Video Description:
Longmont City Council Regular Session – April 27, 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:
Read along below, or follow along here: https://otter.ai/u/n-x9z1so9vT66swVLR8M87t3r48
Unknown Speaker 20:21
Thanks, everybody for being here again, I’d now like to call the April 27 2021 Longmont city council regular session to order. Let’s go ahead and start with a visual roll call. The chair will note that everyone on Council, including the mayor is present. Let’s go ahead and start with the pledge. I’m Marcia, would you like to lead us?
Unknown Speaker 20:40
No, but I will. Anyway, here we go. I pledge allegiance to the
Unknown Speaker 20:52
Republic
Unknown Speaker 20:55
way.
Unknown Speaker 20:58
It is this fall with Liberty liberty.
Unknown Speaker 21:04
All right. So, Chair would like to remind anyone wishing to provide public comment during public invited to be heard must watch the livestream of the meeting and then call in. When the meeting is open for public comment. You’ll get instructions like this on the screen when that happens. So let us continue to have a motion for the approval of the minutes of April 30 2021. It was a regular session. Councilmember Christiansen So moved. Second Second. All right. It’s been Moved by Councillor Christian Christiansen and seconded by Dr. Waters. All in favor say aye. Aye. Hi. I got an eye or a comment. Councillor Martin?
Unknown Speaker 21:46
It was an eye.
Unknown Speaker 21:47
Okay. All opposed say nay. All right. Motion passes unanimously. All right. Let’s go ahead. And oh my gosh, you see here we have a proclamation designating this month. The month of May 2021. Is the older Americans month in Longmont, Colorado, and I just closed my outlook on one second.
Unknown Speaker 22:16
I will pull that up for you if you like here,
Unknown Speaker 22:19
just pull it pull it up, because
Unknown Speaker 22:21
let’s see here. Yeah, I’m not seeing it. Sorry. All right, great. Just scroll with me. It’s proclamation designating may 2021. As older Americans month in Longmont, Colorado, whereas Walmart includes a growing number of older Americans who have built resilience and strength over their lives through successes and difficulties. And whereas 14.5% of last month, one month population in 2019 was over 65 years of age and currently representing the fastest growing age group in the state. And whereas llama benefits from people of all ages, abilities and backgrounds are included and encouraged to share their successes and stories of resilience. Whereas Longmont recognizes our need to nurture ourselves reinforce our strength and continue to thrive in times of joy and difficulty. And whereas aumont can foster communities and strength by creating opportunities to share stories and learn from each other, engaging older adults through programs supporting physical, mental and emotional well being through education, recreation and service, and encouraging people of all ages to celebrate connections and resilience and engaging and supporting all who care for older persons. And whereas the stories and contributions of older persons helped support and inspire others. This older American month we celebrate the strength of older adults and the aging services network with special emphasis on the power of connection engagement and building strong communities. Now therefore, I Brian job as the mayor by virtue of the authority vested in me and the City Council, the city of Walmart do hereby proclaim may 2021 is older Americans month in Longmont encourage every resident to recognize older adults and the people who support them as essential contributors to the strength of our community. Sign the mayor. At this time, I would like to invite council to accept this proclamation on behalf of all the older Americans on Council. I’m just kidding. You don’t have to do that guys. But, but we just wanted to recognize that many of these glorious 14.5% control our town. So nice to see that you guys are in power. Hope you enjoy the Proclamation. Thank you for your service. All right. That said let’s move on to Well, hold on a second. What happened to my agenda? There it is. Alright, so let’s move on to the city manager’s actually, do we have any agenda revisions or submission of documents at this time? All right, seeing none. Let’s go ahead and move on to the customer record, if I may pretend was that hand. Okay. Let’s go on to the city manager’s report. You want to fill us up to date how the hospitals doing Harold?
Unknown Speaker 24:49
I’m doing well. That’s I’m going to show you three slides. Quickly. I’ve got to move some stuff around on my screen so I can do this. share with you all
Unknown Speaker 25:05
share my screen. So
Unknown Speaker 25:11
on this screen, you will will see, this is what we’re seeing in terms of hospitals in Boulder County. So as of the 26th, we had 28 people hospitalized. We had 25 last week. And so you can see that slide trend upward, again, that we’re seeing. And then the next slide, this is really what it looks like from a state level. Currently, there are 606 people hospitalized for confirmed COVID-19 across Colorado. Last week, we had 510 people hospitalized, you can see that that’s an increase of about 19%. And, and I talked about this, because that’s actually what folks are going to be looking at. As as we move forward with these new orders and where we sit, it’s really going to be based on hospital capacity. I did want to show you this chart, I’m going to share my screen again. And I’m going to show you a different chart. So you saw what we’re seeing in terms of hospitalization. Now, this is a chart a few days behind. But this is where we are you seeing one like a graph on it. So this is the Denver Metro hospital admission rates by county and I’m going to read that to you because I’m going to slide down. So when you look at really that that threshold, where we were over the limit, it really was around this time, right. And so this is what the entire metro area looks like. So when I come in and draw the boulder numbers, so two is the number that you heard us talking about with the state in the new order. So that’s when the retraction comes back in place as they discussed it. And if you look at this, so it was on the 24th of November until approximately the sixth of December. That’s the only time we crossed that threshold in terms of Boulder County. But you can see what’s happening here and this is what folks are watching so you can see the the broader metro area moving up. As a county we move down obviously, you can see that we’re increasing and it’s probably going to do that a little bit more when we catch up. But to give you a perspective, I’m going to lay or Denver in this and you can see that Denver’s really mirroring the broader metro area. But then when you drop in Arapahoe, you can see that there are actually higher so you have that you can see what’s happening in terms of hospital admissions, and then I’m going to drop in Douglas. And it’s with the area Jefferson. And you can see where they were down with boulder but now they’re moving up. And then Adams and you can see Adams was down but then moving up and then moving down again. And then last. I’m gonna throw in Broomfield because Broomfield tends to be lower, they move around a lot just because of their size. So what you can see in terms of the hospital admissions piece, the broader metro area is really higher than we are in Boulder County and in Broomfield. But when you look at that threshold that they’re talking about in terms of the new orders and the new status, it’s it’s at this blue line. So in terms of hospital capacity, we’re still in a good spot. But everyone is really watching this this trend in the broader metro area. And is that changes we’ll let you all know. But instead of going through all the data that we used to go over, those are the three points that we’re going to be talking about with you all because that’s really what’s going to control how we move forward. And through this process. The one thing I will say is the CDC did come out today and changed some of the order their recommendations on masking. And so they were very specific to say that if you’re vaccinated, outside, you don’t need to wear masks. They were they didn’t address inside in masking What was interesting as part of some of the conversations that we’re seeing this afternoon, and I’m going to try to dig this data up. But really the chances once you’re vaccinated of getting sick or getting hospitalized and then mortality related to if you’re vaccinated. It’s very, very low. And there is actually someone talking today that they really wish the CDC would really push those numbers out more. Because the big thing that we all need to do right now and this is I think anytime we get a chance is really to continue to encourage people to go in and get vaccinated. There are spots available, you can go into different locations. There’s a lot of clinics available.
Unknown Speaker 29:55
In terms of the equity clinics, there’s going to be one in Lafayette I believe this weekend, similar to what we had Front Range, we’re continuing to work on that they’re evaluating the hours at some of the clinics so they can make it accessible. So if we all do one thing in the coming weeks, is just continue to, in all of our circles encourage folks to get vaccinated because the data is really showing that it’s working. And the more we get vaccinated and the fast and the faster we do it, the less strain that’s going to continue placing, but ultimately, that really helps us get out of the situation we’re in. So that’s what you’re going to hear me talking about. From here on out, it really is about getting people vaccinated and watching the hospitals. That’s really where that that’s what we’re going to be focusing on. And we’re kind of we’re going to continue to do everything we can to make those opportunities accessible for everyone. So other than that, I’d be happy to answer any questions.
Unknown Speaker 30:52
Casper Christiansen
Unknown Speaker 30:55
this isn’t actually a question Harold. But I just wanted to say that I’m give a shout out to the city because we open lashley Street Station, and right. And that’s run by the city and my son has registered at several other places. And nobody ever called him back. He went online because somebody suggested that and was able to register in less than a minute, pick his time and day, it was the next day. He got a confirmation call within a minute. It was excellent. I don’t understand why other people are not following that kind of protocol to set up scheduling because it’s wonderful. And so he’s halfway done now. And he’s scheduled for the second one. And that’s solely because the city set up a really good system there. And it’s also small enough at that neighborhood people can come over and get their shots and salute is always does a very good job of everything. So um, anyway, I wanted to thank the city for doing that it really is a wonderful place to get vaccinations and incredibly efficient. Thank you.
Unknown Speaker 32:15
Yeah, that’s like the only point that you mentioned, it is salute that’s doing it. And you know, we provided the facility. Shannon, Kevin work with them and doing it. And so they’re doing that some of the other locations too. But that’s part of the actually a national program that saludar in terms of getting vaccine to so it’s been a great partnership with them. Actually, Dan’s on the line. But they, they’re working to extend it, they were doing everything three days a week. They really want to do that five days a week now. And so that that’s what we’re talking about in Dan and Kevin and Shannon have done a great job and working with people to get those set up.
Unknown Speaker 32:57
Alright, that’s fine. Yes, this
Unknown Speaker 33:00
is a premature question. Just tell me to go away. But um, I’ve had a couple of of emails about constituents who couldn’t get anybody on the phone. And I have had that experience myself. You know, that people when people are working from home or working from home, and they answer their emails, but the phones aren’t forwarded. And I’m just wondering how soon we’re going to, or whether we’ve begun planning back to a normal work schedule where the phones are manned and more consistently, as people start to try to access recreation services, for example.
Unknown Speaker 33:39
So a couple of things on that we do have people and we probably have more people there. I will tell you that when we do work remotely, so my office phone is live with me. And so if folks are able to get in, I would say that they we can reach out to the main number for the city. So we could try to get him in or they can call our office to see what’s going on. Because unless we’re on a call, I can take calls from my office phone here. Now the reality is, we may be on other calls, too. So but we’ll look into it. But we’re starting that planning right now. In terms of bringing folks back what I will tell you all, we’re probably a little ahead of most of the other communities in Boulder County. So we have really been open for a while, at least with the reduced amount of folks in the office. Some of our other communities haven’t opened yet. And so we’re going to start bringing folks in as we’re looking and watching the orders based on the amount of people we can have. I will tell you, we’re going to still need to be careful because we have seen we have continued to see situations where somebody would be positive and if you have too many people together. You don’t want to have to then quarantine an entire department. So we’re managing that too as we look at this, and we’re going to continue bringing more folks on. But most operations should have people, all of them should have someone in there that can do that, and we’ll follow up on it. I’ll get with you on some specifics, so we can make sure that we’re connecting appropriately. You’ll see that within the next month, you’ll see that roll up in the next month.
Unknown Speaker 35:23
Okay, good.
Unknown Speaker 35:25
Thank you. Alright, great. Thank you, Harold.
Unknown Speaker 35:27
Let’s move on to the special reports. We also have an annual report presentation for the Senior Citizens Advisory Board.
Unknown Speaker 35:40
Hello, Mayor Begley, members of council audience members, my name is Michelle Wait, I’m the manager of senior services. And with me tonight is art cantana, Vice President of the Senior Citizens Advisory Board, and we will present tonight’s Report. I’m going to start things off and are will join me later. However, if you have any questions, please feel free. There are board members and staff present listening tonight. And I just want to acknowledge all of them and thank them for their work in 2020. It was an unprecedented year. As you all know. Erica, would you like to pull up the presentation please?
Unknown Speaker 36:23
Thank you.
Unknown Speaker 36:27
So as many of you know, the senior center closed its facility on March 13 of 2020. And this year, for the first time we combine the annual report of the advisory board, the staff and the Friends of the senior center.
Unknown Speaker 36:42
Go ahead, Erica has
Unknown Speaker 36:52
driven our work this last year. And for the senior services, it resulted in several things. Most important to mention is that even though the facility closed its doors, the staff and volunteers continued to provide programs and services both virtually as well as over the phone. And early on. In the pandemic, we did receive permission from Boulder County Public Health to do one on one in person assistance for basic needs in a safe and controlled environment, which was very important. And the Senior Services staff were able to be repurposed and were able to support facilities that remained open. And so all of the staff continued to operate at their full levels. Erica, the initial focus so it after we closed our doors in March of 2020 was really around responding to the immediate needs. Do people need masks food, and as well as things like toilet paper and sanitizer that quickly, and maybe not as quick as some had hoped, moved into access to testing. And then of course, more recently, has really been about accessing vaccination information. And so Senior Services was providing that information through a variety of sources. And we’ll get to that in just a minute. I think it’s also important to note that Longmont Meals on Wheels housed in the senior center, though they close the onsite dining, they immediately began offering meals in a different way. And so they took over the dining room at the senior center. And it has been used throughout the closure as their staging area as they were serving additional meals, but two additional people and they were also especially early on providing things like toilet paper and sanitizer, Durga. So communication needs were really, really important this past year. And so we were able to increase our email subscribers. We also increased our email newsletters themselves, we went to once a week for the English version. And once a month for our Spanish version. We also made a lot of phone calls. And we had a number of customers who wanted us to remain in contact with them via the phone. And so we kept that list going and stayed in contact with our volunteers or leaders of classes and also those customers who wanted to maintain a phone connection. Throughout this last year, the Friends of the senior center were indeed very, very, very good friends. They were able to continue to pay our instructor fees so that all of the programs that we offered online in 2020, were able to be free of charge And we could still compensate those individuals who supported those programs. They paid for a HIPAA compliant platform so that we could continue to offer emotional support in a confidential and private way. They also totally committed their funds through our last resort requests, which staff are integrally involved in and spent over $38,000 primarily in the area of housing, but really supported those impacted by COVID. As well as those impacted by other issues. The friends also provided $5,000 for technological devices, and in partnership with Boulder County area agency on aging. So far, we’ve been able to hand out 49 devices, and we are moving on and taking lists of other individuals and looking at ways to ensure internet connection as well as printing capabilities. Erica,
Unknown Speaker 41:05
the age well strategic plan, which many of you have heard about since 2006. efforts were stalled in 2020. The plan is built around four quadrants. And going forward, this plan will be built around a World Health Organization and an AARP, a framework for Age Friendly communities. And so we will be moving in to an eight domain versus a four quadrant approach. And not surprisingly, those eight domains have had four areas added to them, including public safety, elder abuse, emergency preparedness, and dementia friendly communities. So the next time we come back with our agewell strategic plan to Council, and to our community, it will be a broader and in some ways a little bit more focused planning process. And we have a meeting tomorrow to reengage around that plan and move that forward. Next. So looking at the annual report in terms of our age, well planning quadrants, we had 110 individuals you can see from the screen, who received counseling, we also utilized intern and intern and our peer support volunteers who were able to continue to provide the kind of emotional support continued with several of our support group options virtually as well as telephone support through our counseling services. And we were able thank goodness to keep golf going as well as some of our fitness programs. Through our connection with city recreation services. Erica. basic needs were a huge component and 2020 as mentioned already, the friends support was critical. We also have a great partnership with Longmont sunshine club, the oldest civic group in Longmont, and they provided over 30 $500 in oral health care. We sell 526 new clients for inflammation, referrals, referral and assistance. I know Of particular note to this council has been around those who were at risk of homelessness or homeless at at the moment. And you can see we serve 74 individuals and 58 people received more specialized case management services. I’m thrilled to be able to give Meals on Wheels credit, they served 127 515 127,515 meals in 20 to over 1000 different people. So really wonderful service. They were able to do sometimes a frozen meal and a hot meal seven days a week. And it was a really great way to keep connected and keep people with nutrition. Erica over the years I think you’ve heard me talk about I read dollar deposit our end of life Spanish program for people to be able to do their advanced directives. As throughout 2020. We were able to help 59 people get their end of life planning in order. We served over 170 caregivers, and not surprisingly our technology program which many of you are aware of our senior computer tech program. We closed our doors March 13. And almost immediately they were in they had their zoom account set up and they were shifting to a technologically virtual platform and they have served As you can see, by those numbers, over 1600 people were served through their technologically technological goal, my goodness, our tech center, I was gonna say it Tech Center, Erica,
Unknown Speaker 45:15
and then blast personal connection and community. I think through our pandemic, we have certainly learned the impacts of isolation and ways to really reach people. I think we learned through the initial vaccine signup, that was all online, what a struggle it was, in terms of the digital divide for many of our older adults and those without access to technology. We continue to offer programs, we continue to make phone calls, we continued our email. And certainly, we using technology, both the phone technology in terms of our bridge calls, but also virtual platforms to reach people to connect them with resources as well as programs. I’m going to turn it over to art, and he is going to talk just a little bit about the senior citizen advisory board specifically in 2020. So art, if you’d like to go Erica can pull up that slide.
Unknown Speaker 46:20
Okay, first of all, I would like to say that on behalf of the senior advisory board, we’d like to thank the mayor and the City Council for the proclamation and we in the recognition. Next I want to talk about the board members participated in the hiring of two people at the Senior Center, the resource specialist, and make dystopian, and both of whom are happened to be bilingual and bicultural. We’ve also provided input into the AIG rail strategic plan. Unfortunately, due to COVID, we’ve had to slow down on being run home. However soon we will be continuing with that. Also, I just want to say that we’re just fortunate to have the board members that we do have, who in addition to our attending our regular board meetings are involved in in as liaison on various other boards. Again, we we really appreciate being on there and enjoy participating and giving back to your community, especially the senior center.
Unknown Speaker 47:46
Okay, Erica.
Unknown Speaker 47:50
Um, and so just wrapping up 2020. I don’t need to tell you city council the work that we’ve been doing on behalf of the Longmont Housing Authority. But with six of the nine properties owned by Longmont housing authority as older adult housing, it was a perfect partnership to bring Senior Services in. And it was very exciting and important for our staff to connect in this way with Lh a with the Housing Authority work and their staff. And we look forward to continuing that partnership and that engagement with the residents and with the staff of the housing authority. Erica, in addition, 2021 We are looking forward to reopening and I’m thrilled to say we’re going to do so Monday, May 3, we will be open limited hours from 8am to 1pm. And we’ll kind of get our feet on the ground see what happens over the next few weeks in terms of Boulder County Public Health. And so we’re working on the logistics and the marketing. And we will be open for senior center business primarily on a reservation system. However, we will continue to do our information referral and counseling services. As we look forward to 2021, we’re going to be addressing ageism. And the advisory board is going to kick that off in June with a training session brought to us from Boulder County area agency on aging. And we will continue to move that forward. As well as looking at the age well plan itself. So those are some big things for 2021. I also want to thank the advisory board for all of their work. They have been stalwart they have been everywhere they could be to represent older adults. And they’re an incredible group of folks. Thank you Mayor Bagley and Council for the Proclamation. And that concludes our annual report. All right, thank you.
Unknown Speaker 49:56
Thank you so much for doing that you do wonderful work. Without the senior center, and whenever I go over I I’ve enjoyed the dances. I’ve enjoyed the activities, and just just keep it up. That sounds awesome. Thank you and art YouTube, thank you very much for for being here tonight and presenting that just big hats off to wonderful amenity we in resource we have in our community. Thank you. Any other questions from council? Councillor Christiansen?
Unknown Speaker 50:27
Not a question. Just thank you, Michelle and Mr. Quintana for being here. And for all that you do, I I as a member of the fastly aging populace. I’ve been really quite surprised at how fearful people who are older are have been during this pandemic. And I am sure that you have saved some lives because people have felt very isolated and very frightened. And knowing that there’s somebody there that will talk to them and help them and just walk them through what they need to do to get what they need. It is worth its weight in gold. So I thank you, all of you who are doing what you’re doing because it’s it’s very important. It’s been a an extremely isolating experience for a great many seniors. Thank you.
Unknown Speaker 51:30
All right, what
Unknown Speaker 51:30
I’d like to do now is if we could Don, we’re going to do a twofer. What I’d like to do is let’s go ahead and we’re not going to take a break. Well, let’s let’s go ahead and put up the first call public invited to be heard. First call public invited to be heard. And so while we do that, while we invite people to call in, what I’d like to do is Don, can you go ahead and read the consent agenda. And then let’s go ahead and not take a motion or pull anything until after first call public invited to be heard. And let’s just keep the first call public invited to be heard line open for a couple of colors. That will save us some time. So we at this time invite the public to call in while we’re reading the consent agenda into the record. Very good. Thank
Unknown Speaker 52:17
you, Mayor item nine a is ordinance 2021 dash 27. A bill for an ordinance authorizing a farmland lease agreement between the city of Longmont and Alan seewald on the Adrian open space public hearing and second readings scheduled for May 11 2021. Nine B is ordinance 2021 dash 28. A bill for an ordinance approving an amendment to the Vance brand Municipal Airport hangar parcel h 41. lease, public hearing and second reading scheduled for May 11 2021. Nine C is resolution 2021 dash 40. a resolution of the Longmont city council approving the amendment to intergovernmental agreement between the city of Longmont and Colorado Department of Human Services Office of Behavioral Health for a grant amendment to support the Lamont public safety LEAD program. 90 is resolution 2021 dash 41 a resolution of the Longmont city council approving the amendment to intergovernmental agreement between the city of Longmont and Colorado Department of Human Services Office of Behavioral Health for grant amendment to support the Longmont public safety crisis outreach response and engagement team. Nine is resolution 2021 dash 42 a resolution of the Longmont city council approving the amendment to the intergovernmental agreement between the city and the Colorado Department of Public Safety Division of Criminal Justice Office for Victims programs for grant funding for victim services. Nine F is the resolution 2021 dash 43 a resolution of Longmont city council approving an intergovernmental agreement between the city and Platte River Power Authority for engineering support services. Nine G is resolution 2021 dash 44 resolution of the Longmont city council approving the intergovernmental agreement between the city acting by and through its water utility enterprise and St. brainon. Left hand water Conservancy district for water supply. Nine H’s was resolution 2021 dash 45 a resolution of the Longmont city council authorizing an agreement between the city of Longmont Longmont and Eva Jo Logan for the purchase of real property in support of quiet zones to close the Terry street at grade rail crossing, and nine is resolution 2021 dash 46 a resolution of Longmont city council approving the intergovernmental agreement between the city of Longmont and the Federal Aviation Administration for grant funding under the airport Coronavirus response grants program.
Unknown Speaker 54:32
All right. Do we have any callers at this time?
Unknown Speaker 54:36
No, Mayor, we do not have any callers at this time.
Unknown Speaker 54:39
All right. So let’s go ahead and before we take a motion, does any Council have any consent agenda items that they would like to pull? Councillor waters?
Unknown Speaker 54:49
Yeah, Mayor
Unknown Speaker 54:50
beggar, thank you. I’d like to pull items A B and C or I’m sorry, cnd. Seeing items nine, nine, C, and D.
Unknown Speaker 55:01
Mayor,
Unknown Speaker 55:03
my apologies. It looks like just after I stopped sharing that screen, we got somebody in the waiting
Unknown Speaker 55:07
room.
Unknown Speaker 55:08
That’s what I figured. So let’s go ahead now that we Anyone else want to pull anything other than cmd. Alright, so we’re not going to the event that somebody calls in to talk about these items. Let’s go ahead and do first call public invited to be heard. Let’s start with the person who’s on the line, but let’s please not close it off.
Unknown Speaker 55:25
Okay,
Unknown Speaker 55:25
let’s just keep it open till the end of this call.
Unknown Speaker 55:29
Sure thing, alright, so
Unknown Speaker 55:30
for the caller ending in 414414, you should be able to unmute yourself and state your name and address for the record and you have three minutes.
Unknown Speaker 55:48
Call her for one four.
Unknown Speaker 55:52
star six to unmute.
Unknown Speaker 56:01
Please remember, Oh, hello. Am I and
Unknown Speaker 56:06
you are in you can go ahead and state your name and address for the record and then you have three minutes.
Unknown Speaker 56:11
Thank you very much Sharon alarie 534, Emory Street, Mayor Bagley and councilmembers. I just wanted to share some thinking about two agenda items. A and B. First, it’s very exciting for downtown business to receive a grant for parklets to support business during this pandemic. Was concerning to me is that downtown does not already provide adequate parking. And with the removal of parking spaces for the parklets it will cause increased parking issues. Downtown restaurant owner stated today in the paper, people around the country and specifically in Longmont are realizing that this is the most prime real estate and it shouldn’t be used for cars, but rather for people. Well, will the cars go to subprime residential neighborhoods? An analogy would be if residential neighborhoods didn’t believe trash was an issue and didn’t support trash collection. What if we encouraged people to place their trash in downtown receptacles rather than dealing with the issue and displacing the problem? Second, your discussion on electric scooter companies. I just wanted to give you some insight. My daughter lived in Seattle for six years. And we visited springs frequently. scooters were the new litter in the city of Seattle. Students were discarded and streets, Parks neighborhoods and creeks. They were everywhere. Once your honeymoon is over with the scooter company, whose problem is that it becomes an enforcement issue. cities do not have the resources to take on this job. We saw this problem again when we went to San Diego, scooters are just discarded throughout the city. What I would really appreciate you doing is focusing on making downtown a pedestrian friendly and a handicap accessible place for all citizens. I so greatly appreciate your time and dedication to the citizens of Longmont. And thank you for what you do.
Unknown Speaker 58:13
This is a Larry or is there anybody else in line with the queue? No,
Unknown Speaker 58:17
nobody else jumped in the queue.
Unknown Speaker 58:19
Alright, so we have been now five minutes. Nobody objects, we’ll go ahead and close out first call public invited to be heard and let’s move on to the consent agenda.
Unknown Speaker 58:32
Do we have a motion? Councilmember Martin?
Unknown Speaker 58:39
the consent agenda minus a, b and c. Is that correct?
Unknown Speaker 58:44
The chair will recognize that is a motion for the consent agenda. But instead of being C at C and D i
Unknown Speaker 58:50
believe i Excuse me.
Unknown Speaker 58:52
Right? Do you have a second? Second?
Unknown Speaker 58:55
All right. It’s been Moved by Councillor Martin. And seconded by Councillor Ward waters. The motion is for to pass the consent agenda less nine C and nine d? All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. All right, the consent agenda passes minus C and D. Let’s go on to ordinances on second reading and public hearings on any matter. What we’re going to do is we’re going to at this time, take our three minute break. And let’s go ahead and I think if you’re if you’re calling in for public hearing on item 10, a 10, d 10, c 10 d or 10 e, please call in now, because this is your chance. So we’re gonna take a three minute break and I’ll Donald’s and we’ll be back in a second. Thanks, guys. Just
Unknown Speaker 1:00:18
a reminder, folks that if you want to join us for the public hearings coming up next, make sure that you mute the live stream and enter the meeting number on your screen and listen to the instructions on your telephone. We will call you by the last three digits of your telephone number.
Unknown Speaker 1:03:55
Once again, just a quick reminder, if you’re going to join us for to speak on our public hearings on any matter make sure that you mute your live stream and enter the meeting ID when prompted on your telephone. And listen for the instructions on your telephone. We will call you by the last three digits of your telephone number.
Unknown Speaker 1:05:26
All right, are we back?
Unknown Speaker 1:05:28
Very long, three minutes closer to five. All right, is anybody in the queue for a second call or for public hearing on second reading of ordinances?
Unknown Speaker 1:05:39
I do not have anyone in the queue so far.
Unknown Speaker 1:05:42
All right, let’s go ahead and close. The actually let’s let’s leave it open. Just leave it open. All right, so let’s go on to item 10. A ordinance 2021 22. A bill for an ordinance amending chapter three of the Longmont municipal code on personnel rules. There’s no staff report. Anybody have any questions? If not have motion, please. I would move ordinance 2021 dash 22. Second, I made the motion. Dr. Waters seconded it. Seeing no further discussion or debate All in favor of ordinance 2021 22. And its passage say aye. Aye.
Unknown Speaker 1:06:18
Opposed say nay.
Unknown Speaker 1:06:20
All right. Or the
Unknown Speaker 1:06:22
mayor. Just your
Unknown Speaker 1:06:24
clarification. you’re considering the public hearing open and closes.
Unknown Speaker 1:06:28
We I said leave the call open but that that that that will play us? We’ll close we’ll close public hearing on ordinance 2021 22 kind of motion passes unanimously. But let’s go on to ordinance 2021 23. A bill for an ordinance amending chapter 14.04 of the Lamont municipal code on meter and waterline maintenance for arterial right of way. We have motion. There’s no staff report, by the way.
Unknown Speaker 1:06:52
Is it we will here have a hearing?
Unknown Speaker 1:06:56
Well, there’s nobody in the queue. So we’ll close that will close the hearing. But an
Unknown Speaker 1:07:00
ordinance 2021 dash 23
Unknown Speaker 1:07:04
All right. All in favor say aye.
Unknown Speaker 1:07:06
It’s been moved by Dr. Waters say to my counselor Martin. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. All right, Motion carries unanimously. That’s one ordinance 2021 dash 24 bill for an ordinance authorizing the city of Longmont leased a real property noseband spread Municipal Airport hangar parcel h 52. Gil shipper. We’ll close the public hearing. There’s not a staff report. We have motion counselor pic.
Unknown Speaker 1:07:30
I moved to 2021 24
Unknown Speaker 1:07:34
All right. All right. It’s been Moved by Councillor Peck seconded by Dr. Waters. Councillor Christiansen?
Unknown Speaker 1:07:41
This refers to the amending. amending the Oh, no, I’m sorry. Nevermind.
Unknown Speaker 1:07:51
It’s later in the day.
Unknown Speaker 1:07:56
They say that one more time. Sorry, Counselor.
Unknown Speaker 1:07:58
Oh, I actually Yes, I wanted to ask a question. This is to both D and E have to do with amending the the lease to from 20 to 30 years. Is that correct?
Unknown Speaker 1:08:15
Mayor Bagley, Councilmember
Unknown Speaker 1:08:16
Christiansen Dave Slater airport manager? That’s correct.
Unknown Speaker 1:08:20
Okay. So in this lease, which now extends it by 30%.
Unknown Speaker 1:08:29
Do we
Unknown Speaker 1:08:31
keep the same rate? Or is there some incremental movement upward? In other words, are we losing 30%? of of her rental?
Unknown Speaker 1:08:49
Just later,
Unknown Speaker 1:08:50
I’m gonna get David, you kids?
Unknown Speaker 1:08:56
Should I repeat it? I’m just wondering if there is a mechanism for increasing the rent over the course of 30 years or if it stays exactly the same for 30 years.
Unknown Speaker 1:09:09
There’s a mechanism I’m looking to find it. I think he can’t hear us right now. Oh, okay.
Unknown Speaker 1:09:15
We’ve increased rates before in the middle of their 20 year lease.
Unknown Speaker 1:09:20
There is a mechanism for doing that in the
Unknown Speaker 1:09:25
David King. David, can you hear us now?
Unknown Speaker 1:09:28
I can now
Unknown Speaker 1:09:30
Oh, can you go over the rental increase in this per year? The CPI, the CPI increase? Can you go over that?
Unknown Speaker 1:09:38
So the the current CPI for 2021 is at 2.7% increase over the previous year’s rate.
Unknown Speaker 1:09:48
Okay, thank you. That explains it. I
Unknown Speaker 1:09:50
just didn’t want us to be locked into the same rate for 30 years. That’s it’s like pretty bad deal for the taxpayers along with thank you and you mayor and council member Christiansen each year those leases have that built in CPI. So whatever the CPI is for the previous year is what it will be for that that following year. So in the event that it goes to zero or negative, we never go down. It stays the same and any increase them we go up.
Unknown Speaker 1:10:20
Okay, thank you very much for explaining that. David. Thank you.
Unknown Speaker 1:10:25
Alright, so we have a motion on the floor I believe, for ordinance 2021 dash 24. A bill for an ordinance authorizing the city of lamarque leased Real Property known as band spread Municipal Airport in your post the deal shipper who made that motion was Councilmember Peck and seconded by Councilmember waters. Is that accurate?
Unknown Speaker 1:10:41
Correct.
Unknown Speaker 1:10:42
All in favor?
Unknown Speaker 1:10:44
All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. All right, that Motion carries unanimously, ordinance 2021. That’s 25. And Guilford Nord is probably the first member of the band’s Prime Minister airport parcel h 14 sb lease. We’re going to close the public hearing at this time.
Unknown Speaker 1:11:01
We have a motion
Unknown Speaker 1:11:04
I’ll move ordinance 2021 dash 25. Second,
Unknown Speaker 1:11:07
Second. All right.
Unknown Speaker 1:11:09
I made the motion Councillor Chris seconded it. See no further discussion? debate. All in favor say
Unknown Speaker 1:11:14
aye. Aye. Aye.
Unknown Speaker 1:11:16
Opposed say nay. All right. Motion carries unanimously. Let’s move on to orders. 2021 days 26 bill for an ordinance approving the First Amendment to the band’s brand Municipal Airport hangar personal and ht to lease. We’re going to go ahead and close the public hearing at this time. We
Unknown Speaker 1:11:32
have motion. I’ll move approval of ordinance 2021 dash 26.
Unknown Speaker 1:11:37
Second, seconded that.
Unknown Speaker 1:11:40
I did. All right.
Unknown Speaker 1:11:42
Thank you, Councilmember Martin. It’s been moved by Dr. watersafe. But Councillor Martin, and at this time, go ahead and turn off the turn off the queue. There’s no more public hearings, or people won’t be allowed to speak. It’s all been closed out. So all in favor of orders. 2021 26 say aye. Aye. Hi. I was an eye as well opposed in a. Alright, the Motion carries unanimously. Let’s move on to the items removed from the consent agenda. Counselor waters, resolution 2021 dash 40. Why don’t you go ahead and state your comments or ask your questions, please. Yeah, thanks, Mayor
Unknown Speaker 1:12:17
Bagley. I’ll make one editorial comment. And then I do have some questions for I suppose it’s for Dan Eamon. And I know Dan’s logged into the meeting, the editorial comment would be this. In both times column, one leader, I read articles about what’s on tonight’s agenda, read one article in both publications about scooters. And I read one in at least one of the two periodicals
Unknown Speaker 1:12:52
about parklets.
Unknown Speaker 1:12:55
I didn’t read anything in either publication, and maybe I just missed it. And it was there about the these two items eight C and D on the agenda. So if I missed it, my bad. But if I didn’t, it’s a curiosity made that given given the scrutiny, and the narrative and the energy and the concerns about policing and what policing means community by community across the country, that that our residents wouldn’t have had a chance to read about these items. Now, I know this is a story that’s been told. I don’t think it can be told often enough. What’s happening here with decriminalizing homelessness, and, and in substance related issues, and how we are responding in ways here that are unlike so many other communities. It’s not unique, but it’s it’s unusual. So with that kind of editorial comment. I do have a couple of specific questions for Dan. That are I think everything that I’m curious about is an exhibit two. And it would start Dan, which is the amended statement of work. I in the in both the statement work for both items, but we’re dealing with AC there’s a very specific change in language, deleting the word police officer in substituting the word law enforcement officer in terms of identifying who is involved in responding to incidents as they occur. But any background you can provide on the rationale for the change in that language.
Unknown Speaker 1:14:40
Dr. Waters, they’re badly members of council. My name is Dan even on the assistant public safety chief for the city. I think what it what it really does is it kind of speaks to the the changing nature of the entire discussion around these topics. You know, when we started this four or five years ago, it was a very specific thing that we were that the country was Talking about what’s happened in the last four or five years, especially with the kind of the national level discussions is it’s broadened tremendously. So it’s not, we’re not just talking about a police officer, this could be, you know, a sheriff’s officer. It’s everybody’s looking at doing this now. So we have to change the way we talk about everything. It’s being widely embraced now. Whereas before four or five years ago, we were relatively unique. And certainly, like you mentioned, it’s not unique anymore. But we’re different in what we do. And it’s good to see that you know, a lot a lot more agencies and places are looking at these kinds of things, because they absolutely do work.
Unknown Speaker 1:15:39
So following that’s a great setup. Next question. In Section 3.19. There’s a specific reference to a third party evaluator. Could you talk just about who employs the third party evaluator? And listed there is some criteria, I think, is what how he should view that, for determining program effectiveness. Just talk about who employs the third party evaluator for the statewide initiative and the relationship of those criteria to the evaluation? Sure.
Unknown Speaker 1:16:16
So the state at the Office of Behavioral Health has contracted a, an independent evaluator, and that evaluator is tasked with a pretty significant job. Really, there’s four, there’s four lead, or pre arrest diversion sites around the state. There’s there’s Longmont, there’s Denver, there’s Alamosa, and there’s Pueblo, and you know, those are pretty diverse communities, right. So this is a significant challenge. And they’re trying to figure out how you can evaluate for very different communities with one set of criteria. And something that really isn’t hasn’t been done before. So this pre arrest diversion thing is really new. You know, Seattle started it not even 10 years ago now. So it’s so new, and we’re trying to figure out, how do we evaluate it? And all of those criteria, or, you know, data they’re asking us to gather have changed over time, as we kind of in the diversion community, you’re really trying to figure out how do we even evaluate this stuff? What are we really even looking at? So we decided when we got our first grant, it’s in our best interest, we really want to know what’s effective in our community. So we hired our own outside evaluator that’s evaluating our programs specific to the city of Longmont. Because we do things differently, we integrate our co responder program with our diversion program with our Angel program with our community health program. They’re all backed by public safety case managers, nobody else does that. So we wanted to make sure we’re getting an independent look at what we do that we can also compare with what the state’s evaluator does, and try to make good decisions with how we’re using grant funding and city funding.
Unknown Speaker 1:17:58
is one more narrative kind of editorial comment. And that is, that’s that’s the that’s the way that’s the effective use of an external evaluator right? To accelerate inform the learning process. So you get smarter, faster, and so good on the state, and good on our department for reaching out in in inviting in an external evaluator to evaluate what we’re doing to get smarter, faster as we go along. The only other question I would have, in terms of the Statement of Work is just any more any explanation in terms of the performance measures? on the last page, page eight of eight? As you look at it’s like, trying to get clear on what are those measures of, I assume for the statewide program?
Unknown Speaker 1:18:40
Yeah. And it, it varies program to progress. So if we’re talking about correspondence can be different than then lead our pre arrest diversion. So when we’re talking about co responder programs are really talking about mental health crisis related issues. So what we’re really trying to do there is remove those from the criminal justice system as much as we possibly can. So we’re trying to figure out how many times are we avoiding unnecessary emergency holds to the hospital? How, how many times are we taking people to the correct destination the first time? Can we take people directly to, you know, an inpatient facility? Can we take people directly to a crisis center without any of the other stops in between? We’re trying to figure out have we effectively trained the rest of our patrol officers? We’re trying to figure out how many connections can we make resource wise with everybody else involved in the incident because we don’t stop at the crisis. So we bring a police officer, a clinician and a paramedic to every co responder call, and it doesn’t stop there. Most of their work is done afterwards. They do an incredible amount of follow up work. So if we see one day when you’re having the worst day you’ve had, we’re gonna come back the next day to make sure do you have connections? Do you have resources are you able to make those Connect? And if you’re not, we will help you make those and continue to follow up to make sure that we don’t see you again, that’s the ideal scenario, right. And certainly COVID has driven business significantly up on the pre arrest diversion side, the concept is similar but a lot longer term in nature. You know, we’re dealing with the, we’re dealing with substance use, you know, the decades of addiction, sometimes that isn’t going to go away overnight. That’s an incredibly difficult thing to try to measure. So performance evaluations are really trying to understand are there charges that make sense to divert or not, in our case, that doesn’t necessarily matter to us, what we want to do is get somebody into a case management program and not focus too much on the initial interaction with a patrol officer, our patrol officers are extremely good at understanding what the moment means they know when somebody is ready. They know when they’re not, we trust them. So we try to figure out performance wise there. What is the intervention that matters? And we fall back on our belief that personal individual relationships matter? How many times can our peer case managers go to where people are? How many times does it? How many times does it take for us to just be there with them? And we’re trying to figure out what, what are those interventions and it’s, it’s incredibly challenging, but we always fall back on what we believe in and what we think we’re the best at which is building individual relationships, trusting our public safety, frontline personnel, and just being there for people when they need us. That’s our philosophy. And that that is what has worked for us.
Unknown Speaker 1:21:45
Well, those are my questions. If other council members have questions, I’ll be quiet. Otherwise, I’ll make a motion.
Unknown Speaker 1:21:54
That’s member you dog appearing.
Unknown Speaker 1:21:58
Thank you. Um, so I do have a question around. So this is a state pilot program.
Unknown Speaker 1:22:05
Is that correct?
Unknown Speaker 1:22:06
One is and one isn’t. So the lead sites are designated as a pilot program, but the corresponding programs are more long term.
Unknown Speaker 1:22:16
Okay. Okay. And then how long is this? Because we are getting state funding? And it is for our participation? I believe in the pilot program, is that correct?
Unknown Speaker 1:22:26
or it gets a look, see? Yes. And it gets really kind of crazy when we’re talking about funding. But that is where you’re the answer to your question is yes. But I think it’s important that you that you guys understand that the city has put in long term money into these programs we have out of all of the staff and that we have in these programs, the city has funded about a third of them on an ongoing basis. So that’s I think that’s important for you guys to understand that that has happened. But the rest of it, you’re right is mostly state, we do have some some federal grant funding in there and a little bit of private foundations in there, too. But the majority, yes, you’re right. It is state funding from the Office of Behavioral Health.
Unknown Speaker 1:23:08
Okay, and then when is the pilot program expected to expire?
Unknown Speaker 1:23:13
Another good question. And that’s, we’re kind of figuring that out as we go to the initial thought was, it was a five year grant cycle that we got in 2018. So we’re coming right up on it. But we’ve, we’ve already gotten an extension letter an extension award on the LEED grant from Asa behavioral health already. So they have understood, we can’t figure out how to measure this thing effectively enough to know whether or not we need to get rid of sites or not. So you know, we’re gonna extend it a couple more years already, with the, I guess you can still call it a pilot, there’s still only four sites on the lead side, there’s like 123, and the correspond per side.
Unknown Speaker 1:23:59
Okay, and it just it seems,
Unknown Speaker 1:24:01
so I think about, you know, it’s not necessarily a program, it’s more like a culture within the department and how, how folks conduct themselves with the community and how they interact with the community. So it goes above and beyond, you know, I think that that pro idea of program is kind of a misnomer. So because it’s really a change in interactions with the community, and also D stigmatizing mental health and drug addiction. And I think those are those are two I heard you talk about those, those pieces, and those are really important to, to mention and highlight because I think as more folks, you know, are experiencing their own problems with addiction or mental illness, that they know that there are supports in the community. And I think that is that is really essential. You know, I’m going to go back to my daughter who’s now 22 but when she was 30 There were there was very little out there for us. And we just we felt so alone. And it was very, you know, just some of her interactions she she had in the school setting and in with officers that she felt very, and it just was very criminalized. It just felt like there was something there was a deficit. And so I think, you know, we’re changing that narrative, that these are not deficits, these are we need to be supporting our community in these areas. And so, you know, I greatly appreciate what what the city is doing and the commitment they have to mental, mental health, mental illness and, and drug addiction and overcoming those. So, you know, I really want to, you know, I think as as money starts is as program or the pilot starts expiring, and the state maybe wants to pull out money. You know, I want to know, is there talk in legislation? Or have you heard anything about making this more permanent and spreading it out statewide? And is this something that we as council members can be lobbying and advocating for, to see that that the state will continue to fund these types of programs
Unknown Speaker 1:26:15
in our public safety? Well,
Unknown Speaker 1:26:18
I think first, I appreciate everything you said, I completely agree. It’s a culture change of how we do business, and it’s part of who public safety is. Now I completely agree with that. That was very well said. And the I think it’s a little hard to read the state legislature right now. I think Sandy would probably agree with that. It’s, it’s an interesting session this year, we’ve heard a little bit of what we do every year of talk about the LEED program, specifically, we’re a little more solid on the CO responder side. But on the lead side, that’s the one that I think because of the the challenge in bringing numbers to an evaluation for a diversion program related to substance use, that’s the challenging one, and of course, you know, council reaching out to any sort of state legislature, and that would be fantastic. And, you know, we do try, and we have tried or not tried, we have successfully over the past several years, from a city side moved, you know, a position at a time in, you know, a measured way to get these positions into the city permanently. Because, you know, I think it is a city philosophy, it isn’t something that that we no longer believe in or not think we’re not going to believe in long term. But I think to answer questions, specifically, it’s the lead programs that I think if anything is going to go away, that would be those. That’s also the largest grant we have, and any influence all of you would have, and that would be wonderfully appreciated.
Unknown Speaker 1:27:59
Specifically, specifically, on your budget questions to Dan’s point, we’ve evaluated some positions we’ve had that were vacant and converted those positions over to I think we did a couple of those last year. Dan, where’s the year before last? So so we do that we’re going to evaluate in the budget process, every year understanding timing on grant what that looks like. The Robin, I’ve also had other conversations about taking what we have and what we know, and also identifying other gaps that we’re seeing, because as we continue to evolve, I think as an organization, we’re gonna have to continue to evolve in this but you know, I can say I’ve personally seen these folks deal with individuals in our building and certain situations, and it’s, it is a difference. I mean, it’s as basic as you see the officers pull back and the clinicians move forward. And it changes the whole dynamic of the interaction. And so those are things we will be talking about in our budget discussions.
Unknown Speaker 1:28:58
Okay. Okay. Thank you. Councilmember Walker,
Unknown Speaker 1:29:01
Councillor Martin, and then hopefully, Dr. Waters will make a motion. Yeah,
Unknown Speaker 1:29:06
I when you’re talking about the state not knowing how far to continue and continuing year by year. I understand that each of these correspond or situations is is unique, because every person is unique. But are there metrics about outcomes in qualifying situations that you have? And are you able to to measure the difference that this this mode of responding
Unknown Speaker 1:29:47
makes?
Unknown Speaker 1:29:49
We do and, you know, we produce a an annual report every year and, you know, I’d be happy to get it back to you guys. So you can take a look at it. The biggest I think the biggest measurable thing we have is the interim report that our evaluator did on the lead side. And it really shows a difference in engagement on public safety services before lead engagement than an after. And it’s showing about a 60% reduction, which is enormous. That’s the biggest that we’ve seen anywhere on the corresponding side. I’m sorry, go ahead.
Unknown Speaker 1:30:23
Sorry, reduction in what
Unknown Speaker 1:30:25
in the amount of times public safety sees them. So we’re talking summonses arrests, those kinds of things. But on the CO responder side, we really tried to measure, it’s kind of hard to measure a negative, it’s kind of hard to measure how many times we think a police officer would have done something if we weren’t there. So we tried to measure the positive outcomes, the amount of times that the corresponding team was there that nobody was arrested, nobody was hurt, and we had a successful outcome. So we try to measure it in that way. Thank you.
Unknown Speaker 1:31:01
All right. Great. Dr. Waters. Want to make a motion, please. Yeah, I will. I
Unknown Speaker 1:31:04
hope I hope we all get a chance to read about this. This part of the agenda in tomorrow’s local publications. And with that, I’ll move approval of resolution 2021 40.
Unknown Speaker 1:31:17
I’ll second it. To move by Dr. Waters.
Unknown Speaker 1:31:19
seconded by Councillor dogberry. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. All right, I’m assuming you want to make a motion for a resolution 2020. Windows 41 as well. Dr. Waters? I will
Unknown Speaker 1:31:33
I just if Dan, he’s probably made sufficient distinctions between the reason I pulled the second one off was just to get clear on the distinctions between in the similarities between the lead and co responder program just in 30 seconds. Dan, can you reinforce your highlight that and then I’ll make my motion?
Unknown Speaker 1:31:52
Sure. So the correspondent program, it’s it’s a dedicated frontline response thing. So we have a clinician, a police officer and a paramedic seven days a week that are dispatched to mental health crisis calls. The lead is a is more of a philosophy and a program where we have public safety case managers that take referrals from patrol officers for people with substance use issues that are entangled with the criminal justice system that we want to try to remove from the criminal justice system. That’s the 32nd difference.
Unknown Speaker 1:32:29
Got it. Evaluating prevention is the most difficult performance to evaluate with that. I’m going to move approval of resolution 2021 dash 41 and thanks for your service
Unknown Speaker 1:32:44
it’s been moved by Dr. waters and seconded by I believe as a counselor Christiansen All right. It doesn’t matter nobody’s gonna care and grandson can. The church recognizes counselor Martin cuz remember y’all Fairing for wanting to second the motion? All right. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. All right, the Motion carries unanimously. All right, let’s get this through the consent agenda and the items on second reading. Let’s move on to general business item 12. a resolution 2021. That’s 47 resolution Aloma city council approving the intergovernmental agreement between the city, the Colorado Department of Transportation for grant funding to support the Longmont parklet project for public spaces. They believe we have Kimberly McKee and Phil Greenwald here. Where’s Phil? Phil? You hear
Unknown Speaker 1:33:31
fam is
Unknown Speaker 1:33:32
Alrighty, good evening, mayor and city council members. My name is Phil Greenwald, transportation planning manager with the city of Longmont. Tonight, we have pulled a consent item Much to the chagrin of a couple of our our staff members. But we did want to pull this this consent item and make it give give you a little bit more background and some information so that you have more understanding of kind of what’s been going on and why we’ve moved on to this this item. So our staff working with LD da Steph, Kimberly McKee specifically have done a lot of work over the last four to five months, put a lot of work into trying to get something that’s a little bit different than the link closures that we had last year, and addresses some of the concerns that were out there because from from what we heard back from citizens and businesses and all sorts of folks about those. So as you probably know, I mean, we we definitely see continued indoor distancing requirements there. They’re continuing and there. We don’t know when they’re actually going to end. So this is pretty important during our spring and summer here to have those outdoor amenities and those outdoor spaces available for folks. So Kimberly McKee, our executive director for LDA is here and she’s going to provide a short presentation for us and other statements also hear from engineering and help answer any safety questions that you have regarding the parklets. So with that, I’ll turn it over to Kimberly. Thank you.
Unknown Speaker 1:34:58
Thank you, Phil. So much. Much better. Yeah,
Unknown Speaker 1:35:02
wonderful. Um,
Unknown Speaker 1:35:05
you know, mayor and council, thank you so much for having me here today. As we all know, our entire town was hit hard by the pandemic downtown was hit particularly hard. Restaurants are our anchors and with foreclosures, capacity issues and that type of thing. We really did struggle through COVID. You can Next slide, please. Last year, I want to thank you for helping with the lane closure in each direction. If you remember, it did have a rocky start. When we put down really old barricades, it did look like a construction zone. And we got a lot of bad feedback. One of the things that we were able to do was really embrace our creative district and our creative community. We worked really strongly with the firehouse Art Center who did summer in the streets. Every Saturday, the closures came alive with artists and booths and musicians and painting the barricades. It really gave the, I think the entire town and everyone who visited it a sense of hope and a sense of moving forward during the pandemic, we had certain areas of that closure that were utilized very well buy businesses, but we did have others that remained unutilized, maybe the kind of business or the kind of business that they did, did not warn it very well into moving into that private lane. Some people loved it. Some people hated it, as you know, as those things go. So it was great. We felt like it was very positive and what we needed at the time the community embraced it. I think a huge bonus of single lanes were slower speeds and a quieter Main Street. Yeah, next slide would be great. We did do a community survey and a business survey we had over 50 businesses answered the survey, but we also had several meetings involving them. For our community members, we had over 16 150 people that were answering those community feedback. Last year of our business community about 50% thought it was positive or somewhat positive, the lane closure, and then 50% were either neutral or did not think it was positive. So it’s a pretty mixed bag of our community members. 67% of the respondents said that they went and enjoyed the downtown space. 72% said that they were very satisfied or satisfied with the solution that we put forth last year. But knowing that we need to balance the needs of everyone, we really did ask our business owners. After having discussions and putting out options in small group meetings, it seemed like parklets was the perfect balance to be able to allow those that could avail of the outdoor space to continue to have it. And to continue hearing the needs of our community. Our community said that they love the outdoor space pandemic for not that it was something that they absolutely enjoyed. of our businesses about 80% were either satisfied or somewhat satisfied with the use of parklets. And in the community when we asked them how likely or somewhat likely they would be to use them about 80% said that they would give them a try. Next slide please. We did aggregate all of the open comments to kind of see what the major trends were of the business owners. They liked chocolates. Again, there are some concerns about parking but much smaller than those that supported it. And overall, within our entire parking system, it will only take out 30 spaces. So it’s certainly not a huge, significant amount. In our community feedback, we had 130 people in their comments say that they liked the parklets. We had 133 people say just close the whole lane, they like that, again, you could see that other folks liked outdoor spaces. I think the biggest worry were kind of the safety and the noise, the smell and the traffic that would go with it. Next slide. So for the parklets, we really looked at starting with 30 parklets. within the system, each parklet will take up a parking space, it’ll be about five feet by 20 feet long. We started where those spaces were most highly used last year. So that’s how we started in figured out where some folks decided that they didn’t want them. So we talked to businesses independently. We’re hoping to have them designed and built locally, it’s much easier to transport, ordering parklets and having them shipped is very expensive. So to help our local economy and to have our local businesses that use them provide the seating and the amenity that go on those. By using the park lights it does allow for parking spaces to be in some places and as businesses to this side. Next slide please. So when we look at funding, each packet will be about $10,000. We are looking to build them so they can come out year after year. They could be moved in different locations as we’re seeing that need
Unknown Speaker 1:39:58
the LDA would put forward Worth 150,000. See, Doc grant would fun the other 150,000. And to really help with that sense of safety, we will be putting water filled barricades on the other side between the parklets in the traffic to add to that sense of safety. And that would be additional $40,000. I would just really like to thank Phil Greenwald, and Tyler and Adra, who really helped put this grant together and did an amazing job. And it’s been so great. being available and researching different solutions. They’ve been really wonderful. I’m going to turn it over to Phil to talk a little bit more about the grip.
Unknown Speaker 1:40:40
I think at this point, we can certainly turn it over to the city council for any questions you might have on on that IGA that’s in front of you
Unknown Speaker 1:40:48
tonight. What’s your alarm?
Unknown Speaker 1:40:51
Oh,
Unknown Speaker 1:40:52
yeah, just It sounded like the parklets. Were going to cost $300,000. And it was going to be half by for LDA and half from the state. Oh, where does the extra $40,000 for the barriers come
Unknown Speaker 1:41:06
from?
Unknown Speaker 1:41:08
That’s a great question. What we’re planning to do at this point in time is to use the ARPA funding from the COVID relief package that was recently passed and use that to help purchase those barricades and those will be for future use as well. So we’ll be able to use those into the future. They’re not a one time only like the last barricades were from last year.
Unknown Speaker 1:41:29
Thank you.
Unknown Speaker 1:41:33
Answer Phil castmember Christiansen
Unknown Speaker 1:41:38
we don’t need comments for the peanut gallery, Harold.
Unknown Speaker 1:41:42
Oh, I thought you were referring to me as the peanut gallery. I can do them. Yes, we
Unknown Speaker 1:41:47
can do that, too.
Unknown Speaker 1:41:48
There’s room for everybody here in the gallery.
Unknown Speaker 1:41:52
I really do think this is a good idea. I’ve been trying to interest people in this sort of thing for the last seven years, because Lewisville has done this for at least a decade. And sorry about the ringing. I do think this is a wonderful idea. I do think that for 30, parklets, $300,000. At $10,000. A piece is a lot. You know when Louis first started, this was a they got a lot of volunteers. They got a lot of free or low cost supplies from Home Depot. And I really, I think we need to talk to them. Because they’ve already done this. They know how to store them, they know how to build it. They know how to operate this stuff. We don’t need to start from scratch all over again, they do exactly this every year. And they have for quite some time. So I really would like us to try to not spend $300,000 for basically palettes that are have a little bit more hardening on them. And I do think we can do a little bit better than that. But I think it’s a wonderful idea. I think I am concerned also about what Sharon O’Leary mentioned, which was my concern last year when we did this that people who are disabled or elderly or have trouble walking will not be able to use this and we already have enough trouble parking downtown but we’re only doing this for the summer. And I think we’ll work our way through it. I think last year everybody was kind of delighted with the outcome of what downtown turned into it was very pleasant. Lewisville, of course just closes off their entire downtown. But it’s much smaller. And it’s not a state highway and it’s a different situation here. But I would just like us not to recreate the wheel. Thanks.
Unknown Speaker 1:43:59
If I can jump in real quick with with Kimberly to one of the difference. I think in the design. It does overlap under the curve. So it is more accessible. Correct, Kimberly. So there are some accessibility pieces in this but because it is a state highway and you do have cars moving on that I think it really creates a different situation in terms of how you build it and what you build based on the situation it is which is distinctly different than what Lewisville is doing. And that’s part of the conversation we had.
Unknown Speaker 1:44:29
I just meant what what sure are Larry was mentioning with parking and the effect is going to have on the adjacent neighborhoods and the effect of people being able to get there in the first place. Okay.
Unknown Speaker 1:44:45
Mayor ragley Councilmember Christiansen I have been in contact with Lewisville and we’ve talked with several people. One of the things that we’re doing with ours is we’re building them all out of aluminum or TRex decking and that is because we’ve learned from other folks that have done this, the wood deteriorates very quickly, not to mention what has increased 400% since the pandemic. And so by being able to use aluminum and decking as we take them in and out and store them, the lifespan of these parklets is expected to be 10 to 20 years and and I’m talking to my colleagues and Lewisville, they’re certainly not getting that out of theirs. And she said there’s are now at about 5000 per when they build them. So we do feel that this is probably as good as we’re going to get, and they’re going to be good for much longer than would if you take it down and put it back up.
Unknown Speaker 1:45:41
Alright, great. My question is, will this reduce the four lanes of traffic on Main Street?
Unknown Speaker 1:45:46
You’re not married, okay.
Unknown Speaker 1:45:48
And I’m all for it. If we can, if we can enhance shopping and mobility downtown and maintain traffic. I think that’s awesome. I don’t know how that works. But you guys, it’s magic baby magic. Go for it. All right, Casper Christiansen.
Unknown Speaker 1:46:05
One thing I forgot to mention, it might be good to add some extra bike racks because that will encourage people who can to bicycle downtown. And although they’re not allowed to bicycle on the sidewalk, they bicycle downtown.
Unknown Speaker 1:46:19
So you’ll be glad to hear Councilmember Christiansen and in our last grant that was in the same program for Wayfinding. We did. We did get an additional 30 bicycle racks with that with that grant. So that’s going downtown as well. So
Unknown Speaker 1:46:37
Alright, great cars were born
Unknown Speaker 1:46:39
on Yeah, just quickly. They’re still even even though there’s not a parklet in every parking space, you know, so it’s not the full lane being closed off. Was there still a zone where you know, outside the zone, there are no parklets and inside the zone near a parklets and we have these Waterfield barriers, is there going to be any traffic calming measures at the ends of the zone so that people understand they need to slow down because there are people closer to the traffic? I guess that’s fulfilled.
Unknown Speaker 1:47:19
Now might turn that over to Tyler. But just to kind of take a first crack at it we we are talking about possibly, you know, adding some signage to possibly slow down folks or ask people to slow down and realize that there are more pedestrians during the spring and summer months, but I don’t know Tyler, if you have anything to add to that or any thoughts on that.
Unknown Speaker 1:47:44
Perrin castmember, Martin Tyler stabi,
Unknown Speaker 1:47:48
Longmont, transportation engineering and Minister,
Unknown Speaker 1:47:51
we’re looking at a couple of different signage options, as Phil mentioned, to hopefully provide some notification that there are people out closer to the street and in traffic mentioned we’ll have the barricades between traffic and, and the parklets as well. That’s what we’re looking at at this point.
Unknown Speaker 1:48:12
The barricade should probably provide a fairly good visual clue that you need to slow down because those will be closer to traffic than a parked vehicle technically, but it’ll be far enough away that it’s not going to be an impedance, but they’ll definitely be a visual effect.
Unknown Speaker 1:48:28
Okay, so you’re sort of not not reducing the number of lanes but you are, in a sense, narrowing the lane
Unknown Speaker 1:48:37
with providing more activity closer to the lane that people are gonna have to, you know, people are already pretty aware of when they’re driving in the downtown area, because of the increased activity, pedestrian bicycle and other activity that’s down there. So this will bring more activity closer to the park view or to the vehicle so we’re going to make sure that we’re protecting that activity, but also that will slow down traffic we believe. Okay, thank you, Phil.
Unknown Speaker 1:49:06
All right. We have a motion for resolution 2021 dash 47
Unknown Speaker 1:49:11
move adoption.
Unknown Speaker 1:49:13
Second.
Unknown Speaker 1:49:13
It’s been moved by Councillor Martin seconded by Councillor Peck. We’ve all asked and had our say anybody else want to say anything? saying nothing all in favor of resolution? 2021 dash 47 say aye. Aye.
Unknown Speaker 1:49:25
Aye.
Unknown Speaker 1:49:26
Opposed say nay. All right, resolution 2021 dash 47 carries unanimously is going to Toby discussion of allowing electric scooter companies to operate in Longmont. Phil, would you go there you are. You’re back. All right. If you would like to go ahead and share your presentation.
Unknown Speaker 1:49:43
Sure.
Unknown Speaker 1:49:45
Thank you again, mayor and council members Phil Greenwald, again transportation planning manager with the city of Longmont. Tonight we’d like to talk a little bit about the well we’d like to ask you about about scooters, electric scooters in Longmont. You’ve all you’ve asked us in previous sessions about future thinking and, and where we are with thinking about the future and transportation. And this is it part of it. He, he micro mobility is what we’re calling this and what it is actually called, it really does affect the overall transportation systems are appreciating that. Just wanted to go over some of these issues and talk a little bit about what we already know about electric scooters and electric scooter companies. You’ve heard some tonight from from citizens who’ve called in. You’ve also received a couple emails, I believe, from folks stating their feelings about electric scooters. But I think generally we have an idea that electric scooters are these ones that are placed, you know, in the in Denver and Denver situation and maybe in Seattle as well. These were kind of dropped into cities without any warning. And that was not acceptable, quite frankly. So I think the scooter companies have definitely taken a step back. And now we’ve been approached by now it’s been three with, with this article going into newspaper, we’ve now been approached by three different scooter companies, companies, at least, to ask about the possibility of locating these scooters in the city of Oman. So again, I think you have a pretty good idea of what’s going on with the scooters, how they operate. You basically there’s a there’s a code or there’s a QR code on the on the scooter itself. It’s a low cost way of getting a ride. And it does provide those those kind of quicker trips across town. And we’ll talk about that a little bit more. Next slide, please. So the reason why we’re coming to tonight is really that that we’ve run into some pretty divisive, it’s been a pretty divisive issue with with our city staff. And, and for that reason, we’ve not had a formal recommendation by staff to you tonight. And I’d want to apologize for that. But I think that’s just the way some of these, some of these, some of these different discussions go on these different issues go. So this time, we’re really asking for you for your general direction on E scooters in the city. And if you if you do agree that they should be allowed in the city, then we would provide you with actual language, the exact text as part of likely a study session where we’ll go through the text with you and make sure that you’re good with the text, before we went to went up into first and second reading for an ordinance. So next slide, please. Again, we included this in like council communication for you. And for the for the public to kind of read over. This is just a quick list of pros and cons. I think you understand basically all of these different issues, really the pros that we’ve really kind of targeted or keyed on, because that low cost mobility option and the cleaner mode of travel quite frankly, with with the electric motors that these things have.
Unknown Speaker 1:53:07
And the technology is is is is really increasing. And so we’re seeing that the technology of these scooters, at least the companies we’ve talked to, they’re able to restrict travel in specific areas, or they can slow down the scooters in certain areas as well. So they can they can restrict the speed on in certain areas. And what they do is they each scooter has a GPS unit tied to it. So at the end of each day, there’s somebody that the scooter company hires, or a group of people that go out and find these scooters and bring them back and place them back into more of an orderly pickup location for each morning of travel. So the idea that these will get thrown around in and thrown away is certainly possible but the scooter companies have come up with a lot of ways in the last couple of years to decrease that by having people take pictures when they park them and and in their ride so that and also with the GPS being able to find them so that those things are happening. But the cons are obviously that there’s increased injuries we see this in cities across the United States that have allowed these into the cities. There’s obviously the increase of conflicts as well the the idea that you’re adding a different modes on top of bicycles and pedestrians and and, you know, people with their private scooters, people with skateboards, we’re adding a conflict, another mode of conflict. And typically, the benefits for the electric travel option here that we’re providing is really that it replaces typically replaces a bicycle trip or a walk trip which obviously has no or very few effects to the to the to the greenhouse gas and the end in the end. General climate, then then these do so. And also we’ll talk about this short scooter life, you know, these, these do tend to get abused a little bit more than, you know if you own them. I think that’s obvious and then just creating sidewalk hazards by placing these in the sidewalk when they when they’re parked and making sure that a person heard some correctly. So there’s a lot of things that go with that. One thing that the scooter companies have offered is that they will, they’re awful, they will offer a free helmet rental or a free helmet actually, as part of the rental of the of the scooter you have to go pick it up or they get shipped to you. So it’s not immediately a free helmet. But they do offer that for future rides. So next slide. So this is really my question tonight. I’d really like to open it up and hear your comments. The shell city staff moved forward with an ordinance to support a scooter companies operating along on basic, very basic question, but a lot of nuance to it. So we want to certainly hear your thoughts on that. Thank you.
Unknown Speaker 1:56:05
But before we launch into this, is this just that they need to be located downtown? Or is this all over the city, Phil?
Unknown Speaker 1:56:11
This is going to be city wide. So they’ll be placed all in different areas in the city. And as they as the scooter companies kind of watch people’s usage. They’ll determine where they kind of set these things up for the next day based on the usage.
Unknown Speaker 1:56:26
And then next week. We currently have an ordinance where we don’t have we don’t well bike riding downtown in scooters and bike riding are very similar. Is this going to city staff can recommend we undo that or there’s so we’re going to not allow bikes but we are going to allow scooters downtown.
Unknown Speaker 1:56:42
No, we’re not gonna allow scooters in the dismount zones along sidewalks on Main Street with scooters as well as bicycles. Caracas.
Unknown Speaker 1:56:49
So the idea is are we going to allow scooters to travel around the city and we will still continue to disallow scooters and bicycling in the dismount zone. Correct?
Unknown Speaker 1:57:00
The dismount zones on the sidewalks on Main Street? Correct between those third and sixth. All right,
Unknown Speaker 1:57:05
perfect. Let’s go ahead and given the parameters of discussion. Let’s go with Councillor Christiansen. Actually, let’s go with Councilmember pack because she hasn’t said anything tonight, then we’re gonna go with Councilmember Martin, then we’re gonna go with Councilmember Christiansen. That’s perfect.
Unknown Speaker 1:57:17
Thank you, Mayor Bagley. Thank you for that update. Phil, I do have a couple of questions when you mentioned the GPS so that the scooter company knows where these scooters are? Who’s going to go pick them up? Is it going to be city staff? Is it going to be?
Unknown Speaker 1:57:33
No, no, it’s it’s a council member pack. The scooter company takes care of everything with the scooters, so we don’t have any, the city isn’t responsible for them in any way shape, or form kind of like our shelter contract, where we have those bus shelters around town that have advertising, this is kind of in the same vein of of that model of the private scooter company wants to make some money off of people using the scooters. So we’re basically opening up our rights rights of way to the scooter companies to profit. And that’s the same thing that we did with the with the shelter companies. So that’s a model where they have people employees who pick these up and relocate them every every morning, and make sure that they’re picking him out of any kind of strange places they might be. But before there was not a GPS component to these scooters, and now there is because I really do need to find each scooter at the end of the day.
Unknown Speaker 1:58:29
Exactly. Okay. Okay, I’m in the for me anyway. And this could just be my ignorance, because I haven’t seen them used as anything other than recreational. So, um, you know, to, to put them in our multimodal category as a cleaner mode of travel, it isn’t really something that they’re going to go shopping and have had the ability to take groceries or retail merchandise home with and there’s no carrier on these scooters. It’s whereas a bicycle you can use it as a as a mode of travel. So that is one issue that I have. The other thing is, is there an age limit on who can operate a scooter?
Unknown Speaker 1:59:14
My understanding from the scooter companies, Councilmember pack is that it’s people over the age of 18, I believe you have to have a credit card as well. So there’s two things that you need. And I think that they’re trying to work in a low income aspect of that. So you don’t need necessarily to have a credit card for some of these companies. But you need to have, you could get a voucher for a lower price point on those on the scooter usage. So there is a low income piece of this. I don’t have enough information to share with you tonight. But I can certainly bring that back if you’d like to hear more about how that works.
Unknown Speaker 1:59:51
Yes, actually, I would. The other thing is education. Um, I don’t know what scooter companies have been reaching out to you but I think that it would be very important to They have an educational component of on how to use a scooter in relation to other modes of transit, other modes of recreation transportation, say on bike trails, etc. Because there seems to be in a way, the scooters that I seen when I’m out cycling, it’s kind of a hot dog mentality with a lot of people, and they can be very dangerous. So I just think education, whether it’s bicycles, or scooters, or whatever, is to make sure that people understand they’re sharing the road. They’re sharing the bag bike path. So thank you. Thank you. But
Unknown Speaker 2:00:37
Let the record reflect that Casper Peck is a hot dog. I’m just kidding. All right,
Unknown Speaker 2:00:41
Casper, Martin.
Unknown Speaker 2:00:44
Thank you for your Bagley. I’m still a short question in a long and a longer comment on the question is, what is the expected benefit financially to the city? I mean, you have these companies offering to come in and place these scooters and and do the maintenance and stuff. Does the city pay for it? Or does the city gain a cut of the revenue?
Unknown Speaker 2:01:14
Typically, with these scooter companies have offered a small cut of the revenue just the same as the sheltered companies do. So the scooter companies are offering a small slice of that in order to operate within the city. Again, I don’t have the details of a contract in front of me. But I can certainly work those details from the different scooter companies and get that to us as we talk about whether we want to this is really about whether we want scooters in the town or not. But if if we hear Yes, we’ll certainly bring back some of those details. But if we hear No, we won’t follow up with these companies.
Unknown Speaker 2:01:53
Okay, so I don’t have a particularly strong opinion. But that seems like a good time to listen to the public. So when the calls and letters started coming in the tally is that everything I received was a negative. Except for two that was that were under certain conditions, we could do this. So let’s start with the conditions they were not on sidewalks anywhere, they needed to be on the bike paths or treated like a bicycle, which means that they could be a vehicle in a in a lane that was built for automobiles, you can take the scooter onto the street, but don’t have them in don’t have them on the sidewalks. And I agree with that. And the two sources of that comment were a young millennial and the the cyclists organization that thought that they would be okay if they were essentially treated like another lower scarier bicycle.
Unknown Speaker 2:03:10
I would just add to that Councilmember Martin that bicycles are allowed on sidewalks today? Yeah, both electric
Unknown Speaker 2:03:17
scooters,
Unknown Speaker 2:03:19
both electric bicycles and regular bicycles.
Unknown Speaker 2:03:22
Yeah, and except in dismount. So right, but um, I having having experienced them because my, my daughter lived on 17th Street downtown near 16th Street Mall, and in Denver, and it was incredibly hazardous because people think that it would be like a, you know, the scooter that you put together out of out of old two by fours when you were a kid and a roller skate, right? And you could just get on it and it would do its you, you’d be able to control it. And these things are crazy. And there would be you know, people that thought they could get on and they would lose control and they’d be veering all around. And they were trying so hard to look to figure out what their scooter was doing that they didn’t even look to see who was around them on the street. And it was quite terrifying. So I find it real problematic. And the other observation that I got from one of the con letter persons who had had really laid things out was that this is a want and not a need for the city in the sense that the demographic it’s aimed at doesn’t really need help with the last mile. Right? You know, if if if you are young and athletic enough that you can get the hang of these scooters pretty easily. You could walk the last mile whereas They would be useless for families. They would be useless for elders because they’re too dangerous. And those are the people that need help with the last mile. So I’m kind of a no, I guess, listening to the public, I think I’m a no. Alright,
Unknown Speaker 2:05:19
so at this time, is there so is there anyone who wants to speak in favor of the resolution? Is there anyone who wants to vote for it? Yes. And who would like to speak?
Unknown Speaker 2:05:32
All right. Okay. Councillor Christiansen?
Unknown Speaker 2:05:37
I have many of the same comments that both Councilwoman pack and Councillor Martin have brought up and particularly the comment of, you know, people my age, I would love to get on a scooter. But I think that ship has sailed, you know, I I don’t, I can’t afford to break anything else. Um, so this isn’t really about whether we’re gonna allow East scooters in town. They’re already East scooters, and electric bikes and bicycles and various things. This is about whether we’re going to let allow two commercial companies to sell their services in town. And that’s problematic. One of the letters I got today was from the NMR wall called Tiger who use the phrase left holding the bag, which is I went to Los Angeles two years ago. And these things were out by the beach, they’re everywhere abandoned in the sidewalk, you can hardly walk in certain areas of town because they’re all over. So you know, companies pledge, people make many promises. And then after a month or so they slack off until pretty soon we are left holding the bag for the liability for the cleanup for everything concerning this, and it’s just one it would be to me one more problem that the city has to deal with. I have no objection to people having East scooters and electric bikes I think are a terrific idea. Europe has had electric bikes for 100 years. And bicycles I love but none of these belong really on sidewalks, particularly where it’s crowded, we need to be preferencing. Pedestrians head, Austrians people on their foot, so that our pathways and our sidewalks are for people walking along with their kids and their dogs and their elderly relatives, they have a right to be safe and to be able to walk along at their leisure without looking over their shoulder. I, for instance, have had numerous people run into me with their skateboards, nearly breaking my ankle. I’ve had people nearly run into me with scooters and bikes, I can no longer hear well enough to know when someone isn’t back at me. So it doesn’t do any good. If they announced something, I can’t hear them. And most many people can’t get out of their way. Even if they could do them. Blind people can’t hear them, they could walk along a path but they couldn’t find out, they wouldn’t be able to get out of the way of these. I want our paths and our sidewalks to be safe for you know, regular people walking around. And as Councilman Peck said, with with these are not really a solution to the last mile because as both council women pointed out, you can’t really load up the you can’t really load them up with anything like groceries or furniture or anything, they really won’t carry anything except you. So I just don’t think that we already had our experiment with zagster. These don’t tend to work out too well. And we’re not a big enough town I think to afford them much of a profit. So they’ll begin to slowly abandon us in pretty short order. So I would rather see us just not venture into this. People can have a scooters here right now. And they do. This is about a commercial couple of commercially industries who probably have their hearts in the right place. But our experience has not really been awfully good with people in Denver people in Los Angeles people in Seattle, people in New York. People everywhere so
Unknown Speaker 2:09:55
alright, so I’m going to go ahead and call him Dr. Waters. Then after Dr. Waters comment, I just want to point out No one here I don’t think wants wants this. So we could all talk and share opinions. Or we could just make a motion and move on and give staff direction that we don’t want it. So and save some time. So, Dr. Waters?
Unknown Speaker 2:10:15
Well, I’m an I’m going to vote no, I’ll make the motion. And just let me just I just want to make one comment. I’ll make the motion to vote no. On 2021 47. But here’s the comment, Phil, you prefaced your presentation with expressed interest in discussing or learning more or engaging in conversation about the future of transportation. And I’m one of those who would like to do that. I personally, I would never have chosen this as the lead for that conversation. Right? If you want to frame what the future transportation is, and and get some robust image and then have a conversation about e scooters. That’s one thing, but to lead with this is is not I don’t think is where we want to how you want to bring us into a discussion about the future transportation. So I’m, I am excited about that possibility. I’m not excited about East scooters in Longmont. So I’m going to vote. I’m going to move we vote no. On resolution 2021 47.
Unknown Speaker 2:11:19
actually accepted your you mean it Sorry, 1212 v. Dr. Waters. Basically do what the most the chair, I believe I’m sorry, on 12. d got it. I’m
Unknown Speaker 2:11:27
sorry. Yeah, look up there. Yes.
Unknown Speaker 2:11:29
Thank you. So
Unknown Speaker 2:11:30
the chair will take that motion to direct staff to not continue with the electric scooter, exploration and implementation.
Unknown Speaker 2:11:39
Thank you for the correction of my motion mailbag.
Unknown Speaker 2:11:42
It’s rare that I have to correct you, Dr. Waters. So I’m here. Everybody has bad night. Everyone has been I’ve had I’ve had like 90 the last couple years. All right. So I’ll second. All right. It’s been moved by Dr. waters and seconded by Dr. Councilmember wireman that we instruct Phil Greenwald in the city staff to not continue with the electric scooter option and continue things as they are at least as far as electric scooters go. So having heard plenty of discussion, all in favor, say aye.
Unknown Speaker 2:12:11
Aye. Aye. Hi.
Unknown Speaker 2:12:13
posed a name. All right, there you go. You have your direction. Thank you for your donation kit. That doesn’t mean as we discussed before, Phil, that doesn’t mean that that does not mean that this was a bad idea. It means you keep bringing us ideas. So we appreciate your your brainstorming and we look forward to the next one. Alrighty, thank you. Alright, let’s go on to 12 c 20, or 2021 legislative bills recommended for city council position. Before we do that, um, I want to make sure that we address this prior to the mayor and council comments because pursuant to our rules were not allowed to be given. So I just want to open it for discussion again. Senate Bill 278, the RTD. Bill, I’d like john just to talk about the testimony today. But also, I’d like to move that we reconsider council position last week. I’m not going to advocate you support it. But given that, given that the Front Range commuter rail boards basically passed resolution saying that they endorsed the Northwest rail option. Does that move our position at all? That’s it. Okay, there was not a second. So that’s good. So Councilmember pack and I committed to to a couple of the state legislators that I would actually bring it up. So I have fulfilled my obligation. Johnson Overpeck, what happened today down at the Capitol?
Unknown Speaker 2:13:40
Well, it was interesting. It was about Senate Bill 238. For the for the district for the rail. There was a really not a lot of testimony, there were a few supporters and a couple of opposition. And actually there were three of us a commissioner, clearly the city councilman Aaron brocket, and myself, who want to amend it, because we actually think that we probably do need a district. But the bill as written has too many loopholes in it. There’s not enough transparency. And there’s no complete definition on the cost of it. Matt Jones is also Commissioner ranch Jones is also in the position of wanting to amend it. I’m Aaron brocket, gave spoke for council I did not I spoke for myself as a council member because because I wanted to amend it, not to oppose it or support it in the fashion that it has been laid out for us. And the reason for that is that the authors of the bill stated that the district if it was formed, there’s nothing defined in it yet. Nothing Nothing and I I have a problem with that to say, okay and support a district, which we have to be part of and pay taxes into when the alignment has not been solidified yet, when the cost is has not been determined. And if we don’t get if Amtrak does not get the funding they hope to get what does that actually mean in the text that they are going to ask us to pay? Also in the bill, it says along with the district tax, if there is any other tax, for example, that they would need to build stations, for private your private property, then we’d have to pay sales tax use tax, etc. On top
Unknown Speaker 2:15:45
of our
Unknown Speaker 2:15:47
tax district tax the point 08 percent that they presented. So to me, those are all loopholes, which means that it gives this taxing authority way too much money with not enough transparency in the bill. so badly, do you want to make a motion to change our position to amend and then support?
Unknown Speaker 2:16:08
Well, I made I made the motion to reconsider and it feels like it so but it’s not a it’s a cu. So what everyone else does, we also had an MCC meeting where all the mayors came together, we met with Representative gray, it’s he’s one of the co sponsors of the bill. And then Senator winners, they weren’t typical to everybody. You know, when I share my opinion, most people are pretty upset that I’m running contrary, but pursuant to what how we voted, what I said is my opinion is that they need to fix the governance, meaning the governance body of the district was not very well in alignment with population centers. And so my point was, you know, and then also, you need some type of commitment for Northwest rail, because the only thing worse I said, than getting paying for train we never get is paying twice for a train that we never get. And so the they weren’t very happy with with us not voting to other board members of the Front Range passenger rail call, they expressed a disappointment, that my point was personally I said, Option A, we would like rail going through Northwest and if they didn’t commit to that I’m pretty sure this council would change our viewpoint. Next would be no trainer, no train at all. Third would be Yeah, we vote and have a train and we pay for it twice, and we don’t get a train. So they weren’t happy with our decision. But I think I think everybody understands where we stand. So, Dr. Waters.
Unknown Speaker 2:17:44
So I’m just trying to understand. A week ago, the motion was made, there was a majority of the council that voted. I thought, because I recall, to withdraw the this bill. I remember expressing some my own thoughts At the time, it felt like a chicken and an egg scenario, then it feels like a chicken and egg scenario. Now. How do you fix the bill, if our position is to withdraw the bill than it did it isn’t going to get fixed sometime between now and the net at some future date when a new bill is introduced? Maybe some group of people come together and work on what the fixes should have been in this bill. Or we do take a position to say we oppose pending amendments, or we monitor pending amendments, which is what we did with one of the other bills last week why we didn’t do that with this one. I’m still puzzled about because I think I don’t know how you get the fixes in the bill, if there isn’t a bill to fix. So I’ll listen.
Unknown Speaker 2:18:45
That does. Right. So that’s the reason for a motion to reconsider that failed for a lack of second.
Unknown Speaker 2:18:50
But if you want to make it again of a second, if that’s the intent,
Unknown Speaker 2:18:53
the intent was to reconsider and then monitor with amendments and encourage them to a fix the governance be provided Northwest rail. And one of the other things that I mentioned was don’t tax us. If we do this, we don’t get the train don’t tax us in this district.
Unknown Speaker 2:19:12
I guess I didn’t understand. With all apologies. And I guess I didn’t understand you are offering that as a motion, I would have second.
Unknown Speaker 2:19:21
But we’d have to reconsider. It’s the first meeting after etc, etc. So I’m going to make the motion that we reconsider our position so that I can then make a motion to monitor with amendments.
Unknown Speaker 2:19:32
Second.
Unknown Speaker 2:19:32
It’s been moved and seconded. All in favor say aye.
Unknown Speaker 2:19:36
Aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. Nay.
Unknown Speaker 2:19:40
All right, so Councilmember Rodriguez. So I’m going to go ahead and move that we change our position to monitor with the encouragement of making the amendment specifically change the government so it reflects population to some type of guarantee of Northwest rail and three, some type of guarantee that we’re not doubling taxed in the event that I mean double tax for train. Should we not get Front Range passenger rail coming through one
Unknown Speaker 2:20:07
Second.
Unknown Speaker 2:20:08
It’s been moved and seconded. Mayor Pro Tem, I your hands not up. But and I’m not arguing with you. I just you haven’t said anything tonight and you’re the only day on this. And I’d be curious to hear your thoughts on the matter.
Unknown Speaker 2:20:21
I believe it’s excessively premature to be voting on something along these lines with so many outstanding issues. So I’m going to be an A until they either flesh it out, or somebody does eventually down the road. I just don’t you know, I just can’t get there right now with the amount of information that’s available.
Unknown Speaker 2:20:39
Thank you, Councillor pack.
Unknown Speaker 2:20:42
So thank you very badly, and I agree with you count. Mayor Pro Tem Roderick because there is a group in Boulder County which I have asked that Longmont be a part of which would be the mayor probably feel Greenfeld Greenwald’s and myself, to work with the county to come up with the amendments that we present to the bill, and that they draft, then they would come back to us with the draft of the bill with the amendments. And that would be what our vote would be to monitor with with the amendments. And before I call on him, but as an aside, just I wouldn’t say this.
Unknown Speaker 2:21:24
Claire levy
Unknown Speaker 2:21:26
is one of the most intelligent elected political leaders that I’ve ever met, that woman should be governor not because I agree with their policies. But in these meetings, she is so clear spoken and thoughtful on her positions. It’s rare that when I hear someone talk and go, you know what she didn’t say one extra word unnecessarily. She just awesome. She’s been doing great on this. So customer, Martin.
Unknown Speaker 2:21:56
Yeah. It seems to me that what you all are describing about having a group with a specific set of amendments is that our position should be opposed, unless amended, with a set of of amendments. And and so I’m wondering if the motion should be changed?
Unknown Speaker 2:22:20
Well, the only reason I didn’t do that is because in talking with people, it’s a fine line we’re trying to their argument is we need to get the funding from the federal government if we’re going to do this. And if we’re not in agreement of Walmart, of all people are opposed to it, they’re not going to give us the money. And if we don’t get the money, you’re not going to get a train no matter what. But we can’t commit to Northwest rail, because there’s legal reasons behind closed doors. We all know we want it. But so it’s it’s it’s all that stuff. And so that’s the reason why I said monitor with amendments so that they can then look at the federal government say that one one is not opposing. Let’s go with Councillor crewson, the mayor Pro Tem.
Unknown Speaker 2:22:59
I agree with the mayor’s strategy there because we do want to, we really do want to have mass transit, on the front range, and actually all over Colorado. And this is a time when they’re going to be large infrastructure investments. And we want to jump on that and get some of that. But as we’ve all observed, just getting something without having it clarified, doesn’t actually has not proven to get long on anything at all. So we want it I think the strategy really is to encourage them, to monitor it, monitor it with amendments to not discourage them and say we’re against it, because we’re not really against it. We’re against something that’s half baked. And so if we have the opportunity to have a voice in amending it, that would be excellent.
Unknown Speaker 2:23:58
We will have that voice. Mayor Pro Tem.
Unknown Speaker 2:24:04
Thank you very badly, somewhat understanding how this process works. As far as convening and joining said Boulder County ad hoc committee, that’s proposing amendments to our legislators, watching them get those amendments put into the bill, having that bill go through the legislative process at the Capitol and knowing how long their legislative session is, I just don’t think that’s going to happen this year. So I just I don’t think it’s it’s really worth our time necessarily, to try to force something through in this legislative session. When I said in my opinion before that it was premature. I think that’s part of it is that having been the liaison for computing solutions for a little while now, and knowing that it counts member pack has also been in part of these conversations as well. Listening to the infighting just in computing solutions about what the world would be via going through boulder to Longmont or going down the I 25 corridor, or going down to 87 corridor without diverting westward towards Boulder. There’s a lot of infighting about that alone. So seeing something really concrete come out of this ad hoc committee, I just, I just doubt the timing of it. And again, I think the legislation was premature.
Unknown Speaker 2:25:29
I also received this just, I also received. Another idea is that RTD directors could actually say that unless it’s Northwest corridor, they will not partner with Amtrak, which would be a powerful move. So I know that there are directors who are also trying to do that. But again, my motion is to encourage movement, and I share their protests concerns, but the money is available now. And either we go for it, or we don’t we get the money. Now we don’t is what what people are telling me. So let’s go ahead and vote All in favor of moving that we monitor with the amendments as listed.
Unknown Speaker 2:26:04
say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. Nay. All right.
Unknown Speaker 2:26:11
The motion carries six to one with Mayor Pro Tem Rodriguez, respectfully descending. Thank you. All right. Let’s go on. Sandy with the other legislative bills coming we
Unknown Speaker 2:26:20
got tonight.
Unknown Speaker 2:26:21
Thank you, Mayor Bagley, members of council Sandy cedar assistant city manager and it’s kind of throwback Tuesday. Tonight, we’re going to talk about Senate Bill 201. More time. So you may remember Senate Bill 200 is the one that’s concerning measures to further environmental protections, particularly greenhouse gas emissions. You remember there was all kinds of back and forth about the costs for the bill. And the main issue is that the PSC is the one regulating municipalities, which is not only inappropriate, but takes away your authority to be able to do that work. And so since then, actually, at the same time, as you were meeting last week, the Senate Committee on Transportation and energy, we’re also meeting and they amended the bill to be very clear about the costs. So the caps on the on the emissions they actually put into the bill. So that really does take out any questions about the cost that we had before. And so that’s very helpful. So the only issue at this point is still the fact that PFC would be regulating municipalities, which is inappropriate, it doesn’t happen in any other legislation. So it’s not that we don’t appreciate the legislation or what they’re trying to do, but this manner is not great. So last week, the motion was that we monitors and a bill 200 inch and with recommendations and the staff would bring back the recommendation. So that is my one and only recommendation is that we continue to monitor Senate Bill 200. And the recommendation part of that is is to let our legislators know that it’s just it’s not the right manner to have the PFC regulating municipal electric utilities. So moved.
Unknown Speaker 2:27:54
Moved by myself seconded by Dr. Walker. Okay. Okay. Again, we can talk all night about this. But
Unknown Speaker 2:28:00
does anyone oppose this motion?
Unknown Speaker 2:28:04
Okay, so if we’re all going to say things that we were all in agreement with, let’s just keep our comments short, because we’re Martin.
Unknown Speaker 2:28:11
Yeah, I will keep it short.
Unknown Speaker 2:28:13
Um,
Unknown Speaker 2:28:15
I actually still oppose two things about the bill. One is, as as Sandy said, most emphatically, the PVC should not be in our business. And the other thing is that the PVC is already in our business because mandates and carbon taxes are in direct opposition with one another, even though this is a small little carbon tax. It sets a bad precedent, because a carbon tax on us a generation utility with a mandate means that it’s paying to fulfill its mandate. It’s paying with money that it could be spending, as on capital investments on renewable energy. This is dumb. It’s too late for carbon taxes or fees or whatever you want to call them. We have a mandate, let us pursue it. Okay, that’s my comment. I’ve stated it now we’ll vote
Unknown Speaker 2:29:15
counts for Christmas.
Unknown Speaker 2:29:17
I agree with what most other people have said. However, I do think that Colorado as a state needs to have a state strategy. I don’t know who would monitor it, not oversee it, but monitor it and encourage it and force people to write up reports and deliver them to the PFC so that every town every municipality and region had has some kind of plan. That I think is the best way of looking at this. However, that would have to be specified as what p you see actually does do they have the right to punish people and as Councilwoman Martin said, to punish them with carbon taxes for when, when they’re already trying to do the right thing. That’s that’s the wrong direction. But to force every region in the state to have a plan for themselves and submitted every year to the CPUC, I think is actually a good idea. I provided it doesn’t undermine our municipal authority of Home Rule.
Unknown Speaker 2:30:38
All right, motion is that we follow staffs recommendation. All in favor say aye.
Unknown Speaker 2:30:43
Aye. Aye.
Unknown Speaker 2:30:46
Opposed say nay. All right. Motion carries unanimously. Sandy, that’s it for the for the state bills tonight.
Unknown Speaker 2:30:53
We have one more very quick wind mailbag. This is Senate Bill 21 to 42 concerning the expansion of the allowable uses for the housing development grant fund. So what this would do is it would allow the division of housing to expand some of their development grant for rental assistance, tenancy support programs, awarding grants and loans for the purchase of an underutilized hotels and motels that could be used for housing. And so since this is something that the city has been thinking about looking at, that this is something that if these funds were available, we may be able to leverage them as well. And so the staff recommendation is to support Senate Bill 242.
Unknown Speaker 2:31:30
I moved to support if we can.
Unknown Speaker 2:31:34
I can it’s been moved by Councilmember Duggal fairing, sigma Councillor Martin. See no further discussion. All in favor of supporting this bill say aye.
Unknown Speaker 2:31:40
Aye. Aye. Opposed say nay.
Unknown Speaker 2:31:43
All right, Motion carries unanimously. All right, let’s
Unknown Speaker 2:31:46
make a mistake.
Unknown Speaker 2:31:47
Let’s take a three to five minute break for last call or final call public divide to be heard. And then we’ll wrap up the meeting. So we back in three to five. Thank you.
Unknown Speaker 2:32:35
Hi, folks, this is the final public invited to be heard. Please remember if you’re going to join us and call in to enter the meeting ID on your screen and to mute your live stream and listen for instructions on your telephone. We will call you by the last three digits of your telephone number, at which time you will have three minutes to state your case. You’ll be asked to enter your name and address before you speak.
Unknown Speaker 2:35:02
All right, do we have people in the queue?
Unknown Speaker 2:35:08
No one in the queue just now.
Unknown Speaker 2:35:10
All right, let’s wait another 30 seconds or so just to be sure if there were people in the queue, I’d say let’s go and leave it open. Just wait.
Unknown Speaker 2:36:09
Alright, is there anybody in the queue?
Unknown Speaker 2:36:11
Not at this time?
Unknown Speaker 2:36:12
Alright, let’s go ahead and close final call public invited to be heard and move on to mayor and council comments.
Unknown Speaker 2:36:18
Anybody want to say anything? We’re gonna go with Mayor Pro Tem.
Unknown Speaker 2:36:25
Thank you, Mayor Bagley, I just want to say it was very nice to be able to attend the ribbon cutting for the Hilton Garden Inn, having not done a ribbon cutting and well over a year. It’s very nice to get out and be able to socialize a little bit and see some projects still going forward in the city after this long pandemic that we’ve been going through for a while. And then also looking forward to former mayor Wilson’s unveiling of his sign at Union reservoir on Friday afternoon.
Unknown Speaker 2:36:55
So thank you, Councillor Martin.
Unknown Speaker 2:37:00
Thank you. I would just like to give thanks and encouragement to our public safety organization. They did a good job this week. I don’t want to say any more than that, but thank you very much.
Unknown Speaker 2:37:16
Thank you. Alright, anybody else? All right, Harold, anything from you? comments,
Unknown Speaker 2:37:22
Mayor council?
Unknown Speaker 2:37:22
Perfect. Eugene, are you even here?
Unknown Speaker 2:37:25
Oh, go here, Mayor. No comments.
Unknown Speaker 2:37:29
Cool. All right. Guys. Do have motion to adjourn. I’ll take that Kazmir. Christiansen has made a motion to adjourn.
Unknown Speaker 2:37:37
Second.
Unknown Speaker 2:37:38
Counselor packet seconded it. All right. All in favor say aye.
Unknown Speaker 2:37:42
Aye. Aye. Alright,
Unknown Speaker 2:37:44
I’ll say nay. All right. The Motion carries unanimously. Great meeting effective, efficient, great thoughts, folks. Alright, so thank you, and we’ll see you next week.
Unknown Speaker 2:37:52
Bye. Bye.