Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - PR - 2025.09.18Parks & Recreation Commission City of Burlingame Meeting Agenda BURLINGAME CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CA 94010 Burlingame Community Center 850 Burlingame Avenue 7:00 PMThursday, September 18, 2025 Commissioner Giere will be appearing at this meeting remotely from: 8017 Aberdeen Rd Bethesda, Maryland 20814 To Attend the Meeting in Person: Burlingame Community Center, 850 Burlingame Avenue, Burlingame, California 94010 To Attend the Meeting via Zoom: Consistent with Government Code Section 54953, the meeting will also be held via Zoom. To access the meeting by computer: Go to www.zoom.us/join Meeting ID: 815 9609 0648 Passcode: 888105 To access the meeting via phone: Dial 1-669-900-6833 Meeting ID: 815 9609 0648 Passcode: 888105 To Provide Public Comment in Person: Members of the public wishing to speak will be asked to fill out a "Request to Speak" card located on the table by the door and then hand it to staff. The provision of a name, address, or other identifying information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each, but the Chair may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. To Provide Public Comment via Email: Members of the public may provide written comments by email to recadmin@burlingame .org. Your email should include the specific agenda item on which you are commenting. Please note if your comment concerns an item that is not on the agenda. Emailed public comments that are received by 4:00 p.m. on the meeting date, will not be read out loud, but will be included in a supplemental packet that will be sent to the Parks and Recreation Commission prior to the meeting and published on the City’s website here: https://www.burlingame.org/192/Parks-Recreation-Commission 1. CALL TO ORDER – 7:00 p.m. – Community Center/Zoom 2. Roll Call Page 1 City of Burlingame Printed on 9/11/2025 September 18, 2025Parks & Recreation Commission Meeting Agenda 3. Approval of Minutes Draft Minutes - April 17, 2025a. Draft MinutesAttachments: The minutes to the May 15 and July 17, 2025 meetings will be available at the October 16, 2025 meeting. 4. Correspondence 5. Public Comments Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State and local agency open meeting law) prohibits the Commission from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a ‘request to speak’ card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although provision of a name, address or other identifying information is optional. The Chairperson may limit speakers to three minutes each. 6. Old Business 7. New Business Appointment of One Commissioner to the Time Capsule Ad Hoc Committeea. STAFF REPORTAttachments: Approval of a Pilot Program for Priority Use Times at Washington Park Sports Court STAFF REPORTAttachments: 8. Staff and Commissioner Reports 9. Future Agenda Items 10. Adjournment Next Meeting: Thursday, October 16, 2025 NOTICE: Any attendees wishing accommodations for disabilities should contact the Parks & Recreation Department at (650) 558-7323 at least 24 hours before the meeting. A copy of the agenda packet is available for review at the Recreation Center, 850 Burlingame Avenue, during normal office hours. The agendas and minutes are also available on the City's website: www.burlingame.org. Page 2 City of Burlingame Printed on 9/11/2025 1 Parks & Recreation Commission DRAFT Minutes April 17, 2025 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION DRAFT Meeting Minutes Regular Meeting on Thursday, April 17, 2025 1. CALL TO ORDER The duly noticed regular meeting of the Burlingame Parks & Recreation Commission was called to order by Vice-Chair Brunello at 7:00 pm. 2. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Milne, Brunello, Giere, Curtis, Yu (via Zoom), Wettan & Chang (via Zoom) COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Parks & Recreation Director Glomstad, Recreation Manager Acquisti, Recreation Supervisor Gresh, Recreation Coordinator Garcia, Parks Superintendent Holtz, Parks Supervisor Barron & Recording Secretary Helley OTHERS PRESENT: Amy, Victor, Rabi, Jacki, Kashen, Nemanja Colovic 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Wettan made a motion to approve the minutes as written. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Brunello. The motion was approved 7-0. 4. CORRESPONDENCE None 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS None Presentation – 333 Committee – Richard Terrones noted that the 333 Committee was born out of the Joint Use Facilities Agreement between the school district and the City. The Committee 2 Parks & Recreation Commission DRAFT Minutes April 17, 2025 consists of three representatives from each of the City, School District, and community members. The Committee holds quarterly meetings to facilitate dialogue on facilities and general topics related to the youth who use the programs. The Committee discusses classes/programs, conducts a survey of those program offerings every few years, and continues to strengthen the partnership between the City and the school district for the community they serve. Vice Chair Brunello re-ordered the agenda to move the New Business Items before the Old Business Items. 7. NEW BUSINESS (moved ahead) a. New Recreation Coordinator – Allan Mateo – Recreation Supervisor Gresh introduced new Recreation Coordinator Mateo to the Commission. Mateo would be overseeing youth and adult sports. His background is as an athletic director/teacher for the past twelve years. Commission welcomed Recreation Coordinator Mateo to the Department. b. Approval of Victoria Park Blacktop Lining Options – Director Glomstad noted Parks Superintendent Holtz is in attendance to answer any questions on the topic. Glomstad reviewed the background of the park and noted that after receiving requests from the public and then working with a landscape architect, staff had two options for the Commission to consider. One option was to include one full-size basketball court, two pickleball courts, a 5’ bike/walking path on the outside of the court, a hopscotch area, and a 4 square area or two hopscotch areas, and to keep the court multipurpose, pickleball players would need to bring their portable nets. Staff requests that the commission discuss the various options, including a full-court or half-court basketball, and approve the chosen layout for the Victoria Park Blacktop Area Renovation. The Commission inquired about the noise of pickleball and its potential impact on the surrounding community, as well as the feasibility of using a softer surface to accommodate older basketball players and potentially mitigate the pickleball noise. Holtz noted that the pickleball noise is typically from the paddle contact, rather than the surface bounce. Holtz noted Washington Park is by far the most used for pickleball. Glomstad noted the biggest difference in use of a court is a permanent net vs a portable net. Many users bring their own nets to the courts if they do not have a permanent net installed. Vice Chair Brunello opened Public comment: Melissa Nemar: Lives three doors down from the park; when the playground was renovated several years ago, they were excited at the prospect of a full basketball area for her son. Now they are a pickleball family. They feel the area is an underutilized section of the park. The playground is always very busy, and currently, the basketball area rarely gets used. They are glad the renovation is being brought forward, as it seems like a space that needs more for the community itself. She was in favor of both basketball and pickleball. She agreed that a portable net is beneficial because it’s not 100% dedicated to pickleball, which helps to deaden the noise and prevent constant play. 3 Parks & Recreation Commission DRAFT Minutes April 17, 2025 Tom Snider – Lives directly across from the park. He agreed with the bike path, hopscotch, foursquare, and even a full-court basketball court. However, if a full-court basketball court leads to pickleball, he is against a full-court basketball court. He said that pickleball has an amplified noise with the pop, pop, pop high-pitched sound of the plastic ball hitting the paddle and the court surface. The noise pollution is only compounded by the frequency of play. The following is an excerpt from a New York Times article: “Pickleball noise pollution has brought a nationwide scourge of frayed nerves and unneighborly clashes. Those in turn have elicited petitions and calls to police and last-ditch lawsuits aimed at local parks, private clubs, and homeowner’s associations that rushed to open courts during the sports' recent boom. It is like having a pistol range in your backyard, " claims a man whose home abuts a pickleball court in the town of Wellesley Massachusetts.” The California Environmental Quality Act, also known as CEQA, requires an environmental impact report whenever there is evidence that a project’s proposed activities could have an impact on the environment, including noise pollution. He asked if an environmental impact report had been completed for the proposed pickleball courts at Victoria Park. He is not sure why an indisputable sport like pickleball would be considered by the Commission for Victoria Park when noise complaints from adjacent property owners were the very reason the Burlingame Parks and Recreation Department reduced basketball play from a full court to a half court several years ago, according to the recent staff report. He stated, Why is any consideration being given to go to a full basketball court with its previous noise complaints and doubling down on the noise pollution by adding pickleball use at Victoria Park. He thanked the Commission for their time and attention to this matter. Dan Devoy – This park is a neighborhood treasure for young families. It is one of the few places where community members can go without feeling overwhelmed by pickleball and basketball players. He said that he sees it get used every weekend by parents teaching their kids to ride a bike, scooter, or rollerblades. It is a park you can send your kids to without worrying about adults being there without kids. He said that if you allow pickleball or basketball, you would have large groups, and without a restroom, that can get problematic. He encouraged the Commission to leave the park the same, except for the foursquare and hopscotch, because it is great for little kids. The park is great and wonderful the way it is. If the Commission decides to proceed, he suggested considering time limits. For instance, pickleball and basketball could be held during the day, while after-school and weekend activities could be reserved for the younger kids. He thanked the Commission for their time. Emails received: Davina Chall: “Park and feel like the court canon should be redone and can be better utilized to be part basketball and part pickleball. Pickleball is so great at Washington Park, but it’s so popular and there are so many people who tend to want to play that it can be tricky to get in for a private hit with just your own family. Drawing lines of Victoria Park would be a lovely way to offer an alternative to Washington Park. Thanks for listening!” 4 Parks & Recreation Commission DRAFT Minutes April 17, 2025 Eric Christmann: “My name is Eric Christmann and I am a long-time resident located at 215 Humboldt Road, which my property runs along the park fence. Just to get you a background on me and my family, I did grow up in this house and was here when the original park was installed, and remember that my brother and sister couldn’t wait to play in. When those metal toys were removed and the new design came in, my kids played in this park also growing up and it attracted a lot of kids from San Mateo and Burlingame. This park has always been a great park for the neighborhood kids to play in and should remain a kid’s park, especially the asphalt area. As new parents teach their kids to ride bikes for the first time, young kids also skate board and roller skate here regularly and this is a safe place for them. This park just isn’t for kids in the area lots of families come in from around San Mateo to let their kids play without worrying about them wondering off. Putting in a pickle ball court would take a large section away from those kids playing in the park and basically pushing them into a small area, which isn’t fair for the kids. Plus, the noise pollution that would be created by playing pickle ball would be bad for the neighbors living right next to the park like myself. I don’t want to relax in my backyard with my family hearing people playing pickle ball all day long, and with the sound wall along the freeway next to the park the sound would travel much more. New pickle ball court can be installed over by Bayside Park area as there are no neighborhoods in this area and there is plenty of room there, along with parking. As our neighborhood at the Victoria Park area is over run by the business located in San Mateo, such as Kitchen Town and the other business along there. I don’t think anyone from the commission has taken the time to drive through the area or walk there to see the impact from these new businesses, creating havoc for residents in the area like myself. As my wife and I have already called in a number of times to police, with people blocking my drive way as they visit the business in across the street in San Mateo with no regards for the residents in the area. So, closing this email out: I am firmly against having a pickle ball court installed in Victoria Park, also a ¼ mile up the road at the park there is alread y pickle ball courts there.” Mark Lucchesi: “I live just around the corner from Victoria Park. Ironically, it's the park that I spent my younger years at and I have a deep love and affection for it. I walk by it every day and have fond memories. I have seen the sign posted that some work is being proposed and wanted to contribute my thoughts: 1. I would love a restroom, it would allow people to spend more time there, but I know the cost of one is prohibitive, but can still dream. 2. Also, in terms of safety, what about a fence around the playground? That would make it enclosed so that young children cannot wander out of the gate without their parents. 3. Leave the basketball hoop, and I'm all for adding 4-square, hopscotch and yes even pickle ball lines for America's fastest-growing sport (which personally, I don't play, but know a lot of community members do.) Overall, I feel the park is in excellent shape, I've enjoyed seeing kids take advantage of the playground updates that were made and the grass is well cared for, the bushes and shrubs are neatly trimmed and the hard court is in pretty good shape.” Abby & Matt Edling: “We thank the city for considering improvements to Victoria Park. We write as parents of a teenager and soon to be teenager. We are strongly in favor of a full-length basketball court with two hoops (ideally break away rims and nice backboards), maximization of time for basketball, limited pickleball time, and if the blacktop would be painted, that it be different than that which was used at Washington Elementary for the area around the basket, which is incredibly slick, and largely unusable for basketball as a result. The city has few full court basketball opportunities (none in the newly constructed recreation center) and the outdoor court at 5 Parks & Recreation Commission DRAFT Minutes April 17, 2025 Washington Park shares time with pickleball. Our children (especially the older child) plays basketball at Victoria Park on a nearly daily basis. As pickleball enthusiasts ourselves, we appreciate the desire for more pickleball sites, but that should be tempered with at least some space for basketball. We wish we had spoken sooner for an indoor facility but at the very least please increase and do not decrease outdoor basketball space. We request that Victoria Park be preserved for basketball during non-school hours and the weekends. Thank you” Todd Weller: “First, thank you for your service to our city of Burlingame. I am writing to express concern and consideration of the blacktop re-pavement. I live directly across from the park, on Victoria road (I have lived in this house since 2007). Thus, any chances are likely to have the largest impact directly on me and my family. I appreciate the effort to improve our (limited) park space. I hope my concerns are not read as "Not in My Backyard" type critiques. Please note that I served on the neighbor design committee that suggested themes and initially approved the Victoria Park playground. When designing the playground, I suggested the "Space" theme that ultimately was chosen. At first others were concerned about the "visual" appeal, and is it "ugly". I told the others to ask their kids what theme they wanted: the playground is for kids, and I felt fun should be the primary consideration for the design/theme. I share this context for my mindset, and hope my comments below are viewed as constructive and helpful. My concerns fall in two categories: Change of a neighborhood park to more of a destination park Adding pickleball and a full- court basketball court to Victoria Park (VP) would likely make this a park that non-neighbors (residents and non-residents) travel to. Pickleball is already in great demand. Also, it is not uncommon for non-residents to drive up park and play half-court basketball. There are two sub- problems with this likely outcome: 1) There is already little to no parking at high usage times of the day. Below are photos I took at 3:30 on 16Apr25. This is common during the afternoon and evening. Looking East down Howard Ave. VP to the left. Zero open parking on both sides of the street.” Vice chair Brunello closed public comment. Wettan observed that other than Washington Park, other pickleball courts in the City are moderately used in comparison, so the noise and people traffic are not so overwhelming, and are usually used by people who live nearby. Curtis likes the idea of a timeframe for pickleball, specifically during the day versus at night, when there may be more kids wanting to utilize the basketball court. Milne suggested that the lining be approved, provided it undergoes some sort of mitigation investigation. It could involve a schedule, physical infrastructure to mitigate the noise, or other factors. He said that as a Commission, they should not wait for potential problems. He believed that the Commission could anticipate some of those problems and have them agendized for a future meeting. Yu agreed with exploring some options around hour restrictions for both of those activities, potentially. 6 Parks & Recreation Commission DRAFT Minutes April 17, 2025 Milne noted in terms of a motion, there are two options in front of the Commission: 1) Two lining options or a combo version, and 2) then we could do perhaps a separate motion to bring back an item on a future agenda to discuss hours of priority use. Holtz noted the project would hopefully be done in late August or September. Milne stated that with this timeline, there is ample opportunity to think through the other items. Chang explored the possibility of less is more in terms of lining. He recalls that the joy of hopscotch is drawing the lines yourself with chalk, so perhaps those permanent lines could be eliminated. Leaving pickleball lines, perhaps in different locations than the drawings, and leaving the foursquare lines. Example: if someone were playing on the middle pickleball court, it prevents anyone from playing basketball on either side. If pickleball courts were on the outside, then if someone was playing on one side, then someone could still play basketball on the other side. Wettan agreed that kids love foursquare but generally do not play on pre-drawn hopscotch. He agreed with including foursquare. MOTION by Commissioner Milne to approve the option with two pickleball, one four square, and a full court basketball; and to come back with ideas to mitigate the noise, other impacts, and the track. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Wettan. Motion was approved 7-0. 6. OLD BUSINESS a. Approval of the Updated Field Use Policy – Vice chair Brunello disclosed for the record that his child plays in the Burlingame Soccer Club, and he manages the team as a volunteer. He has also served in the capacity of coach & referee for AYSO and has been an assistant coach for Burlingame Girls Softball. Supervisor Gresh presented the staff report. He noted that if the policy was approved tonight, next month’s field users would need to return to the Commission to be approved as a Commission Approved Organization (CAO). If the policy is not approved, staff would continue with the current policy for the Fall of 2025, and three organizations would need to be revalidated. Those organizations are AYSO, BGS, and St. Catherine. Gresh noted that the Policy has not been updated since 2018. The current policy does not address current usage and allocation procedures, nor does it provide staff with sufficient guidance to allocate fairly and equitably among Burlingame residents when issues arise. Additionally, Burlingame Soccer Club (BSC) feels they have not been fairly accommodated during the allocation process. BSC doesn’t meet the criteria to be a validated user and is a renter. In February of 2024, the Commission approved an Ad Hoc Committee. The Ad Hoc Committee consisted of two representatives from City Council, four representatives from City staff and three 7 Parks & Recreation Commission DRAFT Minutes April 17, 2025 representatives from the Commission. From March to May 2024, the Ad Hoc Committee evaluated each section of the field use policy. In June 2024, the Commission approved the subdivision of fields but didn’t approve the other proposed changes due to how they affected other user groups. Also, during this time, the Ad Hoc Committee was instructed to re-evaluate the field policy and bring it back to the Commission at the end of the spring 2025 season. Over the last ten months, the Ad Hoc Committee has evaluated the allocation process for a fair and equitable solution for all Burlingame residents. A variety of methods have been reviewed, including but not limited to residents being weighted higher, hours per capita, establishing certain fields for certain specific sports, and withholding slots. The new proposed update included changing the organization title from Validated Users to Commission Approved Organizations (CAOs). Previously, Validated Users were required to reapply for validation every three years for Tier 1 and every year for Tier 2. Once deemed a CAO, organizations would need to provide the field scheduler with three things annually: 1) Proof of Insurance; 2) A list of players identifying by address, residents/non-residents; and 3) A list of board members that consists of 75% residents. The allocation priorities would remain the same. The allocation process would be four times a year: the fall, winter, spring, and summer. The Department and the Burlingame School District would reserve their slots, then city staff would email the CAOs with the number of field slots available to select, the timeline for selection, the master matrix, fields used by traditional in-season sports, and historical data. Three weeks later, the CAOs would submit their field requests. Based on the requests, a master matrix would be created. A predetermined meeting would be scheduled for overlapping CAOs to resolve conflicts, where overlapping refers to multiple organizations requesting the same slots. If the CAOs cannot agree to a resolution, staff would make the final decision with the predetermined criteria below (in no order): • Highest percentage of residents • Traditional in-season sport • Appropriate type of field • Percentage of volunteer coaches Prior to the start of the fall and spring seasons, a mandatory preseason meeting about field-related items would be held. Field time not needed by a CAOs must be turned in by the deadline established by staff. If a CAO fails to submit givebacks by the deadline, they would lose the requested slots based on the frequency of their non-consistent use from season to season. The frequency would be determined based on historical data provided by staff (heat map). Throughout the season, the CAO would be charged for any slot not given back within 48 hours prior to the slot time. At the end of the season, staff would issue an invoice to be paid by the CAO 8 Parks & Recreation Commission DRAFT Minutes April 17, 2025 within 30 days. If the invoice is not paid within 30 days, the CAO may not be eligible for next season’s allocation. CAOs are required to pay fees for field use. Fees include: • Per player fees for all participants in each of the four seasons (separate fee for resident/non-resident) • Hourly field usage fee (separate fee depending on the number of non-residents) • Hourly light fees • For organizations using BIS and Franklin fields: A portion of the cost of the portable restrooms located at each site ▪ Amount is based on the percentage of use on the specific field • A refundable deposit of $500 that would remain with the City until the organization is no longer a CAO and is for damage to the fields/equipment. The changes to the policy affect the other user organizations. Removing the Tiers and maximum enrollment for organizations that have a majority non-resident participation would allow BSC to be eligible as a CAO. This, in turn, would reduce the number of slots allocated to all the organizations that were previously Validated Users, but it is most impactful to the smaller organizations. They would receive fewer slots. However, residents participating in the BSC would receive a percentage of the allocated slots. Due to the drop-in slots for smaller organizations, staff recommends that a small number of slots be retained for upcoming fall and spring allocations to minimize the potential negative impacts on the smaller organizations. If needed, the retained slots can be used by the smaller organizations; otherwise, they would be released for all CAOs. If there are no negative impacts, staff would no longer hold a small number of slots. If the impacts are detrimental to the small organizations, the staff would return to the Commission. Supervisor Gresh reminded the Commission that the City only has so much field space and doesn’t have the financial capacity or land to increase the number of fields. If field user organizations continue to increase their participant numbers and program outside of their traditional season, the Commission may need to explore placing a maximum percentage or number of non-resident participants per organization. In the meantime, staff would be reviewing and updating the Field Density Matrix to ensure the quality and safety of the fields. In addition, while the policy update would address the timeline of when organizations receive field slots, the density per slot (the number of players on the field at one time) would vary depending on how each organization chooses to use the space. The City’s concern is to ensure that the permitted density of the slot by the type of sport isn’t exceeded. The update would also not address the time each age group practices. That is solely up to the discretion of the organization’s field scheduler. If the updated Policy is approved at the April 17, 2025 meeting, it would go into effect for fall 2025 allocations. Each organization would need to go through the CAO process at the May 15, 2025 Commission meeting to be eligible to participate in the fall and future allocation processes. 9 Parks & Recreation Commission DRAFT Minutes April 17, 2025 Commissioner Brunello thanked Gresh for the excellent summary. He stated he has read the reports, emails received, and spoken to people from all organizations that are currently field users. He noted we all want what is best for Burlingame, and there is a limited amount of resources that everyone wants. He said we are all on the same team, working together to do what’s best for the community and the kids, and to ensure they have access to the best resources available. In any negotiating process, there are always people who don’t get everything they want. Thank you for putting us all together. For the audience, the Commission has been addressing this issue for a long time, and Coordinator Garcia has been exploring various approaches to make it work. His observation from reading the material is that there is a lot of passion out there, which is outstanding. Unfortunately, there is also a lot of misinformation out there, and that comes from every single group, in his opinion. And that is not super constructive. Brunello asked what staff have seen in the historical data that is at their disposal, and from his understanding, that the way it is proposed would allow everyone to get the field space they have historically used, assuming no single organization significantly grows. Coordinator Garcia confirmed that the data and projections are correct. With this field policy, it appears that staff can meet almost all organizations' needs. Brunello asked Garcia, who has been doing this for a long time, about his concerns. Garcia stated there are more benefits to it than concerns. He has worked with schedulers from all organizations and has strong faith that Burlingame's organizations can come up with a solution to best accommodate everyone, fairly and equally. Commissioner Milne noted that the staff report indicated this would reduce the number of slots allocated to all previously validated organizations, resulting in fewer spots for them. Garcia noted that the number of slots is relative to the number of residents each organization has; the more residents, the more slots would be allocated. If the field policy goes through and BSC is considered a CAO, then yes, it would negatively impact all the organizations based on the percentage BSC is given. Public Comment: Edward LaGory: Resident of Burlingame, father of two young athletes, and also the fields co- director at BYBA. He appreciates the work at the Parks & Rec and the commission to try to make the Burlingame Parks and fields such and incredible resource for the community, he is firmly opposed to the changes proposed within this new FUP, first and foremost because the proposal would abandon ling-standing principles of serving the Burlingame resident enabling volunteerism in Burlingame Youth Sports and providing access to all children that want to play sports. By removing the residency requirements and validated user status, this policy would increase the number of non-user residents at the expense of resident user access. Although the allocations would be made based on resident numbers, an organization with more than 50 percent non- residents would definitely consume every field space to which they are allocated. He urged the Commission to reject this proposal and consider streamlined give-back timelines instead. 10 Parks & Recreation Commission DRAFT Minutes April 17, 2025 Ismael Rey Lara: Has two boys, is a team manager, and he is a history professor here in the Bay Area. What he values most about BSC isn’t just soccer, it is the sense of belonging and community his sons have found there. The club brings together families from all walks of life, united through our love of the game and our hopes for our children. He sees children forming friendships that cross city lines and school boundaries. To him, that is what sports are meant to do: connect us and give every child a place to grow, learn, and be proud. As a parent, he is especially proud of BSC’s MLS status. MLS is great news for Burlingame. The platform offers the strongest college pathway in the country, and BSC is led by none other than the head coach of Cal Berkeley. The next USA men’s or women’s national team super soccer star could come from the Burlingame soccer community. He hopes we move forward with an equitable policy for all athletes and families. Laurel Peters: She agrees with what both speakers before her stated; she wants the kids to have a happy experience. She looks at the visions of each organization and the Commission as well. It seems the language aligns most with BYBA, BGS, and AYSO. Though she stands with BSC to become all it should be and play, she does not think it should have priority. She noted that someone mentioned the Commission is trying to create a universal policy to make everyone happy. She does not think that is the Commission’s job. She believes the job is to align.” (timed out) Aaron Kinney: A board member and coach for the Coyotes Lacrosse Club. He thanked the Commission and staff for all the time and consideration they have given to this subject. He asked that in this process it is ensure priority to the largest extent to the primary season of an organization when allocations are made to allow to ensure there is diversity of sports and activities for young people in Burlingame and the peninsula to pursue. Patrick Lenaghan: A resident and BYBA and AYSO parent. He wants to reiterate the Burlingame fields are for Burlingame residents and that 85 percent is a good number that should be used across the board. He thinks $400,000 hit to the budget is a significant thing to consider, however, he wants to focus on fair use for our children. Thad Glavin: an AYSO board member and coach for BGS and BYBA. The biggest concern is how the revenue gap will be filled, and whether other organizations will bear the burden. This raises the question of whether the participation fee will increase to the point of damaging the mission of those organizations. Nemanja Colovic: On behalf of BSC and the entire Burlingame community, thank you for the 12-13 months of work, dissecting all the data and bringing together all the users to provide feedback to incorporate that in different iterations of the policy, which we now feel at this point is going to offer equal access to all Burlingame residents. The BSC is home to 600 Burlingame families, and taxpayers have been using it in the last couple of days. There has been a lot of misinformation going out in the last couple of days. We are shocked because we have an excellent 11 Parks & Recreation Commission DRAFT Minutes April 17, 2025 relationship with all Burlingame youth groups, especially AYSO coaches and schedulers. Which is why we are so shocked. If you're looking for facts, we have a fact sheet in the back with a QR code. Would like to thank you again and hope you pass this policy to benefit all the residents. Brendan O’Brien: A Coyotes board member, has three kids in BSC and has been an AYSO coach for years. Supports the seasonality component as a Coyotes organization. Coyotes is concerned with getting drowned out. And from a soccer perspective, she doesn’t think that BSC should be penalized just because they have hired coaches. The policy should accommodate a wide range of sports offered within our community, on the sports fields, and at various levels. We see ourselves as a top-of-the-funnel organization where we are equal to AYSO. We are introducing kids to our sport, and if parents want to self-select into a club travel program, they can, but we can work in unison with that club travel program. To the extent that you can offer the seasonality component, we are concerned about being overshadowed by soccer. Additionally, I believe there are approximately 1500 to 2000 soccer kids represented here, whereas each high school likely has only 40 or more players who would make that team. So, whether the kids want to play volleyball, softball, or lacrosse, or if the diverse number of sports being offered is supportive of the community. Victor Aguayo: Thank you and the ad hoc committee for all the hard work put into revising the field use policy that is now before the commission. Father of two BSC players and volunteers for the organization. Fully supports the Parks & Recreation in improving and adopting the draft field use policy, as well as designating BSC as a commission-approved organization. The updated field use policy is equitable for all Burlingame youth sports organizations and is a much-needed step towards fixing long-standing inequities. It is both fair and just for the Parks and Rec Commission to approve and adopt the updated field policy and grant BSC CAO status for the benefit of all children. Isabel Aguayo: Is a fifth grader who has been playing with BSC since she was seven. She is passionate about playing and is committed to playing. She also volunteers for the Dude program for four-year olds. She supports the new field policy as she would be entering middle school in the fall and she would like to know what her soccer schedule would be so she can plan her other activities. If the new policy is not adopted, she would face the same problem of getting her schedule late and may not be able to join other activities because they would fill up. She also does not want her parents to sign her up and pay in advance, as they may not get the money back. Kieron Saunders: Thanked everyone for all the hard work they are putting into this issue. He has been a resident of Burlingame for twenty-one years and has two daughters who played for both AYSO and BSC. He coached as a volunteer at both clubs, and he is currently a volunteer BSC board member. He feels as strongly as everyone that they are the most important aspect and the discussion here. All the organizations are here to serve the community, and he believes they all 12 Parks & Recreation Commission DRAFT Minutes April 17, 2025 should be treated equally in regard to field access. We should be working together rather than seeing conflict arise in regards to youth sports, obviously. As a parent, the children are most important. Sean Rocca: Secretary of BYBA. While his organization ultimately won’t be the one that is most impacted, it really does not matter what sports entities offer or what they are called. But requiring community focused all volunteer organizations to compete with any club sport that has more than sufficient means to help itself seems to him a non-trivial abdication of the policy goals purported here under. While he does not wish to remove any organization's access to resources, putting them on the same footing for access results in a metaphorical playing field that is certainly not level. The policy may need revision, perhaps just slightly, or perhaps entirely, but what this would achieve in effect is not what needs to be done. It is too far and too drastic in its effects. Trevor Tileston: Resident since the eighties. He reminded the Commission of the law the Commission has to address, which is, to consider the issues and the needs of the senior population of the City and recommending programs, policies and facilities that is Section K of your legal mandate. There has been no consideration that the senior population in doing this which seems like a joke. Their have very strong feelings and are very impacted by the growth of club soccer, the way their grandkids interact, their volunteer opportunities, their dog get-togethers on the field. He has talked to many of them about this. They feel very strongly about it, giving you guys said, have you not considered it. I don’t actually think you can legally make a decision on this policy today because of the mandate in the Articles here, so he encourages Commission to follow the law. Figure out what is going on with the seniors, secondly, on the legal side, he does not think Commissioner Brunello, who is clearly conflicted, a he stated, should be involved in voting or advocating on this issue. Please follow the law. Hannah Osinski: Is a sophomore at BHS and has been playing soccer with AYSO since she was five. She has played with BSC for eight years. She is immensely grateful for the experiences as they have shaped her as a player and a person. This is her third season as a head coach through the Women’s Coaching Alliance, and she just started a role as an AYSO board member. These are just a few of the incredible opportunities AYSO offers teenagers to help build confidence and leadership skills. The availability of volunteers is critical to the function of AYSO. In preparing to speak tonight, she reached out to several other female teen head coaches from the Women’s Coaching Alliance. She asked if they could coach if they couldn’t choose the times of practice and they said no. With more limited flexibility in selecting practice times, many volunteer coaches would not be able to participate. Tyson Scofield: Resident of Burlingame, father of two young children, and the president of BYBA. BYBA is the biggest impacted user in the fall season, given that we have to use seven slots to rent Washington Main. The first question he asks himself is how are we even considering this change to the field user policy. This should be simple since the kids BYBA and AYSO put on the 13 Parks & Recreation Commission DRAFT Minutes April 17, 2025 field are residents. For every two kids BSC puts on a Burlingame Field, one is a resident and one does not live here. These are Burlingame taxpayer-funded fields, and priorities should be given to the organizations that put the highest percentage of Burlingame kids on the fields. He keeps hearing there is plenty of room for everyone, and this is about priority, when you get to choose, and being inconvenienced with the times you get. In the end, you have to decide who to give priority to, and that’s the whole reason for validated users and tiering system. It’s the Commission’s duty to do the right thing here and get this right. I’m not opposed to a change to the policy, but this isn’t the one. Jamie Russo: The workflow of the practice/game slots to volunteer organizations is super challenging if every organization, that is a CAO, gets the access at the same time because a volunteer board members & coaches are all at work when that happens and the ideal slots are going to the coaches who are sitting on their email waiting for that to come out and then the workflow is going to be that we all have to get together in a room and duke it out and the squishiness of the policy is going to make it really challenging for that process. She encourages the Commission to think through whether that workflow is reasonable and realistic for those organizations. Adam Glass: A BSC parent and an AYSO board member. He urges the Commission to vote against the proposed policy because it eliminates the must run and non-select program from the CAO requirements. That is a mistake. John mentioned the club offers non-competitive programs. But here’s the thing, not one of our kids is going to play on the national team or even make a career as a professional soccer star; nearly all of them are going to be on teams in their professional lives. Youth sports teach our children critical life lessons, such as how to be a good teammate, how to work together for a shared objective, even if you may not like all your teammates, and how to fill a gap, because while it may not be your job, it’s what your team needs in the moment. Technical development consolation programs are how you get rid of less skilled players while playing lip service to a non-select requirement. In a policy, they denied children that critical team experience and the critical life lessons that come from being on a team. True community youth sports organizations give everyone the full team experience, not the team experience for the most skilled and relegation to a second-class foot skills program for the club release kids. Everyone plays must be part of the community sports user group policy. Arjis Rakstins: The AYSO field manager. The proposed draft policy from his reading is unclear about what the financial implications are. The staff report simply suggests that it depends on the number of CAOs, the percentage of non-residents, and the number of field slots used. This is concerning to him because he has heard a range of zero-dollar impact on city parks and rec revenues, up to a loss in the neighborhood of half a million dollars annually. In his mind, if there is an impact and the Commission should be considering the fact of both the Parks and Rec budget, the results in staffing implications and building utilization. At the same time, if there is a loss of revenue associated with a proposed policy change, recovery of this loss is expected to be passed 14 Parks & Recreation Commission DRAFT Minutes April 17, 2025 on to the CAO’s, then the effect on the COA’s should be assessed, that is the CAO’s be expected to bear part additional financial burden, that affect should be part of your decsion Todd Weller: Urges the Commission to read his email. The policy is vague and has gameable conflict resolution rules. As an example, consider the following: Two teams are asking for field space, team A has 700 non-residents and 700 residents, and the other team has 600 residents. The rules, as written, would mean that Team A would win this category despite having only 50 percent Burlingame members. How much field space should this team get? Enough for 1400 players despite their numbers being residents being equal or relatively equal. This policy does not resolve conflict; it creates more. What a mess. You can’t unscramble an omelet. You should prioritize not to cut. Everyone plays, low-cost organizations first, just like surrounding cities do. Gretchen Kindberg: First of all, she wants to leave no doubt of her opinion that BSC definitely serves an important role in our community, and no one is in any way trying to push out or keep athletes from Burlingame fields. She is not opposed to an updated field use plan; she is opposed to high-cost sports organizations receiving the same field allocation status as those whose mission it is to serve Burlingame residents for an affordable fee. Unfortunately for her family, the BSC uniform is a symbol of an elite club that is out of financial reach for many, many Burlingame families. She believes that Burlingame fields should first and foremost benefit organizations that are inclusive, affordable, and rooted in the Burlingame community. The current draft policy removes key protections that have helped ensure this alignment in the past. If the new policy no longer distinguishes between selective high-cost programs and inclusive, affordable community- run organizations with field access, then athletes from smaller community organizations would be severely restricted. As a taxpayer, she wants her tax dollars to first benefit the community-based organizations in Burlingame. Meghan Dunne: President of Burlingame Girls Softball. She planned on saying this meeting shouldn’t be about pitting one organization against another; however, after listening to the advantages only benefiting BSC and only disadvantaging smaller, resident-based volunteer programs, most especially BGS, it unfortunately feels that way. BGS is fortunate to have 25 teams this spring, the largest softball rec program per capita in our area. We are doing an amazing job providing a robust program. The spring is BGS’s primary season, having one field practice a week, a bi-weekly night game, and a weekend game. We are already dividing up as much as possible, losing 30 field slots would actually mean potentially having to turn away players, or having teams so large that no one gets play time. She has three children who play BSC; she is much less inconvenienced by having their practice roll out late than by turning children away from a recreational program. This proposal would give one organization the same access as three combined, three of which have upwards of 95 percent resident-based, with 100 volunteer coaches. We need to ensure that all the children of Burlingame from all sports and backgrounds continue to have equitable access to our shared community resources. 15 Parks & Recreation Commission DRAFT Minutes April 17, 2025 Eric Nuss: I know Commission and Committee worked hard on this. He is not here to put any organization down, and he thinks there’s room for everybody out there; however, he does feel it is the staff and Commission’s job to protect our residents first. Losing 30 slots for girls’ softball and other smaller organizations losing slots in the name of non-residents is a bad look for us, as it is not for the community. He does not think this field policy is the correct answer. He is not opposed to looking into the field policy and making it better for everyone, but this version does not hit the nail on the head. Nick Fantin: A board member, a coach, and a proud parent of two lacrosse players on the Burlingame Coyotes Lacrosse Club. Lacrosse is a sport predicated on field access. Coyotes offers access to the sport at a low barrier of entry. We do not turn anyone away based on skill. We are one of the few programs on the peninsula that offers enough access to lacrosse. The one thing we do ask from our program is that seasonality be considered in this policy. There is a lot of thought and consideration that is put into this, so 7.2, we want to make sure that this is prioritized. Jane Sherman: A resident and full-time working mom. It is difficult for her to take her kids to all the sports. Her youngest plays soccer; he does both BSC and AYSO. Unfortunately, AYSO was not competitive enough, so he chose to stick with BSC only. The ever-changing schedule has been a serious issue for her. She agrees they need equitable access and equitable sports, at the same time, she requests that busy families be considered as well. Natalie Brosnan: The Head of School of Mercy High School in Burlingame. She thanked the park and rec staff for all their work on this. As written, the field policy could inadvertently impact Mercy High School's athletic program. They partner with the City to host four sports in three seasons. They do not ask for field space out of season, and they do not ask for extra time for what CIF allows for high school athletics. The nature of high school sports serving a four-year age group with cuts and on cut teams and limited admitted teams, such as JV and Varsity, could not compete with year-round sport-specific clubs requesting the same field time for programs serving 3 to 19- year-old groups. This puts them at a disadvantage. If a larger organization gains CAO status, it could impact smaller organizations, while priority wouldn’t be impacted as written, field allocation would be, which would hurt high school athletic seasons. The reason for this is that it would put larger organizations that serve a year-round population at an advantage. Unique to Mercy, we are restricted in size by the City of Burlingame based on our CUP, and we are not able to grow in quantity based on the City’s policy. We appreciate our 94-year relationship with the City and hope we protect high school and all girls’ athletics. Brian Chang: A 14-year volunteer with BGS and a board member. The hardest part tonight is judging the merits of the policy on paper, and it is hard to predict what the future holds. He did some homework and would like to offer some examples of cities that have done it right and cautionary tales of ones that have not done it right. The City of Palo Alto uses a priority matrix that scores field applications based on resident percentage and volunteerism, and they have ensured 16 Parks & Recreation Commission DRAFT Minutes April 17, 2025 recreational sports have consistent field access. The City of Berkeley enforces strict usage limits on competitive clubs and guarantees field time for recreational leagues, and also encourages non- profit and local first-use teams. Santa Clarita has a two-tier allocation system that prioritizes local non-profit organizations with at least 75% residents and has had great results. As a cautionary tale, the City of Pleasanton has allowed soccer clubs to receive favorable access while other sports have struggled to secure field time, leading to community frustration and a drop in participation in those programs. San Jose has also allowed that to happen, and that has resulted in teams shutting down. Aaron Avelar: Last time he was at a commission meeting, he was protesting Top Golf, which is why we do not have soccer fields. He is here tonight to say the BSC has a unique part for him in teaching his girls in terms of diversity. Their strength is being held as a negative, as being able to reach across city limits, reaching across the aisle. There is a diverse group in BSC that is not offered for them to succeed in the modern world. When you look at a board nowadays, public or private, it’s diversified. He wants them to have the opportunity to be different. He grew up in a small town, Los Gatos, and the board looked like yours, all one race, and we ended up having to take the community and not just our city residents as a priority. It is really frustrating to see, especially with DEI going out the window, that the one thing his kids can do that is diverse and includes other people, financial backgrounds, everything else, you guys are penalizing. Shannon Delucchi: Current BGS board member, and her husband is a current BYBA board member. Sharing this as they are active and involved community members, and their children have grown up with BYBA and BGS for the past nine years. While the appreciate the effort to create a fair system, the reality is organizations like BGS and BYBA, which are run entirely by volunteers, with over 90% Burlingame residents, are going to lose field space. She urges the Commission to reject the field user policy changes as written. They are increasingly seeing the impact that club sports have on youth athletics. Pushing children to specialize too early often prices out many families. In contrast, the other organizations talked about tonight, proudly offer recreational leagues for children of all skill levels, creating an environment where kids can explore, grow, and enjoy sports without the pressure to perform or commit year-round. As mentioned earlier tonight, in Burlingame, everyone plays, we need to protect Burlingame residents and Burlingame-led volunteer organizations. Misha Anjanwa: A board member of BYBA. He wanted to note that he has seen in all of the PowerPoint presentations the term “Burlingame residents”; all of you on the Commission are Burlingame residents. Yet, here we are, considering giving an organization that is 60% non- residents the ability to trump a largely Burlingame resident team. That is not right. As a second comment, if there is anybody on this committee who has a perceived conflict of interest, he would urge them to recuse themselves from the decision process. This is to make sure that any decision this committee makes is not perceived as illegitimate. 17 Parks & Recreation Commission DRAFT Minutes April 17, 2025 Burlingame resident: A Father of three children who play for BSC. For the last three years, they have struggled to plan their family schedule during spring and fall because BSC allocates spots as a second tier, and they are waiting for spots that become available from tier one. He and his wife have demanding jobs that require them to be away from home, necessitating careful planning and adjustment in advance. This creates a hard time for them as well as for many other families from our team. He does not believe BSC should be penalized for having a higher fee, as it is invested in our kids. Marco Vancovich: Before he coached for BSC, he was a PE teacher. The main goal of BSC is to develop the human being, not just soccer players. For the taxpayers, we have 500 Burlingame residents who are waiting for the schedule at the last second, and they don’t have space for some kids. So, the reality of the numbers is like this: let’s say an organization can have 1,500 kids on paper, but only 100 kids are showing up in the sessions. Those kids not only play for BSC, but they also play for AYSO. We have 200 kids on one half of Murray and 10 kids on the other half of Murray. His players, fifteen girls, last weekend they went to LA to play, and we encouraged them, we encourage kids because there are different levels of play. San Mateo County is very proud of Tom Brady, and he talks about the NFL because he is a star. Patricia Tormey: Said she is against the proposed updates, as a mom of four kids in Burlingame, a former Division One athlete, coach with AYSO and Woman’s Alliance mentor, she can tell you that the idea of affording and signing up her four kids for competitive sports, starting at kindergarten would not be accessible nor desirable given the data against specialization. She does not agree with putting all these organizations on the same playing field. She supports prioritizing sports that are focused on the percentage of Burlingame residents in their season and open access for both playing time and affordability. She thinks any improvements should make sure it is done efficiently and support the club sports, but they should not be considered to have equal access. Man in suit: Proud father of three kids with a busy schedule. He barely gets to see his kids play because of the schedules. He feels the scheduling is really tight and the new system looks like it would be impacting their schedule a lot more, so he wants to make sure all kids are getting their fair share. He is not a Burlingame resident; he brought his kids from a less competitive club to Burlingame so they could join the Burlingame family, and there are a lot of us here today, so he would consider the Commission’s fairness and support to residents and non-residents, so it should be equal for the kids. Yoko Saito: Requests Commission to remember what problem they are trying to solve. The problem of people getting space as early as possible can be done by changing the rules and setting deadlines in terms of when they need the space not necessarily by changing the tiered system. Just a reminder to take a step back and remember the problem that is to be solved. Emails received: 101 – Available on request 18 Parks & Recreation Commission DRAFT Minutes April 17, 2025 Brunello closed public comment and opened Commission discussion. Commissioner Milne noted several public comments tonight mentioned the financial aspect. It is recognized that if the BSC became a CAO, it would reduce their costs. Would there be any pressure to make that up by a general fee increase or attempt to equalize that hit, or would the city subsidize more. Glomstad noted that currently, the fees generally increase each year. In the future, if there is less support from the General Fund the increase may need to be higher. She noted that it takes a whole year for staff to determine the impacts. Milne asked if there is one aspect of the allocation process wherein whoever jumps on the slot first gets it, or does everybody have two weeks to request whatever they want, and it doesn’t matter if a slot has been requested six times already, it can be requested by any group. Coordinator Garcia noted that many organizations can select the same slot, which is decided at the allocation discussion and potential arbitration level to decide who gets the slot. If there is a duplicate request for a slot, the reality is that the community-based organizations would get the slot unless they are out of season. If both organizations are in season, they hold a discussion to determine each organization's needs. Commissioner Chang pointed out the tie-breaking points for slot selection are: 1) In season sport; 2) Suitability of field; 3) Volunteer coaching; and 4) Percentage of residents. Garcia confirmed this to be the case. Commission discussion included protecting primary seasons, tightening up on the “give back” of slots policy, use of the “heat map” for analysis of usage, and enforcement of deadlines. Discussion with the user groups present led to the planning of a coordination meeting for the fall, where the organizers of each group provide their schedules to coordinate the scheduling of games & practices. Staff would set a deadline for tentative schedules. Any organization that does not fully participate is subject to having field space revoked that that organization has not historically used. MOTION by Commissioner Milne to send the policy back to the Committee to protect the in-season allocation. Seconded by Wettan. Motion was approved 7-0. MOTION by Commissioner Wettan to authorize City staff to follow Section 9 of the draft policy of the allocation of fields in the fall. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Milne. Motion was approved 7-0. MOTION by Commissioner Wettan for staff to schedule a meeting for fall allocation with all organizations to coordinate scheduling of use. Staff is to set a deadline for tentative 19 Parks & Recreation Commission DRAFT Minutes April 17, 2025 schedules, and any organization that does not fully participate is subject to having field space that is not historically used revoked, per Section 9 of the proposed policy. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Yu. Motion was approved 7-0. 7. STAFF AND COMMISSIONER REPORTS a. Parks & Recreation Department Reports Director Glomstad noted that, due to the lateness of the hour, to omit staff & commissioner reports for the month and resume them at the next meeting. The Commissioners agreed. b. Commissioners Reports – Omitted to next month 8. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS 9. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:11 pm. The next meeting of the Parks & Recreation Commission is scheduled to be held in person on Thursday, May 15, 2025, at 7:00 pm. Respectfully submitted, Joleen Helley Recording Secretary 1 STAFF REPORT To: Parks and Recreation Commission Date: September 18, 2025 From: Margaret Glomstad, Parks and Recreation Director Subject: Appo intment of One Commissioner to the Time Capsule Ad Hoc Committee RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Chair of the Parks and Recreation Commission appoint one member of the Parks and Recreation Commission to the Time Capsule Ad Hoc Committee. BACKGROUND The City will be opening a 25-year time capsule in December 2025. The time capsule is located in the lawn of City Hall. After opening, the contents will be displayed in the Library. This opens the opportunity to create a new time capsule, which will be kept in the Community Center. The City will repurpose an old steel footlocker to hold the contents of the new time capsule. DISCUSSION The Ad Hoc Committee will be comprised of one commissioner from both the Beautification Commission and Parks and Recreation Commission, one Library Trustee, and a representative from the Historical Society. They will be assigned to help with the contents of the new time capsule. The Ad Hoc Committee will meet as needed to determine how items should be submitted for review, which items will ultimately be included in the time capsule, the wording of the plaque on the time capsule, and the schedule for having it ready to be sealed. The Ad Hoc Committee is expected to be active from October 2025 through April 2026. FISCAL IMPACT None 1 STAFF REPORT To: Parks and Recreation Commission Date: September 18, 2025 From: Nicole Acquisti, Recreation Manager – (650) 558-7307 Molly Crossfield, Recreation Supervisor – (650) 558-7317 Subject: Approval of a Pilot Program for Priority Use Times at Washington Park Sports Court RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Parks and Recreation Commission approve a pilot program for priority use times at Washington Sports Court. BACKGROUND In March 2020, the Burlingame Parks and Recreation Department opened the Washington Park Sports Court. The Sports Court can accommodate full-size basketball, futsal, and pickleball courts. The lines for the three sports overlap, and all three sports cannot play at the same time. The Sports Court is currently designated as a drop-in facility (first-come, first-served), consistent with the usage model of other City courts. The only exception to this model is the City’s tennis/pickleball single- use courts, which operate under established guidelines. In June 2025, a commissioner notified staff that they had received concerns from basketball players who felt their access to the court was being impacted by other uses. While additional pickleball courts are available nearby, alternative options for basketball are limited and located farther away. On July 17, 2025, staff presented to the Parks and Recreation Commission discussing the significant increase in pickleball activity at the Washington Park Sports Court, often extending into evening hours. In response, the Commission asked staff to work with an ad hoc committee of commissioners to propose options, adding guidelines with priority use times on the Washington Park Sports Court. DISCUSSION The Washington Park Sports Court Ad Hoc Committee met on August 18, 2025, and included Commissioner Milne, Commissioner Wettan, Commissioner Brunello, Manager Acquisti, and Supervisor Crossfield. After discussing what would best serve the community and accommodate the needs of the greatest number of users, the Committee recommended implementing a pilot program to test designated priority play times and encourage shared use of the court. The proposed schedule is as follows. Approval of a Pilot Program for Priority Use Times at Washington Park Sports Court September 18, 2025 2 Proposed Pilot Program Schedule: Monday – Friday • 8:00 AM – 10:30 AM: Priority Pickleball • 3:30 PM – 6:00 PM: Priority Basketball Sunday • 9:00 AM – 12:00 PM: Priority Pickleball • 12:00 PM – 3:00 PM: Priority Basketball Outside of these hours, the court would remain open for all users on a first-come, first-served basis. The Committee also recommended adding signage to include: • Pickleball Players, please check Washington Tennis/Pickleball Courts availability before using the Sports Court. • Share the Washington Sports Court - use the middle pickleball court first The goal of the pilot program would be to alleviate user conflict by establishing clearly communicated priority hours for each sport, while preserving flexibility and accessibility at all other times. The program aims to balance the needs of two user groups without requiring formal reservations. If the Commission approves the pilot program, it would be effective through May 31, 2026. During the pilot period, staff monitor court usage patterns, gather public feedback, and assess effectiveness. A summary report would be presented at the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting in June 2026 with recommendations on whether to continue, modify, or formalize the priority play structure. In addition, at the April 17, 2025, Parks and Recreation Commission meeting, the Commission asked staff to bring back a similar program to the renovated court at Victoria Park. Staff requests that the Commission Chair direct the Ad Hoc Committee to determine if a similar pilot program is needed at Victoria Park, and if so, propose hours to be reviewed at a future meeting. FISCAL IMPACT If approved, new signage will be required. The average cost for a park sign is approximately $300. To ensure visibility, three signs, one at each entrance to the Washington Park Sports Court, are recommended. The total cost for the signs, staff time, and materials is approximately $1,500. Sufficient funds are available within the Department’s current budget to cover this expense EXHIBITS None From:Barb Niss To:recadmin Subject:Washington Sports Court Pilot Program Date:Thursday, September 11, 2025 5:11:20 PM You don't often get email from barbniss@gmail.com. Learn why this is important Dear Parks and Rec Commission, Thank you for sending out a note re: the new pilot program. I think overall this is a fair and equitable solution to what can be some conflicts in court times in general. However, my personal request would be for the basketball priority to end on weeknights (really Fridays mostly) at 5pm instead of 6pm, but I see what you are trying to accomplish, so only count this if I am not an outlier to this thought. Thank you for allowing residents to chime in with their thoughts. Barbara Niss This email is from an external source. Please take caution when clicking links or opening attachments. When in doubt, contact your IT Department