My 2 cents:  Whatever you do, don't take down any more trees.  The trees are precious and they take decades to cultivate and only hours or minutes to eliminate.  A few years/decades ago a harsh storm moved through this area and took out many trees.  I noticed that.  

I grew up in Lester Park but not near this park.  I didn't even know it was named Washington Park until just now.   

I will defer for more information about the need for more disc golf and tennis courts as I do not really have a strong opinion about this one way or another.  I do think it is good for kids to have positive activities to keep healthy and competitive (for those in sports).   

Are there other parks that might be modified to include tennis courts?  For example, the "Sport court" up on E 7th Street seems like a good candidate for that. It's on the busline and has plenty of parking if youth and families outside the neighborhood want to go there.  And there's a park that could use a facelift.  

Then again, I don't live near either of these parks and I think the immediate neighbors point of views should probably be weighted slightly higher than those of us from other neighborhoods in these matters. 

The Project for Public Spaces in New York City works with communities worldwide to help come up with good plans and processes for developing community spaces and parks.  I would recommend that supporters of this project learn more about PPS and maybe try using some of their processes to come up with a good plan that is likely to result in a public space that is used by many and where everyone who has an opinion feels like their opinion has been valued and incorporated into the process.

The image didn't work, but here is the page for "What makes a successful place?" that I retrieved it from http://www.pps.org/reference/grplacefeat/

It sounds like there is some dispute over whether or not the neighbors have really been involved in the process or not.  Just because a meeting is public doesn't mean that everyone with a valid opinion was at the meeting. As for the park board, I have no idea when the park board meets, how many people regularly attend those meetings?  I have four kids and at least two jobs, sometimes more.  I am sure that the City Council will be happy to re-visit this idea if people raise their voices in support, opposition, or caution on this project.  Right now it sounds like they've said "find the money and neighborhood support and you can get your park."  That's not exactly a ringing endorsement.  

One thing that boosters of this project could do is to take it upon themselves to canvass the neighborhood door-to-door and explain the broad strokes of the idea and ask for input or invite people to another meeting to look at funding or alternatives.  If you look at funding the plan as is, you might not get the financial support that you want.  If you ask for more input and alternatives then the process might take longer. Such is life in a democracy.  But imagine the alternative.  

Also, as this is a public space the neighborhood's input is important, but it is not the only interest to consider.  Parks belong to all of us.  So putting up a blog post here at PDD and using other means to publicize the idea and to invite discussion and stir up support are other good moves.  

Also identifying people with defined interests and expertise to contribute to the development plan, such as Chilly would be another great idea.  Is there a tennis club in the neighborhood with something to contribute?  What about a disc golf league?  How about gardeners and amateur foresters?

Finally, recognizing that the end product should be something that contributes to the community's shared values (whatever those are).  I agree that there are often shockingly better equipped and staffed parks in Twin Cities suburbs than what we have in Duluth, but I believe that Duluth has the most per capita acreage of public green space in the nation.  It is possible that one of our community values is that parks are relatively undeveloped and green. Maybe I don't want my parks to look like the ones in Anoka or St. Paul.  In that case maybe a better idea would be to look at improving a park that already has courts of some kind or a fenced in area, like Portman or the Sport Court, or the Hillside Community Center or a public private partnership with Longview or the school and colleges ...  

I am fine with spending any available amount of money from the city's budget on parks that are well-planned, well-managed and designed with broad community and visitor interests in mind.  So far I am not hearing the case for developing this park.  I am hearing the case for more tennis courts being needed.

Thanks Brian, I wasn't trying to sound unreasonable, sorry.  I was actually trying to be helpful, if you can believe that.  

My guess is that this development isn't going to happen at Washington Square.  Especially not if the organizers don't bend over backwards to incorporate broad feedback and input into the process.  And then, broad support is also likely to generate more funding opportunities both to do the development itself and for ongoing operations.  It sounds like that's what you have found in the Chester Bowl process.  

With everything that I know now the disk golf plan looks like it may be a good idea at this park, but I think that a better case can be made for adding tennis somewhere else.  How about Portman or the old Rockridge school site?  Both of those places are in decline and begging for thoughtful development and improvements.