Longmont City Council Regular Session – March 30, 2021
Note: The following is the output of transcribing from a video recording. Although the transcription, which was done with software, is largely accurate, in some cases it is incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or [software] transcription errors. It is posted as an aid to understanding the proceedings at the meeting, but should not be treated as an authoritative record.
To listen to the meeting alongside a transcript, please visit:
Follow along below, or listen directly here: (pt1: https://otter.ai/u/3ndBJ8rlrsX4pWGewYAYKrqWUHY, pt 2: https://otter.ai/u/pA_k7HUCpvQn9cbbObThrkRi_oA)
Unknown Speaker 0:04
City Council regular session to order. And before we start, do we have all a council here? I’m not seeing Hold on a second here
Unknown Speaker 0:14
Unknown Speaker 0:14
Unknown Speaker 0:19
I’m not seeing Dr. Waters Is he here?
Unknown Speaker 0:22
Select gallery view mayor.
Unknown Speaker 0:24
I am here Mayor Bagley.
Unknown Speaker 0:26
Oh, there he is. I’m on gallery
Unknown Speaker 0:28
Unknown Speaker 0:29
But hold on a second.
Unknown Speaker 0:33
For some reason, I am not seeing it. Anyway, usually I just see I’m seeing everybody. I don’t know how to get rid of that.
Unknown Speaker 0:46
Unknown Speaker 0:47
you seeing Mayor?
Unknown Speaker 0:48
Unknown Speaker 1:30
Absolutely. Mayor Bagley is present. Councilmember Christiansen here. Councilmember Iago fairing. Here. Councilmember Martin?
Unknown Speaker 1:39
Here. Councilmember Peck. Here.
Unknown Speaker 1:42
Mayor Pro Tem Rodriguez.
Unknown Speaker 1:44
Unknown Speaker 1:44
Councilmember waters here. Mayor, you
Unknown Speaker 1:47
have a quorum. All right, great.
Unknown Speaker 1:48
Let’s go ahead and say the pledge. We would like to do that for us tonight. Teacher dogberry. Would you like to do that?
Unknown Speaker 2:00
Unknown Speaker 2:02
Ready, begin. I pledge allegiance. Have you
Unknown Speaker 2:11
and to the republic
Unknown Speaker 2:13
for which it stands. One
Unknown Speaker 2:15
nation, under God, indivisible,
Unknown Speaker 2:18
Unknown Speaker 2:20
and justice. All right,
Unknown Speaker 2:22
thank you. Council Member toggle fairing. Alright, quick reminder, the public anyone wishing to provide public comment during public invited to be heard must watch the live stream of the meeting and then call in when the meeting is open. You’ll call that number you’ll enter that meeting my meeting, Id press pound and then you will be called in pursuant to the last three or four numbers, your phone number. So that said, let’s go ahead. And do we have a motion to approve the minutes of February 23 2021. I will make a note. All right. I will second it. It’s been moved by Councilmember Pac seconded by myself all in favor of passing and approving the February 23 2021 2021. regular session minutes say aye.
Unknown Speaker 3:04
Unknown Speaker 3:06
Opposed say nay. The Motion carries unanimously. Do we have a motion to pass the march 16 2021. regular session minutes. So moved.
Unknown Speaker 3:14
Second. All right. It’s
Unknown Speaker 3:15
been moved by Dr. Waters. Seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Rodriguez. All in favor say aye.
Unknown Speaker 3:21
Aye. Aye. Opposed?
Unknown Speaker 3:25
All right. Motion carries unanimously. All right. Do we have any agenda revisions submission to demand? Okay, Councillor Martin.
Unknown Speaker 3:33
Thank you, Mayor Bagley. This is a little long, but I don’t do this very often. So bear with me. I have three motions. First on the subject of firearm safety. And I’ll try to abridge this a little bit but the city clerk has the full text. While the state of Colorado was recently affirmed by the courts, prohibits a municipality other than Denver for regulating the sale or ownership or carry of firearms. It does offer a local government little limited control over its own public buildings. Today long not forbids open carry of firearms in a city owned or city leased building. Further all weapons are forbidden in the municipal courts, which are equipped with detection devices and staffed during court hours. I’ve checked out the municipal buildings and learned that while the carry prohibition notice is posted on public entrances, it’s small compared to other postings based and faded and sometimes defaced. Most buildings other than that are already well designed for controlling a single entry point. State law allows the broad weapons prohibition now applied to the municipal court only to be applied to any city building if the detection equipment and staffing required are present in the interests of the safety of the public. When x city services and the safety of the staff of the city of Longmont. I moved to direct staff to investigate and bring before counsel on no particular timeline as possible. But on a future agenda, the feasibility of extending broad weapons prohibitions and protections to more city buildings, especially those where large groups of people gather regularly, such as the library Museum, Senior Center and recreation facilities.
Unknown Speaker 5:33
Unknown Speaker 5:37
we you done Councilman Gordon?
Unknown Speaker 5:41
Unknown Speaker 5:42
there’s actually a little more to it, but but it just some extra
Unknown Speaker 5:49
to clarify, just put up a sign larger signage to make it clear that we do not permit open carry of firearms on city properties.
Unknown Speaker 5:58
Know, the, although I advise that I’ll read it again.
Unknown Speaker 6:03
And I don’t want you to read it just just the motions out of order because it’s too long. So just what is the motion? It’s
Unknown Speaker 6:08
not too long, and it’s not out of order the chair, the chair finds
Unknown Speaker 6:11
it out of order. So what is the motion? I don’t want
Unknown Speaker 6:16
the staff to investigate and bring before council the feasibility of extending broad weapons prohibitions and protections to more city buildings, especially where large groups of people gather regularly. Okay,
Unknown Speaker 6:31
so and we had a second by Councilmember pack. All right, cool. And then any dialogue or debate? All right, and I’m gonna vote against it only because what happened in Boulder was a travesty. But I don’t think this is going to do anything to prohibit that type of scenario. But let’s go ahead and vote All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed say nay nay.
Unknown Speaker 6:54
Unknown Speaker 6:55
Who was the other name? Councillor Christiansen? All right. The motion carries five to two with myself and Councilmember Christiansen opposed. All right, that was motion one Councillor Martin?
Unknown Speaker 7:09
Yes, city another.
Unknown Speaker 7:11
The second motion is an ABS First I’d like to observe that a document titled active developments is maintained under the city website. And it provides basic public information on projects under construction awaiting public hearing, approved under review and withdrawn. I was gratified to see that between February and March, this document acquired a new column, which gives information about the affordable and middle tier units expected in multifamily developments. However, there’s a lot of ambiguity to be about how this document is to be read. And a lot of the affordable housing in the affordable housing column, a lot of times it says pending. And that’s kind of not any more useful than blank.
Unknown Speaker 8:09
So we’re aware that sometimes the number of units which are affordable or qualify for personal partial waiver of the fee in lieu for military housing changes between permit approval and certificate of occupancy, I move to direct staff to produce and publish a key explaining how the active developments reports must be interpreted and to replace the word pending in the inclusionary housing column with something more indicative of the number of affordable units currently anticipated. And to require that applicants have read report changes to the expected number of affordable and minutes middles here, units to the assigned planner when they happen. So this can be brought before council as a discussion or whatever works. Again, it’s just a lot of people really care about this document and I’d like it to be a little clearer. Also,
Unknown Speaker 9:12
I get mode Moved by Councillor Martin seconded by Councilmember waters, although I believe that Councilmember Christiansen was moving, you have something to say or we just wanted a second council member. Okay. And then Harold, I guess my only question anybody dialogue or debate before we agree to put this on a future agenda. Harold, do you understand the motion well enough to get us the information? All right. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. All right, the Motion carries unanimously. Kazmir Martin floor is still yours.
Unknown Speaker 9:47
Yes, the third one. At the time that the inclusionary housing ordinance was adopted in December of 2018. Longmont made a commitment to developers and builders to engage in the process. Improve For the purpose of shortening the time and effort expended in moving affordable developments through the permitting process. This is important in preserving the market viability of low end housing due to the high cost of borrowing prior to the completion of construction. An examination of said active development report showed that in many cases, the hoped for compression of time and effort has not materialized. I move that the staff perform an action after action review on why major developments, including affordable housing have taken so long to reach approval, and share the results with the council and the public either at the upcoming retreat, or if time doesn’t permit at a subsequent study session.
Unknown Speaker 10:50
Alright, there was a motion and no second parallel. There was a second, do you have that information to be able to provide that to Councilmember Martin.
Unknown Speaker 11:02
It depends on the project itself. And so that varies based on the development project and the issues that are in play. So we can talk about specific projects and generally work through the issues. But I mean, that’s what we would have to do is take specific projects.
Unknown Speaker 11:22
This was not a second, I’m just just pointing out the Councilmember Martin could get together with you.
Unknown Speaker 11:26
We can sit down and talk
Unknown Speaker 11:27
Unknown Speaker 11:29
Now the reason that I didn’t second this is that each project is so different. And a lot of times, there are things that are going on with staff that they’re working out to compress something in general as as an umbrella statement, I don’t think actually works because of the individual nuances of every project. And, um, I just think it would be onerous. And if we want to know about a specific project, I know staff was is more than willing to talk to us about it.
Unknown Speaker 12:02
So um, Alright, there we go. You can have a last word, Counselor Martin,
Unknown Speaker 12:07
I just would like to point out that we did a process improvement exercise in 2019. And I guess it would be that does not appear to have produced results, which was supposed to have general in a generalized way produce results. So um, I guess I will independently suggest that that’d be a subject at the retreat, because I don’t think it’s something that we should just let go. Thank you, council member.
Unknown Speaker 12:38
All right. Anybody else? All right, let’s move on then to city manager report. COVID-19.
Unknown Speaker 12:48
Let me pull this up.
Unknown Speaker 12:54
Unknown Speaker 12:56
get something going on here. I’m sure it’s screen with you all. I’m going to give an abbreviated presentation tonight. Because of you Li coming next. So we point out today was her this week is Jeff Sachs last week, as the county health director, yesterday had the opportunity to participate in this, I guess, semi final interviews for the replacement, and we’ll see what happens in the next week or two. Once it goes to the Board of Health and the county commissioners, when we start out, we’re still in yellow. The one difference that I’ll point out to you all right now as you see this number here at 130 2.3. If you remember the last time we presented to you all we may have been in blue, I can’t remember what it looked like then it has been changing we have been bouncing back and forth between you blue and yellow, but it is now continuing to move into the yellow category into in the numbers. So now we’re higher than we have been in while at 130 2.3. As you can see, yellow goes from 100 to 300. So we think we’re going to be there we were starting to prepare for movement into blue. But as we discussed it today doesn’t look like that’s going to happen in the next few weeks. Current positivity rate. Again, that’s also going up. We’re still in level blue sub 5%. But if you remember before, we were as low as 2.5. And you can see where most of the counties sit there. And then 10 days of decreasing and stable hospitalizations. I’m going to show you another graph flow. later in the presentation where you can actually see what’s happening. We’re still low in terms of the number of hospitalizations in Boulder County. So any movement in that does it Is this one of the things that we do know. And in next week, there’s probably going to be a lot of information coming out is really what the governor is going to do as we look to the future in terms of many of the executive orders that are coming out what that looks like in terms of the dial, and then how they’re going to approach it, because it looks like they’re gonna potentially shift that into the counties. And it looks like the metro region is working together in terms of how we move forward. So So we know that there’s going to be a fair amount of change in the next couple of weeks, when it comes to the dial in the orders and what that’s going to look like as we continue to move forward. When we look at the case, numbers, you know, what the biggest change that you can see is, you know, we’ve now consistently been, we’ve been over 50. And the last few days, you can actually see there were some days in March where we were, we were higher. And so that’s something that they’re they’re continuing to watch. When we look at the seven day or seven day rolling average daily case counts about 63 cases per day, this rose from 52 per day last week. So again, they’re really starting to watch these numbers. As we continue to move forward. You can see where we were dipping, we were stable, but now they’re they’re seeing this increase. And so everyone’s starting to pay some attention to this. The good news, in all of this cases are very low in our long term care facilities. So when folks talk about what what is the impact in the vaccination process, you’re actually starting to see it in this data. Because if you remember, the long term care facilities were the first that really went through the vaccine process. And if you remember this chart, when it had other, when we went further back into December, December through January, there was a lot of orange in this chart based on the number of cases that we were seeing. And you can see how how that has continued to call to decline. And as we look at most of March, you’re really one case here, in one case here in the long term care facilities. And so as they’ve talked about that with us, that’s really a product of what they’re seeing in terms of the efficacy of the vaccine. Moving forward
Unknown Speaker 17:21
26% of the cases in Boulder County are now in Longmont. 45% are in Boulder, obviously, that’s a product of what they were seeing in the student population. You know, this is a bit of a flip, if you remember. And December, January and February long mountain had the bulk of the cases. And what we were seeing in our in our community, or in our county, the disparities in cases among Hispanic residents is much lower, has been much lower in February than it than it was in previous months. So we’re seeing that start to move where it’s more consistent with the demographics in our county, I know there’s continued to be a lot of engagement within our Hispanic community in the past seven days, 15.4% of our cases have been among our Hispanic Latin x community members. And they represent about 14% of the population in Boulder County. So you’re seeing more of an alignment there than we’ve seen in the past. And that’s really a product of the work that we’re doing with a lot of the work that they’re doing with their equity plans and our cultural brokers. In the engagement there. We actually crossed the 100,000. threshold in terms of number of Boulder County residents that have been vaccinated, you can see that 62,000 have had both courses, in 41,000 have had one course. So we’re continuing to make progress in the vaccination meetings that we’ve had. When we look at it. We know there’s a lot of work that we can we need to do. But what we can say is boulder County’s performing better than most counties in the state of Colorado. based on the data and what we’ve been seeing over 90%, over 70 plus population has been vaccinated, you know, we’re still really focusing on on some of our target populations. The last two weekends, we actually had a targeted vaccination clinic at Timberline K through eight. And they had a couple of 100 appointments on each day each Saturday. And they were full. And I think we only had you know, one or two that didn’t show up. So in terms of the targeting work that Boulder County Health was doing in our traditionally underserved populations, we were definitely seeing that. Really seen those folks coming into that vaccination clinic next week. I believe it’s next week solute is going to start Their vaccination clinic that the city’s partnering with in public health, that is from a federal grant. And that’s it that will actually be conducted at lashley Street Station. And again, it is a targeted vaccination clinic to our traditionally underserved populations. And there’s a lot of guidelines that came from the federal government associated with this grant in the allocation of vaccine. When you look at almost half of our 50 plus population has been vaccinated across the metro Reed region. When you look at how the counties are doing, and I talked about how Boulder County was doing in terms of vaccinations, you know, outside of Broomfield and Broomfield is definitely a different comparison. But when you really look at how Boulder County is doing with the other Metro counties, they’re doing really well in terms of that population. So that’s really good for us to see, when I talked about we know that we still have work to do. This is the map that really highlights it. And we can see that 20, the right about 27% on this eastern part of the county. And so when we talk about some of those targeted vaccine clinics, we’re really in terms of Longmont, we’re really looking in this area here. And that’s why you saw the first location at Timberline and the one that we’re doing with saloon at lashley Street Station, because we think it’s really based on the data that we’re seeing it really is that heart of the area where we’re trying to push those percentages up. It all at all. It also aligns with if you saw a lot of the cases that we had last year. And I showed you all I think I showed you all a map last year, those areas overlap. And so that’s a lot of work that we’re being that we’re doing right now, to let you know where we are, in terms of a lot of this targeting conversation. So we had Kevin s smell, and and Shannon, in our Emergency Management Department, they’re really working on setting the clinics up Carmen Ramirez, and then Sheila Davis, who’s over equity for Boulder County are co leads in so you see Longmont in that co lead position with Boulder County Health in terms of continuing to work the equity components of the vaccination process. So we know this is there, we’re continuing to focus on it. And we think as we get more vaccine into the clinic that we’ll continue to see improvements. And obviously with the work that they do partnership with solute, we think we’re going to make a dent in that over the next few weeks. So hospitalization so we have 17 people in Boulder County that’s hospitalized for COVID-19. When I talked in the previous graph about how a few numbers, and when a few numbers shift, it changes where we are on the dial, you can see what’s happening. So we could increase by five or so and it shifts that the dial. But the reality is where we were in terms of total hospitalizations, we’re still in a pretty good spot. So as they continue to look at this, and if it if it becomes more focused at the county level or the metro region, we’re asking them to really look at how they’re how the data is being calculated, and on that dial for hospitalizations. Statewide hospitalizations continue to be steady, as we’re continuing to move forward. And today, we’ve only had one death in March. And so that’s that’s a big change as well, in terms of what we’ve seen prior to that in previous months. And the big issue that they’re talking about is when you see the case growth, in what we’ve talked about in our admin calls, everyone knew that when school came back in session, they were going to see case growth. But what they’re also starting to see is that the social distancing, is dramatically decreasing across the state and in Boulder County. So you can see that in Colorado, there was about 13%, social distancing. Prior to weeks, 46 and 32%. Boulder, we were at 28%. But prior to that we were at 69 to 65 and 49%. And so they’re continuing to really watch this when they look at case growth and what that what that’s gonna look like for us. When they talk about the case growth in you’ve seen this. They are also looking at the variants that are associated with it, specifically UK, California in South African. And that is my presentation for you today.
Unknown Speaker 24:37
Alright, anybody have any questions, comments or concerns? All right, great. Thank you. Let’s go. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Alright, let’s go ahead then. And I believe it’s time for us to go ahead.
Unknown Speaker 24:50
I would if I can ask Jim golden come and we wanted to update you on the bond sale for the water bonds. Okay, got some good news for you. Jim,
Unknown Speaker 25:06
sorry is joining again, Mike, Can you see me? Yep. All right. So, yes, we had a bond sale this morning Marin Council on the water bonds, we raised $55 million for what a bond projects. We had 12 bidders. And that’s a very competitive situation we had high interest in these bonds. The winning bid was JP Morgan at a true interest cost of 1.85%. Annually, we’ll be paying about $3.3 million of debt service on these bonds. So it’s good news to report. It’s good, good result for the city. So I got
Unknown Speaker 25:56
Thank you very much, Jim. Mayor Pro Tem Rodriguez.
Unknown Speaker 26:02
Thank you, Mayor Bagley. I’m not quite related to what CFO golden said. But my point being is that we’re getting closer to vaccination point, at least amongst city staff and and council members, I’m sure. And so I’m just wondering At what point maybe we could start having some in person counsel, even may not be the, you know, regular session meetings or study session meetings. But if we have to have an executive session, I’m just wondering what the status is for for our council members. I will start off and saying that, I’ve had my first dose, and my second will be on April 12. So
Unknown Speaker 26:54
well, my quarantine for COVID ended last Saturday. So I’m immune for a little bit at least. So I had the sniffles. That was it. But the if we I’ll be getting vaccinated, you’re pretty quick to and I’m all for he said April 12. I’m all for going back as soon as possible.
Unknown Speaker 27:11
That’s my second dose. And I believe that most of the other council members have been elated.
Unknown Speaker 27:17
Right. Well, yeah, light. So I’m, I’m leaving it up to those council members who are in a more at risk group once everybody else wants to go back. I’m anxious to to go back.
Unknown Speaker 27:29
Unknown Speaker 27:31
all right, let’s go ahead and move on to a three minute break as we wait for first call up. Sorry, Councilmember Christiansen?
Unknown Speaker 27:37
Don’t you just mean old? Well,
Unknown Speaker 27:40
I was trying to be political. You know, I’m not very political lately, but I was just trying to be nice. But yes, now we can go ahead and the older the old people can decide when we meet. Thank you. Councilmember Christiansen. All right. Let’s go ahead and take a three minute break on that. And we’ll go ahead and come back and have our first cup public invited to be
Unknown Speaker 27:59
here. Mayor, I believe we have seven a
Unknown Speaker 28:04
Oh, urban land his Technical Advisory Panel. Sure. Let’s go ahead and hear the report on the sugar mill.
Unknown Speaker 28:15
Aaron, we can’t hear you. It looks like you’re unmuted, but I’m still not hearing you.
Unknown Speaker 28:22
Can you hear me now? I can. Okay, well,
Unknown Speaker 28:25
we’ll do this without the headphone Susan, even though I know you don’t like that. But we’ll start again. I’m Erin. Fantastic. Thank you Mayor Bagley members of council. We’re very excited to be hosting members of our usli Urban Land Institute Technical Advisory Panel. I’m also joined by Tony chacoan. Our manager, really excited to hear from the panel. So you will be hearing from staff tonight. But Tony and I are available if there’s specific questions. With that, I’d like to ask Susan to pull up the presentation. I’ll introduce Marian epic. She’s with urban lands Land Institute, and was really instrumental in bringing together a panel of six diverse experts that have varying expertise in the development process. they volunteered their time, over the course of a couple of days in August of last year, to really delve deep and help us strategize about the long run sugarmill. As you know, this is an area of town that generates a lot of interest. A lot of comments just city council is identified as one of four focus areas and our comprehensive plan. And the document that you’ll be hearing about tonight, recommendations from the panel really set the stage for some exciting visioning and some exciting work that we’ll be setting out on to think about what the sugarmill could be in the future. So with that, I’d like to introduce Marianne. She’ll talk a little bit about usli, the tap process and then we’ll hear from three of the panelists to go over some of the recommendations. I do want to note that we gave you the full report in your packet. Hopefully you’ve had a chance to look at that. It is very detailed and specific. We won’t be able to cover everything tonight. But certainly if you have questions for the panelists, they’re available tonight, Tony and I are always available, if you have additional questions that come up after tonight’s presentation. And with that, I’d like to turn it over to Marianne.
Unknown Speaker 30:16
Thank you, Erin. And I’m going to wait for Susan to pull up the slides.
Unknown Speaker 30:19
Unknown Speaker 30:20
So as Erin mentioned, I’m with the Urban Land Institute. I’m a director with you ally, Colorado here in Colorado. Our mission is to provide leadership in the responsible use of land and in creating and sustaining thriving communities worldwide. So we are a global nonprofit, but our district council focuses solely on Colorado. Next slide, please. So what are technical advisory panels, this is a service that you ally offers to communities to help solve challenging issues. And we put together panels of UI members who volunteer their time to offer unbiased third party professional advice. And they’re each experts in their field. And we select these experts based on the questions that the community asks us to help respond to. And we have conducted over 60 taps throughout Colorado since 2004. Next slide, please. I’m going to talk a little bit about the findings that we came up with from many stakeholder interviews that we did at the beginning of the tap. And then I’m going to turn it over to some of our panelists who are here tonight to talk about the recommendations.
Unknown Speaker 31:37
Next slide, please.
Unknown Speaker 31:40
So I’ll start with some assets and opportunities. This site that we looked at is around 110 acres of mostly undeveloped lands surrounding beautiful historic buildings that make up Great Western sugarmill. And this is a great adaptive reuse opportunity. And it’s in such a strong market. There’s a huge amount of demand for redevelopment in this area. And a lot of people can see a lot of potential with these buildings and with this land. Next slide please. There are many challenges as I’m sure many of you know, this is a brownfield site with known assesses contamination, in and most likely around the buildings. However, there’s been a lack of due diligence on the site for both the buildings, the site and environmental assessment, all of which will need to happen so that more is known about what needs to be done on the site and how much it’ll cost. There’s also many different ownerships, I think, at least five different ownerships in the land surrounding the historic structures. And there’s been trespassing on the in the buildings and fires as a result, so the buildings are not currently safe. And then next slide, please. So I’m going to turn it over to our panelists to talk about what they recommend to move forward for the city.
Unknown Speaker 33:08
Next slide, please.
Unknown Speaker 33:15
And I’m gonna turn it over to Mary Hashim.
Unknown Speaker 33:19
Good evening, Mayor, Bagley and council. We are very pleased to present our findings this evening and hope, hope they’re of value to you and we’ll entertain any questions you may have. My role was to address as a as a brownfield redevelopment professional. My role was to address issues of site access and remediation ways to revitalize the property and issues that should be addressed. We were asked by the city to address in particular, these two questions that you see on the screen, gaining how to gain control of the property and strategies to be employed both to remediate it, but also to reuse existing buildings. And I believe inherited a lot of this was questions of liability and protection of risk from some of the environmental conditions on the property. Next slide, please. So our recommendations are as follows. One, as Maryann noted in her introduction, there’s a lot of due diligence that is lacking, there are investigations that need to be done before a true approach to revitalization of this product property could be scoped. So our first recommendation is to fill those data gaps. The second recommendation or direction liability is to manage environmental risks, and manage that liability to a variety of mechanisms. These are well known and well used in the ground. Field redevelopment industry, things such as environmental insurance or contractual mechanisms, Colorado was lucky to have a very good voluntary cleanup program, which in a buyer or owner of the property could enter this site into for not only oversight and direction in the cleanup, but also liability protections and liability relief through that program. There are also tax credits available through that program that should a private or a public private partnership be founded tax credits could also be monetized to help fund the remediation. And then there was a question of how to control the outcome for the city knowing that, that you would like to have some influence over what becomes of this property. And we had some suggestions for how to control the development outcome through an ownership structure. And particularly that would either provide for a Community Development Corporation either existing or new one to be formed specifically for this site, or to a public private partnership. Next slide, please. We also recognize that it’s important to make the site safe, because it is right now in a state of disrepair with a lot of environmental conditions. How to effectuate the sale of the property, as well as as control what happens there will be a prime concern, I’m sure to the city. So these were our recommendations regarding ownership and control of the property. variety of transaction structures that could achieve the city’s goal while also meeting the current ownerships interests. The current ownership has very definite ideas about what they would like to pursue for the property. And there has to be some willingness on the part of the current owner to either sell or participate in a public private partnership for remediation and redevelopment of the property. So we identified a number of what we call carrots and sticks, and incentives for the current ownership, as well as perhaps some enforcement actions. That frankly, given that it is a relatively uncontrolled site with a number of hazards are probably things that the city should be contemplating in terms of health and safety for your citizens. So as you can see, we listed a number of different options for both enforcement as well as incentives for current ownership to try to encourage them to sell and release control of the property. Next slide, please.
Unknown Speaker 37:57
Our final recommendations are regarding in the in this remediation phase. Regarding remediation, we use it historic buildings, there are some beautiful buildings on the site. There are some some history of these this property to the history of longline. And we have some ideas regarding how to approach that. The first and most important is an assessment and scoping of what needs to be done. As Marianne noted, there’s a lot of asbestos on this property. But there are also significant issues regarding the structural condition of the buildings. And the the systems, you know, whether it’s infrastructure of various sorts, and co compliance, just life and safety considerations around some of the buildings that are not structurally sound. So it requires a very thorough assessment to understand what elements of these buildings can and should be preserved. What needs to be replaced or improved. And what really just for safety, instructional purposes needs to be removed. We would anticipate that significant building upgrades will have to take place. Elevator service, ADA compliance and significant code compliance issues will have to be addressed to make any of the existing business building usable. But we believe that there is value in those buildings that there are reuse opportunities. And those should be pursued both to preserve the historic nature of the site as well as just from the sustainability perspective in reusing existing structures. We had a goal as that we believe is achievable to achieve what’s often called a white box, sort of core and shell that could be brought up to modern standards of code but also be fairly large and open and allow a lot of flexibility for end users. So with that, next slide please. I believe Jocelyn is going to Address further some of these, these contacts. Thank you. Great.
Unknown Speaker 40:05
Thank you, Mary. And thank you, mr. mayor and council for the opportunity to speak with you tonight. My name is Jocelyn hittle. And I was honored to be part of the tap. Looking at the sugar mill site, I will be transitioning a little from Mary’s excellent presentation on some of the foundational challenges of redevelopment of this site to some of the vision work that we did in the creative, forward looking piece of the technical advisory panel. So one of the things that we were thinking about is the history of this site, and its role within the agricultural economy in the Front Range, and thinking about how we could leverage that in a forward looking way. Next slide, please. So there are a number a number of examples that we look to across the country that focus on integrating agriculture within various types of development. You can see one here that is primarily within some some housing and has some larger scale agricultural production. Next slide, please. Another in Texas that is a bit more structured and formal. Next slide, please. And this one, relatively nearby, and the ARIA development in North Denver, that is focused on agriculture and health within this mixed use and affordable housing redevelopment project. So you can see from each of these examples that there are real opportunities to integrate agriculture into the built environment, and into redevelopment projects, and to think about how to weave the history of the site into its future. And thinking about the legacy of that site and agriculture within Colorado. Next slide, please. The other component that we were considering is how we can take the agricultural integration and make it a forward facing public facing component of the site, you can see some examples here of how other places across the country have done that, with educational components with farmers markets with commercial and retail public facing opportunities to really weave that in. And there’s been a number of developments that have done this very successfully, we think the sugarmill property is has the potential to do this as well, especially with some of those beautiful historic buildings that Mary mentioned. Next slide, please. The flip side of that, is there some opportunity for back of house agricultural work, if you will, agricultural innovation centers, actual production distribution hubs that are a little bit more focused on producers, and larger scale consumers and the ability for them to come together in one place and have a distribution hub that takes advantage of the location of the sugar mill site and access to to regional transportation infrastructure. Next slide, please. In addition, we wanted to look at the site as an opportunity to further what we saw in the city’s sustainability plan. So we looked at a number of different sustainability opportunities here. Next slide, please. That can include everything from energy to water in the natural environment to thinking about the site’s role within the food system, as I’ve already mentioned, thinking about the materials and the reuse of the site, how we can look at the greenhouse gas footprint, footprint and connect to transportation and mobility, all of that with a foundation based in equity. So that’s a brief snapshot of the agricultural and sustainability concepts that we talked about. But I am now going to turn it over to Matt Prosser, who’s going to continue to outline some of the site planning work that we did.
Unknown Speaker 43:50
Hi, yes. Great to be with you, Mayor, Bagley and council members. I’m Matt Prosser with economic and planning systems. I’ve been before a number of you before so it’s good to see you again. We APS is a land use economics firm. I participated on the panel to help provide input into market demand and feasibility, as well as assisting with development of some conceptual land use plans. The a few of the questions we had from from you all in terms of what to investigate and our panel, terms of master planning were one how to integrate the historic buildings into an overall sort of plan for the area. How do we introduce diverse housing options? What are some ways to incorporate agricultural uses into the area as well as how do we connect this area via different modes of transportation? So we considered those questions Next slide please.
Unknown Speaker 44:51
Next slide, please.
Unknown Speaker 44:53
And developed a few different conceptual plans for the site and I think one of the biggest takeaways was looking at This area as a district is very important. And not necessarily just as, as just the parcels that include the historic buildings, there is a large opportunity to make this a pretty unique destination, especially with the use of those historic buildings. But the reality is, it’s going to be very challenging to reuse those buildings and will be a timely process. And so there’s an opportunity to begin to spur development that supports and works in concert with the reuse of those buildings. In the meantime, especially as a way to potentially generate some funding in terms of either Tax Increment dollars, or potentially money from public financing tools like a metro district, or a general improvement district or other types of tools that can be used. And so understanding that we see the opportunity for a mixture of uses here, whether that’s retail along can Pratt residential uses along the creek or sort of at the high point of the site, to the east, it has really wonderful views of the mountains, and understanding how those sort of work together with the historic buildings in the center. Next slide. Another finding really is that these buildings will ultimately be sort of the focal of the site, but they don’t necessarily want to have to be the first done or to have to be completely activated or used. We have seen a lot of different examples nationally wore historic structures are used in a variety of different different ways, whether it’s very active reuses within the building, or sort of passive uses, whether that’s aesthetic or for sort of more indoor outdoor type situations. As you can see with a public market example here down on the slide, that’s actually from Detroit, Eastern Market in Detroit. So realizing that these historic structures are important and major part of the overall site, but they don’t necessarily have to be first and they don’t necessarily have to be fully occupied for this site becomes something that’s value to the community. Next slide. We also we think there’s an opportunity to introduce uses in the meantime, as I’ve mentioned, so whether that’s introducing some industrial leases that are either compatible or actually directly supporting the agricultural theme, whether that’s grow houses or actual storage for farming within Boulder County. And we’ve talked to one stakeholder that said that there is there’s always been a need for sort of storage, supporting the farming operations. And so there may be opportunities for those types of uses, as we also work on the historic structures. Next slide. And then we also know that there are a lot of great options or great models, I should say, in terms of integrating a mixture of housing within to these types of projects. And so these pictures shows some examples of the full gamut of housing options that I think would fit in this context, whether that be assisted living facilities in the top left, more sort of senior oriented product in the top REITs. And more traditional sort of family neighborhoods, and the bottom left, and even some mixed use development that includes some context appropriate multifamily uses. Next slide. And so our last question really being how do we pull this all together through funding. So next slide, we identified a number of funding opportunities, actually, there is is sort of a wealth of different potential pool pools that either the city or developers or other partners can tap into, whether that’s funds to address due diligence and cleanup from the EPA, Dola and other state agencies. I mentioned the use of public financing districts or tools. There’s already existing urban renewal area for half of our sort of study area that could be leveraged and also expanded as a potential carrot for participation. And then I think there’s value in considering things like Metro districts that can help support the operations of a special place that will need to occur and find some of those things that the private sector may not be able to provide on a parcel by parcel basis. We also know that there’s, you know, opportunity zone Enterprise Zone designations in the areas of well, so there’s an opportunity to attract investors to the area based on those tools. I’m going to turn it back over to Mary to touch on our strategy of sort of taking these tools and the land use plan and making it a reality.
Unknown Speaker 49:51
Thank you, Matt. Next slide please. So the path for We envision being most effective under a master planning approach, that there has to be an entity, public or private or a public private partnership that will step into the role of overseeing the master planning of the site as a whole. The efforts are necessary, both on the elements that I addressed to begin with in terms of historic building reuse, filling data gaps, remediation and restoration of the structure and the property, as well as planning for the future development. So development of the district decisions about what annexation and the various potential funding sources that matches described, these two things can take place on parallel tracks. But both tears need to be addressed need to move forward in their own process, all under the umbrella of a master plan. So that the property as a whole does not get broken up into small pieces, and, you know, piecemeal development of one parcel here or one parcel there, and you end up with just sort of a, a lost opportunity for these large district wide options that Matt Joslin has been talking about. Next slide, please. So one of the advantages of this site, as you can see is it fits within a number of areas that can provide support for funding. In addition to the urban renewal area, and the opportunity for TIF, there’s an opportunity zone is an enterprise zone overlay. And all of these provide funding and financing opportunities. I mentioned earlier about the tax credits that are available to the state’s cleanup program. There’s opportunities for met district and focusing on a variety of infrastructure and transportation system that can help bring services and bring people to the site. Next slide, please. So that really is the heart of it. And Jocelyn, I think I turn it back to you to to wrap up here. Thank you very much.
Unknown Speaker 52:23
Thanks, Mary. I will be very brief. In the interest of time, I’m not going to go through all of these key takeaways, I’ll just note a few that we think are particularly important. One is that you have an amazing opportunity with this gateway location into the city. With these existing structures and the legacy of this site. There are some data questions that still remain there’s missing some information that would be more helpful if we had more information. And there’s some issues to resolve around water and land ownership. But really, the most important takeaway is that you can do this, and you should do this, to take advantage of this site, and the opportunities that that it affords the city and now I think we are happy to entertain any questions you have.
Unknown Speaker 53:13
Okay. Councillor Martin?
Unknown Speaker 53:17
Um, yes. Although these are very exciting possibilities. I hear you say you should do this. And it seems to me that the the cost of the clean up, bear has a lot of bearing on how big of a should this is. And there have been no soil samples. You know, there there are a lot of open questions regarding the rehabilitation of the site. Do you have any concrete data as to what that cost is going to be and and how much value we’d have to find in the master planned development in order to begin the cleanup?
Unknown Speaker 54:05
So I’ll address that one. I think the is the need for data here is obvious to all of us. And there are ways to get financial support from the state and from the federal government to identify sources of funding mostly grants, some technical assistance that EPA can undertake itself. In its own contractors. There is a lot of grant opportunity that a nonprofit or CDC or the city could apply for Brownfield grants for assessment and for remediation. Those funds can also address asbestos remediation. So I think there are a lot of public sources of funding to help get you enough information to be able to answer the question Agenda, what is the financial gap? What is the cost of the remediation? There is even technical assistance available to help do that financial analysis to help do planning to do community outreach. So in the Brownfield world if the city is behind the project, and importantly on this site, if the owners cooperate and allow access, there are a lot of funds that can be brought to bear to address those very important questions that you raised.
Unknown Speaker 55:29
Before I call on we’re gonna go, Mayor Pro Tem and Councillor pack and Councillor Christiansen My question is, is the all the owners I know we’re talking about this and we’re taking, we’re taking time tonight, the parcel of lands that we’re talking about developing in this presentation are all the owners on board. I know that we talked about having to coordinate among owners and but has everyone basically signed off? Or is are their owners still that are not on board? Because if they’re not on board, the question is why are we talking about this? So? Well, I just want to know, are they dig Thomas on board? Is he ready to sell these he cooperated?
Unknown Speaker 56:05
Mayor Bagley, members of council Tony chicom. I’m just interjecting here. But there are effectively five large land parcels that incorporate the study area that you Li looked at, I can tell you two of those large parcels are now under contract with development interests. That does not at this time include the parcel owned by Dec Thomas. But deck Thomas is actually talking to several prospects at this time. And we are facilitating those discussions to try to get him off center to move his property.
Unknown Speaker 56:44
Alright, so I’m going to call on my fellow council members. But I would remind everyone that as long as I’ve been on Council, this is this in my mind, this is not we’ve made no progress if dick Thomas has not signed off, there is no sugar mill. This is just another development. And so we can talk about how wonderful it is what it could have, should have. But I for one don’t want to talk about this until we actually have unless we’re gonna talk eminent domain, which I’m not willing to do. But anyway, that’s kind of where we’re at. I think
Unknown Speaker 57:14
so we have with him.
Unknown Speaker 57:18
Thank you, Mr. Bagley. My, it’s gonna be two motions. The first motion being is that I think procedurally we should accept the presentation and report provided by the Urban Land Institute. So that’s my first motion.
Unknown Speaker 57:43
It’s been moved by Mayor Pro Tem seconded by Councilmember Christiansen, I tried, but I was muted. saying that there’s no further dialogue and debate. The motion is to accept the report by the overland is today as presented All in favor say aye.
Unknown Speaker 57:56
Unknown Speaker 57:59
All right, Motion carries unanimously. Mayor Pro Tem.
Unknown Speaker 58:02
Thank you. My second motion is that I don’t believe in my opinion. There is true consensus among council members about our vision for this piece of property. And so my motion is to add this item to our retreat agenda.
Unknown Speaker 58:24
That was very Christiansen.
Unknown Speaker 58:27
I do think that’s a good idea. We could spend some time discussing this because it is a really large chunk of land. I’ve been looking at it for 30 years, wishing and hoping and it would be good for us to actually have a discussion about it. I think so I would second airpo times motion.
Unknown Speaker 58:48
Alright, it’s been moved and seconded. We’re we got some dialogue and debate. We’re going to go with Councilmember
Unknown Speaker 58:53
Unknown Speaker 58:54
And then Councilmember Martin.
Unknown Speaker 58:57
So my first question, I agree with our mayor that unless dick Thomas is on board, this is a moot discussion. But are the other land owners that are in in discussions with developers and people who want to buy it? Can their properties be developed without Dec Thomas? That or is it or is it a huge all in or nobody? So Harold, can you answer that?
Unknown Speaker 59:28
Right here? hell can you I’m gonna. I’m going to jump in on a couple of points. I think one of the biggest changes in this conversation is that the property owners think all the property owners actually participated in the interview process on this. Perhaps the biggest changes that dick Thomas participated in the interview process on it, which is I don’t think he’s done that to date on any of the conversations that came in so that that’s a fairly significant change. To take you back to the presentation that they made, they did talk about that this could be developed in different components based on those other properties, and specifically the ones that Tony was talking about, that are under contract for development. That could be then the catalysts that you utilize to to get momentum on some of these other projects, because time, this is not quick. When you talk about brownfields and, and working on all of these grants, it’s not like we’re going to move through this in a year to go through those processes. It takes a long time, because sometimes you go into the queue for some of these Brownfield grants and you don’t get them the first time. You have to come back in again to really get that those grants so you can start moving through through this process. That’s been my experience on projects like this.
Unknown Speaker 1:00:52
Alright, we’re gonna go with Councillor Martin and Councilmember waters.
Unknown Speaker 1:00:55
Yeah, I’m a little confused about what we’re debating here. Because Don’t we have a motion on the floor to add this to the to the retreat agenda?
Unknown Speaker 1:01:03
Unknown Speaker 1:01:04
we do accept that. Okay. But But
Unknown Speaker 1:01:09
then we can talk about about the the,
Unknown Speaker 1:01:12
the direct eye for one, for example, where they come together is I don’t want to waste any time on this. For example, for example, if we’re just going to develop the area, I mean, the whole point is that we want something coming into town. That is a corridor. Dick Thomas, he might have been Mr. Mayor. Yeah,
Unknown Speaker 1:01:32
I have things to say about the retreat.
Unknown Speaker 1:01:36
Unknown Speaker 1:01:38
So you might want to say, but were you done with your point?
Unknown Speaker 1:01:41
Yeah. I was not I was about to make my point when you jumped in.
Unknown Speaker 1:01:45
Alright. Go ahead. Councilmember Martin. Okay.
Unknown Speaker 1:01:48
So we agreed that we were going to have a short retreat that was focused on the housing authority and affordable housing development. If we are going to add something as far afield as this, which I think happened, I agree with the mayor reluctantly, is premature, then we should go back to a full format two day retreat, because this is a big subject, and housing is a big subject. So one or the other of those two things should happen. And I would you know, I guess, like to ask the mayor Pro Tem, which intention he had for, for the retreat, because I don’t think that we can get you know, six or eight hours on housing. And then anything done on this topic in the single day retreat.
Unknown Speaker 1:02:45
Councilmember waters. Thanks, Mayor Bagley, I’m
Unknown Speaker 1:02:50
happy to defer to
Unknown Speaker 1:02:52
Councilmember Council, my boy, you go ahead. And then what I don’t want to do I lose. Okay. I mean, I understand it, but I don’t want to be arguing over, you can go and then I’ll address.
Unknown Speaker 1:03:03
So the only point I would make, I’m just going to echo what Councilmember Martin just said the, I think this is, first of all, I want to say to you, ally, team. Thanks for your great work as volunteers, this is going to be extraordinarily helpful to the city going forward. I’m excited about the planning that’s underway in the southeast part of town, how it aligns with the steam area. And in we ought to have a vision for that whole corridor all the way to the airport. So So thank you very much. Number one, Tony and Harold, thanks for the, for the thoughtfulness of making this happen. You’re going after the resources, both human and financial resources to get this pulled together. That said, I think Mayor pro tems observation that there’s not a, you know, a unified vision here among councils probably spot on. And even if we could forge one, in in however many hours it would take during a retreat to do that a few months in advance of an election cycle, where we may have four new people on council doesn’t seem like a good use of time, especially when we are clear on what the urgency is around housing, especially for our seniors. And we lack we’re gonna have an item on the agenda later tonight to talk about goals and objectives for oaj. When we get there, I’m gonna make the case they’re not goals and objectives for llj. It’s a bunch of stuff that’s been there for a long time. And Cathy tried to do the best, she could make something out of it to meet a HUD deadline. But that’s the work that we need to do is get clear on what we want to accomplish as a housing authority, in my opinion, and this is something that ought to be on the horizon as we transition, you know, into into 2022 with a new council, in my opinion. Thank you,
Unknown Speaker 1:04:42
Mayor Pro Tem. The question I wanted to go ahead and the question was, what are your thoughts?
Unknown Speaker 1:04:51
very broad question, but I think the question is a little bit more specific in the concept that the reason I was suggesting to add this to The retreat agenda. And while we may be an election cycle, we still are the elected members of council, and in our retreat can still provide guidance even if it gets overturned after an election. The point being, though, is that we’re going to more often hear similar concepts of brownfield redevelopment in our community. And what true council guidance is on how we tend to deal with it, including finances such as the CDC, as they talked about the community development, as well as the p3 the public private partnerships, and exactly what we expect to see from some of those things in especially with brownfield redevelopment in the sense of what kind of environmental, you know, constraints there might be there, because that’s what we’re seeing more and more in Longmont. And we will continue to see that more and more in Longmont, as we run out of Greenfield space to develop. So those are going to be very important ideas that the council is going to need to address sooner rather than later. And, you know, if fellow council members don’t agree that, because we’re in an election cycle that we should at least opine upon it, that’s fine. But I think that Council is definitely going to need to deal with it very quickly, regardless of the election cycle. That’s why I made the motion. I don’t disagree with what councilmembers Martin and waters say, as far as the necessity to talk about and specifically prioritize a housing issues. As a real estate professional, I can tell you, it’s it’s a very difficult market to deal with right now. I think any real estate professional will tell you that. I mean, we’re seeing a severe lack of inventory versus the demand for the area. So I’m not going to dismiss that by any turn. My point being a and I do not mind. As far as I’ve already said publicly on the record, I don’t like retreats. But I don’t mind if we have really substantive good issues to delve into in our retreats. That doesn’t bother me. And so I wouldn’t mind extending the retreat if we have said, substantive issues to talk about. And those are my opinions on all the things that were said the last, I don’t know, five minutes or so. So thanks for bearing with them.
Unknown Speaker 1:07:46
So just let me I just want to finish my comment. Mayor Kazmir Martin, you asked the question, why are we having this conversation? And I was trying to answer your question, as the chair of why was permitting the conversation to go forward. And so again, responding to your to your question, that is, ever since I’ve been on this council, Dick Thomas, I have heard unsubstantiated rumors of potential sales of this property, people showing up with money cash offers, and it constantly being discussed and ignored, discussed and ignored, discussed and ignored. And if we are going to discuss what is going to happen with these properties, I don’t want to spend any time Personally, my time or this council time, if the owner of the property known as the sugar mill, is still not off. I’ve seen no indication just be he continues to talk continue to engage. But until there is a contract some type of movement. I do not think that sitting around talking about the grandiose ideas this council may or may not have united or otherwise, I do not see how it would be efficient, effective, or a good use of our time. Councilmember pack.
Unknown Speaker 1:09:00
Thank you, Mayor Bagley and my comment or my question about can we develop this in segments without dick Thomas was dependent upon whether I would vote to have it in the retreat or not? If we had to wait for him, then I would say absolutely not. It’s a waste of time. But I will vote for having an in there retreat based upon the comment that yes, there are owners of some of these parcels that are willing to go forward. And I think it’s worth discussing because of that. And I have a lot of questions that we shouldn’t ask tonight. So a retreat would be the right format to do that. Thank you.
Unknown Speaker 1:09:42
Unknown Speaker 1:09:46
I agree with you mostly Mayor Bailey. Cuz as I say, I’ve looked at this for 30 years and thought, why are we missing this opportunity to have our gateway be something really Special that actually honors long months history and is something incredibly creative and wonderful anyway. But as you say, yes, it goes round round round around. Anyway, I would like to call the question so that we can actually vote on whether we’re going to think about discussing and I would say, if we can find the discussion to one hour, that would be, that would be fine. And then we could spend the rest of it mostly talking about one Housing Authority.
Unknown Speaker 1:10:29
I will second that that motion is not up for discussion and debate. We need five of us to say yes, we’re just going to vote. Is there anyone who is opposed to this? Alright, so let’s just go ahead and take the lift. Do you mind if we didn’t want to post it just voting on the motion as is in any debate? All right, Mayor Pro. The way we can’t we there’s then we need to take a vote. All right. There’s a motion to call the question. All in favor of taking a vote immediately say aye. Aye.
Unknown Speaker 1:10:59
Aye. Opposed say nay.
Unknown Speaker 1:11:02
All right, the Motion carries unanimously. Mayor Pro Tem, sorry, Councilmember dog of bearing the
Unknown Speaker 1:11:07
rule. Actually, I just wanted to draw attention to Aaron. She had her hand up and I I wasn’t sure if you saw
Unknown Speaker 1:11:16
that. I saw the information
Unknown Speaker 1:11:18
to share the baby has ended.
Unknown Speaker 1:11:21
So regardless, debate has ended. Alright, so let’s go ahead and Mayor Pro Tem has made a motion and that is to put this on the retreat as a topic. Who seconded it. Councilmember Christiansen you seconded it. Alright. Let’s go ahead and all in favor of the motion say aye.
Unknown Speaker 1:11:41
Unknown Speaker 1:11:42
Aye. Opposed say nay.
Unknown Speaker 1:11:44
Nay. All right.
Unknown Speaker 1:11:46
The motion carries five to two with myself and Councilmember waters supposed were you also in a Councilmember pack? No. Okay. So it was five two. So the motion carries. Councilmember Lago fairing. Do you have anything else to add? And we’re going to go back to Aaron fosdick. Do you have anything? Okay, I didn’t see your hand up. And I did not mean to. I didn’t mean to ignore you only because there was a motion and a second to call the question. That was it. So Aaron Bostic, do you have anything to say?
Unknown Speaker 1:12:16
I just wanted to mention to Council, as you heard that the tap mentioned, one of their overall recommendations was that we do some more detailed master planning for the site. So obviously, as you know, this is one of four core focus areas in envision, meaning that we expect, you know, a lot of attention to the page, and we want to do some sort of master plan or sub area plan, similar to what we’ve done with the Main Street corridor. And so you’ll recall that this was part of the discussion we had with Council. Back in mid February, when we talked a little bit I think, Councilmember Councilmember waters mentioned the discussion that we had on Steam and the southeast urban renewal area. And at that meeting council did direct us to move forward with some sub area planning. So I did just want to let council know, that planning staff in conjunction with redevelopment is working on preparing an RFP, that would do some more detailed sub area planning for this area. And this in conjunction with the steam area. So kind of the study area we’ve been talking about tonight, as well as the steam area that Council was focused on last year. So just wanted to let council know that remind you that this effort is sort of all tied in together and we are moving forward with that overall recommendation. So potentially, it sounds like you just voted to include that on your retreat agenda. We could I guess, get some additional information from counsel prior prior to or after releasing that RFP. So we’ll work. We’ll work with Harold on that.
Unknown Speaker 1:13:44
Thank you, Councillor Martin, Councilmember Christiansen? Um, yeah.
Unknown Speaker 1:13:48
Just a point of clarification. Did we agree that this subject in the retreat was going to be limited to one hour or was that just a remark that did not get incorporated was just a
Unknown Speaker 1:14:01
remark it was do we move to put it onto the retreat agenda and we will look to staff to squeeze it in somehow and go from there. Anything else? Councillor Martin? Alright, Councillor Christiansen?
Unknown Speaker 1:14:18
I would suggest that we I would strongly suggest that we involve developer Dana Crawford down in Denver with this project. She has a stellar record of developing projects that are very historic in a way that is robust and profitable and elegant and absolutely devoted to what to the particular history of that area and the particular people of that area. And she would be doing an excellent job at providing some guidance and Help. And certainly she knows how to finance things. She knows how to get the project done. And she’s working on the the mine right now of Idaho springs. But anyway, so I would strongly suggest we think about that. Thank you,
Unknown Speaker 1:15:19
Mayor Pro Tem Rodriguez.
Unknown Speaker 1:15:22
Thank you. I just wanted to clarify that. Hopefully, the impetus of the motion as well as the intent of the motion was for council to discuss amongst ourselves as far as how we want to deal with Brownfield regulation, as as well as development in the future as far as how we want to consider it when we’re talking about adding any possibility of public funding, public funding. Because I could name a list of developers that are really good at this kind of stuff, too. But I don’t want us to do that is my point. And I was the one that made that motion. And so I really would just rather it be a conversation amongst counsel about what we think about public funding of redevelopment and things like that, not specifically, technically, about the sugar mill site, because like I said, there’s going to be many sites afterwards that are probably going to be eligible for similar things. And so I know that wasn’t a motion, Councilmember Christiansen, but I would just strongly suggest that we keep this as far as the retreat is concerned, to counsel as far as possible, interior conversations without trying to add other people because I know that other council members would love to add people to. So that’s just my suggestion.
Unknown Speaker 1:16:52
Thank you that we are going to discuss this at the retreat. But just I’m going to call a new Councilmember Christian, just a second, just pointing out the more we talk about this, the more that we spend resources as a city staff, the more we let the Urban Land Institute and and i believe i don’t know where Jocelyn went. But anyway, the more we talk about this, the more value we add to the seller who already is having a hard time letting it go because he thinks his property is worth more than it is. So the more we talk about this, the less likely it is from a capitalist perspective that we’re going to do anything. And so we’re gonna keep talking about this come November, when I’m gone. You guys can continue. But anyway, Counselor questions. Yeah,
Unknown Speaker 1:17:35
just to clarify for Mayor Pro Tem Rodriguez, I did not mean to suggest that we have Dana Crawford talked with at our retreat, I think she’s a little too busy for that. Anyway, I just meant one if this does go forward, that we involve her. And I mean, specifically the sugar melt because that’s, you know, that’s a it’s a project that’s has her name all over it really, as far as I’m concerned. I’ve seen so much of her work in Larimer square and all over the place. Um, yeah, I don’t want I want this to just be a conversation at the retreat with with us. Not a lengthy thing, because the mayor is right. The more we talk about it, the more Mr. Thomas will think, Oh, goodness, I love her even more. All right. Anyway.
Unknown Speaker 1:18:27
Thank you all for your feedback. And it was an honor to present to you all tonight, I just want to put in a plug for the report. And this was a very, very brief overview. There’s a lot more detail in the report. And we spoke at length with all of the owners and their quotes, or direct quotes, analysis of what they said and what they’re hoping to get out of the site are all in the report, including Mr. Thomas’s desires about why he hasn’t sold so far. So we really encourage you to go in there and read it. And this section with Mr. Thomas’s comments, and he called his energy, his company, clean energy LLC, because he really is hoping for the sustainable vision. And I think if we, if the city, maybe helped him accomplish some of those goals, I think he would be actually really excited about it. So just putting out putting out there and please feel free to reach out if you have any questions after your retreat or anything like that. So we hope that this is a resource for you going forward.
Unknown Speaker 1:19:27
All right, Councillor Warren?
Unknown Speaker 1:19:30
Thank you, Mr. Bagley. I did I did already read the full report with with great interest. And I’m do thank you very much. Love the various visions that are presented. But I did have a question earlier that kind of got blown past, do you it’s not in the report. Can you suggest any comparables that might give us Some kind of way of anticipating what the cost of cleanup might be, because that’s my issue about why are we talking about this is, you know, the value of the whole concept depends greatly on how much the cleanup costs.
Unknown Speaker 1:20:18
Cost Councilwoman, I, as I said, the cost of the cleanup really requires more data to quantify how much asbestos is there, for instance, and there have not been adequate investigations into the condition of the soil or the groundwater under the site or other environmental conditions that could be present that we don’t know of, in general, it would not be unusual on a building this size and of this vintage for the asbestos abatement alone to run a million dollars or more, it can, the numbers can get very large. But there are other ways of dealing with the asbestos thing, simply removing it. So it becomes very, very technical very quickly. But again, the key thing is having the information and being able to to quantify those costs. And without knowing what’s there and how much is there. It’s it’s really hard to say we could give you ranges, but but it wouldn’t necessarily be anything you can rely on. Sorry for that. But that’s just
Unknown Speaker 1:21:32
is it feasible to do that analysis without buying the property?
Unknown Speaker 1:21:39
Yes. And I would note that while all of these things do in some way create value for the property owner. There are ways if a process is created and a master plan process is put in place, with as I said, either a public private partnership or Community Development Corporation, then all of the multiple property owners have a vehicle through which to coordinate cooperate, take advantage of whatever incentives are available. A plan like that creates value for all of the individual owners. And there are, as Maryann noted and are detailed in our report, there are goals that the current sugarmill owner has for the property that actually could be beneficial to online sale is not necessarily required to achieve the vision that a master plan could create.
Unknown Speaker 1:22:42
I’m going to go ahead and call us all out of order. We had a the agenda item was Urban Land Institute title advisory panel report, it has been accepted. Kazmir Christiansen made a motion to end the discussion. So not only did we have a we had a motion to call the question which ends debates and questions. We had the motion. We voted on the motion, the motion is over. We have the report. We’ll accept the report. This issue is now done. So we’re gonna go ahead and end it thank you very much to Jocelyn Marianne and Mary. And I didn’t say that until you’re done talking because they don’t want to be rude for your time. Thank you so much. At this time, we are not going to take a three minute break and we’re going to go on first call public invited to be heard. So be back in three.
Unknown Speaker 1:23:41
Okay, folks, for those of you that are watching the live stream and you’d like to call in during our public invited to be heard, now is the time please dial 1887880099. When prompted, you will enter the meeting id 87858056595. Again, the toll free numbers 1-888-788-0099. The meeting id 87858056595. When it prompts you for a participant ID press pound, you will enter a waiting room and then we will let you into the meeting. You will be muted until it’s your time to speak. Please make sure that you unmute your telephone so you can hear what’s going on. When we call you out. Make sure to mute the live stream so that you can hear the instructions through your telephone
Unknown Speaker 1:27:06
All right, how many people in the queue at this point?
Unknown Speaker 1:27:13
there looks like we’ve got about nine or 10. All right.
Unknown Speaker 1:27:16
So let’s go ahead and start the process of getting counsel back and doing public right to be heard.
Unknown Speaker 1:28:00
Looks like we’re just missing a couple council members. For those of you who have entered the meeting, and you’re on mute, I will unmute you by calling out the last three digits of your phone number. Please make sure to mute the live stream or you will hear these instructions about 20 to 30 seconds after I’ve said them, and we will move on to the next caller. So please listen for your phone number. Alright, looks like everyone’s back. May or shall I begin?
Unknown Speaker 1:28:51
Let’s go ahead.
Unknown Speaker 1:28:52
I got the camera ready.
Unknown Speaker 1:28:53
All right. The first caller your phone number ends in 199199. I’m going to ask you to unmute caller 199. Try hitting star six that will also unmute you. There you go.
Unknown Speaker 1:29:22
Can you hear me? mayor and city council? Yes motion 5139 old ranch drive.
Unknown Speaker 1:29:30
I just wanted to make several points on the affordable housing ordinance. First point being as we move forward in 2018, the City Council did adopt a great affordable housing ordinance that we always thought would need some small changes at some point we got 90% there. The ordinance can’t be talked about without also in the binding it with the Envision long term plan which was also incredibly important to providing affordable housing to the city. In those those both those actions taken in 2018, with an awful lot of input from all the stakeholders in the process, and I’m very proud of that process. But it takes time to bear fruit because it only impacted developments that were starting to go through the development process. So I wanted to make this comment. One, as we’re starting to see the fruit of that develop of that of those ordinances, there was always going to be a lag or runway, if you will, until those projects were developed, I think the summer we’re gonna start to see some super exciting things. And a lot of projects generating a lot of revenue for the affordable housing fund. That’s number one. Number two is I just asked that the city council, or staff does seek the input of people that are actually building the housing, that’s the not for profits, and the developers who are investing in the community to make it happen as you consider changes to those ordinances. Because I think that important that input is extremely important. Number three, I think that having the comments been brought up before about whether it’s wise to have developers working with not for profits, I can tell you, it’s it’s not only wise, it’s imperative, because when you do studies, and we have a lot of research on how to build houses affordably, we can give you studies of that we’ll compare largest builders in the country versus entities like Habitat for Humanity. And it’s not even close, you have to align yourself with the people who do it the best. And that’s the only way it gets done. And the last, so I just hope that the we could continue to have a good have some input into the process to come out with a better product process or better end product. The last point I wanted to make and then I’ll hang up is that is that I think Councilman Martin brought up before in her comments about the process of getting a project approved, projects do take a long time to get approved. I want to say this about the process. We’re looking forward to also helping staff as they review that process and hopefully they will review the process. And we’ve had great conversations with the city manager and with Joanie Marcy assistant city manager about that process. Because you have the city council when you say that the most important thing in the city is affordable housing for people. You need to make sure that you’re very comfortable that at the end of the day, you don’t have somebody holding up an affordable housing project because somebody doesn’t like the landscaping that they’re providing or, or other minor items that could be holding things up. I will raise my hand any minute. Any day. If you have an important affordable housing project to move ahead, and it has to move ahead of a project that I do that doesn’t have that doesn’t provide that same affordable benefit. I think your Mosharraf
Unknown Speaker 1:32:33
I’m gonna have to cut you off yet. You’re over three.
Unknown Speaker 1:32:35
Thank you. All right. Have a great day. All right. Next caller.
Unknown Speaker 1:32:42
All right, the next caller, your phone number ends in 278. I’m going to ask you to unmute 278 Are you there?
Unknown Speaker 1:32:53
Hello. Hello, please
Unknown Speaker 1:32:55
state your name and your address. You have three minutes.
Unknown Speaker 1:32:59
Hi, this is thank you it when my address is 21 28/23 Avenue. And I wanted to make comments on the McIntosh Lake situation. So we live near McIntosh lake. And the complaints seem to be impossible to resolve without a huge fence around it some of the people who are complaining, which in my opinion is those people who are complaining don’t like it and know the squeaky wheel folder and regulations await them. My second comment is if you’re really trying to resolve it, why could the union reservoir potentially be free for paddleboarders and kayaks to go out on union? I mean, like for the city of Longmont residents, because if you want me to not go to Macintosh, which is free? What’s the solution to that? And my third point is more of a question. There’s 25 watercraft allowed out on that lake. I agree there’s always way more than 25 watercraft. But where does that come from? Like, how did they determine that? The 25? And is that because of the time they picked the number or is that something someone should look into? That’s all I have.
Unknown Speaker 1:34:09
Thank you next caller.
Unknown Speaker 1:34:13
What would get the next caller? By way of reminder, just the reason why we’re not answering questions. We don’t answer questions at this point staff hopefully will be able to reach out to you. All right, next caller.
Unknown Speaker 1:34:23
All right, the next caller, your phone number ends and 341341 I’m going to ask you to unmute.
Unknown Speaker 1:34:33
Are you there? Hi. I’m here. Great, you
Unknown Speaker 1:34:37
may begin hear me?
Unknown Speaker 1:34:39
Yes, we can. My name is Nancy Davis, becoming a regular and this is about the Mars us meeting meeting.
Unknown Speaker 1:34:51
Can you also state your address for the record? Thank
Unknown Speaker 1:34:53
you. Yes. 10975 lookout road Longmont This is about the meeting on March 16, and about the plan to send the Boulder County Commissioners a letter in favor of a regional composting facility. First with regard to the meeting on the 16th Miss Christensen, you have no idea whether or not we’re wealthy. I’m wondering if it’s possible that someone living next to rainbow might have financial struggles that you don’t know about making your mean spirited comments especially cruel. Either way is being wealthy worthy of disdain. And I’m sorry, color that your comments are out of order.
Unknown Speaker 1:35:33
Do you need to address the chair meaning you can talk to me and say I don’t agree with Councilmember Christensen’s comments, but you’re not supposed to. Okay, council member individually so,
Unknown Speaker 1:35:44
okay. I’d like to know if wealthy or Longmont residents should know about this contempt for wealthy people. I’d also like to know if there might be long run month residents who consider the council members wealthy and thus worthy of contempt. I think that it’s important to acknowledge that the council in the march 16 meeting was incorrect about biosolids. And someone in that meeting, said that they wanted to clarify that this type of composting for this material we’re talking about is different than composting human waste. That is not already allowed by federal law allowed to be land applied many crops to be consumed by human. This is just not true. And it’s irresponsible to assert something like this to a group making decisions that may affect people’s lives. All of us that is and we did a lot of research, a lot of people did a lot of research. And it is very frustrating to be have that chalked up to getting people all riled up. The biosolids plan is in the project narrative, it’s an extensive documentation from years back, the county has paid at least two consultants who are expert in processing and land applying sewage sludge, which does include human sewage, but also even more toxic material that cannot be processed out. There is no reason to build a class three composting facility if you don’t intend to process bio solids. The product was intended for our local farmers quote unquote, who knew nothing about this and plainly stated that they couldn’t use it to grow their crops with I think it’s really important that people in Longmont think, not in slogans but in science, and it’s very clear that people have an iron grip on the moral imperative in Longmont, and I think that needs to be acknowledged in changed. I think we need to be willing to demand science behind project like this instead of buying into environmentally destructive and toxic greenwashing Emery regarding the assertions about representing Longmont right rather than building Boulder County if this facility had been built at rainbow and get more Longmont residents died on 287 and long months, restaurants and shops suffered loss of loss of business because people didn’t want to fight more traffic. I think that wouldn’t be well representing Longmont. I think it’s really important that
Unknown Speaker 1:38:21
that was a little over three and a half minutes. I gave you some extra time because I interrupted you earlier with the point of order. But But everybody’s Okay, given three minutes. But thank you very much for your comments. We appreciate it. Thank you. All right,
Unknown Speaker 1:38:32
Unknown Speaker 1:38:35
All right, the next caller, your phone number ends in 470470. I’m going to ask you to unmute 470. There you are.
Unknown Speaker 1:38:50
My live. Yeah, Yes, you are. Thank you. This is Michael Belmont at 841 tenacity drive. Thank you, council members and Mayor. I’d like to read excerpts a few from an article published today in the Colorado sun. Quote, state air pollution control managers endangered the health of Coloradans by unlawfully approving noxious gas permits for industry without federally mandated modeling or monitoring. According to a whistleblowing complaint filed Tuesday by technical employees inside the agency. Three state employees claim in a complaint to the US EPA Office of Inspector General that their leaders ordered them in mid March to stop performing modeling required by the Clean Air Act. The whistleblowers from the air pollution control division who run the computer models to predict how much pollution will result from a company’s activities say their managers bypass modeling rules in order to speed permits, and avoid a paper trail should the state be sued by environmental groups. The whistleblower say the alleged halt to modeling required by the Federal Clean Air Act is part of a years long pattern of unlawful state actions all of which increased health damaging pollution in Colorado. Loose permitting also push the state deeper into non attainment of US Air standards. The alleged policy change by air pollution control division leaders is the latest and most concrete instance of a pattern of unlawful conduct which is directly responsible for Colorado’s precipitous decline in air quality in the last decade according to the complaint. It includes a sample list of unlawfully issued permits to Colorado industrial operations that range from asphalt plants to oral grilling pads. The complaint describes in detail a leadership culture of approving permits at all costs at apcd and its overarching agency, the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. employees say the division enforces certain standards only when an individual permit might draw extra public attention. public scrutiny is the only criteria that CBP he is concerned about when enforcing or abstaining from the National ambient air quality standards, not legal obligations, or concern for public health and environment. The complaint reads, and quote. Now that doesn’t bristle the hair on the neck of every public servant in this state. We’re in deep trouble from a health, environmental and quality of life perspective. As long months representatives, I urge you to demand support for an investigation into this nefarious and dangerous behavior under the auspices of cdphp and related to this issue. I’m proud of you for facilitating doing our part by continuing to support the critical error monitoring we’re doing with Detlef Hellmuth, thus keeping us on the cutting edge of advocacy for a healthy environment. And I trust you will continue that commitment well into the future. Thanks for your time, folks.
Unknown Speaker 1:41:56
Unknown Speaker 1:42:00
All right, our next caller your phone number ends in 618618. I’m going to ask you to unmute.
Unknown Speaker 1:42:15
Bear on city council members. My name is Susie price and I live at 2241 Spinnaker circle in the shores neighborhood on the north side of McIntosh lake. I want to emphasize my support for working much harder this year to protect the Wildlife Area on the northwest side of the lake. Additional signage is needed to inform users of the area boundaries. The one big sign was fine print at either end and a few signs placed knee high along the path just aren’t cutting it. Since the path around the lake opened, I have seen the occasional person wander through that area to get to the lake shore typically, to let their dog run free into the lake and terrorize the waterfowl. With increased usage,
Unknown Speaker 1:42:56
this problem has only gotten worse,
Unknown Speaker 1:42:58
especially at that Western most sure where the old cocklebur Yacht Club was located. I urge you as part of the staffing plan for the lake, which you are discussing tonight to ensure that there are Ranger and possibly Park volunteer patrols focus on educating people about the nature area and the things that can be found there. The more people understand what is there, the more they will be inclined to participate in the protection of it. Thank you for your time. Thank you, man. All right, next caller.
Unknown Speaker 1:43:31
All right, the next caller your phone number ends and 723 I’m going to ask you to unmute 723 Are you there?
Unknown Speaker 1:43:41
Hello, my name is Cody travelclick. I’m located at 2078 Goldfinch pretty close to Macintosh. Can you guys hear me?
Unknown Speaker 1:43:49
Unknown Speaker 1:43:51
Unknown Speaker 1:43:51
So I’m here as the fire chief of hygiene fire protection district which is just on the west side of city of Long bought. And as of right now, hygiene fire protection district covers the water of McIntosh it’s been like that for a long time. Throughout the past, Longmont fire has responded out there along with hygiene fire. I’m a big fan of whoever gets there first is that’s a great thing. That way someone can get rescued. But in the times call article that I saw it was brought to my attention that you guys are going to try to annex the water into the city. And I would really like to invite you guys to a board meeting and discuss why you would want to do that in the article. It says that we are not providing proper care that city along might can provide proper care and I like to challenge that. I would like to show you the numbers that we have going out there but the jetski to rescue all these paddleboarders I do agree it is an issue. There’s a lot of people out there not proper floatation devices. And it’s been on our radar for the last two years because they increase but I would like to have you guys come to our board meeting and discuss it before you just choose to annex If I add some more time I my grandma also has water rights to that lake. And it worries me that if you guys annex it, what’s that going to do to our water rights? There’s there’s people around hygiene district that have water rights that don’t like people swimming in their water rights. I really don’t have an issue with that. But I just want to make sure that if the lake needs to fix that city permits aren’t going to complicate the process of fixing like, that’s all I have to say.
Unknown Speaker 1:45:31
Thanks, Jeff. All right,
Unknown Speaker 1:45:33
Unknown Speaker 1:45:36
All right. The next caller, your phone number ends in 182182. I’m going to ask you to unmute 182. There you are.
Unknown Speaker 1:46:00
Unknown Speaker 1:46:01
Unknown Speaker 1:46:03
All right. My name is police Harlow. I live at 1762 Drake Street, which is at the corner of Lakeshore drive and Drake. And directly across from McIntosh lake. I have read the report. There’s many good things in it. I would tell you that by August, when that report was or survey was done. Most of us who had been complaining all summer long about the overuse and total disaster of McIntosh, Lake Dawson Park excetera. We didn’t even know about that survey. And we certainly would have voiced. I have spoken with the police. And they’ve told me that unless they see something visually themselves, they cannot act on it. My suggestion for decreasing the number of people using the lake so it comes not back to where it was. But certainly to a limiting number, that you do the same thing that you have done near the dog park on 21st. And that is to designate the street parking on the neighborhood side of Lakeshore drive as neighborhood parking only. That would cut in half the number of cars that would increase the safety. We have seen people making u turns and private property driveways, not paying attention to where kids are. And I will tell you that I am a senior citizen. I have health issues. And as of last summer, I was afraid to walk across the street for fear of getting COVID because of the number of people that were there, the number of people that were totally disregarding the rules and regulations policies for the park and without wearing masks. So the fastest way that you can take care of this would be to make the neighborhood side of Lakeshore drive neighborhood parking only. And I thank you so much for taking this up. It certainly needs to be addressed. Thank you.
Unknown Speaker 1:49:05
Right, how many more callers we should have what one more?
Unknown Speaker 1:49:10
No Mayor that leaves me with 1234 more.
Unknown Speaker 1:49:15
Unknown Speaker 1:49:16
assume that and hold on. And we’ve cut off the we’ve cut off the I mean once we will once the list is pulled, the list is pulled. So let’s make sure that it’s now pulled no more. No more callers can join the line place. Alright, let’s go and listen to the last four.
Unknown Speaker 1:49:34
Okay, the next caller is 212 your phone number ends in 212. Are you there? There you are. Oh yes.
Unknown Speaker 1:49:55
Okay. Can I speak now?
Unknown Speaker 1:49:58
Yes, go ahead and stay true. name and address for the record you may begin.
Unknown Speaker 1:50:03
Okay, this is Jeff Thompson 1616 Sumner Street. Um, with regard to item nine beyond the agenda ordinance 2021 dash 19. It amends paragraph B of Section 4.7 9.02 of the code fee reduction or subsidy for affordable housing. My comment on that is that nobody on the city console has read that paragraph, the amendment. And nobody on the city council can explain how that could possibly work. So that we can make necessary additions and upgrades to our water and electric utility infrastructure needed to provide for the growth of the city without increasing our utility bills, once again, like you do every year. If we allow the Director of Planning and Development Services to reduce the fees that are in that are for reduction in paragraph a, I don’t think anybody on the city console has taken the time to read this ordinance or consider it or understand it. And I think this is just your moral responsibility. I don’t think anybody on the city console can answer the question as to whether it’s good as to whether providing affordable housing is a legitimate function of an electric or water utility enterprise. And I’d also like to say that Mayor Bagley has been encouraging non compliance with reasonable health orders met for us to protect each other. Mayor Bagley has been encouraging non compliance with that. And now we’re here to not that he got COVID, probably because he wasn’t complying with health orders, he probably put other people in danger or maybe infected them. And the problem is, is that Mayor Bagley has no empathy for the people that have been killed by this virus for the people whose health has been permanently damaged for the people who have been wiped out by medical fees because of this virus that they’ll never be able to pay. Mayor Bagley has no empathy for anybody at all. He’s a narcissist. He doesn’t care about anybody else. And he’s willing to go on and on about development and finances and blah, blah, blah, and try to show everybody how smart he is about these things. All right. That’s
Unknown Speaker 1:53:04
three minutes. Thank
Unknown Speaker 1:53:05
you very much, Mr. Thompson.
Unknown Speaker 1:53:06
All right, next caller.
Unknown Speaker 1:53:09
All right, the next caller, your phone number ends in 438438.
Unknown Speaker 1:53:18
Are you there?
Unknown Speaker 1:53:27
438. Try hitting star six on your phone to unmute. Call her for three, eight. Please make sure that you’ve muted the live stream. Otherwise, you’ll be hearing these instructions in about 20 or 30 seconds.
Unknown Speaker 1:54:09
All right, I’m going to go on to the next caller. Caller 917. I’m going to ask you to unmute. There you are.
Unknown Speaker 1:54:20
Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of council. My name is Travis homie. I’m the fire marshal for hygiene fire. I just want to kind of piggyback on what chief Trebek said. One point that struck me in the times call article, city staff with that annexing this water in to the city of Longmont will lead to quicker and more efficient response by Longmont public safety. I’m the numbers guy for hygiene fire. In 2020. We were three minutes and 25 seconds from dispatch to on scene. There’s not many agencies that can beat that time. So That statement kind of struck a chord. If you guys like, instead of inviting you all to the board meeting, because I know that you’d have to call a special city council meeting for it. If any of you would like to the numbers to compare apples to apples, I’m happy to provide them in a report for you all, just ask. I’m happy to give anything that we need to show our response time from hygiene to that water. And we can have a jetski I mean, three minutes, 25 seconds to have a jetski in the water is pretty good time. Thank you for your time. Have a good evening.
Unknown Speaker 1:55:39
Unknown Speaker 1:55:40
Unknown Speaker 1:55:44
All right. The next caller is 740. I’m going to ask you to unmute 740 There you are.
Unknown Speaker 1:55:57
Hello, good evening. Can you hear me? Yes, we
Unknown Speaker 1:55:59
can. Please state your name and address for the record. You
Unknown Speaker 1:56:02
have three minutes. Jeff longer 1357, Washburn Street and airy. Good evening, mr. mayor and council members. Thank you for taking my comments. As a former low month citizen and continued citizen of Boulder County I’m extremely disappointed with the Longmont City Council’s recent proposal of support for the county’s regional compost facility. The County’s proposal was to build a 40 acre industrial scale compost facility on open space purchase with taxpayer dollars with previously had a conservation easement to protect the land from development. This facility was to be a class three site, which would accept 1000s of tons of materials including construction demolition, as well as BIOS all the way is from the entire Front Range, not just Boulder County. The County’s own waste diversion reports indicate there’s no need for the additional capacity of compost facility. local farmers indicate they can’t use the non organic compost such a facility would create any environmental savings from trucking our materials to kingsburg would easily be erased by the plan to truck other materials into the county. The county could not reference a single example of an equivalent facility and size materials and proximity to homes located anywhere in the United States. In India, the only similar size the references have significant pollution complaints in some places were shut down. All this information is available in the public record and likely other reasons The proposal was pulled back. Any bowler county citizens should be concerned about these issues and the cost of taxpayers millions and labor hours consulting and legal fees. So the compost facility is the purview of the county belong on city council has a responsibility to your citizens to look out for their interests, including how their tax dollars are spent and how their land is used. You could be issuing a statement of support but also listing potential concerns and objections that might ensure future proposals are in alignment was about with long one values. Instead, you have chosen to issue a blanket statement of support without any element of concern or accountability for what has occurred thus far. And in doing so you missed an opportunity to ensure effective oversight of the county on behalf of your citizens. having accomplished facility is not as important as building one safely and ethically ethically. If any elements of the previous facility proposal are not acceptable to you, you should be saying so now your silence is implicit support. Thank you. I thank you, sir. Alright, last caller.
Unknown Speaker 1:58:13
All right. Let’s try 438. Again, I’m going to ask you to unmute
Unknown Speaker 1:58:19
Susan, Susan, I got a text from the caller at 438. Who indicated she’s trying to unmute and the system won’t allow her to do it.
Unknown Speaker 1:58:28
She needs to trice there she goes she’s been able to do it. Are you there? For three eight looks like you unmuted. Hello 438 while I heard her just mute herself. I’m going to ask her to unmute again. 438 hit star six. star six should unmute unmute yourself on using your telephone. There you are. Can you hear us? All I can hear is silence line.
Unknown Speaker 1:59:24
Susan her text
Unknown Speaker 1:59:25
indicates she pushes star section. It doesn’t unmute her. I know we can. It looks like it does but apparently not. Okay,
Unknown Speaker 1:59:33
well there’s not much else I can do.
Unknown Speaker 1:59:39
But you want to unmute or texted to me.
Unknown Speaker 1:59:42
Unknown Speaker 1:59:43
don’t don’t don’t
Unknown Speaker 1:59:44
say it out loud. Just text it to me doc and then I’ll just call her and put her on my speakerphone.
Unknown Speaker 1:59:56
Caller you probably want to hang up if if the mayor’s gonna go ahead and give you a Call. Alright, so they have they have hung up.
Unknown Speaker 2:00:32
It’s on its way.
Unknown Speaker 2:00:33
I got it.
Unknown Speaker 2:00:34
Unknown Speaker 2:00:44
All right, we’ve got we have got Kathy would pull more on. And go ahead Kathy.
Unknown Speaker 2:00:51
Okay. My address is 2312 Kelly drive unit a Longmont, Colorado 80504. It appears I am piggybacking on the previous presentation of the evening in the importance of our agricultural history, and it was an excellent presentation. And I’m actually calling regarding the presentation of a beautiful red brick silo on highway 66. East of Pei Street. The silo is owned by the city of Longmont. It is located on the north side of blue Creek Golf Course. It is 83 years old. The two signatures of its creators are still on the silo. The historic preservation commission did vote to designate the silo is a historic structure at the march 4 2021 meeting, I’m hoping the city council will also vote to preserve it for future generations. As the Front Range has been swallowed up by development. We could not go back as a community member that was born and raised here. I remember when you Creek Golf Course was a farm. And as you know, a large communication company applied to place their unattractive equipment on top at the bottom of the silo three years ago. And this could happen again at any time. I would like to see this historic designation happen as we celebrate long lost 100 and 50th birthday. We could all use some good news. I would also like to see this as a tribute to the three generations of Ohio family, the farm this land. Unfortunately, Mr. Larry Hale passed away in 2018. Mrs. Alma Hale is an involved community member that teaches our classes at the Lamont Senior Center, and she has written an interesting history of the farm and silo. In my opinion, the silo is an extension of art and public places. it welcomes people into Longmont on highway 66 and is viewed by many golfers nearly every day. Over 150 Longmont citizens have signed petitions expressing their desire for this designation. Please do not forget that protecting existing neighborhoods and preserving our community’s history are foundational elements of the lawman area comprehensive plan. Thank you for your consideration in this matter and all the time you spend on City Council.
Unknown Speaker 2:02:59
Thank you, man. We appreciate your call.
Unknown Speaker 2:03:03
Unknown Speaker 2:03:04
Thank you Dr. Waters for the assist. All right, that will conclude first call public invited to be heard. Let’s move on to item nine, which is our consent agenda. Donna, could you read that for us? Please? recuse vote on it like last time?
Unknown Speaker 2:03:19
I will read it first. Thank
Unknown Speaker 2:03:20
you, Mayor. item nine a ordinance 2021 dash 18 a bill for an ordinance amending chapter 15.05 sections 1505 to 20 and 1510 zero 20 of Longmont municipal code on inclusionary housing, public hearing and second reading scheduled for April 13 2021 nine B ordinance 2021 dash 19 a bill for an ordinance amending chapter 4.79 of the Longmont municipal code on fee reduction or subsidy, public hearing and second reading scheduled for April 13 2021. Nine c ordinance 2021 dash 20. A bill for an ordinance approving the lease agreement between the city of Longmont, Colorado, and the oligarchy irrigation company, public hearing and second reading scheduled for April 13 2021 90. ordinance 2021 dash 21 a bill for an ordinance designating the Heil melander silo at 2000 up Creek drive as a local historic landmark public hearing and second reading scheduled for April 13 2021 90. Resolution 2021 dash 25 a resolution of Longmont city council authorizing an agreement between the city of Longmont and the estate of Donald D Montgomery for the purchase of real property known as the Montgomery farm. Nine f resolution 2021 dash 26 a resolution of the Longmont city council approving the intergovernmental agreement between the city acting by and through its water utility enterprise, East Cherry Creek Valley Water and Sanitation district Arapahoe county water and wastewater authority and united water and sanitation district for short term raw water exchange. Nine g resolution 2021 dash 27 a resolution of the Longmont city council approving a future intergovernmental agreement between the city and the Department of local affairs for a grant supporting carbon footprint reduction at the wastewater treatment plant. Ah resolution 2021 dash 28 a resolution in Longmont city council approving the intergovernmental agreement between the city of Longmont and Boulder County housing authority for maintenance and replacement of a permanent stormwater control facility at 508. Catherine Street, nine eyes resolution 2021 dash 29 a resolution of the Lamont city council to approving the intergovernmental agreement between the city and the Colorado Department of Transportation for grant funding to support the Longmont Mainstreet bicycle Wayfinding project. Nine j resolution 2021 dash 30 resolution of the Longmont city council approving an agreement with Kp Kaufmann company for the site relinquishment plugging and abandonment abandonment of the Tabor number seven well 9k resolution 2021 dash 31 a resolution of the Longmont city council approving the intergovernmental agreement between the city and the city of Boulder concerning the use of a city of Longmont van for the COVID-19 shelter for the homeless. Nine L is approved one Capital Improvement Program amendment and nine M is approved revised letter to Boulder County Commissioners supporting a local composting facility. And Mayor just reminder that staff would like you to pull nine a for a brief discussion.
Unknown Speaker 2:06:10
All right, you have emotion. dark waters,
Unknown Speaker 2:06:13
you y’all move the consent agenda minus item nine a
Unknown Speaker 2:06:17
I guess. All right. It’s
Unknown Speaker 2:06:19
been moved by Dr. Waters. And seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Rodriguez. Councilmember pack
Unknown Speaker 2:06:23
wanted to move on.
Unknown Speaker 2:06:26
I mean, pull nine. I wanted to pull J. Nine J.
Unknown Speaker 2:06:33
The chair is going to take it as a motion if there’s no objection to pass the consent agenda minus a and j Will you accept that amendment?
Unknown Speaker 2:06:40
Can we’ll do yesterday? All right. Thank
Unknown Speaker 2:06:42
Unknown Speaker 2:06:43
No problem. Counselor pack. Thank
Unknown Speaker 2:06:44
Unknown Speaker 2:06:45
All right. All in favor of moving capacity. The consent agenda minus a and j say aye.
Unknown Speaker 2:06:51
Aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. All right, the
Unknown Speaker 2:06:55
consent agenda minus a and j passes unanimously. Let’s go on to item j first, since it’s a council member who pulled it ginsburg pack.
Unknown Speaker 2:07:05
Do we do second reading first? Oh, yeah,
Unknown Speaker 2:07:08
I guess we Yes, we could we could do that. Could we? Let’s go ahead and blaze on through these. All right. ordinate 10 A ordinance 2021. That’s 15. Actually, let’s go and take three minutes and allow the public to call in. And if you’re going to be if you want to speak at the public hearing pertaining to item 10 a 10 B 10. c. Call in now left three minutes to get on and then just kind of hang tight until your ordinance in second reading comes onto the agenda.
Unknown Speaker 2:07:38
Back in three.
Unknown Speaker 1:54
All right, we are back. All right, great. Looks like we’re all back. All right. We’ll go ahead and reconvene. We’ll go on to ordinance, readings of ordinances on second reading and public hearings on the following matters. Yes. Councillor Martin?
Unknown Speaker 2:20
We did not pass the consent agenda.
Unknown Speaker 2:23
Unknown Speaker 2:23
Yeah, I think did we know? Yeah. We took the motion passed. Last unanimously. Less Item A and J. And then Councilmember pack so graciously pointed out that instead of going on to a and J, we needed to continue with the agenda, which I wholeheartedly agree with. All right. Thank you. So item 10. A ordinance 2021. That’s 15 a bill for an ordinance making additional appropriations for expenses and liabilities, the city of lamarque for fiscal year beginning January 120 21. Are there any questions from council or staff presentation? I do not believe there is. Alright. Seeing none. Let’s go ahead and open the public hearing on ordinance 2021 dash 15. Are there any callers wishing to speak at this time? Do we have any callers on the line? Don?
Unknown Speaker 3:05
mayor, we have just one caller that was still in the waiting room from the first public invited to be heard. So I don’t know if they want to speak on any of the public hearing items. I can unmute them and ask them.
Unknown Speaker 3:17
Let’s go ahead and unmute them and ask them.
Unknown Speaker 3:20
Caller 212. I’m going to ask you to unmute. Are you here to speak on one of the public hearing items? caller 212.
Unknown Speaker 3:37
All right. We’re gonna take that as a no. And we’re gonna go ahead and close the public hearing on ordinance 2021 15. And we’ll come back and ask that caller again on on. Yep.
Unknown Speaker 3:50
Yeah, I’m trying to speak on this ordinance.
Unknown Speaker 3:53
Alright, go ahead. Go ahead. Mr. Thompson. Welcome back.
Unknown Speaker 3:57
Okay, you got my name and my address. Um, this is incredibly frustrating. Okay, on this one, I want to direct your attention to transportation Community Investment fee Fund. The communication on this and the ordinance. There’s no citation of any authority that the city council would have to reimburse the developer for transportation Community Investment fees, none whatsoever. I was the code. How, how is the city council where does its power to reimburse these fees come from and I’m addressing these comments to you mare, but it really makes me sick to do so because you are person without human empathy. And you don’t understand how taxes and utility bills, impact working class people harder than people in your income, you don’t understand, you know, you don’t understand how these, this financial mismanagement really hurts people, especially during a pandemic, people are putting utility bills and payments on their credit cards, and then they can’t pay their balance. And then they’re paying 18 to 30%. interest, other utility charges. And this is a perfect example of how you intend to reimburse things like in this case, transportation Community Investment fee. And also your you’re planning to reimburse things like the cash in lieu fee and the systems development fees, and shift all these costs off the developers onto the backs of working class people and people on fixed incomes, doing things like this. And you look at this, how you’re doing it here, in this case, there’s no citation of a code that allows you to do that. And there’s no justification of why that developer in this case, it’s a very sympathetic case. You see how that’s great. But it could be Kevin May, Kevin, Mel shine, it could be dim waters, best new friend, Kevin, Mel shine, and this, what is this? HR, ah, whatever Rogers road development that Councilmember waters has been so intimately involved with and with the developer, and we’re going to be seeing things like this come through, you can be sure that they’re going to want reimbursement of their fees, they’re going to want to have the burden taken off of them. So they can make additional profit,
Unknown Speaker 7:09
Mr. Mr. And Miss talking about the cutoff. That’s three minutes, but the good news is the good news is we have item 10, B and 10. c, so hang on the line, and you can keep going and just a few seconds. Okay, so just hang tight. All right. No, anybody else on the line?
Unknown Speaker 7:25
May or no, we don’t have any other callers.
Unknown Speaker 7:28
All right, we’re gonna go ahead and close the public hearing on this matter. But we will hope that Mr. Thompson sticks around for another three minutes. And we will go ahead and close the public hearing if there’s no further comment, or debate. All right. Do we have a motion on ordinance to 2021? That’s 15 customer waters. Would you like to make a motion?
Unknown Speaker 7:48
I’ll move approval of ordinance 2021 dash 15.
Unknown Speaker 7:53
I will second that. So it’s been moved by Councilmember waters and second by Mayor Bagley. All in favor say aye. Aye.
Unknown Speaker 8:01
Unknown Speaker 8:02
Aye. Opposed say nay. All right, the Motion carries unanimously. Let’s move on to item 10 b ordinance 2021 dot 16. A bill for an ordinance amending chapters 15.0 to 15.04 15.05 and 15.10. The Longmont municipal code regarding city council review of development applications adjacent to city parks greenways and open space. Um, let’s go on to just open the public hearing. Is there anyone on the line?
Unknown Speaker 8:29
mayor, we just have one caller I can see if they want to speak on this awesome.
Unknown Speaker 8:33
I’m sure he will. Mr. Thompson. You’ve got three minutes.
Unknown Speaker 8:44
Call or 212? I’m asking you to unmute. Do you want to speak on this?
Unknown Speaker 8:59
Pretty sure he does. So we’ll just wait.
Unknown Speaker 9:06
Yeah, I don’t want to speak on that.
Unknown Speaker 9:10
Well, all right. Well, you will. Okay. Then we will go ahead and close. Close the public hearing. All right. Are there any questions from council pertaining to ordinance? 2021 dash 15 All right, seeing none Do we have a motion? Councilmember Christiansen?
Unknown Speaker 9:30
ordinance. 2021 dash 16.
Unknown Speaker 9:33
I will Second. All right. No, go ahead. Counselor Peck will let you second the motion. ordinance 2021 dot 16 and it has been moved by Councilmember Christiansen has been seconded by Councilmember Peck. All in favor of ordinance 2021 16. say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. All right, the Motion carries unanimously. All right, let’s move on to item 10. See ordinance 2021 17. A bill for an ordinance conditionally Moving the vacation of an eight foot temporary pedestrian easement within the shadow grass Park conveyance plat general located south of 17th Avenue, west of county line road. Are there any questions from council? Let’s proceed to the public hearing. Is there any callers on the line that would like to address us during the public hearing?
Unknown Speaker 10:17
We can check and see if you’d like to speak on this item.
Unknown Speaker 10:20
All right, Mr. collard
Unknown Speaker 10:21
color. 212. All right. Mr. Thompson, would
Unknown Speaker 10:24
you like to address ordinance 2021 17 for three minutes. Mayor, it
Unknown Speaker 10:29
looks like he’s hung up.
Unknown Speaker 10:30
All right. We will then close the public public hearing and saying that there was no questions or comments from Council. Do we have a motion?
Unknown Speaker 10:37
Move approval of ordinance 2021 dash 17.
Unknown Speaker 10:41
Unknown Speaker 10:42
it’s been Moved by Councillor waters and seconded by Councillor Christiansen Councilmember. They all fairing got to move a little quicker if you’re going to get that second in but we did. We do appreciate the effort. All in favor say aye.
Unknown Speaker 10:54
Unknown Speaker 10:56
Po say nay. All right, the Motion carries unanimously. Let’s go on to the items removed from the consent agenda Councilmember pack and in the spirit with which it was intended. Can we go ahead and address item nine j, which was Councilmember pecks issue. Thank you. I
Unknown Speaker 11:12
just have a couple of questions about this. First of all, I’m very glad that we are abandoning and closing and abandoning as well. But it says that we’re taking 75,000 out of the royalties to help close this. My question is, how much do we have in our royalties? How much do we get our royalties in 2021? Do you can anybody answer that?
Unknown Speaker 11:43
Jim Dale, are you there? I can’t remember the exact or Jane answer.
Unknown Speaker 11:50
Yeah, I’m happy to answer. So he did a little over 2 million in royalties. And those royalties go to different places, as you know, some will be set aside for the cub Creek agreement. But we do have funds available to cover the 75,000. And we also are keeping an eye on those funds to make sure that they’re quality monitoring and other monitoring programs that we have for oil and gas. plenty of money for the coming years is available for that. Okay,
Unknown Speaker 12:20
thank you. I also would like to know, it says in part of this, that Caitlyn is going to pay for the expenses for remediation. How does doesn’t 75 I guess I don’t know what the difference is and what we are paying for, for the closing of and abandoning of the well versus the remediation. Are these one in the same are these two different efforts are two different processes?
Unknown Speaker 12:56
mayor and council, the process is kind of two parallel parts. So co GCC will guide them through the steps for plugging and abandoning well, they’ll fill it with concrete, they’ll remove the infrastructure and the flow lines. And yes, that’s the part that the city pays half of now getting that property back to a more natural state. So any disturbances that happened during the plugin abandonment, any contamination that may be discovered along the way, and then the reclamation process, so receding it making sure that that soil is stabilized, that will all be completely paid for by coffin.
Unknown Speaker 13:35
Okay. And my other question, and perhaps the remediation takes does this is the plans are to make this a public park? Are we going to make sure that soil is not contaminated? Is that part of the remediation process?
Unknown Speaker 13:51
Absolutely. mayor and council co GCC will require them to sample any contamination that they come across. And we do currently monitor that site and have been for a couple of years. So we have three monitoring wells out there. We have done some soil samples as the city of Longmont and we’re not expecting to find any contamination, but they will be removing tanks and things. And so there certainly is a possibility and we will make sure that they’re sampling and we’re also talking about having third party oversight from terracon or another contractor to make sure that we’re happy with how that’s done.
Unknown Speaker 14:27
Okay, great. Thank you for that information. With that. I’m going to move 2021 30
Unknown Speaker 14:33
I’ll second that then. We’ll go ahead. It was moved by Councilmember pack and it was seconded by Councilmember Naugle fairing any additional Actually, she pulled it nobody else had any comments. So let’s go ahead and vote All in favor of resolution 2021 dash 30 resolution Aloma city council approving the agreement with Kp cop and company for the site relinquishment plugging in a Bama the Tabor number seven well say aye.
Unknown Speaker 14:56
Unknown Speaker 14:58
Opposed say nay. All right Motion carries unanimously. Herald,
Unknown Speaker 15:03
Mayor council Jane once this is done the only remaining active well will be the stamp in that will be plugged in abandoned once the night is at night once the night sights completed so Council, you all started this few years ago and I wanted to remind you based on this action tonight, we now have agreements for the act all active wells that were within the Longmont city limits to be plugged and abandoned. And I just wanted to point that out to you all tonight. There was a big step by step.
Unknown Speaker 15:43
Unknown Speaker 15:45
Well, yes Casper pack. I’m sorry.
Unknown Speaker 15:49
Um, so we’re here. Oh, just to make a finer point. Are we talking about only wells that are on public property? Are there any wells on private property within the city limits? There are none. Okay, thank you.
Unknown Speaker 16:07
All right. Then with that, let’s go on to item 11. Nothing of the 12 general business
Unknown Speaker 16:18
nine a mayor
Unknown Speaker 16:19
nine oh, that you’re right nine a Steph, thank you. Let’s have a report. Thank you go ahead and staff. They’re in Council
Unknown Speaker 16:26
Kathy fetlar has in Community Investment division manager. And I really just wanted to information on on this item wanted to let you know that these code changes do not apply to projects that have complete applications in the development review process. This applicability is primarily impacting the change from 60% ami to 50% ami for rental projects. So this will impact five projects, five rental projects that are in the review process right now, three of these have chosen to provide their affordable units on site to are 100% affordable with one having all their units below 50% ami, so it’s not impactful to them. One has eight of 25 units affordable at 60%. ami and the rest are all below 50%. So it is not that impactful to them either. The final one is trying to provide 12% at of their units at 60% ami. So that’s the one that is most impacted by this. But because they will be exempt from that change, they can continue at 60% ami. Two additional rental projects are under construction. Both of those are primarily at 60%. area median income, obviously it doesn’t apply to them. But it’s Kauffman the Kauffman project at 518. Kaufman 32% of their units are below 50%, ami and 68 are at 60%. And then the farmhouse project at third and one night team has 12% of their units or 33 total units at 60% ami. So they’re obviously grandfathered as well, since they’re under construction. So I just wanted to bring this forward to make sure that we were informed aboveboard. We don’t have to make any additional code language changes to it. And so the developments that this might be impacted, can rest assured that they move forward at the 60% ami level.
Unknown Speaker 18:44
Unknown Speaker 18:45
Right. Thank you. Councilmember Christiansen and then Dr. Waters.
Unknown Speaker 18:51
We’re going to you’re not going to show the slide deck.
Unknown Speaker 19:00
I don’t have a slide deck for this.
Unknown Speaker 19:05
The public hearing about we’re not talking about eight, a
Unknown Speaker 19:09
Unknown Speaker 19:12
we’re talking? Okay. I’m confused about what what that slide deck goes to. It’s the one about the
Unknown Speaker 19:20
Unknown Speaker 19:34
It’s the one that’s labeled review of possible changes to the inclusionary housing code. Oh, so that there
Unknown Speaker 19:41
was a PowerPoint attached to it. Just to remind you of what the votes were that were taken as we move into the code change. So we’ll be going through that in more detail at public hearing and second reading at the April 13 meeting, I think.
Unknown Speaker 19:57
Okay, I want us to be sure to discuss Once again, they’re the notion of land in lieu, and how that should actually be going to the city not being a developer decision of who they get to give it to. Okay, that’s your last slide on that review of possible changes in inclusionary housing code.
Unknown Speaker 20:23
Okay. And I think that was I think that was scheduled to come back later in the year because we were going to do some research around the implications and how that all might work together. We were going to bring that back, I think in the third quarter is what we kind of estimated. Because we did want to talk to the developers and we wanted to do some additional outreach around that, if I’m remembering correctly.
Unknown Speaker 20:51
refer to later rather than later. Okay.
Unknown Speaker 20:56
That’s my waters.
Unknown Speaker 20:57
Unknown Speaker 20:58
Unknown Speaker 20:59
I just want to thank Kathy, just for the comments. I know those were the two that was one of the two more complex potential amendments to the ordinance. And I, you know, and it’s scheduled to come back later in the year. And you just you just confirmed what I was hopeful that, that we would be pretty inclusive in terms of who we hear from, including habitat and others who are part of that whole decision making, you know, process and in means for meeting the expectation in terms of donations, however, that however, the council decides to handle that, that we would have a pretty robust engagement process and it sounds like that’s what you’re going to do. So thank you.
Unknown Speaker 21:45
All right. Do you have a motion customer? Actually? Who made the motion who actually made the motion? I’ll move? item nine a orders. 2021 dash 18 second. All right. All in favor board is 2021 dash 18. say Aye.
Unknown Speaker 21:57
Unknown Speaker 21:59
All opposed say nay. All right, Motion carries unanimously. All right. Consent Agenda all passes. Now, let’s go on, I believe, to general business. Am I missing anything? Hi, Third time’s the third time’s the charm. 12. A is llama Housing Authority Board of Commissioners. Let’s go ahead and do we have a motion to recess the Longmont city council and convene as the Board of Commissioners the llama Housing Authority. All right. Councillor Martin has made the motion Mayor Pro Tem has seconded it, at least I that’s how I’ll take the take the dual motions. Thanks. Yo, yo. All right. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. Alright, so the we are now it’s unanimous. We are now convened as the Longmont city I’m no longer as long as city council but as the Board of Commissioners along the Housing Authority. Let’s go ahead and review and approval on my Housing Authority five year public housing plan and many other actions. Harold is our executive director, or interim acting executive director.
Unknown Speaker 23:08
First thing I need you all to do is approve the approval of minutes from the February 26 2021.
Unknown Speaker 23:17
I’m also moved.
Unknown Speaker 23:19
Unknown Speaker 23:20
All right was moved by myself and seconded by Councilmember Christiansen All in favor of approving the minutes say aye. Aye.
Unknown Speaker 23:26
Unknown Speaker 23:28
Okay. Dr. Waters.
Unknown Speaker 23:30
Yeah, just in the minute. Terrell, one of the things we did in that meeting was, was authorize you or the city. Or maybe Well, that was it would be as the city or as the llj. Director, actually, to lease those, the least the lsj offices. I’ve just I would just as I read the minutes, I should have asked you this yesterday, but I forgot. Where are we with that with that lease agreement.
Unknown Speaker 23:59
So what we have now is, I’ve talked to him and we’ve agreed to price. The issue that we’re having the final issue we’re trying to deal with on this is actually files and get those moved over. I think we now have a solution to it. But that was the the most significant issue is understanding what we do with the files and how we move them over because I can’t move the people without the files and they need to be together. So talk to Paul yesterday. Now, Roy, when he gets back in town, we’re going to talk again, but I think conceptually all the terms are there. We just need to continue moving through with that.
Unknown Speaker 24:37
You have it.
Unknown Speaker 24:38
Jeff, do you have any anything to correct on the minutes? Dr. Waters?
Unknown Speaker 24:42
I do not. I just I should have waited to wait.
Unknown Speaker 24:45
I’ll just I’ll just make sure so we’re halfway through the vote. All opposed to approve the minutes. Alright, the approval of minutes passes unanimously. All right. Sorry for the weirdness of that vote but still counts. All right, Harold Can you please continue?
Unknown Speaker 25:01
Cathy’s got the next one. I’m trying to five year five year policy, the one thing I want to do and probably I’m going to talk about something Kathy was planning on, we know that we have for the retreat, time to talk about the Housing Authority. And you’re probably asking, Well, why is the five year plan coming at this point? It’s because it is due to HUD. So this was a deadline that we have to hit. And mayor, we need you to come in and sign this tomorrow. So what we did is we made some minor adjustments, and Cathy will go over that, on what we saw. We need you all to adopt this to check the box for HUD, we will get that sent in to him. But we do know that we’re going to have another conversation with you all as part of the retreat on the Housing Authority. And this plan can be amended. So when we talk about goals and objectives, there will be time to do that. This is to check the box for HUD and meet the deadlines that they require. Correct Kathy?
Unknown Speaker 26:03
Harold knowing that, that her knowing that signature is important. And Don pointed that out to me, I need to be in Denver for meeting at nine. Could you guys please put that on my desk and have it ready for signature like it’s seven. And I’ll just sign it as I head out of town. Or unless you want to sign up Mayor Pro Tem.
Unknown Speaker 26:21
I’ve already been asked because I knew you’re going to be out of town to sign some paperwork. So I’m available tomorrow to do that. So
Unknown Speaker 26:29
what if you could if you could go in and sign that stuff? I’m not going to be out of town. I just got to go to the airport. But it’s important. So I’d rather have I’d rather have you covered for me and get it done on time. So which is why we have an airport town. So thank you. I appreciate that.
Unknown Speaker 26:42
Kathy, do you want to go over it real quick?
Unknown Speaker 26:44
Sure. So as Harold indicated, this is a very prescribed plan, because we’re a small public housing agency. And so it’s a very abbreviated type of type of plan. What we did was we took what they had in place before we made updates where we thought was appropriate without getting too far ahead of of the board and where they wanted to go. We did take this by the Longmont Housing Authority advisory board as well. And provided they provided a couple of comments. And we did make those incorporated in it in here. But unfortunately, as Harold indicated, because of timing, which it actually it was due in January, and we missed that deadline. So we got an extension till March 31. So it’s like worth the effort very end, we can amend it. And I think that’s a good idea after there’s more times to spend on exactly where we want to go to go back in and amend this. But it’s kind of like the Consolidated Plan is it’s very prescriptive. And it’s not very user friendly or public friendly. I don’t think at all, but it is what it is. So that’s that’s basically it we we revised or not revised, but we reordered the objectives and the Progress Report. So they match up better was was the main change that we made. So there’s any specific questions, I’d be more than happy to take a stab at answering them.
Unknown Speaker 28:24
Because we’re Christians.
Unknown Speaker 28:28
I would like to. Okay, I’d like to point out these are the, our discussion about dough a lot the other day, Harold and Kathy and Karen, if she’s here that on both the goals and objectives B two and B three, the Progress Report. The last one is to develop, enhance and strengthen external relationships with key partners, other agencies and target and the larger community. And these are the our discussion about how the agency we were talking about meets that complies with the five year plan. That’s an additional way of compliance.
Unknown Speaker 29:22
All right, Kathy, what else have
Unknown Speaker 29:24
you got for us?
Unknown Speaker 29:28
That’s it on this I we just need to motion to approve it and move forward unless there
Unknown Speaker 29:32
Unknown Speaker 29:35
customer Krishna says that a second.
Unknown Speaker 29:37
Unknown Speaker 29:38
All right. It was moved by myself. Seconded by Councilmember Christensen. The motion is to move forward with the five year public housing plan. All in favor say aye.
Unknown Speaker 29:47
Unknown Speaker 29:48
Oh, say nay. All right,
Unknown Speaker 29:51
the Motion carries unanimously. Anything else regarding llama Housing Authority. Whoa.
Unknown Speaker 29:58
Let’s keep going.
Unknown Speaker 30:00
I’m Kathy, do you want to go over the
Unknown Speaker 30:04
Unknown Speaker 30:07
I’ll start this, this is the bad debt policy. So what we started seeing lsj had in place, a bad debt policy related to the tenants. And it was being followed. But the challenge with this is it didn’t give us any latitude and writing off debt prior to the Lh a board approval. In specifically, as we mentioned, in the council column, if the debt would cause an inability to process a security deposit refund, took into the into account the incorrect data in the financial management system or other issues. that required a quicker response. We didn’t have the ability to act quickly on that. And in terms of the the executive director, so what the revised bad debt policy does, it gives the executive director the ability to write off up to $5,000 in in bad debt for the tenant if a quick response is needed prior to the next board meeting. Kathy, do you have anything that you want to add to that,
Unknown Speaker 31:13
just that there’s a time limit to when we have to refund security deposits. So that’s, that’s what creates the issue. It’s a pretty short turnaround, if 30 days or 60 days.
Unknown Speaker 31:24
Unknown Speaker 31:26
So it’s very difficult sometimes to fit it in without having a special board meeting and really reacting quickly. So it just gives up to a certain dollar amount as well, for us to be able to move forward. With that up to 5000 per per tenant or resident to write off, and they’re hardly ever that much, it’d be usually a lot
Unknown Speaker 31:48
Unknown Speaker 31:50
We also think that this is, as we look at the financials, we’re seeing things that exist in history on this one. One of the things that’s different now versus what was being done before is that Lisa and the property managers have really created a process for us to stay on top of this, so that we don’t see these issues arise in the same fashion in terms of what we’re seeing in some of the older records.
Unknown Speaker 32:26
Unknown Speaker 32:29
actually, Councilmember waters this first, look.
Unknown Speaker 32:33
Okay, dark waters once you go ahead, and then we’ll catch mine, Christiansen. Oh, thanks, Mayor.
Unknown Speaker 32:37
And council member Christiansen. I think this is a good idea here. I just think we need to add the word debt on number three in the red after the word tenant in between before the word prior
Unknown Speaker 32:51
Unknown Speaker 32:56
Unknown Speaker 33:01
Anybody else? Casper Christiansen?
Unknown Speaker 33:04
Unknown Speaker 33:07
I don’t have a color printer. I am wondering if and then No, I’m looking at the printout
Unknown Speaker 33:15
Unknown Speaker 33:17
item be under the policy. It says within 90 days and 30 days was crossed out. I’m wondering if that’s a new thing. We added that
Unknown Speaker 33:27
30 days was the original we added 90 days because that’s more industry standard and what we’ve learned with Lisa.
Unknown Speaker 33:35
Yeah, that’s good. And it gives them more time. But it also does if you then have to return the security deposit and things like that it creates this problem partly to so I’m glad we’re doing this. That’s very sensible. I think at least that has been an enormous help and having somebody to oversee things who has the expertise and that’s, that’s been desperately needed for a long time. Thank you. Yes, she
Unknown Speaker 34:03
Unknown Speaker 34:07
Alright, what else do we have here?
Unknown Speaker 34:09
Oh, we need a motion.
Unknown Speaker 34:12
We have motion.
Unknown Speaker 34:13
I’ll move approval of the the revised tenant debt policy.
Unknown Speaker 34:20
Unknown Speaker 34:22
Was that consumer level firing? seconded. Oh, yeah, she’s getting it tonight. All right. Councilmember water. Councillor waters made the motion. Councilmember illegal. fairing seconded. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. All right. The Motion carries unanimously.
Unknown Speaker 34:40
Anything y’all Terrell? Yep. So item five c review and approval of right off debt for former resident at the lodge. This really kind of gets at some of what we were seeing. So we had the bad debt policy that were in place that we referred to earlier and allows for writing off debt that cannot be collected with approval for the board. In this particular instance, the resident was notified in 2018 of rent increase from 342 to 432. But they continued to pay the lesser rent Lh a staff and again this is pre This is prior let me go back. This is prior to us taking an active role. ellijay staff failed to notice and collect the additional amount owed even though the fact of the financial system was recording the debt. Once the resident moved out lhsaa. Again, we must return the security deposit if any is owed within 60 days. In reconciling the tenant and count the we found the uncollected rent, because it was ellijay that failed to follow up on the uncollected rent. And because the time to respond for the security deposit was fast. I made the decision to waive that bad debt based on the timelines that we were having and getting the security deposit back. And more importantly, the Li j did not follow up with the resident when they were paying the incorrect amount or when they weren’t paying the new rent. The resident was paying on time, every month. And so we made the decision that that was an internal error on our part, and we felt I made the decision to to waive that fee, and I need you all to ratify that decision.
Unknown Speaker 36:32
Unknown Speaker 36:34
That gets moved by myself seconded by Councillor crewson. Anybody opposed want to debate this? All in favor of ratifying that say aye. Aye. Opposed say nay? All right. It’s ratified unanimously, Harold, thank you. What else?
Unknown Speaker 36:52
Since we have some other things coming up, and we’re going late, I didn’t unless there were any specific questions regarding the Housing Authority. We weren’t going to bring anything additional to this discussion. What I did want to say is I know you asked about balance sheets, Jim and his folks have been working on putting that together for you all, but we’re going to bring it back because it’s different because of the way the property set up and how we have to move through it. And so we’re gonna want to set up a time to talk about that, where we can we can spend some time going over that. And I just wanted to that was a request from you all and I wanted to make sure you knew they’ve done it, they pulled it together, but we want to bring that back as part of a broader conversation on the financials.
Unknown Speaker 37:38
Alright, so is that it for the oma Housing Authority Herald Kathy? Karen,
Unknown Speaker 37:40
did we miss anything?
Unknown Speaker 37:43
All right, do we have a motion then to reconvene as Aloma city council?
Unknown Speaker 37:47
I need to adjourn.
Unknown Speaker 37:49
Do I have a motion to adjourn as the Board of Commissioners along the housing authority and reconvene as the last City Council, so move? All right. We had a bunch of motions. We’re going to go with Councilmember Pac and we’re actually going to with Councilmember toggle fairing and seconded by Councilmember pack, fair enough. All right. All in favor, say aye.
Unknown Speaker 38:09
Unknown Speaker 38:11
Opposed say nay. All right, we have adjourned as the local housing authority and we have now reconvened as the Longmont City Council. Let’s go on to the initial review of upcoming personnel policy ordinance changes, Harold.
Unknown Speaker 38:26
I have Joanne zS here to go over those. And mayor, I’m going to introduce this a little bit. So you hear us talking about our personnel policies, and our administrative regulations, our administrative regulations, I can adopt. Our personnel policies have to be adopted by the City Council. We wanted to have a brief presentation on what we’re doing. We haven’t gone over a personnel policies and some time, obviously, we’ve had a number of legislative changes that have impact this in because at least since I’ve been here and really looking before that the council hasn’t looked at those in quite some time. We wanted to take this opportunity to provide you with a brief presentation on on our personnel policy changes that we’re recommending. Joanne
Unknown Speaker 39:15
Good evening, Mayor,
Unknown Speaker 39:15
members of council. I’m here tonight Just to make a brief presentation in regard to the personnel rule revisions that were included in your packet. Susan, if you wouldn’t mind pulling that up. Thank you. I have a brief presentation. Just want to introduce those revisions, I’d like to give a general overview of the reason for the changes and then I’d like to highlight some of those areas that are just going beyond providing some general updates such as job titles or grammar. What we’re really looking for in this presentation is any feedback that you have prior to us introducing an ordinance. Next slide, please. Some general history, the city wide code has been in place for 40 years now. So it’s a 1981 code. We do have various revisions We’ve been doing throughout the years in individual sections. But there has not been a wide scale change over that 40 years. So sections have just kind of come forward as necessary. And we’ve been looking at them at different times. Next slide, please. The goal that we have with the personnel policy revisions is threefold, we’d like to make sure that we’re reflecting any current compliance with state and federal law, we have been following state and federal law, that’s always going to take precedence. But we would like to make those match. We’d like to provide for some minor policy changes where we’ve seen some efficiencies in the policies. And then we’d also like to make sure that we have a brief correction for vacation and sick time capital accruals, that were already approved by Council, we want to make sure that those match our collective bargaining agreement, and those match what everyone knows.
Unknown Speaker 40:50
Next slide, please.
Unknown Speaker 40:54
So the first thing I’d like to highlight is just equal employment opportunity. And the adjustments in here are adjustments because of changes in federal and state law. So we added all of the different protections that are available for equal employment opportunity, either in federal or state, or local ordinances. And those include the pieces that you’re seeing there. We also included a piece that says any other characteristic protected by federal state or local law. And the reason that we did that is because we do see changes in this area fairly regularly. And we want to make sure that we’re keeping this in compliance as we move forward.
Unknown Speaker 41:31
Next slide, please.
Unknown Speaker 41:34
I wanted to bring up the change in domestic partnership terminology and eligibility for benefits. Because we’re not taking anything away, it looks a little bit like we’re taking something away. We are not what we had in the in the personnel policies before was domestic same sex domestic partner. And the reason that we had that in there was because there was not an eligibility before for benefits by marriage. Now that that’s included in the law, we do continue to provide those benefits for individuals, but we don’t need to have it in the policy itself. next section, employee of classifications, this piece is put in based on our March 2016 conversation through the budget process. And through our conversation with counsel, we made a little bit of an adjustment to our employee classifications. And what we did is we added a part time non benefited status. That was largely in there because we had a number of part timers that were being considered temporary, even though they may have been here 510 15 in some cases over 20 years, we wanted to make sure that we had those in as regular employees. We also added a seasonal employee definition because we do have employees that come for a period of time each year. That is an unemployment designation that we do use throughout the year. And we wanted to make sure we classified that the other policy change that’s in there as probationary period. And this is a little bit of a change largely for efficiency. What we’re hoping to do with this is include a original appointment date, that is specific to a regular appointment, what we were seeing before is that probationary periods were being applied to the first time someone worked for the city. And that could be for example, when they’re a teenager, maybe they work for rec, and they come back 10 years later in a regular role. We want to make sure that we’re reflecting the probationary period during that regular role, not during that temporary employment.
Unknown Speaker 43:31
Next slide, please.
Unknown Speaker 43:36
A couple of changes in regard to our pay rate. And this is reflecting current practice. And we’re trying to make sure that we’re able to hire qualified employees. So what we wanted to do with this is instead of saying people need to come in, and the minimum, if we have an experienced candidate, we can hire that candidate anywhere within the range from the minimum to the midpoint that just helps us bring in individuals that are qualified and may have significant experience. We also incorporated the exceptional pay program into the into the personnel policies. That is something we’ve had for a few years now. We do anticipate continuing it. And we want to make sure that we’re separating that from the annual increases that we’re looking at because of market.
Unknown Speaker 44:23
Next slide, please.
Unknown Speaker 44:26
Some general additional changes that you’ll see throughout the document. So there’s some updated definitions. These are some of the ones that we included in the changes. There’s also some notations for current practice to make sure that we’re reflecting that practice in the personnel policies. So bereavement leaves, we did adjust that to accommodate for our flex schedules. So what we did is instead of making it five days, we made it one week, so it’s consistent across the workforce. We added a little bit of a definition of that exceptional performance and we also looked at poor performance and holding increases during the period of time that somebody is trying to remedy that poor performance.
Unknown Speaker 45:09
Next slide, please.
Unknown Speaker 45:11
And these are just general changes that you’ll see throughout the document. So job titles and recruitment processes, we would anticipate, after 40 years, we might need to change some of those, um, the adjustment to probationary employee status just to reflect that again. And then an eligibility list for strong employees who have exhausted leave options. And this really came in as a reflection of individuals who had may have had long term health issues. We couldn’t continue to keep them on leave. But we wanted to make sure we had a way to bring them back if they were able to return to the workforce. And so that that’s a real broad overview of the changes that you have in your packet. And I’m open to any questions that you may have.
Unknown Speaker 45:54
On some more Christiansen.
Unknown Speaker 45:57
I think these are really good updates. You know, I know things change a lot in the work environment. I’m the one thing that sort of concerns me because I know a lot of people, including myself, who’ve experienced this is happening, who decides what is the conflict of interest? Because if it’s just your boss, and you have no way your direct supervisor, and you have no way to appeal that many people have been discriminated against that based upon the fact that their boss says really like what they do in their free time. So I just think that people need a way to appeal that if, you know, I mean, obviously, there are cases where something is an obvious conflict of interest. But unless that term is defined, and unless someone has a way to appeal that, that’s kind of problematic to me. Risa
Unknown Speaker 47:08
Mayor council member Christiansen, our code defines conflict of interest. So it provides some guideposts for that it’s still up to an individual to determine whether they have a conflict or not. That’s an individual designation. However, the city is available through human resources and purchasing, and legal to help someone navigate whether something might constitute a conflict of interest. And to think about how a person if if it’s appropriate, and if it’s possible, how a person might disclaim a conflict or disclose what they need to to resolve such a conflict? Is that
Unknown Speaker 47:54
the question? Kind of, um, so it’s really a voluntary thing. In other words, you disclose your conflict of interest? It’s not that your boss has a right to say, you have a conflict of interest.
Unknown Speaker 48:07
Second, that’s correct.
Unknown Speaker 48:09
Oh, okay, then I’m fine with that. I think most people would do that, because they certainly don’t want to put themselves in that position. And, and they don’t want to put their employer in that position either. Okay, thank you.
Unknown Speaker 48:23
Do we need to accept the presentation paralleled by vote? Or is this just an informative?
Unknown Speaker 48:28
This is an informative, we have to bring it back for a first reading and a second reading and we wanted to take this opportunity as at zero reading to make sure we Okay, answer questions. And if you all are fine, then you can direct us to bring it back as a as a first reading of the ordinance. Alright, well, we
Unknown Speaker 48:47
look forward to that first reading the ordinance. Okay. Thank you, Harold. Thank you, Teresa. Thank you, Joanne. Alright, let’s move on to the managing increased visitor use at McIntosh lake and see one Harold’s presentation. David Bell.
Unknown Speaker 49:02
That would be David Bell and Dan Wolford. Yes.
Unknown Speaker 49:05
Let’s just stick with David.
Unknown Speaker 49:08
Just kidding, Dan. Welcome. Well, thank
Unknown Speaker 49:10
you, Mayor. Thank you, council members, David Bell, Director of parks natural resources. I do have Dan Walker with me here as we go through this presentation this evening. So this is again, a topic that we dealt with throughout the 2020 season with COVID and increased use of our parks. And just want to make sure we gave you an update on what we’re looking to do moving forward into the 2021 season. So if I get Next slide, please. We actually have a couple different actually three items on here that we want to bring to your attention this evening. The first of me going over kind of a broad overview of what we learned from 2020. What we’ve heard from the neighbors and again, we heard that tonight. We also have done a volunteer project to do a higher level outreach to kind of look and see what’s happening on Macintosh. We could include that in her presentation as well. Dan will further be talking about annexation which again will need some time discussion and direction. And on that topic, hearing from hygiene fire this evening, again, because we were just looking for direction from Council. I think reaching out to those partners that have helped us in the past is that they will continue to do. But just so councils aware. I have personally gone out with hygiene fire to help with their trainees and their jet skis who recognize that they are valuable partners, and we want to keep them in that position as we move forward with annexation. But annexation does have other benefits. That’s benefits for the city as well. And then Dan also talked about Mackintosh Lake Emily with Boulder County, and we’re looking for our request for approval on that. So next slide, please. So with COVID if you remember the very beginning when the governor came out and said everyone’s safer home, he put a pretty big caveat on that next slide. They get out enjoy college, Colorado’s Great Outdoors. Next slide. your RV took that to heart. And I think it was a great piece. I think that the residents long lot definitely benefited from the fact that Longmont has put a lot of years into making sure that we have a system that provides for opportunities to get outdoors, I think it was critical to our community’s physical and mental health that we had those opportunities. Next slide. However, that came with new challenges. And if you can kind of look at these slides here, that’s just those cars that we heard neighbors talking about this evening Park down both sides of the road, oh, lake shore and other neighborhood streets within the city. And that was definitely one of the challenges that we faced. But what we’ve done is tried to capture those in a kind of a high level piece, it will talk to council about to share what we’re looking to do this coming season, see if counsel has any other ideas and that we need to do as we move forward. Next slide, please. So again, just a reminder that, you know, going first came to counsel with this, we had neighbors calling in was concerns users claiming with concerns and staff kind of bringing their observations out there as well. But we wanted to see if we get a more objective way to do that. So we did work with our volunteer coordinator. Again, next slide, please. We actually had a significant group of volunteers that went out and helped provide us some input. And we had document food in your packet as well to provide a lot more detail on what those volunteers saw. So this presentation tonight is like in those high level takeaways that we got from the volunteers, the neighbors, and staff. And I think as we look through those are some pretty common themes throughout that a few others that I’ll get to the end of this as well. But one of the first especially during the early parts of COVID. Throughout the summer, we saw that one of the complaints was a lack of mass and social distancing. That’s something that we will continue to work with, as we move through this process. But again, is Harold’s presentation looked at we’re constantly seeing changes there so that we something will be available to move through, move forward. We saw it we heard about impacts to wildlife and habitat swimming violation, which is a violation of rules and regs. We don’t have lifeguards out there, we don’t have have a water quality testing. We also heard tonight, from people calling in that we all saw that there was a lack of personal floatation devices for people using the reservoir. And then we saw the increase in parking on the streets. Next slide please.
Unknown Speaker 53:25
So again, we I really grouped those into three categories. The first one being public safety, which is always going to be our our primary concern. And the PCT that we really heard about early in the season was, again, not wearing masks and not social distancing. We’re continue to work to work with Boulder County Public Health, to make sure we’re staying consistent with our rules and rights, our practices as people use our parks, open space and greenways weather challenges that we have, I think as we move forward, we’re gonna stay in this role in this bracket. Otherwise, as we looked at those groups of people, people not wearing masks, those are often allowed under certain circumstances, if this from the same household staff has never been in a role, we went out and asked people if they were from the same household. So we were always making those assumptions that there is groups and there’s room for other users to use the system without being impacted by that group that we thought that was an acceptable practice. If we saw situations where people were unmasked and people could not use the shelf, I mean not use the park not use the trails, that would be something that we’d want to engage in conversations by norm Mart about so we will continue to use Rangers and staff to help educate as we move through the COVID dial and the masking and distancing as we move forward to the seasons of swimming was another one that we saw as a high priority for staff as we tried to manage that. And one of the things we’ve heard is that we need more signs we put signs out and again we will continue to make sure the signs we have out there are appropriately trying to address that need. However, as you look at that survey with the volunteers talking to People out there 70 to 80% of the people out there knew that something was prohibited. law the swimming saw was right adjacent to signs that said no swimming. So again, it really is us getting out there, engage with the public trying to educate, inform. And I think as you’re seeing these, you’ll see some educate and monitor. But in this one enforce I think in some of these areas, as we look at educate people, it does take some times people recognize that these are serious health and safety risks and writing some citations for that sends a message that we as a community are serious about that. So that’ll be something we’ll be looking at. For next slide. Buddy without personal floatation devices, again, heard throughout the season heard it tonight on the Collins, people, I think from the volunteers to users to our firefighters and police officers are just really surprised by the number of people out on the water, especially young children that didn’t have personal floatation devices with them. And it’s something again, that we want to make sure that we are informing, educating. And also if it is a breach of violation, safety for that with things that came up this conversation with our community engagement was that state regulations made via some flexibility with agencies who manage bodies of water to make an official rule and reg, we want to make sure that we’re making that an official ruling right that we could cite for people are out there. If it’s not, we will bring that into alignment. And in the meantime, we do have a ruler, right that allows for our assistant or deputy city manager to promulgate rules and rights through signage until we get that brought to Council. So something we could address pretty quickly if that is something that we need to look at making sure that every knows it. Having a personal floatation device devices is a requirement a rule regulation city. The other piece that came up with this was the the boating was the 25 vessels out there is something that was part of a management plan that when that was adopted council did adopt that 25 number, however, that is not in our rules, right at this point, is something that I think is what color is talking about this evening. How do we come up with that at the time that that magic plan was written, we did not have a standard paddleboards we didn’t have the that used I don’t think was ever contemplated that we see that much. So something that we probably do want to go back and look at how we came up with a number if that number still appropriate how we move that from a master plan recommendation into something we could manage. Because, again, if we started counting people out doing the water heavy to contact the 26% out there, we would have to have on staff personnel there all day long. So at this point, we’re looking really for the safety issues and making sure that we’re protecting the wildlife as we look at the numbers of vessels out there. of the use of single chamber for flotation toys, these are typically inner tubes, it’s something that people are out on the water. If it pops, they’re stranded out there a bit fails on the water, I use Word pops, I use it a couple of times in our internal conversations. But again, it really is, it really is that that floatation toy that could get snagged on something and could actually fail and leave them stranded out there knowing that we don’t have a rescue vehicle or arrangers on site at the time. So we want to make sure that we are out there educating and forcing on that as well. Next slide.
Unknown Speaker 58:23
Other big high level category beyond public safety was impacts wildlife habitat. Last year, one of the challenges was as we knew, we had to put buoys out. That process takes people working shoulder to shoulder doing heavy lifting and working very close confinement on a boat and on and on the shore too. So we we did wait longer than we would typically do. But that was really a response to staff safety. In that process, recognize that a lot of our buoys were damaged. So we do have the ability to get some new buoys with oil this year. And those should be a start like mid April that will be addressing that intrusion into that western edge that we heard I actually call her talk about this evening. The other pieces is people looking for places to put in, they’re just walking through vegetation. We have a grant from great outdoors, Colorado and wild land restoration, which will allow us to put in to more places that people can access to water where they will not have to impact native vegetation or vegetation that we have out there. Next slide, please. The third big category was really parking. And it was something that Rangers staff PD, myself, Jim angstadt, from engineering, his staff, were going out on a continuous basis to monitor that. And while we are very aware that there was an increased use, and there was parking that was, you know, bumper to bumper on both sides of the roads throughout the season. We didn’t see and as far as I know, no citations were given for illegal parking again, I would not say that it wasn’t happening out there. But with even all the use of we had other we did not see that we we know those breeds are designed to have people parking on both sides and that area. There are things we talked about as far as how we could address that I heard things from this evening. Council may want to talk about the biggest piece was it. At this point in time, we’ll continue to monitor the market there is legal parking that we’re seeing. And if we try making some changes to no parking there, what we’ve seen is people just shifted parking a street over and that that uses it’s moving to another part of the neighborhood. So it’s not really solving the problem just pushes it to another area. So if we do see illegal parking ranges, we can continue to educate and enforce public safety. jetsetter has been great. It continues to support our group, looking at patrols in the weekend out there. And again, we will continue to monitor to the 21 season. Next slide please. So those are the big high level pieces. We’re looking at what we’re looking at trying to do that with our Ranger group with public safety. The next piece like talk about those, we’re not the only ones going through this right now. I have a weekly meeting with Boulder County Parks and Recreation directors and Boulder County, Lewisville, Lafayette, IRS approved Bluefield, they’re all managing these same sorts of issues be of use on tennis courts, skate parks, or parking at lakes and bodies of water. So we’re trying to share with them what we’re seeing out there. They’re sharing with us what they’re seeing and how we’re trying to manage that. One of the things from that group, I think there’s a very strong commitment from all the participants, myself and his staff at city of Longmont is it. We don’t want to close places down to give people access to the outdoors during this time. It’s something I think that again, we recognize importance to our community, we also see a ripple effect. If we close something down or another agency closes down, it pushes that you someplace else and someone else becomes the the individual it has to the agency has to manage that. The other group that we’d be with on a every other week basis, basically at some points, it’s every week is okay, trailhead overcrowding on this Boulder County city of Boulder, US Forest Service in Denver water, all the places really have those trail has attracted people to other communities where we’re trying to manage parking and the impacts to the community. So again, that that I can say we have great answers, but we we are all trying to share what we’re learning throughout the season to try to move forward with better practices coming up in 2001. This one really was the biggest help EPA button rock will regulate Boulder County to get some permanent, no parking signs up along county road 80. We will continue to work with them as we move forward. And again having public health of those means with this. They’re they’re great resources, we move forward. Next slide please.
Unknown Speaker 1:02:57
So the resources that we really have out there is it we’re this coming season going to have additional Rangers we in the 2020 season, due to the budget constraints because of COVID. And the uncertainties with budget, we didn’t hire the seasons that really even had budgeted for this year. However, we will be hiring those and we have plans for for additional Rangers. I would like to just be clear, though, that those same ranges, the ones that we down at dekins Park, making sure we don’t have kids jumping off bridges that they want out of the greenways dealing with homeless camps along the creek. So it’s not that those individual be there all the time. But it definitely will be an increase the range of presence out in the in the parks. The other pieces, we have a new training program, it’s been a big benefit department with public safety to make sure that we get our Rangers trained, I think a little bit better for work on the water, getting around the water and with some of the challenges we’re seeing with with COVID as well. So we’ll have that increased training as well as the additional Rangers. And again, we’ll have public continued command from public safety to have patrols out there the weekend. And they’re working with us as we train our Rangers. Our engineering services has continued to help us support and monitor parking out there and they will continue to the 2021 season. And again, we’ve heard that tonight to our volunteers are a great asset as we looked at how we were observing, monitoring and assessing what’s happening out in McIntosh. And we would like to continue that again. That will be based on our ability to use our halftime volunteer coordinator to continue that role. But those are the resources we really have will be leaning on in the 2001 season. Next slide please. Some of the additional comments we’ve heard from neighbors through the survey and also I think we heard this one tonight. Again, we heard that we had a need for additional trash containers, additional restrooms, and those who are things that we can look at as we move with the season because it gets In the 2020 2020 season, we did not have our full capacity of seasonals and temporaries out there. So this year we will have that and please continues that we have the ability to bring in porta potties, we have the ability to look at additional restrooms as we see that need. The other pieces. We know we had groups out there that were using the reservoir to teach classes or they’re out there in larger groups. And we’ll be working on a recreation staff to make sure that eight groups using like Macintosh are using a permitted system and is a allowable activity on the water. So we work with recreation to to help us manage some of the use out there as well. Next slide, please. So, as we looked at 2020, we continue to look at 2021. We know to have this this program really fully fleshed out. One of the things we probably need out there, it will be making contacts with users in the water via increased numbers, people though floatation devices, people in the closures that will probably want to or will be asking for resources to bring it patrol boat for the 2022 budget season. We’ll be looking at additional seasonal Rangers in 2022, the additional budgeting for trash cans, and then some additional staff for our park operations if this trend continues to move forward. Next slide, please. So at this point, I can answer questions on this first part about what we have seen over the last year what we’re looking at to move forward ideas or suggestion from Council. And if not, we can move right to Dan Walker’s piece, which will be the annexation piece and mlu. We can address that all at once. So, Mayor, I’ll leave it to you and how you want to proceed.
Unknown Speaker 1:06:42
All right. We have a couple of questions. So let’s go good. ask the questions now and then move into the annexation piece. We’re going to go with Polly your first but let’s go with Councilmember Lago fairing only because she hasn’t said much tonight. So Councilmember Naugle, Ferran will go with you.
Unknown Speaker 1:07:00
Thank you, Mayor.
Unknown Speaker 1:07:01
So I’m the one of the callers that had mentioned and I just wanted some follow up on this, about making calls to the police and then being told that they couldn’t do anything about it, if they aren’t, are not witnessed to it. So, you know, I just wanted to a little bit of context to that.
Unknown Speaker 1:07:24
Mayor, council member hurdle very, I think that probably is going to be as you call it a dispatch as far as their policies for PD. But there are ways that if it’s, I think it probably depends on the resistance events. If it’s something that as they’re looking at their lineup with who’s out there and ability to respond. There are ways that we can write tickets without having PD arrangers being that we can write our witness statement, those takes a little more time, they’re a little harder to manage in court. But they are doable. And I would say that if dispatch could give that to the Rangers, we probably have a bit greater capacity to kind of look at how we could follow up on that. And I get I guess my question that in that collars piece, if if those were the masking violations, if those were people in the water, if it’s after hours, those are probably the different response.
Unknown Speaker 1:08:20
Okay. Um, if
Unknown Speaker 1:08:22
I can add, if I can add to what he said the key is the witness complaint. So the the individual who sees it has to be willing to essentially sign and be willing to testify of what what they saw. And if they’re not, then we really can’t unless we have that direct statement, correct in it.
Unknown Speaker 1:08:44
Yeah. Because last summer, and I had been in several conversations with both Harold and I think Joni and David, because I live near Lake McIntosh. So that’s, that’s my area. And, you know, as a resident who could I can just like walk across the 17th and go over there, I actually avoided it, because I didn’t want to contribute to the crowding. So even though I technically could have I wasn’t concerned, you know, I’m younger, I, you know, COVID was an issue of teaching. It was more along the line is I didn’t want to contribute to the crowding. However, when I would get calls or complaints, I would I would drive by there, you know, then, you know, somebody had complained once that somebody was grilling on the sidewalk next to their driveway. So, you know, as a matter of just people, you know, you know, we say, well, we want you to be to self regulate. Well, you know, the opportunity’s there to self regulate and you’re over there with a hibachi at somebody’s driveway. I mean, come on. And so that those kinds of issues, like what can we do as a city to kind of help, you know, move people along, you know, it’s hard because, you know, we can’t as a city, enforce respect But that is, you know, respect for other people’s properties and and their spaces and, and the other one we had had a discussion on was the parking. So I know we had discussed, and I heard a lot of people comment and send emails about the idea of having the parking full on the residential side just be for people who live there. But we had had a discussion last summer about how we would kind of push that parking out into the other streets. So it not, it’s not that it would really go away. It’s people would if they can’t park, if they’re limited in their parking, it would kind of push push it to other spaces, like how I mean, it was a good idea when I first heard it, and then I started thinking more about it, of the consequences.
Unknown Speaker 1:10:52
So mayor, Kazmir dogberry, I will say that, again, looking at this area and with other agencies as they looked at how they manage Parkinson these areas. That is like you said, you could walk from your house. So just think about how far someone could actually Park away if you if you took it off that one side of the street, that they went over those streets or even a couple blocks is still within walking distance. So those people that drove out there are probably going to stay there’s probably find a spot for someone else’s house within that same same area. So it is a challenge for I know those those individuals living right there outline diminish that but I don’t see that going away by just living it that was push up probably another street over.
Unknown Speaker 1:11:31
Unknown Speaker 1:11:32
an example of that is, so when I drove in the area, I would personally see people drop people off. Yeah, and then go Park farther out?
Unknown Speaker 1:11:42
Yes. And then And all the while they’re walking through people’s
Unknown Speaker 1:11:47
spaces. And yeah.
Unknown Speaker 1:11:50
So I, you know, I just wanted to make sure that, you know, these were things that we’ve all discussed and we are looking at, but we also have to consider the unintended consequences behind those things. The other one, that as I was making my drives around the area, especially last summer, where the number of people who were parked so far away from the curb, that I would not even have space, because you’d have people parked on both sides. And then people and it was primarily I’d seen a lot on the lake side where they were parked further away from the curb. And so there wasn’t really any space for my truck and somebody else to go by. I mean, we were single aiming it
Unknown Speaker 1:12:32
through those. So
Unknown Speaker 1:12:32
what so if somebody is complaining about that, would that I mean, that sounds like something that would be people could be cited for?
Unknown Speaker 1:12:42
Yes, I think, again, at there is a parking violation, that that that can be cited. And those are things that as we go through our training with PDM, where Rangers can and cannot force with parking because parking with things we can enforce. I think that things out there. And I think what you’ll hear from me with my Ranger group is we’re always trying to gain voluntary compliance for Troy’s rate educate. I think it has been this business long enough knows that at some point, if you’re not getting some tickets and citations, and it doesn’t get around that the city is serious about these public health issues. These are transportation issues that if we can’t get vehicles through that, we do take that seriously. So I think what things you’ll see this year, I hope is the fact that having additional people out there to help with that education piece. And then if need be defined to be other times those happening and do that through either a formal warning or a citation for some of these hopefully start gaining some more compliance.
Unknown Speaker 1:13:34
Unknown Speaker 1:13:35
Thank you that helped.
Unknown Speaker 1:13:39
Unknown Speaker 1:13:43
Susie said a lot of thinking about you know, a lot of people have been writing us and they often have really good ideas. And it is so neighborhood that’s often their neighborhood and they they’re genuinely trying to be helpful and not being out of my name or you know, not being evil. It’s just that as soon as he says cancel on and doggo firing said, These seem like a good idea at first and then you think, Oh, well, what would be the actual repercussion of that. So, you know, there is not enough money, or enough people to make people behave, make people show each other respect for public property and respect for each other’s private property. And we just can’t have to think a little bit harder when we go out in public and behave ourselves. I mean, I think a lot of this is very much COVID related. It’s a really hard time. But there have been problems with the public parks for several years now. And David and Dan, deal with them all the time. So this is not Just because of the pandemic, but it is made worse because people are desperate to get some kind of recreation. So one of the ideas other than the parking being just for residents, which I thought was a good idea, and then I thought the same thing is like, Well, yeah, they’re just gonna drive further into the neighborhood and make the problem actually worse. The other idea that someone came up with is charging a minor fee for water devices, kayaks, or any any device out on the creek, you know, something modest, like 20 bucks for the season. It might discourage people it might not it because if you are a family with a pretty modest income, and you’ve got five kids, that’s a lot of money. So all these things, they’re good ideas, they also do have repercussions. But we do have to, we have to try to take better care of all our public lands when we’re out side, because these are our lamps, they, they belong to all of us. And nobody can tell you how nobody can make you behave, you have to make yourself behave, that sort of boils down to all of us need to behave. Okay, I’m bowing out now,
Unknown Speaker 1:16:30
may or cosmetic purchase. And again, I think those are some great comments. And we could probably go into more conversation you want to but staff is really thought through a lot of stuff, as you talked about, you know that the fees, and what that really takes to those, those consequences are what it really takes because then you really start having a lot more staffing about the person out in the water, making sure everyone has that. That equity piece, this is one of few places, you can go out with a family of four or five and do something, you don’t have to buy a pass to Union reservoir, you don’t have to have a substantial vehicle to get the button rock, you don’t have to drive down to Boulder. So those are those are pieces that council definitely can direct staff to look a little more into. But I think one of the things that, again, as we look at opportunities in their community, to use our parks, we don’t have that same opportunity, other places throughout the city, how that fits into our system. Again, I think the things that staff is hoping for is that with the COVID piece you talked about as people now have bought those paddle boards, they will be back. So I’m not going to try to push back. But I think that this increase use is here to stay. However, as restaurants and bars and movies and theaters open up hopefully people have some other opportunities to get out and do other stuff to balance that a little bit. And we’ll be able to look at how this this increase acts over this coming season as
Unknown Speaker 1:17:42
Unknown Speaker 1:17:46
Mayor Pro Tem you’re on your hand was up. Yep. So we’re gonna go with Mayor Pro Tem, then. Sorry, Councillor pack.
Unknown Speaker 1:17:51
Thank you, Mayor Bagley, this is actually perfect as far as what a director of parks natural resources, bell said, in the sense that what we experienced last year was unprecedented, as we all know, as far as the fact that at this time last year, we were completely pretty much shut down versus what in my opinion is basically what we were at later in the summer as far as openness of restaurants and and some of our other, you know, private facilities, not public facilities. And so my question was going to be along the lines of I know, it’s hard to predict because we couldn’t have predicted what happened last year, but with some more data points that we do have, what projected Delta would be in in usage for specifically I guess, like Macintosh versus generally, you know, our public facilities and, and in that essence. And like I said, I think you’re already starting to touch on it. In concept of weather, we’ll still see as much traveling from other parts of the community to specific locales, versus find more localized spaces, be it Dickens or some other parts all around the city. And so I was just wondering if there’s any way we have projections on that, and concept of a change in attendance? Because I think that would really speak to how we look at any sort of policy changes. Outside of that I would like to generally make make known in the conversation before other members. Before we get on to it, I guess that any changes we can make as a city to have a little bit more control over the policy I agree with and that includes the annexation, but just back to my question of what you project this summer to look like versus what we was completely unconventional last year.
Unknown Speaker 1:20:04
Mayor Pro Tem I appreciate it. We know as a crystal ball, I will say I do see the numbers probably decreasing somewhat, because if you remember, you talked about not only the restaurants and bars and theaters are closed down that up to is national parks, state parks, other places closed down. That was one of things that I just want to say that I know was impact neighbors. I think that while much we were probably we really didn’t close anything down, we close the swimming beach down at Union, we were getting noncompliance just for the COVID regions. But our parks, open spaces and trail stayed open throughout that process. Because we we knew when we started seeing places like you know, Rocky Mountain closing down, those people had to go someplace else. So I’m hoping that only those other venues by the fact that we’re going to have probably more outdoor spaces open to should decrease those numbers. I couldn’t give you even a ballpark on that be but I’m I really do expect to see some decrease. But again, we saw people that went to sporting stores and bought their first stand up paddleboard and I’m sure those people will be coming back and looking for a place to go. So it’s is going to continue.
Unknown Speaker 1:21:12
Part of the answer to that question is what we’re starting to hear. And honestly, I think I’ll have a better sense Thursday for next Tuesday is that when we look at the new orders, in terms of outdoor activities, it’s going to look much different this year than it did look than it looked like last year. And it’s probably going to happen more quickly. So I think you will have to David’s point, a lot of these st brain State Park and places like that that were closed, it appears they’re going to be open. And so you’re going to actually have more places for people to go which in its nature should then start pulling people in different directions versus very specific locations that were open when other things are closed. And so we really think we’re going to hear that late this week, early next week in terms of what that’s going to look like from the new orders. Right,
Unknown Speaker 1:22:06
Unknown Speaker 1:22:11
Thank you, Mayor Bagley and Thank you, David, this is good information. What I would like to know before our summer gets started is what is your policy? I’m sorry, not your policy, perhaps your monitoring of the 25. Boats are floating vessels on late Macintosh? Because I know we’re going to get letters about that. So how are you going to manage? You’re only allowing 25? And will there be any repercussions? I think there should be for over over use of it. Mayor,
Unknown Speaker 1:22:47
Councilmember Peck I think that’s probably one of the I think last year, the masking and distancing was probably our most challenging because we didn’t have a good mechanism to enforce or really understand who was in households. I think the 25 is going to be a real challenge. I just work you know, Dan and I were even receiving text back and forth looking at policy that 25 was adopted by Council in the management plan. It has not been codified in our rules and regs. So really is someone out there to write that ticket, there’s not a citation that even right as far as that 25 at this point, it’s something we can look at the other pieces that I think we would have to have someone out there from the first put on the vessel to say who was the first person on what’s happening sixth person on 26, you leave or you wait till number one or number three gets off. So it’s really gonna be a staffing, as well as this kind of a continued presence out there. I think one of the reasons we wanted that 25 and Dan can jump in as he talks about his pieces, too, was really for the impact of the wildlife out there. So if we can start doing a better job manage that through that closure area, that Western and making sure people say that that that is we don’t need to have no who is first in first out. If you’re in that closure area, that’s going to be a a warning slash ticket pretty quickly. If you’re in the closure area with the buoys up, that’s a conscious decision to pass those buoys. If you’re launching from areas that are habitat, or vegetation, will, we’re now putting in two new life spots, that can be something that can that can protect the wildlife and habitat more. So I don’t have a good answer for how we would manage that 25 this point, it’d be something we’ll be looking at. I know if you looked at that visitor survey, there were over 100 vessels on some of the weekend days, if they can be out there in a way that’s safe for the user is not getting into those closures for the wildlife. They’re not, you know, trampling down vegetation to get there. I think we may have to re evaluate what that number could or should be. Because I think Dan will tell you there was there was no thought of this type of use. You know, the stand up paddle boards are really probably the biggest user groups out there. And it wasn’t even contemplated when we did this. So I wish I had a better answer for this evening. But it’s one that we have been talking about internally and I think that the primary goal is make sure people are safe in the wild. Life is impacted to the minimum, the minimum amount possible for that use out there.
Unknown Speaker 1:25:05
So if you decide that more than 25 floating devices, whatever they are, can be on that we need. Council needs to codify that. So yeah, people can come up with a number and we can get that codified will help all of us this summer or late spring.
Unknown Speaker 1:25:24
Yes, I think so. Now, the one thing that we look at very soon as we move forward with this,
Unknown Speaker 1:25:28
Unknown Speaker 1:25:30
I guess I guess my my my only thing that I’d say is I think that everything we heard from the report, I think it’s great. We need to worry about me as Councilmember Duggal furring said about parking, we need to worry about trespassing, we need to worry about safety floatation devices that the 25 people keep them out of the West End protecting the environment. But the one thing that it would like to remind everybody, not the council, but staff, I think that we all agree is that this is a public amenity. It’s not a private lake is not private parking. People who bought these houses, it sucks that people park on the street, and it sucks that people are using the park, but it’s not your park. They can all band together and I guess by the lake, but it is a public park. And it’s the same issue that a lot of people have live across the parks, people are going to come and they’re going to use the park. And so we need to make sure people are safe. We need to make sure that that you know the laws are there are followed. But as far as just a lot of people use the park. That’s what parks are for. So Councilmember waters. Yeah, just
Unknown Speaker 1:26:33
a couple of comments. The first is, as I’m listening, watching David do his presentation. I see Dan, I’m reminded of Partho part of the loss of what we’ve been how we’ve been meeting is, we haven’t had a chance to see those fellows at a meeting for a long time. So it’s good to see your faces, boys. It’s Yeah, thank you. Yeah, number one, number two. Just your last comment, Mayor Bagley and it goes back to the number of, of flow of, of vessels on the water. I think we have to be really careful about quantifying anything that we can enforce. So I don’t know how I don’t know what to do with a number I, we’ve all been there and looked out there and thought, how could you possibly control 25 vessels on that lake, no one’s going to know what’s the 26th or the 14th. So I just I we do this. On ordinance after ordinance. We could talk about amplified noise ad use SD short term rentals, all these ordinances that that we somebody passed, that are almost impossible to enforce. So whatever we do with ordinances or codification of what we expect, I think we had to be really careful Personally, I’m not going to vote, to put our staff in a position to try and enforce laws that are not enforceable that and that starts with us to make certain that we we give them what is enforceable. And that’s, that’s got to be based on the recommendations from David and Dan, and you know, the rest of their crew, I get that. So they’re having to think that stuff through but I just want to say, the time comes that for me as a filter or a screen is going to be can we enforce this or not? in a way that’s consistent fair, to the to our residents, as well as to the people who are who we’re asking to enforce, no matter how many Rangers we have out there. But I appreciate the work that’s been done. I think it all has to be done. We need to be clear, we need to resource the area in ways that we had not both with personnel, and with all of the things that you’ve talked about in terms of waste receptacles and whatnot in signage. So So everybody’s clear on the expectations, and then we can enforce those expectations.
Unknown Speaker 1:28:57
Mirror customer waters, I appreciate those comments. And those are the same comments we’ve been having internally, and I think is hearing customer packagers. comments on this is something that we as staff had talked about. For me, I’ll just go back and look at go back to what I think that is truly enforceable. And what I’m going to say my highest priority, if that 26 boat becomes a safety issue issue for the users, we need to make sure we’re addressing that if that 26 boat is an impact to the wildlife, we need to address that. But is it the number or is it the is it you know, those of us who look at what is it to public safety issue and what is the true impact to our our natural areas of wildlife are those more enforceable than a than a number but you know, Dan was above that original master plan. I want to make sure we’re true to that are making sure that council understands what we’re looking to do, because that number really was there for a reason. And it really was for the public safety and for the impact of the wildlife. So that’s what we want to make sure we’re keeping in mind throughout this. So appreciate the comments.
Unknown Speaker 1:29:53
And I’ll read reiterate the fact that we’ve been managing this reservoir since 2002. And during that time, we’ve never seen that reservoir hit that boating capacity until last year. So it’s been literally 18 years. But we will address it. And there’s a variety of management issues, we will step up and deal with our
Unknown Speaker 1:30:20
sorry, let’s quarter to 11. I’d like to try to get out of here by 11 o’clock. So do you want to give a brief so the question I think Council is going to have is, what’s the upside? what’s the downside for annexation? Let’s vote on the resolution, please.
Unknown Speaker 1:30:35
If I could get the slide PowerPoint presentation, I’ll jump right in there. Mayor Bagley Dan Wolford land program administrator for public works and Natural Resources Mayor Bagley and council members thank you for this opportunity. Next slide, please. So again, with this, it’s intended for discussion and direction. A little bit of history back in 2003 previous councils recommended to staff to do our best to annex as many of our city owned properties as possible. At that point in time, we were annexing similar facilities like union reservoir, sandstone Ranch, and a variety of other of the open space properties farther out east. And at that time, the reservoir the lake Mackintosh reservoir company was very hesitant to do to engage in this annexation. Since that time, the leadership on the of the reservoir company has changed, as well as the city’s management now of the reservoir company, and the ownership of approximately 58% of the reservoir is now held by the city. Additionally, we’ve held the recreation lease on this property since 2002. As we mentioned earlier, all of these three items, they don’t happen within a vacuum. There’s been a lot of interaction with Boulder County Sheriff’s Office, Boulder County Parks and open space Rangers, our PD, public safety and our staff and one of the recommendations that including in your in your packet comes from Steve Silverman, who is the communications director for the Boulder County Sheriff’s Office that clearly indicated that if Longmont annexes the lake, and our unincorporated lands emergency response will be simpler. The primary purpose for this annexation is probably twofold. Primarily though, is to enhance the efficiency and the response from a public safety perspective. Whereas 911 calls come in, they go to the dispatch center with Boulder County, there’s confusion of that it’s the reservoir is in unincorporated Boulder County, however, the city of Longmont is managing it, the fingers get, you know. And so, the board County Sheriff’s Office, Boulder County Parks and open space our parks staff and PD believe that this process will certainly expedite that make it simpler and we believe a faster response and more coordinated response. Certainly, hygiene fire, like many agencies will have a mutual response agreement with the city and county so I don’t see their response being any different than it might be down the road. With that, we’re looking for direction. From council whether we proceed with this process. If you want to modify this, again, it would be the annexation of the 280 acre parcel. We go with the next slide please. And that’ll show the annexation of the 280 acres. Then Then the next slide. The inclusion of the five city owned parcels immediately adjacent to the reservoir. And then the final slide on this presentation. It’ll show you the in the hatched areas what we’re anticipating to be annexed which is 360 acres. So with that I’m happy to facilitate any questions and discussion and certainly seeking direction from Council on how they would like to proceed.
Unknown Speaker 1:34:33
I’d actually moved that we
Unknown Speaker 1:34:36
annex the 306 360 acres of the McIntosh lakes
Unknown Speaker 1:34:40
Unknown Speaker 1:34:41
Alright, it’s been moved by me seconded by Councillor Martin. Is there any debate or issue on this and you want to post this like to speak on council? Or sorry counselor Christiansen, by the way, my dogs are going nuts in the background. Sorry,
Unknown Speaker 1:34:52
but guess my questions.
Unknown Speaker 1:34:56
Um, so I have a question Would we be so It looks like we’re not annex in the agricultural land to the west. That still belongs to photo County. Is that correct?
Unknown Speaker 1:35:09
If we can go back to that PowerPoint, I can show you the city ownership and the total acreage, but the property immediately to the west of Lake McIntosh is owned by the city of Longmont.
Unknown Speaker 1:35:23
Unknown Speaker 1:35:24
what’s identified there as city of Longmont property, we will be we anticipate and mixing that with your direction. The property to the north. That’s mark there as the county of Boulder we will not anticipate annexin
Unknown Speaker 1:35:40
Unknown Speaker 1:35:42
Unknown Speaker 1:35:43
I understand. Thanks, that. It seems like a very good idea to me. Actually, I don’t I don’t want to enter.
Unknown Speaker 1:35:52
Nope, nope, nope. Nope.
Unknown Speaker 1:35:56
I thought you were referring to me.
Unknown Speaker 1:36:01
Unknown Speaker 1:36:03
But this way, we would actually have control over the whole perimeter of the lake, which seems like a much better, much more efficient way to do things.
Unknown Speaker 1:36:13
Well, does anyone oppose this that wants to speak? All right. All in favor of the motion annex the 360 acres of Lake McIntosh in the city of Longmont say aye.
Unknown Speaker 1:36:23
Unknown Speaker 1:36:24
Opposed say nay.
Unknown Speaker 1:36:25
Unknown Speaker 1:36:26
the motion of the resolute resolution 2021 dash 32 resolution along with City Council approving the annual agreement between the city of Longmont the county of Boulder for the lake Mackintosh joint management agreement. We haven’t voted on that. But we’ve directed staff voted in just to be clear, I move resolution 2021 dash 32.
Unknown Speaker 1:36:42
So I got second. All right.
Unknown Speaker 1:36:44
I made the motion. Mayor Pro Tem Rodriguez seconded it all in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. All right, resolution 2021. desk 32 is approved. So we think every week I think we’ve covered all the bases here.
Unknown Speaker 1:37:00
Thank you. Thank you, everyone. Really appreciate it.
Unknown Speaker 1:37:02
Alright, thanks, guys. Alright, let’s move on to the final issue. legislative bills recommended for city council position. Sandy cedar assistant city manager take it away.
Unknown Speaker 1:37:11
airbag Lee, members of council Sandy cedar assistant city manager, I have three bills for you today. I did get a question from the media. Is it always three bills, it just has been so far three bills every time. So today, we’re going to talk about a couple that really affects public safety. The first one is the jail D population bill. This is Senate Bill 62. There have been lots of revisions and COVID that have basically loosen some of the reasons that you would take somebody to jail based on their arrests, mostly in order to protect the jail populations from the virus itself. However, this bill, run by the ACLU would ask to put those in permanently, which I think people are really hesitant in law enforcement and certainly our judges well, because these aren’t really proven. We’re not really sure exactly what happens when we lift restrictions during a time that’s not pandemic. And so there’s suggestion is that the city council oppose Senate Bill 62.
Unknown Speaker 1:38:10
So moved. Second.
Unknown Speaker 1:38:15
Unknown Speaker 1:38:19
you know, these bills get rewritten and rewritten often before they actually get out there. I think it would be more prudent with this. And also, when I get one or the other one that’s coming along, to monitor it until the final language gets decided upon. I see what they’re trying to do. It’s well, meaning I just think it’s it. I agree with you. It’s very problematic, but I don’t know that we should just throw it all out. But that’s my suggestion. Except that the council
Unknown Speaker 1:39:00
Alright, there’s been a motion and it’s been seconded. Just I guess I just think that I just don’t like this part of the council meetings because I don’t think it’s much makes much of a difference. But let’s go and vote. All in favor say aye.
Unknown Speaker 1:39:12
Unknown Speaker 1:39:13
Aye, say nay a. Alright. Alright, so there were three Nays, four eyes. That’s a fairing. Alright, the motion carries four to three to Falstaff suggestion.
Unknown Speaker 1:39:25
Unknown Speaker 1:39:27
The next bill is around increasing recycling efforts in Colorado. And so this bill really will create some grants to be able to help with bringing recycling recycled materials to market as well as some r&d. Obviously this supports our sustainability goals and so staff suggest the city council support Senate Bill 180.
Unknown Speaker 1:39:47
Because we’re Christiansen, I move we support that
Unknown Speaker 1:39:51
back alright, it’s
Unknown Speaker 1:39:52
been moving Councilmember Christiansen saying the counselor pack all in favor of following staffs recommendation say aye.
Unknown Speaker 1:39:57
Aye. Aye Opposed
Unknown Speaker 1:39:59
Unknown Speaker 1:39:59
All right, Sandy,
Unknown Speaker 1:40:01
Unknown Speaker 1:40:02
Thanks, Senate Bill 182 is around school discipline. This one is tough because there are parts of the bill that I think are probably very helpful when it comes to dealing with school discipline, particularly with Student Resource Officer school resource officers and law enforcement. But it does go as far as to basically say, that law that it would prohibit law enforcement from arresting students or issuing summons or tickets, sometimes that’s necessary. Now in Longmont. It’s very rare, quite honestly, because we use the restorative justice project process, as well as the other programs that you have just recently heard about. But when something egregious does happen, sometimes it is required for a student to be arrested. And so to be able to take that off the table completely. It’s very concerning to both law enforcement and to our judge. And so their suggestion is that we oppose Senate Bill 182.
Unknown Speaker 1:40:50
All right. Those were Christensen.
Unknown Speaker 1:40:54
Um, I likewise would suggest we monitor it because it is, as I say, these are being rewritten. It is problematic. I know officer Garcia, who spoke to us several weeks ago, wrote to me about that. And there’s a great deal of difference between kids who are raised in a environment that’s a lot more sophisticated and tough like Denver, and a kid from May Bell, and this makes it them but all be treated alike. And I I have a hard time with this bill, even though I really, really am for what they’re trying to do, which is have all kids be treated like kids. Is
Unknown Speaker 1:41:39
that emotion not all kids.
Unknown Speaker 1:41:41
So I would just suggest we monitor this one too. Do you move or suggest?
Unknown Speaker 1:41:47
Do you move or suggest that we monitor so
Unknown Speaker 1:41:49
I’m aware that we that we monitor it?
Unknown Speaker 1:41:52
Alright guys. All right,
Unknown Speaker 1:41:55
Moved by Councillor Kristen, second by Councilmember back. We are now open for dialogue and debate Councilmember level fairing? Um,
Unknown Speaker 1:42:03
yeah, thank you. So yeah, I did have a I was able to talk with have a conversation with Sergeant Garcia about this. And I wanted to comment, I really do think this is one that we would want to monitor, as opposed to to just throw out because there are, as I read through the bill, there are pieces that you as you mentioned, that we are doing in our city, and we need to make sure ensure that other cities in our state are, are adhering to those things. One of the things and we had a really long conversation around this was around the rewind and diversion or what was the other one restorative justice. So that can often be used as a as an incentive for you know, so you either do this program, or you get cited. So it really encourages reluctant parents who are already, you know, just or even children who,
Unknown Speaker 1:42:59
Unknown Speaker 1:43:00
you know, just, I don’t want to, I don’t want to have to go through this, this work. But if they know that they’re going to get cited, that they have to appear in court, that’s the push, they would need to get the supports, that they wouldn’t, that they wouldn’t need. And, you know, it’s a lot more difficult to attain those supports, as an adult, getting in trouble than as a child. So I think that that component that did have me really concerned, um, and the other one, too, is and I could speak, you know, I, we had a good conversation around this and being a public employee, we often have legislators who tell us and pass laws that have impact on our profession and our practices, with no clue as to what it means to be in the classroom or out on the, you know, out on the streets, are you doing their daily duties? So we it’s really important that stakeholders are present, and they have a voice in what is written in this piece of legislation. So that might extend
Unknown Speaker 1:44:07
Unknown Speaker 1:44:09
Yes. Oh, yeah. Well,
Unknown Speaker 1:44:11
I’ll second. But, um, so, uh, you know, I think it’s, I think it’s really important to that. If they’re not willing to change the language on this piece, then I think we should oppose this. I think we should put it on, you know, to monitor it Pending Changes in language. So anybody,
Unknown Speaker 1:44:34
anybody oppose monitoring this? Okay. Dr. Waters. Yeah, I
Unknown Speaker 1:44:39
think we ought to actively oppose this, this bill.
Unknown Speaker 1:44:42
So I was trying to explain why I felt we should monitor it as opposed to oppose it.
Unknown Speaker 1:44:47
Unknown Speaker 1:44:49
good mayor, you could also choose to oppose unless amended, so that it’s something that might we’ll look at in some of those sections that
Unknown Speaker 1:44:56
are good, right. So right now, so But my point is right now There’s a motion on the floor. Yes, the monitor Senate Bill 182. It’s been motion. It’s been Moved by Councillor Christensen, second by Councillor pack. And we can all spend time talking about why we are going that Robert’s rule says My job is the chairs to make sure that Opposing Viewpoints that’s reason why I always ask get heard. So
Unknown Speaker 1:45:19
I wasn’t finished. So that’s the only that’s the only reason
Unknown Speaker 1:45:23
Unknown Speaker 1:45:24
you can keep going with this. Again, it’s 11 o’clock in this council constantly is pushing back on me as I try to chair a meeting constantly. So I’m sorry for cutting people off. I’m sorry for pushing this along. But I will continue to do so go ahead and finish your point. Councilmember dog All
Unknown Speaker 1:45:39
right. You know, I
Unknown Speaker 1:45:40
guess my point is, and maybe if Councilmember Christiansen because you know, I have a DD two man, and you’d say something and it throws my train of thought. So I kind of lost my train of thought here. But would if council member is willing council member Christiansen is willing to amend this, that we could either monitor it or oppose it? If the language is not amended on the particular on that particular piece?
Unknown Speaker 1:46:13
Because we’re Christiansen drawn off.
Unknown Speaker 1:46:16
I would like to amend it to say oppose unless amended.
Unknown Speaker 1:46:20
Unknown Speaker 1:46:22
Do I have a second?
Unknown Speaker 1:46:23
I’ll second. Okay. Okay.
Unknown Speaker 1:46:25
So we’ll go ahead. It’s been moved so that we are going to oppose unless amended. And it was seconded by Councilmember Pac, is anyone opposed to this motion that would like to speak? All right. All in favor of the motion to oppose unless amended say aye.
Unknown Speaker 1:46:41
Unknown Speaker 1:46:43
Opposed say nay.
Unknown Speaker 1:46:44
Unknown Speaker 1:46:45
the Council, the motion passes unanimously. That’s it for legislative bills. We also have a motion on the floor to the chair will now entertain a motion to extend the meeting past 11 o’clock. It’s not 1059. All in favor, say aye. Aye.
Unknown Speaker 1:46:59
Unknown Speaker 1:47:00
Opposed say nay. Alright, the meeting is extended unanimously. Let’s go ahead and take a three minute break for final call public invited to be heard. And then we will
Unknown Speaker 1:47:10
Mayor point of order and you’re really going to hate me for this one. Right. And I remember back, we had actually asked to extend this time to five minutes to give people enough time to actually call in because I still get people calling, you know, saying hey, I don’t have time to call in every time I try to get on they’re really close. Well,
Unknown Speaker 1:47:34
if they’re watching, they got three minutes. I know I understand that. I don’t think we voted on it. We could always do that. But let’s just see how many people call in it’s 11 o’clock and let’s just see how it goes. So let’s go ahead and and I usually I usually am way past three minutes anyway as I Donald about my kitchen, but let’s go ahead and come back for three and let’s see how many people show up. Back in three
Unknown Speaker 1:52:19
Just a reminder for those of you that have called in, please make sure that you mute the live stream so that you can listen to the instructions through your telephone. I will be calling on you by the last three digits of your your phone number. All right. Alright. How
Unknown Speaker 1:52:43
many people do we got?
Unknown Speaker 1:52:47
mayor, we have three people at
Unknown Speaker 1:52:48
this time. All right, let’s go ahead and
Unknown Speaker 1:52:52
make just a few seconds to let the livestream catch up with us. Hang on.
Unknown Speaker 1:53:15
Just a quick shout out to gamble. Love, see and gamble.
Unknown Speaker 1:53:21
He loves seeing you too.
Unknown Speaker 1:53:23
Unknown Speaker 1:53:25
What can I say? I’m a cat guy.
Unknown Speaker 1:53:28
Alright, looks like the live stream has caught up to us. So the first caller, your phone number ends in 372372. I’m going to ask you to unmute. Are you there? Hello. Yes, please state your name and address for the record. You have three minutes.
Unknown Speaker 1:53:52
Yes, my name is Todd icorn. And my business located at 471 Main Street, right downtown Longmont at 501.
Unknown Speaker 1:54:03
You may continue.
Unknown Speaker 1:54:06
Um Yes, I was calling about the How to the street dividers not the last conversation that was speaking on so I’m not sure if this was the time to make that talk about that subject of blocking one of the lanes like they did last summer.
Unknown Speaker 1:54:21
It’s the It’s time.
Unknown Speaker 1:54:25
I’m sorry, sir. Go ahead. It’s
Unknown Speaker 1:54:26
time you can say whatever you’d like. Okay, great. Perfect. Okay,
Unknown Speaker 1:54:29
I’ll try to make this fast. I’ll try to do in half that time because I know it’s late. I represent Lupita Bella, and we did some really great things for the town, brought some excitement with music, and it really kept my business alive. Otherwise I would have closed my doors. So I appreciate everybody did that. Same thing for this year. This is really important. We also believe that it’s great for the town because it catches traffic that drives through the town. And with that they shop around town sales and tax revenue goes up Downtown businesses will thrive. So we really pushing for these dividers, we look at the parklets. And they look very, very dangerous. So we want people to actually reevaluate them. And look at the possibility what we were told that we can have the city come back with a divider in the summer. It’s just the summer months. And we just really want to talk about that. And how can we get the public more involved in the awareness of how good and beneficial is the town? All right, thank
Unknown Speaker 1:55:29
Unknown Speaker 1:55:30
We appreciate that.
Unknown Speaker 1:55:32
Okay, thank you so much. And I also want to ask one thing is that for the city, we’re really trying to do our best to make it more vibrant, bringing in multiple businesses bringing in rural communities that we work with, because a farm to table now. And so we actually through multiple businesses on our street, we actually have created this collective collaborative to really again, bring more awareness to small businesses, and especially rural farmers right here in hygiene in Longmont. So we want to know is what is this Longmont wants just because we don’t want to work against with laws to do Longmont wants, so they want the town to be more of a pass through. Because we see what happens in Lewisville wood Lafayette, soon to be doing Loveland and all these towns are doing great things and is creating a very vibrant downtown sector. And we want to be part of that. But if the town doesn’t really want to really like create more of that, you know, capture people bring tourists into town, then we just need to know that. So we just want to pose that question to the city like what do they want their downtown to be like, and these dividers will flow traffic makes it safer, warmer and brings a lot more people downtown and makes more exciting to the town. So on that note, once you guys go to sleep, then thank you so much for giving me that time to speak.
Unknown Speaker 1:56:41
Thank you, sir.
Unknown Speaker 1:56:42
All right, next caller.
Unknown Speaker 1:56:46
All right, the next caller, your phone number ends in 182182. I’m going to ask you to unmute. There you are. Can you hear us?
Unknown Speaker 1:56:58
Yes. Hi. My name is Felice Harlow. Again, I’ve stayed up with you all to this whole meeting. Just to clarify a couple of things. parking on Lakeshore drive. That’s not just on Lakeshore drive. If you drive around the playground and the dog park on 21st, all through that neighborhood. There are signs that say no parking neighborhood only. And it’s just not on the three surrounding streets. It’s all up and down that whole area. Secondly, as far as safety goes, again, I live on the corner of Drake and Lakeshore there is a fire hydrant directly across the street. If you would like me to share with you, the numerous pictures I took last summer of cars parked within four inches of that fire hydrant. That is a safety issue. It is not us trying to be snobs with a park across our street. It is safety. And the third thing is if you drive not only and look at that fire hydrant, you drive down towards Harvard, on Lakeshore, there is at least one neighbor that is had to put a chain across his own driveway to prevent people from turning around in his driveway and hid in his yard as well. There are rocks that were landscaped years ago. And last summer, somebody decided to drive over the rocks. And you can see where one of them has been lifted in squish. So it is not just a Oh, please don’t join our neighborhood. We want anybody to enjoy it. If you have to carry your boat, three blocks away, then maybe there won’t be so many boats, if that’s the safety issue, but parking in front of a fire hydrant is definitely a safety issue. And if you all want the pictures, you all got an email from me today. Please somebody respond, and I will send you pictures. And thank you so much for taking this time to really entertain the issues on Macintosh like and I think that if more citizens would have known about this discussion Tonight, you will purge them a lot more of this. Just like when that survey was done in August, we have already had four months of calling you all, and nobody even knew the survey was being taken. So they just took whoever hadn’t made a call to you all up until August. What was it eight or whatever that week was, Ma’am, I’m gonna.
Unknown Speaker 2:00:27
I’m gonna have to cut about three minutes. 20 seconds. But thank you so much. We appreciate you calling in. We get it. Thank you. All right, next caller.
Unknown Speaker 2:00:39
All right, our last caller, your phone number ends in 212. I’m going to ask you to unmute
Unknown Speaker 2:00:47
Unknown Speaker 2:00:49
Unknown Speaker 2:01:00
Miss Thompson, you there.
Unknown Speaker 2:01:04
There you are, can you hear us? Yeah, you may begin.
Unknown Speaker 2:01:11
Okay, the last part of the meeting the discussion in the last part of this meeting tonight. Um, it just makes it obvious what’s happening in this city is that people are increasingly just doing whatever they want to do, without regard to the impact on anyone else. This is getting worse and worse in this city. And this kind of behavior is being modeled by Mayor Bagley, who encouraged people not to comply with health orders, and threatens it not to comply with them in the south, without regard to the impact that that might have on other people. Um, Councilmember Rodriguez was caught violating a quarantine. So again, he just did whatever he wanted to do without regard to the impact on anybody else. He modeled that kind of behavior. And tonight, the City Council voted to give $246 to a developer without any citation of legal authority to do something like that, as if that $246,000 belonged to the city council and not to the people of Longmont. They just did whatever they wanted to do with, regardless of the impact on the people of llama acted with impunity, it’s like everybody is starting increasingly, to act with impunity. And as the Italians say, the fish rots from the head down. And if you want to know why we’re experiencing this sort of decline or decay in our society here in Longmont, you can just look at what the mayor and the mayor pro town you look at how they behave and how the city council behave, whether our money and I’m sure you can see what the problem is right there. And the thing about the police needing to be a witness and that they have a problem enforcing laws, when they’re not a witness, while I made a lot of complaints about violations of health orders and got the police to come up and be a witness where they knew exactly what was going on. And you know, there was no doubt about it, but they still refuse to enforce health orders. Because they said they have been told not to enforce the health orders only to educate people. And I’m pretty sure
Unknown Speaker 2:04:11
Mr. Thompson we appreciate that. All right. That concludes tonight’s public invited to be heard. Let’s go ahead and move on to Mayor council comments. Dr. Waters. Yeah, I
Unknown Speaker 2:04:24
just want to go back to the comments that were made about what we did last summer downtown is does any Can anybody any the staff? Just remind us where are we with plans for this summer? Is that? Is that part of the plan here? Oh, I know we do this with LD da and it requires the I guess approval of C dot just kind of what’s the what’s the state of play right now.
Unknown Speaker 2:04:53
Kimberly’s working on that and she did a survey with her downtown group. As you know, last year, there were A lot of folks that were opposed to the barriers and there were folks that support them. And they’re evaluating this concept of parklets. And it actually fits within the parking areas along the road, but it doesn’t close the other lane. And so I Phil’s working with Phil and Tyler and I’ve asked them to, to put an item to talk to council about that within a month.
Unknown Speaker 2:05:25
Thanks. Appreciate that.
Unknown Speaker 2:05:28
All right, Councillor Christiansen and then Councillor pack.
Unknown Speaker 2:05:36
I just want to say a few words about the police because it has been a very few weeks before we’ve met since we’ve met. And in that time, a great deal of things have happened. We’ve had the horrible tragedy at King soopers which shows us the best of a police force. With officer Tommy and all of Longmont police who went and helped them. We have a really dedicated police force, but the amount of courage it took for a man to walk into there and sacrifice his life for us is something that is awesome. It truly fills me with our and we need to do everything we can to help the his family leaving seven children and all the other families, the two young people who will never see their lives unfold the all the other people who have lives too. So we see the best of police. We also see in the trial of officer Chauvin, who, in my opinion, murdered judge Floyd, we see the worst of police. So we have this both going on at the same time. And I think that this gives us all pause to reflect upon how great humanity can be, and police forces can be and how dreadful police forces can be. I’ve lived in places where there were truly
Unknown Speaker 2:07:21
Unknown Speaker 2:07:22
abated racist police forces and that’s a very bad thing. Anyway,
Unknown Speaker 2:07:28
Unknown Speaker 2:07:30
want to share to give a shout out to our police force who went over there and also risked their lives and say a word of thank you to our police force and all the people who serve on that. Thank you.
Unknown Speaker 2:07:44
Councilmember Chris Kazmir back.
Unknown Speaker 2:07:48
Thank you, Mayor Bagley, you know, we, we talked about when when we can get back to being normal. For me, the bastion of normalcy is King soopers. I mean that that is our level of normal. And it saddens me in our country to be quite honest, that we’re selfish. I think that we become very selfish people who think they have rights to override other people’s rights. And I totally understand gun rights and ownership. But we as elected officials from the federal government, all the way down to the local government, we have to come up with a with a solution. So what I want to say to the residents of Longmont is if you if you are a person who wants to protect gun rights at all costs, at all costs, so that you can have as many guns, every type of gun every type of a weapon, then would you be willing to pay enough taxes to take care of mentally ill and addicted people? Because we can’t have it both ways in our country. We cannot say it’s okay to murder people on a mass level, and then say, oh, but they were mentally ill or they had an addiction or they everything’s an excuse. And we have to confront it. So I think that we have a horrible mental health issue in this country. And if that is, if that is contributing to these mass murders, then we as as residents of this country, need to decide Are we willing to take care of people who need help? Or are we not? So I just wanted to throw that it saddens me to my very to the depths of my heart that we do not solve this Issue art or try to solve it. So personally, I would give, I would pay three quarters of my income to help solve this issue either on the mental health area or doing something with regulation, because we do have to solve it. So that’s it. Thank you Have a good night.
Unknown Speaker 2:10:22
Thank you, customer by customer, though fairing.
Unknown Speaker 2:10:27
Um, thank you. So I have a couple of things I wanted to say. And one of them is around on the mental health issue. You know, I worry over and over again that when so I think about the shooting at Sandy Hook. Okay, the person who did it was diagnosed autism, Asperger’s. Okay, that’s my child’s diagnosis, and the level of stigma and shame that we had. Because using that as a highlight, rather than dealing with comprehensive legislation for any, it comes from the top down, you know, and it really is, it’s hard. I mean, we Dr. Waters had put out the resolution and the upheaval that it created in our own community, when those messages really should have been coming from our federal government, it should have been coming from the top. And you do so then you’re created this divisiveness and within our own community. Um, so so there are several facets here that need to be addressed mental health being one of them legislation on on gun ownership, and responsible gun ownership, this person legally attained that weapon. all they had to do was ask two people, one person who knew him personally and say, is he someone who should have a gun. And overwhelmingly, the more and more I read about him, people loved ones were saying he should have never had a gun. So, you know, their reference check we do. I mean, I’m just throwing stuff out there. But really, it’s it’s having serious conversation. So then it goes back to I think about these bills and legislative bills, you know, we we did to have the right people at the table, talking about and having input on on what kinds of language we put in our laws and policies, so that they really are comprehensive, and that they do work. So I want to speak back on to why I opposed the city stance or supporting that opposition in those bills. Really, my purpose in that was, I want to start seeing the people who are doing that work, have roles in playing in putting language in. So rather than just throwing a flat out opposition, I want people to be thinking about having police officers, if we’re going to pass bills around public safety, then let’s have public safety people be present, and be the ones who are putting the language in those types of bills, because they know what works. They’re out in the field, they, you know, they are the experts. So to have somebody in an office to say, I want this because it sounds good. You know, let’s have the right people calling the shots on these on these issues. Um, so that that was the reason why I took the stance I did, it wasn’t necessarily because I support these bills. I think they have potential, but the right people need to be at the table. So I didn’t want to close the dialogue on that. And the other one is I do want to, so well, I’ll call people out who need big dude, who I think need to be called out on and I expect the same thing. I also give credit where credit is due. So I really wanted to thank our mayor for the letter he put out in response to the shooting. I appreciated that, um,
Unknown Speaker 2:13:57
you know, that was, I
Unknown Speaker 2:13:59
mean, I went over to the site afterwards and and took flowers contributed to all the flower methods there. And, you know, it was overwhelming, and I just I have no words. I have no words for that. So I really I appreciate you taking that role and putting together that statement and I stand behind it.
Unknown Speaker 2:14:18
100% so that’s what I have to say thank you.
Unknown Speaker 2:14:24
That’s for water.
Unknown Speaker 2:14:26
Okay to make a second comment this time. Well, I want to echo council woman indigofera appreciation for your statement. I thought it I thought it was it was the right thing right statement to make. So I appreciate that as well. Council woman Hidalgo Farren very made reference to the resolution that I introduced to the council. And I honestly I became a defensive issue. Certainly The Division in the community exists before I introduced a resolution, right? Wasn’t the resolution that divided the community, the community, the communities divided on this issue? It simply brought it out. But I will say this, I just want to remind this council, in anybody in the community who’s listening, at the time I introduced that resolution, I was I was pretty clear that I did, I wasn’t naive about that making a difference that was making a statement. I was hopeful that that it might make a statement that was loud enough for for, for policymakers who actually have the authority to make decisions to make some we didn’t make a loud enough statement, we didn’t make a lot enough statement for other elected officials in Boulder County to make statements right. But the more important work, I think, that we’ve done, and and that needs to be done, was reflected in the report following the the what we did in 2018, and into 2019, the world cafe process in September of 2018. That was that that led to an action planning process and report to the counseling in 2019. There were four areas that came out of that process in which the participants along the whole continuum, from gun enthusiast to opponents of gun ownership, four areas on which people could agree that there was common ground on which we could work together. One of those was reducing violence at the root cause in society, with guns being an example of how it gets expressed. But there are other ways bullying, what starts at very young ages, there’s there are a lot of ways people express their anger. Secondary was mental health in and we provide an action planning format for that process. And we provide an example of an action plan specifically focused on mental health. And what might lead to a ballot question to the question, Are you willing to pay more reticent residents, there was an action plan that was that was offered as a template that could have produced a ballot question that would allow lung monitors at least to decide Yes, we’re going to make a deeper, more robust investment in mental health in Longmont. Third area was was education and the fourth area was advocacy. But across the continuum, those were the four areas on which people agreed we can work together, no matter how much we disagree, but we can’t do it by pointing to somebody else. This is not the job of legislators someplace else. As much as I as much as the resolution reflection, I think Congress ought to do. The more serious work here to reduce violence is on us and on the community. And it’s not through legislation, it’s through committed work together, to plan our way into more, more and better with mental health more and better with the education about gun safety, more and better in terms of the advocacy we need to do. And more and better in terms of addressing the root causes of violence in the society. So if anybody is up for doing the real work, that would be difference making let’s dust off that plan. And let’s go back at it and get serious, not about pointing to to what others ought to do. But assuming the responsibility for ourselves to take the leadership to do the kind of work that has to be done in this community, that might make a difference. I’m done. All right.
Unknown Speaker 2:18:33
Unknown Speaker 2:18:34
The I guess I don’t see anybody else. I just, I just wish that members of the public were nicer. I mean, we don’t get paid for that crap. And in general, I think everybody does a great job. Even those I don’t necessarily always agree with Mayor Pro Tem Rodriguez, I have no idea where some of those comments came from. You’re a great guy. You’re a great public servant. And I have no idea. I’m shocked that people assume what our incomes are. I’m shocked that they assume what we do in our private lives and just shocked and I will not miss that November. Just the and gratitude and just the vitriol and just the the negativity the public sometimes or just certain members of the public just shocked me. So I didn’t deserve it. I didn’t care. But I was more mad at the comments directed at you. You’re a good man. And long months. lucky to have you YouTube. Dr. Waters, those comments directed to you were also unfair. And I know many of you are thinking well, why even waste the time addressing it because it bugs me. That’s why anyway, so well. Harold, do you have any comments?
Unknown Speaker 2:19:37
No comments, Mayor council? All right.
Unknown Speaker 2:19:40
They look Eugene, still awake.
Unknown Speaker 2:19:42
They’ll hear me You’re still here. You have anything to say? comments, comments? All right, good. We
Unknown Speaker 2:19:49
have a motion to adjourn then
Unknown Speaker 2:19:50
so we can go to bed room move. I get that all in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. It’s unanimous. We’re done. Seeing a few days guys later But