The County Parks Committee rejected Resolution 8-25, a request to amend the budget to add $35,000 to the White River Park dog‑park project using higher-than-expected investment income. Committee members debated fence materials, neighbor concerns and long-term maintenance before opposing the increase.

Staff explained the proposal sought additional funds to upgrade the dog‑park fence from galvanized chain link to a vinyl‑coated chain‑link finish that would visually blend with the landscape; staff said the vinyl coating has an expected 20–30 year service life but the coating will wear over time. A staff member described the proposed product as “a plastic coating on it that that does wear down over time” and said the county could get two to three decades of service from the material.

Committee members expressed concern about cost and whether the upgrade would address neighbors’ objections. One committee member said, “I do have a problem with paying twice as per additional more than what we spent with the fence to begin with,” and others noted that the township discussion had included many neighbors objecting to increased dog traffic and visual impacts. Staff said financing would not come from parks operating funds but from the general fund using an identified increase in investment income for the year.

After discussion, the chair called the voice vote. Multiple members voted “nay,” and the chair announced, “Nays have it.” The resolution therefore failed and no budget amendment was adopted. Staff and the committee discussed continuing to pursue lower‑cost options, standard dog‑park rules and signage and to consider additional community outreach on site design and rules.

No formal amendment or alternative funding source was adopted at the meeting.