Good evening. I'm Sharon Pinkstaff, Chair of the PROS Commission. Welcome to Monday, August 31st, Special PROS Commission Meeting.
Commission Secretary Mike Vickers, would you please do the roll call?
Yes. Commissioner Oler. Here. Commissioner Garland. Here. Commissioner Brockhouse. Here. Vice Chair Sasser. Here.
And Chair Pinkstaff. Here. Let the record show that all are in attendance.
All right, let's move to the public communications part of this meeting.
Under California law, public comments at special meetings are limited to subjects on agenda only.
Therefore, public comment will be received during the commission's consideration of the item.
Under the Brown Act, the commission cannot act on items raised during public communications
but may respond briefly to statements made
or questions posed.
Request clarifications or refer the item to staff.
Written comments submitted have been posted
to the city's website for public review
and are included in the meeting record
but will not be separately read into the record.
Do we have any public communications and comments
from the audience?
Seeing none, let's,
Commission commissioners do you have any questions or comments related to the public comments? No, all right
We'll just move forward to the next item consent calendar
approval of meeting minutes of June 1st 2026
Does any Commissioner wish to pull the item for discussion?
Does any member of staff wish to pull the item for discussion?
No, okay. Does any public?
member wish to comment on item on the consent calendar and
Okay, seeing no I'll ask the commission if anyone would like to make a motion with regard to the consent calendar
Anyone who wants to make a motion? I move we approve the
Minutes of June 1st
Do we have a second second?
All right
New call roll. Yeah
Commissioner Garland
Vice chair Sasser. Yes chair pink staff. Yes
Commissioner or yes and Commissioner
Rockhouse yes. Yeah, sorry. I got mixed up there. Let the record show that the item passes unanimously. All right
This is a fast meeting
Next on the agenda is a presentation of Heather farm new aquatic and community center phase three planning options
I invite Chris Farrell director of arts and recreation with the city of Warner Creek forward to provide the presentation
Hi Chris Farro director of arts and recreation and I'm not going to read aloud the staff report
But I'll give you a high level and then I thought this could be more conversational to answer any questions that you had
so council appropriated
$250,000 for staff to
Hire an outside consultant in order to decide what to do with the Clark pool property
once the pool is
The new pool is opened and the pool is demolished. So the idea was we would go to a consultant this consultant would
conduct public outreach to determine the wants and wishes of the community and
Then we would come back to council with a plan of what we would recommend for that parcel
in the meanwhile the city has
started general plan
2050 which I'm sure you are well aware and
And as staff have been interacting with the consultants of the general plan, we have
been asked a lot of the same questions that we'd be asking about this particular parcel
at Clark.
So they're looking at land use.
They're looking at how traffic moves, development, the use of our park lands.
So they're looking at a lot of the same kind of ideas, and so staff thought, hmm, does
Does it make sense to roll these projects together?
Does it make sense to use the research and public outreach data that is coming from the
general plan to help us decide what to do with the Clark property?
And one of our other concerns was do we want to be doing public outreach on just Clark
while general plan is also doing public outreach and might that be redundant or confusing to
the public if we have multiple surveys going on and a little bit of survey overload so
to speak.
So we thought maybe an idea would be to hold off on spending the funds that were appropriated
by council for this project, let the data come in from the general plan, see if that's
enough data to surmise what needs to be done not just with the Clark property or the Clark
parcel but the entire property over at Heather Farm. As you know we have some
new amenities there that we do not plan to touch but there are some other areas
that we could look at that includes a portable that is out on the property
right now that has been there for a very long time and we bought it I think it
was almost 50 years old when we bought it so we have to make some decisions
about that. There's also the equestrian center that's out there there's also
So our tennis center that's out there,
pickleball tennis center.
So there's other pieces of the property
that we could examine with a broader master plan.
So we wanted to bring it to pros to get your feedback.
It does affect a timeline.
I think that's the major thing that would be affected.
So right now if we move forward with council's direction
as is currently been adopted,
we are looking at being able to present a plan to council
and moving to construction pretty quickly
after the pool demolition.
If we were to go with the broader master plan idea
when the pool is demolished is just about the time
that we'd be bringing a new concept to council,
which then means it would need to go
to design and construction.
So guesstimating about a year and a half difference
between the two pass forward.
but we'd like your input and staff.
Mike and I are here to answer any of your questions
that you might have about the two options.
Questions from the commissioners?
All right.
Yeah, I know that we're presented with basically two options,
but at the very end, there's the mention of,
or something else, right?
Sure.
So, while I don't wanna present something else,
I have questions concerning the timeline,
if there is a way to accelerate the,
let's say we recommend approval of the combined plan,
so to speak, I don't have a better title for it.
And we head in that direction,
Is there a way to at least start the process earlier
with the consultant to chip away
at that year and a half difference between the two?
It would seem like it would be possible
to go through the hiring process, for instance,
a little bit before where it's suggested
in the presentation, at least so that the onboarding starts even before the ink dries
on the 2050 accumulation of input from the citizens and everything else, that type of
thing.
I think the thought, and Mike can jump into this because you're far more of an expert
about these kinds of RFPs is we wanted to wait to bring on the consultant until we knew
what data sets we would have from the general plan, because we would want to include that
in the RFP.
So, if we find out we have, you know, I don't know, just to make up a number, 100 pages
of data that are very specific to that parcel into Heather Farm that all came in, well,
That would define a pretty small course of outreach work for this consultant.
However, if we find out we get to the end of the general plan and maybe it wasn't as
in depth as we thought and additional outreach needs to happen, we would want to include
that in the RFP.
So I think that was our concern, but to your point, if we get the go ahead on this, then
we can go ahead and talk to the general plan folks.
Like, we've kind of talked around the general plan folks of what we're thinking and they're
on board, but that would give us the ability to go to them directly and say, here's the
information that we need, and hopefully be able to guide them in the path, and then we
would certainly be able to move forward more expeditiously.
And in that respect, at least the group that is working on the general plan would possibly
be able to develop ranges of data sets.
It's going to be from this to this based on the input we've had and the way things are
going and the way the calendar is working, that type of stuff.
I'm just trying to think of a way to satisfy the demands of a good RFP, but not wait until
it's really, really, you know, set, so to speak.
I think it's workable.
So I have a question about the timeline.
So for the option, the first option
with going with the consultant, so in fall of 2028,
that the city should be able to implement, execute, kind
of what the plan is, right?
So if going with the general plan, option two,
would that be 2029?
The project will be executed?
Correct.
So the main difference is the demolition of the pool
will happen 2028 on option one at that same time ish.
Always at ish with construction.
We will be able to go out to bid for the project
that council has approved.
OK.
Option two at that same time, we would
be able to go out to design of the project
that council approved.
So that's the difference.
And so to the point that was made earlier,
is could we back that up a bit?
I think we could back it up a bit.
We can't close the entire year and a half gap
because we are waiting for the information
to come back from the general plan consultant.
Okay, so for the general plan,
there's so many aspects of general plan, right?
So the pros piece, the open space,
or the park and rec piece,
is there any opportunity to move it up?
I know we're gonna have a joint study session
at some point, like in terms of timing of it,
like is the consultant approaching the general plan
like parallelly with all aspects?
Yes, it all happens at once
because there's different consultants
for each area of specialty.
So they're all pushing forward at the same time.
There's kind of three phases.
So the phase that we're in right now
is called current condition.
So basically everyone's trying to ask questions
about what does Walnut Creek look like right now today?
The next phase is where do we want to be in 2050?
And then the big work that takes years and years
is how do we get from here to there, right?
We don't need to wait for that part to happen.
We just need the outreach of what do you want to see
in Walnut Creek that's missing now?
And then we could take that to kind of extrapolate,
okay, well, what if that can go at work?
How could we use Clark for that?
All right, and my other question is
what does it look like between demolition
and the implementation of a new project?
What is the...
Like what will Clark look like in the meanwhile?
I will let Mike speak to that.
So when the pull is demoed,
whether we have a plan ready to go,
we'll still be waiting for construction to happen,
regardless, what is our plan?
Is we just putting grass in there?
I'm not exactly sure if we've even gotten that far.
Yeah, so we haven't gotten that far yet,
because there hasn't been any money appropriated right now.
The funding that has been appropriated to date
is to demo this structure.
And then there's $250,000 that was set aside
to start working through a planning process.
So I don't have an answer for you.
What would make sense is to go back there
and make the space available.
Just put some grass and some sprinklers out there
to make sure that the space is available and usable
while we're waiting for the next phase.
but if we're truly going to go with option one
where we're going back to council in the spring
or summer of 28, and then potentially going out
with an RFP to start construction three to six months
or a year, maybe beginning of 29,
we'll have to weigh what's beneficial financially.
Does that make sense?
Thanks.
I'm kind of wondering if the general plan update
we'll cover everything that Walnut Creek has now
and we'll need in the future.
It feels silly to kind of ignore the parks
and do it separately.
I mean, we would want the amenities to be shared
across all city facilities,
and so to kind of carve out Heather Farm.
I'm just wondering if there's a way
that we can accelerate that process within the general plan
so that it speaks to all of the parks amenities altogether,
so that there's a plan that would include Heather Farm
instead of Heather Farm being separate
from the general plan?
The general plan will speak from a land use perspective
about it's more of looking at our needs,
like is our current park system working for us?
Do we need parks in other areas?
It looks at density, it looks at traffic patterns
getting to and from our parks, those kinds of things.
won't speak necessarily to each individual park and the needs in each
park. We will get information as far as, you know, we need to have more outdoor
recreation. We need to have, you know, it'll make some generalizations like
that. And so that's where we'd like to piggyback in to get the consultants to
drill down to give us some more information. And then why we're tying it
to Heather Farm as opposed to any other park is we staff are looking at once
these new buildings go in it is going to change the traffic flow and patterns of
the park we won't really we can our traffic team is phenomenal and they can
make some guesstimates how the park will be impacted but we won't know for sure
until people are out there and I don't mean traffic just cars and parking lots
that is one thing we're concerned about the parking lots will not be located as
as close, for example, to the pool as it is now.
So we're wondering how that's going to work,
but also just how people move throughout the park.
So as you know, how we shifted the buildings
and how they're laid out on the site,
we've reduced the amount of passive space
for people to just go out and lay out their picnic blanket
and things like that, which is very high use at Heather Farm.
And so we're also wanting to see how that shifts.
Like perhaps the use for that parcel is passive space.
Perhaps it's pickleball courts.
We don't know the answer to that,
but one of the things that staff talked about
with option two is it does also give us the time
to see those buildings open and to be able to look at
what the traffic patterns end up being
and the needs just naturally kind of happen in that park.
So I don't know if that answered your question,
but I think we just looked at it as the advantage
of Heather Farm, whether we do it now
or whether we do it down the road,
needs a revision of the current master plan that it has.
It's already outdated
in that we're doing this project right now.
So we just thought it as an opportunity
to just say kind of check multiple boxes.
Like yes, we can look at Clark,
but also like we need an update
to the Heather Farm master plan.
So that's why we picked it out,
not to necessarily prioritize it other others.
It just seemed like the timing was right to do that.
Sure.
I was thinking more about your comments about,
Are we now surveying the same people on the same thing
in multiple different ways?
And if we're already getting that information one way
and that information is feeding decisions
on all of the parks and all of the recreation space,
it seems like that information would be invaluable
to whatever happens at Heather Farm.
And so I don't know that it needs to be done twice,
but it would be a bummer to do it so much later than it could.
So for the demolition of the at Clark,
Is that gonna affect the parking lot there at all?
I mean, or is that staying intact?
The parking lot is staying intact.
We just have questions whether it's going to,
one, meet the need, and then how people are going
to react to the distance.
So obviously, not just the main community center,
but also the pool.
There's a lot of events there.
So people are kind of trudging a lot of wagons
and hand carts and those kinds of things.
And so we're just wondering, like, will we need kind of a closer maybe like drop-off
lot, you know, just looking at the whole parcel to say, is there going to be other parking
needs that are going to be needed down the road?
So giving us the opportunity to look at that.
Any other questions?
Yeah.
If we go with the general plan concept combined, how quickly can that the public input be changed
to allow for that more in-depth given the fact that we have September events coming
up where public, well, at least at the markets, they're going to be starting to present and
and I don't know how, whether that's also to get comments.
Yeah.
Good question.
So pending outcome tonight,
if the decision is to recommend option two,
we are slated to go to council second meeting in October.
So we will need their approval
before we talk to the consultants,
but it would be immediate after we're all,
all the departments are in like almost daily,
if not for sure, weekly conversation with the consultants.
So it would happen after the second meeting in October.
The general plan is general, as we described, and it is not a planning process for Heather Farm,
it is a planning process for parks and rec and open space needed within the city. So that is going
to be a broad base which will be done long before the actual general plan is done, correct? And so
we can get started, which I think is what I'm interpreting your schedule that you put in here.
It's going to take that, I think you said it was a second phase, it's going to take that second
phase, once we have that information, then we could start working on the master plan
here.
And I do like the idea of doing all of Heather Farm, because it's 2003, is that what the
old one...
Yeah, so it's been a while since we did a comprehensive update of Heather Farm.
Yes.
So I like doing a whole, instead of just that section, as fun as that would be, but there's
no expectation that someone's going to come in and say, you know, the public is very unlikely
to say, oh, well, I think we should, you know, let's put, I don't know, you know, a little
go-kart racing place on that corner, you know, I think they're going to be talking in general
too.
So I think the information we'll get, we'll feed this, but we're still going to have to
have a designer who's going to come in and take all that information and then come up
with options for how to use all the space at other farms.
Yes, I mean what we'll get from the general plan consultants
is amenities that our residents would like to see.
They're not necessarily gonna say,
at Heather Farm, we wanna XYZ,
but it will rise to the surface that they want
fill card tracks, whatever.
Right.
Yeah, so what we'll have is.
And someone might because people do know
that those folks are gonna go away.
So they may say, oh yeah, we really need pickleball
and that's a great place for it,
which they would know, right?
But that doesn't take away from
The deliberations that the consultant and your staff
and our commission and others will have about,
okay, this is what we learned from all the input
to the general plan,
and this is what the population projection is
and all these other things.
And then we still have the same process.
So we just wait and we don't have to do that baseline again.
So I think that's a good idea to combine.
I would support, even though I wanted to get at it
right away, I do support the waiting for this.
Thank you. So any other questions for Chris? If not, I guess we have to vote on the options, right?
I don't believe there's any public comment. Okay.
So if there's no public comment, yeah, just pull it back in final comments and then make a motion if you would, please. Any final comments?
So I'll just deliberate is
right. I think we should go with option one. I mean, I think it's important.
I think it's an important piece,
those three acres is an important piece to the city.
And I think it's important to look at that specifically.
I think the general plan is gonna be very general,
very high level with the parks.
And I think there's value in specifically looking
at those specific three acres.
And I also think that it's important to keep momentum going
and there's extreme amount of momentum right now
with the wonderful aquatic facility that's going in.
So I think, you know, that's another thing
that Walnut Creek does well, you know,
is that, you know, we see one corner gets developed
and then the one across the street develops, you know,
and it's always changing and it's always moving forward.
And I like the idea of keeping that momentum going
at Heather Farm.
And so I'm in favor of option one.
Other commissioners?
I don't have strong feelings, but I lean towards the combined.
If only because I think that trying to seek multiple types of input from our users and
citizens
can be confusing uh... more confusing than trying to
do it
one time so to speak uh...
i think it it's already going to be confusing enough to talk to get people
talking about
twenty fifty
what they're looking like because it's all going to get
moved forward in their minds and
more of a want this no one now type of thing so
I think it's possible to do both at the same time, which would be the option, too, I guess.
So I'm leaning towards that.
But I'm also of the feeling that we do spend a lot of time planning, and we do good planning.
I know that.
But I want to get on with it too and it would be desirable to make that timeline as fast
as possible.
Any other input?
I am in favor of a hybrid kind of combination of the option one and two.
I appreciate that the general plan, I think there's definitely some synergy there and
it's comprehensive planning for the future of the city.
a really big plus. But the timeline piece, I wonder if there's any way to
prioritizing that discrete, you know, Heather Farm pros aspect of general plan
outreach, you know, interviewing and getting input from the communities. And
we can fast that, fast track that piece to get the project, you know, going as
soon as possible. That would be great. So that's my preference. So to that, I'm
I'm just thinking about the vote
and what would be helpful for Mike and I moving forward.
Can I hear some input on the thought
versus looking at the clerk parcel
versus looking at Heather Farms Master Plan?
You exactly say that your question again.
Sure, so one of the things that is different
between option one and option two besides the timeline
is the scope of work.
So is it the preference of this council
that whichever option or hybrid we end up with,
that we are looking at just the clerk property
or that we are looking at Heather Farm and its totality.
My preference is Heather Farm.
Yeah.
I don't know what other commissioners your thoughts are.
You're saying the master,
redoing the master plan for the entire park.
Right.
And I concur with that being a better approach.
with that parcel as kind of priority piece that needs kind of immediate action. I
guess you have to do it all together as a comprehensive planning approach.
I just want to make sure I understand your direction. If we do develop some
sort of hybrid or try to change the timeline, I just want to make sure we
understand like the scope that you want covered as the priority. We were
We're definitely hoping to build consensus and be able to move forward with a motion
so that we do have the direction.
To your point, we want to go to council and provide some feedback from the pros commission
to the council so that they have an understanding where we sit.
I'm not trying to force a decision here, but even if there's an opportunity to talk amongst
yourselves and try and flesh this out or ask some additional questions.
I know we're in the comment section, but if you have some additional questions so
that we can build consensus, that would be helpful.
A lot of this predates my time on the council, but I guess I'm just confused on
if all of the, or many of the sporting fields were replaced and the pool is
replaced, like, wasn't there some sort of planning process for the park in general,
because those are two very, very large constituents of the park.
So it seems like those two things couldn't have been decided on without thinking more longer term about what most of the park would look like.
So I know arts general arts plan that he brought in is 20 some years old.
But I've got to imagine that there was some discussion before about what the rest of the park would look like with the pool being moved.
So I guess I'm just confused on where those discussions were and what decisions were made at that point when the decision was made to move the pool.
Well, the ball fields just got a new turf.
They're the same ball fields that have always been there.
So that wasn't a change in use, really.
Just a change in the material.
And, well, it is a change in use.
But you know what I mean?
It's like, it's still soccer and baseball, softball still
being played there.
But not without a large expense, right?
And so if we're putting out expense
into changing the fields, what is not being changed?
And there is a long history there.
That's kind of different than the land use plan, which is, you know, kind of looks at
everything in the park.
Are we, do we have the right mix of uses in the park, you know, based on the population?
That's where I think the general plan will help us.
It's not really going to help us decide what goes in those three acres, and I've been looking
forward to trying to help plan for those three acres for a while, but given the general plan
being redone I'm kind of thinking we're better off trying to leverage some of
that but I also really want to make sure we don't get bogged down in a very long
and sometimes contentious general plan process that when really what we what we
need are just that public input process and they're starting this fall so what
they're done in it you know the whole public outreach how long is that six
months eight months right well and that's our thought is we're not going to
wait till the general plan to be complete. We're absolutely not we're
waiting to get our outreach data and then move along our business. So in
another way to maybe do it is if you've got an audience there at a public
meeting or a public event you know you could and there's questions about parks
you know the city park in general and the needs and the open space and all
that kind of stuff and what would you like to see what do you think's missing
you know however they word it you know maybe there is a chance there to to also
say you know ask them about changes at Heather Farm maybe your staff could put
together you know certain you know because it's the biggest community park
in the city and it's definitely you know it is for all people in the city it's
not a neighborhood park it's not you know it's really so I think you know
maybe you could get the consultant to just have a little side piece on
specifically you know here's gonna be the new facilities and you know what or
just you know they could ask a couple questions specifically about how their
farm I think that would be appropriate and if they get input they do if they
don't they don't right but I mean it's since they're already out there doing
something yeah that's that's our thought so if we're to get approved by Council
that we would then meet with the general plan teams to say how can you help us
you know like you said it to us it's just a few more questions that they would
be asking but it's their scope of work so we'll have to but we we are in
agreement and so what it allows us to do is to take the $250,000 that would have
just been for that parcel and now make it for the whole site because as much as
we have wanted to do a new master plan because it's 20 something years old we
don't have the budget to do that but this allows us to say well we can check
the outreach box and use the general fund money and we can use this money to
do the master plan and so it just kind of gives us a little bit more bang for
the buck but we understand that the timeline pressures too and we want
something out there too and you know we certainly don't want it to just have a
demo site sitting out there that's not our goal for sure so I understand the
concerns. So can we talk a little bit more about that demo site? Are the pools
going to be as soon as the new pool is operable and open they're gonna start
demolishing is that the plan not right away I would say within three to six
months of the new pools opening the the current pool as the direction today is
the current pool will close when the new pool opens and then we will ramp up and
there's some you know there's some environmental testing for some of the
materials that the pool was made from those types of things will have to start taking place so not I wouldn't say right away
I'd say three to six months. It'll take to demo the site
so
What we're what we're trying to settle is are we sticking with the scopes as?
defined
in the presentation, which is option one is a
plan for the repurposing of the Clark site period not master plan of
Heather farm versus combining that with what's going on with the 2050 project
as
As it currently stands but adding you know this little
nugget to it so to speak
not necessarily
Create a new master plan for Heather farm. That's not in the scope currently of those two options
But you're suggesting we ought to have a master plan
What is for option two so so it's not in the scope of the current general plan
Right, but it's in the scope of option two, right? So I think and everyone jump in and tell me
if I'm
Hearing this incorrectly or synthesizing this incorrectly what I'm hearing is there may be a consensus to do a Heather farm
Master plan if we can expedite the timeline that staff initially proposed
Does that sound like there might be agreement?
I see you had knots.
OK.
And to be fair, this is a timeline
that we put together without meeting with all
of the general plan consultants.
So we might meet with them, and they give us
a timeline that's more expeditious.
We were trying to be pretty conservative
and give them kind of the time that we are understanding,
as outsiders, kind of looking into the process.
And so far, how we've been working with the teams
and how the meetings have been rolling out.
But we could certainly find out after meeting with them
that they could give us the information sooner.
We could also find out that they could need more time.
So this number is very much based on Mike and I's kind
of preliminary assessment of how the process has been working.
But I think that that recommendation, I mean,
do you think that's enough information, Mike,
that there are, if you were to vote to say you are on board
with option time, if we could, option two,
if we can expedite this timeline?
Yes, yeah, I think that worked.
I think we can work with that.
Should we do a vote?
Are we ready to do a vote?
I just wanted to make another comment.
So on the $250,000 in this year's budget,
there's no issue with rolling that till we're
ready to do the master plan?
We would go back to council and ask for that authorization,
but likely that would not be a challenge.
Correct.
what would the process be if you talk to the general planning consultants and
that it's not possible to expedite this and then what would happen? We'll get
that information before the council meeting so if that were the case we
would let council know this was your recommendation but we staff can't meet
that expectation and then council would decide what they want to do. But yeah my
plan would be to after tonight we'll talk to the general plan folks so that
Council has that information. So we would put a vote forward contingent upon that
information because I think we're all for this more expeditious if that's not
gonna happen I think we'll our vote might change well our preference might
change. Sure you can give us an option to I think that's fair so if we determine
that the timeline cannot be changed, or it's going to be longer, then your
recommendation is X. I think that makes sense to provide that. So you need a motion?
Yes, please. So I move that the Commission support preparation of a
the Heather Farm Master Plan and that we rely to the extent it's available for us the information
gathered by the consultants for the General Plan 2050 and that we try to get them to be
as expeditious as possible in providing that information and if they can't provide it in
time we matter and that's not part of this motion. This motion only applies if
they're able to expedite. We have a second. Can I second? Just gonna make a
comment. Wouldn't we want to include the comment in the in the proposal that
without an expedited capability we would then support option one? That would be a
a more eloquent wording.
No, I mean, I didn't want to leave that silent.
That's all.
Right, and I guess I was just anticipating that.
I'm not 100% sure I would vote for one anyway.
So that doesn't mean the commission
won't positively vote for one.
Yeah, I mean, you're welcome to amend the motion
and then vote on that.
I believe that's it.
you would do the second you'd vote on the second motion and if it doesn't pass it then you go back and vote on the
First, yeah
So we should vote on this
Yeah, I modification and provided so yeah, we want to have a vote based on
The initial motion added to my comment about
defaulting to
Option one is that correct? It sounds that we want. Yes to vote on
So what does it sound like? We'll vote for option one if option two cannot be expedited, right?
Okay. Okay, so I don't really like that
Because I'm not really sure I support one
in other words
Then let's vote on your let's vote on your original
Proposal and then if if we want to add one we'll vote it down
So since there's a second motion on the floor that has to get voted for first or we can take another amendment
So if you would like to amend that again
Okay
So what you are currently voting on is what chair just shared is that?
your
Preference is option two with an amended timeline meaning sooner and if that cannot be achieved then option one
Do you want me to call the roll?
Yeah.
OK.
Commissioner Oler?
Yes.
Commissioner Garland?
No.
Commissioner Brockhouse?
No.
Vice Chair Sasser?
Yes.
And Chair Pinkstaff?
OK.
So then it would default to Commissioner Garland's
or there can be an amendment.
Would you call the roll on Commissioner Garland's?
OK.
Just for clarity.
So Commissioner Garland's was option two with no if their plan no if but with a
request that they try to expedite yes option two with a expedited timeline so
we need a second for that I think you already did the second okay now
Commissioner Brock house Brock house okay so I'll call roll Commissioner
Oler yes Vice Chair Sasser Vice Chair Sasser yes Chair Pinkstaff yes
Commissioner Garland yes and Commissioner Brockhouse yes okay thank
you so that the record show so let the record show we're gonna move with option
two with the request to expedite the planning process and I would like to make
a request for the staff to let us know your outcome you know conversation with
the general plan consultants prior to a council meeting it's the first Monday so
we'll be yeah we can report back on October that the October meeting great
thank you thank you direct okay so the next on the agenda is presentation of
the Heather farm aquatic center amenity naming approvals I invite Chris Farrell
with the city of Warner Creek forward to provide the presentation hey I'm back
so for this one I mostly wanted to highlight the attachment and that that
is the agreement that the City Council asked staff to go into with the
aquatics foundation. So the aquatics foundation was asked to raise three
million dollars and that was because of some pool improvements that they wanted
to see as part of that project. So in return council allowed them some naming
opportunities that they could use for fundraising purposes. So I want to
highlight the agreement because it does sit a bit outside of our normal naming
process, so I wanted you to be aware of that. So normally a naming would go to
council for approval, however in this case council gave prose approval for the
names. So council outlined the process and the kind of steps that the Aquatics
Foundation could take and how much money they had to raise, but as far as the
names themselves and the approval for that, it actually goes to pros. So what
we have included here are the donations that have been received to date. So on
page two of this staff report, there is a list of the names, the amenities, and the
dollar amounts for the donations that the Aquatics Foundation has contracted
to date. So we just ask for your approval. There will be more that will come in the
future. These are just the ones that have been approved to date. And why we're
doing them in chunks is because we are already working with the design
team as far as designing the donor plaques and where they'll be located and
so the more information that we have up front as far as how many characters per
name and where the sign will be located and things like that are helpful to us
in the design process. So this is the first batch but you will certainly be
seeing more over the next few months. Can I ask what a lane captain is? Sure
that's just a name that they gave them they basically sold the name to each
lane but we're not going to like put a placard for each lane it'll just go up
on a donor board. So is that for all of these that they'll be on a donor board
even like the locker rooms or will those be named at the... So the ones that are a
room will actually be on the room I can actually go just go through the list so
the rec pool and when they sell the comp pool,
those will be out on a wall by the pools.
The changing rooms will be signage
that is up on the changing room, same with classroom.
The lane captains will be on just a general donor board
and the benches will be on benches.
They are also selling,
there's another item that just goes up on the,
it escapes me.
There's another one that doesn't have an individual
that will also be on the donor wall.
So it's a mix.
There'll be some that are on the actual item,
while others will just be on the donor wall.
And it's just kind of logistics, what works for the space.
Any questions?
Any other questions from the commissioners?
I have a question about one of the names.
Sure.
So it is the Lane Captain James R. Delacy,
comma, in brackets, JD, closed brackets.
I don't understand that.
As a common use, I don't know, for instance,
whether JD is what this individual is called.
That's a good question.
Or it could be juris doctor.
I assume he was juris doctor, but I don't know.
Well, I think you may be able to assume either one.
But normally, when you have a JD,
you wouldn't put it in brackets.
True.
And above, there is one that is the JP gym in brackets,
king men's changing room.
So there's an inconsistency if it is a nickname.
If it's not a nickname,
then I question the use of a comma in the brackets.
Sure.
You know, these things are gonna be permanent,
so we wanna be absolutely sure they're done right.
agree so if there's a way to approve the list with that one to be clarified and
proposed later absolutely that or we could also say that our preference is if
it is a nickname that JP Jim King and James Delancey are recognized in the
same way exactly and if it is something else then we'll bring it back but let's
at least start with that in case it's that and then if not we'll bring it back.
All right so do we have a motion for approval with the clarification that
Chris just mentioned yeah no public comment from the audience can we do a
motion? I guess I'm gonna have to create the motion since I created the mess. I
I propose we approve all the names, with the exception of the JP, Jim King's men's changing
room, and James R. Delasey, JD, to check with these individuals as to what the references
are and try to gain a consistent approach to that.
I'll second
Excellent. I'll call the roll
Commissioner Garland
Yes, Commissioner
Brock Brock house. Yes, vice chair Sasser. Yes
Chair pink staff. Yes and Commissioner older. Yes, and can I make a comment?
I do appreciate all these people and the tremendous
Deep pockets they have for giving to support the pool project. I don't want to take away anything from that
I want to note the item passes unanimously, thank you.
All right, next on the agenda is reports on project.
Does Secretary Vickers have any report, updates?
I just have a brief report on the pool and the new pool and community center.
Things are going well. If you've been out there, you can see from the fence, if you're kind of peering over,
that the the pool both pools have been completely excavated and the utilities
meaning the plumbing and electrical are starting to go in those pools once the
utilities are complete they will move forward and install the rebar and then
try and get the shot Creek that the concrete poured before winter hits
likely you know end of October or even sooner so they're they're vigorously
working on getting that portion completed the vast majority of the slab
for the community center has been poured. There are a couple sections that
are left. One is for the changing rooms and then part of the kitchen and part of
the utility rooms off of the side of the lakeside room. Those should be in line to
be poured here fairly shortly, hopefully within the next week or two, and then we
plan to start installing the vertical beams, the steel beams, hopefully by the
end of September, early October and then we'll be going vertical from there. So
things are going well. We are a little, we're a couple weeks behind due to some
weather that we received in the late rains we had in May. The contractor feels
pretty confident that once the facility is enclosed that we'll be able to make
that time up and so we feel pretty confident that we are going to be able
to reach those dates as previously mentioned and stay on schedule. So that's
all ahead. Any questions from the commissioners on the update? No. All right. Next item, any
staff announcements, reports of activities? No announcements. Thank you. Any announcements
from commissioners? Okay. None. All right. This is a short meeting. So this concludes the August 31st,
2026 prose Commission special meeting. We adjourn to October 5th, 2026 regular schedule meeting.