The newly initiated recreational master plan was a major focus of the meeting, with the Bond representative outlining their approach to the project. Emphasizing community engagement, they stated, “we just want to get some feedback from everybody,” underscoring the necessity of local input. The firm plans to conduct a comprehensive assessment of existing facilities, evaluating usage, condition, and community needs to ensure they meet safety and accessibility standards. This detailed evaluation will include inspecting fencing, dugouts, and field surfaces and considering whether facilities can accommodate current and future community demands.

The project timeline includes a resource and discovery phase, with community engagement expected to intensify in the coming months. Specific plans were mentioned for one-on-one meetings with local recreational groups and stakeholders to gain insights into their experiences and challenges. The firm aims to understand spatial constraints and scheduling conflicts among sports teams. The representative noted the importance of considering future demographic trends and recreational needs.

Community engagement will be facilitated through surveys and public meetings, both virtual and in-person, to gather input on proposed improvements. The firm expressed a strong desire to ensure that the community’s voice is integral to the planning process, with feedback sought before any major design decisions are made. Concerns were raised about the adequacy of the current timeline for gathering community input and completing the master plan. It was suggested that if the board intends to implement a fee structure based on the plan, allowing extra time might be prudent.

Another topic was the evaluation of existing recreational facilities. The meeting discussed challenges in field utilization, noting that some fields were underused due to their condition rather than a lack of demand. It was highlighted that certain fields might not be suitable for nightly use due to wear and tear, affecting playability during peak seasons. The need for careful evaluation of available hours versus actual usage was stressed, with community involvement seen as critical in identifying significant sports groups and their facility needs.

The conversation also touched on the importance of prioritizing improvements based on community feedback, with a diverse range of stakeholders involved in the planning process. The idea of using individual representatives from various sports groups was suggested to facilitate communication and ensure discussions about specific needs. Emphasis was placed on gathering feedback on underused areas, with suggestions that spaces like the area behind the middle school could be improved or repurposed for better community use.

Funding and land ownership were additional concerns. Discussions highlighted the need to understand legal constraints and land ownership when planning improvements. The potential use of Community Preservation Act (CPA) money was mentioned, with recommendations expected in the spring. Immediate actions on “low hanging fruit” tasks were encouraged, although concerns were raised about financing larger projects, which could take up to ten years.

Outreach to the community was deemed critical, with suggestions for utilizing social media and direct surveys to gather feedback. There was recognition of the challenges in ensuring diverse community input, especially from those not directly involved in sports. Ideas for improving outreach included engaging with neighborhood associations and local organizations to maximize participation in the survey process.

The meeting also addressed the potential extension of field usage hours through the installation of lights, considering the implications on community life and the need for community input. Concerns about existing facilities’ aging infrastructure were expressed, with various suggestions for potential improvements, though not all would be feasible or supported by the community.