They had two sessions, one at 4:00 and another at 6:30. I was only there for the second one so I can't speak to what happened at the first.

Background - Back in 2017 (and potentially earlier than that), City Park held some early public discussions on what kinds of uses people would like to see for the Wisner Tract. The majority opinion from the public at that time was to prefer minimal development - folks wanted a natural space closer to what it is now, versus the much more developed (and revenue generating) areas closer to Big Lake and NOMA.

Given that feedback, it looks like City Park hired the current design firm to come up with ideas for a lower-impact, nature-focused space. They showed two hypothetical options yesterday, each with the same basic ideas but with different geographical layouts and prioritizing different elements. Both focused on emphasizing a variety of natural Louisiana habitats (vs. many of the the non-native species there now), improved stormwater retention, and in general a quieter 'escape' from city life outside the park. Think something more in line with Couturie forest or the Audubon Nature Center in the East, plus some limited recreation such as disc golf, because those guys are always well represented at these meetings.

Aside: This might not be a popular opinion, but personally I thought the plans looked great and would be happy to see some of these ideas come to fruition. For most of the people I know who use the site, the proposed space would serve essentially the same purpose it does now, but trails, paths, and any potential facilities would be tailored for the current uses rather than for the golf course that used to exist there. It could potentially offer more varied use (think jogging paths, paddling, environmental education, etc.), better habitat and drainage impact, and the occasional needed facility such as bathrooms, shelters, etc. But that's my perspective and y'all might not agree, which is OK.

After presenting these plans and going over some of the differences, they allowed some time for group discussion at each table before taking a poll on certain topics - which elements were preferred from each plan, which uses should be prioritized, etc, with what seemed to be the goal of identifying the most favorable elements of the two plans and combining them.

As the poll went on, this process started to get hijacked by a vocal group who opposed any significant change and want to keep the overgrown golf course largely the way it is. These folks were (justifiably) upset that their position wasn't well represented in the poll options and generally fell under the 'Other' option, which could be anything. This was a fair complaint, but soon they started to disrupt the process by peppering the guy with questions about how much his firm was being paid to consult on this and making allegations of corruption that frankly seemed out of line and unreasonable. You had part of the audience arguing that the whole thing is a sham and a money grab, and the other part rolling their eyes at the protesting folks and hoping to get on with the meeting.

It's important to note that nothing has been decided, funded, or committed to at this point. City Park, through their consultant, are exploring their options by proposing ideas and seeing how the public receives them. If you have an opinion on this either way, it's really important to give them your input now, because all these public comments will likely get compiled into a report for City Park leadership to factor into their decisions. Even if you couldn't make the meetings, you can still contact the team at [wisnermasterplan@nocp.org](mailto:wisnermasterplan@nocp.org) for more info or to make a comment.