Lake Elmo parks commissioners ask council to back a new parks manager role

The Parks Commission on Tuesday asked the Lake Elmo City Council to support creating a parks managerial position to begin implementing the city’s 2024 parks master plan.

The commission’s presentation outlined six areas the commission said the city’s parks program currently lacks: recreational programming, increased community engagement, exploring funding sources, long-range strategic planning, trail network coordination and environmental stewardship. “Does the city council support the need for the parks director position, for the city of Lake Elmo?” Parks Commission presenter Paul asked the council.

Why it matters: Commissioners said the new role would coordinate scattered park initiatives and seek outside funding to accelerate work that staff say cannot be handled under the current organization. Mayor said he would “support a position that is leaning towards that” and suggested the job could start as a coordinator and “grow into a parks director” if demand and funding allow.

Discussion and details: Commissioners and councilmembers repeatedly framed the request as an implementation step for the master plan, which the commission said already ranks projects by priority and contains cost estimates. Commissioners emphasized that the position would not necessarily run all programs directly but would develop a framework and partnerships — with neighboring cities, Washington County or community education — so the city can offer more youth, adult and senior programming. The commission also said the new role could spend substantial time pursuing grants: “I might even put it at 50% of their job,” a commissioner said, referring to grant-seeking.

Council questions centered on timing, cost and organizational fit. The master plan included a compensation range for a managerial position: the commission referenced an estimate of $120,000 to $165,000 per year for total compensation. Councilmembers asked whether the new position would be a standalone parks department role or sit inside public works and whether additional field staff would be needed to supervise. Staff and commission members said those details remain to be defined and that part of the position’s work would be to craft the job duties and recommend where it sits in the organization.

Council reaction: Multiple councilmembers expressed support in principle but requested more specifics before a budget or ordinance change. Some favored starting with a lower-titled position such as a parks coordinator or supervisor to “get the ball rolling,” while others made the case for a full director depending on duties and the expected scope of supervision. One councilmember urged phasing the decision and suggested temporary or term positions as a lower-risk way to pilot work before committing to a permanent hire.

Next steps: Staff and the Parks Commission were asked to return with a proposed position description, recommended pay grade or range, a proposed reporting structure (whether within public works or as a separate unit) and options for funding the role in the 2026 budget cycle. Commissioners asked that the position recommendation reflect priorities in the master plan and include an estimate of time dedicated to grant pursuits and community engagement.

Ending: The council did not vote on the proposal; members signaled conditional support and directed staff and the commission to refine the position scope, cost and organizational placement for future budget consideration.