All right, we're going to go ahead and call to order. Let's do roll call. Katherine Jones here. Naomi Gray here. Vanessa Justice present. Is it okay that I wear my red? Okay. Chris Carney here. Tara Hathman here. Your red hat is very great. Thank you. I'm going to take it off. I might put it back on. Yeah. Yeah. You look very chic. Okay. I'm not sure if it's going to be there. I'm not sure if it's going to be there. I'm not sure if it's going to be there. I'm not sure if it's going to be there. I'm not sure if it's going to be there. I'm not sure if it's going to be there. commission and staff announcements. Commission announcements anyone? Do we have any commission announcements? Do we have any commission or announcements? No, okay, I have one. Cat, it's her last meeting. So we're going to say goodbye. And we already brought her some little treats and things. We have a nice little card for her. And we're saying goodbye because she's gonna become one of our new city council members. Yes! And here's the thing. She really likes beverages. And I just felt like they didn't, one beverage is not enough. I know you gave her a card so she could pick out her own But I thought I could bring you some of my favorites and just like see if you like them so Tobu Chico which you probably had before and a door okay, so Love that Here we're gonna just pass the best sparkling water My most favorite flavor of Oli pop in all of of the land, which you may not have had, because they don't have to write this. Cherry Cola. So excited. Second favorite when I get just want a little something different, the root beer is super good, because a lot of other root beers are too sweet. A classic. Classic. Those ones are appropriate for council meetings, but after council meeting or before no, sorry, I didn't say that This is another favorite. It's a little espresso martini And then if you just need something a little bit warm because those are all cold beverages Here's one of my favorite teas. It's passion perfect for cats And here you can have this back. And this is an upcycled, quayuchi baggie that you can use to carry your things. Because I know you care about the environment. Very Marin. Thank you, Commissioner Gray, for participating as well there. It was all me, really. Well, in the past, that's where the magic happens. Congratulations, Kent. Okay excellent. So let's move on to staff announcements, Ashley. Some of the stuff the Parks Department of Compliance was there's culinary hedge coming into town, like they'll be doing dollar work there and getting that bit of a making it nice and neat and we're going to be introducing more, planning more plants there so that that hedge can be a nice, beautiful hedge coming into town and that's what the parts are been doing. It looks really nice. It's a nice little entrance on that part of town. Yeah, it's a good charm that when you come into town it's been there for a long time. It's good to be introducing the plants there to make that more live and private section. Nice. 2025 Boards and Commission recruitment is open. So specifically to the Parks and Rec Commission as we have announced, we will have a vacancy after this meeting, as well as our chairperson terming off after two very wonderful and successful terms. So we have at least two positions that we'll need to recruit. So if you can spread that we are accepting applications far and wide. The process is to submit online. There's also more information. The Parks and Recreation Commission shall consist of five members, least four of whom. Shall be residents of the city of Mill Valley. One may be residing outside of the city and within the boundaries of the Mill Valley Elementary School District. And we also have positions on the arts commission. So since that's also under our purview within the arts and recreation department, just a recognition that they have seven members. And right now they have one term ending. I'm not sure if that commissioner plans on submitting an application, but that's a very different commission. So if somebody's interested in trying something different, that's a very hands-on working commission. So again, if you could help us spread that there's gonna be applications available for both of our commissions as well as the rest of the city's boards and commissions. So applications are open now online and I believe the interviews go between January and February depending on how many people apply with the first meeting being in March. Sitting in March. When is the deadline for people to apply? They don't put a deadline. So, Sunish would be great. I think they just, as they receive them, they consider. So, the sooner the better. All of the open positions? Yes. It's on a rolling basis. So, it used to be on January 15th, I feel like. They didn't have, there's no deadline right now. Yeah. They just say interviewing between January and February. Okay. So by the end of December would be a good thing based on those, those outlines. Announcement that we have our winter activity guide. And all of our residents should have received that in the mail most likely last week. And we have the registration date coming up on December 10th and a new registration start time so no longer 8.30 a.m. and is that noon and we're going to roll with that going forward. Hopefully that meets the needs of a lot of our families and past participants and maybe some participants that haven't been able to get in. So looking for feedback on that. This weekend is a big weekend in town on Saturday the seventh. We have the craft fair at the community center and that is from 10 to 2. There are over 64 vendors. We even have food trucks coming and they'll be food inside. On Sunday, on the eighth, winter fest by the Chamber of Commerce is downtown Plaza area and that event is from 2 to 530. So I just wanted to bring that to your attention. As far as division updates, aquatics and fitness, life-guarance certification course will be happening during winter break. If you know anybody looking for the course, it's December 27th to the 29th. And then November and December personal training slots are available online. Pre-school celebrated their annual friendship fest. The little ducklings and kinder cubs came together to celebrate one another. During the feast, the ducklings brought fruit and string cheese, and while the kinder cubs are paired at popcorn turkey. Pre-school classes highlighted thankfulness and gratitude and emphasized the power of togetherness. In Richmond classes and program, Old Mill supervised play will be adding five families off the wait list, expanding a much needed out of school time program to old male families. Huge kudos to enrichment coordinator Natalie Byer for taking the lead on supervised play. Winter enrichment again begins on December 10th, and they are offering 43 different classes between the five elementary school sites. Teens, the next teen event is the first pool party of the school year, which is Friday, and they have 50 middle schoolers attending. They have been selling out of the pool parties and the teen parties in general, which has been amazing. And this one particularly is a combination of our teen coordinator as well as our aquatic team. So it's a nice collaboration. Professional development, supervisor Yuki Sano attended the California school age consortium, which is called CalSAC, training earlier in November. And she was selected to be one of 20 out of school time professionals across California to participate in that training program in Oakland. And they support within youth programs. And as part of the CalSAC Network, she's able to provide CalSet curriculums to not only our agency but to the Greater Bay Area, so she'll be a trainer for other locations, and then that will continue to grow our youth programs that are offered by the Recreation Department. And that's the end of our efforts. Any questions? And Winterfest, the tree lighting, is it 530? I don't know what time the tree is going to be lit, but the event is 2 to 5.30. And there's going to be a train around downtown and everything. Sounds really, really fun. This is going to be on Sunday. Awesome. I will see you guys there as part of the EPC. It's going to be participating, too. So give us some gifts. Amazing. All right. participating too so. Um yes amazing. Um alright. I'll switch it both over both name tags. Okay let's go on to public open time. Do we have any public open time? Persons wishing to address the commission on subjects not on the agenda may do so at this tent. Nope. Alright let's move on to the consent calendar. All right. All right. All right. Let's move on to the consent calendar. Let's see. Do I have a motion to approve the consent calendar? I move to approve the consent calendar. I second. All in favor? All right. Sorry, I'm a lingering wrong. It's okay. I will cover my... Did you have boiling water to make that tea? I have tea. I should have brought my team. I did not. Okay. Can you repeat who made the emotion in who second? Yeah, sure. I moved. Okay. And then I said second. Thank you. All in favor? All right. So moved. Thank you. Oh my god. Take a moment. Moving on. Recreation and Department of Public Works reports. the first priority project is the Boil Park Master Plan. The main update is that we have a kickoff meeting with RHAA, with our advisory group, and that is coming up this month. And so, we have a project that is going to be going to be going to be going to be going to be going to be going to be going to be going to be going to We are the main update is that we have a kickoff meeting with RHAAA, with our advisory group, and that is coming up this month. And so we are preparing a list of all of the wishes, maybe current challenges with the different amenities of the entire park, you know, looking about the ball fields and the playground and the restrooms and the tennis and dog use and open space, grass area, so all the different elements and kind of giving all of our summary of information that we can provide to RHA in advance so that we can just hit the ground running. We are a little bummed out that we haven't gotten a traction to start this process sooner, but RHA had a couple of vacations scheduled that we weren't aware of, so we are just doing our best to kick it off before the end of the year. And hopefully the next meeting will be able to share some of our community outreach plan and schedules and so that the community can start getting aware and providing their feedback. Cool. Yeah, that's too bad. When will they get started? We'll have our first kickoff meeting this month. Oh, okay. And I've been working on the playground, the development program, replacement program. I've been reaching out to you all last time I was here. I reached out to all the vendors. They came back to me and they gave me all the structure information of who was the company and put that on the PDF under my computer and now I can access to get repression parts or to ask them to give me a list of improvements for the park and as well. And I met with two vendors that came out and we discussed some of the areas of what they can improve and his recommendations, but it's something that I'm still talking with Frank and see what's best for the park. Mark M. M. W. Director of Operations and Utilities, to an update on the improvements to Miller Grove, I have been working with Hugh Cune to try to get a source of some lumber to make a small classroom area in Miller Grove and the working with the historical society and others to try to get some signage out there. And then the next project is to review the Bayfront Master Plan. That project is completed, culminating with the amendment to the Bayfront Master Plan, allowing changes to the conditions of use and possible improvements to hockey fields with the improvements focused on the softball field at hockey north. Some improvements in the golf course, some of the materials came in, we did the sign, other golf course, they painted it, put it and put a new post, it looks more visible from the road. Awesome, sounds great. Let's, we have a meeting tomorrow about Miller Grove. We're walking the site with Hugh Cune and Caroline Jalakim from the City Council and I think Michelle Terrell. Sort of a hybrid of beautification brigade plus Hughes expertise in sort of talking about that classroom space. So we'll check in afterwards. Awesome. All right. Well, next priority project. We did all. Okay, excellent. Is there any public comment on that item? Okay, great. Let's move on to the DEI update. Okay, we have three DEI updates for part of our programming during the month of November, December, holiday times. The preschool classes will highlight 11 global holidays within lessons and activities to provide representation within all our classes. And again, highlighting the importance of inclusivity. And during the month of December, Teen Zone is celebrating winter holidays around the world on the Teensone Bolton Board and Team Coordinator Melanie Ma will host Tuesday trivia in Teensone featuring the winter holidays. And then finally, tonight staff will introduce a new policy for partnerships and fee waivers and the purposes to establish specifically responsible guidelines to echo to the evaluate and consider fee reductions in waivers and partnership requests for one time events or ongoing use of city facilities and the draft policy would enable city to be proactive when represented with a partnership opportunity and create an equitable process for potential partners and a clear selection criteria. All right. Thank you for, do we have any public comment on the item? Thank you for giving us a little heads up for what the new businesses coming up. Let's see. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I did the switching remarks. Do we get the answer? Yes. So I'll be introducing this topic, the Sajunda item, on behalf of Christy, and then Christy can answer any questions that the commission might have. We know that the commissioners have already read our staff report and we feel that it's really helpful to put it into a presentation format and highlight some of the key elements of the introduction of the policy. This is a new policy. It's coming from a place of wanting to memorialize relationships within our community but also have the opportunity to create new partnerships and support new organizations that might want to utilize city-managed facilities at a discount or in collaboration with the city. So we hope that it's something that's well embraced, and it also goes to support our cost recovery model. We think it's really important to know how much the city is giving and contributing to our community to make it the place that we all enjoy. But that there is a dollar value that goes to it and consider making a cap to those amounts as well as providing staff as well as this commission with a threshold of money to be able to allocate towards these relationships. So first off, like I had mentioned, the purpose of the draft partnership and fee waiver policy is to establish a fiscally responsible guidelines to equitably evaluate and consider fee waiver and partnership requests for one-time events as well as ongoing uses of city facilities. The background is that fee waiver and reduction requests are made to the arts and recreation staff throughout the year. They use it for any city managed facilities. These requests can range from single day single room use to multi day multi facility uses having fiscal impact ranging from $200 to 11,000 per group. Staff identified 43 current users for fiscal year 2324 with fees and reductions totaling more than $100,000. Facilities being utilized include the Community Center, Aquatics and Fitness Center, Golf Clubhouse Parks and Fields, and fees charged for the use of city facilities help cover only portion of the actual cost to provide services and maintain those facilities. Our fees do not cover all of our utilities and some of our software costs. Defining the need, being proactive through an equitable process. The purpose of the draft partnership and fee waivers to establish again a fiscal or responsible guidelines. We want to make sure that we're proactive in presenting these partnership opportunities. We want it to be very transparent. We want it to be welcoming. We also want to create a more equitable process for evaluating it and making sure that the selection criteria is very clear and that roles and responsibilities and expectations are recognized on both sides of the applicant as well as from the city, especially related to the partnerships. Primary goal of these partnerships is to enhance public offerings in a fiscally responsible manner. The Mill Valley Arts and Recreation Department is interested in promoting partnerships which involve cooperation among multiple partners and bringing resources together to accomplish goals in a synergistic manner. And eligibility uses could be applied towards staffing fees, deposits, permit fees, and our facility use rental fees, and our eligible for the waiver. This related to some of the research that Christy put into this. A lot of the other agencies surveyed, did not put a V discount or a waiver towards staffing or deposits. There was a couple that did partial, but that would be something that we are going above and beyond to create a discount offer. In eligibility uses, security, utility reimbursement, deposits for damage facilities, refuse removal, so do maintenance, et cetera, insurance, are there fees required by the city or ordinances, liquor licenses, permits that are outside of us, health permits, activities primarily of a fundraising or charitable nature unless the funds directly benefit city-managed facilities programs and are underserved demographic, events that are political in nature or by individual seeking political office or re-election purposes of an election campaign. Funding for religious organizations or religious organizations seeking facilities for religious services. Family or social gatherings events that do not meet the resident benefit or impact parameters in the policy. Trainings that charge for participation in organizations who have failed to fulfill the obligations to the city during previous events or activities. Procedure for approval, applicants would receive, complete, receive, complete, and return the partnership and fee waiver application form seen on pages 7 to 9 in the draft policy. Mill Valley Arts and Rec staff would be able to approve a fee waiver reduction up to $2,000 and that's a threshold amount that Christie has researched within the other organizations that seems like a comparable amount based on what our fees are to utilize the facilities. Request for fee waivers over 2000 per year, per organization would go to the Parks and Recreation Commission. So as we've seen the one-off request to the Commission before, those would still come to you if it was going to be a request, if the applicant is requesting more than a $2,000 concession essentially. Organizations may receive up to 10,000 fee reductions or waivers within a 12-month period. Again, amount is up for your feedback. Just considering again how much our facilities cost and then benchmarking it against the other organizations. Total combined fee waivers and reductions granted to organizations may not exceed 100,000 per year for fiscal year. And this is an amount that we also kind of ran by our city manager and Todd was very comfortable with having that be a cap, but again, wanting your feedback on what you feel about that being the relevant feedback or relevant cap. Few waivers may be approved to cover a portion of or all of a rental amount too. So it depends if you're looking at a collaboration or a partnership, say it's something that the city was feel very strongly about and it's a 100% it could be and then the city would get Marketing and naming on it and the recognition to go along with it Complete application are you can you just go back to that part real quick? So the hundred thousand would be no matter what or could we still override the hundred thousand? So that's a question really to for commission feedback. That's what we're looking at is maybe something to consider Yeah, we have not run it by our Finance director on that but again right now we're already Essentially giving away more than that sure So we thought that that would be a good starting point and then coming back obviously if we were able to move to approve This it would go to the council consideration and we would suggest a review after a year to see how it was going. Got it. Sorry to interrupt your presentation. That's not me. Thanks. Not at all. Let's see. Just to add to that point, and a lot of the policies that I reviewed, they do have, they do mention intent for the policy to be reviewed on an annual basis. And I think that's something that I could see us adding into ours and the introduction of ours is that this policy would be reviewed on an annual basis. And then in that review we could talk about where we landed within these dollar amounts and parameters. All right, complete application components. Okay, next slide. All right, complete application components, a completed partnership and fee waiver application form, completed rental application, and other supporting documents, for example, a copy of insurance, promotional materials, examples prior to the event, a letter determination for nonprofit status. And then we also wanted to introduce the concept of maybe having a group one group two, similar to the field allocation process, that essentially would give priority to our local nonprofits or the nonprofits in general. And then also recognize that there might be other organizations that would also want to apply. But also considering a percentage of whether we were going to offer more priority to those local and we'll get into it. Then later slides. A group one would be organizations are qualifying for group one status must meet one or more the following criteria similar to the allocation process, nonprofit organization, local organizations, public schools or school districts with 75% residency in the 949411 zip code, social service organizations, community organizations, volunteer neighborhood organizations, governmental district or quasi-governmental entities and then organizations who have partnered with or received a fee waiver or reduction from the city within the past two fiscal years. We don't want to sever any relationships that we've had for years. We want to really memorialize and move forward in an appropriate transparent way. Group two, for example, would be a commercial, private, or corporate. All other groups not qualifying under Group One status. And then Group One organizations would request and be considered for the following by Group Two. And then group one organizations would request and be considered for the following by group two before group two Group one organizations may be allocated up to 70% is what we were originally thinking Based on some of our other policies and then group two organizations would be allocated up to 30% of the total available fee waiver and reduction funds so if group one has the first chance at it They have up to 70% then group two has the opportunity to come in. And again, we accept rental requests ongoing, but it's up to, at most 365 days, so one year to the date. So we anticipate requests year round as we are getting now. It would also become with an acknowledgement or some marketing depending on what the, essentially, the concession or waiver would be. All recipients of a fee waiver or reduction shall acknowledge the city of Mill Valley and all publicly relating to the event or activity. And it could include logos, statements and all advertising, promotional materials, media releases, and other promotional outlets. And they must be detailed out in all the application form. Community impact, which is the main thing we're doing. These fee waivers are available for a variety of events, including sporting, cultural, general, and major community events, as long as the event meets the direction set forth in the policy. And then, consistent with our other policies, is the mention of within 45 days of the completion of the event for which a fee waiver reduction was given. The organization must provide a written report to the Arts and Rec Department, including the number of participants, the event venue revenue, and description of the benefit to the city and our community. It's a nice way to kind of summarize their event and really feel the value to our community. Some of the potential and its considerations as we were talking about it within our office, within multiple staff members is that you could amend the group one and group two from being 70% of group one to say 80%. If you really want to focus on supporting the nonprofit groups or the groups from the 94941 area outside rather than outside groups. So kind of a point for conversation. And then staff recommendation adding a question on the application form regarding percentage of the fee that they're requesting. So whether they're requesting 25, 50, 7500. And that's the end of the presentation. 2550, 7500. And that's the end of the presentation. Very good. Do we have some questions? I've got one to start with. First, thanks for all the work you put into this. Obviously, a lot of work and careful thought. If this policy were to be put in place this past year, just using that as an example, how many three waivers would have come before the commission? I believe we said 43. So there's 43, how many groups? Sorry, I think what you're asking is how many of those 43 would you have seen? Is that correct? Oh, if it was over the 2000s. How many would you have seen? Yeah, so that's hard to define because our fee waivers, as you could kind of see with the previous, one of the previous meetings we talked about, just the ones in Old Mill Park, there wasn't really a rhyme or reason to if they got 100%, 70%. I think one of them was like 72%. It was just like a number that had been assigned somewhere along the way through verbal conversation. So that's hard to define how many would have come to you because we haven't been asking, do you want 25%, 50%. So I think that's part of the intent behind the pilot year of this policy, if we can get this policy off the ground, is to better track that and create consistency behind what people are receiving. I think 2000 is a cap that is reasonable when we look at like that would cover most 50% waivers for a one day event. If someone wanted 100% that would then come to commission. So I think it would cause our partners to be more mindful to in their request. So hard to say because we've never done it, but I think that's a good example of why we need to do it. I think we could confidently say that the majority of rental requests for the community center being the cascade room in any additional rooms would come to the commission if they were asking for more than a 50% or 50% or more concessions. For example, the last one off that this commission heard was to support play marines event in April of next year. And that was a concession of more than $2,000 at 50%. Yeah, I was just looking at the numbers that are in the staff report. If 43, fewer, we're resulted in more than 100,000, you would think that most of those 43 were large percent of the larger than $2,000. We may be missing something. The indoor ones, yes, because whereas it's also including fields, yeah, probably the Aquatics and Fitness Center that's considering the SOMO program that you know, this is the swim, swim lessons in the pool. Some of the old know might not. A lot of our, so we also have, they function like programs, but they're not programs that we manage through our, our rec department, like a senior supporting other seniors through loss. And that's a group that we have historically waived fees for, but they use a small room once a week. So that wouldn't cap over 2000, even though it is an ongoing rental. But those sort of things could be handled at staff level. And then staff could also, upon receiving it, offer, we can waive $2,000. If you would like to receive more $2,000, you can go for Parks and Recreation Commission. And the organization has the opportunity there to say, we'll take the $2,000 waiver as opposed to going for $2,500, because that may be the true half of theirs. So it just depends on what the organization is asking for. On the one hand, I appreciate the way that it would make entities more thoughtful in terms of their requests. But I tell me if I'm incorrect in seeing how you're feeling, but I think the way I'm feeling is that the policy that you are creating is something that will create a lot of consistency in how you treat organizations. And we have a lot of trust in you to make those decisions. And so I think I just want to make sure that we understand that the two, that what comes to the Parks and Rec Commission should be an extraordinary request, not a typical request. And so I don't want this to become the next, any event at the depot. Yeah, I appreciate that perspective. I think where my hesitancy lied was because our numbers are well above other municipalities that I looked at. You know, looking at like City of Mopea was one that I looked at and there's a cap of 1500 and you do have to go before council just for that amount. And so 2000 staff level was already high. Richmond has to go before City Manager's office either way with a cap of $5,000 and we have a $10,000 cap. So our numbers are already higher. So I think I was looking at it from a staff perspective of supporting and making staff feel like what they're doing is transparent and equitable. So because it's you know people may want to be heard if they don't feel like staff gave them the reduction that they were looking for. Okay, then I have another sort of relevant question. If we approve this policy and then it goes, it sounds like it goes to council, what's the process for amending it after an annual review? Can it be amended at the Parks and Rec Commission level or would it have to go then again to City Council? Just in case we want to make or that the Parks and Rec Commission wants to make tweaks based on your recommendations next year or the following year. Is that a simple process? What does that look like? Yeah, absolutely. So that was addressed in the staff report. The intention would be for it to go before council and then council would be granting the permission to parks and rec to oversee it going forward. So that's the idea is council would review it and give that permission back down to parks and recreation commission. So the future edits would be through Parks and Recreation Commission. And that is also highlighted in the policy. So it calls out in the policy what the CME of Allie Arts Recreationation staff can approve and it calls out what commission can approve. And like I said, I am very open to adding into the introduction and intent to review on an annual basis at the Parks and Recreation Commission. And I think that's very reasonable and something I did see as a trend in some of the other municipalities. I had a question with regards to just looking at some of the classification systems you are noting that organizations that have partnered within the past two fiscal years would be able to kind of be like grandfathered into this situation. I was just curious out of the like 43 events that was over the 100 K mark. A lot of these events that we do, maybe some of them are book like a year in advanced and just given the fiscal year from like a July to July, do we think that there'd be a scenario where the events would kind of hit that minimum like within the first six months of a fiscal year where then it would disc, we wouldn't have an ability to allow additional groups in the second part of a fiscal year. Great question. I think that's part of why we created the application time period. Yes, so we'd review them quarterly and then we can keep track of it on like a quarterly basis and make sure that we're not. So I'd say if we did go with 100 100,000 with that up kind of cleanly so we know if we approved 30,000 in the first quarter, maybe we need to be more conservative in our second quarter. And that's research staff can do too on when have these 43 events historically been? Are they peak summer? Are they happening most frequently in the winter with fundraisers? My gut tells me it's summer and spring, but that's something we get considered and start to really keep track of through this policy. Yeah, I think it's a great idea. And then one other question I just had is that when you looked at the events from 2023, how many of them were group one versus group two if you were gonna classify? Could you give me an idea? Yeah, so looking at that, I think what's hard about that is we haven't given groups the opportunity to prove what their community impact are. So there are about 1,5 dozen groups that identified that are not within city and mill value limits or are not official nonprofits. However, I feel their impact to the community could probably sway it to a group one. And that's just not something we've ever asked before. Yeah, one of the questions I was just curious about, because you have like one of them is the social service community organizations or other volunteer organizations. So like the friends of groups, for example, but those would be consisting of residents that live in Mill Valley, correct? Or is that not a prerequisite? That's a great question. Yeah, just thinking about it just from, like I think of some of these things, like would it be organizations that are on the outside coming in bed and fitting Mill Valley, or residents in Mill Valley that are part of these organizations that are taking advantage of that? That's what just, yeah. I think of like the driving class for seniors is another good example They're not technically based in Mulvalley, but they're coming here to put on a training that benefits Mulvalley residents Specifically, yeah, so that would be a good example someone who's not necessarily Mulvalley resident Or a nonprofit, but are providing a service directly to our community So that's we're asking the community impact again. I like in that scenario I'm sure 90% of the people that are attending are residents of Mill Valley. Right. It's from the outside. Exactly. That's still benefiting our residents. So maybe there's just a thought about like a percentage of residents being involved or benefiting from. Yeah, we could loop that down. That same 75% resident see that we're asking for the local organizations. We could loop that same percentage down to the item three, which is the social services community organizations that are volunteer groups. With a 75% residency, we can bring that same line down. So it's carried through. Yeah, I wouldn't want to limit it. I just I'm looking more of just like are we benefiting and including those who are within the city limits, right? So thank you. I go ahead, no, go ahead. You can go first. Okay. I do have one question about the use of the word partnership in this document. It's a partnership in fee waiver policy. What is it that you're intending to convey by the use of the word partnership? Say it's interchangeably with like a collaboration. So if you're a partner, if we're going to be co-hosting an event, this is going to co-host the event. Yeah. So, I might just suggest, and I don't want to unnecessarily complicate this, because I'm not here to advise the city in any kind of legal capacity. I'm not the city attorney, however, using the word partnership, I mean, a partnership under certain circumstances can have certain legal ramifications to it and I just question whether or not the use of the word partnership is something that we want to do here. You know, you might want to consider using the word collaboration instead if it works. Otherwise, I might suggest that you show it to the city attorney and just make sure that there are no unintended consequences that could flow from the use of that language. Thank you. Yeah, I like that. Also, like what's sponsorship? Be good? No, because we're not. Okay. Yeah, I think collaboration fits well and it seems to flow collaboration and fee waiver policy I think that was fine and if you feel like that's safer and very open to that as well. Yeah, so there's a couple things. One is charging so when we're discounting people but people are able to charge. So in eligible uses and organizations, you talk about charging for like trainings, I think. And just, is it, are you allowing charging for any kind of event for this? I mean, obviously, if it's like a fundraiser for the nonprofit, they're going to charge them on a what. But is there more language around charging? Right, so the idea behind that would be, if we go back to like the seniors class, if they are charging folks $250 to 10, then pocketing that money, and we gave them a free rental, where is that coming back to benefit the community? Versus a local nonprofit, that money's going right back into the community. So that's where charging comes from. So trainings that are charged with this priority participation, that should fall into commercial rates. No, I'm saying yes. We want to make sure that if they're charging, that we need to be really specific about what, when they can charge them, when they can't charge it, we're given the money. So like for example, the group two or whatever. So, like, group two, if they don't have, you know, if they don't have a 501C3, so we can assume that 501C3s, if they're charging and that's benefiting their nonprofit organization, if it's a mill-value nonprofit organization or an organization that's benefiting the valians, then we can assume that whatever charges just covering their administrative costs and whatever else. But I just want to make sure that we have good language around the groups and charging. So like just profit groups and whatever else. I totally understand that it's not like these huge money-making groups that are really coming in maybe and asking for just counts, but that's something that I think is important. And then the other thing is for ineligible uses under anything political in nature. So one of the things that I can see an issue with there is just candidates forums, forums about propositions, measures, things that are mill valley perhaps for example. If it's city sponsored, I get it. They can probably do whatever they want. But if it's a third party group that wants to put on a forum where they, and by all the candidates for city council for example, and they want to hold it at the community center, those kinds of things I don't want them to be completely ineligible to do. So if there's some sort of exception language around that, that would be something that I would be in favor of. Let's see. I think in that case it would be hosted by the Chamber, which is an entity of the city, so it would be exempt. Yeah, or it could fall under quasi-governmental. I think it depends on what group. Yeah, I have an example because it has happened in the past. I know that some of the neighborhood associations have hosted City Council members within the association. I mean if you think about a neighborhood there's just obviously too many people to do at someone's house and so they would do it at the community center for a night and it was a city what would you say it was like a city implied event but being sponsored by a third party group that are residents of that area and there also just could be groups who are It's like let me put it in a different way. It's more of like a public information that directly benefits the Residents of Mulvalley that's kind of more what I'm talking about. And I think that saying nothing political can ever happen, I don't, I don't, I there needs to be some exceptions for that. Because I think that's really dangerous. Because for example, if there's a proposition or whatever out that people are really being misled on, if there's something happening that we, that a community group might want to hold a forum about if there's exception language around it, like who needs to be invited in order for it to be accepted or it needs to go to City Council or I mean commission or whatever, I just think there needs to be some sort of language around that. We could highlight a bit, I have a comment on the screen, we could just strike that first part of the sentence and just start it at individual seeking political office or elected officials for the purpose of an election campaign. So we could just strike the first intro of that line if we feel that addresses that concern. Sure, I can think about it if I think that's enough. That's one thing. You just repeat, I'm sorry just just for what you said to strike. Again, I was just looking at that. The part that's highlighted is, we should have a part that's highlighted in blue, which is on events that are political in nature that first line. Yes, events of political in nature, not the whole line, so just up to or by. And so it would start at individuals seeking political office or elected officials for the purpose of an election campaign. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. Am I hearing the commission supports deleting that portion of the line? Yeah. Is that satisfied? Yes. Yeah. I bust. Sure. I'm don't really in favor of the establishment of this policy with the understanding that if there are circumstances that come up that we're not thinking of right now that necessitate, you know, slight modifications that those can be made. 100% I can always, and anybody can always appeal and come and talk to the commission. Should we talk about the additional question and the 80, 20, 70, 30 questions at staff? Yeah, I had one other thing, which is, I think it should be more than 100,000, because there's a couple of things that we've done in the city. We just increased the sales tax, and so part of that will have additional revenue coming into the city, which is great. I know that that's not earmarked for this per se. I know that the facility improvements. What's that? It could only go to the facilities. Yeah, I understand. But what I'm trying to say is that we are, you know, there's a perception that people are paying more to live here now. And I think that we're going to max out at 100,000 really fast. And I want this staff to be able to say yes to some of these more easily, these requests that fit in easier and that sort of thing. And I'm not saying that I'm saying maybe 100,000 max, and then after that, every request has to come to the commission, pass until 150 or something like that. But definitely some sort of a little bit more budget or buffer, especially since this is going to be brand new. And we'll keep that in mind that we're trying to be frugal, and maybe we won't hit the max who knows. But I think we need to give ourselves some leeway and grace around it. Again, also so staff can feel like they can say yes to things and not really feel like they have to say no to everything. So that's just one of my ideas. We can talk about other things now too, but I just wanted to kind of get out the picture. In the same vein, I was worried that there would be, because of the way the policy is written, that it's more likely that group ones will be funded and groups two won't, like, are much more constrained, and that there's a possibility, in in my mind that group one might hit 70,000 by June and then what there's no more waivers. So I was instead of 70, 30, 80, 20, I was I was more in the mind of keeping the $100,000 limit but I totally understand what you're saying, Vanessa, but that there, if there's no group two's coming in, that the group one can get up to 100,000, if there's no requests coming in, for example. That's a good idea. Sorry. I like that idea too, that we're giving some leeway to the group one. So maybe allocated per quarter or something like that. So it's like 70, 30 per quarter. And if there's no request from Group 2 in an individual quarter, 100% can be given to something like along those lines. I don't know if that map would work for this situation because I don't know like the flow of applications. And maybe for the first you say $100,000 is the goal for the maximum. If there are compelling circumstances, every single request that goes above and beyond $100,000 will then go to. For those that are over $2,000. No, every request. You think everyone. If you, if after $100,000, because that's the goal to get- So try to get there. Yeah, things. I'm floating it. We could also remove the cap for the pilot ear and not have a set amount target and just keep track of it and see where it lands and then look at it here too. So for the pilot ear, we could remove the 100,000 per fiscal year target. And I know you mentioned that there was, was there a ballpark amount from the previous year? Like, yes there was. So basically that's actually a really good idea because for the staff you could definitely use kind of this knowledge in place that you might wanna put a cap on it at some point and be really reserved about how you're allocating it into managing, exactly. Right, we could still maintain group one, group two. It just wanted to mention the 70, the 70 30 split or 80 20 split would be something we approached for year two. So we could put that on back burner for pilot ear. Yeah, I think that makes sense. We just don't really have the data. I feel like. Yeah, I agree. I agree if it's a sensible cutoff or not. I agree with that. I do think not having a cutoff probably in the beginning makes sense. I also think I continue to have concerns, we don't have a good handle on how many matters would come before the commission. Strikes me just guessing it could be four or five a month. And I think that's going to be a burden on the commission may take away from our other work and priorities. And in an area of work where we have the trust and confidence and you guys to do it. So that's my continuing concern. We could do more like a 50, 50, so up to 5,000, so up to half of the total they could be granted. And I think over 5,000 would come before commission. That would capture a lot of them. I mean, I personally think the commission should be deciding stuff over like 2000, based on what you've said. So 2000 will give them a day of doing an event, but if it's over that, then that means a lot more staff, a lot more time and all of that. So that's, I kind of differ from Chris on that. I mean, I guess I still feel like we just, we don't have the data. I mean, because yeah, if it's five every month, and we have to, if we have to consider five requests every month, that's gonna add to the agenda pretty significantly, it kind of feels like, right? Would those potentially be on the consent calendar or would they have to go? I mean, I think anything that we deal with has to be open to public comment and has to be right and has to be debated and discussed. They need a business item. Yeah, so I mean, I don't know how likely it would be that we get, you know, hordes of community members coming out to comment on each of these individual requests, but it does strike me if there were five per month that that could add a fair bit of time to our meetings and a fair bit of work for staff and all that kind of stuff. So it just feels like we don't have the data that we need to assess these limits and cutoffs and stuff like that. I mean, maybe we try and make them soft targets for the first year in some way. Yeah, we could have just like an internal soft target. It doesn't have to be that kind of policy. Yeah, year one. I think any structure and, know like guiding post would be helpful at this point. And this is new for many organizations that have been receiving waivers maybe year-over-year based on prior interactions with the different you know community members. I think that that's part of you giving like sort of people who have done it the last two fiscal years have an opportunity to continue but I think if we start to of you giving like sort of people who have done it the last two fiscal years have an opportunity to continue. But I think if we start to sort of narrow that down and there's a better visibility consistency in data than I think it's easier to make those decisions. So I agree. And I think I missed the October meeting, but I believe it was discussed that the potential changes to those events that were discussed were not going to take place in 2025. So when would this actually take place? You're referencing the old Mill Park. Yeah, they have already submitted their applications for 2025, so those have been received. The commission will see those as they normally would in January and I'll bring a summary specific to those ones, kind of as a pilot of negotiating and releasing this information to the community. But any new request, I think we're talking if this policy were to be put into place and approved by the council, it would start with any request as soon as that policy is started. So not impacting any current applications that have been submitted to staff? Yes, similar to when we do our CPI increase on July 1, anyone who submitted their application prior to, sorry, January 1, anyone who submitted their application prior to January 1 receives the old rate. And so it's all applications there forward. And I think because that's something we do already within our department, that would be a really consistent way to do this. So it would be everything new from the time of this approval forward. Does that make sense? I think that the commission, I mean I hear of whatever one saying I just want to say one other thing. I think commissions need to be used for what they are intended to be. They are appointed by City Council to help evaluate issues and evaluate things. And if there's a new policy starting, we're being really selective about what we allow to get concessions on the rental fees. The commission needs to weigh in. Because City staff who I love appreciate, do great jobs, get paid to do a good job, often are not the residents of Mill Valley commissioners are. And so sometimes they need help from residents of Mill Valley who are commissioners to help decide what should be discounted, what's good for the city of Mill Valley, what's not. And I just really think it's very important to remember that. what should be discounted, what's good for the city of Movala, what's not. And I just really think it's very important to remember that. I understand people want to expedite meetings and they don't want a lot of people to come to meetings and they don't want to read paperwork, but that's not the point. The point is for the commission to weigh in. And then the City Council trusts that we're evaluating these policies, weighing in on the different things and how they're affecting people in our community and that we're going to help give the council, sorry I meant council, feedback so that they can make the decisions that they need to make. So when we're sending things to council to approve, they know that we've already fully vetted it, we've thought it through, we've thought about all these aspects and they feel more inclined to approve good policy and that's the point of commissions. So that was more than one more word. Yeah, I just want to say that that's not the 10. I don't think what some of the commissioners who are here are saying that we're looking to short meetings or cut back on our work. Right. That's absolutely not what we're looking at. But I do think we don't have a sense at all in terms of what this universe looks like of the fee waivers in the past. And if we were to just turn that around and have it under the policy now, what that would mean for this commission, which would also mean less attention to other issues that are of equal or greater importance to the community and a part of our mandate. So that's my concern that I don't have a good sense based on where we are right now, what this would involve without seeing kind of the history. So that's my concern. With an additional month, we could prepare more data to give example to the commission for consideration in January of what that volume could look on look like based on requests from the last fiscal year if that would make the commissioners more comfortable moving forward. I think that would be helpful. I agree. I agree. And I think it should just include some of the questions that maybe have already come up. So if we said there was 43 events in 2023, how much of that was waived? How much would fall into group one versus group two? So this policy was in place today, like how would that affect the 43 events of 2023? It's a huge data lift. I don't know that we'll be able to give specific numbers. So for example, in our recreation system, the current rentals, if we want to report on how much a rental cost was, it's going to evaluate all of the rental agreements, which is our contracts of what the hours and the rates were put into. If there's a discount of rate in there, it's not going to tell us what that discount was. It's just going to say what the event total was. So this would be going back to every single event and looking at and calculating and writing new reports, new documents of what the original full cost would be. So just give that perspective. I think any data that comes next month is helpful, and we understand that the, that no matter what, there's going to be a learning process in the first year or two. My guess is just if we narrow down to maybe like two months worth or a quarter worth, it might be easier than a year, a full year if that would be okay. I think it's fine. Yeah, what a good worth. It might be easier than a year, full year, if that would be okay. Acceptable. Yeah, what a good thing. We're not looking to like, you know, send you down a rabbit hole and make a hole in the heart of the works. That's something to work with, yeah. But just some sort of, some sort of data that gives us at least an estimate of what we might be looking at if we make this change. And while you might not know what the discount rate might have been for that event, there's a way to probably aggregate the size of the group, the number, the room that was used for say, no. Okay. Getting excited, like. So our system, perfect minds, not very perfect. The only way to find out how much they would truly have paid is to redo the contract and then eventually then have to terminate out in the system so it doesn't confuse the system which is silly and that it doesn't do that. But because a lot of these you know using the old mill ones that you've already seen as an example are very different and all over the board it's hard to say what they received or didn't receive or what rates they were promised because that's part of the problem too. So I'm not sure where I would even start on some of those. Some of those are very clean like senior supporting seniors through loss one hour every week all year. That's very easy to calculate. Very hard to calculate parking usage ones, hard to calculate arts groups, you know, that are very fluid and when they come and go. So I just, I think it's hard to go backwards because so many of those things were verbal conversations between staff. And some of them, too, the contracts are under staff names because it was just done. That's what they've always done. So we'll be under a previous staff member's name, which makes it very hard for us to find. I guess what I would say then, then, and this is maybe just a continuation of what we said is that there are an opportunity for us to sort of reevaluate this after the first quarter of next year that we could actually, as like, have data track this data and re-look at this, let's say in three months' time, so that Q2 of 2025, we're just looking, I'm sorry, that's the wrong fiscal time period, but time period of next year, and we could look at it again and just say, okay, in the last three months, this is what we gathered and maybe reevaluate the policy if we have to. I mean, the commission could suggest that maybe this policy be put in place temporarily for a finite, predatory time, not a year. I knew we could measure it that way. It's just hard for events that are going to be wanting to apply if we're looking at the schedule. So that's going to, that'll be complicated. And we really want to get rid of the, you know, sunset these handshake agreements. Yeah. My thought was maybe to put this in place for a year, but if we saw three months of data and wanted to make some adjustments to the policy, there could be a revised version of the policy that could come out middle of next year for any new events that started. I don't think well has it get approved by the City Council so yeah I think once City Council approves it back to parks and recognition I don't see why we can't crack it open when we feel we need to once it's in I've been approved into your ball court I think there's no reason I would like to see like some of this go, but I do think we need to everyone's point we should look at it holistically to see what makes sense, but maybe data moving forward as opposed to moving backwards if we don't have it. Well that does sort of bring us back to where we're at the beginning, right, which was I mean passing the thing and then adjusting it as we go because presumably if City Council approves what's going to be put in front of them, we would have that you and we would have the discretion to make the changes as we needed. So maybe we've just come full circle. So that should take that. It's important to talk it through and hear your opinion. No, this is really different. I think I agree. I'm just saying I think that's where we are. We're forgetting that this is brand new and that this is the first draft. And also, you know, there's kind of this underlying concern that I have as well, which I asked if we could have a list of this of like who all requests. Like when we did our prep for the meeting, you know, I wanted a list of all the requests. And one of our routes and Christie said the same stuff that she's telling me. It's just very hard to get all this information out of perfect mind. And one of the things I'm worried about is the, that one group that you just mentioned, the seniors who they like come like clockwork every Thursday for one hour and it's like really a low lift. It doesn't affect the community centers probably staffing or anything else. They know what they're doing. They take care of themselves. They're there during a time that no one else is going to be there anyway. You know, I want to make sure that we let these groups continue and that they don't feel like burdened by a bunch of paperwork that they need to do right away and all of these things. Like it would be great if they knew, hey we just made up this policy. You guys are good. We know that you're here doing this and that's great but by the end of the year we'll want you to fill out a form for it, you know, just to make sure that you're all good. And like, you know, I really want to make sure that the transition to the people that really think that they have their space on lock is clear. I understand if it's... No, I think that's a huge part of where I was coming from to. I think why I keep ring up that group's because they're close to that group. Because they work with them a lot. And every time they reapply, they have to say, well, like previous directors said this. The director for that said this and they're like digging up what emails to prove to me that they should have it free and I'm like, I hear you I understand and so I'm waving it because I feel it's the right thing to do but this is public funds and it should be approved through a approval process. So I don't want them to feel anxious every time they reapply, like they have to track back an old conversation with a previous director. Right. So this would give them something substantial that would be recorded that they could feel at ease that they've been approved for the whole year. And that they're going to do that once every year. And I think that would looking at those groups would actually give them more peace of mind. That's right. And half-ning to track back who said it when? To go back to the previous statement that you are referencing about the role of the commission and just recognizing publicly again that in our municipal code council has delegated to the commission the responsibility of setting fees, especially facility rental fees. And so now that we have quantified that the essential waivers that are being given away of over $100,000 by staff based on word is very uncomfortable for the staff level. And we don't want to continue now that we have this identified. We really want the commission to have their power back. And we don't and we want to reflect that you have set the fees and it goes up an average of 3% a year, but we really want to move forward in the appropriate manner. I personally would feel comfortable approving the policy for the first year without the 100 KMAX and without the 70-30 split and with the new question in the application so that there is a lot more flexibility in that first and the $2,000 cap before it goes to the commission so that we can learn a lot in the first year and then determine the appropriate cap for going to the commission, the cap for total waivers and the split if necessary between group one and group two. Yeah, if I can summarize some of the edits I think I've written down as you were just doing and see where we're at. So changing partnership to collaboration and fee waiver policy and then coming down to at the bottom of introduction we can add a line stating the intent to review the policy as needed based on community needs. Just real short line like that. That way that we have that ability to review it more than annually and people know when they're receiving it the first time that it is going to be seen again. And then by removing partnership at the top, we would also remove official city of MoValley partner here under definition of terms. So would you call it collaborator? Yeah, I like the word partner. I think it's better than I understand. Well, let's, but can we just do a quick sin and in search, sin and I'm sure? Can partnership, how about partner is fine? Can you just run it by, if you run it by council? Sure. Oh, city attorney. So yeah, I can list it as like I did for you all, have a last part of the slideshow that's my potential edits and suggestions, and it can have partnership versus collaborator. Okay, I can do partnership versus collaborator. Okay. I can do that. No problem. And we can pre-reach out to City of Trini. Great. Okay. And then the next edit I have would be to, let me go down to page three would be to remove the first part of the fifth bullet point, the events that are public or political in nature or by, it would just start at individuals seeking political office or elected officials for the purpose of an election campaign. Is that correct? Great. And then we would, I guess, point we didn't totally clarify here that I have in the yellow, the $2,000 per year, per organization at a staff level. Did we want to adjust the $2,000 to a higher amount? Believe it as is. And then it shall suggestion to council. Or we can put that on the suggestion to council to 3000 versus 5000. Or sorry 2000 versus 5000. Fine. It sounds like from what you said though, that this is even a little bit higher than other municipalities. I feel okay with two, I think we go higher than that. That's probably not the right thing based on the rates that we usually. Okay. So we- I would say stay with it. Okay. I don't know what to do with this. Okay, so leave that one. And then we would strike the 100,000 per fiscal year. So line seven would just be stricken and we would just monitor it and then reevaluate if that needs to be added back in on another edit. I mean, we could do 150, 200. We could put a high number on it and say, or we could put like a 150 and then say, after that, we need to go to commission and approve additional funds to fund the rest of the request or something like that. It doesn't have to be that commission has to go through every single request, but maybe commission has to look at the calendar and see how we're doing fiscally, and see if we can afford to go up to that max. You know? We could bring it up to 200,000, we could double it first. Yeah, and then, but maybe say like there's a cap that something. I'm just saying if you want to put cap language in, which I think cap language is prudent, because otherwise what's the point? Well, I think one of the points is this is kind of a pilot project. We don't know what's right, so why put a number in there if we don't know? Well, we know how much we spent, though. Well, yeah, you did say it, yeah, it said it was more closer to 250,000, right? You said it says $100,000 in the document, but it's actually closer than $250,000. You did say that, right? Yes. It does. Yeah. Could you say something with that, any additional amounts would need to be brought forth to the Parks and Rec Commission for further review? Yeah, just keep the lines. It's a threshold. Yeah, and then if any additional will go back to the Park to our Commission for consideration. So we'd add in so we keep seven and then add a Second sentence on seven saying once the hundred thousand has been exceeded all All fee waivers and reductions will come before Commission. I actually don't think it needs to be all fee waivers. I think it's more if the staff wants to come back and ask for additional budget up to whatever. Any additional funds that exceed the 100 that exceed this amount would go back to parks and wreck for Commission for further review because to your point you could say we now extend to 150 I think that would be fun something like that. Yeah, not specific to the waivers more specific to additional funds over that cap amount would have to be brought forth to the commission I think it makes more sense. Yeah, okay. Okay. So adding a second line onto seven stating that if funds exceed this amount, it would come back before commission for further evaluation or consideration along those lines. For an asset. We can word Smith that. But yes, you can be intent. Okay. I think that's just the intent. Great. And then the other edit I had if we're moving the 7030, so these two dots on page four under facility fee waiver criteria, we would just remove those two dots. So it would only state group one organization request will be considered first followed by group two. I wouldn't have mentioned to a split, for percentage split. I agree. Great. Great. Yeah. And then I heard we wanted to add in the other question to the forum asking what percentage fee waiver they're requesting. Yeah, that was your staff suggestion, right, from some other staff members. Yes, I think that's a really good idea. And that is in, go down here. So taking the staff recommendation too of adding what percentage of fee waiver reduction are you requesting for your event or program 2550 75 or 100. And that is, you know, I'd say split between municipalities that ask that and don't ask that, but I do think it's a worthwhile question to ask. No, for sure. Great. Those were all the edits I had from that conversation. I just have one more silly question. Maybe this is just because of the draft. Do we put an as of date on this so that it just indicates when this document was created? Yeah, great question. So once it's approved, it'll have an approved on date at the bottom. So it's approved on and it'll have that date. Thank you. Just wanted to make sure. Yeah, I think I always see them in draft, so I just wanted to confirm. Thank you. Yeah, so until then it'll have the big watermark draft on there. Thanks, Christy. No problem. So just to confirm, everyone using space, free space, discounted space now has some sort of use agreement in place. It's not necessarily. Okay, so I just want to make sure again that we, I think you already addressed this, but that we're giving grace to some people because I don't want it to come as a shock. It needs to be something that there's a warning period, letting people know, hey, we did this, and this is gonna happen. Yeah, absolutely. Anyone who hasn't applied yet, who's on that historic user group, would be notified about this intent. And like I said, for my experience working with a lot of these groups, it'll come as more of a relief. Yeah. You know, tam high music is a good, another good example. We host their spring and winter concert. And so knowing that they have that secured every year is huge for them. So I think this will actually be, instead of going through a MOU process, it'll be more streamlined. Because we've had turnover in our department when I came on and took over from former director McGrew, when Christie came in a few months before me, there's been a lot of staff turnover. And so these groups that have historically received concessions or discounts have been nervous because they, like Christy mentioned, they've been digging up their written proof for trying to validate their verbal relationships. All of them have been given the heads up over the last year of we're trying to immoralize something. Yes, we'll, yes, you're still a proof for this year, but we are trying to get something memorialized and approved so that we can go through a process. So most of them have that heads up. That's why they're asking now, like, are we approved? I don't think I asked if we had public comment on this or... Is that your head? Yeah, just wanted to say anything. Yeah. Okay. I just want to give kudos to the group here. This is a very good working session. So thank you for listening and participating I feel like we made made some headway so happy to be a part of this All right, okay great. Well if we don't have any more questions or Anything people are putting down away computer Let us go ahead to commission requests and ideas for discussion Well, can we make a motion? So if we go back to the staff report with the recommendation, it's to review and discuss the draft partnership fee waiver and policy minus the partnership part now, potentially. And cross the commission consider recommending approval to city council with the modifications as noted and recorded by Christy. If we could have a motion please. Sorry, I didn't realize we are approving it. Okay, yes. Just recommend it. Can we please have a- I move to approve. I second. All in favor. All right. Very excited. Thank you. Okay. Excellent. Commissioner Quesson, ideas for discussion? All right. Very excited. Thank you. Okay, excellent. Commission requests and ideas for discussion? None. If I could add one comment, the commission wanted to hear about the request for the plaza since the municode change. And we only have had two requests. One is from the Chamber for Sunday's event for Winterfest and the other would be from the rabbi and he's still working on his finalizing his paperwork for the end of December. So just two requests and steps bit approved. All right great thanks so much. All right if we have nothing else then I will adjourn. Yeah. That's it.