Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 10/26/2017 - Parks and Recreation CommitteePARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT Thursday, October 26, 2017 Municipal Center Council Chambers, 3:00 PM 1. Call to Order: Chairperson Schaefer called the meeting to order at 3:00 pm in the McHenry Municipal Center Council Chamber. 2. Roll Call: Chairperson Alderman Schaefer, Alderman Devine and Alderwoman Condon. City Staff Attendance: Director of Parks & Recreation Hobson, Recreation Supervisor Witt, Athletic & Aquatic Supervisor Thompson, and Parks Maintenance Superintendent Gorniak. Public Attendance: Mr. Jeff Andreason representing aQuity, Inc. 3. Public Comment: None. 4. Approval July 13, 2017 Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting Report. It was the consensus of the Committee to approve the July 13, 2017 Parks and Recreation Committee Report. 5. Review of Community Needs Assessment Results. Mr. Andreason from aQuity was introduced to the Committee. aQuity is the firm contracted by the city to conduct the Community Needs Assessment (CNA). Mr. Andreason presented the Committee with the results of the survey and walked the Committee through the Executive Summary. The survey was conducted for residents within the corporate limits of the city. A total of 407 households responded to the survey. Date collection was performed through most of August and September. Chairperson Schaefer noted some households outside the city limits also received the survey and those were not included in the results. Alderwoman Condon asked if telephone surveys were conducted. Mr. Andreason stated people were given the option to complete the survey online, via mail, or via telephone of which seven households selected. The average length of the survey was 14 minutes. Most importantly, the 407 response were compared to census data by age, race, ethnicity, neighborhood, gender, and children in the household so we know at least demographically, the data is representative of the City of McHenry. Overall, the results of the survey were positive. The average rating given for the department on a 1-10 scale was 7.3, which is considered very positive and the city department is better known than the McHenry County Conservation District. The average rating for school districts and agencies is about a point lower than the city. The proportion of negative to positive responses were also reviewed. The city department has a 10:1 ratio of favorable ratings to unfavorable ratings. Approximately 80% of residents rated the department positively and 8% were negative. The longer someone lives in the city the more the department is favored. Questions were also asked Parks & Recreation Committee Meeting Page 2 October 26, 2017 about the share of property taxes that go to the department. Most residents think it about 5% of the share they pay. When they are told it is actually just under 1 % they were asked to rate the facilities as a good value. Mr. Andreason noted parks districts usually receive 5-6% share of property taxes. In the survey, residents were asked to express what they like most about the department and its strengths. The number one response focused around the programs and events offered by the department. A close second was how well the parks are maintained; they are clean and safe. One in five stated the McHenry Recreation Center was clearly a strength. When asked what they do not like about the department, almost half could not think if anything; either they are not aware or there is absolutely nothing they dislike. Those that did mention something stated issues around the lack, of an indoor pool, need to improve existing outdoor pool, better maintenance of specific parks and playground equipment, and regulation prohibiting dogs in city parks. When asked if they had been to a parks facility in the past 12-months, 84% answered yes. Veterans and Petersen Parks, Fort McHenry and the Recreation Center were visited the most. When asked how satisfied they are with all the facilities they had visited, overall in terms of safety, maintenance, and staff interaction, the scores of higher for the quality of the park experience than the department overall. Average scores are in the 8's again on a 0 to 10 scale, with 10 being the highest score. Very few people surveys expressed anything negative on any of those levels. Chairperson Schaefer asked for the percentages for likes and dislikes of city parks by name from the 84% households reporting. Mr. Andreason presented a pie chart depicting the parks and responses that received 10% and higher. For example, McBark Park came in at 13%. Mr. Andreason stated if someone did give a negative rating to any of these elements, they were asked again in an open-ended question, why they are unhappy with any of the parks facilities. Most often, sources of dissatisfaction were a feeling that some of the places are not well maintained or in need of improvements. This was especially true with the pool, Knox Park. More landscaping was requested for the dog park and Petersen Park, and more parking at the Recreation Center and Veterans Park specifically for outdoor concerts. Of those 16% who said they had not been to any parks or facilities, stated the reason, as they do not have the time or there are no children in the household. For those 16%, there is an impression that what the department offers is geared more towards families or households with younger children and not for adults. Mr. Andreason noted this as a challenge and an opportunity for the city to think about what programs could be offered to include adult households. Approximately one-third of the households said they have not been to any facilities because they go elsewhere — Health Bridge was often mentioned, facilities in Crystal Lake, private studios, and fitness facilities. Some said they were unaware of what was available in the city. Most of the other facilities mentioned were in the Conversation District or other municipalities. Parks & Recreation Committee Meeting Page 3 October 26, 2017 aQuity wanted to know what outdoor improvements or facilities were of greater interest to people. The survey asked people to select what outdoor improvements or facilities were of greater interest to them and to rate their demand. aQuity tested the list by offering trails, open pool, pool with a water park, playgrounds, etc., and asked which of these does your household have an interest or need. Two-thirds or 66% of the respondents answered trails in their area; 44% expressed interest in an open pool; 39% for an outdoor pool and water park; 33% playgrounds. Those who said they were interested in one of the selections were asked to explain how well the parks department or another source is meeting their demands. None of the outdoor facilities tested represent critical unmet needs. In fact, trails, baseball/sports fields, and playgrounds are sufficiently available. Of the outdoor improvements tested, a majority, 40%, placed a top priority on adding and improving trails followed by outdoor pool -related facilities/amenities at 38%, and playgrounds at 4%, sports fields 3%, and ballfields at less than 1 %. Mr. Andreason stated it was clear, an outdoor open pool, water park and splash pad were the top three opportunities based on demand. Chairperson Schaefer said he receives several requests for more sports fields as there are times when the city has a high demands and not enough fields. Mr. Andreason stated overall only one in five households stated athletic fields as a demand. Mr. Andreason cautioned the Committee from thinking the city has a high priority to provide trails as this demand will always be high and it is not possible to saturate completely the city with enough trails. Chairperson Schaefer noted the city received the same response for walking trails from the previous needs assessment. Director Hobson noted the previous assessment was performed in 2004 and trails have been added to the city. Mr. Andreason stated with all his clients, if he sees trails coming up as a low priority he does the research over again. This is why we ask how your needs are being met not just by the parks and recreation department but also from all other sources. If the conservation district and city provide ample trails, why the city should be investing in more trails. Director Hobson added when the city proposes new locations for trails, connectivity to other trails is a priority. At the end of the survey, households were asked for the one thing they would like the Parks and Recreation Department to focus on in terms of improving or expanding. Again, trails was the number one demand and an outdoor water park was a clear second. Mr. Andreason noted it was interesting that earlier in the survey just a general outdoor pool was listed as a demand however as the survey continued, this demand expanded to an outdoor water park with a water park. When you add results for the three outdoor water options— outdoor water park, open pool, and lap pool — comprise 38% of the responses. No included in this was a splash pad because this feature was made more specific to a neighborhood park. Chairperson Schaefer comments this was interesting as out of the over 400 respondents, there had been 21 % who had been to the pool in the last year or 60 respondents. Mr. Andreason noted to keep in mind, 44% or about 180 respondents said they were interested in an outdoor pool but not even half of them had been to the Merkel Aquatic Center. Parks & Recreation Committee Meeting Page 4 October 26, 2017 Many respondents stated they were driving to other facilities out of town to use an outdoor pool because Merkel is too crowded, too old, too simple, etc. Asking the same questions, almost as many respondents — 49% - said they would use, have a need, or would be interested for a fitness center and almost as many — 43% for an indoor walking track. Only about a third said yes to group exercise, indoor splash park, indoor lap pool and gym courts at 28%. Of those items mentioned as a demand, an indoor open pool emerges as the item that has the highest level of demand and a very low level of supply or need being met. Indoor track is close behind and either splash park or lap lanes followed by gym courts and playgrounds. Mr. Andreason reported he was surprised gym courts did not rank higher. Alderwoman Condon agreed. Chairperson Schaefer said people might view this as a low need because we have use of other facilities that have courts. A discussion ensued on the limited access the city actually has to gym courts in other facilities. Chairperson Schaefer said he has heard indoor pools are not used regularly by many people and would be interested to learn just how much they are actually used. For example, the YMCA is probably the closest to McHenry. Director Hobson stated the indoor pool at the high school is only open to the public once a week. Mr. Andreason reported 44% overall said they were interested in an indoor pool; 74% of the people who wanted an indoor pool were 35 to 54 years old, women with households with children. Mr. Andreason noted a need for an indoor warm -water therapy pool was also expressed among the older aged respondents, which includes another demographic who is interested in an indoor pool. Mr. Hobson commented on the fact that the assessment is U.S. statistically valid and matched up to census data. Mr. Andreason reported on the responses received for parks programs and overall 40% of the surveyors said a household member has participated in a department program or event. In the past year most often some type of fitness program such as group training or a class. About half as many mentioned participation in sports. Events came up at about 28% specifically more often was the River Run. When people were asked to rate satisfaction with programs and events, 53% rated their satisfaction at almost 10. Only 4% were dissatisfied. Again, very strong satisfaction scores for the department. Only 16 people said they were unhappy, mostly because of the lack of water classes and small facilities. The same analysis was conducted for department programs and events. The four programs/events that registered the highest level of interest were fitness, adult programs/classes, special events, and active adult programs for 55+. Mr. Andreason found it interesting that programs for older folks scored at the top; for younger folks were more toward the bottom. When respondents were asked how well things were being provided, we saw the same separation where those that say they are interested in youth programs, summer camps, etc., this scored less than 20% but said these programs are in good supply. Adult programs such as active adult events and fitness programs represent the biggest gaps. Parks & Recreation Committee Meeting Page 5 October 26, 2017 Chairperson Schaefer noted this is most likely the biggest area expanded in the past two years. Director Hobson said this might be due to awareness. When you are a member you see all that the recreation center offers but prior to the center, if there were not enough people preregistered for a class it was cancelled. Now we have a much larger selection of exercise classes but they are geared towards the membership. Chairperson Schaefer asked if we know how many of the respondents are members of the McHenry Recreation Center and Mr. Andreason answered that question was not asked. In terms of one improvement, residents would like to see, the active adults classes for 55+ came up most often followed by fitness. Between 11-15% mentioned youth programs, special events, or broader health classes and programs. Alderwoman Condon asked if this could possibly be because we are already providing that. Mr. Andreason said this was a question about improving and expanding and it may be that with the fitness center, the city is automatically doing more than it was two years ago however, 19% are saying it is still not enough. Chairperson Schaefer asked if this has anything to do with the ages of the people who responded. Mr. Andreason said these answers are representative of all adults and households with and without children. By definition, there will be more people without children. The census shows approximately 35% of households have children, which is part of the reason why programs for children did come up as often. Chairperson Schaefer said in our survey 65% were no children households. Mr. Andreason said again, this is an opportunity for the city as the data regarding non -visitors and non -users goes back to the biggest reason given for not utilizing the parks department is no children in the household. This is a communication and information opportunity. Mr. Andreason reported another open-ended question asked was for people to tell us as far as other adult programming, general programming, and youth programming, what specifically you would like to see. For active adults, it was more fitness or group fitness, aquatics, yoga, exercise programs, and group events. Broader adult groups is almost exclusively about fitness programs. At the conclusion of the assessment, respondents were asked about the idea of the parks department upgrading and improving the recreation center to include a two -court gym, indoor running track, indoor pool with lap lanes/splash pad, therapy pool, expanded indoor childcare space, and an outdoor pool/aquatic park. Respondents were told the addition of all this would mean for a home valued at $200,000, an additional $150 in property taxes per year and asked if they support or oppose. Clearly, a majority of respondents support the expansion although most of that support is only somewhat. However, the 29% who strongly support the expansion are valuable to the total number of people who oppose it, which is 31 % combined. Alderwoman Condon asked what is typical; the referendum process can be harsh. Looking at the information, these seem like favorable numbers. Mr. Andreason noted on the plus side, the response is strong in support versus opposed. In addition, when asked why do you support or oppose it, a good number of people said Parks & Recreation Committee Meeting Page 6 October 26, 2017 they support it, not necessarily because they are going to use it but because the community needs it, noting the expansion would be used often and improve property values making McHenry a more desirable place to live and move to. Chairperson Schaefer commented his surprise when he read the analysis adding he was pleased that the question was asked. Director Hobson said one of the things discussed about the assessment was to be specific regarding the proposed expansion and the cost. The only referendum he experienced through the city was in 2002 and the question asked simply do you want a recreation center or do you not want a recreation center. This may have been too vague of a question to ask, as the voters were not given details on what they were being asked to pay for. He added the city must always clearly inform residents on how much the expansion will cost and what they will get for it. Alderman Devine asked if the respondents were registered voters and it was noted this is just 25% of a slice of the community. Mr. Andreason noted this support was well distributed through all age groups. This is a survey of residents, and not registered voters or voters who actually vote. It would be a different group depending on the election, primary, consolidated, or general. It is very easy to say yes to this while we do have some detailed information about the cost and amenities. In addition, there is no organized opposition to the expansion in the survey. Regarding Alderwoman Condon's question about what is typical, these initial numbers are very good. Mr. Andreason would be more confident if it were 40% in favor. Superintendent Gomiak asked if respondents were broke down by location and Mr. Andreason answered, the households surveyed were evenly distributed throughout the city. However, for some reason when they were testing the outdoor water features, people in the southwest quadrant of the city were more in favor of this feature than the other regions. The Committee and staff discussed reasons for this result speculating more families are concentrated in this region of the city and a few high -income neighborhoods. Another important result shared by by Mr. Andreason was that 18% or one in five people attached a condition to their support; 7% said if they pay more in property taxes they do not expect to pay fees to use the new facilities; 6% said they support it but do not think the community will support a property tax increase; and 2% said they support it but do not believe all of the features in the proposed expansion can be done for just $150 a year in property taxes. The opponents gave only one reason for opposition and it was taxes are too high, this is a waste of money, or you should charge only the people who are going to use it. In response to Chairperson Schaefer's question, Mr. Andreason stated these were typical responses from people opposed to the expansion or who just do not want their property taxes to increase for any reason. Director Hobson stated the process is more difficult because there is no way to change the opinions of people opposed to any tax increase no matter what the reason. If we move forward with the expansion, being able to answer every question is essential. Director Hobson added this connects to the recreation center's membership structure and has been discussed internally between staff. If we Parks & Recreation Committee Meeting Page 7 October 26, 2017 head down this direction, we need to be able to answer every question throughout the referendum process. For instance, people have expressed the need for an indoor walking track, which is something the city could offer free — no membership required. Staff wants the community walking through the doors of the recreation center and the cost of a walking track is minimal; not like a machine that has to be replaced every five years. When they enter the recreation center to use the free waking track, they will see everything the center offers such as water aerobics classes and the fitness center and it will persuade them to pay for a membership. Offering an ala carte -type membership for us to answer questions specifically about the entire project may ease some concerns and sway people who are undecided about the expansion. We may not be able to change the opinion of those who are opposed the referendum but, there are many groups who are asking for the expansion. Mr. Andreason also noted the city's impressive record of accomplishment. The success of the recreation center and what it has meant in terms of memberships and interest, traffic, and usage demonstrates the city did their homework and delivered something the people of McHenry really wanted. The recreation center is being utilized to the point where now it is meeting only some of their needs and people are now telling you they do not understand why a gym was not included in the original construction. Alderwoman Condon commented the majority of those people might not understand that they did not pay any taxes to construction the recreation center. Mr. Andreason said it does demonstrate the city knows how to deliver what is needed to the community. Mr. Andreason said as follow up half of the respondents clearly agree the most important item needed was an indoor pool; the other half were almost evenly divided between larger outdoor pool, indoor track, or additional gym space. One in five left the question blank, which is separate from the 11 % who are mostly all opponents of any expansion and said none of these items is a priority. An interesting fact is the 11 % who are opposed have no children in the household, and are either the newest or the most long-term residents of the city. In summary, Mr. Andreason reported people were asked where they go for information about programs and activities that the department offers and they answered the printed program guide remains the most used source of information. The website was a close second followed by the city's website. Other people telephone the city for information. Chairperson Schaefer said he was pleased by these results because for years, the city has looked into alternatives for the printed brochure and this shows that it is being used. Director Hobson stated the only brochure mailed out to all residents is the summer brochure — the fall and winter/spring guides are only sent to users. This may be something for the city to reevaluate as mailing all brochures to all residents may increase awareness of the department and memberships for the center. Chairperson Schaefer asked Mr. Andreason if he had data on results from past referendum surveys. Mr. Andreason said aQuity has never shown support for a referendum that failed. There have been instances when they did not recommend proceeding with a referendum and the community did it is not known if it would have been successful. Director Hobson asked what is the next step should the city decide to proceed with a referendum. Mr. Andreason said the process to conduct a referendum survey is different than for a needs assessment for example, the survey is only conducted Parks & Recreation Committee Meeting Page 8 October 26, 2017 with registered and likely voters. The voter rolls are obtained and only those people who had voted in two of the last three elections are selected. The focus is more on the referendum question and ideally, it is drafted, as it would appear on the ballot. We are looking for voters to respond to the survey as they would in the voting booth. The survey would also ask why do you support or oppose. Then we would test arguments for both sides for example we would give six reasons to support and six reasons to oppose and ask them to rate the examples. Subsequently, the referendum question would be shown on the survey again to find out the respondent's opinion after they have read the reasons to support and oppose. We would then test who moved their support and if they move we will review which arguments were most effective. We can than profile which argument affected families with no children, with children, seniors, etc. The challenge and the reason why aQuity does not conduct many referendum surveys is because there is now a state law prohibiting public agencies from funding those types of surveys. aQuity is currently conducting a referendum survey for the Fox Valley Park District that is being funded by the parks foundation. A Friends of the Park group or foundation must be available to underwrite the survey. Alderwoman Condon asked which election cycle is more beneficial to place a referendum question. Mr. Andreason said there is a lot of strategy involved and it depends on if there is another referendum on the ballot. If it was between schools and parks, schools usually prevail. aQuity works with consultants but they are not campaign consultants. Director Hobson asked about the timeframe for the referendum process. Mr. Andreason said a referendum survey takes about the same as a CNA, two or three months. In a voter survey, people are more engaged and responsive to the survey and more interested in expressing their opinion. The survey is first to be done in the process, then a campaign consultant will assist with messaging and getting out the vote efforts using the referendum survey as a target. Director Hobson asked if a campaign consultant can only be used for that reason and the answer was yes. If the survey is conducted through a foundation, it is legal for them to turn over the results to the city. Director Hobson summarized the next step is to present this same presentation to the full City Council and the Committee agreed. Chairperson Schaefer informed Mr. Andreason that Councilmembers and members of the public will have an opportunity to ask questions at the meeting. Director Hobson stated he and Chairperson Schaefer had previously discussed adding a link to the 14-minute survey on the city website to publicize the effort and staff will poll the recreation center members. However, it must be recognized that this will not be "clean data," but can be compiled by aQuity over the next few weeks. The information will be made available on the city's Facebook page and website. Mr. Andreason added when they conducted referendum surveys for the Lake County Forest Preserve, which is a much larger geographic area than McHenry, and only approximately 600 responded to each of the surveys and aQuity was still able to determine the level of support for the question accurately. Comparing that ratio to 400 respondents in a community the size of McHenry, clearly demonstrates you do not need to talk to thousands of people. Mr. Andreason added the city should have confidence in the data. Alderwoman Condon stated she would recommend aQuity stress this point to the full Parks & Recreation Committee Meeting Page 9 October 26, 2017 Council, as it is important. The demographics fit what is representative of the community including the margin for error. Chairperson Schaefer asked how many surveys were distributed to city residents and Mr. Andreason answer between 6,000 and 7,000. The percentage of return was a bit lower than average. Chairperson Schaefer advised Mr. Andreason to be prepared to discuss the fact that some of the surveys were sent to homeowners outside the city limits and that this data does not reflect responses from those households. Chairperson Schaefer asked if the survey indicated McHenry is a park department and not a separate taxing district. Mr. Andreason stated this point was discussed in the focus groups. Director Hobson noted the city is a regional provider for recreation and activities. Director Hobson reported the CNA would be a discussion item on the November 20 City Council agenda. There being no further questions for aQuity, Chairperson Schaefer thanked them for the information and Mr. Andreason left the meeting. After a brief discussion, the Committee agreed to bring the question of a referendum back to the Committee prior to full City Council consideration. Alderman Devine asked if staff had an idea for which election a referendum question could be on the ballot noting a General Election might be beneficial. Director Hobson said he would target November 2018 for the ballot question. Regarding the indoor pool proposal, Chairperson Schaefer said he would be interested to know if communities that have added indoor pools to their facilities in the past 10-20 years still receive a good draw. Director Hobson stated this information is based on demographics and that is why offering different elements to the expansion will draw more people to the center. Supervisor Thompson noted the McHenry County YMCA had planned to install a 50- meter pool, but instead they installed a 25-yard pool, missing a great opportunity. When you go to the YMCA in the evenings, the entire pool is swim lesson and classes. The new pool is swim team competition. When a pool is idle and losing money in the middle of the day, it creates opportunities to partner with schools and offer pre-schools lessons during that time to get people in the doors during slow periods. After work and after hours those pools are filled with people. 5. Department Updates Director Hobson provide update to the Committee on the following matters: Boat Ramp: It is substantially completed. A few things still needed outside the original scope of the project is lighting. Approximately 10 lights would be needed — three in the middle of the parking lot, perhaps four on the ramp, and three on the driveway entering Parks & Recreation Committee Meeting Page 10 October 26, 2017 the area. There currently is no electric service in the area. One thing being explored is to address this project as a design build. The project is relatively simple and could be presented to electrical contractors to quote. Director Hobson asked the Committee what thoughts they would have to handling the project in this manner. Chairperson Schaefer said he agrees and asked if this was something Project Engineer Strange could be involved in and Director Hobson answered he does not handle electrical proj ect. Superintendent Gorniak stated the companies that he spoke with said they would take an overhead Google image of the area to develop photo metrics. They will tell us how much spread is needed between lights, etc. This is not a big system. Chairperson Schaefer noted now is the time to perform this project as the parking lot is not paved and there would be no cutting involved. Director Hobson said yes, eventually at some point the lot may be paved, but not at this time. From an engineering standpoint, and how the project has been described, it sounds like an electrical contractor can complete the project. Director Hobson agreed, as this is a relatively simple project — run power and install 10 light poles. Director Hobson reported this project would Chairperson Schaefer inquired about the state the fund is increasing from new development. The Committee was agreeable to the project. s be paid using park developer donations. of that fund and Director Hobson noted Fox Ridge Park. In the near future, Director Hobson would recommend the Committee review installing a build a public restroom facility at Fox Ridge Park. This item ranked #2 in our last CNA. Lacrosse games, soccer matches, and four softball fields are often utilized at the same time. Restrooms, concessions, and a maintenance structure would be ideal at this location. Chairperson Schaefer asked if next year's CIP is completed. Director Hobson said yes, however he would like the Committee's input on having staff prepare for this project before the next ball season. Director Hobson will prepare a list for possible CIP projects for the next Committee meeting. Alderwoman Condon agrees with the proposed project at Fox Ridge Park. Supervisor Witt determined revenue made from concessions at Petersen Park is approximately $10,000412,000 per year. Director Hobson said with the amount of games held at Fox Ridge Park it is conceivable that revenue could equal or surpass Petersen Park. Chairperson Schaefer asked if the structure could be built in phases, for example restrooms first. Director Hobson said the Althoff Park building is a good model, it is not a full garage and just a maintenance storage shed with a small concession. When it was built sometime around 2000, it cost $96,000. In addition, a sewer line would have to be Parks & Recreation Committee Meeting Page 11 October 26, 2017 installed and most likely from Whitmore; fortunately, all the easements are already in place. In response to Chairperson Schaefer's question, Director Hobson stated paving the parking lot at Fox Ridge Park is not on the CIP. Northern United Soccer Federation. Director Hobson reported the President of the Northern United Soccer Federation, formerly the McHenry Area Soccer Federation, contacted him. This organization has combined with Johnsburg and Richmond and are seeking property to create a home base for the federation somewhere in the area to potentially purchase. Director Hobson asked the Federation why would they buy the land and he told her about the 22-acres off Petersen Park. The Committee recalled that his area was always planned for soccer fields. Two U-10 fields and a couple full sized fields as well as a potential partnership with the Pigtail or MBA to turn field #5 into a four-plex ball field. Director Hobson also said this is a potential area for walking paths. A partnership could be proposed to develop this facility. A discussion ensued on how this plan would affect the residential areas around Petersen Park and the soils at Althoff Park. The Committee agreed to direct Director Hobson to pursue talks with the Northern United Soccer Federation regarding a possible joint venture with the city. Director Hobson said he would like to invited the President of the Federation to a future Committee meeting. Skate Park Lighting. Director Hobson reported Superintendent Gorniak is in the process of collecting quotes for Skate Park lights. This topic is of interest to Carol Chrisman who has asked about hosting an event to raise funds for park lighting in honor of Ryan Buss who recently passed -away. The conduit and bases are already installed and potentially renaming the park after Ryan. The Committee agreed to Director Hobson's continued talks with Ms. Chrisman. Althoff Park Chairperson Schaefer asked if staff has any ideas to share regarding the use of Althoff Park. Director Hobson reported he had met with someone about electric Drone Parks. In addition, Disc Golf was briefly considered at this location. Superintendent Gorniak reported the washroom building at Althoff Park is frequently vandalized. The washroom building is now boarded up for security and the water to the building is shut-off. Chairperson Schaefer asked if the proposed Lakeland Park Drainage project would affect Althoff Park in terms of water storage. Director Hobson said from a storage point of view, the location is too downstream; storage is needed upstream. Director Hobson noted Althoff Park is an ideal location for a dog park however, as the Committee recalled, the neighborhood was opposed to this use at the park and Mr. Althoff who donated the land was not in favor of using the land for this purpose. Parks Tour/Next Meeting The Committee agreed to meet at the Parks and Recreation Center on Thursday, November 16th at 2:00 PM for a parks tour. Parks & Recreation Conunittee Meeting Page 12 October 26, 2017 Committee/Staff Comments. Alderwoman Condon thanked Director Hobson for assisting with the use of Veterans Memorial Park for the McHenry County Suicide Prevention Taskforce Memorial. The members of the taskforce were impressed with the park. Director Hobson reported the city might want to reconsider the date of the Rotary Oktoberfest in Veterans Memorial Park. It rained heavily on the day of the event; for the most part the event was rained out however vendor vehicles were driven through the park creating ruts in the grass. Parks Maintenance had to roll the ground because of this event. Chairperson Schaefer said this would have be a huge event with Modern Day Romeos performing if the weather was better and maybe it should be scheduled in a different location. Director Hobson said the event was not anticipated to be as large as it might have been and he would recommend Petersen Park for future Oktoberfest events. The Committee discussed the condition of the lights in Veterans Memorial Park. Superintendent Gomiak will contact Temple Display about moving lights that were installed too close to pedestrian traffic. The Downtown Christmas Walk will be held on Saturday, November 18 and the annual Toys for Tots Parade is at 1:00 PM on November 19. Motion to Adiourn As there were no further comments, Chairperson Schaefer called for a motion to adjourn the meeting. Alderwoman Condon made a motion, seconded by Alderman Devine to adjourn the meeting. All ayes, motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 4:35 PM. Respectfully submitted by Marci Geraghty, Executive Assist/Deputy Clerk Reviewed and approved this ; � day of v b 2017.