A key issue was the uniformity of program costs, all pegged at $3,000, prompting concerns about their accuracy in reflecting actual expenses. The board debated the necessity of a more nuanced financial approach, which would consider the specific costs associated with each program. Discussions also highlighted the importance of having the city attorney review these agreements to ensure clarity in contractual terms. The unresolved status of legal review raised concerns about the potential for misunderstandings regarding compensation for services not rendered, especially in cases of program cancellations.

In addition to these contractual discussions, the board addressed the need for clarity in invoicing and payment schedules, emphasizing a streamlined process that aligns payments with actual program completion rather than upfront lump sums. The implications of this payment model for the YMCA and community education programs were considered, given their potential need for upfront funds to cover initial administrative and marketing costs. This exploration of contract language aimed to eliminate redundancy and confusion, striving for a clear understanding of responsibilities and expectations for all parties involved.

The board also tackled the topic of facility fees, particularly concerning pavilion usage and special events. There was a proposal to waive rental fees for organizations contributing to the construction or maintenance of park structures. The discussion acknowledged financial constraints, noting the limited revenue generated by the current pavilion and the importance of aligning fee structures with public access and community benefit. A consensus emerged on maintaining clear contract terms and flexibility in park usage agreements to prevent misunderstandings.

Further, the board examined the ADA budget for 2025, with recent improvements at Lions Park noted, including paving and accessible stall additions. While some ADA projects might be deferred to 2026, the board expressed interest in addressing immediate needs at Lum Park’s restrooms. Considerations extended to potential improvements at Rotary Park, though costs estimated above $20,000 made it a less feasible option compared to Lum Park’s projects.

Discussions on park renovations included the Lum Park pavilion rebuild in collaboration with the Ski Loons, who proposed demolishing the non-compliant existing structure to construct a new facility. This plan was met with support, contingent on adherence to building codes and safety measures, despite concerns about volunteer-led construction on city property.

The board’s conversation on financial matters extended to capital equipment requests for 2026, with emphasis on acquiring a multipurpose “gator” vehicle for park maintenance tasks. The need for snow removal equipment was also discussed, though concerns were raised about budget adjustments close to submission deadlines. The board was reminded that the city council holds ultimate authority on budget allocations.

The Lum Park campground rate review was another focal point, with a proposed fee increase to align with regional rates, including a $55 daily rate and discounted rates for veterans and seniors. The introduction of a weekly rate was seen as a competitive advantage for extended stays, responding to community and organizational feedback.

Lastly, the board addressed issues of graffiti and park maintenance, acknowledging the need for better volunteer engagement and community outreach to alleviate staffing challenges during events. The surplus from concessions was also discussed, with plans to donate unsold items to city departments for upcoming events, pending legal guidance on donations outside the city system.