Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Parks Signage topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council discusses park entry signage program; no contract approved

5933864 · August 5, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Council heard a parks presentation Aug. 4 about ‘celebrated entry’ signs for city parks and considered using an established local sign company to prepare designs and costs. Council did not approve a dollar‑specific contract that evening and directed staff to pursue a design scope and return with final costs and sign options.

The council discussed a proposal to develop branded entry signs for city parks as part of implementing the parks master plan but did not authorize a purchase contract on Aug. 4.

Erin Murphy, the city’s recreation director, said Parks & Recreation had solicited a qualifications response and received a recommendation to use Don Bell Signs to develop design options. Murphy said Don Bell provided an estimate of about $17,500 per sign for non‑illuminated signs that would include engineering, fabrication and installation; the firm also offered an illuminated option for one sign that the parks advisory board requested for a larger park.

Council members asked questions about the number and size of signs, whether Veterans Memorial and Jan Leeson parks should be treated as a single location, and about illumination and electrical costs. Murphy said sign size and illumination needs would influence cost and that some parks might need a smaller, less expensive sign while larger parks could require bigger, potentially illuminated signs. She said funding was available in the current fiscal year for the program.

Councilmember Volz moved to authorize an agreement with the recommended vendor without specifying a dollar amount; the motion did not advance to an approved contract that evening. Several council members suggested staff could instead contract for a design‑only scope (which could be under $25,000 and handled administratively) and return to council with final designs and cost estimates. The motion to authorize a full‑scale contract did not pass; staff said they would contact the vendor to prepare design options and terms and return with a recommended action and budget.

No final contract was executed; council asked staff to return with design options, proposed sign locations and firm costs for council consideration.