST HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO BETTER TEASE OUT THAT BOARD PRIORITIES. I THINK IF, IF YOU CAN KIND OF TEASE THAT OUT THAT AND MAYBE SEPARATE IT FROM THIS TYPE OF PROCESS, THAT WILL KIND OF MAKE THIS STRONGER. BUT, [03:50:02] YEAH. JOHN, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD? YES, I DO. I REALLY, REALLY APPRECIATE THE THE SPIRIT OF WHAT WAS INTENDED HERE TODAY. I REALLY FEEL THAT IT WAS A VERY SINCERE EFFORT TO ENGAGE THE BOARD IN WAYS THAT WE'VE NOT PREVIOUSLY BEEN ENGAGED. AND, YOU KNOW, I ALSO WAS CONFUSED AT TIMES ABOUT WHAT WAS GOING ON BECAUSE IT'S SUCH A SHOCK TO HAVE ALL THIS INVOLVEMENT AND ALL THESE STEPS THAT WERE PUT IN THERE AND ALL THESE DIFFERENT RANKINGS THAT WE HAD TO DO. WE HAD TO DO IT 3 TIMES, AND I DON'T KNOW WHY WE HAD TO DO THAT, BUT, YOU KNOW, IT WAS PRETTY AMAZING TO ME THAT YOU WERE ABLE TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN. THAT WAS REALLY GREAT. I ALSO REALLY THOUGHT IT WAS VALUABLE TO SEE THAT OVERVIEW TODAY AT THE BEGINNING OF ALL THE FUNDING AND THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE DIFFERENT YEARS AS WE'VE GONE THROUGH. AND WHERE WE'VE, YOU KNOW, WHERE EXPENDITURES HAVE EXCEEDED REVENUES. NOT THE BEST NEWS, BUT THE GOOD NEWS, I THINK, FOR NEXT YEAR IS GOING TO BE THAT WE WILL HAVE HAD THIS PRIORITY BUSINESS SQUARED AWAY AND REVAMPED TO OUR SATISFACTION, WHERE THAT HAS TAKEN UP A PRETTY BIG CHUNK OF OUR TIME. AND IF WE DIDN'T HAVE TO DO THAT WE MAYBE COULD HAVE BEEN DOING SOME OTHER THINGS. SO I'M REALLY, REALLY LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT PRIORITY REVAMPING TO, YOU KNOW, WHAT A LOT OF US THINK WOULD BE A BETTER WAY TO PRIORITIZE THE PROJECTS. BUT OVERALL, THANK YOU, THANK YOU FOR PUTTING ALL THIS TOGETHER. I KNOW THERE WAS A BUNCH OF YOU INVOLVED IN IT. AND AGAIN, I APPRECIATE THE SPIRIT OF IT. LINDA, DID YOU SAY SOMETHING? OKAY, GO AHEAD. I JUST REALLY LOVED THE PROCESS. I REMEMBER THE FIRST CPP, I WALKED OUT OF HERE SMILING. I REALLY FELT LIKE I WAS UNDERSTANDING WHAT WAS GOING ON. TERM I USE A LOT, PEEL BACK THE CURTAIN. I KNEW THE INFO WAS THERE, BUT ACTUALLY HAVING IT BETTER PRESENTED. I WAS CONFUSED IN THE BEGINNING, THE TERMINOLOGY OF A FRAMEWORK KEEPS SHOWING UP TODAY VERSUS THE CPP. I COULDN'T QUITE UNDERSTAND WHAT WE WERE DOING, TO BE HONEST, BUT WE ALL GOT THERE. AND THE CPP FOR ME AND THE NEW DASHBOARD, THAT FIRST DAY I I JUST WAS LIKE, WOW, THIS IS SO COOL. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE EVERYTHING WE'VE ASKED FOR. AND I THINK THAT DASHBOARD WILL PROBABLY EVENTUALLY HOST THE CPP NUMBERS AND RANK THEM, AND MAYBE WE CAN EVEN PLAY WITH THEM OURSELVES, IDEALLY, AT SOME POINT, WOULD BE REALLY NICE. SO I REALLY FELT HEARD. I REALLY FELT NOT JUST PRESENTED TO, BUT AS A DECISION MAKER, I FELT BETTER PREPARED UNDERSTANDING. I THINK I WOULD HAVE LIKED MAYBE BETWEEN THAT AND TODAY, MAYBE SOME MORE TIME. IT FELT A LITTLE REPETITIVE TO GO BACK THROUGH, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S WEIGHTED AND WHAT'S NOT, ESPECIALLY WHEN I SAT WITH MY LIST AND STARTED, YOU KNOW, LIKE, WE ALREADY HEARD YOU, LINDA. BUT MAYBE SOME MORE TIME TO ACTUALLY HAVE HAD THAT IN FRONT OF US, TO HAVE THAT DASHBOARD. AND I THINK THAT'S COMING. BUT THAT CPP IN FRONT OF US AND MAYBE IF WE HAD MORE TIME, WE COULD HAVE HAD THIS THE STAFF COULD HAVE COME BACK WITH US, HEY, OF COURSE, MAYBE THAT'S DREAMING. MAYBE IT'S GOING TO TAKE YOU 8 MONTHS TO DO THAT. I DON'T KNOW, BUT DREAMING THAT, LIKE, THE CPP CRITERIA IS DONE AND WE HEARD YOU AND HERE'S ALL THE SCORES AND THEY'RE ALL RANKED AND LET'S HAVE ANOTHER SESSION. SO ANYWAY, I LOVED ALL THAT. I DID ALSO REALLY LOVE TODAY THE FINANCIAL DETAILS, THE 5 YEARS. I SUPER LOVED SEEING SEEING THE PROACTIVE IDEAS COMING OUT OF STAFF OF WHERE WE CAN CUT 2%, 5%, AND HAVING THAT DISCUSSION AND REALLY SEEING THAT. I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I WOULD LOVE TO SEE EVERY YEAR HALFWAY THROUGH THE YEAR ABOUT NOW, BUT WITH ALSO THE COMBINATION OF ARE WE ON TRACK, HOW DID THE BUDGET THAT WE APPROVED LOOK, A MID-YEAR BUDGET REVIEW. WE'RE RIGHT ON TRACK OR EVEN MORE PROBLEMS. HERE WE ARE IN JUNE AND SO, A REGULAR, AND I DO THINK THAT MAYBE I'M OLD SCHOOL LIKE COLIN, MAYBE I'M JUST TRYING TO, I REALLY WOULD HAVE LIKED TO SEE, I THINK, PRIORITIES SEPARATE AND MAYBE FIRST AND MAYBE AS PART OF THE BOARD RETREAT THAT WE HAVE BIG PICTURE TERMS LIKE, ARE WE ALL IN AGREEMENT, WOULD WE PUT CLIMATE CHANGE FIRST OR EDUCATION FIRST, WOULD WE PUT EQUITY FIRST OR WOULD WE PUT, YOU KNOW, OUR PROJECTS, DO WE PUT ACQUISITION FIRST. SO I WOULD HAVE PREFERRED THE BIG PICTURE PRIORITIES. I [03:55:01] WENT WITH IT AND IT WORKED FOR ME EVENTUALLY, AND I APPRECIATED ALL THAT AND ALL THE WORK THAT EVERYONE DID AND BROUGHT THAT AROUND. BUT I'LL STILL BE A LITTLE OLD SCHOOL AND SAY I THINK THE PRIORITIES AND I WOULD LOVE IF WE COULD ALL COME UP WITH ONE TOGETHER. IT'S NOT EASY WITH 5. IT WOULD PROBABLY BE REALLY HARD WITH 7 OF US, BUT TO TRY TO COME UP WITH ONE PRIORITY LIST OVERALL AND MAKE SURE IT'S MISSION-DRIVEN RIGHT AT THE OUTSET, RIGHT AT THE BEGINNING. AND SO I GUESS I THINK I REALLY APPRECIATE EVERYTHING, AND I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THE CPP SCORES. I'M LOOKING TO THE BUDGET CHANGES AND ADJUSTMENTS. I ACTUALLY FEEL OPTIMISTIC. I THINK SOMEONE STARTED, KATIE STARTED, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT ALONE IN THIS, CAME THROUGH RIGHT FROM THE OUTSET. AND AS WE WRAP UP HERE, I THINK THAT'S STILL THE MESSAGE. YOU KNOW, WE'RE REALLY AN AMAZING WE ARE NOT JUST THE LARGEST PARK DISTRICT, WE ARE THE BEST PARK DISTRICT AND WE ARE DOING THIS PROACTIVELY AND SOON. AND WHAT WE HAVE DONE IS NOT BECAUSE WE ARE LIKE, OH MY GOD, WE ARE IN A LOT OF PAIN. IT IS LIKE, OH, WE ARE SO PROACTIVE AND WE ARE A TEAM AND WE ARE GOING TO MAKE THIS BETTER GOING FORWARD. AND I AM FEELING SOME OF THAT AND I LIKE THAT APPROACH. SO I REALLY APPRECIATE HAVING THE CONSULTANTS COME HELP US AND FACILITATE AND MEDIATE THAT. I DON'T THINK WE COULD HAVE DONE IT WITHOUT YOU, HONESTLY. IT HELPS BRING A BALANCE AND KEEPS US ON TRACK. SO I'VE REALLY APPRECIATED THE PROCESS AND PRESIDENT SAN WONG FOR DRIVING THAT AGENDA. AND I'M SURE YOU PUT IN A LOT OF EXTRA HOURS WITH CONSULTANTS ON THE SIDE. THE PRESIDENT'S JOB IS KIND OF LIKE A MAYOR'S JOB AT A CITY. YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW MUCH EXTRA TIME YOU'RE PUTTING IN. SO THANK YOU TOO FOR YOUR TIME. I THINK WE NOW HAVE A GOOD PLAN FOR 2027. AND I'M JUST THINKING BACK TO OUR JANUARY RETREAT. AND I THINK AT ONE POINT WE WERE EVEN THINKING OF CANCELING THE JANUARY RETREAT. AND I REMEMBER SAYING, NO, WE'RE NOT CANCELING IT. WE'RE GOING TO DO SOMETHING. AND WE'RE GOING TO MAKE IT EFFECTIVE. BUT I KNOW THE PAST 2 YEARS WITH OUR JANUARY RETREATS, WE KIND OF HAD SOME DIFFERENT SCHEDULES AND GOALS. BUT MAYBE NEXT YEAR'S, I THINK THAT COULD BE A REALLY GOOD OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PRIORITIES SESSION. SO THAT'S SOMETHING TO CONSIDER. DIRECTOR SAN JUAN, I JUST WANTED TO REMIND, I THINK WE STILL NEED TO DO PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE LAST PARTS OF THE BUDGET. SO THE LAST PARTS OF THE AGENDA. SORRY. YEAH, YEAH, I WANT TO JUST ECHO OR JUST SAY THANK YOU AND THE BOARD STAFF FOR JUST TRUST IN KAREN FOR WORKING THROUGH THIS AND JUST TRUSTING THE PROCESS AND TRYING NEW THINGS AND BEING OPEN TO JUST BEING CREATIVE. AND KAREN, FOR YOUR EXPERTISE AND JUST YOUR INCREDIBLE PENMANSHIP. ABILITY TO CAPTURE. AND YEAH, FOR JUST EVERYBODY WORKING, OLIVIA, MAX, AND STAFF WORKING TO PUT THIS AGENDA TOGETHER IN SHORT ORDER AND BEING SO AVAILABLE FOR LAST-MINUTE PHONE CALLS AT 4:30 OR WHAT HAVE YOU. WE DO HAVE THIS LAST ITEM. AS A PART OF THIS LAST ITEM, IT WAS THE WORKING AGREEMENTS AND WHAT'S NEXT FOR THESE. THIS WAS GOING TO INTENDED TO BE A LONG, LIKE A 15-MINUTE PIECE, WHICH WE DON'T HAVE TIME FOR RIGHT NOW. BUT THE QUESTIONS WERE, IS THERE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO EDIT? HOW, IF AT ALL, DO YOU WANT TO CARRY THESE FORWARD IN FUTURE MEETINGS? AND DOES THIS MAKE SENSE TO CHECK IN ON ANNUALLY? AND I WONDER ABOUT PUNCHING THAT TO A FUTURE CONVERSATION, A FUTURE MEETING, VERSUS DOING THAT NOW. HOW DOES THAT SOUND? WELL, HERE'S WHAT I PROPOSE. THANK YOU FOR THE NICE POSTER BOARD. LET'S TRY HAVING THIS HERE IN THE BOARDROOM AND SEE HOW IT WORKS FOR US TO HAVE THIS LOCATED HERE. AND IF THERE'S SOME INDIVIDUAL, LIKE, EDITS, MAYBE YOU CAN SEND THEM TO MAX, MEGAN, AND I. AND THEN, I DO THINK IT'D BE GOOD MAYBE THAT COULD BE THE OTHER AGENDA ITEM FOR JANUARY 2027, COULD BE TO REVISIT THESE AT THE BOARD RETREAT. COOL. DOES THAT SOUND GENERALLY GOOD TO THE REST OF THE BOARD? YEP, BRING THIS BACK IN JANUARY FOR A CHECK-IN? COOL. ALL RIGHT. THERE'S AN EVALUATION FORM. PLEASE FILL IT OUT. AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR SLIDES. SO YEAH, COMMENT. THANK YOU SO MUCH TO OUR FACILITATORS. WE'LL DO SOME PUBLIC COMMENT NOW AND THEN WE'LL ADJOURN THE MEETING AFTER PUBLIC COMMENT. SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND SEE WHAT PUBLIC COMMENT WE HAVE. JEFFREY KAHN, YOU HAVE 3 MINUTES. HI, I'M JEFFREY KAHN REPRESENTING FRIENDS OF LAKE TEMESCAL. I WANT TO COMMENT ON YOUR PROJECT PRIORITY FRAMEWORK. THIS PICKS UP ON SOMETHING COLIN KOPPE HAS SUGGESTED SEVERAL TIMES, HIS NOW FAMOUS ROTARY CLUB METRIC. POPULARITY, USAGE, HOW MANY PEOPLE ACTUALLY USE A PARK OR IF A PROJECT BEING RATED WAS FUNDED, HOW MANY MORE PEOPLE WOULD USE THAT PARK? IT'S HARD TO IMAGINE PRIORITIZING PROJECTS WHILE IGNORING THIS. IN TERMS OF CURRENT USAGE, YOU HAVE DATA ON PARK VISITS THAT WAS PART OF THE DISTRICT PLAN EFFORT. TEMESCAL, FOR INSTANCE, WAS THE 8TH MOST HEAVILY VISITED OF YOUR 73 PARKS IN 2024. [04:00:02] LOOKING FORWARD IN TERMS OF WHAT PROJECTS SHOULD BE PRIORITIZED, THIS FOR FUNDING, LET'S LOOK AT WHAT DRIVES VISITS TO YOUR PARKS. OF YOUR 11 MOST HEAVILY VISITED PARKS, 6 HAVE SWIMMING. GROUND BEACH, TILDEN, MILLER KNOX SHORELINE, QUARRY LAKES, DELVALLE, AND TEMESCALP. THESE ARE NOT SWIMMING POOLS, BUT BEACHES, WHAT IF YOU FUNDED THE TEMESCAL LAKE RESTORATION PROJECT? WHAT LEVEL OF ADDITIONAL VISITATION WOULD THE PARK SEE? A 1977 EPA REPORT ON LAKE TEMESCAL PROVIDES INSIGHT INTO THAT QUESTION. IN 1977, PER THE EPA REPORT, 750,000 PEOPLE VISITED THE PARK IN ONE YEAR, AND 150,000 OF THEM USED THE BEACH AND LAKE. THE REPORT NOTED THE FOLLOWING, AND I QUOTE: "A PEAK DAY DURING THE 4-MONTH SWIMMING SEASON BRINGS AS MANY AS 03,000 PEOPLE TO THE LAKE'S BEACH AND SWIMMING AREA." THANK YOU. BOB PEOPLES, YOU HAVE 3 MINUTES. I JUST AGAIN WANTED TO THANK THE STAFF, ACTING GENERAL MANAGER CORDEN, AND THE CONSULTANTS AND THE BOARD FOR GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS. I MEAN, IT'S A CHANGE IN THE PROCESS OF DEALING WITH THIS. YOU'RE DEALING WITH A LOT OF NEW ISSUES THAT, YOU KNOW, HAVEN'T HAVEN'T BEEN RAISED IN THE PAST. AND I APPLAUD YOU FOR WORKING THROUGH THIS AND I THINK WORKING TOWARDS SOME CONSENSUS ON IT, IT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE. BUT I WOULD SAY THAT CHANGE IS ONGOING AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE EXPERIENCE WITH THIS IS GOING TO INFLUENCE WHAT HAPPENS NEXT YEAR, YOU KNOW, IN THE PLANNING PROCESS. YOU ALREADY TALKED ABOUT IT A LITTLE BIT, BUT YOU NEED TO THINK ABOUT IT. AND AS MUCH AS WE TRY TO KEEP POLICY AND BUDGETING SEPARATE, THEY REALLY COME TOGETHER IN THE BUDGET PROCESS, AND THEY NEED TO DEAL WITH BOTH OF THEM AT THE SAME TIME. THANK YOU. KELLY ABREU. ALL RIGHT. SCANNING THROUGH THE PRIORITIES, THERE'S LIKE A MILLION PRIORITIES HERE, BUT I WANT TO PICK OUT ONE AND EMPHASIZE IT. AND SO I WAS GOING TO CALL IT GEOGRAPHIC EQUITY, BUT THEN I FOUND OUT THAT IT'S ALREADY DEFINED AND IT'S GOT THIS VERY UNUSUAL COUNTERINTUITIVE DEFINITION ABOUT BEING WITHIN A HALF-MILE RADIUS OF A CENSUS TRACT THAT'S DISADVANTAGED, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. SO GEOGRAPHIC EQUITY, THAT'S NOT WHAT IT MEANS. IT MEANS THAT THIS IS A 7-MEMBER BOARD. EACH MEMBER HAS ABOUT THE SAME NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT THEY REPRESENT, AND EACH ONE WANTS WARD TO HAVE EQUITY. SO THAT'S GEOGRAPHIC EQUITY. IF YOU CAN'T GET PROJECTS SPLIT UP SOMEWHAT EVENLY GEOGRAPHICALLY BY WARD, OR GOOD ENOUGH, LET'S SAY ONE WARD GETS A GREAT PROJECT AND THE OTHERS GET, GET A COUPLE OF SO-SO PROJECTS, BUT THEY ADD UP TO BE GOOD ENOUGH TO KEEP THE BOARD MEMBER HAPPY, THEN THAT'S GOOD ENOUGH. THIS IS GEOGRAPHIC EQUITY. IF IT'S NOT ON THE LIST, IT SHOULD BE ON THE LIST SOMEHOW. AND IF THESE PROJECTS ALL END UP IN THE SAME PLACE, IT'S NOT GOING TO FLY. IT CAN'T FLY. THANKS. KEVIN SMALLMAN. I [04:05:02] APPRECIATE HEARING SEVERAL BOARD MEMBERS DURING THIS LAST ROUND DISCUSS WHERE DO THESE TRAIL-BASED PROJECTS FIT INTO THE LARGER CONVERSATION. IT HAS ITS OWN STUDY SESSION, BUT THAT STUDY SESSION DOESN'T NECESSARILY LIKE DIRECTLY RELATE TO THE CAPITAL PROJECTS LIST. AND YEAH, IT'S A BIG QUESTION THAT I HAVE. TRAILS-BASED RECREATION IS HOW I MOST ENJOY USING THE PARKS. IT'S MAYBE NOT THE TOP PRIORITY FOR WHAT I THINK THE PARK DISTRICT SHOULD SPEND THEIR MONEY ON, BUT IT'S DEFINITELY LIKE THE SPECIAL PLACE IN MY HEART. AND I'M INTERESTED IN HEARING, WITH THE LAST, WHAT, 4 OR 5 YEARS, EVERY LIKE FROM THE TRAIL USER WORKING GROUP INITIATION TO NOW, THERE'S BEEN A TON OF EFFORT ON YOUR STAFF'S BEHALF AND ENGAGEMENT WITH THE COMMUNITY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT TRAILS MEAN AND LOOK LIKE GOING FORWARD FOR THE PARK DISTRICT. AND I'M, UM, YEAH, I GUESS I'M JUST QUESTIONING WHERE, WHERE DO WE GO FROM LIKE CONCEPTUAL, WHAT ARE THE TRAIL-BASED OPPORTUNITIES GOING TO BE, TO LIKE WHERE IS THE LIST OF TRAIL-BASED OPPORTUNITIES GOING TO TAKE PLACE. SO ON YOUR BIG CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT LIST, THERE'S ONLY JUST A HANDFUL OF PROJECTS, AND UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT'S A 3 TO 5 YEAR LIST, THAT'S A PRETTY LIKE SMALL AMOUNT OF TRAIL-BASED OPPORTUNITIES THAT ARE IN THE PIPELINE. SO I JUST WANT TO ECHO THAT CONVERSATION OF THE PARK DISTRICT DOES SOMETHING UNIQUE IN THAT YOU HAVE LARGE TRACTS OF LAND. YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO BUY LARGE TRACTS OF LAND, AND YOU HAVE THE ABILITY FOR PEOPLE TO RECREATE ON LARGE OPEN SPACES. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IS NOT MAYBE THE GREATEST AND BEST USE OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU ARE UNIQUE AT DOING. IT'S SOMETHING THAT ALMOST NOBODY ELSE DOES ON THE SCALE THAT YOU GUYS DO, AND OUR REGION. THERE'S A HANDFUL OF OTHER FOLKS WHO OWN SOME GOOD CHUNKS OF LAND BUT ARE NOT TARGET-FIXATED ON RECREATING ON THEM. SO I'D LIKE TO HEAR MORE OF THOSE CONVERSATIONS. WHERE ARE THOSE TRAIL OPPORTUNITIES AS WE HEAD INTO THE SECOND CENTURY? THANKS. NO MORE PUBLIC COMMENT. OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU EVERYONE FOR YOUR COMMENTS. I'LL JUST REMIND BOARD MEMBERS, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A SHORT BREAK ONCE WE ADJOURN, BUT THERE'S THIS EVALUATION TO FILL OUT REAL QUICK. WELL, ONE MOMENT. OH, ELLEN THOMPSON, I THOUGHT YOU YOU WANTED SOMETHING NOT ON THE AGENDA, CORRECT? SO THAT WILL BE AT 3 O'CLOCK. THANK YOU. OKAY. ALRIGHT, SO THEN WE WILL RECONVENE FOR CLOSED SESSION AT 3 O'CLOCK, AND WE WILL HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT FOR CLOSED SESSION. AND SO WHAT I'M GOING TO DO IS I'M GOING TO ADJOURN NOW, AND PLEASE FILL OUT THOSE EVALUATIONS. THANK YOU, EVERYONE. OH, REAL QUICK. SORRY, I EVEN HAVE IT RIGHT HERE IN FRONT OF ME. DIRECTOR DECHAMBEAU WOULD LIKE TO ADJOURN IN HONOR OF SOMEONE. PLEASE GO AHEAD. YEAH, I JUST WANT TO ADJOURN TODAY. I HOPE MANY OF YOU KNOW PAUL PAUL EHRLICH'S WORK. HE PASSED AWAY A COUPLE WEEKS AGO. FOR ME, HE WAS VERY INFLUENTIAL. IN 1968, HE WROTE THE BOOK THE POPULATION BOMB, WHICH REALLY LAID OUT THE ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT ABOUT HOW HUMAN BEINGS UNCHECKED AND OUR OVERCONSUMPTION WOULD LEAD. HE'S BEEN A PROFESSOR. I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO MEET WITH HIM A COUPLE TIMES AT STANFORD. HE ACTUALLY FOUNDED STANFORD CENTER FOR CONSERVATION BIOLOGY BACK IN 1984, AND HE'S A GREAT LOSS, AND HE DID A LOT FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT AND CONSERVATION OVERALL. SO I JUST WANT TO ADJOURN AND RECOGNIZE THAT WE LOST HIM A COUPLE WEEKS AGO. THANK YOU. MY APOLOGIES, WE WILL NEED TO GET THIS LAST COMMENT IN, PUBLIC COMMENT IN. GO AHEAD, ELLEN. I GUESS IT IS. MY NAME IS ELLEN THOMPSON. I OWN REDWOOD VALLEY RAILWAY COMPANY, THE STEAM TRAIN IN TILDEN. WE'VE BEEN THERE FOR 74 YEARS. WE GET NO MONEY FROM THE DISTRICT, NO GRANTS, NO DONATIONS. EVERYTHING THERE IS BUILT AND MAINTAINED WITH PRIVATE FUNDS. IN ADDITION TO PROVIDING THE TRAINS, THE TRACK, AND THE BUILDINGS. WE MAINTAIN THE MAJOR DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL, PROVIDE LANDSCAPING INCLUDING PLANTING THE REDWOOD TREES. WE DO FIRE HAZARD ABATEMENT, INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES REMOVAL, AND RARE SPECIES PROTECTION, ALL AT PRIVATE EXPENSE. WE'RE TRYING TO ENSURE THAT THE STEAM TRAIN CAN OPERATE [04:10:01] FOR MANY MORE YEARS INTO THE FUTURE AND MEET THE HUGELY INCREASING ATTENDANCE BY PARK PATRONS. AND TO DO THAT, WE HAVE TO MAKE MANY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS WHICH REQUIRE PERMITTING FROM THE COUNTY, BUT WE CAN'T DO THAT WITHOUT OUR DISTRICT LEASE. BUT NOW WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO RENEW OUR LEASE WITH THE DISTRICT FOR 7 AND A HALF YEARS WITH ONLY LIMITED SUCCESS. IN RECENT WEEKS, THERE HAS BEEN A FLURRY OF EFFORT BY STAFF TO ADDRESS THE SITUATION, AND I WOULD LIKE TO THANK ACTING GENERAL MANAGER KORTEN AND THE LEGAL TEAM FOR MAKING TIME TO FIND A NEW WAY FORWARD. ALSO, SEVERAL BOARD MEMBERS HAVE MADE STATEMENTS IN SUPPORT OF THE STEAM TRAINS, WHICH ARE GREATLY APPRECIATED. BUT UNFORTUNATELY, AT THE SAME TIME, THERE HAVE BEEN STATEMENTS MADE TRYING TO REVERSE DECISIONS THAT WERE SETTLED YEARS AGO AND WHICH WOULD VIRTUALLY ENSURE THAT THE TRAINS WOULD HAVE TO LEAVE TILDEN. THIS IS EMBLEMATIC OF THE CHALLENGES WE HAVE FACED IN TRYING TO COLLABORATE WITH THE DISTRICT ON ANY MATTERS THAT HAVE COME UP IN THE LAST 74 YEARS. THE RIGHT HAND AND THE LEFT HAND ARE COMPLETELY AT ODDS WITH EACH EACH OTHER. DISTRICT BEHAVIOR TOWARD CONCESSIONAIRES HAS SOMETIMES BEEN ILLEGAL. SOME DISTRICT STAFF MEMBERS HAVE BEEN FOND OF SAYING THAT THE DISTRICT AS A PUBLIC AGENCY DOESN'T HAVE TO ABIDE BY THE LAW. THAT IS NOT ENTIRELY TRUE. WE HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE NEW DRAFT READY FOR REVIEW. IS ANYONE REALLY READY TO READ IT? WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR MONEY, BUT ONLY THE ABILITY TO KEEP SERVING THE PUBLIC. WITH NO LEGAL PROTECTION, WE WOULD HAVE TO PICK UP EVERYTHING AND LEAVE. WHEN YOU HAVE SOMETHING LIKE THIS FOR FREE, WHY WOULD YOU THROW IT AWAY? ON ANOTHER NOTE, PLEASE DO NOT ALLOW ANY CASHLESS PLANS TO BE ENACTED ANYWHERE IN THE PARK DISTRICT, EVER. I KNOW IT'S A PAIN, AND I KNOW NOBODY CAN DO MATH IN THEIR HEAD ANYMORE, BUT THIS WOULD UNDERMINE THE DISTRICT'S EFFORTS TOWARD EQUITY IN A VERY BIG WAY. THERE IS A VERY LARGE UNDERGROUND ECONOMY OF GIG WORKERS ALL OVER CALIFORNIA, EVEN THOUGH THE STATE SAYS THERE ISN'T, AND THEY GET PAID IN CASH AND THEY WANT TO BRING THEIR FAMILIES TO THE PARKS. ARE YOU GOING TO STAND AT THE GATE AND TURN THEM AWAY, OR ARE YOU GOING TO MAKE THE STAFF DO THAT? THANK YOU. NO MORE PUBLIC COMMENT. SO WE ARE NOW ADJOURNED. THANK YOU. 2:45. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.