Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout250501 - Minutes, Recreation & ParksPARKS & RECREATION BOARD May 1, 2025 MINUTES Present Absent With Reason Robin Papa Jeff Cline Julie Sanders Dwayne Freeman Eric Michael Amy Sterner Thomas Moore Mike Tesla Lori Sines Chair, Amy Sterner, called the meeting of the Washington County Parks & Recreation Advisory Board to order at 3:19 pm. Guests were Jaime Dick, Director of Parks & Recreation; Andrew Eshleman, Public Works Director; Travis Allen, Comprehensive Planner; Rob Holsinger, Recreation Supervisor; Pam Boyd, Parks Manager Approval of Minutes Ms. Sterner asked for any additions or corrections to the minutes of April 3, 2025, Parks & Recreation Advisory Board meeting. With no corrections or additions, the minutes passed as presented unanimously, 7-0 by the Board. Tom Moore made the motion to approve the minutes, and Mike Tesla seconded the motion. Citizen’s Comments No one appeared for Citizen’s comments. FY26 POS Discussion and Review Mr. Eshleman provided the Board a draft of the FY 2026 POS Program Schedule with recommended funding and notes to support the projects and notes as to why the projects are not supported. (schedule attached for reference) Before further discussion on the FY 2026 projects Mr. Eshleman shared with the Board a Memorandum from Maryland Department of Natural Resources House Bill 717, Effective October 1, 2025. The purpose of this memorandum is to inform Local Jurisdiction of statutory changes to Program Open Space Local, as a result of legislation that passed the General Assembly of Maryland in 2025. This bill states that the local governing body may use up to 100% of its POS Local apportionment for development projects because we met our acquisition target. This is new information and because there is a time gap between the Annual Program Deadline of July 1, 2025, and the effective date of the new law, local governing bodies that are eligible to use up to 100% of their apportionment for development projects may prepare their FY 2026 Annual Program based on updated rate with the understanding that DNR will not be able to schedule these projects for Board of Public Works approval until after the new law takes effect on October 1, 2025. Below is a breakdown of FY 2026 POS Program Schedule recommended for funding. Funkstown Jerusalem Park – Town received a $275,000 Community Parks and Playground grant. POS grant to fund non redundant scope items. Reduced requested funds from $135,000 to $110,000 because of the CPP grant they received. $110,000 in funding recommended and will cover all the items not included in the CPP grant. City of Hagerstown Hamilton Run Golf Course – Hole 5 reconstruction. Top priority, $112,500 in funding recommended. Fairgrounds Park – Pickleball Court. Additional planning work needs to occur on Pickleball Court. Cost makes project difficult to fund in FY26. No funding recommended. City Park – Train Museum, $13,500 in funding recommended. Antietam Creek Water Trail – Easement, mid-cycle request. Acquisition can be funded from unencumbered prior year acquisition funds. Will not need funding prior to July 1st. Washington County Woodland Way – Playground Replacement, Top priority. Possibly include the fallen Chinkapin Oak Tree into the plan. $180,000 in funding recommended. Pen Mar Interpretive Museum and Vending Machine Kiosk - covered by Ag Center fund reallocation. Pleasant Valley – Playground Replacement - covered by Ag Center fund reallocation. Marty Snook Park - Playground #2 - $40,000 from FY26 and remainder from Ag Center reallocation. WCPS Clear Spring Elementary – Playground Improvements - project request not funded in FY25. $90,000 in funding recommended. Town of Williamsport Byron Memorial Park – Pavilion #4 Construction – projects funded in FY25, FY24. Received FY26 CPP $229,000 grant for playground equipment in Byron Park. No funding recommended. Total POS Program FY26 Allocation is $544,413 and total recommended funding is $546,000. Ms. Sterner added that even though there is a reduced amount allocated this year to POS it seems to have worked out nicely. Ms. Sterner asked if the Board had any additional questions or input on the draft schedule for FY2026. Mr. Moore questioned the $40,000 being allocated to Marty Snook Playground #2. Mr. Eshleman explained there is $791,000 earmarked from Ag Center reallocation and $40,000 is the remainder from FY26 POS after all the other projects were funded to get us to the $800,000 mark. The feedback from the Board is that they felt strongly about the inclusive playground at Marty Snook and felt it was important. Mr. Eshleman said he didn’t want to drastically downsize it and would try to do all they can to bring that version of the playground that was presented to the Board to light. Will still have to value engineer aspects of it to bring the cost down. It would be a million dollars plus project if they built what was originally presented to the Board. Mr. Eshleman shared with the Board a spreadsheet of the Ag Center POS fund reallocation that was a budget adjustment BOCC approved on 3/4/25. The spreadsheet shows the projects, amount of reallocation and notes for each project. Spreadsheet attached for reference. Total POS funds to be reallocated $1,495,000 Mr. Eshleman further explained the list of projects to the Board and asked for discussion and for the Board to confirm the amounts to be reallocated. The projects listed on the spreadsheet are more or less set. These are projects that were already in the CIP that either needed more money or to be funded in FY27 and will go ahead and fund those projects now with the reallocated POS funds. The list of projects was approved in a budget adjustment and the Board has the opportunity prior to the County’s final budget being approved to approve or shift things to a different amount because of new information or feel something else is a greater priority. Mr. Moore asked for clarification. Mr. Eshleman explained that a budget adjustment has already been made, and money has been assigned from one project to another. It has already been encumbered in that way but from the State’s perspective it is a different process. Until it makes it to the POS schedule and an application has been submitted, that is what encumbers the funding on their level. At the County level the money has been allocated and at the State level it has not. Where it stands now trying to marry the two processes together that we want a schedule that includes the projects listed on the reallocation sheet which will lock in at the State level and the County needs to match and make sure the local funding share is provided. Until everything is finalized and sent to the State there is still an opportunity for change so things could be revisited but cannot make drastic changes for one to another. A lengthy discussion about the allocated projects on the spreadsheet and the implications of waiting on using the money until a later date. It is an option to wait and use the allocated money at a later date, but it is not advisable to wait too long to use the money because of the 5-year timeline for projects. Ms. Papa asked when the Marty Snook Inclusive Playground would start. Mr. Eshleman said it would be another year at the earliest. The design would be the first phase and would like to get the other projects through first because there is a lot going on for the number of staff. What Mr. Eshleman is looking for is to what degree does the Board support the Inclusive project. Whether it is funded all now or later. Will need to know when doing the design if it is for a half a million playground or million-dollar playground. Ms. Papa said she loves the idea of the Inclusive Playground and feels it is important for all kids to play together, and it is a beautiful design. She said with her own children being involved in Best Buddies and unified sports they could have benefited a long time ago from an inclusive playground like the one being proposed. Ms. Papa also mentioned the great job that was done at Marty Snook with the Mythical Woods. Mr. Moore also expressed his appreciation for the playground structure at the Mythical Woods and his desire to have additional playground designs like that at other parks in the County so we could get away from all the plastic materials used, but he realizes the safety certifications etc. involved. Mr. Moore said he is personally satisfied with the FY26 POS Schedule and feels Mr. Eshleman did a great job keeping the Board informed and updated with the Town’s changes with their projects. Ms. Sterner said she was also satisfied with the proposed schedule and very much is in support of the Inclusive Playground at Marty Snook. Mr. Moore made a motion to approve the FY 2026 POS Program Schedule as proposed. Ms. Papa seconded the motion and the FY26 POS Schedule was approved unanimously, 7-0 by the Board. Ms. Sterner also wanted to reiterate what Ms. Papa said and feels in lean times when there is an opportunity to use this kind of money for an important project like Marty Snook Inclusive Playground we should go forward with it. Ms. Sanders shared on a personal note her feelings about the inclusive park and the importance of Washington County having this for our kids because there aren’t enough inclusive playgrounds for kids and she stands behind this project 100%. Mr. Michael also feels that equal access and inclusion is important and feels the proposed inclusive playground is a great project and we have an opportunity to do something good for the community now. Ms. Sines asked about some potential increase in costs for the Marty Snook project. Mr. Eshleman said there has been an increase in playground equipment in general. The County has not priced playground equipment since the tariffs. Whatever amounts get approved for the project that would be the starting point and would get updated pricing from the vendor and ask the cost and look at site development costs and look at what we can get with the amount of money available. Mr. Eshleman also wanted to be transparent with the Board that the $1,495,000 POS reallocation amount is fixed. We do not get an inflationary adjustment on prior funds, but the costs for what we are trying to do with it will go up. Best case scenario is the purchase order will be placed in Fall/Winter and get updated pricing to set what we are going to do then lock in the equipment order. Mr. Eshleman stated they did not want to go much further on the project development design for a million-dollar playground if that’s not what the Board supports. The big-ticket projects are the ones we need to have community buy in because they are the big targets questioning why we are spending so much money on a project because we are in a recession, tax increase, etc. This is why Parks & Recreation is always the first domino to fall in lean times. Mr. Moore said the issue he is having, looking at it from a citizen’s point of view, is the $791,000 for playground equipment. Mr. Eshleman said there was an $800,000 price quote from 2 years ago for the playground equipment and it includes the surfacing as well, but not the site work. The current playground at Marty Snook Park has a wheelchair ramp, but the part that doesn’t meet code is the pathway to get to the park is not accessible. Also, access to the restrooms is not accessible. Ms. Sines asked if it was a requirement that the County have at least one ADA accessible park or is it something as a community that has value. Mr. Eshleman said it is not a requirement and the piece of equipment that is there now MIHI provided the fundraising for it. All new recreation facilities are to be ADA accessible, it is to the degree that occurs. The reason the County is focusing on having an inclusive playground at Marty Snook is because they do not want to remove something and not put something back in that would be comparable. Mr. Eshleman said this project is a big dollar amount and it may still be vetoed at the Commissioner level, but getting to that point depends on what level the Parks & Rec Board supports it as well and staff will follow that direction and build a facility with the money they have. Mr. Moore asked if it was possible if we didn’t allocate the money to the project now if we could revisit the project later to really sell it to the County Commissioners with full support. Mr. Eshleman explained that whatever the Parks & Rec Board approves of for the POS amount, and it goes before the County Commissioners what the Board recommended that is the playground that would be built with the amount of money allocated. When working with playground budgets they work with the vendors and they will price out the equipment, installation, and give them quotes. Ms. Sterner feels that since we have the money available to us now and the Board approved $40,000 in FY26 POS funding this is a good opportunity for the Board to take that to the County Commissioners to politic for the project in instead of waiting and project costs increase and would need to ask for more money to fund the project. Mr. Eshleman added that he feels the window of opportunity for this project is now because next year could be a tough budget year again. Ms. Sanders feels if they stand as a board behind this project, it says something about them as a Board that they are trying to be inclusive of everyone. Ms. Sines asked if there are any other projects in the near future that are big-ticket items. Mr. Eshleman said in the Capital Improvement Plan is North County Park. Trying to put money away for that. It may be several years before dirt is turned but will try to build up funds along the way. Other big projects are Marty Snook Pool, Antietam Water Trail (multiple locations), Marty Snook project (possibly designing a loop trail). Also, possibly loop trails around the lake at Ft. Ritchie. Ms. Sanders asked if it was possible that we could secure funds from something else to help support the inclusive playground project. Mr. Eshleman thinks it would be unlikely with programs like Greenspace Equity because it would most likely not score high and would need more funding than what is typically given, which is in the $50 - $400,000 max range. Mr. Eshleman said he is not opposed to it and has not turned down opportunities to apply for grants on projects. Mr. Eshleman said what they would like as staff is consensus from the Board to what degree they support the inclusive playground project. Because this is Parks and Recreation money this Board should have a greater say as to what degree they support the project or would rather support multiple projects instead of one. Mr. Moore said he is happy with the reallocation of funds to the projects on the spreadsheet except for the $791,000 for Marty Snook Inclusive Playground. He was hoping for a better understanding of the large projects like the Inclusive Playground and North County Park and maybe have another year to decide. Mr. Moore made a motion to reallocate funds as presented on the reallocation spreadsheet except for $500,000 to Marty Snook Inclusive Playground and the rest of the money to be reallocated at another time. There was not a second motion, but Ms. Papa made a motion to amend Mr. Moore’s motion to reallocate funds as presented on the reallocation spreadsheet with $158,000 going to Pleasant Valley and $500,000 going to Marty Snook Inclusive Playground. The vote was 1-6 by the Board and was not passed. Ms. Sterner asked how that would be received at Commissioner level to allocate less money to the Inclusive Playground Project. Mr. Eshleman said that if $500,000 is agreed upon they would have approximately $550,000 for the project and that is what they would go with for the project because that is the amount of money that was approved by the Board. Discussion about phasing the project and adding to the project in the coming years. Mr. Eshleman said the inclusive playground will not really work out as a phased project because of the site work, surfaces, and fencing. Mr. Eshleman reiterated the Commissioners already approved the budget adjustment with the categories listed on the reallocation spreadsheet with $949,000 going towards Park Equipment/Surfacing (playground equipment). There was a new motion by Mr. Tesla to reallocate funds as presented on the reallocation spreadsheet. Ms. Papa seconded the motion. The motion was passed as presented, 7-0 by the Board. Ms. Sanders said she will be an advocate for the inclusive playground project and spread the words to teachers and parents at her school as well. Department Reports Parks & Recreation Director’s Report Mr. Dick briefed the Board on his report instead of going in detail considering the lengthy meeting. Below is the written report from Mr. Dick. Black Rock Golf Course The maintenance staff is working on the aerification of the greens & fairways. Bunker project is on hold for staff to catch up on mowing season. The Course is fully staffed for the upcoming peak season. Senior League is in full play with 116 participants and Tournament play is up and running for the summer. Ag Center The Master’s Gardeners Show was a success on Easter weekend. This past weekend the Center hosted a Model Railroad Show, and the Kennel Club hosted a Dog Agility event. The month of May will have Tractor Pulls and the Pickle Fest. Staff are continuing to work on the Pole Barn & Museum Village Pavilion projects. Parks & Recreation Parks & Facilities staff are continuing to clean up storm damage from the April 19th storm. The Chinkapin Oak tree in Woodland Way Park which was over 200 years old was lost in the April 19th storm. County staff are working on repurposing the remains of the tree. Officially Parks will open this weekend. Rental activity has been strong, and parks are off to a busy start. Pool renovation work is ongoing. We hope to be ready by Memorial Day. Staff are continuing working on hiring lifeguards. Staff met with WCPS officials at Smithsburg High School. They have been great to work with. We will be offering a Girls High School Summer Flag Football League. Parks & Recreation staff are working with County Officials on the 250th Anniversary Celebration scheduled for July 4, 2026. Spring/Summer program session has begun, Pickleball Ladder League & Drop in Volleyball started this week. We are continuing to take registrations for the Summer Session. Next Scheduled Meeting Next scheduled Board Meeting will be held on June 5, 2025, at 3:20 pm in the ARCC on the campus of HCC, Room 220. Unfinished Business No unfinished business was discussed. New Business – Review of Bylaws Ms. Sterner led the discussion regarding the bylaws. The bylaws were emailed to Board members for review as well as hard copies available at the meeting. The bylaws were put into place in May 2001 and Ms. Sterner said she recognizes how things have evolved overall in the County Government and the Parks & Recreation Department. Ms. Sanders suggested a bylaw subcommittee to review the bylaws. Mr. Dick said he would work with Board members and be the point person to review and make changes to the bylaws. Mr. Eshleman said he feels now the ball is rolling and the more that we can work from both ends and the role of the Board is in line with what the Commissioners want and what the Board has been doing the better it will be. As stated in the bylaws, the Board may, from time to time, recommend to the Commissioners any amendment to any portion of the bylaws by a majority vote from the Board at any regular meeting or special meetings for that purpose, but only the Commissioners shall be entitled to amend these bylaws. Mr. Dick said he would assist and work alongside the Board with making changes or additions to the bylaws by the Board. After that the next step would be to take it to the County Attorney for additional changes or additions and then go back to the P&R Board for approval and the last step would be to go to the Commissioners for approval. Ms. Sines addressed her concerns and feelings about how the bylaws are written now and her role with the P&R Board. Mr. Moore also addressed his concerns as well with the bylaws and the purpose of the bylaws. The bylaws were written by the County Commissioners to give the citizens of Washington County a voice because P&R is serving the citizens of Washington County. Mr. Moore feels strongly that is why the bylaws were set up that way to represent the citizens of Washington County and the employees (County Staff) are there to assist them. Mr. Moore also referenced the success of Frederick County and how they operate with similar bylaws. Mr. Moore said he also spoke with legal counsel for the County as well and he has no problem in doing what the County Commissioners are asking of him. Ms. Sterner said she agreed they are the representative voice of the County, but where is the delineation of being the voice and representing and planning and developing and how does that interface with the staff and departments and what their jobs are as full-time employees. Ms. Sines suggested maybe redefining the bylaws, so it is more clear how the Board and staff work together and one of the reasons she wanted to be involved with the Board is because she loves Parks and Recreation and has served this community as an official and nonprofit leader. Mr. Eshleman said his parting thought on all of it is that he welcomes having those who want to take an active role. Staff have their part they are working on. Also, advocacy is a big part whether it is picking up the phone and calling a Commissioner or getting individuals to write letters of support to projects are things Boards can help with. Community level partnerships and engagements are important when looking to take more on and accomplish big things. It would be beneficial if the staff and Board have a focus area so the Board can contribute and be beneficial and be an advocate for their time at the meetings. Mr. Moore said he recognized that what they are being charged to do by the County Commissioners was not going to happen in the short time they have at their monthly meetings and that is why he suggested establishing committees so then at the monthly meeting the committee’s reports will help accomplish what they have been asked to do by the County Commissioners. If the committees are successful and staff is happy working with Board members and things are going well then they know they are headed in the right direction, but things may not work out that way and it is not meant to be, but would like to be given a chance and feels like his voice and the voice of the board members is not being heard. Mr. Allen added the way some of the board functions have evolved over time is due to the recent operations of it. The former public works director essentially solicited no input from the Board whatsoever. Mr. Allen gave Mr. Eshleman a lot of credit and made it very clear what Mr. Eshleman has done has been to a level far surpassing what the Board has done before with soliciting input and transparency about where money is going and how the process works. Mr. Eshleman suggests the Board take their time and think about what the Board wants their role to be or what they think the Board should be doing because there is an opportunity to make recommendations to change it. It will be a collaborative process with the staff to be an advocate. Ms. Sterner suggested we use June as a work session to collaborate to develop a subcommittee for bylaws. Mr. Moore said he would rather go to legal counsel to talk about bylaws. Ms. Sines added that we need to have a starting point if they are looking to make changes then the next step would be to take it to legal counsel. Mr. Michael also added that he agreed with Mr. Allen regarding the transparency and information that Mr. Eshleman has provided to the Board and talked about this role with the School Board and feels it is important for the P&R Board to move forward and figure out the roles of the Board going forward. Mr. Moore would like everyone to understand it is not his opinion or anybody else’s opinion, but the County Commissioners gave the right to the citizens, and do we want to change those rights and if they are changed better understand why. If things are changed and if it is for the better, then great and remember this is supposed to be representing the citizens of Washington County and that is why the bylaws were designed so citizens would have a say and that is why we are a board. In conclusion, Ms. Sterner said she would like the meeting in June to be a productive, positive meeting and clearly define roles as a board member which may ultimately lead to subcommittees and in the end figure out how they can best serve the County with the Board. Adjournment With no further discussion, the meeting was adjourned at 5:02 pm. _________________________ _________________________ Amy Sterner, Chair Jeannine Miller McVicker Washington County Recording Secretary – Washington Co. Parks & Recreation Board Parks & Recreation