Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02.11.26 Parks and Rec Packet Meeting Location: Farmington City Hall 430 Third Street Farmington, MN 55024 PARKS AND RECREATION REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Wednesday, February 11, 2026 7:00 PM Page 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVE AGENDA 3. APPROVE MINUTES 3.1. January 14, 2026 Meeting Minutes Agenda Item: January 14, 2026 Meeting Minutes - Pdf 3 - 6 4. PRESENTATIONS 4.1. Public Comments Agenda Item: Public Comments - Pdf 7 4.2. Introduction of New Parks and Recreation Commission Member Agenda Item: Introduction of New Parks and Recreation Commission Member - Pdf 8 4.3. Open Meeting Law and Speed Limits on Trails Agenda Item: Open Meeting Law and Speed Limits on Trails - Pdf 9 - 27 5. BUSINESS ITEMS 5.1. Chair and Vice-Chair Elections Agenda Item: Chair and Vice-Chair Elections - Pdf 28 6. DISCUSSION ITEMS 6.1. Parks and Recreation Commission Bylaws Agenda Item: Parks and Recreation Commission Bylaws - Pdf 29 - 35 6.2. Skatepark Agenda Item: Skatepark - Pdf 36 - 37 6.3. Parks and Facilities Tour with Rambling River Center Advisory Board and City Council Agenda Item: Parks and Facilities Tour with Rambling River Center Advisory Board and City Council - Pdf 38 - 40 Page 1 of 48 6.4. 2026 Work Plan Progress Agenda Item: 2026 Work Plan Progress - Pdf 41 - 45 7. COMMISSION ROUNDTABLE 7.1. Round Table Format Agenda Item: Round Table Format - Pdf 46 8. STAFF REPORT/UPDATES 8.1. Informational Updates Agenda Item: Informational Updates - Pdf 47 9. MEETING AGENDA TOPICS 9.1. Possible Items for March 11, 2026 Meeting Agenda Agenda Item: Possible Items for March 11, 2026 Meeting Agenda - Pdf 48 10. ADJOURN Page 2 of 48 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION AGENDA MEMO To: Parks and Recreation Commission From: Kellee Omlid, Parks & Recreation Director Department: Parks & Recreation Subject: January 14, 2026 Meeting Minutes Meeting: Parks and Recreation Commission - Feb 11 2026 INTRODUCTION: Attached are the draft minutes from the parks and recreation commission’s January 14, 2026 meeting. Commission members are asked to review the minutes and provide any corrections or additions that are needed at the meeting. ATTACHMENTS: January 14, 2026 PRC meeting minutes Page 3 of 48 Farmington Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes from the January 14, 2026 Regular Meeting Members Present: David McMillen, Megan Merricks, Doug Pewowaruk, Katharine Caron, and Katie Putt Members Absent: Other’s Present: Parks and Recreation Director Kellee Omlid and David Barr I. Call Meeting to Order Chair Putt called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. Quorum was present. II. Approval of January 14, 2026 Meeting Agenda Moved by McMillen and seconded by Caron to approve the meeting agenda. All persons in favor (APIF). Motion carried. III. Approval of December 10, 2025 Regular Meeting Minutes Moved by Merricks and seconded by Pewowaruk to approve the meeting minutes with no revisions. APIF. Motion carried. IV. Presentations A. Public Comments There were no public comments shared at the meeting. B. Recognition of Outgoing Commissioner Megan Merricks Director Omlid and commission members thanked Megan for her service to the parks and recreation commission, community, and city. She has done so much good for parks and recreation and the community. Megan will be missed and we hope to still see her in the community and at events. Commission members introduced themselves and David Barr introduced himself. V. Business Items A. 2026 Work Plan Director Omlid reviewed the draft 2026 Work Plan. The only change from the December 2025 meeting was on Goal #9 – changing the joint work session with the Planning Commission and Rambling River Center Advisory Board to by April 1. Moved by McMillan and seconded by Pewowaruk to approve the 2026 Work Plan. APIF. Motion carried. B. Spring Food Truck Event with City of Empire Parks and Recreation Commission The City of Empire Parks and Recreation Commission is proposing Friday, May 15, 2026 from 5-8 pm for the fifth annual spring food truck event. Commission asked about having music at the event whether it be a DJ or just some speakers. Director Omlid will follow up with the City Clerk of Empire, so their parks and recreation commission can discuss this. Moved by Caron and seconded by McMillen to approve Friday, May 15, 2026 for the spring food truck event with the City of Empire Parks and Recreation Commission. APIF. Motion carried. Page 4 of 48 The commission also discussed potential dates for the joint work session with the City of Empire Parks and Recreation Commission. Monday, October 26 was identified as the first choice followed by Tuesday, October 20, and Tuesday, October 27. These proposed dates will also be sent to the City Clerk of Empire, so their parks and recreation commission can select their preferred date for the joint work session. C. Sawyer Glenn Park Location An overview was provided regarding the preliminary plat for Sawyer Glenn residential subdivision and proposed park location. Discussion focused on the potential future use of the land if it does not become parkland, concerns that expanding the current park would not be practical without the ability to add a parking lot, and that the preliminary plat shows no opportunity to provide a parking lot. The commission also expressed concern about adding amenities that would require parking considerations. Moved by Caron and seconded by Merricks to not accept the proposed parkland dedication and instead require the full parkland dedication to be met through cash in lieu of land. APIF. Motion carried. VI. Discussion Items A. Depot Way Arts Park The commission had a good discussion on improvements to Depot Way Arts Park and began identifying locations on a park map for future amenities. The commission directed staff to prioritize park cleanup including pruning trees and shrubs, replacing the sidewalk, removing the structure on the northwest side of the park, and adding benches, pet waste station, and history panels. After completing these improvements, commission and staff will reassess whether there is still room in the park for more amenities. B. Chair and Vice-Chair Elections During February Meeting The commission discussed the chair and vice-chair positions as the elections take place in February. Putt and McMillen are interested in the chair and/or vice-chair positions. VII. Commission Roundtable McMillen: Didn’t have anything to share. Putt: Didn't have anything to share. Caron: Didn't have anything to share. Merricks: Didn’t have anything to share. Pewowaruk: Didn't have anything to share. VIII. Staff Report/Updates Director Omlid provided information on the following: A. Skatepark Staff, Spohn Ranch, and WSB met Monday to review and discuss the geotechnical report. There were questions regarding drainage and fill materials that needed to be better understood, Page 5 of 48 discussed, and recommendations on how to proceed. Based on this, the decision was made to push the second design workshop to February 9 to secure quotes for excavation and fill. B. Shoreline Fishing in Rambling River Park Staff met with the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Division of Fish and Wildlife staff at Rambling River Park in early December. The DNR is interested in adding three to four shore fishing stations along the Vermillion River in Rambling River Park. The DNR would pay for the accessible concrete fishing stations, which would provide more access to the river which was a recommendation from the Rambling River Park master plan. The team identified four possible locations for the shore fishing stations. They will be constructed and installed when the trails in Rambling River Park are reconstructed. C. Trails in Rambling River Park Dakota County Parks, KLJ Engineering, and city staff are currently working on design of trails through Rambling River Park. The shore fishing stations will be incorporated into the design. D. Outdoor Rinks and Warming Houses Warming houses were scheduled to open December 22, 2025, but didn’t open until January 3, 2026 because of weather and ice conditions. The warming houses have been open for six (6) days out of a possible 23 days. We have 14 seasonal staff and everyone has had at least one shift now. Weather permitting, the warming houses and outdoor rinks will remain open through February 16. E. Electrical and Motorized Use on Trails There are two upcoming opportunities to visit with students and parents / guardians about e-bike, e-scooters, and e-motos. Boeckman Middle School is holding their Spring Celebration on February 10 and Dodge Middle School is holding their Celebration of Learning on February 12. Director Omlid will attend both events and is checking with the Police Department if they want to participate. Commissioners are invited to attend as well. IX. Meeting Agenda Topics The following items were tentatively identified by the commission for February 11, 2026 meeting agenda: 1. X. Adjournment Moved by McMillen and seconded by Merricks to adjourn the meeting. APIF. Motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 8:28 pm. Respectfully Submitted, Kellee Omlid Parks & Recreation Director and Recording Secretary Page 6 of 48 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION AGENDA MEMO To: Parks and Recreation Commission From: Kellee Omlid, Parks & Recreation Director Department: Parks & Recreation Subject: Public Comments Meeting: Parks and Recreation Commission - Feb 11 2026 INTRODUCTION: This agenda item allows the public to speak to commission members about any item that is not on the agenda. When speaking to the commission it must be in a respectful and non-threatening manner. Anyone wishing to provide public comments must provide their name and address for the record. Public comments shall not exceed five minutes. The commission will not respond to the comments and a formal written response will be sent prior to the next commission meeting to the person who made the public comments. Under no circumstances will any formal action be taken on the public comments that are provided to the commission. Page 7 of 48 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION AGENDA MEMO To: Parks and Recreation Commission From: Kellee Omlid, Parks & Recreation Director Department: Parks & Recreation Subject: Introduction of New Parks and Recreation Commission Member Meeting: Parks and Recreation Commission - Feb 11 2026 INTRODUCTION: Annually, the city solicits applications from residents for appointments to boards and commissions. City council interviews the applicants and after a thorough review makes and approves appointments. City council at its January 20, 2026 meeting approved David Barr as the newest 2029. 31, January on ending term a be will This member. commission three-year Introductions of David and existing commission members are in order for the first part of the meeting. Please note this is shown under presentations, but will occur immediately after the meeting is called to order. The meeting agenda does not allow to add the introduction of David immediately after the call meeting to order. Page 8 of 48 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION AGENDA MEMO To: Parks and Recreation Commission From: Kellee Omlid, Parks & Recreation Director Department: Parks & Recreation Subject: Open Meeting Law and Speed Limits on Trails Meeting: Parks and Recreation Commission - Feb 11 2026 INTRODUCTION: Open Meeting Law Review Minnesota State Statute has a law that pertains to open meetings for elected and appointed officials including city councils and all boards and commissions. It is important to understand the open meeting law and how it affects the work you do as a parks and recreation commission member for the City of Farmington. City Attorney Amy Schmidt will be in attendance to present information on the open meeting law. Included in the packet is information about the open meeting law that was prepared by the League of Minnesota Cities. Speed Limits on Trails Cities across Minnesota, including Farmington, are experiencing a noticeable increase in electrical and / or motorized activity on trails and sidewalks. other and scooters, foot motorized (e-bikes), electric of popularity rising The bikes motorized bikes, has led to increased traffic from non-traditional bicycles on city trails and sidewalks. Staff have observed and received resident and trail users feedback about concerns including (1) the speed of these non-traditional bicycles on shared pathways, (2) confusion among users what is permitted on trails and sidewalks, and (3) potential conflicts or safety concerns with pedestrians and traditional bike users. A joint work session with the City Council and parks and recreation commission was held on October 6, 2025, to review the current situation and discuss potential management strategies. One potential strategy discussed was the posting of speed limits on trails. City Attorney Schmidt will also provide information regarding the posting of speed limits on trails and not actively enforcing those limits. Page 9 of 48 Commission members are asked to listen to the presentations and ask any questions they may have. ATTACHMENTS: Open Meeting Law Page 10 of 48 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Handbook for Minnesota Cities 6/7/2024 Meetings, Motions, Resolutions, and Ordinances Chapter 7 | Page 12 Minn. Stat. § 645.15. See Section I-B-2 for more information about notice for special meetings. State law does not prohibit meetings on weekends. However, state law regulating how time is computed for the purpose of giving any required notice provides that if the last day of the notice falls on either a Saturday or a Sunday, that day cannot be counted. For example, if notice for a special meeting to be held on a Saturday or Sunday is required, the third day of that notice would need to fall on the preceding Friday, or earlier. Minn. Stat. § 204C.03. Minn. Stat. § 202A.19. Minnesota election law provides that meetings are prohibited between 6 p.m. and 8 p.m. on any election day, including a local general or special election. Therefore, if a school district is holding a special election on a particular day, no other unit of government totally or partially within the school district may hold a meeting between 6 p.m. and 8 p.m. Meetings are also prohibited after 6 p.m. on the day of a major political precinct caucus. See LMC MemberLearn course, Open Meeting Law. II. Open meeting law See LMC information memo, Meetings of City Councils. A. Purpose Minn. Stat. § 13D.01. St. Cloud Newspapers, Inc. v. Dist. 742 Community Schools, 332 N.W.2d 1 (Minn. 1983). The open meeting law requires that meetings of public bodies must generally be open to the public. It serves three vital purposes: • Prohibits actions from being taken at a secret meeting where the interested public cannot be fully informed of the decisions of public bodies or detect improper influences. • Ensures the public’s right to be informed. • Gives the public an opportunity to present its views. B. Public notice See section I-Types of council meetings and notice requirements. Minn. Stat. § 13D.04, subd. 7. Public notice generally must be provided for meetings of a public body subject to the open meeting law. The notice requirements depend on the type of meeting. However, if a person receives actual notice of a meeting at least 24 hours before the meeting, all notice requirements under the open meeting law are satisfied with respect to that person regardless of the method of receipt. C. Location Quast v. Knutson, 276 Minn. 340, 150 N.W.2d 199 (1967). (Holding that a school board violated the open meeting law when it held a meeting in a room located 20 miles outside the school district). DPO 18- 003. The Minnesota Supreme Court has held that, to meet the statutory requirement that meetings of public bodies shall be open to the public, “it is essential that such meetings be held in a public place located within the territorial confines of the [public body] involved.” Page 11 of 48 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Handbook for Minnesota Cities 6/7/2024 Meetings, Motions, Resolutions, and Ordinances Chapter 7 | Page 13 D. Printed materials Minn. Stat. § 13D.01, subd. 6. DPO 08-015. DPO 17-006. DPO 13-015 (noting that the open meeting law “is silent with respect to agendas; it neither requires them nor prohibits them”). DPO 18- 003. DPO 18-011. Minn. Stat. § 13D.01, subd. 6. At least one copy of the printed materials relating to agenda items that are provided to the council at or before a meeting must also be made available for public inspection in the meeting room while the governing body considers the subject matter. This requirement does not apply to materials classified by law as other than public or to materials relating to the agenda items of a closed meeting. E. Groups governed by the open meeting law Minn. Stat. § 13D.01, subd. 1. Under the Minnesota open meeting law, all city council meetings and executive sessions must be open to the public with only a few exceptions. Minn. Stat. § 465.719, subd. 9. The open meeting law also requires meetings of a public body or of any committee, subcommittee, board, department, or commission of a public body to be open to the public. For example, the governing bodies of local public pension plans, housing and redevelopment authorities, economic development authorities, and city-created corporations are subject to the open meeting law. Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency v. Boyne, 578 N.W.2d 362 (Minn. 1998). The Minnesota Supreme Court has held, however, that the governing body of a municipal electric power agency is not subject to the open meeting law because the Legislature has granted these agencies authority to conduct their affairs as private corporations. F. Gatherings governed by the open meeting law Moberg v. Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 281, 336 N.W.2d 510 (Minn. 1983). St. Cloud Newspapers, Inc. v. Dist. 742 Community Schools, 332 N.W.2d 1 (Minn. 1983). The open meeting law does not define the term “meeting.” The Minnesota Supreme Court, however, has ruled that meetings are gatherings of a quorum or more members of the governing body—or a quorum of a committee, subcommittee, board, department, or commission thereof—at which members discuss, decide, or receive information as a group on issues relating to the official business of that governing body. Minn. Stat. § 412.191, subd. 1. Minn. Stat. § 645.08(5). For most public bodies, including statutory cities, a majority of its qualified members constitutes a quorum. Charter cities may provide that a different number of members of the council constitutes a quorum. See Section II-G-4 for more information about serial meetings. The open meeting law does not generally apply in situations where less than a quorum of the council is involved. However, serial meetings, in groups of less than a quorum, that are held to avoid the requirements of the open meeting law may be found to violate the law, depending on the specific facts. Page 12 of 48 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Handbook for Minnesota Cities 6/7/2024 Meetings, Motions, Resolutions, and Ordinances Chapter 7 | Page 14 G. Open meeting law exceptions Minn. Stat. § 13D.01, subd. 3. Minn. Stat. § 13D.05, subd. 1 (d). See Closing a Meeting from DPO. See LMC MemberLearn course, How to Close a Meeting, for more information There are seven exceptions to the open meeting law that authorize the closure of meetings to the public. Under these exceptions some meetings may be closed, and some meetings must be closed. Before a meeting is closed under any of the exceptions, the council must state on the record the specific grounds permitting the meeting to be closed and describe the subject to be discussed. DPO 14-005. DPO 13-012. DPO 14-014. The commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Administration has advised that a member of the public body (and not its attorney) must make the statement on the record. The open meeting law does not define the phrase “on the record,” but the commissioner has advised that the phrase should be interpreted to mean a verbal statement in open session. Free Press v. County of Blue Earth, 677 N.W.2d 471 (Minn. Ct. App. 2004). The commissioner has also advised that citing the specific statutory authority that permits the closed meeting is the simplest way to satisfy the requirement for stating the specific grounds permitting the meeting to be closed. Free Press v. County of Blue Earth, 677 N.W.2d 471 (Minn. Ct. App. 2004) (holding that a county’s statement that it was closing a meeting under the attorney- client privilege to discuss “pending litigation” did not satisfy the requirement of describing the subject to be discussed at a closed meeting). Both the commissioner and the Minnesota Court of Appeals have concluded that something more specific than a general statement is needed to satisfy the requirement of providing a description of the subject to be discussed. Minn. Stat. § 13D.05, subd. 1 (d). All closed meetings, except those closed as permitted by the attorney- client privilege, must be electronically recorded at the expense of the public body. Unless otherwise provided by law, the recordings must be preserved for at least three years after the date of the meeting. Minn. Stat. § 13D.04, subd. 5. The same notice requirements that apply to open meetings also apply to closed meetings. For example, if a closed meeting takes place at a regular meeting, the notice requirements for a regular meeting apply. Likewise, if a closed meeting takes place as a special meeting, the notice requirements for a special meeting apply. 1. Meetings that may be closed The public body may choose to close certain meetings. The following types of meetings may be closed: Page 13 of 48 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Handbook for Minnesota Cities 6/7/2024 Meetings, Motions, Resolutions, and Ordinances Chapter 7 | Page 15 a. Labor negotiations under PELRA Minn. Stat. § 13D.03. DPO 13-012. A meeting to consider strategies for labor negotiations, including negotiation strategies or development or discussion of labor-negotiation proposals, may be closed. However, the actual negotiations must be done at an open meeting if a quorum of the council is present. Minn. Stat. § 13D.03. Minn. Stat. § 13D.01, subd. 3. The following procedure must be used to close a meeting under this exception: See Closing a Meeting from DPO. DPO 05-027. DPO 00-037. • The council must decide to close the meeting by a majority vote at a public meeting and must announce the time and place of the closed meeting. • Before closing the meeting, the council must state on the record the specific grounds permitting the meeting to be closed and describe the subject to be discussed. • A written record of all people present at the closed meeting must be available to the public after the closed meeting. • The meeting must be recorded. • The recording must be kept for two years after the contract is signed. • The recording becomes public after all labor agreements are signed by the city council for the current budget period. Minn. Stat. § 13D.03, subd. 3. If an action claiming that other public business was transacted at the closed meeting is brought during the time the tape is not public, the court will review the recording privately. If the court finds no violation of the open meeting law the action will be dismissed and the recording will be preserved in court records until it becomes available to the public. If the court determines there may have been a violation, the entire recording may be introduced at the trial. However, the court may issue appropriate protective orders requested by either party. b. Performance evaluations Minn. Stat. § 13D.05, subd. 3(a). A public body may close a meeting to evaluate the performance of an individual who is subject to its authority. Minn. Stat. § 13D.05, subd. 3(a). Minn. Stat. § 13D.01, subd. 3. The following procedure must be used to close a meeting under this exception: DPO 05-013 (advising that a government entity could close a meeting under this exception to discuss its contract with an independent contractor when that contractor is an individual human being). • The public body must identify the individual to be evaluated prior to closing the meeting. • The meeting must be open at the request of the individual who is the subject of the meeting; so some advance notice to the individual is needed to allow the individual to make a decision. Page 14 of 48 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Handbook for Minnesota Cities 6/7/2024 Meetings, Motions, Resolutions, and Ordinances Chapter 7 | Page 16 DPO 14-007, DPO 15-002, and DPO 16-002 (discussing what type of summary is sufficient). • Before closing the meeting, the council must state on the record the specific grounds permitting the meeting to be closed and describe the subject to be discussed. • The meeting must be electronically recorded, and the recording must be preserved for at least three years after the meeting. • At the next open meeting, the public body must summarize its conclusions regarding the evaluation. The council should be careful not to release private or confidential data in its summary. c. Attorney-client privilege Minn. Stat. § 13D.05, subd. 3(b). Brainerd Daily Dispatch, LLC v. Dehen, 693 N.W.2d 435 (Minn. Ct. App. 2005). Prior Lake American v. Mader, 642 N.W.2d 729 (Minn. 2002). DPO 16-003. DPO 17-003. Meetings between the governing body and its attorney to discuss active, threatened, or pending litigation may be closed when the balancing of the purposes served by the attorney-client privilege against those served by the open meeting law dictates the need for absolute confidentiality. The need for absolute confidentiality should relate to litigation strategy, and will usually arise only after a substantive decision on the underlying matter has been made. Northwest Publications, Inc. v. City of St. Paul, 435 N.W.2d 64 (Minn. Ct. App. 1989). Minneapolis Star & Tribune v. Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Minneapolis, 251 N.W.2d 620 (Minn. 1976). This privilege may not be abused to suppress public observations of the decision-making process, and does not include situations where the council will be receiving general legal opinions and advice on the strengths and weaknesses of a proposed action that may give rise to future litigation. Minn. Stat. § 13D.01, subd. 3. The following procedure must be used to close a meeting under this exception: See Free Press v. County of Blue Earth, 677 N.W.2d 471 (Minn. Ct. App. 2004) (holding that a general statement that a meeting was being closed under the attorney-client privilege to discuss “pending litigation” did not satisfy the requirement of describing the subject to be discussed). • Before closing the meeting, the council must state on the record the specific grounds permitting the meeting to be closed and describe the subject to be discussed. • The council should also describe how a balancing of the purposes of the attorney-client privilege against the purposes of the open meeting law demonstrates the need for absolute confidentiality. • The council must actually communicate with its attorney at the meeting. d. Purchase or sale of property A public body may close a meeting to: Minn. Stat. § 13D.05, subd. 3(c). • Determine the asking price for real or personal property to be sold by the public body. Page 15 of 48 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Handbook for Minnesota Cities 6/7/2024 Meetings, Motions, Resolutions, and Ordinances Chapter 7 | Page 17 Vik v. Wild Rice Watershed Dist., No. A09-1841 (Minn. Ct. App. 2010) (unpublished opinion). • Review confidential or nonpublic appraisal data. • Develop or consider offers or counteroffers for the purchase or sale of real or personal property. Minn. Stat. § 13D.05, subd. 3(c). The following procedure must be used to close a meeting under this exception: DPO 14-014. DPO 08-001 (advising that a public body cannot authorize the release of a tape of a closed meeting under this exception until all property discussed at the meeting has been purchased or sold or the public body has abandoned the purchase or sale). • Before closing the meeting, the council must state on the record the specific grounds for closing the meeting, describe the subject to be discussed, and identify the particular property that is the subject of the meeting. See Closing a Meeting from DPO. • The meeting must be recorded and the property must be identified on the recording. The recording must be preserved for eight years, and must be made available to the public after all property discussed at the meeting has been purchased or sold or after the public body has abandoned the purchase or sale. • A list of council members and all other persons present at the closed meeting must be made available to the public after the closed meeting. • The actual purchase or sale of the property must be approved at an open meeting, and the purchase or sale price is public data. e. Security reports Minn. Stat. § 13D.05, subd. 3(d). A meeting may be closed to receive security briefings and reports, to discuss issues related to security systems, emergency response procedures, and security deficiencies in, or recommendations regarding. public services, infrastructure, and facilities, if disclosure of the information would pose a danger to public safety or compromise security procedures or responses. Financial issues related to security matters must be discussed, and all related financial decisions must be made, at an open meeting. Minn. Stat. § 13D.05, subd. 3(d). The following procedure must be used to close a meeting under this exception: • Before closing the meeting, the council must state on the record the specific grounds for closing the meeting and describe the subject to be discussed. • When describing the subject to be discussed, the council must refer to the facilities, systems, procedures, services or infrastructure to be considered during the closed meeting. • The closed meeting must be recorded, and the recording must be preserved for at least four years. Page 16 of 48 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Handbook for Minnesota Cities 6/7/2024 Meetings, Motions, Resolutions, and Ordinances Chapter 7 | Page 18 2. Meetings that must be closed There are some meetings that the open meeting law requires to be closed. The following meetings must be closed: a. Misconduct allegations Minn. Stat. § 13D.05, subd. 2(b). Minn. Stat. § 13.43, subd. 2(4). DPO 03-020. A public body must close a meeting for preliminary consideration of allegations or charges against an individual subject to the public body’s authority. DPO 14-004. The commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Administration has advised that a city could not close a meeting under this exception to consider allegations of misconduct against a job applicant who had been extended a conditional offer of employment. (The job applicant was not a city employee). The commissioner reasoned that the city council had no authority to discipline the job applicant or to direct his actions in any way; therefore, he was not “an individual subject to its authority.” DPO 10-001. Minn. Stat. § 13.43. The commissioner has also advised that a recording of a closed meeting for preliminary consideration of misconduct allegations is private personnel data under Minn. Stat. § 13.43, subd. 4, and is accessible to the subject of the data but not to the public. The commissioner noted that at some point in time, some or all of the data on the tape may become public under Minn. Stat. § 13.43, subd. 2. For example, if the employee is disciplined and there is a final disposition, certain personnel data becomes public. Minn. Stat. § 13D.01, subd. 3. Minn. Stat. § 13D.05, subd. 1. The following procedure must be used to close a meeting under this exception: Note: There is a special provision dealing with allegations of law enforcement personnel misconduct; see Minn. Stat. § 13D.05, subd. 2(a) and section II.G.2.b.- Certain not- public data. • Before closing the meeting, the council must state on the record the specific grounds for closing the meeting and describe the subject to be discussed. • The meeting must be open at the request of the individual who is the subject of the meeting. Thus, the individual should be given advance notice of the existence and nature of the charges against him or her, so that the individual can make a decision. • The meeting must be electronically recorded, and the recording must be preserved for at least three years after the meeting. • If the public body decides that discipline of any nature may be warranted regarding the specific charges, further meetings must be open. Page 17 of 48 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Handbook for Minnesota Cities 6/7/2024 Meetings, Motions, Resolutions, and Ordinances Chapter 7 | Page 19 DPO 03-020. (Advising that when a meeting is closed under this exception, Minn. Stat. § 13.43, subd. 2 requires the government entity to identify the individual who is being discussed). While the law permits the council to announce that it is closing a meeting to consider charges against an individual, it is still the best practice not to refer to that individual by name. The council should state only that it is closing the meeting to give preliminary consideration to allegations against someone subject to its authority. However, if someone requests the name of the employee who is the subject of the closed meeting, the name will probably have to be furnished since the existence and status of any complaints against an employee are public data. b. Certain not-public data The general rule is that meetings cannot be closed to discuss data that are not public under the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act. A meeting must be closed, however, if the following not-public data is discussed: Minn. Stat. § 13D.05, subd. 2(a). Minn. Stat. § 13.32. Minn. Stat. § 13.3805, subd. 1. Minn. Stat. § 13.384. Minn. Stat. § 13.46, subds. 2, 7. Minn. Stat. §§ 144.291- 144.298. • Data that would identify alleged victims or reporters of criminal sexual conduct, domestic abuse, or maltreatment of minors or vulnerable adults. • Internal affairs data relating to allegations of law enforcement personnel misconduct or active law enforcement investigative data. • Educational data, health data, medical data, welfare data or mental health data that are not-public data. • Certain medical records. Minn. Stat. § 13D.01, subd. 3. Minn. Stat. § 13D.05, subd.1. The following procedure must be used to close a meeting under this exception: • The council must state on the record the specific grounds for closing the meeting and describe the subject to be discussed. • The meeting must be electronically recorded, and the recording must be preserved for at least three years after the meeting. H. Common issues 1. Data practices Minn. Stat. § 13D.05, subds. 1(a), 2(a). See section II.G.2.b.-Certain not-public data. Generally, meetings may not be closed to discuss data that is not public under the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (MGDPA). However, the public body must close any part of a meeting at which certain types of not-public data are discussed. Minn. Stat. § 13D.05, subd. 2(a). Minn. Stat. § 13.03, subd. 11. If not-public data is discussed at an open meeting when the meeting is required to be closed, it is a violation of the open meeting law. Discussions of some types of not-public data may also be a violation of the MGDPA. Page 18 of 48 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Handbook for Minnesota Cities 6/7/2024 Meetings, Motions, Resolutions, and Ordinances Chapter 7 | Page 20 However, not-public data may generally be discussed at an open meeting without liability or penalty if both of the following criteria are met: Minn. Stat. § 13D.05, subd. 1(b). • The disclosure relates to a matter within the scope of the public body’s authority. • The disclosure is necessary to conduct the business or agenda item before the public body. Minn. Stat. § 13D.05, subd. 1(c). Data that is discussed at an open meeting retains its original classification under the MGDPA. However, a record of the meeting is public, regardless of the form. It is suggested that not-public data that is discussed at an open meeting not be specifically detailed in the minutes. 2. Interviews Channel 10, Inc. v. Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 709, 215 N.W.2d 814 (Minn. 1974). The Minnesota Supreme Court has ruled that a school board must interview prospective employees for administrative positions in open sessions. The court reasoned that the absence of a statutory exception indicated that the Legislature intended such sessions to be open. As a result, a city council should conduct any interviews of prospective officers and employees at an open meeting if a quorum or more of the council will be present. Mankato Free Press v. City of North Mankato, 563 N.W.2d 291 (Minn. Ct. App. 1997). The Minnesota Court of Appeals considered a situation where individual council members conducted separate, serial interviews of candidates for a city position in one-on-one closed interviews. The district court found that no “meeting” of the council had occurred because there was never a quorum of the council present during the interviews. However, the court of appeals sent the case back to the district court for a determination of whether the council members had conducted the interview process in a serial fashion to avoid the requirements of the open meeting law. Mankato Free Press v. City of North Mankato, No. C9-98- 677 (Minn. Ct. App. Dec. 15, 1998) (unpublished decision). On remand, the district court found that the individual interviews were not done to avoid the requirements of the open meeting law. This decision was also appealed, and the court of appeals affirmed the district court’s decision. Cities that want to use this type of interview process should first consult their city attorney. 3. Informational meetings and committees St. Cloud Newspapers, Inc. v. Dist. 742 Community Schools, 332 N.W.2d 1 (Minn. 1983). The Minnesota Supreme Court has held that informational seminars about school board business, which the entire board attends, must be noticed and open to the public. Page 19 of 48 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Handbook for Minnesota Cities 6/7/2024 Meetings, Motions, Resolutions, and Ordinances Chapter 7 | Page 21 As a result, it appears that any scheduled gatherings of a quorum or more of a city council must be properly noticed and open to the public, regardless of whether the council takes or contemplates taking action at that gathering. This includes meetings and work sessions where members receive information that may influence later decisions. Many city councils create committees to make recommendations regarding a specific issue. Commonly, such a committee will be responsible for researching the issue and submitting a recommendation to the council for its approval. DPO 08-007. DPO 13-015. These committees are usually advisory, and the council is still responsible for making the final decision. This type of committee may be subject to the open meeting law. Some factors that may be relevant in deciding whether a committee is subject to the open meeting law include: how the committee was created and who its members are; whether the committee is performing an ongoing function, or instead, is performing a one-time function; and what duties and powers have been granted to the committee. DPO 05-014. For example, the commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Administration has advised that “standing” committees of a city hospital board that were responsible for management liaison, collection of information, and formulation of issues and recommendations for the board were subject to the open meeting law. The advisory opinion noted that the standing committees were performing tasks that relate to the ongoing operation of the hospital district and were not performing a one-time or “ad hoc” function. DPO 07-025. In contrast, the commissioner has advised that a city’s Free Speech Working Group, consisting of citizens and city officials appointed by the city to meet to develop and review strategies for addressing free-speech concerns relating to a political convention, was not subject to the open meeting law. The advisory opinion noted that the group did not have decision-making authority. A.G. Op. 63a-5 (Aug. 28, 1996). Sovereign v. Dunn, 498 N.W.2d 62 (Minn. Ct. App. 1993). DPO 07-025. It is common for city councils to appoint individual council members to act as liaisons between the council and particular council committees or other government entities. The Minnesota Court of Appeals considered a situation where the mayor and one other member of a city council attended a series of mediation sessions regarding an annexation dispute that were not open to the public. The Court of Appeals held that the open meeting law did not apply to these meetings concluding “that a gathering of public officials is not a ‘committee, subcommittee, board, department or commission’ subject to the open meeting law unless the group is capable of exercising decision- making powers of the governing body.” Page 20 of 48 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Handbook for Minnesota Cities 6/7/2024 Meetings, Motions, Resolutions, and Ordinances Chapter 7 | Page 22 The Court of Appeals also noted that the capacity to act on behalf of the governing body is presumed where members of the group comprise a quorum of the body and could also arise where there has been a delegation of power from the governing body to the group. If a city is unsure whether a meeting of a committee, board, or other city entity is subject to the open meeting law, it should consult its city attorney or consider seeking an advisory opinion from the commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Administration. Thuma v. Kroschel, 506 N.W.2d 14 (Minn. Ct. App. 1993). DPO 16-005. Notice for a special meeting of the city council may be needed if a quorum of the council will be present at a committee meeting and will be participating in the discussion. For example, when a quorum of a city council attended a meeting of the city’s planning commission, the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled that there was a violation of the open meeting law not because the council members simply attended the meeting but because the council members conducted public business in conjunction with that meeting. A.G. Op. 63a-5 (Aug. 28, 1996). Based on this decision, the attorney general has advised that mere attendance by council members at a meeting of a council committee held in compliance with the open meeting law would not constitute a special city council meeting requiring separate notice. The attorney general cautioned, however, that the additional council members should not participate in committee discussions or deliberations absent a separate special-meeting notice of a city council meeting. 4. Social gatherings St. Cloud Newspapers, Inc. v. Dist. 742 Community Schools, 332 N.W.2d 1 (Minn. 1983). Moberg v. Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 281, 336 N.W.2d 510 (Minn. 1983). Hubbard Broadcasting, Inc. v. City of Afton, 323 N.W.2d 757 (Minn. 1982). Social gatherings of city council members will not be considered a meeting subject to the requirements of the open meeting law if there is not a quorum present, or, if a quorum is present, if the quorum does not discuss, decide, or receive information on official city business. The Minnesota Supreme Court has ruled that a conversation between two city council members over lunch about a land-use application did not violate the open meeting law because a quorum of the council was not present. 5. Serial meetings Moberg v. Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 281, 336 N.W.2d 510 (Minn. 1983). DPO 10-011. DPO 06-017. The Minnesota Supreme Court has noted that meetings of less than a quorum of a public body held serially to avoid a public meeting or to fashion agreement on an issue of public business may violate the open meeting law. Page 21 of 48 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Handbook for Minnesota Cities 6/7/2024 Meetings, Motions, Resolutions, and Ordinances Chapter 7 | Page 23 Mankato Free Press v. City of North Mankato, 563 N.W.2d 291 (Minn. Ct. App. 1997). The Minnesota Court of Appeals considered a situation where individual council members conducted separate, serial interviews of candidates for a city position in one-on-one closed interviews. The district court found that no “meeting” of the council had occurred because there was never a quorum of the council present during the interviews. However, the court of appeals sent the case back to the district court for a determination of whether the council members had conducted the interview process in a serial fashion to avoid the requirements of the open meeting law. Mankato Free Press v. City of North Mankato, No. C9-98- 677 (Minn. Ct. App. Dec. 15, 1998) (unpublished decision). On remand, the district court found that the individual interviews were not done to avoid the requirements of the open meeting law. This decision was also appealed, and the court of appeals affirmed the district court’s decision. Cities that want to use this type of interview process with job applicants should first consult their city attorney. 6. Training sessions Compare St. Cloud Newspapers, Inc. v. Dist. 742 Community Schools, 332 N.W.2d 1 (Minn. 1983) and A.G. Op. 63a-5 (Feb. 5, 1975). DPO 16-006. It is not clear whether the participation of a quorum or more of the members of a city council in a training program would be defined as a meeting under the open meeting law. The determining factor would likely be whether the program includes a discussion of general training information or a discussion of specific matters relating to an individual city. A.G. Op. 63a-5 (Feb. 5, 1975). DPO 16-006. The attorney general has advised that a city council’s participation in a non-public training program devoted to developing skills was not a meeting subject to the open meeting law. The commissioner of the Department of Administration has likewise advised that a school board’s participation in a non-public team-building session to “improve trust, relationships, communications, and collaborative problem solving among Board members,” was not a meeting subject to the open meeting law if the members are not “gathering to discuss, decide, or receive information as a group relating to ‘the official business’ of the governing body.” However, the opinion also advised that if there were to be any discussion of specific official business by the attending members, either outside or during training sessions, it could be a violation of the open meeting law. 7. Telephone, email, and social media Moberg v. Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 281, 336 N.W.2d 510 (Minn. 1983). It is possible that communication through telephone calls, email, or other technology could violate the open meeting law. Page 22 of 48 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Handbook for Minnesota Cities 6/7/2024 Meetings, Motions, Resolutions, and Ordinances Chapter 7 | Page 24 DPO 17-005 (advising communication through a letter violated the open meeting law). The Minnesota Supreme Court has indicated that communication through letters and telephone calls could violate the open meeting law under certain circumstances. Best practice to share information with the entire council is to send it to city staff and have them distribute it. If a council member needs to email the entire council, they should use blind carbon copy (BCC) to add recipients to avoid accidental use of reply all which may constitute the initiation of a discussion among a quorum of the public body. DPO 09-020. DPO 14-015. The commissioner of the Department of Administration has advised that back-and-forth email communications among a quorum of a public body that was subject to the open meeting law in which the members commented on and provided direction about official business violated the open meeting law. However, the commissioner also advised that “one-way communication between the chair and members of a public body is permissible, such as when the chair or staff sends meeting materials via email to all board members, as long as no discussion or decision-making ensues.” O’Keefe v. Carter, No. A12- 0811 (Minn. Ct. App. Dec. 31, 2012) (unpublished decision). In contrast, an unpublished decision by the Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that email communications are not subject to the open meeting law because they are written communications and are not a “meeting” for purposes of the open meeting law. The decision also noted that even if email communications are subject to the open meeting law, the substance of the emails in question did not contain the type of discussion that would be required for a prohibited “meeting” to have occurred. The court of appeals noted that the substance of the email messages was not important and controversial; instead, the email communications discussed a relatively straightforward operational matter. The decision also noted that the town board members did not appear to make any decisions in their email communications. Because this decision is unpublished, it is not binding precedent on other courts. In addition, the outcome of this decision might have been different if the email communications had related to something other than operational matters, for example, if the board members were attempting to build agreement on a particular issue that was going to be presented to the town board at a future meeting. Minn. Stat. § 13D.065. The open meeting law was amended in 2014 to provide that “the use of social media by members of a public body does not violate the open meeting law as long as the social media use is limited to exchanges with all members of the general public.” Email is not considered a type of social media under the new law. Page 23 of 48 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Handbook for Minnesota Cities 6/7/2024 Meetings, Motions, Resolutions, and Ordinances Chapter 7 | Page 25 The open meeting law does not define the term “social media,” but this term is generally understood to mean forms of electronic communication, including websites for social networking like Facebook, LinkedIn, Instagram, and X through which users create online communities to share information, ideas, and other content. It is important to remember that the use of social media by council members could still be used to support other claims such as claims of defamation or of conflict of interest in decision-making. As a result, council members should make sure that any comments they make on social media are factually correct and should not comment on issues that will come before the council in the future for a quasi-judicial hearing and decision, such as the consideration of whether to grant an application for a conditional use permit. See II-H-5 - Serial meetings. It is also important to remember that serial discussions between less than a quorum of the council could violate the open meeting law under certain circumstances. As a result, city councils and other public bodies should take a conservative approach and should not use telephone calls, email, or other technology to communicate back and forth with other members of the public body if both of the following circumstances exist: • A quorum of the council or public body will be contacted regarding the same matter. • Official business is being discussed. Minn. Stat. § 13.02, subd. 7. Another thing council members should be careful about is which email account they use to receive emails relating to city business because such emails likely would be considered government data that is subject to a public-records request under the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (MGDPA). The best option would be for each council member to have an individual email account that the city provides, and city staff manage. However, this is not always possible for cities due to budget, size, or logistics. If council members don’t have a city email account, there are some things to think about before using a personal email account for city business. First, preferably only the council member should have access to the personal email account. Using a shared account with other family members could lead to incorrect information being communicated from the account, or incoming information being inadvertently deleted. Also, since city emails are government data, city officials may have to separate personal emails from city emails when responding to a public-records request under the MGDPA. Page 24 of 48 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Handbook for Minnesota Cities 6/7/2024 Meetings, Motions, Resolutions, and Ordinances Chapter 7 | Page 26 Second, if the account a city council member wants to use for city business is tied to a private employer, that private employer may have a policy that restricts this kind of use. Even if a private employer allows this type of use, it is important to be aware that in the event of a public-records request under the MGDPA or a discovery request in litigation, the private employer may be compelled to have a search done of a council member’s email communications on the private employer’s equipment or to restore files from a backup or archive. See Handbook, Records Management, for more information about records management. What may work best is to use a free, third-party email service, such as Gmail or Outlook, for your city account and to avoid using that email account for any personal email or for anything that may constitute an official record of city business since such records must be retained in accordance with the city’s adopted records retention schedule. I. Advisory opinions 1. Department of Administration Minn. Stat. § 13.072, subd. 1 (b). See Minnesota Department of Administration, Data Practices for an index of advisory opinions. The commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Administration has authority to issue non-binding advisory opinions on certain issues related to the open meeting law. The Data Practices Office (DPO) handles these requests. See Requesting an Open Meeting Law Advisory Opinion. A public body, subject to the open meeting law, can request an advisory opinion. A person who disagrees with the way members of a governing body perform their duties under the open meeting law can also request an advisory opinion. 2. Attorney General Minn. Stat. § 8.07. See index of Attorney General Advisory Opinions from 1993 to present. The Minnesota Attorney General is authorized to issue written advisory opinions to city attorneys on “questions of public importance.” The Attorney General has issued several advisory opinions on the open meeting law. J. Penalties Minn. Stat. § 13D.06, subd. 1. Claude v. Collins, 518 N.W.2d 836 (Minn. 1994). Any person who intentionally violates the open meeting law is subject to personal liability in the form of a civil penalty of up to $300 for a single occurrence. The public body may not pay the penalty. A court may consider a council member’s time and experience in office to determine the amount of the civil penalty. Page 25 of 48 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Handbook for Minnesota Cities 6/7/2024 Meetings, Motions, Resolutions, and Ordinances Chapter 7 | Page 27 Minn. Stat. § 13D.06, subd. 2. O’Keefe v. Carter, No. A12- 0811 (Minn. Ct. App. Dec. 31, 2012) (unpublished decision). An action to enforce this penalty may be brought by any person in any court of competent jurisdiction where the administrative office of the governing body is located. In an unpublished decision, the Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that this broad grant of jurisdiction authorized a member of a town board to bring an action against his own town board for alleged violations of the open meeting law. This same decision also concluded that a two-year statute of limitations applies to lawsuits under the open meeting law. Minn. Stat. § 13D.06, subd. 4. See LMC information memo, LMCIT Liability Coverage Guide, for information about insurance coverage for lawsuits under the open meeting law. The court may also award reasonable costs, disbursements, and attorney fees of up to $13,000 to any party in an action alleging a violation of the open meeting law. The court may award costs and attorney fees to a defendant only if the action is found to be frivolous and without merit. A public body may pay any costs, disbursements, or attorney fees incurred by or awarded against any of its members. Minn. Stat. § 13D.06, subd. 4. If a party prevails in a lawsuit under the open meeting law, an award of reasonable attorney fees is mandatory if the court determines that the public body was the subject of a prior written advisory opinion from the commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Administration, and the court finds that the opinion is directly related to the lawsuit and that the public body did not act in conformity with the opinion. A court is required to give deference to the advisory opinion. Minn. Stat. § 13D.06, subd. 4 (d). Coalwell v. Murray, No. C6-95-2436 (Minn. Ct. App. Aug 6, 1996) (unpublished decision). Elseth v. Hille, No A12-1496 (Minn. Ct. App. May 13, 2013) (unpublished decision). No monetary penalties or attorney fees may be awarded against a member of a public body unless the court finds that there was intent to violate the open meeting law. Minn. Stat. § 13D.06, subd. 3 (a). Brown v. Cannon Falls Twp., 723 N.W.2d 31 (Minn. Ct. App. 2006). If a person is found to have intentionally violated the open meeting law in three or more separate actions involving the same governing body, that person must forfeit any further right to serve on the governing body or in any other capacity with the public body for a period of time equal to the term of office the person was serving. Minn. Stat. § 13D.06, subd. 3 (b). Minn. Const. art. VIII, § 5. If a court finds a separate, third violation that is unrelated to the previous violations, it must declare the position vacant and notify the appointing authority or clerk of the governing body. As soon as practicable, the appointing authority or governing body shall fill the position as in the case of any other vacancy. Under the Minnesota Constitution, the Legislature may provide for the removal of public officials for malfeasance or nonfeasance. Page 26 of 48 RELEVANT LINKS: League of Minnesota Cities Handbook for Minnesota Cities 6/7/2024 Meetings, Motions, Resolutions, and Ordinances Chapter 7 | Page 28 Jacobsen v. Nagel, 255 Minn. 300, 96 N.W.2d 569 (1959). To constitute malfeasance or nonfeasance, a public official’s conduct must affect the performance of official duties and must relate to something of a substantial nature directly affecting the rights and interests of the public. Jacobsen v. Nagel , 255 Minn. 300, 96 N.W.2d 569 (1959). Claude v. Collins, 518 N.W.2d 836 (Minn. 1994). “Malfeasance” refers to evil conduct or an illegal deed. “Nonfeasance” is described as neglect or refusal, without sufficient excuse, to perform what is a public officer’s legal duty to perform. More likely than not, a violation of the open meeting law would be in the nature of nonfeasance. Although good faith does not nullify a violation, good faith is relevant in determining whether a violation amounts to nonfeasance. Sullivan v. Credit River Twp., 299 Minn. 170, 217 N.W.2d 502 (1974). Hubbard Broadcasting, Inc. v. City of Afton, 323 N.W.2d 757 (Minn. 1982). In re D & A Truck Line, Inc., 524 N.W.2d 1 (Minn. Ct. App. 1994). The open meeting law does not address whether actions taken at a meeting that does not comply with its requirements would be valid. Sullivan v. Credit River Township, 217 N.W.2d 502 (Minn. 1974). Lac Qui Parle- Yellow Bank Watershed Dist. v. Wollschlager, No. C6-96- 1023 (Minn. Ct. App. Nov. 12, 1996) (unpublished decision). DPO 11-004. Minnesota courts have generally refused to invalidate actions taken at an improperly closed meeting because this is not a remedy the open meeting law provides. Quast v. Knutson, 276 Minn. 340, 150 N.W.2d 199 (1967). But the Minnesota Supreme Court has held that an attempted school district consolidation was fatally defective when the initiating resolution was adopted at a meeting that was not open to the public. III. Meeting procedures A. Citizen involvement Any person may observe council meetings. In fact, the council should encourage citizen attendance to help raise awareness of the city’s problems and help create support for programs suggested by the council. Minn. Stat. § 13D.01, subd. 6. Citizens must be able to hear the discussion at a meeting and must be able to determine who votes for or against a motion. DPO 08-015. DPO 17-006. One copy of any printed materials relating to the agenda items of the meeting that have been distributed or made available to all members of the council must be made available to the audience unless doing so would violate the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act. Minn. Stat. § 412.191, subd. 2. Although anyone can attend council meetings, citizens cannot speak or otherwise participate in any discussions unless the mayor or the presiding officer recognizes them for this purpose. Page 27 of 48 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION AGENDA MEMO To: Parks and Recreation Commission From: Kellee Omlid, Parks & Recreation Director Department: Parks & Recreation Subject: Chair and Vice-Chair Elections Meeting: Parks and Recreation Commission - Feb 11 2026 INTRODUCTION: According to the commission’s bylaws and city ordinance, the commission is to elect a chair and vice-chair from its members. The election occurs in February due to the possible appointment and seating of new members at this meeting. The chair and vice-chair may serve no more than two consecutive years in the same position except under extenuating circumstances. The chair position is responsible for presiding over the monthly commission meetings and collaborating with city staff to create the meeting agenda. The vice-chair position is responsible for assuming the chair duties in the absence of the chair. Parks and Recreation Director Omlid will ask for nominations for the chair position. After the chair is elected, this member then asks for nominations for the vice-chair position. The person elected as the commission chair will run the remainder of the meeting. Page 28 of 48 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION AGENDA MEMO To: Parks and Recreation Commission From: Kellee Omlid, Parks & Recreation Director Department: Parks & Recreation Subject: Parks and Recreation Commission Bylaws Meeting: Parks and Recreation Commission - Feb 11 2026 INTRODUCTION: One of commission’s goals for the 2020 Work Plan was to “Create Commission Bylaws”. These bylaws were intended to identify rules so the commission operates consistently, there are clear expectations for members, and the commission can function in an orderly manner. The commission developed bylaws over several months in 2020, which included reviewing sample bylaws from other parks and recreation commissions and boards and deciding what to include in its bylaws. Commission created draft bylaws that it approved at its May 13, 2020 meeting and forwarded them to city council for approval. City council approved the parks and recreation commission bylaws at its June 1, 2020 meeting. Included in the packet is the city council approved parks and recreation commission’s bylaws. The bylaws are reviewed annually in February due to the possible appointment and seating of new members at this meeting. Commission members are asked to read the bylaws prior to the meeting, come prepared to discuss, and ask any questions you have. No formal action is required as this is for informational purposes only. ATTACHMENTS: 2020 City Council Approved PRC Bylaws Signed Version Page 29 of 48 CI T Y OF FA R M I N G T O N J? BY L A W S OF TH E PA R K S AN D RE C R E A T I O N CO M M I S S I O N OF TH E CI T Y OF F AR M I N G T O N , MI N N E S O T A SC O P E Th e F ar m i n g t o n Pa r k s an d Re c r e a t i o n Ad v i s o r y Co m m i s s i o n ' s mi s s i o n is to ad v i s e an d ma k e re c o m m e n d a t i o n s to th e Fa r m i n g t o n Ci t y Co u n c i l co n c e r n i n g th e co m p r e h e n s i v e pl a n n i n g of th e Ci t y pa r k s , tr a i l s , op e n sp a c e , re c r e a t i o n fa c i l i t i e s an d re c r e a t i o n pr o g r a m s . AR T I C L E I: CO M M I S S I O N RU L E S Se c t i o n 1: Pu r p o s e Th e "F a r m i n g t o n Pa r k s an d Re c r e a t i o n Co m m i s s i o n " he r e i n a f t e r re f e r r e d to as th e Co m m i s s i o n , sh a l l be co m p o s e d of ?v e (5 ) re g u l a r me m b e r s . Th e du t i e s of th e sa i d Co m m i s s i o n sh a l l be to ad v i s e an d re c o m m e n d to th e Ci t y Co u n c i l on al l ma t t e r s to th e es t a b l i s h m e n t , ma i n t e n a n c e , an d op e r a t i o n of th e ci t y pa r k s , re c r e a t i o n pr o g r a m s an d tr a i l sy s t e m fo r th e Ci t y of Fa r m i n g t o n an d to ca r r y ou t ot h e r du t i e s as ma y be as s i g n e d by th e Ci t y Co u n c i l . Se c t i o n 2: Ap p o i n t m e n t : Te n u r e Th e re g u l a r me m b e r s of su c h Co m m i s s i o n sh a l l be ap p o i n t e d by th e Fa r m i n g t o n Ci t y Co u n c i l . Te r m s sh a l l be st a g g e r e d so th a t th e r e sh a l l be co n t i n u i t y on th e co m m i s s i o n . Me m b e r s sh a l l be ap p o i n t e d fo r th r e e (3 ) ye a r te r m s ea c h be g i n n i n g on Fe b r u a r y 1, pr o v i d i n g fo r a ro t a t i o n of tw o (2 ) me m b e r s on e ye a r , on e me m b e r th e ne x t ye a r an d tw o (2 ) me m b e r s th e fo l l o w i n g ye a r , et se q . Al l me m b e r s mu s t be ci t i z e n s of th e Un i t e d St a t e s an d re s i d e n t s of th e of at ra t e of th e ca l e n d a r ye a r . Pr i o r to as s u m i n g th e du t i e s to wh i c h ?r s t ap p o i n t e d , ea c h me m b e r sh a l l ta k e an oa t h of of ? c e . Page 30 of 48 Se c t i o n 3: Re s i g n a t i o n s , Re m o v a l s an d Va c a n c i e s Th e fo l l o w i n g sh a l l be us e d to go v e r n an y re s i g n a t i o n s , re m o v a l s , or va c a n c i e s ex p e r i e n c e d by th e Co m m i s s i o n . a. If a me m b e r of th e Co m m i s s i o n wi s h e s to re s i g n , no t i c e mu s t be te n d e r e d to th e to th e Pa r k s an d Re c r e a t i o n Di r e c t o r an d Co m m i s s i o n Ch a i r . In th e ca s e of th e re s i g n a t i o n of th e Co m m i s s i o n Ch a i r , no t i c e mu s t be te n d e r e d di r e c t l y to th e Pa r k s an d Re c r e a t i o n Di r e c t o r . b. Re m o v a l of a Co m m i s s i o n Me m b e r fr o m of ? c e ma y ta k e pl a c e wi t h a (4 / 5 ) vo t e of th e co u n c i l . (3 . Va c a n c i e s re s u l t i n g fr o m th e re s i g n a t i o n or re m o v a l of a si t t i n g Co m m i s s i o n me m b e r sh a l l be ?l l e d by th e Co u n c i l fo r th e le n g t h of th e un e x p i r e d te r m . Se c t i o n 4: Co m m i s s i o n Ab s e n c e s In or d e r to ma i n t a i n ma x i m u m pa r t i c i p a t i o n of al l ap p o i n t e d Co m m i s s i o n me m b e r s at al l re g u l a r l y sc h e d u l e d me e t i n g s , th e fo l l o w i n g at t e n d a n c e gu i d e an d Co m m i s s i o n e r re p l a c e m e n t po l i c y fo r “e x c u s e d ” or “u n e x c u s e d ” sh o u l d be im p l e m e n t e d : a. Wh e n ap p o i n t e d , ea c h Co m m i s s i o n e r sh o u l d st a t e th e i r wi l l i n g n e s s an d in t e n t i o n to at t e n d ea c h me e t i n g of th e Co m m i s s i o n . b. In th e ev e n t of un p l a n n e d pe r s o n a l ma t t e r s , bu s i n e s s tr i p s , fa m i l y va c a t i o n tr i p s , ch a n g e d jo b re q u i r e m e n t s , si c k n e s s , or ot h e r ph y s i c a l di s a b i l i t i e s th a t pr o h i b i t th e co m m i s s i o n e r fr o m at t e n d i n g th e sc h e d u l e d me e t i n g ; th e Co m m i s s i o n , pr o f e s s i o n a l st a f f of th e Ci t y , or th e Co m m i s s i o n Ch a i r p e r s o n sh o u l d be no t i ? e d as ea r l y as po s s i b l e pr i o r to th e st a r t ho u r of th e i r in a b i l i t y to at t e n d th e sc h e d u l e d me e t i n g . Th e Co m m i s s i o n me m b e r up o n th i s no t i ? c a t i o n wi l l re c e i v e an “e x c u s e d ab s e n c e ” fo r th e in v o l v e d sc h e d u l e d me e t i n g . 0. If an y Co m m i s s i o n me m b e r is ab s e n t , wh e t h e r ex c u s e d or no t , fr o m ov e r 30 % of Co m m i s s i o n me e t i n g s , wh e t h e r co n s e c u t i v e or no t , du r i n g an y on e - y e a r pe r i o d , th e co m m i s s i o n e r wi l l be re c o m m e n d e d fo r di s m i s s a l un l e s s ex t e n u a t i n g ci r c u m s t a n c e s ex i s t . d. Th e re c o m m e n d a t i o n fo r di s m i s s a l as re q u i r e d wi l l be in i t i a t e d by Co m m i s s i o n me m b e r s an d fo r w a r d e d t h r o u g h ci t y st a f f to th e Ci t y Co u n c i l fo r of ? c i a l ac t i o n . Se c t i o n 5: Or g a n i z a t i o n Sa i d Co m m i s s i o n is au t h o r i z e d to es t a b l i s h it s ow n co n s t i t u t i o n an d by l a w s as ma y be de e m e d pr o p e r , no t in c o n s i s t e n t wi t h th e or d i n a n c e s of th e Ci t y an d la w s of th e st a t e ; an d sh a l l pr o v i d e fo r re g u l a r an d sp e c i a l me e t i n g s ne c e s s a r y to ca r r y on it s ow n bu s i n e s s , se p a r a t e an d ap a r t fr o m th e Ci t y of F ar m i n g t o n , ex c e p t as he r e i n pr o v i d e d . Page 31 of 48 Se c t i o n 6: Li m i t a t i o n s Th e Co m m i s s i o n sh a l l no t be au t h o r i z e d to in c u r on be h a l f of th e Ci t y of Fa r m i n g t o n , an y ex p e n s e in c i d e n t to th e op e r a t i o n of sa i d pa r k s an d re c r e a t i o n pr o g r a m s , un l e s s ex p r e s s l y au t h o r i z e d to do so by th e Ci t y Co u n c i l . Th e Co m m i s s i o n sh a l l no t kn o w i n g l y co n d u c t bu s i n e s s th a t ha s be e n as s i g n e d by or d i n a n c e to an y ot h e r go v e r n i n g or ad v i s o r y bo d y of th e Ci t y of Fa r m i n g t o n . AR T I C L E II : ME E T I N G S Se c t i o n 1: Re g u l a r Me e t i n g s Re g u l a r me e t i n g s sh a l l be he l d on th e se c o n d We d n e s d a y of ea c h mo n t h , at th e ho u r of 7: 0 0 p m un l e s s ot h e r w i s e st a t e d in th e me e t i n g ag e n d a . Re g u l a r me e t i n g s wh i c h fa l l on an ob s e r v e d ci t y ho l i d a y wi l l be mo v e d wi t h i n th e sa m e mo n t h an d th e ne w da t e wi l l be co m m u n i c a t e d in ad v a n c e of th e me e t i n g da t e Se c t i o n 2: No t i c e of Me e t i n g s No t i c e of al l re g u l a r Co m m i s s i o n me e t i n g s sh a l l be de l i v e r e d vi a e— m a i l to ea c h me m b e r of th e Co m m i s s i o n at le a s t se v e n t y - t w o ho u r s pr i o r to ea c h me e t i n g No t i c e of al l me e t i n g s sh a l l be li s t e d wi t h i n th e ci t y ca l e n d a r an d de l i v e r e d to th e ne w s me d i a in co m p l i a n c e wi t h al l st a t e an d lo c a l la w s . Se c t i o n 3: Sp e c i a l Me e t i n g s Sp e c i a l me e t i n g s ma y be ca l l e d at an y t i m e by th e Pa r k s an d Re c r e a t i o n Di r e c t o r fo r th e pu r p o s e of ad d i t i o n a l bu s i n e s s or me e t i n g wi t h ot h e r go v e r n i n g bo d i e s . Se c t i o n 4: Pl a c e of me e t i n g Re g u l a r me e t i n g s wi l l be he l d in th e Fa r m i n g t o n Ci t y Ha l l . A no t i c e wi l l be po s t e d if a qu o r u m of th e Co m m i s s i o n me m b e r s is ex p e c t e d at a ci t y ev e n t . Se c t i o n 5: Qu o r u m At t e n d a n c e of at le a s t th r e e (3 ) of th e cu r r e n t l y ap p o i n t e d me m b e r s of th e Co m m i s s i o n Se c t i o n 6: Ru l e s of Or d e r Ge n e r a l pa r l i a m e n t a r y ru l e s , as gi v e n in Ro b e r t ‘ s Ru l e s of Or d e r , as mo d i ? e d by th e ru l e s an d re g u l a t i o n s of th e Co m m i s s i o n sh a l l be ob s e r v e d in co n d u c t i n g me e t i n g s of th e Co m m i s s i o n . Page 32 of 48 Se c t i o n 7: Or d e r of Bu s i n e s s Th e fo l l o w i n g sh a l l be th e Or d e r of Bu s i n e s s of th e Co m m i s s i o n , bu t th e ru l e s of or d e r ma y be su s p e n d e d an d an y ma t t e r s co n s i d e r e d or po s t p o n e d by th e ac t i o n of th e Co m m i s s i o n : Ca l l to Or d e r Ap p r o v e Me e t i n g Ag e n d a Ap p r o v e Me e t i n g Mi n u t e s fr o m pr i o r se s s i o n Pr e s e n t a t i o n s / Pu b l i c Co m m e n t s Bu s i n e s s It e m s Di s c u s s i o n It e m s Co m m i s s i o n Ro u n d t a b l e St a f f Re p o r t / U p d a t e s Re v i e w Cu r r e n t Ye a r Wo r k Pl a n Me e t i n g Ag e n d a To p i c s Ad j o u r n m e n t H“ © P ° > ‘ . ° ‘ S " P P ’ P : ‘ HO ' Se c t i o n 8: Pu b l i c ac c e s s an d pu b l i c a t i o n of Co m m i s s i o n Pr o c e e d i n g s An y me m b e r of th e pu b l i c ma y at t e n d or ad d r e s s th e Co m m i s s i o n du r i n g me e t i n g s re g a r d i n g re l e v a n t bu s i n e s s ma t t e r s . Ea c h pa r t i c i p a n t wi l l be as k e d to li m i t th e i r pr e s e n t a t i o n ti m e to le s s th a n 5 mi n u t e s . Al l me e t i n g mi n u t e s of Co m m i s s i o n pr o c e e d i n g s sh a l l be do c u m e n t e d an d po s t e d on l i n e an d ke p t el e c t r o n i c a l l y in th e of ? c e of th e ci t y cl e r k fo r in s p e c t i o n by an y pe r s o n du r i n g no r m a l bu s i n e s s ho u r s . Se c t i o n 9: Pr o c e e d i n g s Al l de c i s i o n s an d re s o l u t i o n s of th e Co m m i s s i o n sh a l l be in i t i a t e d by a mo t i o n or co n s e n s u s . Se c t i o n 10 : Vo t i n g An af ? r m a t i v e vo t e of a ma j o r i t y of th o s e pr e s e n t sh a l l be ne c e s s a r y to pa s s an y mo t i o n in v o l v i n g th e ad o p t i o n or am e n d i n g of pl a n s , po l i c y st a t e m e n t s , or re c o m m e n d a t i o n s to th e Co u n c i l . Vo t i n g sh a l l be by vo i c e vo t e an d sh a l l no t be re c o r d e d as in d i v i d u a l ay e s or na y s un l e s s vo t e to so ex c e p t an y so to vo t e . An ab s t e n t i o n ma y on l y be ma d e in th e ca s e of a co n ? i c t of in t e r e s t ; it is ot h e r w i s e th e du t y of al l Co m m i s s i o n e r s pr e s e n t to pa r t i c i p a t e in th e vo t e . Page 33 of 48 AR T I C L E II I : OF F I C E R S Se c t i o n 1: Ap p o i n t m e n t of Of f i c e r s : Te n u r e Th e Co m m i s s i o n sh a l l el e c t fr o m it s me m b e r s a Ch a i r an d a Vi c e — C h a i r fr o m am o n g it s me m b e r s h i p , an d ea c h of ? c e r sh a l l ho l d of ? c e fo r on e ye a r or un t i l re p l a c e d by a si m p l e ma j o r i t y vo t e of th e Co m m i s s i o n . Of ? c e r s ma y se r v e no mo r e th a n tw o co n s e c u t i v e ye a r s in th e sa m e po s i t i o n ex c e p t un d e r ex t e n u a t i n g ci r c u m s t a n c e s . Se c t i o n 2: Du t i e s of Ch a i r of th e Co m m i s s i o n Th e Ch a i r of th e Co m m i s s i o n sh a l l pr e s i d e at th e me e t i n g s of th e Co m m i s s i o n , an d sh a l l pe r f o r m th e ot h e r du t i e s or d i n a r i l y pe r f o r m e d by th a t of ? c e r . Se c t i o n 3: Du t i e s of th e Vi c e - C h a i r of th e Co m m i s s i o n Th e Vi c e - C h a i r of th e Co m m i s s i o n , in th e ab s e n c e of th e Ch a i r , sh a l l pe r f o r m al l du t i e s of th e Ch a i r of th e Co m m i s s i o n . Se c t i o n 4: Du t i e s of th e Pa r k s an d Re c r e a t i o n Di r e c t o r Th e Pa r k s an d Re c r e a t i o n Di r e c t o r sh a l l no t be a me m b e r of th e Co m m i s s i o n bu t wi l l se r v e as th e li a i s o n be t w e e n th e Co m m i s s i o n an d Ci t y Co u n c i l . Th e Di r e c t o r sh a l l at t e n d al l me e t i n g s an d wi l l be re s p o n s i b l e fo r me e t i n g wi t h th e Ch a i r of th e Co m m i s s i o n to de ? n e an d pr e p a r e th e ag e n d a fo r re g u l a r an d sp e c i a l me e t i n g s . If th e Pa r k s an d Re c r e a t i o n Di r e c t o r ca n n o t at t e n d a me e t i n g fo r an y re a s o n , th e y sh a l l de s i g n a t e an o t h e r ci t y st a f f me m b e r to at t e n d . AR T I C L E IV : CO M M I T T E E S OF TH E CO M M I S S I O N Se c t i o n 1: Ap p o i n t m e n t of Sp e c i a l Su b ~ C o m m i t t e e s Sp e c i a l Su b — C o m m i t t e e s sh a l l be ap p o i n t e d by th e Ch a i r fo r co n s i d e r a t i o n an d st u d y of an y ma t t e r no t co v e r e d by th e Co m m i s s i o n du r i n g re g u l a r or sp e c i a l me e t i n g s . Th e sp e c i a l co m m i t t e e sh a l l re p o r t th e i r ?n d i n g s to th e Co m m i s s i o n . AR T I C L E V: AM E N D M E N T S Th e by l a w s ma y be am e n d e d at an y re g u l a r me e t i n g of th e co m m i s s i o n by a ma j o r i t y vo t e of th e me m b e r s pr e s e n t , pr o v i d e d pr e v i o u s no t i c e of th e na t u r e of an y pr o p o s e d am e n d m e n t sh a l l ha v e be e n gi v e n at le a s t on e re g u l a r me e t i n g be f o r e th e ac t i o n th e r e o n sh a l l be ta k e n . Th e by l a w s sh a l l be au t o m a t i c a l l y am e n d e d by an y fu t u r e or d i n a n c e s pa s s e d by th e Ci t y Co u n c i l de a l i n g wi t h ma t t e r s re l a t i n g to or ap p l i c a b l e to th e Pa r k s an d Re c r e a t i o n Co m m i s s i o n . / Page 34 of 48 PA R K S AN D RE C R E A T I O N CO M M I S S I O N AP P R O V A L DA T E : MA Y 13 , 20 2 0 CI T Y CO U N C I L AP P R O V A L DA T E : 44 % /' 9’ ? 6‘ 3 0 SI G N A T U R E : MA Y O R : 2% DA T E : £2 4 1 4 ; /; ; ; o a o C, Page 35 of 48 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION AGENDA MEMO To: Parks and Recreation Commission From: Kellee Omlid, Parks & Recreation Director Department: Parks & Recreation Subject: Skatepark Meeting: Parks and Recreation Commission - Feb 11 2026 INTRODUCTION: The City of Farmington was awarded a FY26 Outdoor Recreation Grant in the amount of $350,000 for the development of a new skatepark. This grant is administered by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and is federally funded through the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). The Outdoor Recreation Grant program requires a one-to-one match, which can consist of cash, value of materials, labor, and equipment usage by the local sponsor, donations, or any combination thereof. The maximum grant award is $350,000 for a total project cost of at least $700,000. At its February 18, 2025 meeting, City Council approved matching funds of up to $350,000 to come from the Liquor Operations Community Projects funds. The new skatepark will be constructed at Feely Fields in Rambling River Park. As part of the project, Field #3 will be removed to accommodate the skatepark. At its October 20, 2025 meeting, City Council approved an agreement with Spohn Ranch for skatepark design and construction services. The Agreement includes three public input meetings: two in-person meetings and one virtual meeting. The first design workshop was held on December 8, 2025, and focused on gathering community input and learning more about desired features for the new skatepark. In addition, an online public input survey was available from November 17, 2025 through December 22, 2025. Using feedback from the design workshop and the online survey, Spohn Ranch developed three conceptual designs. These designs will be presented to the community at the next design workshop on February 9. Based on feedback received at that workshop, Spohn Ranch will refine a preferred conceptual design. A virtual public meeting will then be held in late February or early March to present the preferred design and solicit additional feedback. Staff will present the three conceptual designs at the commission meeting. The Commission is asked to review the designs and provide feedback to be shared with Spohn Page 36 of 48 Ranch. Page 37 of 48 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION AGENDA MEMO To: Parks and Recreation Commission From: Kellee Omlid, Parks & Recreation Director Department: Parks & Recreation Subject: Parks and Facilities Tour with Rambling River Center Advisory Board and City Council Meeting: Parks and Recreation Commission - Feb 11 2026 INTRODUCTION: Typically, the commission has planned a tour of parks and facilities every other year with the Rambling River Center Advisory Board (RRCAB) and City Council. Due to COVID-19 and canceling the tour with the RRCAB in 2020, the tour was combined with the City Council tour of parks and facilities in 2021. The combined tour went well and there were many positive comments from all three groups. It was also an opportunity for all three groups to interact with one another. Thus, the tour was combined again in 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025 and proposed for 2026. Both the commission and RRCAB discussed a parks and facilities tour again in 2026 and is included in the respective 2026 Work Plans. Based on this, commission should discuss when the parks and facilities tour should occur. In the past, tours were generally in August at 6:00 pm. Commission should also discuss potential park and facilities stops. For reference, below are the tour stops for the last five (5) years: 2025: Rambling River Center, Rambling River Park Warming House, Farmington Preserve Park, Troy Hill Park, Daisy Knoll Park 2024: Depot Way Arts Park, Rambling River Park, Jim Bell Park and Preserve, North Creek Greenway, Fair Hills Park, Westview Acres Park 2023: Schmitz-Maki Arena, Feely Fields, Flagstaff Meadows Park and new trail to Farmington High School, Dakota County Estates Park, Vermillion Grove Park, Dodge Middle School Tennis Courts 2022: Evergreen Knoll Park, Schmitz-Maki Arena, Rambling River Park, Jim Bell Park and Preserve (and trails), Sunny Hills Park 2021: Rambling River Center, Schmitz-Maki Arena, Flagstaff Meadows Park, Distad Park, Sunny Hills Park, Tamarack Park, Marigold Park Included in the meeting packet is the Parks and Open Space Inventory to refer to for potential stops. Page 38 of 48 The commission should set a tentative date and time for the tour, so this information can be shared with the RRCAB and city council to see if the date and time works for most members in each group. ATTACHMENTS: Parks and Trails Map Page 39 of 48 Page 40 of 48 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION AGENDA MEMO To: Parks and Recreation Commission From: Kellee Omlid, Parks & Recreation Director Department: Parks & Recreation Subject: 2026 Work Plan Progress Meeting: Parks and Recreation Commission - Feb 11 2026 INTRODUCTION: The commission’s updated 2026 work plan is included in the meeting packet. Shown in bold red are work plan items completed either at or since the last commission meeting held on January 14, 2026. Items that are in bold black have been completed. Commission members should be prepared to review the work plan to identify any other additional items that have been completed and then discuss other work plan items it would like to work on at future meetings. ATTACHMENTS: 2026 Draft Parks and Recreation Commission Work Plan February Update Page 41 of 48 FARMINGTON PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION DRAFT 2026 WORK PLAN Goal #1: Provide the City Council a recommended 2027-2031 capital improvement plan for the park improvement fund. Objectives: 1. By June 1, the Commission will have discussed and identified a preliminary list of five-year capital improvement projects for the park improvement fund that will include a list of parks, costs, and schedule to be completed in the years 2027 to 2031. 2. By August 1, the Commission will finalize the five-year capital improvement projects for the years 2027-2031 and make a recommendation to the City Council for approval. 3. By December 31, the improvement projects recommended for funding from 2027-2031 will be included in the City Council’s approved 2027 final budget. Goal #2: Participate in a parks and facilities tour with the Rambling River Center Advisory Board and City Council. Objectives: 1. By March 1, the Commission, Advisory Board and City Council will have identified a date to have a tour. 2. By May 1, a draft list of parks and facilities to tour will be reviewed by the Commission. 3. By June 1, a final list of parks and facilities to tour will be approved by the Commission. 4. By October 1, a parks and facilities tour will have occurred. Goal #3: Participate in a work session with City Council. Objectives: 1. By February 1, a date to have a work session with City Council will be identified. 2. By May 1, a list of work session topic(s) will be approved by the Commission. 3. By October 1, a work session with City Council will have occurred. Goal #4: Participate in the process of replacing the playground equipment (5-12 years) at Prairieview Park. Objectives: 1. By February 1, the Commission will have discussed and decided on community engagement efforts in helping to select the new playground equipment. 2. By March 1, the Commission will have reviewed playground equipment proposal(s) and made a recommendation to the City Council on the purchase and construction of new playground equipment. 3. By April 1, City Council will have approved the purchase and construction of new playground equipment. 4. By September 1, installation of the new playground equipment at Prairieview Park will have been completed and a ribbon cutting ceremony will have occurred. Page 42 of 48 Goal #5: Identify Bike Pedestrian Plan Priorities to Accomplish in 2026. Objectives: 1. By March 31, the Commission will have reviewed the priorities identified in the Bike Pedestrian Plan. 2. By May 15, the Commission will have developed and approved a list of priorities to work on and complete in 2026-2027. 3. By December 31, Commission members will have worked with staff to accomplish the Bike Pedestrian Plan priorities it identified to complete. Goal #6: Participate in the process of identifying and making improvements at Depot Way Arts Park. Objectives: 1. By February 1, the Commission will have decided what improvements will be made. Status: Completed. At their January 14 meeting, the Commission decided to begin with park cleanup, pruning trees and shrubs, removing the structure on the park’s northwest side, replacing sidewalks and benches, and installing a pet waste station. 2. By April 1, cost estimates and potential funding sources will be identified. 3. By August 1, improvements that can be made by staff and/or volunteers will be finished. 4. By September 1, improvements contracted out will be finished 5. By October 1, a ribbon cutting ceremony will have occurred. Goal #7: Host food truck event in the spring with the City of Empire Parks and Recreation Commission. Objectives: 1. By February 1, the date and location for the spring food truck event will be approved. Status: Completed. Friday, May 15 from 5-8 pm at Stelzel Ballfields in Empire was approved by the Commission at their January 14 meeting. 2. By May 15, Commission members will have decided who will help at what times with the spring food truck event. 3. By May 31, the spring food truck event will have happened. Goal #8: Participate in Community Outreach and Engagement. Objectives: 1. By April 1, the commission will have discussed community outreach and engagement, what the Commission wants to know / learn, and where and how to reach and engage. 2. By May 1, community outreach and engagement opportunities and details will have been finalized. 3. By December 1, community outreach and engagement will have occurred. Goal #9: Address Electrical and Motorized Use on Trails. Objectives: Page 43 of 48 1. By March 1, the Commission will have discussed, decided, and finalized a public education campaign. 2. By March 15, the public education campaign will have been initiated. 3. By April 1, the Commission will have reviewed, discussed, decided, and - if applicable - recommended a speed limit for trails. 4. By July 1, the Commission will have discussed, reviewed, and - if applicable - recommended an update to the Park Regulations (Ordinance) to address electrical and motorized use on trails. 5. By December 1, the Commission will have reviewed progress on addressing electrical and motorized use on trails. Goal #10: Receive periodic presentations from each of the parks and recreation department’s professional staff members about programs, parks, facilities, and trails and a presentation from the Planning Manager on new housing and business developments. Objectives: 1. By April 15, the Commission will have received a presentation by professional staff members of the Department’s 2025 Annual Report. 2. By June 15, Commission members will have received a presentation from staff on the results of the Schmitz-Maki Arena’s winter ice season. 3. By July 15, Commission members will have received a presentation from the Planning Manager on current and future developments. 4. By September 15, Commission members will have received a presentation from staff on the first half operations of the Rambling River Center. 5. By October 15, Commission members will have received a presentation from staff on the results of the summer programs offered. 6. By November 15, Commission members will have received a presentation from staff about the spring turf season and summer ice season. 7. By December 15, the Commission will have received a presentation from staff about maintenance and improvements to parks and trails. Goal #11: Continue to build and strengthen relationships with City of Empire’s Park and Recreation Commission (EPRC). Objectives: 1. By July 1, a date for the joint meeting with EPRC will be set. 2. By August 1, discuss and formulate a list of discussion topics for a joint meeting agenda with EPRC. 3. By September 1, approve a list of discussion topics for a joint meeting agenda with EPRC. 4. By December 1, a meeting will be held with EPRC. Goal #12: Participate in the master planning process for the new park in the Vermillion Commons development. Objectives: 1. By July 1, collaborated with staff and consultant to host a public input meeting to receive community input on the development of the Vermillion Commons park master plan. Page 44 of 48 2. By September 1, received a presentation from staff and consultant on draft master plan for the park in Vermillion Commons, allowed public input on the draft during the meeting and then forwarded recommended master plan to the City Council by October 1. 3. By November 1, City Council will have reviewed the recommended master plan, allowed additional public input, and approved the master plan. Goal #13: Collaborate with city staff on the city’s 2050 Comprehensive Plan Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Systems Plan Update. 1. By April 1, a joint work session with the Planning Commission and Rambling River Center Advisory Board will have happened. 2. By May 1, developed an outline for the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Chapter in the city’s Comprehensive Plan that can be used as the framework for the city’s 2050 comprehensive plan. 2. By June 1, existing and proposed local parks, trails, and facilities will have been described and mapped. 3. By August 1, the five-year Park Improvement Fund’s Capital Improvement Plan will have been updated. 4. By September 1, possible future dedicated funding sources for parks and trail development or redevelopment will have been analyzed and determined. 5. By December 31, a public engagement event to present and receive feedback on the draft plan from the public will have been conducted. 6. By January 15, 2027, review of the draft executive summary will be completed. 7. By March 15, 2027, review and approval of the final version of the executive summary and existing and proposed park, trail, and open space plan map will be completed. 8. By spring 2027, the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Chapter will be completed. Goal #14: Participate in the process of designing and constructing the skatepark at Feely Fields in Rambling River Park. 1. By February 1, the second design workshop (public engagement) will have happened. 2. By March 1, the commission will have provided feedback on the skatepark concept. 3. By May 1, Parks Maintenance will have broke ground and started demolition / rough grading of the site. 4. By June 1, skatepark construction will have started. 5. By October 15, construction of the new skatepark will have been completed and a ribbon cutting ceremony will have occurred. Page 45 of 48 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION AGENDA MEMO To: Parks and Recreation Commission From: Kellee Omlid, Parks & Recreation Director Department: Parks & Recreation Subject: Round Table Format Meeting: Parks and Recreation Commission - Feb 11 2026 INTRODUCTION: The round table agenda item allows commission members to share information or ask staff about items not on the agenda. No formal decisions are made during this agenda item. Page 46 of 48 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION AGENDA MEMO To: Parks and Recreation Commission From: Kellee Omlid, Parks & Recreation Director Department: Parks & Recreation Subject: Informational Updates Meeting: Parks and Recreation Commission - Feb 11 2026 INTRODUCTION: This agenda item is an opportunity for staff to provide informational updates to commission members. These items are informational only and no formal decision can be made during this agenda item. Staff will provide an update during the meeting about the following: 1.Spring Food Truck Event and Joint Meeting with City of Empire Parks and Recreation Commission 2.Spring Conferences at Boeckman Middle School and Dodge Middle School 3.Grants Page 47 of 48 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION AGENDA MEMO To: Parks and Recreation Commission From: Kellee Omlid, Parks & Recreation Director Department: Parks & Recreation Subject: Possible Items for March 11, 2026 Meeting Agenda Meeting: Parks and Recreation Commission - Feb 11 2026 INTRODUCTION: The following are possible topics staff has identified for commission to consider for its March 11, 2026 meeting agenda: •Parks and Recreation Commission Photo •Electrical and Motorized Use on Trails •Playground Equipment for Prairieview Park •Parks and Facilities Tour with City Council and Rambling River Center Advisory Board •Bike Pedestrian Plan Priorities •Community Outreach and Engagement •2026 Work Plan Progress Commission members should come prepared to identify other possible topics for the March 11, 2026 meeting agenda. Page 48 of 48