Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/07/2024 - Meeting Minutes PARKS,NATURAL LANDS,URBAN FORESTRYAND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD of SALT LAKE CITY Formal Meeting Thursday,November 7, 2024 5:00 p.m. — 7:35 P.m. Join Via Zoom:https:/IUS02web.zoom.us/j/821692.2:1i2?pwd=AgYvgboHIktDbTzfCH. 2bcR2Ryo2ai.1 Or Join at the Public Lands Administrative Building: 1965 W.500 S.Salt Lake City,UT 84104 Upstairs Parks Training Room Join by phone Phone: +1 669 goo 6833 Webinar ID: 8216925 2312 Access code: 807299 APPROVED MINUTES 1. Convening the Meeting 5:00 PM A. Call to order — Clayton Scrivner — Brianna Binnebose — Ginger Cannon — Samantha Finch — Aaron Wiley — Steve Bloch — Michael Dodd — Melanie Pehrson — Talula Pontuti — Kerri Nakamura B. Chair Comments 5 mins Mr.Scrivner shared he's excited for the CIP discussion today. He also commented on Ms. Nakamura's social media post with the Mayor for the Central 9t" project she's been working on. He shared Central 9t"was one of the projects he worked on when he was with the City.This is an example of what a City can do for itself with these sorts of projects. 2. Approval of Minutes 5:05 PM — Approve October 3, 2024 minutes. 5 mins Ms. Binnebose motioned to approve the October meeting minutes. Ms. Cannon seconded the motion.The Board unanimously voted to approve the October meeting minutes. 3. Public Comment 5:10 PM — Verbal comments are limited to no more than 3 minutes; 15 minutes total. Written comments are welcome. No public comment. 4. Director's Report 5:35 PM — Summary of current high-priority department items.—Kristin Riker 5 mins Ms. Riker shared she's excited to be retiring this year. She said she will keep the Board updated on the progress of finding a new Director. Mr.Scrivner shared he reached out to the Mayor's Administration asking how PNUT can help with this transition. Ms. Riker said the City did a 7.0 earthquake exercise with 70 employees. It was a large- scale event that was multi-jurisdictional. FEMA came and wrote up an evaluation of how the City did,which will be available in about a month.One of the biggest takeaways was how important the communication between each other was. Ms. Riker continued to discuss the earthquake simulation. Ms. Riker said the Department is working on their Mayor 2025 goals. Some of the Mayor's goals are housing applicability, implementing and prioritizing family- sized housing,division zero,capital projects,sports and entertainment district, education and culture district,the Green Loop,growing water smart,and organizational efficiency and employee well-being.The staff will be PARKS,NATURAL LANDS,URBAN FORESTRY AND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD of SALT LAKE CITY presenting to the Mayor in mid-November in relation to these goals.Staff is also working on their 2025 budget request,which she's hoping they will have ready for the Board to review at their retreat in January. Mr.Scrivner asked to let them know when her proper send off will be to say goodbye. Ms. Riker said December 31"is her last day.The Board and staff continued to discuss Ms. Riker's retirement. PARKS,NATURAL LANDS,URBAN FORESTRY AND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD of SALT LAKE CITY 5. Staff Presentations, Updates&Discussions 5:40 PM PARKS,NATURAL LANDS,URBAN FORESTRYAND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD of SALT LAKE CITY A. Donations.—Tyler Murdock 20 mins Ms. Larsen shared her screen to display the donations. Mr. Murdock reminded everyone last year, staff the Board reevaluated how and when staff would bring donations.The discussion led to having the Board weigh in and have discussions on donations with a larger impact or larger in size. Staff is open to a conversation today and whether or not staff would come back to get a formal recommendation from the Board,though not required. Curtis Park Asana Partners This donation is located at Curtis Park and is partnership staff have been working on with the Asana Partners(AP) at Foothill Village. Foothill Village is currently under construction. Mr. Murdock shared that Curtis Park was once owned by AP back in the 1980s was a portion was given to the City, but they still own a portion of the park. AP is looking to construct a breezeway through Foothill Village that comes into Curtis Park.This would improve the community's connection to that space, more eyes on the park, and accessibility.The proposal would be construct a staircase on their property, build connecting sidewalks through Curtis Park, and build another staircase connecting the park to 2200 East. AP would build this as part of their development and then donate it to the City as a completed project. Staff and AP are currently working through a long-term negotiations and donation agreement. Mr. Millar added that this was a constituent CIP application from last year.The constituent drew up a bunch of items they wanted to see happen in the park.The only thing that would be under this agreement and donation is the staircase.The Board and staff continued to discuss the Curtis Park donation. Ms. Cannon asked if there was a final design. Mr. Millar said AP are going to develop the final design before any agreement in assigned. Ms. Cannon asked if there has been any public process for this. Mr. Millar said there will not be a public process for design, but there will be a public information process between staff and AP going out to the community councils and other groups. Ms. Cannon asked if they knew the value of the donation. Mr. Millar said not yet. Ms. Cannon asked about curb and street access. Mr. Millar said there's already a curb cut that's aligned with the proposed staircase alignment.The Board and staff continued to discuss the Curtis Park donation. Mr. Murdock shared there was a sewer failure in Foothill Village this past week and discovered that the failure was under the park,which is not great, but it was infrastructure that was put in before they donated that part to the City and staff is working with a lot of old easement needs. Ms. Finch asked if they've spoken to community council about what they might like to see. Mr. Millar said they haven't yet. Mr. Murdock shared the next two donations are for the International Peace Gardens(IPG).They might not seem like they're controversial or significant, but the reason staff is bringing them to the Board is because for the last three years, staff has received a lot of requests to add or expand areas of the IPG.Staff has told people who have expressed interest in donating or adding monuments to countries that staff would like to wait until there's a comprehensive management plan for growth and expansion of the IPG. Staff has requested funding from the City Council for the last three consecutive years and have not been awarded funding. Staff feels they've put these donations off for too long now and are interested in the Board's feedback on whether staff should move forward with these. International Peace Gardens—Memorial Bench at the Korean Peace Garden Ms. Larsen shared her screen to display the donation proposal for the memorial bench.This donation is for a bench to the Korean Garden.The value is roughly$18,000 for the bench and is in memorial to their daughter who passed away.While maintenance might be negligible, it's one of the big considerations staff is looking at when it comes to donations.There has been a lot of vandalism in the IPG the last five years and it has cost the City significant funding to repair donated art pieces that didn't have a maintenance obligation for the donor. In this case,the donor has agreed to maintain the bench if vandalism occurs.This is something the Department is interested in exploring for future donations, maintenance, and obligations from donors. Ms. Larsen added that the Korean Garden Committee does support this donation. Ms.Cannon asked what the lifespan of the bench is. Mr. Murdock is unsure, but it's something they'd address through a donation agreement process. Benches in general capital have about a 15-year lifespan. Ms. Riker said the donation agreements usually state that if it is vandalized or somehow destroyed, the City is not responsible to replace or repair.The Board and staff continued to discuss the Memorial Bench at the Korean Peace Garden. International Peace Gardens—Memorial Monument for the Genocide in Rwanda PARKS,NATURAL LANDS,URBAN FORESTRYAND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD of SALT LAKE CITY Ms. Larsen shared her screen to display the donation proposal for the memorial monument. Mr. Murdock shared this has been a donation request staff has been putting on hold for about three years now.They've been having conversations with a non-profit group, Rwandan Community Abroad (RCA-Utah). RCA-Utah anticipates the donation would be around $55,000. Mr. Murdock thinks the donation would be fitting for the IPG, but staff has not added a monument of this size for quite some time,which is why they wanted the Master Plan to help guide them.There's not a Rwandan area in the IPG, but there is a section within the African garden that would be considered for location—the location has not been determined. Ms. Nakamura said she likes the design and asked if the landscaping anticipated in the project scope. Mr. Murdock does not believe so, but is something to consider going through donation agreements. Ms. Cannon asked if there is any lighting associated with the project. Mr. Murdock said no. Mr. Bloch asked what the request of the Board for this donation is. Mr. Murdock said it's up to the Board on how they'd like to proceed as a Board. Staff brought these donations to them because they are larger and significant. The Board can discuss them further or make a recommendation or advise to hold off on the donations until a master plan is in place. Mr. Bloch said if the Board is going to make a recommendation, it would be for the best to discuss this further next meeting Price Bench and Plaza Donation Ms. Larsen shared her screen to display the Price Bench and Plaza donation. Mr. Murdock prefaced this is a donation the Board may consider making an official recommendation on.This proposal came from Steve Price,a trustee at the University of Utah (U of U),and was initially a bench donation on behalf of his mother. Mr. Price worked with the U of U and had a bench placed in Dry Creek; it's a curious location and it's on U of U land. Mr. Price would now like to build an art piece and plaza space associated with a native plant garden immediately across from Popperton Park.The donor is wanting to build a small walkway that would connect the South Popperton hiking trail to this plaza and a native plant garden that staff's botanists and ecologists have been with on with the Price family. Mr. Murdock said that all of the vegetation, irrigation, path, and benches would be donated to the City. Irrigation already exists along the street, but they would have to tie into water all the native plants and trees that they plan to build.This donation is in the realm of$200,000. Mr. Murdock said the Price family has done a lot of outreach to the neighbors in the area. He hasn't seen any written report of that engagement, but the family has verbally said they have and that the community supports it. Mr. Murdock said that is something that be considered because it's a significant change in this natural area. Mr. Bloch said it's a curious location for a bench plaza. Mr. Murdock said it is curious, and the family chose this location primarily for the views. Ms. Finch said she would feel more comfortable knowing whether or not the community councils are aware of this. Mr. Murdock said he's happy to go back to the Price family and get some written communication to share with the Board about the engagement that was done and perhaps, an approval or a recommendation from the community council,too.The Board and staff continued to discuss the Price Bench and Plaza Donation. Ms. Cannon asked what the Board had decided regarding handling donations. Ms. Larsen said they removed a dollar threshold because the donation amounts were so varied; some were just a couple$100.She said the Board and staff had decided that staff would bring donations for the Board to review where staff felt like they needed additional input. Ms. Cannon asked so they wouldn't necessarily accept these donations. Ms. Riker said recommendations would go to the Mayor's Office,just like budget and CIP,the Board can have a voice in recommendations the Department submits to the Mayor's Office.The Board and staff continued to discuss donations. Ms. Finch shared she would like more information about engagement regarding some of these donations before providing any sort of recommendation. Ms. Cannon said this is balance of not having master or individual plans and having these sorts of donation proposals that chance the use or added maintenance. Mr. Wiley asked if staff has a tool to score on what the impact would be. Mr. Murdock said no.The Board and staff continued to discuss donations. Ms. Pehrson said she would feel comfortable accepting the donations for the IPG. Mr. Murdock said he will bring the Price Bench and Plaza Donation back for the Board to review. Ms. Riker said the donations will be an action item. Ms. Binnebose said she doesn't feel ready to have an action agenda item for the Price Bench and Plaza as she feels the Board needs more time to discuss it. Mr. Murdock said it's reasonable for him to reach out to the PARKS,NATURAL LANDS,URBAN FORESTRYAND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD of SALT LAKE CITY family to get answers to the questions the Board asked,and Ms. Larsen can share that in the packet next month and can then determine when to have it on the agenda.The Board and staff continued to discuss donations. B. Strategic Capital,Acquisition,and Asset Management Plan—Katherine Andra 10 mins Ms. Andra introduced herself to the newer Board members.Staff is calling this plan SCAMP(Strategic Capital, Acquisition,and Asset Management Plan). SCAMP will essentially outline how Public Lands can accomplish the highest recommended strategy, policy,and action items from the Reimagine Nature Master Plan,which will then recommend specific projects and objectives for Public Lands to pursue over the next 10 years. Staff has six major goals they want to accomplish with this plan: 1. To maintain or improve the level of Public Land service in a growing capital city through property acquisition and development and the improvement of existing properties. - Staff completed a Needs Assessment in 2019 to capture how they're doing and since then,the City has changed a lot.The plan is to do a data update to that Needs Assessment and the outputs would be based on that data. 2. To achieve the five principal goals out of the Reimagine Nature Master Plan. 3. To develop a prioritization criterion and 5-10 year strategic capital project schedule for new projects, replacement projects, and property acquisitions. 4. To align the Public Lands goals and outcomes with upcoming Citywide strategic planning efforts. - There is a Capital Facilities Plan the City is working on as well as an Impact Fee Facilities Plan that looks at how the City spends their impact fees,and then the Capital Improvement Program,goals and project selection. 5. To algin Public Lands'needs and availability of future or current funding and potential future funding. 6. To be more of a living document that can be easily evaluated and updated internally on an annual basis to be a tool for Public Lands to use into the future. Ms.Andra said this plan will give specific recommendations for projects, improvements,and asset management over the next 5-10 years. It will also provide tangible frameworks and tools for Public Lands to use adapt those projects as needed within that first decade, and then also to use those same frameworks and tools in the future to make strategic decisions about projects and funding.Staff is developing the plan is three phases: Capital Plan, Asset Management Plan, and the Acquisition Plan.The goal is set staff up strategically to make funding requests, prioritize improvements and maintenance projects,asset replacement needs,and capital projects.The Board and staff continued to discuss SCAMP. Ms.Andra said she's hoping to have a high-level of involvement from the Board. She thought maybe the Board could form a SCAMP Committee or a workgroup to help staff with bigger decisions along the way. Capital, asset management,and acquisition planning are pretty unique,and staff is lucky to have to internal staff experts. Ms. Andra thinks it would be important to utilize the Board as community liaisons throughout the process. It is a relatively internal facing process without a lot of broad community engagement because it will be based upon the Reimagine Nature Plan. She would like the Board to consider forming a SCAMP committee. Ms. Nakamura said forming a committee on the Board is an arduous process so she asked the Board is they would consider to do a working group—this is something Ms. Nakamura would be interested in participating. Ms. Cannon agreed with Ms. Nakamura and she thanked Ms.Andra for suggesting a committee. Ms. Cannon said she's interested in this project and would like to volunteer her time in whatever form it takes. Ms. Cannon said maybe the consultant could put together a draft committee to bring to the next meeting, but she also thinks the working group is a good solution.The Board and staff continued to discuss SCAMP. C. CIP Discussion.—Tom Millar 60 mins Ms. Larsen shared her screen to display the constituent CIP applications. Mr. Millar explained that SCAMP is to replace the one-off CIP requests where staff generates those ideas every August/September and present to the Board. In the future,CIP and other budget requests will be based on the results of that plan. Mr. Millar said there ended up being 11 constituent CIP eligible.The only one that is slightly tentative, depending on what Finance says, is the Jordan Park Skatepark Expansion as the last couple years, the CDCIP and City Council have been picky on not funding or considering eligible projects that are only planning and design that don't have any construction funding,too. Ms. Finch asked about the 700 East project. Mr. Millar said it's the same project as last year, where the constituent would like to put a garden on the westside of 700 East Community Garden,which is just a couple blocks south of the Liberty Wells Community Garden.These community gardens typically partner with Wasatch Community Gardens and last year they said they didn't have the capacity to take this on if it were funded. Ms. PARKS,NATURAL LANDS,URBAN FORESTRYAND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD of SALT LAKE CITY Pontuti expressed concern about having all community gardens go through one group to give everyone equal access.The Board and staff continued to discuss the 700 East Community Garden. Ms. Finch asked about the dots indicating design and construction on Riverside Basketball Court Renovation. Mr. Millar said it would be about$450,000 for design and construction,which is about how much the basketball court was a Liberty. Ms. Finch asked about the Concord St.to Alzheimer's Jordan River Cleanup. Mr. Millar said that the development of that vacant parcel on the westside of the river, as well as the bridge across the river, staff doesn't think that the City would permit another bridge—this would be a fourth bridge in a one block radius. Mr. Millar said it could be a smaller application that's more about cleanup and activation in that area.The Board and staff continued to discuss Constituent CIP. Ms. Finch asked about the Fisher Mansion Restoration project. Mr. Millar said it's the Friends of Fisher Mansion Group.There have been lots of discussions about what to include for a budget amount and Mr. Millar said he thinks they're trying to make it politically palatable in terms of dollars, but still have an impact to restore it to it's former glory. Ms. Pontuti asked what public access looked like before it was shut down. Mr. Millar said the City purchase the mansion around 2006-2007, before that it was a rehabilitation center run by Catholic community services, before that it was a convent for Catholic nuns and before that it was the home of the founder of Fisher Brewery. It hasn't had public use since the City acquired it.The Board and staff continued to discuss the Fisher Mansion project. Mr. Bloch asked about funding for the Forest at Bonneville. Mr. Millar said this project will be an interesting way of getting funded because the land is currently owned by the Golf Enterprise fund and staff cannot use impact fees to purchase property from Golf,even if it would add a level of service.The property would have to purchased with general fund dollars or some sort of swap. Mr. Millar said he doesn't think the build out of the space would be too expensive relative to other sites of similar size because the community does enjoy the natural forest feel of the space. Ms. Riker said it has been done in the past to purchase golf property,especially in the event was Golf was in the red and the City paid them out of the red and Golf would give the City land. Even though the City owns all the Golf property,Golf is still it's own enterprise.You can't use impact fees to pay yourself.The Board and staff continued to discuss the Forest at Bonneville project. Ms. Larsen shared her screen to display the internal CIP applications. Mr. Millar said there are nine internal applications, six of which are programmatic as in they're not specific to one site, but more a type of infrastructure that needs to be built or replaced in multiple locations. Mr. Millar said the project descriptions are intentionally vague so if the Board has input as to which ones to prioritize over others,that would be helpful to staff.The bolded locations are included in other programmatic requests.There are probably six to seven parks that have multiple needs to replacement and repairs. Mr. Millar said maybe the suggestion from the Board could be to replace all the parts at once for those six to seven parks. Mr. Millar gave a high overview description of the six programmatic projects based on the Board's feedback last month.The Board and staff continued to discuss the programmatic internal CIP applications. In regards to the Restroom CIP application, Ms. Finch asked if this was piggybacking off the constituent CIP application that was funded this past year. Mr. Millar said staff doesn't necessarily expect that if this project gets approved next year,that come September 111,staff will be designing something, but it gives staff the flexibility in having the funding already—staff is trying to avoid waiting for funding and to maintain the momentum because you don't have to spend the funding from CIP right away,from the pilot bathrooms. It will give staff funding to fix items in need of repair or replacing.The rough CIP funding expiration date is three years.The Board and staff continued to discuss the programmatic internal CIP applications. Mr. Millar shared the Events and Special Events Teams identified parks they think are most capable to hosting events to avoid the same parks being used again and again.The Better Event/Power Infrastructure application includes adding some amenities to additional parks to better support events.The goals of this application are to reduce the maintenance impacts of concentrated events, reduce costs for organizers, and activate other parks in the City. Ms. Cannon asked in terms of equity of the design of the pavilions and who they're planning on accommodating—meaning it's serving the most people or the people who are reserving them most. Mr. Millar shared he attended a session at the American Society of Landscape Architects Conference, and they discussed common questions they asked in our park surveys and how different languages responded to those questions. PARKS,NATURAL LANDS,URBAN FORESTRYAND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD of SALT LAKE CITY One of the questions was, "what is a park?"and the responses were very different based on the language the individual spoke.The Board and staff continued to discuss the Event/Power Infrastructure application. Mr. Millar continued to highlight the internal CIP applications the Board discussed last month. Mr. Millar shared either last year or the year before,staff did some repairs at the Liberty Park Lake and had to empty the lake. He said whenever there's a break,staff really can only patch up the aeration system to keep the water quality good.Anytime there's an algae bloom, Public Utilities says no water can be put back into the lake. This application is two part.The first part is dredging because there's so much sediment built up, it's very hard for the aeration system to actually work.The second part is to replace the aeration system.Staff estimates the new aeration system would be about$200,000.The Board and staff continued to discuss the Liberty Park Lake internal application. Ms. Finch asked when there's a joint departmental projects, if the Board ranks them,and the other department doesn't put the request forward, if that would somehow negatively impact the chances of funding. Mr. Millar said Public Utilities could write a letter of support for this project. Ms. Finch asked if this project is just on Public Land's list. Mr. Millar said Public Utilities doesn't apply for CIP so staff is not competing against them. Ms. Pehrson asked if there's something that could be built into this project to reduce potential maintenance in the future. Mr. Millar said yes, and in most of the applications, staff is making the casing or replacing or fixing issues wholesale to reduce the amount of time and money that needs to put in every week or month just to maintain failing infrastructure. The Board and staff continued to discuss the Liberty Lake application.The Board and staff continued to discuss internal CIP applications. Mr. Bloch asked about prioritization techniques. He brought up the Green Loop and that's one big ticket project, but there are more other projects they could do with that funding. Ms. Cannon said that's why the Board adds comments to their rankings to explain the reasoning behind how members rate projects. Ms. Cannon said it also puts parameters around their discussions regarding projects. Ms. Binnebose said the Board will still have time to discuss their rankings at the December meeting, but the timeframe for ranking and submitting comments is compressed. Ms. Binnebose asked for people to more detailed in their comments. Ms. Finch shared she looks at impact fees versus general funds on projects to help with her ranking.The Board and staff continued to discuss CIP applications and rankings. Ms. Finch asked about the Native Plant project. Mr. Millar said it's still on the spreadsheet that was in the packet, and after last month's discussion with the Board and were priorities they moved lower.The reason why they were included in the big project list from last time is that it was a previous year's application that did not get funded. Staff had a property intended for that project if it were to be funded and because it wasn't funded, that property now being used for something else. If staff does a Native Plant center, staff would need to find property for it first. It's a project that's not as fleshed out as the other ones.The Board and staff continued to discuss CIP applications. Ms. Finch asked Ms. Binnebose for next steps. Ms. Binnebose said there are two forms, two processes similar to last year.The Board will rank constituent and internal applications separately. December 51"is a flexible date, but ideally Board members will submit their prioritizations that morning. She also asked for members to submit their comments on rankings so the Communications Committee can begin drafting the letter.The Communications Committee will have a draft letter ready to present at the December 51"meeting.All suggested edits for the letter need to be submitted by end of business day on December 91"to have revisions cleaned up by the 101"for the Board to deliver it to staff before the close of business day on the 101". Ms. Binnebose emphasized these are hard deadlines.The Board and staff continued to discuss their CIP process.The Communications Committee will send out calendar invites with reminders. D. Staff Updates.—Ashlyn Larsen 5 mins Ms. Larsen shared that staff has a new events calendar and people can subscribe to the calendar to have the events populate on their own calendars. She shared her screen to display the new calendar. She shared you can also filter by event type—community,volunteer,engagement, and Park Ranger. Ms. Larsen said she's working on the Division Director updates to the Board and asked since Ms. McCain,the Communications and Engagement Director,will be out when they originally planned on presenting, to have her present in December. Ms. Larsen also suggested having the Parks update at the retreat in January. Ms. Larsen suggested an agenda topic for the December meeting to begin scheduling the January agenda.She proposed having the retreat at the Carriage PARKS,NATURAL LANDS,URBAN FORESTRYAND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD of SALT LAKE CITY House and changing the meeting date to January 91"since January 2"d is right after the holidays and people may still be on vacation.The Board liked that idea of rescheduling the retreat to January 9th.The last item is chair and vice-chair nominations.The Board and staff continued to discuss the January retreat. 6. Board Discussion 7:15 PM A. Committee Reporting 10 mins Communications Committee Their update was presenting the CIP process and steps for ranking and the letter of support. Ms. Binnebose sent out calendar invite reminders. Urban Trails Committee Ms. Cannon said in their meeting they discussed available resources to identify urban trails.Their notes are in their Google folder.They want to meet with staff to get a better understanding of the urban trail system and asks further questions to then better refine their SMART goal. Foothills Trails Committee Mr. Bloch said they've spent time talking to Mr. Murdock to discuss where staff is with an MOU they are working. Staff shared their vision. Staff and the Committee discussed making a technical advisory committee and working group. Mr. Bloch said they would like to get more members on the Committee.The Board discussed reviewing committee membership at the retreat. Jordan River Trail Committee Ms. Pehrson said the Committee hasn't met. She is working on scheduling a meeting with staff. B. Board comments and question period 10 mins Ms. Pehrson asked Ms. Riker about the Jordan River closure at North Temple. It's open during the day now, but she asked if Parks was involved with that. Ms. Riker said she can find out about getting more information.The Board and staff continued to discuss the North Temple closures. C. Next meeting: December 5, 2024 D. Request for future agenda items Ms. Riker said staff would like to present their budget for the next fiscal year.The Board discussed having the presentation done in January so the Board could write a letter.The Board and staff continued to discuss the budget presentation. Ms. Finch motioned to adjourn the meeting. Ms. Pontuti seconded the motion.The Board unanimously voted to adjourn the meeting. 7. Adjourn 7:35 PM