0:00 Okay, she's a increase of 85% in fiscal year 26 and over 200% fiscal year 25.
0:06 And so I want to understand why why was this increase necessary and what will it what will the increase pay for that couldn't be paid for at fiscal year 25 levels?
0:16 I I think to your point um we are increasing uh cost of training because we want our staff to be better aligned with the needs, and so we'll want to provide and ensure our staff are better able to deal with uh constituents.
0:34 Okay, um, so it'll be uh will it be more training or is the cost of the existing training going up?
0:40 So so it's kind of what we also did we moved our training from HR.
0:45 We now have a training and development department so that we can be strategic about ensuring that our uh staff members are properly trained.
0:54 Um you'll see those cost shift.
0:58 Okay, and is that explained because there was an increase in a and the this increase in agency management contrast with a 25,000 or uh or 28% decrease to the training and employee development division?
1:12 So is that the reason for the discrepancy?
1:17 Turning to agency financial operations, there is 229 or 60% increase to agency budgeting and financial management services.
1:26 Uh what's the reason for this increase, or is this a reclassification of FTs?
1:31 Um, so our off our AFO's office was not initially fully staffed, and based on the MOU, um, we had to hire more positions to support the agency's needs, and so we were we're now fully funded.
1:50 Uh there was a small 2,000 decrease in volunteer relations, but that amounts to uh 13% decrease from fiscal year 26 and a 91% decrease from fiscal year 25.
2:01 What was reduced over the last two years for volunteer relations relations that allows for this continued decrease?
2:08 Uh that's a great question.
2:10 I'll have to look at um maybe uh print we may have uh do we have an in-house print team, so maybe publications that we pay for out.
2:22 Um and with the volunteer relations deductions, how have these deductions impacted DPR's ability to engage with its many volunteers?
2:30 They help keep or keep our parks and outdoor uh recreations clean.
2:34 We're excited about our volunteers.
2:36 Um not only do they support with keeping our parks um and playgrounds clean, they support with large events like her story 5K, um, to our late night hypes.
2:48 Um we're seeing an increase in volunteerism.
2:51 Um people are hitting us up and saying they want to help.
2:54 So um we're excited about that.
2:58 And con in con contrast, there was 208,000 increase to donor relations.
3:04 What is this increase?
3:06 Why is this increase next necessary?
3:10 Um in donor relations.
3:15 Yeah, I think that's a uh uh we did a realignment to make sure again going back to our schedule A, we wanted to make sure that we realigned uh various one-off units, so within our comms division, um in our partnership and strategic initiatives, there's more alignment there, okay.
3:37 In her testimony, Kelly call uh Collins Choi from KC Trees encouraged DPR to prioritize expanding public-private partnerships with organizations like Casey Trees to expand access to technical assistance, philanthropic funding, and more capacity support DC's green spaces, especially in a tight but budget year.
3:55 Is this something that DPR is exploring like as as well?
4:02 Um DPR has a security budget, and that was also reduced by 244,000.
4:08 What security services does DPR pay for that are not covered by DGS Protective Services Division?
4:14 Is this after hours events security?
4:16 So DGS Protective Services, um, all of our security we pay them.
4:23 And so this is a reduction in security guards at our sites.
4:26 I heard Director Hunter testify a little earlier how we uh look at various sites and uh reduce our footprint or our armed guards um versus a security officer um at various locations where uh security may not be an issue, and so we do pay for our community our security services directly.
4:52 Okay, and so is this this uh reduction of two hundred forty-four thousand?
4:58 Is that going to limit uh DGS's DPR's ability for to make sure that our centers have the protection so people in space that it needs our strategy.
5:10 So I'll use uh I hate to use site names because you know they're like you'll say my site.
5:18 Um so I'll use um hypothetically Joy Evans, who does not currently have security, but let's say if Joy Evans had security from 6 a.m.
5:28 Joy Evans has a huge basketball following, and so in the afternoon, people are in Joy Evans.
5:35 So in the during the day, we have our uh residents and our of different abilities program, and so from 6 a.m.
5:45 hypothetically if we had security there, we know we may not necessarily need security there because the individuals that are coming um have different abilities.
5:55 Some of them come with their aides and or seniors, however, in the evenings you see um an influx of young people, um you see those Maryland residents who want to be DC residents in basketball put in which they really can't, but um, but we would reduce um security hours in this hypothetical model from the morning and just have security on the back end.
6:19 Does that make sense?
6:24 Um DGS PST budget does not include PSD officers for DPR.
6:33 Well, we don't use P S D officers at DPR.
6:38 We use security guards so we have an MOU.
6:40 So whether the company is Yeah, got you.
6:45 Um in external affairs community relations, uh, we saw eight hundred a hundred and eighty-three thousand um or fifty-five percent decrease in light of cuts to both DPR and DGS that will affect services and operations to a noticeable level.
7:02 I'm considered this cut will limit the agency ability to to relate timely and accurate information to district residents about the changes in service levels due to this decrease.
7:13 What will DPR no longer be able to do in fiscal year 27?
7:17 I don't anticipate that there's nothing we'll be able to do.
7:24 Um so we'll keep continuing to have like timely notifications to community and school and all the things that we utilize, and this cut won't impact that.
7:34 That's what I want to confirm.
7:35 Okay, um, in public engagement and strategic development, we saw 394,000 increase.
7:44 How do external affairs and public engagement differ and what type of things are paid for out of that budget?
7:49 Again, this is a staff alignment, and we again wanted to put individuals for our customer service.
7:57 We wanted to put aligned staff exactly in the division in which they fall, so it's not a true increase in this division, it's moving staffing personnel to the partnerships and strategic initiatives, which houses comms, external affairs, um, and some programs.
8:19 Uh, the under administrative service operations division, it looks like there is a 1.2 million or 50% decrease to support services unit.
8:27 Uh is that also staffing alignment?
8:34 Uh I saw a 542,000 increase to park monitors and rangers budget amounting to a 30% increase from fiscal year 26 and 60% for for fiscal year 25.
8:44 Is this increase entirely due to pay and fringe increases?
8:48 A combination of that and appropriately aligning staff because there were rangers that may have fallen under aquatics, and so moving staff to the appropriate alignment where they belong.
9:02 Okay, and I think you told me this.
9:08 How many park rangers will we have in fiscal year 27?
9:14 And are our rangers unionized employees?
9:23 Everybody's unionized.
9:26 IMDb again, well, not management, but you know.
9:28 Um, it looks like there was a 3.6 million dollar cut.
9:29 Unless this is just a staffing realignment.
9:39 Yeah, so before the Roman leaders, prior to my tenure at the agency, the Roven leaders were under the comms division.
9:50 And so we've moved them appropriately to align in the recreation division.
9:59 And they were under comms, not necessarily, they were under external relationship under external relations.
10:07 But they are truly mobile recreators.
10:10 And I mean, because you highlighted in your testimony some of their success, visiting schools more than 34, 500 times, connected with over 126,000 people.
10:19 Our roving leaders do really critical work.
10:22 And so I just wanted to make sure that what I'm seeing as a what I was concerned about is what I see as a cut, and I don't I don't think we want to cut the critical work they're doing.
10:32 So I just want to make sure that this is not a cut that will result in less um impact and less roving leaders.
10:41 Our roving leaders are thriving.
10:43 Um one of our Roven leader coaches who was moved from one site to another uh last year, his team actually won his team at his new site actually won the basketball championship.
10:57 So they're doing really, really well.
11:02 Um I want to finish up at capital budget.
11:07 Uh help me make sense of what I'm seeing.
11:10 So top line, what I see is an 85% reduction in capital budget funded FTEs from 7 to 1.
11:18 It's in table 30 PBB.
11:21 There it looks like it's a 723,000 or 56% cuts to the project's planning and design activity, and then this includes a 40% of the reduction in personnel services.
11:35 So I just I was trying to get a sense of what are what are the MPS costs being cut or was it moved around somewhere?
11:41 So it was you're you're asking about PS, right?
11:46 So they still exist, they're just moved off of capital, because some of the positions may not have aligned with the cat the structure for to be to qualify as a capital project.
11:58 So we've restructured and moved them so that they're still in existence.
12:03 They're just moved to either operating or a federal award that we've secured in FY26.
12:11 Okay, show up at the point that we roll into 27.
12:16 So there are no non-personnel services costs being cut.
12:22 No, but let me confirm that.
12:24 Not that I'm aware of.
12:30 And so the and then also these this is not a cut that will affect DPR's ability to plan and deliver on capital projects.
12:44 Uh the I want to revisit the 50% capital funding cut, Councilmember Felder brought up earlier.
12:49 It looks like the fiscal year 26 capital budget was 165 million in fiscal year 27, it's 82.7 million, but the fiscal year 27 is still 20 million larger than it was in fiscal year 25.
13:02 So DPR received a massive 100 million increase in fiscal year 27, and 60 million is no longer there.
13:08 What was specifically the reason for the 100 million increase and what specifically is being removed that amounts to 60 million removed?
13:15 So 60 million, I believe, was the initial RFK investment.
13:19 Okay, that was put into FY27.
13:23 Um, as you know, that um project has been increased and moved out and uh spread up above spread out in additional out years.
13:35 So what you saw was that removal of the 60 million dollars for the initial RFK, okay.
13:47 I also wanted to revisit one thing you discussed with council member Parker regarding flat budgets and increasing costs during the duration of capital project.
13:55 My understanding is that the capital project budget from the outset includes adjustments for inflation.
14:01 In other words, a project budget funded in fiscal year 25 is larger than what it would need to be if the project was done in fiscal year 25.
14:10 And the budget is intended to cover the higher costs in future years it will be constructed.
14:18 When we put in a new project request, we do account for escalation for every year.
14:23 So each year that's uh that follows the previous year does include escalation year to year.
14:27 So we do account for that, yes.
14:29 Okay, that's right, okay.
14:31 Um in fiscal year 27 budget, the council added nine million to the Rock Reese Tennis Center on a condition of transfer jurisdiction was reached with the National Park Service.
14:41 What happened to those funds now that there won't be a transfer of jurisdiction?
14:49 I actually will have to find out.
14:54 Um turning to Riggs LaSalle.
14:57 What is the status of the ADA small capital projects for the main door?
15:01 And has the HVAC project been completed?
15:04 I think we are in the end years of the useful life of Riggs LaSalle Recreation Center.
15:13 So we currently will start the HVAC will get started.
15:20 Um yes, the upgrades and will happen, and we're starting, we're looking at May.
15:28 We had to have a reprogramming request to convert from our capital to operating.
15:32 So we're excited that these uh this project will move forward.
15:37 On the masters facility plan, Riggs, LaSalle is recommended for um major recenter renovations, spray park renovation, new community garden, net new exercise equipment, new tracks and fitness loops.
15:49 Uh based on that, where is Riggs of South on the modernization prioritization list?
15:53 Because it sounds like the whole center.
15:58 Uh Race LaSalle is at the top of mind.
16:01 Um it is a heavily used facility, and we know it is at the top, it is top of mind.
16:09 Uh, get back to me on what top what will top of mind equate to for Riggslessau community members and the friends of Riggs Lassau who will ask me as soon as I see them, probably tomorrow.
16:21 Uh this is uh Fort Stevens.
16:24 Uh oh, last point of south.
16:27 The elementary's school is being modernized soon, so it could be an opportunity for some partnership around the elementary school and the recreation center there.
16:37 Um this is not an actual DPR project, but I want to talk about DCI's proposal at Fort Stevens.
16:44 I've been told DCI has now submitted a proposal to DC uh to DCI last year, and now DOE has conducted an environmental assessment.
16:53 Um have DCI and DPR come to an agreement on whether this project will move forward.
16:59 Um, we did um DCI has expressed interest in using um uh area on the field to build a gymnasium for their students.
17:11 I'm aware that residents were taking pictures and emailing them to you of us standing in a group having a discussion.
17:18 Um that picture by no means um does not uh validate that there is an I read the email that we are in agreement and I was teaching people how to circumvent the process.
17:30 So, dear public, that is not what happened.
17:32 Um, as an agency director, I am obligated to meet with the constituents.
17:37 Um, and that's all that we were doing uh was having a meeting.
17:43 Does the funding for the new community garden at Fort Stevens indicate the garden will not be impacted by any potential changes to the property?
17:54 Um the fiscal year 27 budget zeroes out swimming pool replacement after 1.98 million in fiscal year 26.
18:03 Are we not replacing any pools in fiscal year 27, or will we be using that the 2.7 balance to do so?
18:10 We that's a good question.
18:11 We do have several swimming pool projects underway.
18:14 Um it's just that this fiscal year it didn't happen to have any sort of like small parts, got a little bit less funding, but we still have a whole queue of swimming pool projects that are that are ongoing and underway.
18:25 So I don't think we'll really miss miss a B.
18:28 We we have several uh that are that are going on.
18:29 Happy to get a list for you if that's if that's helpful.
18:33 Um it looks like ADA compliance drops from 2.8 to 2.15 million in fiscal year 27.
18:29 What specific sites are funded by the two point one five million, and what is the prioritization criteria around ADA backlog projects?
18:52 We we have a um we actually have four different batches of ADA projects.
18:57 Um I'm happy to send the list over to you that it includes several different sites, uh, but once though all those batches are completed, we should be 100% in compliance.
19:06 The hundred the $100,000 per fiscal years just to if something comes up, if we're ramp breaks or for handle breaks, something like that.
19:14 Okay, there's $1.99 million for playground equipment, which is uh eight million less than fiscal year 26.
19:27 Given what's um, there's it seems like there's a de decrease.
19:31 Are we going to use balance funds to address small cap playground issues as they occur throughout the year?
19:38 We we do we actually um we we already have the playgrounds fixed out, and I think that one of those was uh was a playground, a huge playground blitz that covered a lot of playgrounds a couple years ago.
19:47 So that was the because of the huge funding amount we got for that year.
19:51 This year we have, I think, like you mentioned, I think about 1.9.
19:54 Uh we also look to supplement that with LWCF funds.
19:58 We can actually double that budget with LWCF funds to make sure make those dollars stretch further, but we have a list of priority playgrounds that need the work the most.
20:06 So we'll knock the the next three out with that fund that that funding.
20:14 Um I believe Councilmember Parker covered Langdon, but since we had so many witnesses show up for that, I don't what how would one delay a uh a project?
20:26 I this like from a procedural aspect.
20:34 I sorry, I you don't know.
20:37 It's uh the the one thing that I think that I've the one thing that I'm always focused on is moving forward and getting the projects off the ground because I, you know, and again, to those that are watching, this is not an attempt to minimize, not an attempt to minimize their request, but we have an overwhelming request of residents who want this project to move forward.
21:02 When we have gymnastics, we have 3,000 um families apply for gymnastics.
21:08 As you know, uh chairperson, prior to Langdon, there was no gymnastics facility in our portfolio.
21:18 And so if your child wanted to do gymnastics, you had to either go out of the district or pay an absorbent cost.
21:27 And um I think I know that we've been responsive to a need, um, but to answer your question, I do not know how to stop a project.
21:42 I think they just I don't know if they don't not want gymnastics.
21:46 I think they just want more than just gymnastics.
21:50 Um there's actual, there's more than just gymnastics happening, and I'll let me ask you if I think there's some people who don't want to.
21:56 I will also tell you why Langdon was chosen.
21:59 Langdon was chosen because it did not have a lot of footprint during the during the day.
22:04 There were not a lot of people coming to Langdon.
22:07 Um that's why it was chosen.
22:11 In addition to the proximity it is to Turkey Thicket and uh Edgewood, uh Harry Thomas, you know, War Five has robust large sites.
22:23 So I just wanted to put that out there.
22:26 Well, if you could just work with the community some more, it sounds like it was a lot of people.
22:29 There was a lot of people who testified.
22:30 One lady, this was the first time she ever testified.
22:32 She lives across the street, so she felt very passionate.
22:35 Um, so I think if there could be some more community conversations and some compromise or something that can come out of it.
22:41 I just want to also respond to one thing that I heard the community speak about.
22:45 They kept saying that there was two million dollars that was missing.
22:48 There was not $2 million dollars that was missing.
22:51 That funding was already expended on the park, and so on the Chuck Brown part.
22:56 So I just wanted to make sure that the community does understands that there's no money missing from the project.
22:59 And then last thing on the playgrounds, if you all could let us know just the pri um, it it is.
23:15 Are we correct in seeing that there's a decrease in funding for playground equipment?
23:22 There is in this fiscal year's budget, yes.
23:26 And so based on that, can you all provide with the list of priority playgrounds after having a conversation with ODR in hopes that ADA compliance issues would be prioritized as far as what changes need to happen at which playgrounds?
23:44 And then safety, ADA and safety issues, right, where we have gates missing and taller playgrounds, things of that nature.
23:51 If we could you could do that, that would be great.
24:01 I think we're done.
24:23 Um my ask is between now and uh when we finalize this budget, if you all could work with uh me and my team at identifying where things are practically able to be both funded and implemented.
24:40 Um we would appreciate that because we've been given that very at-large task from the entire body of the council.
24:47 We appreciate the vote of confidence.
24:50 Um, and to answer your question, yes.
24:54 With that, I will give you the last word and we will close out.
24:59 Um, first and foremost, I'd like to thank uh Mayor Muriel Bowser for appointing me to this position.
25:07 Um it has been everything that I've imagined and more.
25:12 Um we have served at the highest level and her commitment to ensuring that district residents not only have an infrastructure uh but rose robust programming um speaks volumes every year.
25:27 Our programs, the numbers have gotten larger and larger from 8,000 to Fresh Start 5K to 10,000 at her story, all initiatives that were started and now have become staples in the community.
25:43 So I'm truly grateful for that and the opportunity.
25:47 Deputy Mayor Paul Kine, City Administrator, uh Kevin Donahue for just being champions of the work and the budget uh to ensure that DPR has everything as we answer the calls of the community.
26:01 Additionally, I'd like to thank our partner agencies at DOH who inspect our polls and make sure that they're able to open to Octo who ensures that we have working phone lines and technology uh to DACL to one's office, uh Latoya Foster, and of course, our partner in all of this, most of this work, Director Hunter and his team.
26:25 Um, I have to give kudos to my amazing team.
26:29 Um, the deputy directors Rogers, Coates, Washington Williams, Chief of Staff, Juna Toppin, Chiefs, Johnson, Herring, Watts, um, uh James Washington, I'm sorry, Jay, Terrence James, Britt Sisko.
26:44 It's a lot of people, uh, Hannah, um, our amazing AFO, Rose Marie Chiwa, who makes sure who finds a yes for us when it looks bleak and we don't know where are we about to get this money from, but um we have great problems um to solve for the community wants more, and the managers, I want to thank all of the managers and most importantly, the employees at DPR who come to work um and show up passionately to serve the community.
27:15 Um, you can walk into any of our recreation centers, and as the team say, ours, our they make our young people feel safe.
27:24 And um, thank you, Chair and Sebastian, and your team for um always willing to work with us, even when we don't always agree.
27:33 Um, but I think that's the things that strengthen and make us grow.
27:37 And last but not least, Hannah Baker.
27:40 Thank you so much for who you are.
27:43 Amy Caspary, our general counsel who is leaving us, um, and she has kept us uh out the paper and making sure we're operating.
27:56 She's the little engine that could, and on camp, you will find her.
28:04 We work really hard, and I, you know, I know that this matters to people when the director is acknowledging you publicly, and so um, I don't take any of this work lightly, and we cannot do it without, so thank you for obliging us.
28:20 Um, I want to make sure to thank all of my people, Leslie Long and HR.
28:26 Mike Tucker, our comm saying we got the best comms team in the city, and you know it.
28:38 Um, it is two fifty-five p.m.
28:41 Uh, this concludes today's budget oversight hearing for Department of General Services and Departments Park and Recreation Government witnesses only.
28:48 Residents are reminded they can still submit testimony for the official record by five PM on Monday, May 11th, by uploading your testimony to council hearing management system or emailing facilities at DC Council.gov.
29:01 With that, this hearing is adjourned.