LIGHTLY EDITED FILE Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Outdoor Recreation Task Force Via WebEx/Remote CART September 21, 2020 9:00 - 10:35 a.m. * * * * * DISCLAIMER This text is being provided in a lightly edited draft format. Any reproduction, publication, or other use of this CART file without the express written consent of the captioner is strictly prohibited. Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) is provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility, and this lightly edited CART file may not be a totally verbatim record of the meeting. Due to the live nature of the meeting, some names and/or terms may be misspelled. This text may also contain phonetic attempts at sounds and words that were spoken, and environmental sounds that occurred during the meeting. * * * * * CART PROVIDED BY: Angie Sundell, RDR, CRR, CBC, CCP, AE Paradigm Reporting & Captioning Inc. a Veritext Company 612.339.0545 Captioning-paradigm@veritext.com >> Gratia: Good morning, everybody. This is Gratia. It's 9:00. But I see that we are getting our meeting start rush of folks logging on. So I'm just going to wait a minute or two to allow folks to finish logging into the meeting and then we'll get started. So just hold tight for a minute or two and then we'll get started. >> Gratia: We'll give folks one more minute to log on and then we'll get started right about 9:03. Thanks, everyone, for your patience. >> Gratia: All right. We will go ahead and get started. It looks like we have most people here and anybody who is still planning on joining us can jump in whenever they get here. But I wanted to say good morning, everyone! Thank you for being here bright and early on a Monday morning. I know it's not always the most ideal meeting time, but I really appreciate everyone for taking the time and being here and for your continued flexibility with this process. We have a good agenda today, where we'll be hearing out the initial draft recommendations from all the work groups. That will be really exciting and see some of the hard work you all have been doing over the last few months, kind of put into recommendations, which is exciting. Again, we have live captioning available if that's helpful for you. You can use the media player to have that up on your screen throughout the meeting. And, again, if you need any technical support, please reach out to myself or Madison McGovern, before I forget, I really want to pay a special thank you to Madison. She is our conservation corps member who's been really really helpful throughout this process, especially with these virtual meetings, helping me with some of the back-end facilitation. So thank you to Madison. And, yeah, use the chat. Should you have any comments or questions for the task force as well, or else feel free to chime in. Here's today's agenda. We're doing the welcome right now. We'll hear from the group who was working on the vision -- the overall vision statement for the task force's work. And then we'll start to hear draft recommendations from each of the work groups. We have a work group -- an order of report-out kind of randomized up on the screen. So each work group will present, and then after each work group presents, there will be an opportunity, if other task force members have any questions or comments for that specific work group, that would be a great time to pose those. You know, we're really getting close to the end here and, so, we really want to take advantage of our time together to offer each other feedback and ask critical questions kind of as we approach the finish line. And then once we hear overall from all the groups, we'll have a chance for an overall discussion if folks are seeing any overlaps or patterns or want to do some reflecting about kind of the overall suite of draft recommendations. Then we'll talk some next steps. We'll take public comments. And then we will wrap up. I know I noted this in my email that I sent out last week, but initially we had three hours set aside for this meeting. I don't anticipate we need the full hours. The agenda's only written for two. You know, but depending on how much discussion and questions you all have for one another, we have that extra time. You know, I didn't want to assume that the meeting would take more or less time just because it's really dependent on the questions you have for one another. So that is the plan for today's meeting. Before we get started, are there any questions that I can answer? I do want to note that we do have both of our chairs here today, John and Randall and, so, they will be offer any perspective they have on draft recommendations as well, in addition to some EMT and DNR staff. So to those folks on the call, please feel free to chime in with your own questions and comments for the task force as we get movin' through this discussion. All right. Not hearing any questions. I'm going to move on. And I'm going pass it right off the bat to the group that was working on the grand visioning statement for the task force and our overall body of work here. So I think JR, Hansi, I know, Elliot, there's a handful of people who are working on this. If one of you wants to chime in and give a brief update or present the statement, if you're all ready to that, to the group, that would be great. >> Aaron: Gratia, this is Aaron Hautala. I was part of this group. I think I might even be responsible for having this part of the meeting. But I do not think -- at least I didn't get together with everybody to work on this as of yet. So, if anyone else did meet on this, I'm more than happy to hear about it. But I wanted to admit that myself in front of all of you digitally, I guess. But I do have a sacrificial vision statement I could provide, but no one has seen it. And I don't know that that's the way to do this. I'd rather pause on it and share that with everybody and then come back to you with something more solid. >> Gratia: Yeah. That's totally fine. I know there's -- especially with those of you with school-aged kids, this past -- the kind of block of time we had between our last meeting and this meeting had a lot going on. So no worries there. If you didn't have a chance to meet, perhaps later in the meeting when we get to next steps, we can figure out a plan for getting that overall statement put together in time for the October meeting. Because I do think that piece will be important as we kind of move forward with our public engagement process to kind of tie all the work together. So no worries on that. And thank you for your honesty. And with that, then, we can just move into sharing out the draft recommendations that each work group prepared. So I think we have the coordination team up first. So, Aaron, that may be you again. But I will pass it off to the coordination team. Just so all the work groups know, I created a slide for each of your vision statements, followed by, you know, whatever draft recommendations you sent in. So with that, coordination team, if you wouldn't mind kickin' it off. >> Greg: Gratia, this is Greg here. Can you hear me okay? >> Gratia: Yeah, loud and clear, Greg. Thanks. >> Greg: Great. When we put this together, Aaron actually was instrumental in the vision statement, but everybody here worked on this coordination statement. So I think without any rehearsal, Aaron, since you've already been digitally honest with us, maybe you could start by just reviewing the vision statement here. Would that be all right with you? >> Aaron: I'd love to read something that I didn't screw up on? [ Laughter ] I also fractured three ribs, so when I laugh right now, it hurts, just in case anyone is running why I'm crying and laughing at the same time. Okay. Coordination vision statement. Work together to create a strong, sustainable outdoor recreation community that delivers inclusivity, enhances diversity, builds Minnesota's economy, and reduces conflict. Back to you, Greg. >> Greg: Sure. So, I guess the first draft recommendation here was to -- and we can kind of alternate. I know Hansi's on here, I know other people, Elliot and Breanne. Bring together outdoor recreation stakeholders throughout Minnesota around a shared plan to build community, drive relationships, and facilitate a unified understanding of outdoor recreation. Basically what we're calling here, on here, is for all of us to pool our thoughts and resources to, you know, promote outdoor recreation across the state, broadly stated. So that would involve convening stakeholders annually. We saw, I think it was in South Carolina, North Carolina, where there's an actual outdoor recreation conference statewide, which we really loved that. Of course, include Black, Indigenous, Latinx and other Communities of Color, LGBTQI, people with disabilities, and people with low economic status. Not sure exactly how to word all that, but the goal is to have a big tent and include all Minnesotans here. Share and make clear the "Plan" the State of Minnesota is currently implementing. Whether that's with SCORP or something coming out of here. When more Minnesotans know the plan, be open to adjusting the plan based on the feedback of a greater response from Minnesota. Measure and share benefit of coordinating at this annual event. That was really the first recommendation that we had here. Any comments about that or should we go through all the recommendations? >> Gratia: Totally up to you. I'm happy to move forward in the slides and then come back to all of them once we've completed the suite. >> Greg: Why don't we move forward then. [ Overlapping conversation ] Yeah, is that Hansi? >> Hansi: Yeah, want me to read this one. >> Greg: Go ahead. >> Hansi: Coordination draft recommendations number 2. Promote and facilitate a culture of "welcoming everyone outdoors." Identify -- so we have some bullet points below that. A, identify and state the values of how we'll all treat each other when we're outside together. Subpoint, Minnesota has world-class outdoor resources and should build on these assets to create a welcoming culture that ensures the safety of everyone and encourages inclusivity, togetherness, and stewardship. Minnesota will be a destination because of our inclusive outdoor culture, not just to experience the beauty of our outdoor resources. Subpoint b, recognize the health and wellness benefits and align with Minnesota Department of Health and healthcare providers. And c, create guidelines, training plans, and promotions around Minnesota's culture of "Welcoming everyone outdoors." So, the idea of creating a culture above and beyond just the physical resources that we already have. >> Greg: Thank you. Should we move on to the next slide, Gratia? >> Gratia: Yup. I moved forward. Can you guys see the new one yet? >> Greg: Yup. >> Yup. >> Greg: And we have Perry and Breanne and Steve, would one of you take this one? >> Steve: Sure, I can take it. This is Steve. Can you guys hear me okay? >> Yes. >> Steve: So our recommendation number 3, create an office of OREC that can coordinate, create, design and implement and deliver upon these goals. And our first subpoint, fund and staff this appropriate appropriately prioritizing Minnesota residents first. Inform Minnesota residents about the outdoor opportunities available to them. This office should continue to ask what Minnesota residents feel they are missing in going outside and then evolve, adapt, and grow opportunities to do so. The OREC office should promote Minnesota's outdoor benefits to a broader world. And the second subpoint is the OREC office should focus on building real relationships and unity amongst the varied and different outdoor recreation groups within Minnesota. I think that that's just a key part of this coordinating -- our coordinating efforts would be to get all groups involved. And create and maintain a database of outdoor recreation stakeholders and track outdoor recreation trends and use patterns. And I think that's it for our recommendations. If there are questions. >> Hey, guys. Joe from Lake of the Woods. Quick question here. So coordination, you're really focusing on it seems like a lot of the state, on the state stakeholders. Joe Henry. >> Gratia: It's back, it's back. >> Joe: Hello. >> Gratia: Hi, sorry. My computer wouldn't unmute me and I couldn't hear anything for like two minutes. So I don't know if anybody had the same issue there. But it appears we are back in action. Do folks -- >> This was Lynnea, I think I was able to hear the entire time, unless I'm missing a two-minute block of time that I can't account for in my life. [ Laughter ] Another type of encounter and experience. Please let me know if that has occurred. [ Laughter ] >> Yeah, I missed it, too. I missed it too. >> Gratia: It sounds like for some of us, we couldn't hear, some of us could. So maybe, Steve, if you wouldn't mind starting over with kind of the slide that's currently up on the screen. Sorry about that. Sure. Can you all hear me now? >> Gratia: Yes. >> Steve: Okay. So this third recommendation that we have was to create an office of OREC that can coordinate, create, design, implement and deliver upon these goals. The first subpoint would be fund and staff this office appropriately prioritizing Minnesota residents first. Which would inform Minnesota resident about the outdoor opportunities available to them. This office should continue to ask what Minnesota residents feel they are missing in going outside and then evolve, adapt, and growing opportunities to do so. The OREC office should promote Minnesota's outdoor benefits to a broader world. The OREC office should focus on building real relationships and unity amongst the varied and different outdoor recreation groups within Minnesota. And create and maintain a database of outdoor recreation stakeholders and track outdoor recreation trends and use patterns. >> Steve: And that was the last of our recommendations. Are there questions or thoughts about this, about all of them? >> Joe: Hey, guys. Lake of the Woods Tourism. Just a quick question. The focus in your presentation, which I think is very good, focuses really Minnesota, Minnesota first. And I'm just curious, in your discussions did it come up about the value of stakeholders and other type of connections outside of Minnesota for lack of good reasons? >> Greg: Joe, I think it came up, for sure. And obviously, you know, sharing the state with -- is an economic driver for tourism. I think a lot of us are in that industry, if you will. You know, it's a very important and positive thing. I don't know. Aaron, if you're there, I don't mean to keep pushing you for digital honest still here, but you talked about the Minnesota residents and kind of the importance of having -- oh, I would say the Minnesota enjoyment or opportunities as a priority for tourism. I don't know if we had any elaboration on that or not. We could share here. >> Aaron: Greg, this is Aaron again. Thank you for another opportunity of transparency this Monday morning. Joe, to your question, two fold. Number one is that I think when you're creating something, you're always going to collaborate with people outside of your boundaries and borders with the best practices and the best ideas that are out there, so you don't have to reinvent the wheel. So I think that comes as a default setting, even though it's not in there. But as we look at actually coordinating a state and our outdoors, it's so easy to forget the people who live here and just focus on people who don't live here, that the people who live here don't even know what they have in their backyard. And when they do learn what they have and when they fall in love with what they have, and then they are able to be empowered by that and be able to preserve that, that person, whoever that person may be, can now do probably more than anybody else can because of how they'll speak about it, how they'll preserve and protect it, and take it to the next step. And that's kind of the thinking. I wouldn't say Minnesota first because that has a lot of weird connotations with another one, but I would say focus on who we have and what we have and let's make darn sure everybody who lives here has that obstacle-free path to get out there and when we do, we might all have to brace ourselves as to what could happen next. The end. >> Lynnea: I felt like I heard that it was about targeting -- making sure we target that audience. And I'm happy to hear other opinions about this. One thing that I feel like is that in the few months I've been involved, we've heard a lot about how we target other people outside of the state and that many times both industry and our existing efforts aren't looking at potential audiences internal or potential new audiences in general. So I guess I feel like I really agree with this approach. I also think that having our residents be ambassadors for what we have is so important to having other people want to come here. To be honest, after living in Colorado for five years, you know, they feel like they got everything. So what brings my friends from Colorado to Minnesota is my talking about what we have here and convincing them it's worth the trip for outdoor activities and recreation comparatively to what they have. And when they get here, they're blown away. So that's another aspect of this, by engaging Minnesotans well and making sure they the ambassadors for what we have to offer, that brings a lot more legitimacy and loyalty and interest, I think, from a broader population as well. >> Hansi: I would agree with everything that's been said. And I also think, you know, point 2 is really an interesting point, as far as that idea of creating a culture of outdoors and in point 3, we talk about the creation of an OREC office, and that office itself, there is a subpoint that does speak to speaking to the broader world but also interacting with other OREC offices. But I think point 2 really, as we know, there's already, what, 17 other OREC offices and there is a lot of other states that have organizing themselves around these concepts. But the fact that we're going above and beyond just marketing our physical assets but actually creating a culture, as Lynnea says, that starts to speak out to the welcoming nature of coming to our state, it just helps us both get our house in order, first, locally, and then spread more nationally later. >> This is Leann with Explore Minnesota. I just want to ask the question because we're getting close to actually map out recommendations formally. So, understanding how promotion and education either overlaps with what DNR already does with the Minnesota audience and what explore Minnesota already does for both Minnesota audiences and out of state. Is this above and beyond? Is this duplication? What makes this different? >> Aaron: Hansi, what want me to try to answer that? >> Hansi: Sure. If you want to start and then I can follow up. >> Aaron: You should start. You go first. I'll follow. >> Hansi: Okay. So, I would say, yes, there probably are some things that are duplicative within that idea, but as we've heard earlier in some of the previous meetings and listening to other people speaking, there is a feeling of, of course, not having done enough to reach out to enough and different types of people. So I think especially when I'm going back to point number 2, just the idea that we still are not hearing that we are a welcoming kind of place for all types of people to come outdoors. So there's obviously a lot of work that can be done there, both in our state but also nationally. And I feel like point number 2 specifically kind of gives us this opportunity to be leaders in that and to actually create that culture. So there's certainly great things that are being done, both in the DNR and in Explore Minnesota, but I think we can magnify those and take those on and go even further. Is that a good way to -- [ indiscernible ] >> Aaron: I think you nailed it. The only thing I would add is that from -- and this is only from a tourism communication standpoint. So, please, only judge what I'm about to say through it. But if we look at all the different states in the country, we all have our inventory of things. And to some degree or another, we're all going to promote our inventory of things in our way. We have lakes, we have trees, we have fish, we have mountain bike trails, whatever. Oregon has oceans, they have trees. And pretty much every state promotes their inventory. But in this case, and I wouldn't suggest doing it now, because we're not there yet, we'd be promoting something that we have work to do on yet of understanding this culture that we need to create, it maybe isn't there yet. From what I heard, it isn't there yet. And I think we have to -- there's got to be a whole 'nother group on what is this culture and how are we promoting it. But pretend we're in the future and that culture is there to the point where we feel like we can tell our neighboring cities and countries about this culture, then you have the opportunity to speak the culture first and use the inventory as a secondary thing. And people are going to feel welcomed. And, by the way, you have 10,000 plus lakes. And I've never seen tourism or anything done that way. But it starts first by going back to the hard discussions of -- and we heard a couple of meetings ago -- I don't feel safe in the outdoors, and that's where the meeting starts and that's where you build up a new culture, and it doesn't mean just because you say something, it will be that way, it will take time to build it, but what a wonderful thing to start building. >> Hey, everyone, this is -- >> Greg: Go ahead. Mark: Sure, Greg. This is Mark Norquist. I'll just jump in. I'm not part of the coordination group. I agree with everything I've heard so far. This is great stuff. I think you guys did some awesome work. And in terms of, I guess, maybe thinking about what Leann had mentioned, I think that is the big question is, how does it all work together? But being part of the promotion and public awareness task group, I think you'll see a lot of consistency in the themes here, and maybe what's a little bit different, I think, like point 2, talking about the culture and what's great about that, I think it goes beyond just, let's say, a tourism campaign or something like that. And that is the question, how do we truly influence the outdoor culture, the broader culture in Minnesota, and focus on the outdoors to be more inclusive. And I think it's a bigger challenge than just what we do from a marketing and a promotion standpoint. So I guess that's one thought in reaction to that question. >> Greg: Mark, just to follow up on that. I view it as a little bit of a quality of life issue, I mean, a quality of life for Minnesota. Whereas, tourism, and, again, this is not an antitourism statement or anything like that because we all love and need and depend on tourism and want that, want people to come here. But we view this task force, at least I do, a little bit as more broadly than that, where it's also public lands, it's also free, it's also something that all Minnesotans should engage in. So I think of it as a little bit of a distinction between economic development and quality of life. And not that the two are not interlinked. They are. But the quality of life is more where that statement is coming from. That's it. >> John: Gratia, this is John Edman, I'd like to ask a question a little bit different from the topic than we've been talking about. And I was just wanting a little bit of clarification. You know, last legislative discussion, there was a lot of discussion about creating an office and there was a request that we put total -- Explore Minnesota put together a fiscal note behind it about how to fund and staff this office and it was really kind of hard to do that based on such broad goals and priorities. And that's what we hoped to get out of this task force. And this may come later as a later part of this discussion. But the point about funding and staffing this office, was there any discussion about what that means? And the reason I'm asking is just that this is a very important time for various state agencies to start to put in budget requests and things like that with a lot of those deadlines coming right up in the next couple weeks. So, was there any further discussion about what that means, funding and staffing, how big are we talking about or how little? >> Aaron: Greg, this is Aaron, do you want me to tackle that one here? >> Greg: I'll give it a shot here. John, I don't think we had specific discussions about that, except to say, generally, that we would want it to be funded and staffed. You know, we didn't, like, throw out numbers or structure or anything here. I don't know if, Hansi, or other people agree with me, but we didn't, at least to my knowledge, we didn't get down to numbers, per se. >> Aaron: John, I would say, the thing to do would be to get to the end of all the recommendations and then see, well, if these are all the recommendations, what kind of organizational structure are we really looking at? Because that's probably the best way to understand, like some states had a one person -- that we heard from, one person doing all of it. When we hear what Minnesota's recommending, is that even possible with one person? And building a budget based on the goals versus building a budget. That's how I was thinking when I heard these words. >> John: Yeah, thank you, Aaron. That makes perfect sense to me that we need to get towards the end to see what all this looks like and what the full recommendations are. But I guess -- I guess my perspective is, and this is not from administration, it's not a reflection of what's going on with state revenues being down, et cetera, but I would skip -- I mean, if we want this to really accomplish what we're all laying out to accomplish, it should not just be one, you know, $50,000 investment for a staff person that's not going to be -- we're not going to be able to succeed if we try to do it that way. I think we have to think a little bit bigger and assume that it's going to be reduced at some point, but let's not be too shy at this point. Anyway, we'll wait for that until later. But that's obviously on my mind as we're putting together budgets. Thank you. >> Gratia: Thanks, everyone, for the great discussion, related to the coordination team's draft recommendations. I'll open it up for last call before we move on to promotion and public awareness. All right. We'll move on. Again, we will have an opportunity once we hear from everyone to kind of come back if there's anything somebody wants to say a little bit later down the line. But with that, I will pass it over to promotion and public awareness. >> Joe: Good morning, everybody. And I think what we'll do is, I'll just read through, you know, what we've come up with and then give the rest of the group an opportunity to chime in and to add color for it and then we can certainly open it up to the big group as well. Let's rock. You know, for our vision statement, we came up with, you know, distinguish and hone a cohesive, modern, and widely-heard voice for the outdoors in Minnesota. I'm going to read it again because there's -- covers a lot of area. Distinguish and hone a cohesive, modern, and widely-heard voice for the outdoors in Minnesota. Okay. Next slide, please. So we came up with ten points, ten draft recommendations. Let me just buzz through them. Remember, this is us boiling down our SWOT analysis based on, you know, everybody having a chance to, you know, add comments to it, et cetera. For number 1, unite Minnesota's fractured outdoor community and industry by promoting shared dialogue on challenges and opportunities and identifying new ways to promote a bigger outdoor experience together in Minnesota. And I'm going to remind everybody to mute your lines if you're not muted. There's some background noise. Number 2, develop cohesive messaging and form a cohesive voice. Number 3, new mediums, media appropriate to reach target audiences. We need to make sure that we are identifying who we're trying to reach and what's the best way to communicate, make sure that we're doing our best to reach them that way. Number 4, apps and mobile-first strategies for maps, brochures, and collateral. Again, technology, using technology, making sure we're on the cutting edge. Number 5, establish new narratives for Minnesota outdoors. Number 6, develop outreach to new groups. Number 7, work for perceptual parity of outdoors, compared to other interests. Number 8, eliminate overlap and inefficiencies within state agencies. Number 9, increased funding to properly staff or achieve goals. And finally, number 10, establish a working group or office for outdoor recreation. You notice we didn't label exactly what this might look like, but we thought there would be advantages to having some type of an outdoor recreation dedicated person, group, office, whatever the case might be. So, with that, I want to open it up to everybody who's part of the promotions and public awareness group to fill in with some color. Mark: Joe, this is Mark. I'll just add, as being part of this group, you know, I hope everyone agrees, I think we've got it distilled down to a good set of points. And I just sort of follow on from the last conversation. I think the point number 1, from my standpoint, is the key piece here, and that is, how do we -- I think this is a way that we can address point number 2 of the previous discussion on coordination when it talks about culture. And I think one of the ways to do that is to bring together the various interests in the outdoor community, and I think an entity within the state, the working group or the office, is the only entity that could do this and really bring the diverse groups together so that there's shared appreciation and respect and an opportunity to both address some of the challenges today and tap into the opportunities that exist for the future. So that's just some comments I wanted to add on from that. >> Joe: Thanks, Mark. Stephen, Aaron, Megan, comments? Comments from anybody? There is a lot of overlap, isn't there, in many areas. [ Overlapping conversation ] >> Greg: Go ahead, Megan. >> Megan: Sorry. Yeah. I think that, you know, as I've been listening to all the groups, I think my only -- my concern for all of this is, is that, as you can see, there's a lot of overlap and a little bit of redundancy. And, so, my only cautionary tale for this group is, sometimes I think we try to reinvent the wheel, and I don't think we need to reinvent the wheel. I think that we just need to maybe utilize the agencies that are already doing some of this work better. And I think that there just needs to be maybe better communication between those agencies. Yeah. That's all I have to say. >> This is Lynnea. And one of the observations that I've had maybe even with the last group and this is something I'm really for is recognizing that to accomplish the things that many of us are talking about, especially those shared things, it's going to take more than just, in my thought, what I like, what I'm really for is having private and public partnerships and, so, one of the things I wonder about is I think having worked most of my career in large public institutions, public, private and citizen partnerships are often challenging and not done because the system's not really set up to do that always well. And while the public agencies and institutions support a significant amount of space and effort and opportunity for connecting to the outdoors, private companies, businesses, and individuals also make up a very significant, if not a majority of the way that people are going to interact with the outdoors, from deciding to buy gear, to go around their block, or to go to a private resort or campground, and the opportunity there. So the one thing that I really like about this conversation, because I'm a huge proponent of the work of the DNR and think that they are innovative and doing amazing things, is that we also need private citizens and private companies to join in that effort, and that's, to me, what has been super exciting about all of this conversation and what I'm really for. >> Greg: I agree with what Lynnea just said. And also the idea of working with the agencies. We're not here to create, you know, new things without a purpose or with muddy purposes. And I think that Aaron's point earlier, hopefully that will come out as part of the recommendations. But I was curious, Joe, about number 7 here, work for perceptual parity of outdoors, compared to other interests. What specifically do you mean by that, if you could elaborate a little bit? >> Joe: I'll open up to my groups. Guys, would you like to chime in? Mark: Yeah, this is Mark, Greg. I believe the general theme of what we're talking about there is looking at the economics. And, so, you know, a lot of the conversation that's been happening as we've quantified and qualified the size of the outdoor recreational industry nationally in the last few years, I think is looking at it so that when it comes to -- I think it quickly goes to the conversations that might be happening in St. Paul. [ note caller ] That there's an appreciation for the economic driver of the outdoor space and what recreation provides to the economy. So I think that's the primary thrust of what we meant with that point. But anyone else in the group, if you want to add to that. >> Joe: Good comments, Mark. I think this goes back to the conversation that we had, you know, right now, we have a lot of different individual interests within outdoor recreation. And when we talk about St. Paul, you know, the legislature and budgets, it would behoove the outdoor recreation industry to come together with all of our different interests and to be a larger group that would be more variety, potentially more budget and if it makes sense, go back to our individual interests once we have budget for outdoor recreation in Minnesota and, of course, that would get divided, whether it's the office, whether it's different activities, whatever. But right now we feel like we might be getting missed, for as important as outdoor recreation is in Minnesota, I think there's a sense that we're maybe not getting our due budget for how important it is. Mark: Yeah, Joe, just to add on to that, and, Greg, to your question, this is where the connection is with point 1. Our belief is that the outdoor community, it does operate in a very fractured way today. And I think that contributes exactly to what Joe just said. So, if we're working together, not only can we address some of those cultural challenges and necessities, but we also then have a louder voice in St. Paul if there's a better unified voice. >> Greg: That makes sense to me and I agree with that. >> Gratia: Any other comments or questions for the promotion and public awareness work group? All right. Thank you to that work group for your draft recommendations and the conversation and verification questions. We will move on, I think next we have stewardship and conservation up next. So with that, I will pass it to Elliot. >> Elliot: Good morning, everybody. So we have been extremely busy and our little group didn't get to meet but we kind of sent out an email to everything. But we came up with two vision statements. We need to as a state take greater responsibility in preserving and maintaining our many great natural outdoor resources for our future generations because this is the only Minnesota they will have. Another one, to educate, promote, encourage the Minnesota value of taking care of our great Minnesota outdoors, so that it will continue to provide the outdoor experiences that heal us, comfort us, feed us, challenge us, excite us and amaze us. These are the two vision statements we came up with. As far as other information, kind of stood with what we originally came up with as the group for our outdoor recreation. But, sure, I'd like to open it up, if anybody else would like to add. >> Hansi: Yeah, hey, this is Hansi speaking. First off, I just want to apologize. I'll take the stance of Aaron earlier in the fact that we -- I highly value the idea of stewardship and conservation and we've just been having a hard time getting together. And I just want to put my energy to get behind this and get it movin' again, so hopefully we can get our group back together and dig deeper into this. Sorry to put you in that spot, Elliot. >> Elliot: No problem. I've been -- what is it -- three federal grants that our little two-person office have been getting together. So we've been extremely busy. I know everybody else is. This is a busy time of year where we're trying to get everything done before wintertime. But hopefully, you know, coming up soon we can get together and work on some of the more... >> Mark: Following along with the Hansi and Aaron theme, I will just say we have just not been able to get this organized. The only thing I would add on this, you know, for the larger group and discussion purposes, if it helps, is, you know, I think direction where we're heading is a very, you know, big-picture view of why conservation is important to the health of our state and our people. And I think there are also practical aspects that need to be part of this that follow on from that larger vision. And that is, as an example, how are we, practically speaking, going to fund conservation in the future? Given that we have trend lines with current participation in different areas that are showing that we're going to have some real challenges going forward. And, so, I think that's one thing that we'll want to follow out of this vision statement is practically speaking, how do we ensure the future of conservation and stewardship funding. So I'd just add that piece to it. Again, apologies that we haven't been able to get together, you guys. >> This is Lynnea. And I just wanted to share, the first statement you read was absolutely beautiful. And I think captured so much of how I feel about conservation and even articulated some things I wouldn't have had words for. So I just want to say thank you for sharing that. And also to the last comments, really echo, in the metro area, in the comprehensive plans that the M.E.T. Council has seen, I'm really concerned about -- we're planning -- communities are planning for less green space. And I don't know -- we're working at trying to get together a holistic picture of that. I don't know that they know. And, so, that's something that the benefit of the M.E.T. Council can help folks see here is a broader regional trend that we're planning for. It's not in place. But I just can't speak enough to the importance of really taking that seriously and the need for cross-sector partnerships around that and also I think one of the things is to ensure that the DNR is resourced appropriately, that the legacy funds are honored, and that, you know, we're taking advantage of the opportunities we have with the agencies we have in place but protecting them as well. And, unfortunately, the trend has been to reduce funding and legacy funds are supplanting the budget for our natural resource agencies and that's problematic. So for the regions you just mentioned. So I just wanted to throw in I believe that's super important work and concur. >> Gratia: Were there any other thoughts to offer the conservation and stewardship work group before we move on? All right. And, you know, again, no worries on not being able to get together. I know people have a lot on their plates right now and just these days in general. So I will just say, though, that as we, you know, move into October, we are approaching our kind of deadline of December for getting those final recommendations to the DNR and Explore Minnesota. So perhaps we can rally after this meeting today to map out a plan that works to develop some draft recommendations in time for our next meeting. But with that, we will move on, next we have the access work group. So I will hand it off to that team. >> Katy: Hi, everyone, this is Katy Friesz. Good morning. And I'll just jump in first and really do invite everyone from the access group to please jump in and add and correct where needed. So, for our access vision statement, we put together the following. Partner with Black, Indigenous, and People of Color, people with disabilities, people with low income, and LGBTQ community cross-sector leaders to co-create Minnesota's sustainable outdoor recreation ecosystem, to realize market potential and prioritize equitable access, safety and joy for all. And, so, a piece that I'll just share about the intent and intention around getting specific in the vision statement. I know previous conversations also -- I think with the coordination group and others -- do specifically name some different populations that we want to make sure that we're connecting with and that was a piece of why and how we got to including with specificity some of the groups of individuals and stakeholders that we want to make sure that we center. We also really are interested in leading with people and, so, that is another reason that the people that we mention are centered first and foremost. So we'll have some opportunity here, of course, to dig into the vision statement, but for now, I think I'll ask Gratia to go forward into the recommendations and then we can open it up for the rest of the group as well as the broader team. So our recommendations are to create bipartisan, independent, representative, and inclusive coordinating -- I'm sorry -- create bipartisan, independent, representative and inclusive coordinating entity to facilitate cross-sector collaboration to advance outdoor recreation and equity in Minnesota. We also recommend co-creating plans, removing barriers and improving cultural relevance with those who have been disproportionately excluded from outdoor recreational experiences, such as individuals with disabilities, Black, Indigenous, and People of Color, individuals with lower financial resources or education, and LGBTQ communities. We recommend to invest in outdoor infrastructure, such as increasing boat ramps, campground modernization, and wifi connectivity, and outdoor accessibility. Also increase diversity, equity, and inclusion regarding hiring and retention practices in both private and public outdoor recreation sectors. Develop sliding scale fees for outdoor recreation activities and park access. In addition, develop low-cost transportation options for local, regional and state parks. Another recommendation is to encourage the private sector to recognize the market potential of underrepresented audiences and approach these audiences with an asset-based lens. And, finally, we recommend that we specify barriers that exist to outdoor access and enjoyment. For example, regardless of cost, lack of culturally and gender-relevant outdoor equipment and apparel can be a barrier. So, you know, for example, one of the discussion points was around finding heated gloves, for example, sized for men versus specific to women or other outdoor apparel sizing, limited availability of women's bicycle seats, et cetera. So you can see that it runs -- the recommendations run a gamut. We definitely want to make sure that our recommendations, again, come across with specificity around populations and stakeholders that we want to make sure are centered in the process and in co-creating the future of Minnesota's outdoor recreation. We also want to make sure that we are not losing sight of access from an infrastructure standpoint. So making sure that all folks are able to access campgrounds or, you know, have adequate number of boat launches from a participation and access standpoint that we have the infrastructure investment that we need in order to make sure that folks are able to utilize our great outdoor spaces. And then I think one other thing that I'll amplify and then ask others to jump in on is, this concept in the second-to-the-last bullet point of approaching communities and partners with an asset-based lens, I think that's a really crucial opportunity for us in this cross-sector space where we are able to really, you know, not always potentially take a deficit lens, but make sure that we are honoring the expertise and talent and, you know, market potential as well of some of the populations that we call out in specificity here and just our broader Minnesota -- group of Minnesota outdoor enthusiasts. So with that, I will pause and let anyone from the outdoor access -- the access team jump in and amplify other points or clarify. So please feel free to do that. Or, of course, if others from other groups have questions, please also jump in. >> Gratia: Does anybody have any comments or questions for the access team based on either their vision statement or their suite of draft recommendations? >> Greg: This is Greg. I have a comment -- I don't know if it's a question or not. But the co-creating plans part to remove barriers and improve -- the second bullet point -- by the way, excellent, excellent job here. I just can't say how strongly I feel about that one because the idea of building, they will come, isn't really necessarily true here. And this really correlates, I think, with our group's bullet about creating a welcoming culture, it's stated differently and implementationwise, perhaps. But just in my experience, it is about actually putting together the plans and the programs and inviting people and getting them to enjoy the outdoor recreation. So I think that's very important. The second one that just occurred to me when you -- I don't know if it's your fifth bullet point down, develop the sliding scale for outdoor recreation activities and park access. You know, and I don't want to trample on anybody's sacred ground here, but I can just say that in doing things like hunting or fishing within the state, deer hunting, other activities that I've done, you know, within state and county parks and municipal parks and federal parks, there's so many different jurisdictions that it's oftentimes very confusing, you know, and you go out today, you can go out in the outdoors and feel like you're somehow breaking a rule or breaking a law. And I think that that actually does form a barrier to access. And it's kind of related to the sliding scale fee for the outdoor recreation activities. But I just wanted to put that point out there. And all well intentioned and all with the best goals of resource management, perhaps, but from a user's point of view who's not necessarily paying attention to whether you're in a Washington County park or a Hennepin County park or a state park it can get very confusing. So I'll just mute myself here. >> Mark: This is Mark Norquist, I'll just add on to what Greg just said. I think the fifth bullet of the fees, I don't know if, necessarily, it's -- I think there's a factor in there of what the cost is, in other words, is it too high or too low. But I think Greg touches on, in my mind, the more important issue, and that is the potential confusion, complexity around permitting and licensing of the outdoor activities. I think that is an issue that should be looked at comprehensively with an eye to how do we simplify it so that you don't have to be studying up hours and hours on end to understand whether you are going to be operating within the bounds of what's allowed or not. I think cost is one factor that should be looked at. But I think also the complexity. Great job on this. Just really well done. So thanks so much. >> Katy: Yeah, this is Katy. That's a great -- both comments are really great points of input. And I think you're right, it's bigger than potentially developing sliding scale fees, but I really like building on that and kind of figuring out how we could potentially through communication and coordination, you know, ideally or hopefully try to streamline a little bit just to create more simplicity for folks. >> Gratia: Thanks so much, Katy, and the access work group for your recommendations. And Greg and Mark, for your questions. Not hearing any other folks chiming in, we will move on to our last suite of draft recommendations from the economic development team. So with that, I'll pass it on to you all. >> Matt: Hey, good morning, everybody, this is Matt Gruhn. Can you hear me okay? >> Gratia: Yes, sir. >> Matt: Likewise, I can run through this, but I'd just encourage any of our work group members to chime in and provide any other additional commentary. Then we can open it up here at the end for conversation. But our vision statement is here. Unite and invest in Minnesota's resources to drive a world-class outdoor economy that facilitates universal and equitable access, promotion, awareness, stewardship, and conservation. So bringing the financial equation, the economic equation to the coordination of all of these groups and so forth. So our vision statement there, if you want to flip to the next slide, I'll walk through the points. So item number 1 here, bring together the outdoor recreation stakeholders and resources to collaborate on behalf of our shared parks, forests, trails, transportation corridors, and destinations. And I think it was Lynnea a little bit ago who mentioned the partnership, the collaboration, the public/private partnership approach and that sort of thing. Definitely part of this you can see, subbullet letter a. Letter b there, ensure all of Minnesota's varied geographies and landscapes are positioned as equal tenants within Minnesota's brand. Urban, rural, forests, prairies and grasslands, waters, restorative and reclaimed lands as well. And then c, share resources, wisdom, best practices, kind of a merging of silos of that content. And then d, we wrote in here, seek to see the unseen, hear the unheard, and always question the status quo. So bringing together all of those stakeholders to collaborate. All right. And then number 2, lean out, simplify, make effective the system of both information creation and information sharing that is intended for the consumption of Minnesota residents. So, bullet a here, create a pathway to get government communication out of government circles, make this communication mainstream content any Minnesota resident can find, knows where to find it, without having to go search for it on Google. B, create powerful metrics of every dollar spent on the outdoors equals X for both Minnesota residents, being the primary goal, and Minnesota businesses, being the secondary goal. C, creating a path where economic development within Minnesota's outdoors has the ability to have an economic impact for our residents as well as our businesses. Item d, make better known the plan, the scholar, that we talked about here in the past meeting, Minnesota outdoors is being created from, position and reference the plan, as decisions are being made and on an ongoing basis. Refresh communication tools, prioritizing digital, to speak the language of the 21st century mobile customer. The example we used is an app for Minnesota's outdoors, where you can find all your maps, your regulations, permits, licenses, that sort of thing. All of which could be purchasable through that app. All right. Number 3, establish communication partners to help distribute Minnesota's positioning statement, the Minnesota brand to the unique, niche, target audiences outside of Minnesota as well. Do more with less through communication partnership creation. At the local, regional, state, and national, and even the international level. And then item 4, and this, again, other groups have touched on this as well, but this is kind of where it all comes together, where it's all coordinated. An office of outdoor recreation exists that can coordinate, create, design, implement, and deliver upon these goals. We've talked here in today's meeting and past meetings about the overlap and about, you know, is this new, is this a different entity, so forth. This is the entity that can help pull it all together, make sure that we're not duplicating efforts and so forth. So, item A, fund and staff this office appropriately prioritizing Minnesota residents first. Build real relationships and unity among the varied and different outdoor recreation groups and industry within Minnesota. And then, c, seek to understand and deploy economic development tools and investments where the outcome and the end product has the ability to first build the economy of all of Minnesota's residents first and businesses and industry second. And I think that's it. So, anybody from this work group have anything to add or any other commentary on any of the points here? All right. How about from the rest of the task force, any other questions or comments, thoughts? >> Gratia: All right. If there's no specific questions for the economic development team, I thought it would be good to kind of open it up for general reflections now that we've seen kind of the suite of draft recommendations, what you all are noticing about those or if you have any further comments for any teams who presented earlier on. I did try and create -- may be a little small to see -- I'm going to pull up a new screen -- where I tried to put all the draft recommendations on one page. So let's see how this goes. It is pretty small but I can zoom in and out if it is helpful. So, again, very small and probably even smaller on your own screen. But if it helps to see the recommendations side by side, here's the suite we have from each of the work groups. Does anyone have any overall reflections or thoughts they want to share with the work group? As kind of a reminder of what's going to happen after this meeting is hopefully we'll have a group that will get together and dig through all of these and really see where those overlaps are and see where things can be collated and streamlined and maybe wordsmithed a little bit to create more of a cohesive package of recommendations that we will put forth for -- to do some public engagement with to get more feedback on. So if that's helpful to know going into this conversation, that's what will happen next. >> Katy: This is Katy. I'll just share that I think, you know, it's really helpful to see every group's vision statements. I think we'll be in a good spot from, you know, either grand visioning or the next group that comes together. I think what's promising, one of the things that's promising to me are that there are some clear themes of overlap that are coming through, as recommendations from each group. Excuse me. So I think that's helpful and then, of course, our challenge will be to make sure with the rest of the recommendations enough of the kind of specificity -- or flavor of each of the groups comes through. But I guess I would just say one of the things that strikes me in the vision statements, I think there's opportunity to come together and move toward those pieces. So well done, groups. I mean, and I think it's always a long process and challenging process to collaborate and come to clarity, but I do think we're getting there. >> Gratia: Thanks, Katy. Anyone else want to offer any insights or thoughts? And to all of our staff, whether, you know, our chairs or other staff on the call, please feel free to offer your reflections or questions if you have them as well. >> This is Randolph. Just real quick, I don't have any questions, just a statement, quick statement. I think this is a great start. I just want to thank everyone again for the work you've dedicated during these very busy and uncertain months that we've been working on this. Your passion for the subject is really clear and it shows through in the effort you put towards this and the recommendations you put forward. This is really difficult to do remotely. It's hard enough to do when we're all sitting in a room face to face, but to do it on a computer away from each other is really hard and I just want to thank everyone and all the staff who have put so many hours to bring this together. I'm really excited going forward with these recommendations to start looking at the overlaps that we have amongst the recommendations. And not only overlaps to recommendations, but also overlaps amongst activities that the agencies might already be involved in that the task force might not know about or the public might not know about. So, I'm looking forward to that discussion. I'm also looking forward to the discussion that's probably the foundational discussion when we want to present a final product is the actionable versus aspirational discussion. Which recommendations are actionable, which recommendations are aspirational, and if we are aspirational, how do we turn them actionable. Obviously, if you want recommendations that don't just sit on a shelf and actually have the potential for making change, we must ensure that those recommendations, the balance of those recommendations favors actionable and ideally builds momentum to be aspirational. So that's a conversation that's going to be really exciting in the coming months. I look forward to it. This is a great start. I just want to say, thanks again to everybody. >> Gratia: Thanks, Randolph. All right. I'm not hearing anything else, we can keep chugging along here. Again, I want to echo Randolph's thank you to the work groups for all of your hard work over the last months of this process. And it is really exciting to kind of see all of your thoughts and discussions come together in the form of recommendations. So I'm going to pull the PowerPoint back up. And I briefly touched on this. But between now and October, our next meeting is also on the 21st, the 21st of October, we will need a group of you all, a small group, to meet to kind of sort through these draft recommendations, to provide a final suite of draft recommendations that we will put out for our public review, so we do need volunteers. You know, the staff have discussed and we really feel that it's super important that this work is carried forward by you all since you all have been the ones to have the conversations and develop the recommendations. So there shouldn't be -- unless your work group wants to further refine any of the recommendations you put forth today, there really won't be any work group work in between now and October 21st. So, it would be great to get a small group of volunteers who would be willing to get together probably rather quickly to start sorting. I don't anticipate it being a huge lift. You know, probably a couple meetings to go through these recommendations. But it would be good to get a start now, just so we kind of can anticipate, not be rushed as we get closer to October 21st. So, it would be great now in this meeting to get some folks to commit to that. I got an email from Greg, which made me really happy this morning, that he has stepped up to the plate to work on this effort. But I'd like to open it up to see if there would be anybody else who would be interested in going through all the draft recommendations to create kind of the final suite. >> Matt: Gratia, you can add me to the group. >> Gratia: Thank you, Matt. >> This is Steve. You can add me to the group. Just as an idea, I wonder if it would be a good idea to have one person from every group to be a part of that small group. >> Gratia: Yeah, I think that would be a good idea, Steve. So, Matt, you are on economic development. Greg is on -- I know some of you are on a couple. And, Steve, can you remind me of the work groups you sit on? Steve: On the coordinating. >> Gratia: Okay. Anybody from promotion, access or stewardship willing to work on this? >> Aaron: And if no one else from promotion would like to, I'll raise my hand. >> This is Lynnea, I'm willing to if there aren't others from my group. >> Mary: I'm willing, too, I'm from the conservation and stewardship or the access groups. >> Gratia: Thank you, Lynnea, Mary and Aaron. So we'll assume that it's Greg, Matt, Steve, Aaron, Lynnea, Mary for now, and if other people want to join in that effort, I think that's okay. I really really appreciate you all stepping up to do this work. I know, you know, we've said this several times today, but there's a lot going on, so I really appreciate and value your time. And Andrew Korsberg and I are happy to be supportive in any way we can, whether it's setting up a meeting for you all or helping get something scheduled. So I'll send an email to kind of help start coordinating this work and you can utilize us as you'd like to help get that work done. So thank you for that. Are there any questions related to that before we move on? I think next we'll get a public engagement update from Randolph. >> Yeah, hi, this is Perry. I'm wondering for all the task force members, if we just take a look at the recommendations and maybe send to the subgroup that you're forming, maybe our top three actionable steps, maybe that helps the subgroup, you know, come together better or just you get more input. Just a thought. >> Gratia: Yeah, Perry. Thank you. Thank you for chiming in with that idea. I think, you know, that probably would be helpful for the work group. So what I could do is I can -- you can either send those to me and I can forward them on or else, yeah, that's probably the easiest way. So for task force members as kind of a to-do in the next week or so wouldn't mind sending me their top three priorities for recommendations, I will forward that on to this team so that can help in their process as they sort through the recommendations. Great idea, Perry. Well, we will move on. Randolph, I will pass it over to you to give a public engagement update to the task force. Randolph: Sure. I've got a barking dog right now, though. So if he joins the conversation, just know that that's the case. [ dog is barking ] So, yeah, for public engagement, so I circulated an email last week or two weeks ago. I just wanted to quickly summarize here on the meeting. So basically our goal is to bring in voices from outside of the task force to take a look at the draft recommendations that you all are developing and offer input or feedback. What they like, what they don't like, what's missing. That kind of thing. Very high-level type feedback. Because it's incredibly valuable to get as many voices into this discussion as possible. So our goal is to do two types of engagement. One so-called formal, the other a bit more informal. The formal would be broken into two kind of scoping categories. The first would be a general discussion. So we would do a public invite basically to join a session, probably on Skype or a different platform if we have it at the time, for about an hour where we can spend the first 20 minutes or staff at EMT or DNR can spend the first 20 minutes just explaining what the recommendations are, how we reached them, and then for the remainder of the time open it up to anyone who has comments or feedback. And that's completely general, completely open to anyone in the public that's interested. I think our platforms can host between 200 some people at a time. And, so, if the demand is high, we can do more than one. We can do -- we can put together some other opportunities. The second scope is a bit smaller scope. So possibly doing a handful of small group public engagement opportunities where you've got -- you proactively reach out to a group who has similar interests, 10 to 12, 15 people, and just sit down for another hour and kind of -- provide the opportunity to get a little bit more into the weeds, to discuss some more finer points of the recommendations, if necessary. And, so, that would be our kind of formal approach. The informal approach, we're thinking about possibly putting together a link that can be shared by task force members to your networks, basically say, hey, this is what I've been working on. We would really love your input. Go to this link, you can fill out a survey, you can look at the recommendations, let us know what you think. That would be a bit more informal. So, we're just looking for ways to get the public's voice involved in the process and I think as far as the time frame, we're looking, since we plan to have at least, quote, unquote, final draft recommendations, there's still drafts, by the end of October, we're hoping to do these public engagement opportunities throughout November so that we can bring all of the feedback back to this group and hopefully work to get a final product by that time. So that's the basic approach. We had a few asks of the task force. One being if you're interested in joining the public engagement subgroup to help plan these out, we'd love to have you. It's always open. Just shoot me a note or a text or whatever, or Gratia or Andrewment and the second ask was basically for these small group discussions with like interest, if you can think of -- if you think of groups that we need to approach, let us know. It can be -- I think I sent a list around of possibles. But it's completely open. So just let us know again. Door's always open. Give me a call, send a text, on email, whatever. So, yeah, and if you have any questions, I can answer them -- or I can try to answer them right now. If not, we'll just keep movin' forward with this effort. That's all I have as far as an update. >> Gratia: Thanks, Randolph. I'll open it up for a moment to see if there's any questions or comments based on what Randolph just shared. All right. I'm not hearing anything. We'll just move along. So here's a review of the timeline. We've got that small group of volunteers, thanks again, who will work over the next month or so to collate and refine draft recommendations with the input from you all by sharing your kind of top three recommendations. We'll meet in October to finalize that set of draft recommendations. Do public engagement towards the end of October and throughout November. And then spend some time finalizing the recommendations before we submit that final suite of recommendations to the DNR and Explore Minnesota in December. So, not too much time left here, but still a lot to do. So should keep us pretty busy. And, so, that is the plan. I think next on the agenda we have some time for public Q & A. Let me just pull up a participant box to see if we have any members of the public on the call today. I don't think we do. So probably not going to be any public comment or questions. But we are recording this so if members of the public do have comments, they can always send an email to MORTF.DNR@state.mn.us and I'd be happy to forward those on to the task force to consider kind of as we're moving forward. So that is actually all we had for today. Thank you, all, for all the work you did ahead of this meeting and for all the great conversation and questions you all had for one another today. >> John: Gratia, this is John Edman, I just want to echo my thanks to all of the participants. I know that there's a lot of time everyone has put into this process, sometimes it's considered long and bureaucratic and you have many other things to do and I just want you to know how much I personally appreciate all of your involvement with this and I also want to thank you, Gratia, for all of your work for keeping us on track. We couldn't do it without you. So, thank you, Gratia. >> Gratia: Thank you, John. So, with that, I think the meeting is adjourned. Again, always feel free to call me or send me an email should you have any ideas or questions. And with that, we will be in touch shortly regarding next steps and that October meeting. Thanks for your time this morning, everyone. >> Thank you. >> Greg: Thank you, Gratia and everyone. >> Thanks, Gratia. >> Thank you. >> Thanks, everyone. >> Have a good day, thanks. >> Thank you. DISCLAIMER This text is being provided in a lightly edited draft format. Any reproduction, publication, or other use of this CART file without the express written consent of the captioner is strictly prohibited. Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) is provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility, and this lightly edited CART file may not be a totally verbatim record of the meeting. Due to the live nature of the meeting, some names and/or terms may be misspelled. This text may also contain phonetic attempts at sounds and words that were spoken, and environmental sounds that occurred during the meeting.