►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
C
F
On
the
question
regarding
removal,
you
know
what
I
mean
I
didn't
wasn't
asking
about
the
reasons
why
the
current
bill
related
to
the
current
bills
list,
but
in
general,
so
just
to
clarify
that
and
then
on
page
48,
the
stricter
striker
sales
stretcher
system,
maintenance
I
wanted
to
know
what
that
was,
not
how
we
pay
for
it
or
you
know
what
the
purchase
order
was
I
want
to
know.
What
is
it?
What
is
a
stretcher
system,
maintenance,
okay,.
G
F
G
E
G
H
H
H
D
A
F
C
E
C
I
I
C
E
I
C
F
F
C
C
J
You
on
a
seven
resolution,
31
dash
R
dash
15
regarding
the
Southwest
TIF
districts,
plus
staff,
recommends
the
City
Council
adoption
of
this
resolution
declaring
and
distributing
a
surplus
of
nine
hundred
and
five
thousand
three
hundred
and
eight
dollars
from
the
southwest
tip
at
the
end
of
the
fiscal
year.
2014
moving
for.
A
I
All
right,
a
madam
chair,
I'd
like
to
move
ordinance
20
for
20
days,
15
taxing
medical
marijuana
staff
is
recommending
recommend
City
Council
adoption
ordinance
24
day.
She
owed
us
15,
which
would
establish
a
tax
on
cannabis
sales
from
the
cultivation
center
to
a
dispensary
that
annoys
compassionate
use
of
medical
cannabis
pilot
program
for
ten
ilsc
s130
dash
was.
C
I
Allows
for
the
sale
and
use
of
metal
medical
cannabis
in
the
state
of
Illinois
subject
to
strict
restrictions.
This
Act
allows
the
city
of
Evanston
to
impose
a
tax
on
cultivation
center
for
the
privilege
of
cultivating
medical
cannabis
at
a
rate
of
six
percent
of
the
sales
per
ounce.
That's
for
introduction.
G
C
Of
lights,
so,
if
I
get
this
right,
it
means
that
the
total
tax
per
ounce
of
medical
marijuana
in
the
state
of
Illinois
and
the
in
municipalities,
if
we
pass
it
right
now,
is
thirteen
percent.
The
total
combined
tax.
So
if
I
read
this
right,
mr.
Lyons,
it's
six
percent
from
a
locality,
seven
percent
from
the
state
of
Illinois
the
privilege
tax.
D
I
Thank
you,
madam
chair
it.
So
if
you
go
to
medical
marijuana,
tax,
solvent
grover,
you'll
you'll
get
a
chart
that
shows
a
variety
of
states
ranging
from
calif
domain
in
the
the
percentages
that
they
charge,
and
so
it
ranges
in
and
percentages
and
one
of
the
things
that
I've
had
discussions
with
the
city,
manager
and
I
didn't
see.
I
A
part
of
this
bill
is,
is
being
able
to
take
a
percentage
of
this,
since
it
is
considered
new
revenue
and
if
it's
the
appetite
of
the
council
to
shave
off
of
2%
out
of
that
six
percent
and
have
those
dollars
go
directly
to
workforce
development
and
I.
Don't
know
from
a
legal
perspective
grant
is
that
something
that
we
can
do?
Madam.
N
O
O
Certainly
the
city
of
Evanston
allocates
portions
of
taxes
for
other
uses
now,
so
that
is
something
that
could
be
done
by
resolution,
which
I
believe
was
before
we
have
done
with
the
economic
development
fund
and
tell
facts
well,
so
we
can
make
those
adjustments
at
a
later
date,
but
we
would
ask
first
that
we
go
ahead
to
introduce
the
attacks,
get
it
on
the
books
and
then
the
council
can
direct
it.
However,
they
see
fit
pursuant
to
the
law
departments.
Research,
great.
O
O
F
D
I
made
the
other
part
is
that,
according
to
economic
development,
folks,
it's
my
understanding.
We
have
a
little
bit
of
growth
period
before
we
ever
see
anything
so
that
we
we
are
going
to
be
collecting
anything
in
the
immediate
future.
So
we
will
have
time
to
study
and
bring
it
back
well,
even
more
reason
to
us
that
it
takes
time
for
the
plants
to
grow
I.
O
A
O
It's
a
separate
license,
Mike
my
limited
understanding
of
the
Illinois
medical
marijuana
industry
is
that
they're
going
to
need
to
import
medical
marijuana
from
outside
the
state
of
Illinois,
initially
with
the
idea
that
it
would
all
be
grown,
and
there
are
growth
licenses
that
have
been
issued
and
again
every
every
license
is
a
different
story,
but
again
back
to
mr.
Lyons.
This
point
we
expect
them
to
begin
operating
in
the
fall.
F
L
I
Question
from
legal-
this
is
a
little
bit
outside
of
this
ordinance
are:
will
they
will
businesses
in
Evanston
or
Illinois,
be
able
to
deposit
the
cash
proceeds
or
revenues
from
their
sales
into
a
bank,
and,
if
not,
how
will
they
account
for
their
money
and
how
will
we
figure
out
what
their
percentage
of
taxes
are?
The.
N
O
A
C
A
J
A
F
F
N
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
A
11
is
our
ordinance
20
60
15,
to
convene
a
public
hearing
proposing
the
establishment
of
a
special
service
area,
s
sa
around
the
business
districts
at
main
in
Chicago
and
dempster
Chicago
and
setting
a
date
for
it.
The
proposed
public
hearing
for
April
13
2015
during
our
regular
meeting.
We
still
be
here,
Alvin
Burroughs
on
the
13th.
Yes,.
C
A
A
J
Q
A
B
B
Good
evening
and
I
want
to
thank
the
board
for
having
this
opportunity
to
speak
I'll.
Try
to
keep
this
brief,
because
I
know
everyone
has
a
busy
schedule,
then
urge
the
board
to
study
this
matter
further.
I
don't
personally
think
that
250
feet
is
a
reasonable
distance
to
have
any
firearm
facilities
to
a
school
I.
Think
the
safety
of
our
children
is
one
of
our
tantamount
rights
and
responsibilities,
I'm
thinking
that
it
would
be
a
minimum
of
500
feet,
his
500
feet
is
the
minimum
acceptable.
Thank
you
thank.
A
You
Denise
stomach.
P
Madam
chair
members
of
the
committee
good
evening,
I'd
like
to
address
the
firearms
ordinance
item
this
evening
and
at
the
last
meeting
I
suggested
that
the
minimum
distance
of
a
potential
gun
range
from
a
school
be
increased
from
250
feet.
Staff
has
mapped
out
the
potential
locations
with
a
500
foot
buffer
zone,
but
is
not
recommending
it
500
feet
would
not
create
a
de
facto
ban
on
ranges
or
dealers.
P
Evanston's
staff
recommendation
to
maintain
250
foot
distance
seems
to
lie
in
its
determination
of
what
is
reasonable
opportunity
to
conduct
Second
Amendment
protected
activity
court
decisions
mandate
that
the
city
merely
provide
reasonable
opportunity
for
these
activities.
The
250
foot
distance
allows
more
than
reasonable,
even
generous
gun
activity,
as
it
would
allow
for
over
22
available
locations
in
Evanston,
where
a
gun
shop
range
and
dealer
could
attempt
to
open
as
long
as
we're
talking
about.
What's
reasonable.
P
I
would
like
to
ask
you
to
consider
if
it
is
reasonable
protection
for
the
community
to
potentially
allow
a
gun,
shop
and
range
within
250
feet
of
a
school
day
care
or
Park.
In
addition
to
mandating
a
certain
distance
from
a
school,
there
are
other
reasonable
restrictions
you
can
put
in
place
to
strengthen
the
ordinance
in
zeal.
The
court
case
challenging
the
city
of
Chicago
ordinances.
In
addition
to
upholding
the
500
foot
distance
from
school,
the
court
upheld
construction
requirements
on
the
ranges,
building
materials
supply
and
exhaust
system
noise.
Sound
and
air
quality
control.
P
Restrictions
on
business
operations
were
also
upheld
by
the
court,
including
age
restrictions
and
the
requirement
for
the
Rangemaster
to
be
present
during
all
operating
hours.
In
addition,
the
city
of
Chicago
is
tracing.
The
guns
report
published
last
year
provides
steps.
Dealers
can
take
to
reduce
the
chances
their
guns
end
up
in
crimes
such
as
anti-theft
safety
plans,
video
taping
of
all
sales,
employee
background
checks
and
training,
and
inventory
audits.
Evanston
could
integrate
these
requirements
into
its
ordinance
to
put
safeguards
in
place.
P
If
a
gun
dealer
were
to
be
located
in
evanston,
this
would
also
make
it
more
challenging
for
a
gun
dealer
to
operate
in
Evanston,
thus
deterring
a
potential
gun
dealer
from
attempting
to
locate
in
Evanston.
Even
if
you
don't
feel
that
a
gun
shop
and
range
will
be
coming
to
evanston
anytime
soon,
the
ordinance
you
pass
now
may
have
implications
in
years
to
come.
P
Many
victims,
families
regret
the
week
gun
laws
we
have
allowed
to
be
enacted
in
this
country
and
that
are
still
in
force
for
the
many
who
have
already
died
as
a
result
of
weak
gun
laws.
It's
too
late,
but
it's
not
too
late
to
make
the
strongest
ordinance
possible
here
and
now
in
Evanston.
Therefore,
I
encourage
you
to
refer
the
item
back
for
more
rigorous
research
and
analysis.
Please
hold
this
item
in
committee
for
further
study
and
research.
Thank
you
very
much.
R
Good
evening,
members
of
the
council
and
city
staff,
my
name
is
Lauren
Barsky
and
I'm,
an
Evanston
resident
and
lawyer
who
lives
in
more
to
a
few
blocks
away
from
Evanston
Township
High
School
and
from
some
of
the
theoretical
locations
for
gun
ranges
under
the
proposed
ordinance.
As
you
may
recall
it,
the
last
a
mpw
meeting
on
march
9th,
you
voted
to
hold
the
gun
range
ordinance
in
committee,
while
city
staff
looked
into
the
effects
of
expanding
the
buffer
zone
around
any
school
child
daycare
facility
or
public
park
from
250
to
500
feet.
R
As
a
consequence
of
your
unanimous
vote
on
March
9th,
the
ordinance
should
have
been
removed
from
the
consent
agenda
at
the
City
Council
meeting
that
followed
later
that
evening.
This
did
not
happen.
Instead,
the
ordinance
was
included
as
part
of
the
council's
consent
agenda
and
formally
introduced
and,
as
a
result,
the
ordinance
is
now
up
for
vote
at
tonight's
council's
meeting
tonight's
council
meeting
when
it
should
not
be.
This
was
an
unfortunate
procedural
breakdown.
R
As
you
know,
city
staff
has
now
looked
into
expanding
the
buffer
zone
around
any
school
daycare
facility
or
public
park
from
250
feet
to
500
feet
and
doing
and
concluded
that
doing
so
would
not.
Allow
quote
reasonable
opportunity
to
conduct
activity
protected
by
the
Second
Amendment,
as
city
staff
recognizes
this
reasonable
opportunity.
Language
comes
from
the
usl
decision
in
which
the
federal
court
that
has
jurisdiction
over
Chicago
and
evanston,
the
Northern
District
of
Illinois
evaluated
the
constitutionality
of
Chicago's
ordinances.
Regulating
firing
ranges.
There
is
no
question.
R
Opinions
may
differ
as
to
what
constitute
constitutes
reasonable
opportunity,
but
I
believe
that
opening
the
door
on
22
locations
in
Evanston,
the
majority
of
which
are
on
the
west
side
to
potential
gun
range
/
gun
dealers,
is
beyond
reasonable
and
is
excessive.
In
my
opinion,
there
is
likely
some
buffer
zone
greater
than
250
feet,
but
perhaps
less
than
500
feet
that
would
better
protect
Evanston
residents,
particularly
those
who
live
work
and
are
raising
and
educating
children
within
mere
blocks
of
the
22
locations
under
the
proposed
or
nets.
R
Where
a
gun
range
/
dealer
could
be,
and
as
ms
stone
bec
mentioned,
there
are
additional
ways:
evanston
can
constitutionally
mandates
a
cards
for
any
gun
range
that
might
wish
to
open
here.
These
methods,
which
focus
on
the
construction
and
business
operation
of
any
proposed
range,
are
in
place
in
Chicago
and
were
upheld
by
the
Iselle
court.
None
of
them
have
been
included
in
evanston
city
staff's
proposed
in
recommended
ordinance.
It
is
not
clear
to
me
why
this
is
the
case,
but
regardless
I
think
these
are
options
worth
thoughtfully
exploring.
R
There
is
no
reason
to
rush
this
process.
I
encourage
you
to
remove
this
agenda
item
from
tonight's
council
consent
agenda
to
vote
no
on
it,
encourage
your
colleagues
to
do
the
same
and
to
move
to
refer
the
item
back
to
this
committee
for
more
rigorous
research
and
analysis
consistent
with
the
city
of
Chicago
ordinances,
reviewed
and
upheld
by
the
Northern
District
of
Illinois
Court.
In
the
SL
case,
Thank,
you
Thank
You,.
K
K
A
F
That
I
just
definitely
talk
about
that.
Just
briefly,
I
know
it's
not
an
item
for
action
of
any
kind.
However,
for
those
who
didn't
read
that,
because
it's
not
having
to
do
with
the
ordinance,
it
is
very
important
to
note
that
number
one.
My
question
was
after
an
incident
in
a
multifamily
building,
where
a
person
shot
off
a
gun,
I'm
assuming
accidentally,
it
went
through
the
walls
of
the
unit
where
the
gun
was
housed
into
another
unit.
So
I
inquired
of
our
legal
department.
F
Is
it
permissible?
Is
it
legal
for
a
property
owner
residential
property
owner
multifamily,
building
management,
etc?
To
make
guns
illegal,
in
other
words,
put
up
the
illegal
sign?
You
cannot
come
into
the
building
with
this
gun
and
I
have
been
told.
No,
it
is
not
legal
for
them
to
do
that.
However,
building
owners
managers,
tenants
etc
can
be
denied
the
right
to
have
guns
in
non-residential
buildings,
for
example,
you
may
not.
F
A
C
N
Well,
we've
had
numerous
inquiries
since
the
passage
of
the
state
statute
over
18
months
ago
as
to
when
the
city
of
Evanston
ordinance
was
going
to
conform
to
that
so
based
upon
the
level
of
continuing
interest,
we're
trying
to
act
as
prudently
as
possible
to
conform
to
the
state
statute,
as
we
currently
understand,
and
also
follow
the
regulations
that
were
promulgated
by
the
Illinois
State
Police.
So
I
think
that
the
need
in
the
urgency
is
definitely
there.
It
is.
N
It
is
always
well
taken
to
conform
statutes
to
city
statutes,
to
the
state
statutory
framework
and
also
to
bring
ourselves
into
alignment
with
what
our
neighboring
jurisdictions,
such
as
Skokie,
have
recently
done.
So
I
think
that
the
urgency
is
there.
I
think
that
that
is
a
prudent
course
of
action.
We
tried
our
level
best
to
fashion
legislation
to
head
off
challenges
before
they
come
over
the
transom,
which
is
precisely
what
we
seek
to
do
with
this
ordinance.
I
could.
C
C
N
Of
those
issues
always
come
up
in
the
context
of
the
special
use
process
and,
as
this
committee
and
council
is
aware,
the
City
Council
regularly
conditions
all
special
uses.
Some
special
uses
are
more
special
than
others,
certainly
given
the
the
public
policy
ramifications
and
the
the
indication
that
the
council
would
be
extraordinarily.
N
Restrictive
and
scrutinize
any
proposed
licensee
that
would
operate
a
range
they
would
scrutinize.
It
very
carefully.
I
think
it's
fair
to
assume
that
this
committee
in
this
council
would
seek
to
impose
very,
very
considered
restrictions
upon
construction
and
upon
the
factors
that
are
enunciated
in
these
L
decision,
and
those
are
all
things
that
are
always
considered
in
a
special
use.
I
guess.
N
Think
we'll
we'll
start
getting
into
into
an
issue
where
we're
muddying
up
this
ordinance,
which
speaks
to
weapons
and
in
intermixing
for
lack
of
a
better
term.
Those
other
considerations
which
again
I
think
will
always
come
up
in
the
stream
of
thought
and
discussion
relative
to
any
proposed
special
use.
Good.
N
Could
certainly
do
a
traitor
yeah.
We
could
certainly
look
into
to
doing
a
trailer.
Obviously,
with
with
this
issue,
what
we
tried
to
do
was
tackle
the
the
weapons
part
of
the
code.
Any
zoning
or
special
use
language
that
would
trail
on
the
issue
of
a
gun
range
would
require
and
necessitate
zoning
code.
Amendments.
Okay,
Thank.
F
You
alderman,
rainy,
well
and
I
want
to
talk
about
that.
The
zoning
code
amendments
first
of
all,
we
did
I'm
almost
an
expert
in
firing
range.
I
know
you
didn't
know
that,
but
chief
Eddington
can
tell
you
that
I
was
absolutely
relentless
in
dealing
with
the
fire
range
at
the
police
station
and,
as
far
as
I
know,
that
cost
a
couple
of
million
dollars
and
we
already
had
the
fire
range.
It
was
renovating
it
in
relation.
F
It
safe
so
I
mean,
if
there's
ever
a
model
for
a
firing
range.
That's
it
the
one
in
the
in
the
police
department,
however,
I
believe
that
any
since
there
is
no
such
thing
as
a
firing
range
in
the
city
of
Evanston
doesn't
exist
in
our
zoning
code.
I
would
like
to
have
more
information
about
identifying
that,
where
you
know
what
district
is
it
going
to
be,
and
what
what's
going
to
be
loud,
it's
going
to
be
a
special
use.
F
Well,
I
could
just
see
a
firing
range
walking
in
to
this
to
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals,
saying
I
want
to
put
up
they
they're
not
going
to
have
any
basis
or
any
model
upon
which
legislatively
to
base
requirements.
So
I
think
that
our
building
code
has
to
address
this
immediately.
If
we
have
to
have
firing
ranges,
I
know
we
have
to
allow
for
guns,
but
where,
where
in
the
Constitution
does
it
say
we
have
to
allow
for
firing
ranges?
I
mean
I.
It's.
A
F
N
I
think
one
thing
that
that
is
that
I
want
to
make
very
clear
this.
This
does
not
mean
that
we
are
conferring
all
right
upon
somebody
to
apply
for
a
firing
range.
The
issue
also
is:
is
every
single
parcel
that
this
could
conceivably
apply
to
is
currently
filled,
so
the
22
lots,
the
tax
parcels
I
mean
there
has
to
be
a
very
large
view
towards
this
in
terms
of
the
parking
requirements
in
terms
of
the
lot
size
itself.
N
So
what
we're
trying
to
do
is
we're
day
we're
trying
to
dance
on
a
very
fine
line
between
respecting
the
court
precedent
enunciated
in
zell
northern
district
last
year.
Judge
tank
Chang's
decision
also
last
year,
which
touches
upon
this,
and
then
the
hell
are
in
mint
the
mcdonald
cases
in
the
progeny
from
the
US
Supreme
Court.
So
that
is
why
we
have
the
250
foot
requirement
in
terms
of
making
it
a
special
use.
N
I
think
that
gives
the
city
the
strongest
possible
powers
in
terms
of
considering
any
prospective
use
which
doesn't
even
become
ripe
because
there's
no
available
spot
for
it
strongest
possible
consideration
of
any
use
and
then
and
then
obviously,
yes,
the
zoning
code
and
the
building
code
will
have
to
speak
to
this
issue.
But
right
now
what
we
tried
to
do
is
is
get
into
the
weapons
part
of
the
code
and
deal
with
the
issue
on
that
basis.
Right
now,
before
a
legal
challenge
comes
and
it
will
come.
F
Okay,
I
understand
that
I
agree
with
you,
I,
don't
understand
it
fully,
but
I
don't
want
a
legal
challenge
and
I'm
sure
they
have
more
money
than
we
do.
But
I
did
hear
the
pro-gun
people
at
our
last
meeting
challenged
us
on
the
issue
of
not
providing
a
space
for
a
gun
range
if
one
were
to
apply
and
just
because
those
spaces
are
occupied
now
everything's
for
sale.
And
so
there
is,
you
know
the
conceivable
that
someone
will
be
glad
to
sell
their
property
to
a
firing
range
and
I'm.
No.
N
That's
also
one
of
the
reasons
why
we
talked
to
chief
addington
quite
a
bit
about
this
particular
issue.
He
raised
the
point
which
I
hope
we
we
tried
to
broach
properly
in
the
memo.
Is
that
it's
also
an
issue
of
who
is
going
to
be
able
to
generate
any
kind
of
revenue
to
to
want
to
come
to
evanston
in
the
first
place.
N
N
Well,
Lincoln
well
Lincoln
what
I'm
not
sure
the
status
of
that
one
right
now
and
and
if
memory
serves
also,
there
might
have
been
one
that
was
in
discussions
with
the
village
of
Skokie,
but
that
hasn't
eventuated
anywhere.
So
there
is
also
a
business
decision.
What
we're
trying
to
do
is
we're
trying
to
balance
many
many
different,
hypotheticals
right
here,
the
issue
that
was
raised
by
the
the
individuals
who
indicated
that
they
would
sue
the
city
no
matter
what
I
don't
think
their
position
is
well
taken.
E
N
It's
an
open
area
of
the
of
the
concealed
carry
act.
I
think
that
they
were
more
concerned
with
business
business
operations
and
business,
regulate,
regulating
businesses
relative
to
customers
going
in
and
out
with
a
concealed
weapon
and
I.
Don't
think
I
may
be
incorrect,
but
I
don't
think
that
the
debate
focused
on
what
happens
inside
a
rental
unit.
So
it's
an
open
area
of
law
I
mean
perhaps
the
building
owners,
Management
Association
of
Chicago
could
be
a
resource
to
consult.
It's
certainly
outside
of
my
purview
and.
J
C
N
I
think
what
we
tried
to
do
was
take
into
account
the
very
highly
urbanized
character
of
Evanston
and
how
that
differs
fundamentally
from
Chicago
the
the
issue
with
chicago
and
the
500-foot
requirement.
There
that's
premise
upon
the
fact
that
there's
a
whole
heck
of
a
lot
more
available
land
that
could
be
available.
N
So
what
we
tried
to
do
is
on
a
macro
level,
still
find
that
harm
that
point
of
harmony
between
the
fact
that
there
are
always
going
to
be
less
available
locations
in
evanston,
given
the
higher
density,
but
also
at
the
same
time,
trying
not
to
to
get
so
wide
open
on
the
number
that
somebody
would
immediately
say
it's
a
de
facto
prohibition.
So
that's
where
we
came
up
with
the
250
foot
requirement.
N
Just
looking
to
file
a
challenge
and
say
you
picked
500,
because
because
that
was
the
number
for
Chicago,
but
you
didn't
take
into
account
all
the
other
fact
and
and
so
what
we're
trying
to
do
is
is
is
pick
that
250-foot
number
it
it
very
well
could
be
calibrated
up.
You
know
it's
impossible
to
tell.
If
you
know,
350
400
foot
would
would
negate
a
challenge.
I'm.
N
E
N
Yeah,
it's
it's
a
little
bit
different
because,
again
not
to
sound,
try
it.
It's
comparing
apples!
Oranges,
because
some
of
that
activities
say
a
retail
activity
may
not
be
considered
a
fundamental
right
under
the
Constitution,
where,
as
a
Second
Amendment
given
the
recent
case
law
is
much
more
emphatic
upon
that.
I
will
say
that
as
you,
obviously,
as
you
get
higher
towards
the
500-foot
number,
the
lot
sizes
become
even
more
constricted,
and
this.
A
F
A
Q
Lights:
baker
park-
this
is
located
in
southeast
evanston.
Portions
of
the
playground
were
renovated.
Last
in
1994,
other
portions
of
the
park
have
not
been
touched
since
1978,
and
so
we
started
a
public
engagement
process
last
year,
which
we
just
concluded
and
we're
going
to
perform
renovations
to
the
park.
This
fall
so
that
the
project
purpose
is
really
to
replace
the
deteriorated
and
non-compliant
playground,
components
and
those
items
are
non-compliant
with
the
American
Society
of
testing
materials
and
the
Consumer
Product
Safety
Commission.
Q
Those
are
the
guidelines
that
we
utilize
for
playground,
equipment,
safety,
we're
looking
to
install
security
lighting
at
the
park.
We've
got
quite
a
few
deteriorated
pavements,
deteriorated
athletic
facilities,
specifically
a
basketball
court
and
a
baseball
backstop,
we're
going
to
replace
site
furnishings
and
we're
also
hoping
to
do
some
improvements
to
a
small
field
house.
That's
actually
been
there
since
I
believe
the
20s
or
30s.
Q
Q
Other
things
at
that
word,
meaning
as
well,
but
just
to
give
folks
an
idea
that
this
was
coming
up
and
then
in
July
of
2014,
we
held
our
first
public
meeting
and
the
main
purpose
of
that
meeting
was
just
to
really
listen
to
the
experience
that
residents
had
utilizing
the
park,
their
concerns,
their
ideas,
their
comments,
their
feedback,
and
we
we
gathered
that
information
and
then,
between
july
and
october,
first
ordinary
held
our
second
meeting.
We
prepared
some
concept
designs
for
their
consideration.
Q
We
reviewed
those
designs
with
the
public
on
october
first
and
gathered
some
additional
feedback
at
that
point.
Between
october
and
november
25th,
we
then
took
the
information
that
we
had
heard
from
folks
when
they
saw
the
initial
concepts
and
we
developed
some
revised
concepts
that
we're
starting
to
narrow
the
focus
down
closer
towards
one
one,
final
concept.
At
that
point
we
still
had
two,
but
they
were.
They
were
getting
closer
together
in
terms
of
the
way
they
were
articulated
and
we
conducted
a
web
survey
where
I
think
we
had
over
300
responses.
Q
So
we
saw
a
slight
preference
towards
keeping
the
basketball
court
really
the
same
as
it
as
it
is
today.
Folks
indicated
that
they
wanted
traditionally
styled
playground,
equipment,
meaning
slides
and
overhead
bars
and
decks
things
that
you
see
in
a
lot
of
our
parks
today,
and
they
indicated
they
want
natural,
wanted
to
see
it
natural
color
tones,
but
maybe
some
bright
accents.
Q
So
this
is
a
just
a
depiction
of
the
final
concept.
I'll
just
kind
of
run
through
it
quickly
just
for
orientation
purposes,
Forest,
Avenue
and
kini.
Here
North
is
to
the
right
on
this
screen.
One
of
one
of
the
things
that
was
really
important
to
the
folks
at
the
meeting
was
that
we
really
maintain
this
large
open
green
space.
It's
used
for
ice
skating
in
the
winter.
It's
used
for
basketball
or
excuse
me
for
baseball
for
casual
games
of
soccer,
and
that
was
just
a
really
important
component
that
we
try
to
maintain
in
place.
Q
We
also
going
to
replace
the
basketball
backstop
here
or
the
baseball
backstop
and
the
basketball
court
again.
These
are
pretty
much
in
the
same
locations
that
they
are
today
we're
going
to
replace
the
playground
equipment.
This
is
going
to
be
the
2
to
5
age
group
play
area,
which
is
pretty
much
where
it
is
right
now,
and
the
5
to
12
age
group
area
as
well
we're
going
to
construct
new
entry
walkways
into
the
park,
including
a
secondary
walkway
that
does
not
exist
today
and
create
a
little
patio
space
around
the
existing
field
house.
Q
So
the
next
steps
for
the
project
we're
working
on
construction
documents
now
we're
hoping
to
finish
them
up
this
spring
and
get
the
project
out
to
bid
and
we'll
be
hoping
to
start
construction
on
the
project
late
summer,
early
fall.
We
want
to
make
sure
that
we
don't
conflict
with
the
programs
that
are
being
conducted
by
the
Recreation
Department
through
the
summer
and
whatever
we
aren't
able
to
get
to.
We
want
to
make
sure
we
keep
track
of
that
and
create
a
list
for
for
future
improvements.
Hopefully
in
2016.
S
S
Lots
of
opinions,
strong
opinions,
but
be
by
really
through
Stephanie's,
very
calm
leadership
and
really
repeating
to
people
over
and
over
again
that
she
didn't
have
an
opinion.
She
just
was
there
to
listen
to
them.
They
finally
really
believed
her
and
much
more
than
they
believed
me
and
and
really
after
meeting
after
meeting,
we
ended
up
with
applause
at
the
end,
so
this
has
really
been
a
really
terrific
process
and
it's
a
heavily
used
park
and
it
really
needs
the
renovation
Thank
You
Stephanie
thanks.